National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for oil tank farms

  1. Tank Farms - Hanford Site

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

    Farms Office of River Protection About ORP ORP Projects & Facilities Tank Farms Retrieval Activities PHOENIX - Tank Monitoring Waste Treatment & Immobilization Plant 242-A Evaporator 222-S Laboratory Newsroom Contracts & Procurements Contact ORP Tank Farms Email Email Page | Print Print Page |Text Increase Font Size Decrease Font Size Tank Farms What are Tank Farms? For more than 40 years, facilities at the Hanford Site produced plutonium Tanks by the Numbers critical to the nation's

  2. Crude Oil Stocks at Tank Farms & Pipelines

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Product: Crude Oil Fuel Ethanol Biodiesel Period-Unit: Monthly-Thousand Barrels Annual-Thousand Barrels Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Show Data By: Product Areas Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15 Jan-16 Feb-16 View History Summary Total 33,667 29,138 22,621 21,347 19,418 21,222 2010-2016 Intra-U.S. Movements 24,977 22,319 19,373 17,412 16,893 16,765 2010-2016 U.S. Exports to Canada 0 0 0 0 0 0 2010-2016 U.S. Imports

  3. AX Tank Farm tank removal study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    SKELLY, W.A.

    1998-10-14

    This report considers the feasibility of exposing, demolishing, and removing underground storage tanks from the 241-AX Tank Farm at the Hanford Site. For the study, it was assumed that the tanks would each contain 360 ft{sup 3} of residual waste (corresponding to the one percent residual Inventory target cited in the Tri-Party Agreement) at the time of demolition. The 241-AX Tank Farm is being employed as a ''strawman'' in engineering studies evaluating clean and landfill closure options for Hanford single-shell tank farms. The report is one of several reports being prepared for use by the Hanford Tanks Initiative Project to explore potential closure options and to develop retrieval performance evaluation criteria for tank farms.

  4. Independent Oversight Review, Hanford Tank Farms- November 2011

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Review of Hanford Tank Farms Safety Basis Amendment for Double-Shell Tank Ventilation System Upgrades

  5. Tank farms hazards assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Broz, R.E.

    1994-09-30

    Hanford contractors are writing new facility specific emergency procedures in response to new and revised US Department of Energy (DOE) Orders on emergency preparedness. Emergency procedures are required for each Hanford facility that has the potential to exceed the criteria for the lowest level emergency, an Alert. The set includes: (1) a facility specific procedure on Recognition and Classification of Emergencies, (2) area procedures on Initial Emergency Response and, (3) an area procedure on Protective Action Guidance. The first steps in developing these procedures are to identify the hazards at each facility, identify the conditions that could release the hazardous material, and calculate the consequences of the releases. These steps are called a Hazards Assessment. The final product is a document that is similar in some respects to a Safety Analysis Report (SAR). The document could br produced in a month for a simple facility but could take much longer for a complex facility. Hanford has both types of facilities. A strategy has been adopted to permit completion of the first version of the new emergency procedures before all the facility hazards Assessments are complete. The procedures will initially be based on input from a task group for each facility. This strategy will but improved emergency procedures in place sooner and therefore enhance Hanford emergency preparedness. The purpose of this document is to summarize the applicable information contained within the Waste Tank Facility ``Interim Safety Basis Document, WHC-SD-WM-ISB-001`` as a resource, since the SARs covering Waste Tank Operations are not current in all cases. This hazards assessment serves to collect, organize, document and present the information utilized during the determination process.

  6. Tank farms essential drawing plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Domnoske-Rauch, L.A.

    1998-08-04

    The purpose of this document is to define criteria for selecting Essential Drawings, Support Drawings, and Controlled Print File (CPF) drawings and documents for facilities that are part of East and West Tank Farms. Also, the drawings and documents that meet the criteria are compiled separate listings. The Essential Drawing list and the Support Drawing list establish a priority for updating technical baseline drawings. The CPF drawings, denoted by an asterisk (*), defined the drawings and documents that Operations is required to maintain per the TWRS Administration Manual. The Routing Boards in Buildings 272-WA and 272-AW are not part of the CPF.

  7. Independent Activity Report, Hanford Tank Farms - April 2013...

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

    Tank Farms - April 2013 Independent Activity Report, Hanford Tank Farms - April 2013 April 2013 Operational Awareness at the Hanford Tank Farms HIAR-HANFORD-2013-04-15 The Office...

  8. Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary - January 2010 | Department...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    0 Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary - January 2010 Meeting Summary for Development of the Hanford Site C Tank Farm Performance Assessment PDF icon Hanford Site C Tank Farm...

  9. Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary - May 2011 | Department...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    1 Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary - May 2011 PDF icon Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary More Documents & Publications Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary -...

  10. Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary - January 2011 | Department...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    1 Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary - January 2011 Meeting Summary for Development of the Hanford Site C Tank Farm Performance Assessment PDF icon Hanford Site C Tank Farm...

  11. Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary - May 2010 | Department...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    0 Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary - May 2010 Meeting Summary for Development of the Hanford Site C Tank Farm Performance Assessment PDF icon Hanford Site C Tank Farm...

  12. Independent Oversight Activity Report, Hanford Waste Tank Farms...

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

    Tank Farms - October 28 - November 6, 2013 Independent Oversight Activity Report, Hanford Waste Tank Farms - October 28 - November 6, 2013 February 2014 Follow-up on Previously...

  13. Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility...

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

    Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility The Secretary of Energy signed Section 3116 of ...

  14. Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary - February 2009 | Department...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    February 2009 Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary - February 2009 Meeting Summary for Development of the Hanford Site C Tank Farm Performance Assessment PDF icon Hanford Site...

  15. Voluntary Protection Program Onsite Review, Tank Farm Operations...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Tank Farm Operations Contract - November 2010 Voluntary Protection Program Onsite Review, Tank Farm Operations Contract - November 2010 November 2010 Evaluation to determine...

  16. SRS F Tank Farm Performance Assessment

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

    Operations Office Art SRS F Tank Farm Performance Assessment The Department of Energy (DOE) is providing the Savannah River Site (SRS) F Tank Farm Performance Assessment (FTF PA) for external review by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This document provides information to support subsequent DOE, NRC, SCDHEC, and EPA F Area Tank Closure Program actions and decisions,

  17. Hanford Communities Issue Briefing on Tank Farms

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Department of Energy Office of River Protection representatives Stacy Charboneau (Deputy Manager) and Tom Fletcher (Tank Farms Assistant Manager) and Washington State Department of Ecology's Suzanne Dahl (Tank Waste Section Manager) discuss Hanford's complex tank waste retrieval mission with members of the community.

  18. Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary - May 2009 | Department...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    May 2009 Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary - May 2009 Meeting Summary for Development of the Hanford Site C Tank Farm Performance Assessment PDF icon Hanford Site C Tank...

  19. Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary - July 2010 | Department...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    July 2010 Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary - July 2010 Meeting Summary for Development of the Hanford Site C Tank Farm Performance Assessment PDF icon Hanford Site C Tank...

  20. Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary - September 2010 | Department...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    10 Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary - September 2010 Meeting Summary for Development of the Hanford Site C Tank Farm Performance Assessment PDF icon Hanford Site C Tank...

  1. Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary - September 2009 | Department...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    09 Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary - September 2009 Meeting Summary for Development of the Hanford Site C Tank Farm Performance Assessment PDF icon Hanford Site C Tank...

  2. H-Tank Farm Waste Determination

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    On Dec. 19, 2014, the Energy Secretary signed a determination that allows the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina to complete cleanup and closure of the underground liquid waste tanks in the H Tank Farm as they are emptied and cleaned. The action marked a major milestone in efforts to clean up the Cold War legacy at SRS.

  3. Grouting at the Idaho National Laboratory Tank Farm Facility...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Small Tank Farm Facility * A system of 11 underground, 300,000-gallon stainless steel tanks - Tanks are fifty feet in diameter and twenty-five feet tall - Eight tanks have...

  4. Tank Farms and Waste Feed Delivery - 12507

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fletcher, Thomas; Charboneau, Stacy; Olds, Erik

    2012-07-01

    The mission of the Department of Energy's Office of River Protection (ORP) is to safely retrieve and treat the 56 million gallons of Hanford's tank waste and close the Tank Farms to protect the Columbia River. Our discussion of the Tank Farms and Waste Feed Delivery will cover progress made to date with Base and Recovery Act funding in reducing the risk posed by tank waste and in preparing for the initiation of waste treatment at Hanford. The millions of gallons of waste are a by-product of decades of plutonium production. After irradiated fuel rods were taken from the nuclear reactors to the processing facilities at Hanford they were exposed to a series of chemicals designed to dissolve away the rod, which enabled workers to retrieve the plutonium. Once those chemicals were exposed to the fuel rods they became radioactive and extremely hot. They also couldn't be used in this process more than once. Because the chemicals are caustic and extremely hazardous to humans and the environment, underground storage tanks were built to hold these chemicals until a more permanent solution could be found. The underground storage tanks range in capacity from 55,000 gallons to more than 1 million gallons. The tanks were constructed with carbon steel and reinforced concrete. There are eighteen groups of tanks, called 'tank farms', some having as few as two tanks and others up to sixteen tanks. Between 1943 and 1964, 149 single-shell tanks were built at Hanford in the 200 West and East Areas. Heat generated by the waste and the composition of the waste caused an estimated 67 of these single-shell tanks to leak into the ground. Washington River Protection Solutions is the prime contractor responsible for the safe management of this waste. WRPS' mission is to reduce the risk to the environment that is posed by the waste. All of the pumpable liquids have been removed from the single-shell tanks and transferred to the double-shell tanks. What remains in the single-shell tanks are solid and semi-solid wastes. Known as salt-cakes, they have the consistency of wet beach sand. Some of the waste resembles small broken ice, or whitish crystals. Because the original pumps inside the tanks were designed to remove only liquid waste, other methods have been developed to reach the remaining waste. Access to the tank waste is through long, typically skinny pipes, called risers, extending out of the tanks. It is through these pipes that crews are forced to send machines and devices into the tanks that are used to break up the waste or push it toward a pump. These pipes range in size from just a few inches to just over a foot in diameter because they were never intended to be used in this manner. As part of the agreement regulating Hanford cleanup, crews must remove at least 99% of the material in every tank on the site, or at least as much waste that can be removed based on available technology. To date, seven single-shell tanks have been emptied, and work is underway in another 10 tanks in preparation for additional retrieval activities. Two barriers have been installed over single-shell tanks to prevent the intrusion of surface water down to the tanks, with additional barriers planned for the future. Single and double-shell tank integrity analyses are ongoing. Because the volume of the waste generated through plutonium production exceeded the capacity of the single-shell tanks, between 1968 and 1986 Hanford engineers built 28 double-shell tanks. These tanks were studied and made with a second shell to surround the carbon steel and reinforced concrete. The double-shell tanks have not leaked any of their waste. (authors)

  5. Hanford Technology Development (Tank Farms) - 12509

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fletcher, Thomas; Charboneau, Stacy; Olds, Erik

    2012-07-01

    The mission of the Department of Energy's Office of River Protection (ORP) is to safely retrieve and treat the 56 million gallons of Hanford's tank waste and close the Tank Farms to protect the Columbia River. The millions of gallons of tank waste are a byproduct of decades of plutonium production. After irradiated fuel rods were taken from the nuclear reactors to the processing facilities at Hanford they were exposed to a series of chemicals designed to dissolve away the rod, which enabled workers to retrieve the plutonium. Once those chemicals were exposed to the fuel rods they became radioactive and extremely hot. They also couldn't be used in this process more than once. Because the chemicals are caustic and extremely hazardous to humans and the environment, underground storage tanks were built to hold these chemicals until a more permanent solution could be found. One key part of the ongoing work at Hanford is retrieving waste from the single-shell tanks, some of which have leaked in the past, and transferring that waste to the double-shell tanks - none of which have ever leaked. The 56 million gallons of radioactive tank waste is stored in 177 underground tanks, 149 of which are single-shell tanks built between 1943 and 1964. The tanks sit approximately 250 feet above the water table. Hanford's single-shell tanks are decades past their 20-year design life. In the past, up to 67 of the single-shell tanks are known or suspected to have leaked as much as one million gallons of waste to the surrounding soil. Starting in the late 1950's, waste leaks from dozens of the single-shell tanks were detected or suspected. Most of the waste is in the soil around the tanks, but some of this waste is thought to have reached groundwater. The Vadose Zone Project was established to understand the radioactive and chemical contamination in the soil beneath the tanks as the result of leaks and discharges from past plutonium-production operations. The vadose zone is the area of soil between the ground surface and the water table 200-to-300 feet below. The project tracks and monitors contamination in the soil. Technologies are being developed and deployed to detect and monitor contaminants. Interim surface barriers, which are barriers put over the single-shell tanks, prevent rain and snow from soaking into the ground and spreading contamination. The impermeable barrier placed over T Farm, which was the site of the largest tank waste leak in Hanford's history, is 60,000 square feet and sloped to drain moisture outside the tank farm. The barrier over TY Farm is constructed of asphalt and drains moisture to a nearby evaporation basin. Our discussion of technology will address the incredible challenge of removing waste from Hanford's single-shell tanks. Under the terms of the Tri-Party Agreement, ORP is required to remove 99 percent of the tank waste, or until the limits of technology have been reached. All pumpable liquids have been removed from the single-shell tanks, and work now focuses on removing the non-pumpable liquids. Waste retrieval was completed from the first single-shell tank in late 2003. Since then, another six single-shell tanks have been retrieved to regulatory standards. (authors)

  6. Toxic chemical considerations for tank farm releases

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Van Keuren, J.C.; Davis, J.S., Westinghouse Hanford

    1996-08-01

    This topical report contains technical information used to determine the accident consequences of releases of toxic chemical and gases for the Tank Farm Final Safety Analysis report (FSAR).It does not provide results for specific accident scenarios but does provide information for use in those calculations including chemicals to be considered, chemical concentrations, chemical limits and a method of summing the fractional contributions of each chemical. Tank farm composites evaluated were liquids and solids for double shell tanks, single shell tanks, all solids,all liquids, headspace gases, and 241-C-106 solids. Emergency response planning guidelines (ERPGs) were used as the limits.Where ERPGs were not available for the chemicals of interest, surrogate ERPGs were developed. Revision 2 includes updated sample data, an executive summary, and some editorial revisions.

  7. 241-AW Tank Farm Construction Extent of Condition Review for Tank Integrity

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barnes, Travis J.; Gunter, Jason R.; Reeploeg, Gretchen E.

    2013-11-19

    This report provides the results of an extent of condition construction history review for the 241-AW tank farm. The construction history of the 241-AW tank farm has been reviewed to identify issues similar to those experienced during tank AY-102 construction. Those issues and others impacting integrity are discussed based on information found in available construction records, using tank AY-102 as the comparison benchmark. In the 241-AW tank farm, the fourth double-shell tank farm constructed, similar issues as those with tank 241-AY-102 construction occured. The overall extent of similary and affect on 241-AW tank farm integrity is described herein.

  8. TANK FARM INTERIM SURFACE BARRIER MATERIALS AND RUNOFF ALTERNATIVES STUDY

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HOLM MJ

    2009-06-25

    This report identifies candidate materials and concepts for interim surface barriers in the single-shell tank farms. An analysis of these materials for application to the TY tank farm is also provided.

  9. Independent Oversight Activity Report, Hanford Tank Farms - March...

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

    March 10-12, 2014 Independent Oversight Activity Report, Hanford Tank Farms - March 10-12, 2014 March 10-12, 2014 Hanford Tank Farm Operations HIAR-HANFORD-2014-03-10 This...

  10. Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary - October 2009 | Department...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    October 2009 Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary - October 2009 Meeting Summary for Development of the Hanford Site C Tank Farm Performance Assessment PDF icon Hanford Site C...

  11. Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary - March 2010 | Department...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    March 2010 Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary - March 2010 Meeting Summary for Development of the Hanford Site C Tank Farm Performance Assessment PDF icon Meeting Summary for...

  12. ICPP tank farm closure study. Volume 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Spaulding, B.C.; Gavalya, R.A.; Dahlmeir, M.M.

    1998-02-01

    The disposition of INEEL radioactive wastes is now under a Settlement Agreement between the DOE and the State of Idaho. The Settlement Agreement requires that existing liquid sodium bearing waste (SBW), and other liquid waste inventories be treated by December 31, 2012. This agreement also requires that all HLW, including calcined waste, be disposed or made road ready to ship from the INEEL by 2035. Sodium bearing waste (SBW) is produced from decontamination operations and HLW from reprocessing of SNF. SBW and HLW are radioactive and hazardous mixed waste; the radioactive constituents are regulated by DOE and the hazardous constituents are regulated by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Calcined waste, a dry granular material, is produced in the New Waste Calcining Facility (NWCF). Two primary waste tank storage locations exist at the ICPP: Tank Farm Facility (TFF) and the Calcined Solids Storage Facility (CSSF). The TFF has the following underground storage tanks: four 18,400-gallon tanks (WM 100-102, WL 101); four 30,000-gallon tanks (WM 103-106); and eleven 300,000+ gallon tanks. This includes nine 300,000-gallon tanks (WM 182-190) and two 318,000 gallon tanks (WM 180-181). This study analyzes the closure and subsequent use of the eleven 300,000+ gallon tanks. The 18,400 and 30,000-gallon tanks were not included in the work scope and will be closed as a separate activity. This study was conducted to support the HLW Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) waste separations options and addresses closure of the 300,000-gallon liquid waste storage tanks and subsequent tank void uses. A figure provides a diagram estimating how the TFF could be used as part of the separations options. Other possible TFF uses are also discussed in this study.

  13. 241-AP Tank Farm Construction Extent of Condition Review for Tank Integrity

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barnes, Travis J.; Gunter, Jason R.; Reeploeg, Gretchen E.

    2014-04-04

    This report provides the results of an extent of condition construction history review for the 241-AP tank farm. The construction history of the 241-AP tank farm has been reviewed to identify issues similar to those experienced during tank AY-102 construction. Those issues and others impacting integrity are discussed based on information found in available construction records, using tank AY-102 as the comparison benchmark. In the 241-AP tank farm, the sixth double-shell tank farm constructed, tank bottom flatness, refractory material quality, post-weld stress relieving, and primary tank bottom weld rejection were improved.

  14. Vadose zone characterization project at the Hanford Tank Farms: BY Tank Farm report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kos, S.E.

    1997-02-01

    The US Department of Energy Grand Junction Office (GJO) was tasked by the DOE Richland Operations Office (DOE-RL) to perform a baseline characterization of the contamination distributed in the vadoze zone sediment beneath and around the single-shell tanks (SSTs) at the Hanford Site. The intent of this characterization is to determine the nature and extent of the contamination, to identify contamination sources, and to develop a baseline of the contamination distribution that will permit future data comparisons. This characterization work also allows an initial assessment of the impacts of the vadose zone contamination as required by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). This characterization project involves acquiring information about the vadose zone contamination with borehole geophysical logging methods and documenting that information in a series of reports. Data from boreholes surrounding each tank are compiled into individual Tank Summary Data Reports. The data from each tank farm are then compiled and summarized in a Tank Farm Report. This document is the Tank Farm Report for the BY Tank Farm.

  15. ICPP tank farm closure study. Volume 2: Engineering design files

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-02-01

    Volume 2 contains the following topical sections: Tank farm heel flushing/pH adjustment; Grouting experiments for immobilization of tank farm heel; Savannah River high level waste tank 20 closure; Tank farm closure information; Clean closure of tank farm; Remediation issues; Remote demolition techniques; Decision concerning EIS for debris treatment facility; CERCLA/RCRA issues; Area of contamination determination; Containment building of debris treatment facility; Double containment issues; Characterization costs; Packaging and disposal options for the waste resulting from the total removal of the tank farm; Take-off calculations for the total removal of soils and structures at the tank farm; Vessel off-gas systems; Jet-grouted polymer and subsurface walls; Exposure calculations for total removal of tank farm; Recommended instrumentation during retrieval operations; High level waste tank concrete encasement evaluation; Recommended heavy equipment and sizing equipment for total removal activities; Tank buoyancy constraints; Grout and concrete formulas for tank heel solidification; Tank heel pH requirements; Tank cooling water; Evaluation of conservatism of vehicle loading on vaults; Typical vault dimensions and approximately tank and vault void volumes; Radiological concerns for temporary vessel off-gas system; Flushing calculations for tank heels; Grout lift depth analysis; Decontamination solution for waste transfer piping; Grout lift determination for filling tank and vault voids; sprung structure vendor data; Grout flow properties through a 2--4 inch pipe; Tank farm load limitations; NRC low level waste grout; Project data sheet calculations; Dose rates for tank farm closure tasks; Exposure and shielding calculations for grout lines; TFF radionuclide release rates; Documentation of the clean closure of a system with listed waste discharge; and Documentation of the ORNL method of radionuclide concentrations in tanks.

  16. Independent Oversight Review, Hanford Tank Farms - April 2013 | Department

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

    of Energy Tank Farms - April 2013 Independent Oversight Review, Hanford Tank Farms - April 2013 April 2013 Review of Management of Safety Systems at the Hanford Tank Farms The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Enforcement and Oversight (Independent Oversight), within the Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS), conducted an independent review of the management of safety class or safety significant structures, systems and components (hereinafter referred to as safety systems) at

  17. Voluntary Protection Program Onsite Review, Tank Farm Operations Contract -

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    November 2010 | Department of Energy Tank Farm Operations Contract - November 2010 Voluntary Protection Program Onsite Review, Tank Farm Operations Contract - November 2010 November 2010 Evaluation to determine whether the Tank Farm Operations Contract is continuing to perform at a level deserving DOE-VPP Star recognition. The Team conducted its review during November 1 - 11, 2010 to determine whether Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC is continuing to perform at a level deserving

  18. PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES FOR TANK FARM CLOSURE PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MANN, F.M.; CRUMPLER, J.D.

    2005-09-30

    This report documents the performance objectives (metrics, times of analyses, and times of compliance) to be used in performance assessments of Hanford Site tank farm closure.

  19. Independent Oversight Activity Report, Hanford Tank Farms- June 2013

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Office of River Protection Assessment of Contractor Quality Assurance, Operational Awareness at the Hanford Tank Farms [HIAR NNSS-2012-12-03

  20. Independent Oversight Review, Hanford Tank Farms - December 2012...

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

    - December 2012 December 2012 Review of the Hanford Tank Farms Radiological Controls Activity-Level Implementation This report documents an independent review by the Office of...

  1. 241-AZ Tank Farm Construction Extent of Condition Review for Tank Integrity

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barnes, Travis J.; Boomer, Kayle D.; Gunter, Jason R.; Venetz, Theodore J.

    2013-07-30

    This report provides the results of an extent of condition construction history review for tanks 241-AZ-101 and 241-AZ-102. The construction history of the 241-AZ tank farm has been reviewed to identify issues similar to those experienced during tank AY-102 construction. Those issues and others impacting integrity are discussed based on information found in available construction records, using tank AY-102 as the comparison benchmark. In the 241-AZ tank farm, the second DST farm constructed, both refractory quality and tank and liner fabrication were improved.

  2. 241-SY Tank Farm Construction Extent of Condition Review for Tank Integrity

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barnes, Travis J.; Boomer, Kayle D.; Gunter, Jason R.; Venetz, Theodore J.

    2013-07-25

    This report provides the results of an extent of condition construction history review for tanks 241-SY-101, 241-SY-102, and 241-SY-103. The construction history of the 241-SY tank farm has been reviewed to identify issues similar to those experienced during tank 241-AY-102 construction. Those issues and others impacting integrity are discussed based on information found in available construction records, using tank 241-AY-102 as the comparison benchmark. In the 241-SY tank farm, the third DST farm constructed, refractory quality and stress relief were improved, while similar tank and liner fabrication issues remained.

  3. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SAMPLING OF TANK 19 IN F TANK FARM

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Harris, S.; Shine, G.

    2009-12-14

    Representative sampling is required for characterization of the residual material in Tank 19 prior to operational closure. Tank 19 is a Type IV underground waste storage tank located in the F-Tank Farm. It is a cylindrical-shaped, carbon steel tank with a diameter of 85 feet, a height of 34.25 feet, and a working capacity of 1.3 million gallons. Tank 19 was placed in service in 1961 and initially received a small amount of low heat waste from Tank 17. It then served as an evaporator concentrate (saltcake) receiver from February 1962 to September 1976. Tank 19 also received the spent zeolite ion exchange media from a cesium removal column that once operated in the Northeast riser of the tank to remove cesium from the evaporator overheads. Recent mechanical cleaning of the tank removed all mounds of material. Anticipating a low level of solids in the residual waste, Huff and Thaxton [2009] developed a plan to sample the waste during the final clean-up process while it would still be resident in sufficient quantities to support analytical determinations in four quadrants of the tank. Execution of the plan produced fewer solids than expected to support analytical determinations in all four quadrants. Huff and Thaxton [2009] then restructured the plan to characterize the residual separately in the North and the South regions: two 'hemispheres.' This document provides sampling recommendations to complete the characterization of the residual material on the tank bottom following the guidance in Huff and Thaxton [2009] to split the tank floor into a North and a South hemisphere. The number of samples is determined from a modification of the formula previously published in Edwards [2001] and the sample characterization data for previous sampling of Tank 19 described by Oji [2009]. The uncertainty is quantified by an upper 95% confidence limit (UCL95%) on each analyte's mean concentration in Tank 19. The procedure computes the uncertainty in analyte concentration as a function of the number of samples, and the final number of samples is determined when the reduction in the uncertainty from an additional sample no longer has a practical impact on results. The characterization of the full suite of analytes in the North and South hemispheres is currently supported by a single Mantis rover sample in each hemisphere. A floor scrape sample was obtained from a compact region near the center riser slightly in the South hemisphere and has been analyzed for a shortened list of key analytes. There is not enough additional material from the floor scrape sample material for completing the full suite of constituents. No floor scrape samples have been previously taken from the North hemisphere. The criterion to determine the number of additional samples was based on the practical reduction in the uncertainty when a new sample is added. This was achieved when five additional samples are obtained. In addition, two archived samples will be used if a contingency such as failing to demonstrate the comparability of the Mantis samples to the floor scrape samples occurs. To complete sampling of the Tank 19 residual floor material, four additional samples should be taken from the North hemisphere and four additional samples should be taken from the South hemisphere. One of the samples from each hemisphere will be archived in case of need. Three of the four additional samples from each hemisphere will be analyzed. Once the results are available, differences between the Mantis and three floor scrape sample results will be evaluated. If there are no statistically significant analyte concentration differences between the Mantis and floor scrape samples, those results will be combined and then UCL95%s will be calculated. If the analyte concentration differences between the Mantis and floor scrape samples are statistically significant, the UCL95%s will be calculated without the Mantis sample results. If further reduction in the upper confidence limits is needed and can be achieved by the addition of the archived samples, they will be analyzed and included in t

  4. AX Tank farm closure settlement estimates and soil testing

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BECKER, D.L.

    1999-03-25

    This study provides a conservative three-dimensional settlement study of the AX Tank Farm closure with fill materials and a surface barrier. The finite element settlement model constructed included the interaction of four tanks and the surface barrier with the site soil and bedrock. Also addressed are current soil testing techniques suitable for the site soil with recommendations applicable to the AX Tank Farm and the planned cone penetration testing.

  5. Criticality Safety Evaluation of Hanford Tank Farms Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    WEISS, E.V.

    2000-12-15

    Data and calculations from previous criticality safety evaluations and analyses were used to evaluate criticality safety for the entire Tank Farms facility to support the continued waste storage mission. This criticality safety evaluation concludes that a criticality accident at the Tank Farms facility is an incredible event due to the existing form (chemistry) and distribution (neutron absorbers) of tank waste. Limits and controls for receipt of waste from other facilities and maintenance of tank waste condition are set forth to maintain the margin subcriticality in tank waste.

  6. CRITICAL ASSUMPTIONS IN THE F-TANK FARM CLOSURE OPERATIONAL DOCUMENTATION REGARDING WASTE TANK INTERNAL CONFIGURATIONS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hommel, S.; Fountain, D.

    2012-03-28

    The intent of this document is to provide clarification of critical assumptions regarding the internal configurations of liquid waste tanks at operational closure, with respect to F-Tank Farm (FTF) closure documentation. For the purposes of this document, FTF closure documentation includes: (1) Performance Assessment for the F-Tank Farm at the Savannah River Site (hereafter referred to as the FTF PA) (SRS-REG-2007-00002), (2) Basis for Section 3116 Determination for Closure of F-Tank Farm at the Savannah River Site (DOE/SRS-WD-2012-001), (3) Tier 1 Closure Plan for the F-Area Waste Tank Systems at the Savannah River Site (SRR-CWDA-2010-00147), (4) F-Tank Farm Tanks 18 and 19 DOE Manual 435.1-1 Tier 2 Closure Plan Savannah River Site (SRR-CWDA-2011-00015), (5) Industrial Wastewater Closure Module for the Liquid Waste Tanks 18 and 19 (SRRCWDA-2010-00003), and (6) Tank 18/Tank 19 Special Analysis for the Performance Assessment for the F-Tank Farm at the Savannah River Site (hereafter referred to as the Tank 18/Tank 19 Special Analysis) (SRR-CWDA-2010-00124). Note that the first three FTF closure documents listed apply to the entire FTF, whereas the last three FTF closure documents listed are specific to Tanks 18 and 19. These two waste tanks are expected to be the first two tanks to be grouted and operationally closed under the current suite of FTF closure documents and many of the assumptions and approaches that apply to these two tanks are also applicable to the other FTF waste tanks and operational closure processes.

  7. Lessons Learned and Best Practices in Savannah River Site Saltstone and Tank Farm Performance Assessments

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Lessons Learned and Best Practices in Savannah River Site Saltstone and Tank Farm Performance Assessments

  8. Tank Farm Area Cleanup Decision-Making

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

    Area Cleanup Decision-Making Groundwater Vadose Zone Single Shell Tank System Closure (tanks, structures and pipelines) * Washington State Hazardous Waste Management Act (Resource...

  9. Supporting document for the historical tank content estimate for AN-tank farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H.; Stroup, J.L.; Funk, J.W., Fluor Daniel Hanford

    1997-03-06

    This Supporting Document provides historical in-depth characterization information on AN-Tank Farm, such as historical waste transfer and level data, tank physical information, temperature plots, liquid observation well plots, chemical analyte and radionuclide inventories for the Historical Tank Content Estimate Report for the Southeast Quadrant of the Hanford 200 Areas.

  10. Supporting document for the historical tank content estimate for C-tank farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H.

    1996-06-28

    This Supporting Document provides historical in-depth characterization information on C-Tank Farm, such as historical waste transfer and level data, tank physical information,temperature plots, liquid observation well plots, chemical analyte and radionuclide inventories for the Historical Tank Content Estimate Report for the northeast quadrant of the Hanford 200 East Area.

  11. Supporting document for the historical tank content estimate for BY-Tank farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H.

    1996-06-28

    This Supporting Document provides historical in-depth characterization information on BY-Tank Farm, such as historical waste transfer and level data, tank physical information,temperature plots, liquid observation well plots, chemical analyte and radionuclide inventories for the Historical Tank Content Estimate Report for the northeast quadrant of the Hanford 200 East Area.

  12. Supporting document for the historical tank content estimate for AP-tank farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H.; Stroup, J.L.; Funk, J.W., Fluor Daniel Hanford

    1997-03-06

    This Supporting Document provides historical in-depth characterization information on AP-Tank Farm, such as historical waste transfer and level data, tank physical information, temperature plots, liquid observation well plots, chemical analyte and radionuclide inventories for the Historical Tank Content Estimate Report for the Southeast Quadrant of the Hanford 200 Areas.

  13. Supporting document for the historical tank content estimate for AW-tank farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H., Stroup, J.L.; Funk, J.W., Fluor Daniel Hanford

    1997-03-06

    This Supporting Document provides historical in-depth characterization information on AW-Tank Farm, such as historical waste transfer and level data, tank physical information, temperature plots, liquid observation well plots, chemical analyte and radionuclide inventories for the Historical Tank Content Estimate Report for the Southeast Quadrant of the Hanford 200 Areas.

  14. Supporting document for the historical tank content estimate for A-Tank farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H.

    1996-06-28

    This Supporting Document provides historical in-depth characterization information on A-Tank Farm, such as historical waste transfer and level data, tank physical information,temperature plots, liquid observation well plots, chemical analyte and radionuclide inventories for the Historical Tank Content Estimate Report for the northeast quadrant of the Hanford 200 East Area.

  15. Supporting document for the historical tank content estimate for BX-tank farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H.

    1996-06-28

    This Supporting Document provides historical in-depth characterization information on BX-Tank Farm, such as historical waste transfer and level data, tank physical information,temperature plots, liquid observation well plots, chemical analyte and radionuclide inventories for the Historical Tank Content Estimate Report for the northeast quadrant of the Hanford 200 East Area.

  16. Supporting document for the historical tank content estimate for AY-tank farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C H; Stroup, J L; Funk, J. W.

    1997-03-12

    This Supporting Document provides historical in-depth characterization information on AY-Tank Farm, such as historical waste transfer and level data, tank physical information, temperature plots, liquid observation well plots, chemical analyte and radionuclide inventories for the Historical Tank Content Estimate Report for the Southeast Quadrant of the Hanford 200 Areas.

  17. Supporting document for the historical tank content estimate for the S-tank farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H., Fluor Daniel Hanford

    1997-02-25

    This Supporting Document provides historical in-depth characterization information on S-Tank Farm, such as historical waste transfer and level data, tank physical information, temperature plots, liquid observation well plots, chemical analyte and radionuclide inventories for the Historical Tank Content Estimate Report for the Southwest Quadrant of the Hanford 200 West Area.

  18. Supporting document for the historical tank content estimate for B-Tank farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H.

    1996-06-28

    This Supporting Document provides historical in-depth characterization information on B-Tank Farm, such as historical waste transfer and level data, tank physical information,temperature plots, liquid observation well plots, chemical analyte and radionuclide inventories for the Historical Tank Content Estimate Report for the northeast quadrant of the Hanford 200 East Area.

  19. Supporting document for the historical tank content estimate for AX-tank farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H., Westinghouse Hanford

    1996-06-28

    This Supporting Document provides historical in-depth characterization information on AX-Tank Farm, such as historical waste transfer and level data, tank physical information,temperature plots, liquid observation well plots, chemical analyte and radionuclide inventories for the Historical Tank Content Estimate Report for the northeast quadrant of the Hanford 200 East Area.

  20. Supporting document for the historical tank content estimate for the SX-tank farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H., Fluor Daniel Hanford

    1997-02-25

    This Supporting Document provides historical in-depth characterization information on SX-Tank Farm, such as historical waste transfer and level data, tank physical information, temperature plots, liquid observation well plots, chemical analyte and radionuclide inventories for the Historical Tank Content Estimate Report for the Southwest Quadrant of the Hanford 200 West Area.

  1. F-Tank Farm Performance Assessment, Rev 1

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Draft Basis for Section 3116 Determination for Closure of F-Tank Farm at the Savannah River Site.  In accordance with NDAA Section 3116, certain waste from reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel is not...

  2. Technical Baseline Summary Description for the Tank Farm Contractor

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    TEDESCHI, A.R.

    2000-04-21

    This document is a revision of the document titled above, summarizing the technical baseline of the Tank Farm Contractor. It is one of several documents prepared by CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc. to support the U.S. Department of Energy Office of River Protection Tank Waste Retrieval and Disposal Mission at Hanford.

  3. Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    ... different types of waste and the efficiency of each removal technology is a ... interior of the tanks and the contour map of residuals left in the tanks after retrieval. ...

  4. Conceptual design report for tank farm restoration and safe operations, project W-314

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Briggs, S.R., Westinghouse Hanford

    1996-05-02

    This Conceptual Design Report (CDR) presents the conceptual level design approach that satisfies the established technical requirements for Project W-314, `Tank Farm Restoration and Safe Operations.` The CDR also addresses the initial cost and schedule baselines for performing the proposed Tank Farm infrastructure upgrades. The scope of this project includes capital improvements to Hanford`s existing tank farm facilities(primarily focused on Double- Shell Tank Farms) in the areas of instrumentation/control, tank ventilation, waste transfer, and electrical systems.

  5. Tank Farms Regulator Perspective Hanford Advisory Board

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

    Decree compliant Identify areas of improvement Determine need for double shell tank space Case 1* Consent Decree Compliant Case 2* Direct Feed Low-Activity Waste and...

  6. Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    4800 EDTECN: DRF UC: Cost Center: Charge Code: B&R Code: Total Pages: 13 Key Words: Waste Management Area C, Performance Assessment, tank closure, waste inventory...

  7. Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    EDTECN: DRF UC: Cost Center: Charge Code: B&R Code: Total Pages: 16 Key Words: Waste Management Area C, Perfonnance Assessment, tank closure, waste inventory...

  8. Hanford Tank Farm Workers Begin Tank Waste Retrieval Ahead of Schedule

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    RICHLAND, Wash. – EM’s Office of River Protection (ORP) and tank farms contractor Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) began retrieving waste from underground double-shell tank AY-102 this month, ahead of schedule, meeting requirements of a settlement agreement with the State of Washington.

  9. AX tank farm waste inventory study for the Hanford Tanks Initiative (HTI) project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Becker, D.L.

    1997-12-22

    In May of 1996, the US Department of Energy implemented a four-year demonstration project identified as the Hanford Tanks Initiative (HTI). The HTI mission is to minimize technical uncertainties and programmatic risks by conducting demonstrations to characterize and remove tank waste using technologies and methods that will be needed in the future to carry out tank waste remediation and tank farm closure at the Hanford Site. Included in the HTI scope is the development of retrieval performance evaluation criteria supporting readiness to close single-shell tanks in the future. A path forward that includes evaluation of closure basis alternatives has been outlined to support the development of retrieval performance evaluation criteria for the AX Farm, and eventual preparation of the SEIS for AX Farm closure. This report documents the results of the Task 4, Waste Inventory study performed to establish the best-basis inventory of waste contaminants for the AX Farm, provides a means of estimating future soil inventories, and provides data for estimating the nature and extent of contamination (radionuclide and chemical) resulting from residual tank waste subsequent to retrieval. Included in the report are a best-basis estimate of the existing radionuclide and chemical inventory in the AX Farm Tanks, an estimate of the nature and extent of existing radiological and chemical contamination from past leaks, a best-basis estimate of the radionuclide and chemical inventory in the AX Farm Tanks after retrieval of 90 percent, 99 percent, and 99.9 percent of the waste, and an estimate of the nature and extent of radionuclide and chemical contamination resulting from retrieval of waste for an assumed leakage from the tanks during retrieval.

  10. Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    o To avoid these problems, they will use a bounding max based on data since not enough data to figure central tendency. o C-200 tanks had big difference between estimated...

  11. EIA-813, Monthly Crude Oil Report Page 1 U. S. ENERGY INFORMATION...

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

    crude oil storage capacity of tanks and underground caverns. Include tanks and underground storage capacity at tank farms as well as working and breakout capacity of tanks...

  12. PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT for the H-AREA TANK FARM at the SAVANNAH...

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

    PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT for the H-AREA TANK FARM at the SAVANNAH RIVER SITE PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT for the H-AREA TANK FARM at the SAVANNAH RIVER SITE This Performance Assessment ...

  13. Draft Performance Assessment for the F-Tank Farm at the Savannah...

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

    Draft Performance Assessment for the F-Tank Farm at the Savannah River Site Draft Performance Assessment for the F-Tank Farm at the Savannah River Site This Performance Assessment ...

  14. Independent Oversight Review, Hanford Site Tank Farms 222-S Laboratory – January 2014

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Review of the Hanford Tank Farms Safety Management Program Implementation Electrical Safety in the 222-S Laboratory

  15. Tank farms solid waste characterization guide with sampling and analysis plan attachment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Quigley, J.T.

    1997-04-02

    This document describes methods used, including sampling and analysis, to characterize hazardous chemical constituent in Tank Farms containerized solid waste.

  16. Stabilization of in-tank residual wastes and external-tank soil contamination for the tank focus area, Hanford tank initiative: Applications to the AX Tank Farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Balsley, S.D.; Krumhansl, J.L.; Borns, D.J.; McKeen, R.G.

    1998-07-01

    A combined engineering and geochemistry approach is recommended for the stabilization of waste in decommissioned tanks and contaminated soils at the AX Tank Farm, Hanford, WA. A two-part strategy of desiccation and gettering is proposed for treatment of the in-tank residual wastes. Dry portland cement and/or fly ash are suggested as an effective and low-cost desiccant for wicking excess moisture from the upper waste layer. Getters work by either ion exchange or phase precipitation to reduce radionuclide concentrations in solution. The authors recommend the use of specific natural and man-made compounds, appropriately proportioned to the unique inventory of each tank. A filler design consisting of multilayered cementitous grout with interlayered sealant horizons should serve to maintain tank integrity and minimize fluid transport to the residual waste form. External tank soil contamination is best mitigated by placement of grouted skirts under and around each tank, together with installation of a cone-shaped permeable reactive barrier beneath the entire tank farm. Actinide release rates are calculated from four tank closure scenarios ranging from no action to a comprehensive stabilization treatment plan (desiccant/getters/grouting/RCRA cap). Although preliminary, these calculations indicate significant reductions in the potential for actinide transport as compared to the no-treatment option.

  17. Hanford Tank Farm interim storage phase probabilistic risk assessment outline

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-05-19

    This report is the second in a series examining the risks for the high level waste (HLW) storage facilities at the Hanford Site. The first phase of the HTF PSA effort addressed risks from Tank 101-SY, only. Tank 101-SY was selected as the initial focus of the PSA because of its propensity to periodically release (burp) a mixture of flammable and toxic gases. This report expands the evaluation of Tank 101-SY to all 177 storage tanks. The 177 tanks are arranged into 18 farms and contain the HLW accumulated over 50 years of weapons material production work. A centerpiece of the remediation activity is the effort toward developing a permanent method for disposing of the HLW tank`s highly radioactive contents. One approach to risk based prioritization is to perform a PSA for the whole HLW tank farm complex to identify the highest risk tanks so that remediation planners and managers will have a more rational basis for allocating limited funds to the more critical areas. Section 3 presents the qualitative identification of generic initiators that could threaten to produce releases from one or more tanks. In section 4 a detailed accident sequence model is developed for each initiating event group. Section 5 defines the release categories to which the scenarios are assigned in the accident sequence model and presents analyses of the airborne and liquid source terms resulting from different release scenarios. The conditional consequences measured by worker or public exposure to radionuclides or hazardous chemicals and economic costs of cleanup and repair are analyzed in section 6. The results from all the previous sections are integrated to produce unconditional risk curves in frequency of exceedance format.

  18. Supporting document for the historical tank content estimate for S tank farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H.; Gaddis, L.A.; Walsh, A.C.

    1994-06-01

    This document provides historical evaluations of the radioactive mixed wastes stored in the Hanford Site 200 West Area underground single-shell tanks (SSTs). A Historical Tank Content Estimate has been developed by reviewing the process histories, waste transfer data, and available physical and chemical characterization data from various Department of Energy (DOE) and Department of Defense (DOD) contractors. The historical data will supplement information gathered from in-tank core sampling activities that are currently underway. A tank history review that is accompanied by current characterization data creates a complete and reliable inventory estimate. Additionally, historical review of the tanks may reveal anomalies or unusual contents that are critical to characterization and post characterization activities. Complete and accurate tank waste characterizations are critical first steps for DOE and Westinghouse Hanford Company safety programs, waste pretreatment, and waste retrieval activities. The scope of this document is limited to all the SSTs in the S Tank Farm of the southwest quadrant of the 200 West Area. Nine appendices compile data on: tank level histories; temperature graphs; surface level graphs; drywell graphs; riser configuration and tank cross section; sampling data; tank photographs; unknown tank transfers; and tank layering comparison. 113 refs.

  19. HANFORD SITE RIVER PROTECTION PROJECT (RPP) TANK FARM CLOSURE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    JARAYSI, M.N.; SMITH, Z.; QUINTERO, R.; BURANDT, M.B.; HEWITT, W.

    2006-01-30

    The U. S. Department of Energy, Office of River Protection and the CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc. are responsible for the operations, cleanup, and closure activities at the Hanford Tank Farms. There are 177 tanks overall in the tank farms, 149 single-shell tanks (see Figure 1), and 28 double-shell tanks (see Figure 2). The single-shell tanks were constructed 40 to 60 years ago and all have exceeded their design life. The single-shell tanks do not meet Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 [1] requirements. Accordingly, radioactive waste is being retrieved from the single-shell tanks and transferred to double-shell tanks for storage prior to treatment through vitrification and disposal. Following retrieval of as much waste as is technically possible from the single-shell tanks, the Office of River Protection plans to close the single-shell tanks in accordance with the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order [2] and the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 [3] requirements. The double-shell tanks will remain in operation through much of the cleanup mission until sufficient waste has been treated such that the Office of River Protection can commence closing the double-shell tanks. At the current time, however, the focus is on retrieving waste and closing the single-shell tanks. The single-shell tanks are being managed and will be closed in accordance with the pertinent requirements in: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 and its Washington State-authorized Dangerous Waste Regulations [4], US DOE Order 435.1 Radioactive Waste Management [5], the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 [6], and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 [7]. The Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, which is commonly referred to as the Tri-Party Agreement or TPA, was originally signed by Department of Energy, the State of Washington, and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency in 1989. Meanwhile, the retrieval of the waste is under way and is being conducted to achieve the completion criteria established in the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order.

  20. Tank farm stack NESHAP designation determinations. Revision 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Crummel, G.M.

    1996-01-18

    This document provides a determination of the status of Tank Farm Exhausters as regulated by the ``National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants`` (NESHAP) specified in the 40 Series Code of Federal Regulations (CFRs), Part 61, Subpart H, ``National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities.``

  1. Operational test procedure for SY tank farm replacement exhauster unit

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McClees, J.

    1995-09-26

    This operational test procedure will verify that the remaining functions not tested per WHC-SD-WM-ATP-080, or components disturbed during final installation, as well as interfaces with other tank farm equipment and remote monitoring stations are operating correctly.

  2. EIS-0020: Crude Oil Transport Alternate From Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 1 Elk Hills/SOHIO Pipeline Connection Conveyance System, Terminal Tank Farm Relocation to Rialto, California

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Office of Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves developed this supplement to a Department of Navy statement to evaluate the environmental impacts associated with a modified design of a proposed 250,000 barrels per day crude oil conveyance system from Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 1 to connect to the proposed SOHIO West Coast to Midcontinent Pipeline at Rialto, California.

  3. Tank Closure Progress at the Department of Energy's Idaho National Engineering Laboratory Tank Farm Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Quigley, K.D.; Butterworth, St.W.; Lockie, K.A.

    2008-07-01

    Significant progress has been made at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Idaho National Laboratory (INL) to empty, clean and close radioactive liquid waste storage tanks at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC) Tank Farm Facility (TFF). The TFF includes eleven 1,135.6-kL (300,000-gal) underground stainless steel storage tanks and four smaller, 113.5-kL (30,000-gal) stainless steel tanks, along with tank vaults, interconnecting piping, and ancillary equipment. The TFF tanks have historically been used to store a variety of radioactive liquid waste, including wastes associated with past spent nuclear fuel reprocessing. Although four of the large storage tanks remain in use for waste storage, the other seven 1,135.6-kL (300,000-gal) tanks and the four 113.5-kL (30,000-gal) tanks have been emptied of waste, cleaned and filled with grout. A water spray cleaning system was developed and deployed to clean internal tank surfaces and remove remaining tank wastes. The cleaning system was effective in removing all but a very small volume of solid residual waste particles. Recent issuance of an Amended Record of Decision (ROD) in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act, and a Waste Determination complying with Section 3116 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2005, has allowed commencement of grouting activities on the cleaned tanks. The first three 113.5-kL (30,000-gal) tanks were grouted in the Fall of 2006 and the fourth tank and the seven 1,135.6-kL (300,000-gal) tanks were filled with grout in 2007 to provide long-term stability. It is currently planned that associated tank valve boxes and interconnecting piping, will be stabilized with grout as early as 2008. (authors)

  4. Hanford Single-Shell Tank Leak Causes and Locations - 241-B Farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Girardot, Crystal L.; Harlow, Donald G.

    2013-07-11

    This document identifies 241-B Tank Farm (B Farm) leak cause and locations for the 100 series leaking tank (241-B-107) identified in RPP-RPT-49089, Hanford B-Farm Leak Inventory Assessments Report. This document satisfies the B Farm portion of the target (T04) in the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order milestone M-045-91F.

  5. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SAMPLING OF TANK 18 IN F TANK FARM

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shine, G.

    2009-12-14

    Representative sampling is required for characterization of the residual floor material in Tank 18 prior to operational closure. Tank 18 is an 85-foot diameter, 34-foot high carbon steel tank with nominal operating volume of 1,300,000 gallons. It is a Type IV tank, and has been in service storing radioactive materials since 1959. Recent mechanical cleaning of the tank removed all mounds of material. Anticipating a low level of solids in the residual material, Huff and Thaxton [2009] developed a plan to sample the material during the final clean-up process while it would still be resident in sufficient quantities to support analytical determinations in four quadrants of the tank. Execution of the plan produced fewer solids than expected to support analytical determinations in all four quadrants. Huff and Thaxton [2009] then restructured the plan to characterize the residual floor material separately in the North and the South regions: two 'hemispheres.' This document provides sampling recommendations to complete the characterization of the residual material on the tank bottom following the guidance in Huff and Thaxton [2009] to split the tank floor into a North and a South hemisphere. The number of samples is determined from a modification of the formula previously published in Edwards [2001] and the sample characterization data for previous sampling of Tank 18 described by Oji [2009]. The uncertainty is quantified by an upper 95% confidence limit (UCL95%) on each analyte's mean concentration in Tank 18. The procedure computes the uncertainty in analyte concentration as a function of the number of samples, and the final number of samples is determined when the reduction in the uncertainty from an additional sample no longer has a practical impact on results. The characterization of the full suite of analytes in the North hemisphere is currently supported by a single Mantis rover sample obtained from a compact region near the center riser. A floor scrape sample was obtained from a compact region near the northeast riser and has been analyzed for a shortened list of key analytes. Since the unused portion of the floor scrape sample material is archived and available in sufficient quantity, additional analyses need to be performed to complete results for the full suite of constituents. The characterization of the full suite of analytes in the South hemisphere is currently supported by a single Mantis rover sample; there have been no floor scrape samples previously taken from the South hemisphere. The criterion to determine the number of additional samples was based on the practical reduction in the uncertainty when a new sample is added. This was achieved when five additional samples are obtained. In addition, two archived samples will be used if a contingency such as failing to demonstrate the comparability of the Mantis samples to the floor scrape samples occurs. To complete sampling of the Tank 18 residual floor material, three additional samples should be taken from the North hemisphere and four additional samples should be taken from the South hemisphere. One of the samples from each hemisphere will be archived in case of need. Two of the three additional samples from the North hemisphere and three of the four additional samples from the South hemisphere will be analyzed. Once the results are available, differences between the Mantis and three floor scrape samples (the sample previously obtained near NE riser plus the two additional samples that will be analyzed) results will be evaluated. If there are no statistically significant analyte concentration differences between the Mantis and floor scrape samples, those results will be combined and then UCL95%s will be calculated. If the analyte concentration differences between the Mantis and floor scrape samples are statistically significant, the UCL95%s will be calculated without the Mantis sample results. If further reduction in the upper confidence limits is needed and can be achieved by the addition of the archived samples, they will be analyzed and included in the stati

  6. Tank Farms Regulator Perspective Hanford Advisory Board

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

    Lyon Nuclear Waste Program Washington State Department of Ecology January 8, 2014 Status on C-110 Completion  Ecology agrees that good efforts were made to remove as much waste as possible with the technologies applied.  Residual waste volume estimated at 280 cubic feet which is below the 360 cubic foot goal.  Ecology hopes the same success will be achieved with C-112. Status of Single-Shell Tank T-111  The level decline in T-111 has continued at approximately one inch per year for

  7. SINGLE-SHELL TANKS LEAK INTEGRITY ELEMENTS/SX FARM LEAK CAUSES AND LOCATIONS - 12127

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    VENETZ TJ; WASHENFELDER D; JOHNSON J; GIRARDOT C

    2012-01-25

    Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC (WRPS) developed an enhanced single-shell tank (SST) integrity project in 2009. An expert panel on SST integrity was created to provide recommendations supporting the development of the project. One primary recommendation was to expand the leak assessment reports (substitute report or LD-1) to include leak causes and locations. The recommendation has been included in the M-045-9IF Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) as one of four targets relating to SST leak integrity. The 241-SX Farm (SX Farm) tanks with leak losses were addressed on an individual tank basis as part of LD-1. Currently, 8 out of 23 SSTs that have been reported to having a liner leak are located in SX Farm. This percentage was the highest compared to other tank farms which is why SX Farm was analyzed first. The SX Farm is comprised of fifteen SSTs built 1953-1954. The tanks are arranged in rows of three tanks each, forming a cascade. Each of the SX Farm tanks has a nominal I-million-gal storage capacity. Of the fifteen tanks in SX Farm, an assessment reported leak losses for the following tanks: 241-SX-107, 241-SX-108, 241-SX-109, 241-SX-111, 241-SX-112, 241-SX-113, 241-SX-114 and 241-SX-115. The method used to identify leak location consisted of reviewing in-tank and ex-tank leak detection information. This provided the basic data identifying where and when the first leaks were detected. In-tank leak detection consisted of liquid level measurement that can be augmented with photographs which can provide an indication of the vertical leak location on the sidewall. Ex-tank leak detection for the leaking tanks consisted of soil radiation data from laterals and drywells near the tank. The in-tank and ex-tank leak detection can provide an indication of the possible leak location radially around and under the tank. Potential leak causes were determined using in-tank and ex-tank information that is not directly related to leak detection. In-tank parameters can include temperature of the supernatant and sludge, types of waste, and chemical determination by either transfer or sample analysis. Ex-tank information can be assembled from many sources including design media, construction conditions, technical specifications, and other sources. Five conditions may have contributed to SX Farm tank liner failure including: tank design, thermal shock, chemistry-corrosion, liner behavior (bulging), and construction temperature. Tank design did not apparently change from tank to tank for the SX Farm tanks; however, there could be many unknown variables present in the quality of materials and quality of construction. Several significant SX Farm tank design changes occurred from previous successful tank farm designs. Tank construction occurred in winter under cold conditions which could have affected the ductile to brittle transition temperature of the tanks. The SX Farm tanks received high temperature boiling waste from REDOX which challenged the tank design with rapid heat up and high temperatures. All eight of the leaking SX Farm tanks had relatively high rate of temperature rise. Supernatant removal with subsequent nitrate leaching was conducted in all but three of the eight leaking tanks prior to leaks being detected. It is possible that no one characteristic of the SX Farm tanks could in isolation from the others have resulted in failure. However, the application of so many stressors - heat up rate, high temperature, loss of corrosion protection, and tank design - working jointly or serially resulted in their failure. Thermal shock coupled with the tank design, construction conditions, and nitrate leaching seem to be the overriding factors that can lead to tank liner failure. The distinction between leaking and sound SX Farm tanks seems to center on the waste types, thermal conditions, and nitrate leaching.

  8. Single-Shell Tanks Leak Integrity Elements/ SX Farm Leak Causes and Locations - 12127

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Girardot, Crystal; Harlow, Don; Venetz, Theodore; Washenfelder, Dennis; Johnson, Jeremy

    2012-07-01

    Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC (WRPS) developed an enhanced single-shell tank (SST) integrity project in 2009. An expert panel on SST integrity was created to provide recommendations supporting the development of the project. One primary recommendation was to expand the leak assessment reports (substitute report or LD-1) to include leak causes and locations. The recommendation has been included in the M-045-91F Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) as one of four targets relating to SST leak integrity. The 241-SX Farm (SX Farm) tanks with leak losses were addressed on an individual tank basis as part of LD-1. Currently, 8 out of 23 SSTs that have been reported to having a liner leak are located in SX Farm. This percentage was the highest compared to other tank farms which is why SX Farm was analyzed first. The SX Farm is comprised of fifteen SSTs built 1953-1954. The tanks are arranged in rows of three tanks each, forming a cascade. Each of the SX Farm tanks has a nominal 1-million-gal storage capacity. Of the fifteen tanks in SX Farm, an assessment reported leak losses for the following tanks: 241-SX-107, 241-SX-108, 241-SX-109, 241-SX- 111, 241-SX-112, 241-SX-113, 241-SX-114 and 241-SX-115. The method used to identify leak location consisted of reviewing in-tank and ex-tank leak detection information. This provided the basic data identifying where and when the first leaks were detected. In-tank leak detection consisted of liquid level measurement that can be augmented with photographs which can provide an indication of the vertical leak location on the sidewall. Ex-tank leak detection for the leaking tanks consisted of soil radiation data from laterals and dry-wells near the tank. The in-tank and ex-tank leak detection can provide an indication of the possible leak location radially around and under the tank. Potential leak causes were determined using in-tank and ex-tank information that is not directly related to leak detection. In-tank parameters can include temperature of the supernatant and sludge, types of waste, and chemical determination by either transfer or sample analysis. Ex-tank information can be assembled from many sources including design media, construction conditions, technical specifications, and other sources. Five conditions may have contributed to SX Farm tank liner failure including: tank design, thermal shock, chemistry-corrosion, liner behavior (bulging), and construction temperature. Tank design did not apparently change from tank to tank for the SX Farm tanks; however, there could be many unknown variables present in the quality of materials and quality of construction. Several significant SX Farm tank design changes occurred from previous successful tank farm designs. Tank construction occurred in winter under cold conditions which could have affected the ductile to brittle transition temperature of the tanks. The SX Farm tanks received high temperature boiling waste from REDOX which challenged the tank design with rapid heat up and high temperatures. All eight of the leaking SX Farm tanks had relatively high rate of temperature rise. Supernatant removal with subsequent nitrate leaching was conducted in all but three of the eight leaking tanks prior to leaks being detected. It is possible that no one characteristic of the SX Farm tanks could in isolation from the others have resulted in failure. However, the application of so many stressors - heat up rate, high temperature, loss of corrosion protection, and tank design working jointly or serially resulted in their failure. Thermal shock coupled with the tank design, construction conditions, and nitrate leaching seem to be the overriding factors that can lead to tank liner failure. The distinction between leaking and sound SX Farm tanks seems to center on the waste types, thermal conditions, and nitrate leaching. (authors)

  9. Hanford Single-Shell Tank Leak Causes and Locations - 241-BY and 241-TY Farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Girardot, Crystal L.; Harlow, Donald G.

    2014-09-04

    This document identifies 241-BY Tank Farm (BY Farm) and 241-TY Tank Farm (TY Farm) lead causes and locations for the 100 series leaking tanks (241-BY-103, 241-TY-103, 241-TY-104, 241-TY-105 and 241-TY-106) identified in RPP-RPT-43704, Hanford BY Farm Leak Assessments Report, and in RPP-RPT-42296, Hanford TY Farm Leak Assessments Report. This document satisfies the BY and TY Farm portion of the target (T04) in the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order milestone M-045-91F.

  10. Hanford Single-Shell Tank Leak Causes and Locations - 241-BY and 241-TY Farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Girardot, Crystal L.; Harlow, Donald G.

    2013-11-19

    This document identifies 241-BY Tank Farm (BY Farm) and 241-TY Tank Farm (TY Farm) leak causes and locations for the 100 series leaking tanks (241-BY-103, 241-TY-103, 241-TY-104, 241-TY-105, and 241-TY-106) identified in RPP-RPT-43704, Hanford BY Farm Leak Assessments Report, and in RPP-RPT-42296, Hanford TY Farm Leak Assessments Report. This document satisfies the BY and TY Farm portion of the target (T04) in Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order milestone M-045-91F.

  11. Case Study in Corporate Memory Recovery: Hanford Tank Farms Miscellaneous Underground Waste Storage Tanks - 15344

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Washenfelder, D. J.; Johnson, J. M.; Turknett, J. C.; Barnes, T. J.; Duncan, K. G.

    2015-01-07

    In addition to managing the 177 underground waste storage tanks containing 212,000 m3 (56 million gal) of radioactive waste at the U. S. Department of Energy’s Hanford Site 200 Area Tank Farms, Washington River Protection Solutions LLC is responsible for managing numerous small catch tanks and special surveillance facilities. These are collectively known as “MUSTs” - Miscellaneous Underground Storage Tanks. The MUSTs typically collected drainage and flushes during waste transfer system piping changes; special surveillance facilities supported Tank Farm processes including post-World War II uranium recovery and later fission product recovery from tank wastes. Most were removed from service following deactivation of the single-shell tank system in 1980 and stabilized by pumping the remaining liquids from them. The MUSTs were isolated by blanking connecting transfer lines and adding weatherproofing to prevent rainwater entry. Over the next 30 years MUST operating records were dispersed into large electronic databases or transferred to the National Archives Regional Center in Seattle, Washington. During 2014 an effort to reacquire the historical bases for the MUSTs’ published waste volumes was undertaken. Corporate Memory Recovery from a variety of record sources allowed waste volumes to be initially determined for 21 MUSTs, and waste volumes to be adjusted for 37 others. Precursors and symptoms of Corporate Memory Loss were identified in the context of MUST records recovery.

  12. PORFLOW Modeling Supporting The H-Tank Farm Performance Assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jordan, J. M.; Flach, G. P.; Westbrook, M. L.

    2012-08-31

    Numerical simulations of groundwater flow and contaminant transport in the vadose and saturated zones have been conducted using the PORFLOW code in support of an overall Performance Assessment (PA) of the H-Tank Farm. This report provides technical detail on selected aspects of PORFLOW model development and describes the structure of the associated electronic files. The PORFLOW models for the H-Tank Farm PA, Rev. 1 were updated with grout, solubility, and inventory changes. The aquifer model was refined. In addition, a set of flow sensitivity runs were performed to allow flow to be varied in the related probabilistic GoldSim models. The final PORFLOW concentration values are used as input into a GoldSim dose calculator.

  13. Configuration Management Plan for the Tank Farm Contractor

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    WEIR, W.R.

    2000-04-21

    The Configuration Management Plan for the Tank Farm Contractor describes configuration management the contractor uses to manage and integrate its technical baseline with the programmatic and functional operations to perform work. The Configuration Management Plan for the Tank Farm Contractor supports the management of the project baseline by providing the mechanisms to identify, document, and control the technical characteristics of the products, processes, and structures, systems, and components (SSC). This plan is one of the tools used to identify and provide controls for the technical baseline of the Tank Farm Contractor (TFC). The configuration management plan is listed in the management process documents for TFC as depicted in Attachment 1, TFC Document Structure. The configuration management plan is an integrated approach for control of technical, schedule, cost, and administrative processes necessary to manage the mission of the TFC. Configuration management encompasses the five functional elements of: (1) configuration management administration, (2) configuration identification, (3) configuration status accounting, (4) change control, and (5 ) configuration management assessments.

  14. CHANGING THE SAFETY CULTURE IN HANFORD TANK FARMS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BERRIOCHOA MV; ALCALA LJ

    2009-01-06

    In 2000 the Hanford Tank Farms had one of the worst safety records in the Department of Energy Complex. By the end of FY08 the safety performance of the workforce had turned completely around, resulting in one of the best safety records in the DOE complex for operations of its kind. This paper describes the variety of programs and changes that were put in place to accomplish such a dramatic turn-around. The U.S. Department of Energy's 586-square-mile Hanford Site in Washington State was established during World War II as part of the Manhattan Project to develop nuclear materials to end the war. For the next several decades it continued to produce plutonium for the nation's defense, leaving behind vast quantities of radioactive and chemical waste. Much of this waste, 53,000,000 gallons, remains stored in 149 aging single-shell tanks and 28 newer double-shell tanks. One of the primary objectives at Hanford is to safely manage this waste until it can be prepared for disposal, but this has not always been easy. These giant underground tanks, many of which date back to the beginning of the Manhattan Project, range in size from 55,000 gallons up to 1.1 million gallons, and are buried beneath 10 feet of soil near the center of the site. Up to 67 of the older single-shell tanks have leaked as much as one million gallons into the surrounding soil. Liquids from the single-shell tanks were removed by 2003 but solids remain in the form of saltcake, sludges and a hardened heel at the bottom of some tanks. The Department of Energy's Office of River Protection was established to safely manage this waste until it could be prepared for disposal. For most of the last seven years the focus has been on safely retrieving waste from the 149 aging single-shell and moving it to the newer double-shell tanks. Removing waste from the tanks is a difficult and complex task. The tanks were made to put waste in, not take it out. Because of the toxic nature of the waste, both chemically as well as radiologically, all retrieval operations must be performed using remote-controlled equipment which has to be installed in each tank, then removed when retrieval is completed. This process involves a variety of potentially hazardous construction activities including crane and rigging, excavation, electrical and piping work. It also requires strong attention to safety to avoid injuries to personnel and contamination of the environment.

  15. Supporting document for the north east quadrant historical tank content estimate report for AX-tank farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H.; Gaddis, L.A.; Walsh, A.C.

    1994-06-01

    This Supporting Document provides historical in-depth characterization information gathered in AX-Tank Farm, such as historical waste transfer and level data, tank physical information, temperature data, sampling data, and drywell and liquid observation well data for Historical Tank Content Estimate Report of the NE Quadrant and the Hanford 200 East Areas.

  16. TANK FARM RETRIEVAL LESSONS LEARNED AT THE HANFORD SITE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    DODD RA

    2008-01-22

    One of the environmental remediation challenges facing the nation is the retrieval and permanent disposal of approximately 90 million gallons of radioactive waste stored in underground tanks at the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) facilities. The Hanford Site is located in southeastern Washington State and stores roughly 60 percent of this waste. An estimated 53 million gallons of high-level, transuranic, and low-level radioactive waste is stored underground in 149 single-shell tanks (SSTs) and 28 newer double-shell tanks (DSTs) at the Hanford Site. These SSTs range in size from 55,000 gallons to 1,000,000 gallon capacity. Approximately 30 million gallons of this waste is stored in SSTs. The SSTs were constructed between 1943 and 1964 and all have exceeded the nominal 20-year design life. Sixty-seven SSTs are known or suspected to have leaked an estimated 1,000,000 gallons of waste to the surrounding soil. The risk of additional SST leakage has been greatly reduced by removing more than 3 million gallons of interstitial liquids and supernatant and transferring this waste to the DST system. Retrieval of SST saltcake and sludge waste is underway to further reduce risks and stage feed materials for the Hanford Site Waste Treatment Plant. Regulatory requirements for SST waste retrieval and tank farm closure are established in the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (HFFACO), better known as the TriParty Agreement, or TPA. The HFFACO was signed by the DOE, the State of Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology), and U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and requires retrieval of as much waste as technically possible, with waste residues not to exceed 360 fe in 530,000 gallon or larger tanks; 30 fe in 55,000 gallon or smaller tanks; or the limit of waste retrieval technology, whichever is less. If residual waste volume requirements cannot be achieved, then HFFACO Appendix H provisions can be invoked to request Ecology and EPA approval of an exception to the waste retrieval criteria for a specific tank. Tank waste retrieval has been conducted at the Hanford Site over the last few decades using a method referred to as Past Practice Hydraulic Sluicing. Past Practice Hydraulic Sluicing employs large volumes of DST supernatant and water to dislodge, dissolve, mobilize, and retrieve tank waste. Concern over the leak integrity of SSTs resulted in the need for tank waste retrieval methods capable of using smaller volumes of liquid in a more controlled manner.

  17. Meeting Summaries for Development of the Hanford Site C Tank Farm

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Performance Assessment | Department of Energy Meeting Summaries for Development of the Hanford Site C Tank Farm Performance Assessment Meeting Summaries for Development of the Hanford Site C Tank Farm Performance Assessment The Meeting Summaries for Development of the Hanford Site C Tank Farm Performance Assessment cover informal discussions between representatives of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

  18. Project Design Concept for Transfer Piping For Project W-314 Tank Farm Restoration and Safe Operations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MCGREW, D.L.

    1999-09-28

    This Project Design Concept represents operational requirements for design of transfer piping system for Phase I of Project W-314, Tank Farm Restoration and Safe Operation Upgrades.

  19. 3D Scanner to Help Boost Worker Safety in Hanford Tank Farms

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    RICHLAND, Wash. – A laser scanner is being tested in the Hanford tank farms as a mapping tool to help conduct virtual walk-downs.

  20. Development of Occupational Exposure Limits for the Hanford Tank Farms

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Still, Kenneth; Gardner, Donald; Snyder, Robert; Anderson, Thomas; Honeyman, James; Timchalk, Charles

    2010-04-01

    Production of plutonium for the United States nuclear weapons program from the 1940s to the 1980s generated 53 million gallons of radioactive chemical waste, which is storedin 177 underground tanks at the Hanford Site in southeastern W 18 ashington State. Recent 19 attempts to begin the retrieval and treatment of these wastes require moving the waste to 20 more modern tanks results in potential exposure of the workers to unfamiliar odors 21 emanating from headspace in the tanks. Given the unknown risks involved, workers 22 were placed on supplied air respiratory protection. CH2M HILL, the managers of the 23 Hanford Site Tank Farms, asked an Independent Toxicology Panel (ITP) to assist them in issues relating to an Industrial Hygiene and risk assessment problem. The ITP was called upon to help determine the risk of exposure to vapors from the tanks, and in general develop a strategy for solution of the problem. This paper presents the methods used to determine the chemicals of potential concern (COPC) and the resultant development of screening values and Acceptable Occupational Exposure Limits (AOELs) for these COPCs. A total of 1,826 chemicals were inventoried and evaluated. Over 1,500 chemicals were identified in the waste tanks headspaces and more than 600 of these were assigned screening values; 72 of these compounds were recommended for AOEL development. Included in this list of 72 were 57 COPCs identified by the ITP and of these 47 were subsequently assigned AOELs. An exhaustive exposure assessment strategy was developed by the CH2M HILL industrial hygiene department to evaluate these COPCs.

  1. Hanford Single-Shell Tank Leak Causes and Locations - 241-C Farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Girardot, Crystal L.; Harlow, Donald G.

    2013-07-30

    This document identifies 241-C Tank Farm (C Farm) leak causes and locations for the 100 series leaking tanks (241-C-101 and 241-C-105) identified in RPP-RPT-33418, Rev. 2, Hanford C-Farm Leak Inventory Assessments Report. This document satisfies the C Farm portion of the target (T04) in the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order milestone M-045-91F.

  2. Hanford Single-Shell Tank Leak Causes and Locations - 241-U Farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Girardot, Crystal L.; Harlow, Donald G.

    2013-12-02

    This document identifies 241-U Tank Farm (U Farm) leak causes and locations for the 100 series leaking tanks (241-U-104, 241-U-110, and 241-U-112) identified in RPP-RPT-50097, Rev. 0, Hanford 241-U Farm Leak Inventory Assessment Report. This document satisfies the U-Farm portion of the target (T04) in the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order milestone M-045-91F.

  3. Hanford Single-Shell Tank Leak Causes and Locations - 241-A Farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Girardot, Crystal L.; Harlow, Donald G.

    2013-09-10

    This document identifies 241-A Tank Farm (A Farm) leak causes and locations for the 100 series leaking tanks (241-A-104 and 241-A-105) identified in RPP-ENV-37956, Hanford A and AX Farm Leak Assessment Report. This document satisfies the A Farm portion of the target (T04) in the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order milestone M-045-91F.

  4. Hanford Single Shell Tank Leak Causes and Locations - 241-TX Farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Girardot, C. L.; Harlow, D> G.

    2014-07-22

    This document identifies 241-TX Tank Farm (TX Farm) leak causes and locations for the 100 series leaking tanks (241-TX-107 and 241-TX-114) identified in RPP-RPT-50870, Rev. 0, Hanford 241-TX Farm Leak Inventory Assessment Report. This document satisfies the TX Farm portion of the target (T04) in the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order milestone M-045-91F.

  5. Hanford Single-Shell Tank Leak Causes and Locations - 241-T Farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Girardot, Crystal L.; Harlow, Donald G.

    2014-05-15

    This document identifies 241-T Tank Farm (T Farm) leak causes and locations for the 100 series leaking tanks (241-T-106 and 241-T-111) identified in RPP-RPT-55084, Rev. 0, Hanford 241-T Farm Leak Inventory Assessment Report. This document satisfies the T Farm portion of the target (T04) in the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order milestone M-045-91F.

  6. Radiation Control in Tank farms discussion with HAB

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

    Control in Tank Farms discussion with HAB Health, Safety, Environment Protection Brandon Williams February 14, 2012 Timeline * 2-23-10, ORP initiated an assessment of WRPS Rad Program * 6-9-10, ORP issues RadCon assessment report. - 1 Concern, 3 Level 1 findings, 12 level 2 findings * 11-5-10, WRPS submits a CAP, which ORP approved. - Based on Root causes - An end point/effectiveness review was required * 5-27-11, DOE Office of Enforcement issues a Consent Order based upon ORP identified

  7. Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Financial Analysis for Phase 1 Privatization for the Tank Farm Contractor

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BASCHE, A.D.

    2000-04-22

    The purpose of the Financial Analysis for Phase 1 Privatization for the Tank Farm Contractor is to provide a third-party quantitative and qualitative cost and schedule risk analysis of HNF-1946. The purpose of this Financial Analysis for Phase 1 Privatization for the Tank Farm Contractor (TFC) is to document the results of the risk-based financial analysis of HNF-1946, Programmatic Baseline Summary for Phase 1 Privatization f o r the Tank Farm Contractor (Diediker 2000). This analysis was performed to evaluate how well the proposed baseline meets the U. S. Department of Energy, Office of River Protection (ORP) Letter OO-MSO-009, ''Contract NO. DE-AC06-99RL14047--The US Department of Energy, Office of River Protection (ORP) Mission Planning Guidance for Fiscal Year (FY) 2002--Revision 1'' (Short 2000). The letter requires a confidence level in the baseline schedule that is consistent with the Phase 1A readiness-to-proceed (RTP) assessment conducted in fiscal year (FY) 1998. Because the success of the project depends not only on the budget but also on the schedule, this risk analysis addresses both components of the baseline.

  8. TECHNICAL BASIS FOR VENTILATION REQUIREMENTS IN TANK FARMS OPERATING SPECIFICATIONS DOCUMENTS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BERGLIN, E J

    2003-06-23

    This report provides the technical basis for high efficiency particulate air filter (HEPA) for Hanford tank farm ventilation systems (sometimes known as heating, ventilation and air conditioning [HVAC]) to support limits defined in Process Engineering Operating Specification Documents (OSDs). This technical basis included a review of older technical basis and provides clarifications, as necessary, to technical basis limit revisions or justification. This document provides an updated technical basis for tank farm ventilation systems related to Operation Specification Documents (OSDs) for double-shell tanks (DSTs), single-shell tanks (SSTs), double-contained receiver tanks (DCRTs), catch tanks, and various other miscellaneous facilities.

  9. Record of Decision for Tank Farm Soil and INTEC Groundwater, Operable Unit 3-14

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    L. S. Cahn

    2007-05-16

    This decision document presents the selected remedy for Operable Unit (OU) 3-14 tank farm soil and groundwater at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC), which is located on the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Site. The tank farm was initially evaluated in the OU 3-13 Record of Decision (ROD), and it was determined that additional information was needed to make a final decision. Additional information has been obtained on the nature and extent of contamination in the tank farm and on the impact to groundwater. The selected remedy was chosen in accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Liability and Compensation Act of 1980 (CERCLA) (42 USC 9601 et seq.), as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-499) and the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (40 CFR 300). The selected remedy is intended to be the final action for tank farm soil and groundwater at INTEC. The response action selected in this ROD is necessary to protect the public health, welfare, or the environment from actual or threatened releases of hazardous substances into the environment. Such a release or threat of release may present an imminent and substantial endangerment to public health, welfare, or the environment. The remedial actions selected in this ROD are designed to reduce the potential threats to human health and the environment to acceptable levels. In addition, DOE-ID, EPA, and DEQ (the Agencies) have determined that no action is necessary under CERCLA to protect public health, welfare, or the environment at 16 sites located outside the tank farm boundary. The purposes of the selected remedy are to (1) contain contaminated soil as the radionuclides decay in place, (2) isolate current and future workers and biological receptors from contact with contaminated soil, and (3) restore the portion of Snake River Plain Aquifer contaminated by INTEC releases to Idaho Ground Water Quality standards (same as maximum contaminant levels) by reducing water infiltration through strontium-90 contaminated perched water and interbeds. In addition, the remedy will prevent future drinking water wells from being drilled into the contaminated portion of the aquifer that is in and near the INTEC facility until such time as the water is restored to maximum contaminant levels or below.

  10. Crude Oil | NISAC

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

    oil fields to fuel distribution terminals. Different components of this system (e.g., crude oil import terminals, refineries, transmission pipelines, and tank farms) can be ...

  11. Hanford Site waste tank farm facilities design reconstitution program plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Vollert, F.R.

    1994-09-06

    Throughout the commercial nuclear industry the lack of design reconstitution programs prior to the mid 1980`s has resulted in inadequate documentation to support operating facilities configuration changes or safety evaluations. As a result, many utilities have completed or have ongoing design reconstitution programs and have discovered that without sufficient pre-planning their program can be potentially very expensive and may result in end-products inconsistent with the facility needs or expectations. A design reconstitution program plan is developed here for the Hanford waste tank farms facility as a consequence of the DOE Standard on operational configuration management. This design reconstitution plan provides for the recovery or regeneration of design requirements and basis, the compilation of Design Information Summaries, and a methodology to disposition items open for regeneration that were discovered during the development of Design Information Summaries. Implementation of this plan will culminate in an end-product of about 30 Design Information Summary documents. These documents will be developed to identify tank farms facility design requirements and design bases and thereby capture the technical baselines of the facility. This plan identifies the methodology necessary to systematically recover documents that are sources of design input information, and to evaluate and disposition open items or regeneration items discovered during the development of the Design Information Summaries or during the verification and validation processes. These development activities will be governed and implemented by three procedures and a guide that are to be developed as an outgrowth of this plan.

  12. ATMOSPHERIC DISPERSION COEFFICIENTS AND RADIOLOGICAL AND TOXICOLOGICAL EXPOSURE METHODOLOGY FOR USE IN TANK FARMS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    GRIGSBY KM

    2011-04-07

    This report presents the atmospheric dispersion coefficients used in Tank Farms safety analysis. The basis equations for calculating radiological and toxicological exposures are also included. In this revision, the time averaging for toxicological consequence evaluations is clarified based on a review of DOE complex guidance and a review of tank farm chemicals.

  13. First Draft Performance Assessment for the H-Area Tank Farm at the Savannah

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    River Site | Department of Energy First Draft Performance Assessment for the H-Area Tank Farm at the Savannah River Site First Draft Performance Assessment for the H-Area Tank Farm at the Savannah River Site The PAs are used to assess the long-term fate and transport of residual contamination in the environment and provide the Department Of Energy with reasonable assurance that the removal from service of the Savannah River Site tank farm underground radioactive waste tanks and ancillary

  14. Regulatory issues associated with closure of the Hanford AX Tank Farm ancillary equipment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Becker, D.L.

    1998-09-02

    Liquid mixed, high-level radioactive waste has been stored in underground single-shell tanks at the US Department of Energy`s (DOE`s) Hanford Site. After retrieval of the waste from the single-shell tanks, the DOE will proceed with closure of the tank farm. The 241-AX Tank Farm includes four one-million gallon single-shell tanks in addition to sluice lines, transfer lines, ventilation headers, risers, pits, cribs, catch tanks, buildings, well and associated buried piping. This equipment is classified as ancillary equipment. This document addresses the requirements for regulatory close of the ancillary equipment in the Hanford Site 241-AX Tank Farm. The options identified for physical closure of the ancillary equipment include disposal in place, disposal in place after treatment, excavation and disposal on site in an empty single-shell tank, and excavation and disposal outside the AX Tank Farm. The document addresses the background of the Hanford Site and ancillary equipment in the AX Tank Farm, regulations for decontamination and decommissioning of radioactively contaminated equipment, requirements for the cleanup and disposal of radioactive wastes, cleanup and disposal requirements governing hazardous and mixed waste, and regulatory requirements and issues associated with each of the four physical closure options. This investigation was conducted by the Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico, during Fiscal Year 1998 for the Hanford Tanks Initiative Project.

  15. Pore Water Extraction Test Near 241-SX Tank Farm at the Hanford Site, Washington, USA

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eberlein, Susan J.; Parker, Danny L.; Tabor, Cynthia L.; Holm, Melissa J.

    2013-11-11

    A proof-of-principle test is underway near the Hanford Site 241-SX Tank Farm. The test will evaluate a potential remediation technology that will use tank farm-deployable equipment to remove contaminated pore water from vadose zone soils. The test system was designed and built to address the constraints of working within a tank farm. Due to radioactive soil contamination and limitations in drilling near tanks, small-diameter direct push drilling techniques applicable to tank farms are being utilized for well placement. To address space and weight limitations in working around tanks and obstacles within tank farms, the above ground portions of the test system have been constructed to allow deployment flexibility. The test system utilizes low vacuum over a sealed well screen to establish flow into an extraction well. Extracted pore water is collected in a well sump,and then pumped to the surface using a small-diameter bladder pump.If pore water extraction using this system can be successfully demonstrated, it may be possible to target local contamination in the vadose zone around underground storage tanks. It is anticipated that the results of this proof-of-principle test will support future decision making regarding interim and final actions for soil contamination within the tank farms.

  16. High-level waste tank farm set point document

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Anthony, J.A. III

    1995-01-15

    Setpoints for nuclear safety-related instrumentation are required for actions determined by the design authorization basis. Minimum requirements need to be established for assuring that setpoints are established and held within specified limits. This document establishes the controlling methodology for changing setpoints of all classifications. The instrumentation under consideration involve the transfer, storage, and volume reduction of radioactive liquid waste in the F- and H-Area High-Level Radioactive Waste Tank Farms. The setpoint document will encompass the PROCESS AREA listed in the Safety Analysis Report (SAR) (DPSTSA-200-10 Sup 18) which includes the diversion box HDB-8 facility. In addition to the PROCESS AREAS listed in the SAR, Building 299-H and the Effluent Transfer Facility (ETF) are also included in the scope.

  17. Three-Dimensional Surface Geophysical Exploration of the 200-Series Tanks at the 241-C Tank Farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Crook, N.; McNeill, M.; Dunham, Ralph; Glaser, Danney R.

    2014-02-26

    A surface geophysical exploration (SGE) survey using direct current electrical resistivity was conducted within the C Tank Farm in the vicinity of the 200-Series tanks at the Hanford Site near Richland, Washington. This survey was the second successful SGE survey to utilize the Geotection(TM)-180 Resistivity Monitoring System which facilitated a much larger survey size and faster data acquisition rate. The primary objective of the C Tank Farm SGE survey was to provide geophysical data and subsurface imaging results to support the Phase 2 RCRA Facility Investigation, as outlined in the Phase 2 RCRA Facility Investigation / Corrective Measures work plan RPP-PLAN-39114.

  18. Science Road Map for Phase 2 of the Tank-Farm Vadose Zone Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zachara, John M.; Freshley, Mark D.; Mann, Frederick M.

    2008-08-18

    Phase 1 of the Tank-Farm Vadose Zone Program (TFVZP) developed information on the nature and extent of vadose zone contamination in the tank farms through field studies, laboratory analyses and experiments, and historical data searches; assembled data and performed tank-farm risk analysis; and initiated interim corrective actions to lessen the impacts of tank leak contaminants. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory scientists and external collaborators at universities and U.S. Department of Energy user facilities sampled and analyzed contaminant plumes. These types of activities will continue during Phase 2 of the TFVZP to refine and expand scientific understanding of the subsurface beneath tank farms, especially of water movement, residual waste leaching, and contaminant transport.

  19. Supplement analysis for the proposed upgrades to the tank farm ventilation, instrumentation, and electrical systems under Project W-314 in support of tank farm restoration and safe operations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1997-05-01

    The mission of the TWRS program is to store, treat, and immobilize highly radioactive tank waste in an environmentally sound, safe, and cost-effective manner. Within this program, Project W-314, Tank Farm Restoration and Safe Operations, has been established to provide upgrades in the areas of instrumentation and control, tank ventilation, waste transfer, and electrical distribution for existing tank farm facilities. Requirements for tank farm infrastructure upgrades to support safe storage were being developed under Project W-314 at the same time that the TWRS EIS alternative analysis was being performed. Project W-314 provides essential tank farm infrastructure upgrades to support continued safe storage of existing tank wastes until the wastes can be retrieved and disposed of through follow-on TWRS program efforts. Section4.0 provides a description of actions associated with Project W-314. The TWRS EIS analyzes the environmental consequences form the entire TWRS program, including actions similar to those described for Project W-314 as a part of continued tank farm operations. The TWRS EIS preferred alternative was developed to a conceptual level of detail to assess bounding impact areas. For this Supplement Analysis, in each of the potential impact areas for Project W-314, the proposed action was evaluated and compared to the TWRS EIS evaluation of the preferred alternative (Section 5.0). Qualitative and/or quantitative comparisons are then provided in this Supplement Analysis to support a determination on the need for additional National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis. Based on this Supplement Analysis, the potential impacts for Project W-314 would be small in comparison to and are bounded by the impacts assessed for the TWRS EIS preferred alternative, and therefore no additional NEPA analysis is required (Section 7.0).

  20. Hanford Single-Shell Tank Leak Causes and Locations - 241-SX Farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Girardot, Crystal L.; Harlow, Donald G.

    2014-01-08

    This document identifies 241-SX Tank Farm (SX Farm) leak causes and locations for the 100 series leaking tanks (241-SX-107, 241-SX-108, 241-SX-109, 241-SX-111, 241-SX-112, 241-SX-113, 241-SX-114, and 241-SX-115) identified in RPP-ENV-39658, Rev. 0, Hanford SX-Farm Leak Assessments Report. This document satisfies the SX Farm portion of the target (T04) in the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order milestone M-045-91F.

  1. Independent Activity Report, Office of River Protection Waste Treatment Plant and Tank Farms- February 2013

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Site Familiarization and Introduction of New Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Site Lead for the Office of River Protection Waste Treatment Plant and Tank Farms [HIAR-HANFORD-2013-02-25

  2. First Draft Performance Assessment for the H-Area Tank Farm at...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    SRR-CWDA-2010-00128 Revision 0 PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT for the H-AREA TANK FARM at the SAVANNAH RIVER SITE March 2011 Prepared by: Savannah River Remediation LLC Closure & Waste ...

  3. First Draft Performance Assessment for the H-Area Tank Farm at...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    ... H-Area Tank Farm at the Revision 0 Savannah River Site March 2011 Page 67 of 864 ... variable hydrogeology and a range of plant communities from herbaceous marsh to ...

  4. Preparation plan, preliminary safety documentation, tank farm restoration and safe operations, Project W-314

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kidder, R.J.

    1994-10-20

    This preparation plan is developed to establish planning for the preliminary safety documentation for Project W-314, {open_quotes}Tank Farm Restoration and Safe Operations.{close_quotes}

  5. SLUDGE BATCH 7B QUALIFICATION ACTIVITIES WITH SRS TANK FARM SLUDGE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pareizs, J.; Click, D.; Lambert, D.; Reboul, S.

    2011-11-16

    Waste Solidification Engineering (WSE) has requested that characterization and a radioactive demonstration of the next batch of sludge slurry - Sludge Batch 7b (SB7b) - be completed in the Shielded Cells Facility of the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) via a Technical Task Request (TTR). This characterization and demonstration, or sludge batch qualification process, is required prior to transfer of the sludge from Tank 51 to the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) feed tank (Tank 40). The current WSE practice is to prepare sludge batches in Tank 51 by transferring sludge from other tanks. Discharges of nuclear materials from H Canyon are often added to Tank 51 during sludge batch preparation. The sludge is washed and transferred to Tank 40, the current DWPF feed tank. Prior to transfer of Tank 51 to Tank 40, SRNL typically simulates the Tank Farm and DWPF processes with a Tank 51 sample (referred to as the qualification sample). With the tight schedule constraints for SB7b and the potential need for caustic addition to allow for an acceptable glass processing window, the qualification for SB7b was approached differently than past batches. For SB7b, SRNL prepared a Tank 51 and a Tank 40 sample for qualification. SRNL did not receive the qualification sample from Tank 51 nor did it simulate all of the Tank Farm washing and decanting operations. Instead, SRNL prepared a Tank 51 SB7b sample from samples of Tank 7 and Tank 51, along with a wash solution to adjust the supernatant composition to the final SB7b Tank 51 Tank Farm projections. SRNL then prepared a sample to represent SB7b in Tank 40 by combining portions of the SRNL-prepared Tank 51 SB7b sample and a Tank 40 Sludge Batch 7a (SB7a) sample. The blended sample was 71% Tank 40 (SB7a) and 29% Tank 7/Tank 51 on an insoluble solids basis. This sample is referred to as the SB7b Qualification Sample. The blend represented the highest projected Tank 40 heel (as of May 25, 2011), and thus, the highest projected noble metals content for SB7b. Characterization was performed on the Tank 51 SB7b samples and SRNL performed DWPF simulations using the Tank 40 SB7b material. This report documents: (1) The preparation and characterization of the Tank 51 SB7b and Tank 40 SB7b samples. (2) The performance of a DWPF Chemical Process Cell (CPC) simulation using the SB7b Tank 40 sample. The simulation included a Sludge Receipt and Adjustment Tank (SRAT) cycle, where acid was added to the sludge to destroy nitrite and reduce mercury, and a Slurry Mix Evaporator (SME) cycle, where glass frit was added to the sludge in preparation for vitrification. The SME cycle also included replication of five canister decontamination additions and concentrations. Processing parameters were based on work with a nonradioactive simulant. (3) Vitrification of a portion of the SME product and characterization and durability testing (as measured by the Product Consistency Test (PCT)) of the resulting glass. (4) Rheology measurements of the SRAT receipt, SRAT product, and SME product. This program was controlled by a Task Technical and Quality Assurance Plan (TTQAP), and analyses were guided by an Analytical Study Plan. This work is Technical Baseline Research and Development (R&D) for the DWPF. It should be noted that much of the data in this document has been published in interoffice memoranda. The intent of this technical report is bring all of the SB7b related data together in a single permanent record and to discuss the overall aspects of SB7b processing.

  6. T-TY Tank Farm Interim Surface Barrier DemonstrationVadose Zone Monitoring Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zhang, Z. F.; Strickland, Christopher E.; Field, Jim G.; Parker, Danny L.

    2010-09-27

    The Hanford Site has 149 underground single-shell tanks that store hazardous radioactive waste. Many of these tanks and their associated infrastructure (e.g., pipelines, diversion boxes) have leaked. Some of the leaked waste has entered the groundwater. The largest known leak occurred from the T-106 Tank of the 241-T Tank Farm in 1973. Five tanks are assumed to have leaked in the TY Farm. Many of the contaminants from those leaks still reside within the vadose zone within the T and TY Tank Farms. The Department of Energys Office of River Protection seeks to minimize the movement of these contaminant plumes by placing interim barriers on the ground surface. Such barriers are expected to prevent infiltrating water from reaching the plumes and moving them further. The soil water regime is monitored to determine the effectiveness of the interim surface barriers. Soil-water content and water pressure are monitored using off-the-shelf equipment that can be installed by the hydraulic hammer technique. Four instrument nests were installed in the T Farm in fiscal year (FY) 2006 and FY2007; two nests were installed in the TY Farm in FY2010. Each instrument nest contains a neutron probe access tube, a capacitance probe, and four heat-dissipation units. A meteorological station has been installed at the north side of the fence of the T Farm. This document summarizes the monitoring methods, the instrument calibration and installation, and the vadose zone monitoring plan for interim barriers in T farm and TY Farm.

  7. Tank farm surveillance and waste status summary report for May 1994

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hanlon, B.M.

    1994-08-01

    This report is the official inventory for radioactive waste stored in underground tanks in the 200 Areas at the Hanford Site. Data that depict the status of stored radioactive waste and tank vessel integrity are contained within the report. This report provides data on each of the existing 177 large underground waste storage tanks and 49 smaller catch tanks and special surveillance facilities, and supplemental information regarding tank surveillance anomalies and ongoing investigations. This report is intended to meet the requirement of US Department of Energy-Richland Operations Office Order 5820.2A, Chapter 1, Section 3.e. (3) (DOE-RL, 1990, Radioactive Waste Management, US Department of Energy-Richland Operation Office, Richland, Washington) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for Hanford Tank Farm Tanks.

  8. Tank Farm surveillance and waste status summary report for February 1994

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hanlon, B.M.

    1994-07-01

    This report is the official inventory for radioactive waste stored in underground tanks in the 200 Areas at the Hanford Site. Data that depict the status of stored radioactive waste and tank vessel integrity are contained within the report. This report provides data on each of the existing 177 large underground waste storage tanks and 49 smaller catch tanks and special surveillance facilities, and supplemental information regarding tank surveillance anomalies and ongoing investigations. This report is Intended to meet the requirement of US Department of Energy Richland Operations Office Order 5820.2A, Chapter 1, Section 3.e. (3) (DOE-RL, 1990, Radioactive Waste Management, US Department of Energy-Richland Operation Office, Richland, Washington) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for Hanford Tank Farm Tanks.

  9. Tank Farm surveillance and waste status summary report for July 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hanlon, B.M.

    1993-11-01

    This report is the official inventory for radioactive waste stored in underground tanks in the 200 Areas at the Hanford Site. Data that depict the status of stored radioactive waste and tank vesseL integrity are contained within the report. This report provides data on each of the existing 177 Large underground waste storage tanks and 49 smaller catch tanks and special surveillance facilities, and supplemental information regarding tank surveillance anomalies and ongoing investigations. This report is intended to meet the requirement of US Department of Energy-Richland Operations Office Order 5820.2A, Chapter I, Section 3.e. (3) (DOE-RL, 1990, Radioactive Waste Management, US Department of Energy-Richland Operation Office, Richland, Washington) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for Hanford Tank Farm Tanks.

  10. Tank farm surveillance and waste status summary report for December 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hanlon, B.M.

    1994-05-01

    This report is the official inventory for radioactive waste stored in underground tanks in the 200 Areas at the Hanford Site. Data that depict the status of stored radioactive waste and tank vessel integrity are contained within the report. This report provides data on each of the existing 177 large underground waste storage tanks and 49 smaller catch tanks and special 9 surveillance facilities, and supplemental information regarding tank surveillance anomalies and ongoing investigations. This report is intended to meet the requirement of U.S. Department of Energy-Richland Operations Office Order 5820.2A, Chapter I, Section 3.e. (3) (DOE-RL, 1990, Radioactive Waste Management, U.S. Department of Energy-Richland Operation Office, Richland, Washington) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for Hanford Tank Farm Tanks.

  11. Tank farm surveillance and waste status summary report for January 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hanlon, B.M.

    1993-03-01

    This report is the official inventory for radioactive waste stored in underground tanks in the 200 Areas at the Hanford Site. Data that depict the status of stored radioactive waste and tank vessel integrity are contained within the report. This report provides data on each of the existing 177 large underground waste storage tanks and 49 smaller catch tanks and special surveillance facilities, and supplemental information regarding tank surveillance anomalies and ongoing investigations. This report is intended to meet the requirement of US Department of Energy-Richland Operations Office Order 5820.2A, Chapter I, Section 3.e. (3) (DOE-RL, 1990, Radioactive Waste Management, US Department of Energy-Richland Operation Office, Richland, Washington) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for Hanford Tank Farm Tanks.

  12. Tank Farm surveillance and waste status summary report for March 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hanlon, B.M.

    1993-05-01

    This report is the official inventory for radioactive waste stored in underground tanks in the 200 Areas at the Hanford Site. Data that depict the status of stored radioactive waste and tank vessel integrity are Contained within the report. This report provides data on each of the existing 177 large underground waste storage tanks and 49 smaller catch tanks and special surveillance facilities, and supplemental information regarding flank surveillance anomalies and ongoing investigations. This report is intended to meet the requirement of US Department of Energy-Richland Operations Office order 5820.2A, Chapter I, Section 3.e. (3) (DOE-RL, 1990, Radioactive Waste Management, US Department of Energy-Richland Operation Office, Richland, Washington) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for Hanford Tank Farm Tanks.

  13. Pore-Water Extraction Scale-Up Study for the SX Tank Farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Truex, Michael J.; Oostrom, Martinus; Wietsma, Thomas W.; Last, George V.; Lanigan, David C.

    2013-01-15

    The phenomena related to pore-water extraction from unsaturated sediments have been previously examined with limited laboratory experiments and numerical modeling. However, key scale-up issues have not yet been addressed. Laboratory experiments and numerical modeling were conducted to specifically examine pore-water extraction for sediment conditions relevant to the vadose zone beneath the SX Tank Farm at Hanford Site in southeastern Washington State. Available SX Tank Farm data were evaluated to generate a conceptual model of the subsurface for a targeted pore-water extraction application in areas with elevated moisture and Tc-99 concentration. The hydraulic properties of the types of porous media representative of the SX Tank Farm target application were determined using sediment mixtures prepared in the laboratory based on available borehole sediment particle size data. Numerical modeling was used as an evaluation tool for scale-up of pore-water extraction for targeted field applications.

  14. Developmental test report, assessment of XT-70E percussion drill rig operation in tank farms

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dougherty, L.F., Westinghouse Hanford

    1996-09-10

    The following report documents the testing of the XT-70E percussion drill rig for use in the 241-SX Tank Farm. The test is necessary to support evaluation of the safety and authorization level of the proposed activity of installing up to three new drywells in the 241- SX Tank Farm. The proposed activity plans to install drywells by percussion drilling 7 inch O.D./6 inch I.D. pipe in close proximity of underground storage tanks and associated equipment. The load transmitted from the drill rig`s percussion hammer through the ground to the tank structure and equipment is not known and therefore testing is required to ensure the activity is safe and authorized.

  15. Tank Farm Closure & Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement <br>

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

    (DOE/EIS-0391) - Hanford Site Statements Tank Closure & WM EIS Info Documents CERCLA Five-Year Review NEPA - Categorical Exclusions NEPA - Environmental Assessments NEPA - Environmental Impact Statements Environmental Management Performance Reports Tank Farm Closure & Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0391) Email Email Page | Print Print Page |Text Increase Font Size Decrease Font Size The U.S. Department of Energy (USDOE) has prepared a Final Environmental

  16. Analysis of NaOH releases for Hanford tank farms

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ryan, G.W., Westinghouse Hanford

    1996-09-12

    The information contained in the canceled document is now located in the document: Consequence Analysis of a NaOH Solution Spray Release During Addition to Waste Tank, WHC-SD-WM-CN-065.

  17. Tank Farms Technical Safety Requirements [VOL 1 and 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    CASH, R.J.

    2000-12-28

    The Technical Safety Requirements (TSRs) define the acceptable conditions, safe boundaries, basis thereof, and controls to ensure safe operation during authorized activities, for facilities within the scope of the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR).

  18. HIGH LEVEL WASTE MECHANCIAL SLUDGE REMOVAL AT THE SAVANNAH RIVER SITE F TANK FARM CLOSURE PROJECT

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jolly, R; Bruce Martin, B

    2008-01-15

    The Savannah River Site F-Tank Farm Closure project has successfully performed Mechanical Sludge Removal (MSR) using the Waste on Wheels (WOW) system for the first time within one of its storage tanks. The WOW system is designed to be relatively mobile with the ability for many components to be redeployed to multiple waste tanks. It is primarily comprised of Submersible Mixer Pumps (SMPs), Submersible Transfer Pumps (STPs), and a mobile control room with a control panel and variable speed drives. In addition, the project is currently preparing another waste tank for MSR utilizing lessons learned from this previous operational activity. These tanks, designated as Tank 6 and Tank 5 respectively, are Type I waste tanks located in F-Tank Farm (FTF) with a capacity of 2,840 cubic meters (750,000 gallons) each. The construction of these tanks was completed in 1953, and they were placed into waste storage service in 1959. The tank's primary shell is 23 meters (75 feet) in diameter, and 7.5 meters (24.5 feet) in height. Type I tanks have 34 vertically oriented cooling coils and two horizontal cooling coil circuits along the tank floor. Both Tank 5 and Tank 6 received and stored F-PUREX waste during their operating service time before sludge removal was performed. DOE intends to remove from service and operationally close (fill with grout) Tank 5 and Tank 6 and other HLW tanks that do not meet current containment standards. Mechanical Sludge Removal, the first step in the tank closure process, will be followed by chemical cleaning. After obtaining regulatory approval, the tanks will be isolated and filled with grout for long-term stabilization. Mechanical Sludge Removal operations within Tank 6 removed approximately 75% of the original 95,000 liters (25,000 gallons). This sludge material was transferred in batches to an interim storage tank to prepare for vitrification. This operation consisted of eleven (11) Submersible Mixer Pump(s) mixing campaigns and multiple intraarea transfers utilizing STPs from July 2006 to August 2007. This operation and successful removal of sludge material meets requirement of approximately 19,000 to 28,000 liters (5,000 to 7,500 gallons) remaining prior to the Chemical Cleaning process. Removal of the last 35% of sludge was exponentially more difficult, as less and less sludge was available to mobilize and the lighter sludge particles were likely removed during the early mixing campaigns. The removal of the 72,000 liters (19,000 gallons) of sludge was challenging due to a number factors. One primary factor was the complex internal cooling coil array within Tank 6 that obstructed mixer discharge jets and impacted the Effective Cleaning Radius (ECR) of the Submersible Mixer Pumps. Minimal access locations into the tank through tank openings (risers) presented a challenge because the available options for equipment locations were very limited. Mechanical Sludge Removal activities using SMPs caused the sludge to migrate to areas of the tank that were outside of the SMP ECR. Various SMP operational strategies were used to address the challenge of moving sludge from remote areas of the tank to the transfer pump. This paper describes in detail the Mechanical Sludge Removal activities and mitigative solutions to cooling coil obstructions and other challenges. The performance of the WOW system and SMP operational strategies were evaluated and the resulting lessons learned are described for application to future Mechanical Sludge Removal operations.

  19. Engineering report single-shell tank farms interim measures to limit infiltration through the vadose zone

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HAASS, C.C.

    1999-10-14

    Identifies, evaluates and recommends interim measures for reducing or eliminating water sources and preferential pathways within the vadose zone of the single-shell tank farms. Features studied: surface water infiltration and leaking water lines that provide recharge moisture, and wells that could provide pathways for contaminant migration. An extensive data base, maps, recommended mitigations, and rough order of magnitude costs are included.

  20. HANFORD TANK FARM RESOURCE CONVERVATION & RECOVERY ACT (RCRA) CORRECTIVE ACTION PROGRAM

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    KRISTOFZSKI, J.G.

    2007-01-15

    As a consequence of producing special nuclear material for the nation's defense, large amounts of extremely hazardous radioactive waste was created at the US Department of Energy's (DOE) Hanford Site in south central Washington State. A little over 50 million gallons of this waste is now stored in 177 large, underground tanks on Hanford's Central Plateau in tank farms regulated under the Atomic Energy Act and the Resource, Conservation, and Recovery Act (RCRA). Over 60 tanks and associated infrastructure have released or are presumed to have released waste in the vadose zone. In 1998, DOE's Office of River Protection established the Hanford Tank Farm RCRA Corrective Action Program (RCAP) to: (1) characterize the distribution and extent of the existing vadose zone contamination; (2) determine how the contamination will move in the future; (3) estimate the impacts of this contamination on groundwater and other media; (4) develop and implement mitigative measures; and (5) develop corrective measures to be implemented as part of the final closure of the tank farm facilities. Since its creation, RCAP has made major advances in each of these areas, which will be discussed in this paper.

  1. Functions and requirements for tank farm restoration and safe operations, Project W-314. Revision 3

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Garrison, R.C.

    1995-02-01

    This Functions and Requirements document (FRD) establishes the basic performance criteria for Project W-314, in accordance with the guidance outlined in the letter from R.W. Brown, RL, to President, WHC, ``Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Project Documentation Methodology,`` 94-PRJ-018, dated 3/18/94. The FRD replaces the Functional Design Criteria (FDC) as the project technical baseline documentation. Project W-314 will improve the reliability of safety related systems, minimize onsite health and safety hazards, and support waste retrieval and disposal activities by restoring and/or upgrading existing Tank Farm facilities and systems. The scope of Project W-314 encompasses the necessary restoration upgrades of the Tank Farms` instrumentation, ventilation, electrical distribution, and waste transfer systems.

  2. Supporting document for the historical tank content estimate for SY-tank farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H.

    1997-08-12

    The purpose of this historical characterization document is to present the synthesized summaries of the historical records concerning the physical characteristics, radiological, and chemical composition of mixed wastes stored in underground double-shell tanks and the physical condition of these tanks. The double-shell tanks are located on the United States Department of Energy`s Hanford Site, approximately 25 miles northwest or Richland, Washington. The document will be used to assist in characterizing the waste in the tanks in conjunction with the current program of sampling and analyzing the tank wastes. Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) developed computer models that used the historical data to attempt to characterize the wastes and to generate estimates of each tank`s inventory. A historical review of the tanks may reveal anomalies or unusual contents that could be critical to characterization and post characterization activities. This document was developed by reviewing the operating plant process histories, waste transfer data, and available physical and chemical data from numerous resources. These resources were generated by numerous contractors from 1945 to the present. Waste characterization, the process of describing the character or quality of a waste, is required by Federal law (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act [RCRA]) and state law (Washington Administrative Code [WAC] 173-303, Dangerous Waste Regulations). Characterizing the waste is necessary to determine methods to safely retrieve, transport, and/or treat the wastes.

  3. High-level waste storage tank farms/242-A evaporator standards/requirements identification document (S/RID), Vol. 4

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-04-01

    Radiation protection of personnel and the public is accomplished by establishing a well defined Radiation Protection Organization to ensure that appropriate controls on radioactive materials and radiation sources are implemented and documented. This Requirements Identification Document (RID) applies to the activities, personnel, structures, systems, components, and programs involved in executing the mission of the Tank Farms. The physical boundaries within which the requirements of this RID apply are the Single Shell Tank Farms, Double Shell Tank Farms, 242-A Evaporator-Crystallizer, 242-S, T Evaporators, Liquid Effluent Retention Facility (LERF), Purgewater Storage Facility (PWSF), and all interconnecting piping, valves, instrumentation, and controls. Also included is all piping, valves, instrumentation, and controls up to and including the most remote valve under Tank Farms control at any other Hanford Facility having an interconnection with Tank Farms. The boundary of the structures, systems, components, and programs to which this RID applies, is defined by those that are dedicated to and/or under the control of the Tank Farms Operations Department and are specifically implemented at the Tank Farms.

  4. Test and evaluation plan for Project W-314 tank farm restoration and safe operations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hays, W.H.

    1998-06-25

    The ``Tank Farm Restoration and Safe Operations`` (TFRSO), Project W-314 will restore and/or upgrade existing Hanford Tank Farm facilities and systems to ensure that the Tank Farm infrastructure will be able to support near term TWRS Privatization`s waste feed delivery and disposal system and continue safe management of tank waste. The capital improvements provided by this project will increase the margin of safety for Tank Farms operations, and will aid in aligning affected Tank Farm systems with compliance requirements from applicable state, Federal, and local regulations. Secondary benefits will be realized subsequent to project completion in the form of reduced equipment down-time, reduced health and safety risks to workers, reduced operating and maintenance costs, and minimization of radioactive and/or hazardous material releases to the environment. The original regulatory (e.g., Executive Orders, WACS, CFRS, permit requirements, required engineering standards, etc.) and institutional (e.g., DOE Orders, Hanford procedures, etc.) requirements for Project W-314 were extracted from the TWRS S/RIDs during the development of the Functions and Requirements (F and Rs). The entire family of requirements were then validated for TWRS and Project W-314. This information was contained in the RDD-100 database and used to establish the original CDR. The Project Hanford Management Contract (PHMC) team recognizes that safety, quality, and cost effectiveness in the Test and Evaluation (T and E) program is achieved through a planned systematic approach to T and E activities. It is to this end that the Test and Evaluation Plan (TEP) is created. The TEP for the TFRSO Project, was developed based on the guidance in HNF-IP-0842, and the Good Practice Guide GPG-FM-005, ``Test and Evaluation,`` which is derived from DOE Order 430.1, ``Life Cycle Asset Management.`` It describes the Test and Evaluation program for the TFRSO project starting with the definitive design phase and ending with operational testing and turn-over of the upgraded systems to Tank Farm Operations. The TEP will be updated as required to reflect the appropriate test acceptance and startup requirements to support design, construction, turnover and initial operations.

  5. ACTUAL WASTE TESTING OF GYCOLATE IMPACTS ON THE SRS TANK FARM

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Martino, C.

    2014-05-28

    Glycolic acid is being studied as a replacement for formic acid in the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) feed preparation process. After implementation, the recycle stream from DWPF back to the high-level waste Tank Farm will contain soluble sodium glycolate. Most of the potential impacts of glycolate in the Tank Farm were addressed via a literature review and simulant testing, but several outstanding issues remained. This report documents the actual-waste tests to determine the impacts of glycolate on storage and evaporation of Savannah River Site high-level waste. The objectives of this study are to address the following: ? Determine the extent to which sludge constituents (Pu, U, Fe, etc.) dissolve (the solubility of sludge constituents) in the glycolate-containing 2H-evaporator feed. ? Determine the impact of glycolate on the sorption of fissile (Pu, U, etc.) components onto sodium aluminosilicate solids. The first objective was accomplished through actual-waste testing using Tank 43H and 38H supernatant and Tank 51H sludge at Tank Farm storage conditions. The second objective was accomplished by contacting actual 2H-evaporator scale with the products from the testing for the first objective. There is no anticipated impact of up to 10 g/L of glycolate in DWPF recycle to the Tank Farm on tank waste component solubilities as investigated in this test. Most components were not influenced by glycolate during solubility tests, including major components such as aluminum, sodium, and most salt anions. There was potentially a slight increase in soluble iron with added glycolate, but the soluble iron concentration remained so low (on the order of 10 mg/L) as to not impact the iron to fissile ratio in sludge. Uranium and plutonium appear to have been supersaturated in 2H-evaporator feed solution mixture used for this testing. As a result, there was a reduction of soluble uranium and plutonium as a function of time. The change in soluble uranium concentration was independent of added glycolate concentration. The change in soluble plutonium content was dependent on the added glycolate concentration, with higher levels of glycolate (5 g/L and 10 g/L) appearing to suppress the plutonium solubility. The inclusion of glycolate did not change the dissolution of or sorption onto actual-waste 2H-evaporator pot scale to an extent that will impact Tank Farm storage and concentration. The effects that were noted involved dissolution of components from evaporator scale and precipitation of components onto evaporator scale that were independent of the level of added glycolate.

  6. TANK FARM CLOSURE - A NEW TWIST ON REGULATORY STRATEGIES FOR CLOSURE OF WASTE TANK RESIDUALS FOLLOWING NUREG

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    LEHMAN LL

    2008-01-23

    Waste from a number of single-shell tanks (SST) at the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Hanford Site has been retrieved by CH2M HILL Hanford Group to fulfill the requirements of the 'Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (HFFACO) [1]. Laboratory analyses of the Hanford tank residual wastes have provided concentration data which will be used to determine waste classification and disposal options for tank residuals. The closure of tank farm facilities remains one of the most challenging activities faced by the DOE. This is due in part to the complicated regulatory structures that have developed. These regulatory structures are different at each of the DOE sites, making it difficult to apply lessons learned from one site to the next. During the past two years with the passage of the Section 3116 of the 'Ronald Reagan Defense Authorization Act of 2005' (NDAA) [2] some standardization has emerged for Savannah River Site and the Idaho National Laboratory tank residuals. Recently, with the issuance of 'NRC Staff Guidance for Activities Related to US. Department of Energy Waste Determinations' (NUREG-1854) [3] more explicit options may be considered for Hanford tank residuals than are presently available under DOE Orders. NUREG-1854, issued in August 2007, contains several key pieces of information that if utilized by the DOE in the tank closure process, could simplify waste classification and streamline the NRC review process by providing information to the NRC in their preferred format. Other provisions of this NUREG allow different methods to be applied in determining when waste retrieval is complete by incorporating actual project costs and health risks into the calculation of 'technically and economically practical'. Additionally, the NUREG requires a strong understanding of the uncertainties of the analyses, which given the desire of some NRC/DOE staff may increase the likelihood of using probabilistic approaches to uncertainty analysis. The purpose of this paper is to discuss implications of NUREG-1854 and to examine the feasibility and potential benefits of applying these provisions to waste determinations and supporting documents such as future performance assessments for tank residuals.

  7. SURFACE GEOPHYSICAL EXPLORATION OF SX TANK FARM AT THE HANFORD SITE RESULTS OF BACKGROUND CHARACTERIZATION WITH MAGNETICS AND ELECTROMAGNETICS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MYERS DA; RUCKER D; LEVIT M; CUBBAGE B; HENDERSON C

    2009-09-24

    This report presents the results of the background characterization of the cribs and trenches surrounding the SX tank farm prepared by HydroGEOPHYSICS Inc, Columbia Energy & Environmental Services Inc and Washington River Protection Solutions.

  8. STATUS OF MECHANICAL SLUDGE REMOVAL AND COOLING COILS CLOSURE AT THE SAVANNAH RIVER SITE - F TANK FARM CLOSURE PROJECT - 9225

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jolly, R

    2009-01-06

    The Savannah River Site F-Tank Farm Closure project has successfully performed Mechanical Sludge Removal using the Waste on Wheels (WOW) system within two of its storage tanks. The Waste on Wheels (WOW) system is designed to be relatively mobile with the ability for many components to be redeployed to multiple tanks. It is primarily comprised of Submersible Mixer Pumps (SMPs), Submersible Transfer Pumps (STPs), and a mobile control room with a control panel and variable speed drives. These tanks, designated as Tank 6 and Tank 5 respectively, are Type I waste tanks located in F-Tank Farm (FTF) with a capacity of 2839 cubic meters (750,000 gallons) each. In addition, Type I tanks have 34 vertically oriented cooling coils and two horizontal cooling coil circuits along the tank floor. DOE intends to remove from service and operationally close Tank 5 and Tank 6 and other HLW tanks that do not meet current containment standards. After obtaining regulatory approval, the tanks and cooling coils will be isolated and filled with grout for long term stabilization. Mechanical Sludge Removal of the remaining sludge waste within Tank 6 removed {approx} 75% of the original 25,000 gallons in August 2007. Utilizing lessons learned from Tank 6, Tank 5 Mechanical Sludge Removal completed removal of {approx} 90% of the original 125 cubic meters (33,000 gallons) of sludge material in May 2008. The successful removal of sludge material meets the requirement of approximately 19 to 28 cubic meters (5,000 to 7,500 gallons) remaining prior to the Chemical Cleaning process. The Chemical Cleaning Process will utilize 8 wt% oxalic acid to dissolve the remaining sludge heel. The flow sheet for Chemical Cleaning planned a 20:1 volume ratio of acid to sludge for the first strike with mixing provided by the submersible mixer pumps. The subsequent strikes will utilize a 13:1 volume ratio of acid to sludge with no mixing. The results of the Chemical Cleaning Process are detailed in the 'Status of Chemical Cleaning of Waste Tanks at the Savannah River Site--F Tank Farm Closure Project--Abstract 9114'. To support Tank 5 and Tank 6 cooling coil closure, cooling coil isolation and full scale cooling coil grout testing was completed to develop a strategy for grouting the horizontal and vertical cooling coils. This paper describes in detail the performance of the Mechanical Sludge Removal activities and SMP operational strategies within Tank 5. In addition, it will discuss the current status of Tank 5 & 6 cooling coil isolation activities and the results from the cooling coil grout fill tests.

  9. In-Tank Precipitation Facility (ITP) and H-Tank Farm (HTF) geotechnical report, WSRC-TR-95-0057, Revision 0, Volume 4

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-11-01

    A geotechnical study has been completed in H-Area for the In-Tank Precipitation Facility (ITP) and the balance of the H-Area Tank Farm (HTF) at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina. The study consisted of subsurface field exploration, field and laboratory testing, and engineering analyses. The purpose of these investigations is to evaluate the overall stability of the H-Area tanks under static and dynamic conditions. The objectives of the study are to define the site-specific geological conditions at ITP and HTF, obtain engineering properties for the assessment of the stability of the native soils and embankment under static and dynamic loads (i.e., slope stability, liquefaction potential, and potential settlements), and derive properties for soil-structure interaction studies. This document (Volume 4) contains the laboratory test results for the In-Tank Precipitation Facility (ITP) and H-Tank Farm (HTF) Geotechnical Report.

  10. Vegetable oils as an on the farm diesel fuel substitute: the North Carolina situation. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Harwood, H.J.

    1981-06-01

    The state-of-the-art of using vegetable oil as a diesel fuel alternative is reviewed. Particular emphasis has been placed on using vegetable oil in farm vehicles as an emergency fuel which may be produced on-farm. The following are reviewed: the mechanical feasibility, on-farm fuel production, and economic analysis.

  11. Characterization and Potential Remediation Approaches for Vadose Zone Contamination at Hanford 241-SX Tank Farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eberlein, Susan J.; Sydnor, Harold A.; Parker, Danny L.; Glaser, Danney R.

    2013-01-10

    Unplanned releases of radioactive and hazardous wastes have occurred at the 241-SX Tank Farm on the U.S. Department of Energy Hanford Site in southeast Washington State. Interim and long-term mitigation efforts are currently under evaluation for 241-SX Tank Farm. Two contiguous interim surface barriers have been designed for deployment at 241-SX Tank Farm to reduce future moisture infiltration; however, construction of the surface barriers has been deferred to allow testing of alternative technologies for soil moisture reduction and possibly contaminant source term reduction. Previous tests performed by other organizations at the Hanford Site have demonstrated that: vadose zone desiccation using large diameter (greater than 4 inch) boreholes is feasible; under certain circumstances, mobile contaminants may be removed in addition to water vapor; and small diameter (approximately 2 inch) boreholes (such as those placed by the direct push hydraulic hammer) can be used to perform vapor extractions. Evaluation of the previous work combined with laboratory test results have led to the design of a field proof-of-principle test to remove water and possibly mobile contaminants at greater depths, using small boreholes placed with the direct push unit.

  12. Evaluation of ISDP Batch 2 Qualification Compliance to 512-S, DWPF, Tank Farm, and Saltstone Waste Acceptance Criteria

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shafer, A.

    2010-05-05

    The purpose of this report is to document the acceptability of the second macrobatch (Salt Batch 2) of Tank 49H waste to H Tank Farm, DWPF, and Saltstone for operation of the Interim Salt Disposition Project (ISDP). Tank 49 feed meets the Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) requirements specified by References 11, 12, and 13. Salt Batch 2 material is qualified and ready to be processed through ARP/MCU to the final disposal facilities.

  13. METEOROLOGICAL INFLUENCES ON VAPOR INCIDENTS IN THE 200 EAST & 200 WEST TANK FARMS FROM CY2001 THRU CY2004

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    FAUROTE, J.M.

    2004-09-30

    Investigation into the meteorological influences on vapor incidents in the tank farms to determine what, if any, meteorological influences contribute to the reporting of odors, smells, vapors, and other gases. Weather phenomena, specifically barometric pressure, and wind velocity and direction can potentially cause or exacerbate a vapor release within the farm systems.

  14. LESSONS LEARNED FROM PREVIOUS WASTE STORAGE TANK VAPOR CONTROL ATTEMPTS ON SINGLE SHELL TANK (SST) & DOUBLE SHELL TANK (DST) FARMS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BAKER, D.M.

    2004-08-03

    This report forms the basis for a feasibility study and conceptual design to control vapor emissions from waste storage tanks at the Hanford Site. The Carbtrol, Vapor Mixing, and High Efficiency Gas Absorber (HEGA) vapor controls were evaluated to determine the lessons learned from previous failed vapor control attempts. This document illustrates the resulting findings based on that evaluation.

  15. T Tank Farm Interim Surface Barrier Demonstration--Vadose Zone Monitoring Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zhang, Z. F.; Keller, Jason M.; Strickland, Christopher E.

    2007-04-01

    The Hanford Site has 149 underground single-shell tanks that store hazardous radioactive waste. Many of these tanks and their associated infrastructure (e.g., pipelines, diversion boxes) have leaked. Some of the leaked waste has entered the groundwater. The largest known leak occurred from the T-106 Tank in 1973. Many of the contaminants from that leak still reside within the vadose zone beneath the T Tank Farm. CH2M Hill Hanford Group, Inc. seeks to minimize movement of this residual contaminant plume by placing an interim barrier on the surface. Such a barrier is expected to prevent infiltrating water from reaching the plume and moving it further. A plan has been prepared to monitor and determine the effectiveness of the interim surface barrier. Soil water content and water pressure will be monitored using off-the-shelf equipment that can be installed by the hydraulic hammer technique. In fiscal year 2006, two instrument nests were installed. Each instrument nest contains a neutron probe access tube, a capacitance probe, four heat-dissipation units, and a drain gauge to measure soil water flux. A meteorological station has been installed outside of the fence. In fiscal year 2007, two additional instrument nests are planned to be installed beneath the proposed barrier.

  16. Technical Review of Retrieval and Closure Plans for the INEEL INTEC Tank Farm Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bamberger, Judith A; Burks, Barry L; Quigley, Keith D; Falter, Diedre D

    2001-09-28

    The purpose of this report is to document the conclusions of a technical review of retrieval and closure plans for the Idaho National Energy and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC) Tank Farm Facility. In addition to reviewing retrieval and closure plans for these tanks, the review process served as an information exchange mechanism so that staff in the INEEL High Level Waste (HLW) Program could become more familiar with retrieval and closure approaches that have been completed or are planned for underground storage tanks at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and Hanford sites. This review focused not only on evaluation of the technical feasibility and appropriateness of the approach selected by INEEL but also on technology gaps that could be addressed through utilization of technologies or performance data available at other DOE sites and in the private sector. The reviewers, Judith Bamberger of Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) and Dr. Barry Burks of The Providence Group Applied Technology, have extensive experience in the development and application of tank waste retrieval technologies for nuclear waste remediation.

  17. Collaboration, Automation, and Information Management at Hanford High Level Radioactive Waste (HLW) Tank Farms

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Aurah, Mirwaise Y.; Roberts, Mark A.

    2013-12-12

    Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS), operator of High Level Radioactive Waste (HLW) Tank Farms at the Hanford Site, is taking an over 20-year leap in technology, replacing systems that were monitored with clipboards and obsolete computer systems, as well as solving major operations and maintenance hurdles in the area of process automation and information management. While WRPS is fully compliant with procedures and regulations, the current systems are not integrated and do not share data efficiently, hampering how information is obtained and managed.

  18. Savannah River Site H-Area Tank Farm Performance Assessment Scoping Meeting

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    H-Area Tank Farm Performance Assessment Scoping Meeting April 20-22, 2010 230 Green Blvd. Aiken Design Center Building Village at Woodside Aiken, SC DRAFT MEETING NOTES Tuesday, April 20, 2010 (8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.) Welcome and introductions made by Tom Gutmann, DOE-SR and Ginger Dickert, SRR. The meeting proceeded with discussion of the topics as identified in the Agenda. Review of General Information Package Consider development of functional requirements/key assumptions tracking process.

  19. Tank Closure

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    of SRS Tank Closure Program Two Tank Farms - F Area and H Area Permitted by SC as Industrial Wastewater Facilities under the Pollution Control Act Three agency Federal...

  20. T Tank Farm Interim Surface Barrier Demonstration - Vadose Zone Monitoring FY08 Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zhang, Z. F.; Strickland, Christopher E.; Field, Jim G.; Parker, Danny L.

    2009-02-01

    DOEs Office of River Protection constructed a temporary surface barrier over a portion of the T Tank Farm as part of the T Farm Interim Surface Barrier Demonstration Project. The surface barrier is designed to minimize the infiltration of precipitation into the contaminated soil zone created by the Tank T-106 leak and minimize movement of the contamination. As part of the demonstration effort, vadose zone moisture is being monitored to assess the effectiveness of the barrier at reducing soil moisture. A solar-powered system was installed to continuously monitor soil water conditions at four locations (i.e., instrument Nests A, B, C, and D) beneath the barrier and outside the barrier footprint as well as site meteorological conditions. Nest A is placed in the area outside the barrier footprint and serves as a control, providing subsurface conditions outside the influence of the surface barrier. Nest B provides subsurface measurements to assess surface-barrier edge effects. Nests C and D are used to assess changes in soil-moisture conditions beneath the interim surface barrier.

  1. Field Test Design Simulations of Pore-Water Extraction for the SX Tank Farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Truex, Michael J.; Oostrom, Martinus

    2013-09-01

    A proof of principle test of pore water extraction is being performed by Washington River Protection Solutions for the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of River Protection. This test is being conducted to meet the requirements of Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (HFFACO) (Ecology et al. 1989) Milestone M 045-20, and is described in RPP-PLAN-53808, 200 West Area Tank Farms Interim Measures Investigation Work Plan. To support design of this test, numerical simulations were conducted to help define equipment and operational parameters. The modeling effort builds from information collected in laboratory studies and from field characterization information collected at the test site near the Hanford Site 241-SX Tank Farm. Numerical simulations were used to evaluate pore-water extraction performance as a function of the test site properties and for the type of extraction well configuration that can be constructed using the direct-push installation technique. Output of simulations included rates of water and soil-gas production as a function of operational conditions for use in supporting field equipment design. The simulations also investigated the impact of subsurface heterogeneities in sediment properties and moisture distribution on pore-water extraction performance. Phenomena near the extraction well were also investigated because of their importance for pore-water extraction performance.

  2. CHEMICAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SLUDGE SOLIDS AT THE F AND H AREA TANK FARMS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Reboul, S.

    2012-08-29

    The primary source of waste solids received into the F Area Tank Farm (FTF) was from PUREX processing performed to recover uranium and plutonium from irradiated depleted uranium targets. In contrast, two primary sources of waste solids were received into the H Area Tank Farm (HTF): a) waste from PUREX processing; and b) waste from H-modified (HM) processing performed to recover uranium and neptunium from burned enriched uranium fuel. Due to the differences between the irradiated depleted uranium targets and the burned enriched uranium fuel, the average compositions of the F and H Area wastes are markedly different from one another. Both F and H Area wastes contain significant amounts of iron and aluminum compounds. However, because the iron content of PUREX waste is higher than that of HM waste, and the aluminum content of PUREX waste is lower than that of HM waste, the iron to aluminum ratios of typical FTF waste solids are appreciably higher than those of typical HTF waste solids. Other constituents present at significantly higher concentrations in the typical FTF waste solids include uranium, nickel, ruthenium, zinc, silver, cobalt and copper. In contrast, constituents present at significantly higher concentrations in the typical HTF waste solids include mercury, thorium, oxalate, and radionuclides U-233, U-234, U-235, U-236, Pu-238, Pu-242, Cm-244, and Cm-245. Because of the higher concentrations of Pu-238 in HTF, the long-term concentrations of Th-230 and Ra-226 (from Pu-238 decay) will also be higher in HTF. The uranium and plutonium distributions of the average FTF waste were found to be consistent with depleted uranium and weapons grade plutonium, respectively (U-235 comprised 0.3 wt% of the FTF uranium, and Pu-240 comprised 6 wt% of the FTF plutonium). In contrast, at HTF, U-235 comprised 5 wt% of the uranium, and Pu-240 comprised 17 wt% of the plutonium, consistent with enriched uranium and high burn-up plutonium. X-ray diffraction analyses of various FTF and HTF samples indicated that the primary crystalline compounds of iron in sludge solids are Fe{sub 2}O{sub 3}, Fe{sub 3}O{sub 4}, and FeO(OH), and the primary crystalline compounds of aluminum are Al(OH){sub 3} and AlO(OH). Also identified were carbonate compounds of calcium, magnesium, and sodium; a nitrated sodium aluminosilicate; and various uranium compounds. Consistent with expectations, oxalate compounds were identified in solids associated with oxalic acid cleaning operations. The most likely oxidation states and chemical forms of technetium are assessed in the context of solubility, since technetium-99 is a key risk driver from an environmental fate and transport perspective. The primary oxidation state of technetium in SRS sludge solids is expected to be Tc(IV). In salt waste, the primary oxidation state is expected to be Tc(VII). The primary form of technetium in sludge is expected to be a hydrated technetium dioxide, TcO{sub 2} {center_dot} xH{sub 2}O, which is relatively insoluble and likely co-precipitated with iron. In salt waste solutions, the primary form of technetium is expected to be the very soluble pertechnetate anion, TcO{sub 4}{sup -}. The relative differences between the F and H Tank Farm waste provide a basis for anticipating differences that will occur as constituents of FTF and HTF waste residue enter the environment over the long-term future. If a constituent is significantly more dominant in one of the Tank Farms, its long-term environmental contribution will likely be commensurately higher, assuming the environmental transport conditions of the two Tank Farms share some commonality. It is in this vein that the information cited in this document is provided - for use during the generation, assessment, and validation of Performance Assessment modeling results.

  3. First Draft Performance Assessment for the H-Area Tank Farm at the Savannah River Site - Part 2

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    8 of 864 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Performance Assessment (PA) for the Savannah River Site (SRS) was prepared to support the eventual removal from service of the H-Area Tank Farm (HTF) underground radioactive waste tanks and ancillary equipment. This PA provides the technical basis and results to be used in subsequent documents to demonstrate compliance with the pertinent requirements identified below for removal from service and eventual final closure of the HTF.  U.S. Department of Energy

  4. AIR AND RADON PATHWAY MODELING FOR THE F AREA TANK FARM

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dixon, K.; Phifer, M.

    2010-07-30

    An air and radon pathways analysis was conducted for the F-Area Tank Farm (FTF) to estimate the flux of volatile radionuclides and radon at the ground surface due to residual waste remaining in the tanks following closure. This analysis was used as the basis to estimate the dose to the maximally exposed individual (MEI) for the air pathway per Curie (Ci) of each radionuclide remaining in the combined FTF waste tanks. For the air pathway analysis, several gaseous radionuclides were considered. These included carbon-14 (C-14), chlorine-36 (Cl-36), iodine-129 (I-129), selenium-79 (Se-79), antimony-125 (Sb-125), tin-126 (Sn-126), tritium (H-3), and technetium-99 (Tc-99). The dose to the MEI was estimated at the SRS Boundary during the 100 year institutional control period. For the 10,000 year post closure compliance period, the dose to the MEI was estimated at the 100 m compliance point. Additionally, the dose to the MEI was estimated at a seepage outcrop located 1600 m from the facility. For the radon pathway analysis, five parent radionuclides and their progeny were analyzed. These parent radionuclides included uranium-238 (U-238), plutonium-238 (Pu-238), uranium-234 (U-234), thorium-230 (Th-230), and radium-226 (Ra-226). The peak flux of radon-222 due to each parent radionuclide was estimated for the simulation period of 10,100 years.

  5. Basis for Section 3116 Determination for the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility at the Idaho National Laboratory

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    NE-ID-11226 Revision 0 Basis for Section 3116 Determination for the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility November 2006 DOE/NE-ID-11226 Revision 0 Basis for Section 3116 Determination for the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility November 2006 ii CONTENTS ACRONYMS.............................................................................................................................................. vii 1. INTRODUCTION AND

  6. High-Level Waste Mechanical Sludge Removal at the Savannah River Site - F Tank Farm Closure Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jolly, R.C.Jr. [Washington Savannah River Company (United States); Martin, B. [Washington Savannah River Company, A Washington Group International Company (United States)

    2008-07-01

    The Savannah River Site F-Tank Farm Closure project has successfully performed Mechanical Sludge Removal (MSR) using the Waste on Wheels (WOW) system for the first time within one of its storage tanks. The WOW system is designed to be relatively mobile with the ability for many components to be redeployed to multiple waste tanks. It is primarily comprised of Submersible Mixer Pumps (SMPs), Submersible Transfer Pumps (STPs), and a mobile control room with a control panel and variable speed drives. In addition, the project is currently preparing another waste tank for MSR utilizing lessons learned from this previous operational activity. These tanks, designated as Tank 6 and Tank 5 respectively, are Type I waste tanks located in F-Tank Farm (FTF) with a capacity of 2,840 cubic meters (750,000 gallons) each. The construction of these tanks was completed in 1953, and they were placed into waste storage service in 1959. The tank's primary shell is 23 meters (75 feet) in diameter, and 7.5 meters (24.5 feet) in height. Type I tanks have 34 vertically oriented cooling coils and two horizontal cooling coil circuits along the tank floor. Both Tank 5 and Tank 6 received and stored F-PUREX waste during their operating service time before sludge removal was performed. DOE intends to remove from service and operationally close (fill with grout) Tank 5 and Tank 6 and other HLW tanks that do not meet current containment standards. Mechanical Sludge Removal, the first step in the tank closure process, will be followed by chemical cleaning. After obtaining regulatory approval, the tanks will be isolated and filled with grout for long-term stabilization. Mechanical Sludge Removal operations within Tank 6 removed approximately 75% of the original 95,000 liters (25,000 gallons). This sludge material was transferred in batches to an interim storage tank to prepare for vitrification. This operation consisted of eleven (11) Submersible Mixer Pump(s) mixing campaigns and multiple intra-area transfers utilizing STPs from July 2006 to August 2007. This operation and successful removal of sludge material meets requirement of approximately 19,000 to 28,000 liters (5,000 to 7,500 gallons) remaining prior to the Chemical Cleaning process. Removal of the last 35% of sludge was exponentially more difficult, as less and less sludge was available to mobilize and the lighter sludge particles were likely removed during the early mixing campaigns. The removal of the 72,000 liters (19,000 gallons) of sludge was challenging due to a number factors. One primary factor was the complex internal cooling coil array within Tank 6 that obstructed mixer discharge jets and impacted the Effective Cleaning Radius (ECR) of the Submersible Mixer Pumps. Minimal access locations into the tank through tank openings (risers) presented a challenge because the available options for equipment locations were very limited. Mechanical Sludge Removal activities using SMPs caused the sludge to migrate to areas of the tank that were outside of the SMP ECR. Various SMP operational strategies were used to address the challenge of moving sludge from remote areas of the tank to the transfer pump. This paper describes in detail the Mechanical Sludge Removal activities and mitigative solutions to cooling coil obstructions and other challenges. The performance of the WOW system and SMP operational strategies were evaluated and the resulting lessons learned are described for application to future Mechanical Sludge Removal operations. (authors)

  7. Testing of Alternative Abrasives for Water-Jet Cutting at C Tank Farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Krogstad, Eirik J.

    2013-08-01

    Legacy waste from defense-related activities at the Hanford Site has predominantly been stored in underground tanks, some of which have leaked; others may be at risk to do so. The U.S. Department of Energys goal is to empty the tanks and transform their contents into more stable waste forms. To do so requires breaking up, and creating a slurry from, solid wastes in the bottoms of the tanks. A technology developed for this purpose is the Mobile Arm Retrieval System. This system is being used at some of the older single shell tanks at C tank farm. As originally planned, access ports for the Mobile Arm Retrieval System were to be cut using a high- pressure water-jet cutter. However, water alone was found to be insufficient to allow effective cutting of the steel-reinforced tank lids, especially when cutting the steel reinforcing bar (rebar). The abrasive added in cutting the hole in Tank C-107 was garnet, a complex natural aluminosilicate. The hardness of garnet (Mohs hardness ranging from H 6.5 to 7.5) exceeds that of solids currently in the tanks, and was regarded to be a threat to Hanford Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant systems. Olivine, an iron-magnesium silicate that is nearly as hard as garnet (H 6.5 to 7), has been proposed as an alternative to garnet. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory proposed to test pyrite (FeS2), whose hardness is slightly less (H 6 to 6.5) for 1) cutting effectiveness, and 2) propensity to dissolve (or disintegrate by chemical reaction) in chemical conditions similar to those of tank waste solutions. Cutting experiments were conducted using an air abrader system and a National Institute of Standards and Technology Standard Reference Material (SRM 1767 Low Alloy Steel), which was used as a surrogate for rebar. The cutting efficacy of pyrite was compared with that of garnet and olivine in identical size fractions. Garnet was found to be most effective in removing steel from the target; olivine and pyrite were less effective, but about equal to each other. The reactivity of pyrite, compared to olivine and garnet, was studied in high-pH, simulated tank waste solutions in a series of bench-top experiments. Variations in temperature, degree of agitation, grain size, exposure to air, and presence of nitrate and nitrite were also studied. Olivine and garnet showed no sign of dissolution or other reaction. Pyrite was shown to react with the fluids in even its coarsest variation (150?1000 ?m). Projected times to total dissolution for most experiments range from months to ca. 12 years, and the strongest control on reaction rate is the grain size.

  8. High-level waste storage tank farms/242-A evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID), Volume 4

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-04-01

    The High-Level Waste Storage Tank Farms/242-A Evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID) is contained in multiple volumes. This document (Volume 4) presents the standards and requirements for the following sections: Radiation Protection and Operations.

  9. Simulant Development for Hanford Tank Farms Double Valve Isolation (DVI) Valves Testing

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wells, Beric E.

    2012-12-21

    Leakage testing of a representative sample of the safety-significant isolation valves for Double Valve Isolation (DVI) in an environment that simulates the abrasive characteristics of the Hanford Tank Farms Waste Transfer System during waste feed delivery to the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) is to be conducted. The testing will consist of periodic leak performed on the DVI valves after prescribed numbers of valve cycles (open and close) in a simulated environment representative of the abrasive properties of the waste and the Waste Transfer System. The valve operations include exposure to cycling conditions that include gravity drain and flush operation following slurry transfer. The simulant test will establish the performance characteristics and verify compliance with the Documented Safety Analysis. Proper simulant development is essential to ensure that the critical process streams characteristics are represented, National Research Council report “Advice on the Department of Energy's Cleanup Technology Roadmap: Gaps and Bridges”

  10. Evaluation of cracking in the 241-AZ tank farm ventilation line at the Hanford Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    ANANTATMULA, R.P.

    1999-10-20

    In the period from April to October of 1988, a series of welding operations on the outside of the AZ Tank Farm ventilation line piping at the Hanford Site produced unexpected and repeated cracking of the austenitic stainless steel base metal and of a seam weld in the pipe. The ventilation line is fabricated from type 304L stainless steel pipe of 24 inch diameter and 0.25 inch wall thickness. The pipe was wrapped in polyethylene bubble wrap and buried approximately 12 feet below grade. Except for the time period between 1980 and 1987, impressed current cathodic protection has been applied to the pipe since its installation in 1974. The paper describes the history of the cracking of the pipe, the probable cracking mechanisms, and the recommended future action for repair/replacement of the pipe.

  11. In-tank Precipitation Facility (ITP) and H-Tank Farm (HTF) geotechnical report, WSRC-TR-95-0057, Revision 0, Volume 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-01-01

    A geotechnical study has been completed in H-Area for the In-Tank Precipitation Facility (ITP) and the balance of the H-Area Tank Farm (HTF) at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina. The study consisted of subsurface field exploration, field and laboratory testing, and engineering analyses. The purpose of these investigations is to evaluate the overall stability of the H-Area tanks under static and dynamic conditions. The objectives of the study are to define the site-specific geological conditions at ITP and HTF, obtain engineering properties for the assessment of the stability of the native soils and embankment under static and dynamic loads (i.e., slope stability, liquefaction potential, and potential settlements), and derive properties for soil-structure interaction studies.

  12. Evaluating Contaminant Flux from the Vadose Zone to the Groundwater in the Hanford Central Plateau. SX Tank Farms Case Study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Truex, Michael J.; Oostrom, Martinus; Last, George V.; Strickland, Christopher E.; Tartakovsky, Guzel D.

    2015-09-01

    At the DOE Hanford Site, contaminants were discharged to the subsurface through engineered waste sites in the Hanford Central Plateau. Additional waste was released through waste storage tank leaks. Much of the contaminant inventory is still present within the unsaturated vadose zone sediments. The nature and extent of future groundwater contaminant plumes and the growth or decline of current groundwater plumes beneath the Hanford Central Plateau are a function of the contaminant flux from the vadose zone to the groundwater. In general, contaminant transport is slow through the vadose zone and it is difficult to directly measure contaminant flux in the vadose zone. Predictive analysis, supported by site characterization and monitoring data, was applied using a structured, systems-based approach to estimate the future contaminant flux to groundwater in support of remediation decisions for the vadose zone and groundwater (Truex and Carroll 2013). The SX Tank Farm was used as a case study because of the existing contaminant inventory in the vadose zone, observations of elevated moisture content in portions of the vadose zone, presence of a limited-extent groundwater plume, and the relatively large amount and wide variety of data available for the site. Although the SX Tank Farm case study is most representative of conditions at tank farm sites, the study has elements that are also relevant to other types of disposal sites in the Hanford Central Plateau.

  13. HANFORD DOUBLE SHELL TANK THERMAL AND SEISMIC PROJECT INCREASED LIQUID LEVEL ANALYSIS FOR 241-AP TANK FARMS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    TC MACKEY; JE DEIBLER; MW RINKER; KI JOHNSON; SP PILLI; NK KARRI; FG ABATT; KL STOOPS

    2009-01-14

    The essential difference between Revision 1 and the original issue of this report is the analysis of the anchor bolts that tie the steel dome of the primary tank to the concrete tank dome. The reevaluation of the AP anchor bolts showed that (for a given temperature increase) the anchor shear load distribution did not change significantly from the initially higher stiffness to the new secant shear stiffness. Therefore, the forces and displacements of the other tank components such as the primary tanks stresses, secondary liner strains, and concrete tank forces and moments also did not change significantly. Consequently, the revised work in Revision 1 focused on the changes in the anchor bolt responses and a full reevaluation of all tank components was judged to be unnecessary.

  14. Design review report: AN valve pit upgrades for Project W-314, tank farm restoration and safe operations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boes, K.A.

    1998-01-13

    This Design Review Report (DRR) documents the contractor design verification methodology and records associated with project W-314`s AN Valve Pit Upgrades design package. The DRR includes the documented comments and their respective dispositions for this design. Acceptance of the comment dispositions and closure of the review comments is indicated by the signatures of the participating reviewers. Project W-314, Tank Farm Restoration and Safe Operations, is a project within the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Tank Waste Retrieval Program. This project provides capital upgrades for the existing Hanford tank farms` waste transfer, instrumentation, ventilation, and electrical infrastructure systems. To support established TWRS programmatic objectives, the project is organized into two distinct phases. The initial focus of the project (i.e., Phase 1) is on waste transfer system upgrades needed to support the TWRS Privatization waste feed delivery system. Phase 2 of the project will provide upgrades to support resolution of regulatory compliance issues, improve tank infrastructure reliability, and reduce overall plant operating/maintenance costs. Within Phase 1 of the W-314 project, the waste transfer system upgrades are further broken down into six major packages which align with the project`s work breakdown structure. Each of these six sub-elements includes the design, procurement, and construction activities necessary to accomplish the specific tank farm upgrades contained within the package. The first package to be performed is the AN Valve Pit Upgrades package. The scope of the modifications includes new pit cover blocks, valve manifolds, leak detectors, transfer line connections (for future planned transfer lines), and special protective coating for the 241-AN-A and 241-AN-B valve pits.

  15. Project W-519 CDR supplement: Raw water and electrical services for privatization contractor, AP tank farm operations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Parazin, R.J.

    1998-07-31

    This supplement to the Project W-519 Conceptual Design will identify a means to provide RW and Electrical services to serve the needs of the TWRS Privatization Contractor (PC) at AP Tank Farm as directed by DOE-RL. The RW will serve the fire suppression and untreated process water requirements for the PC. The purpose of this CDR supplement is to identify Raw Water (RW) and Electrical service line routes to the TWRS Privatization Contractor (PC) feed delivery tanks, AP-106 and/or AP-108, and establish associated cost impacts to the Project W-519 baseline.

  16. T-TY Tank Farm Interim Surface Barrier Demonstration - Vadose Zone Monitoring FY10 Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zhang, Z. F.; Strickland, Christopher E.; Field, Jim G.; Parker, Danny L.

    2011-01-24

    The U.S. Department of Energys Office of River Protection has constructed interim surface barriers over a portion of the T and TY tank farms as part of the Interim Surface Barrier Demonstration Project. The interim surface barriers (hereafter referred to as the surface barriers or barriers) are designed to minimize the infiltration of precipitation into the soil zones containing radioactive contaminants and minimize the movement of the contaminants. As part of the demonstration effort, vadose zone moisture is being monitored to assess the effectiveness of the barriers at reducing soil moisture. Solar-powered systems were installed to continuously monitor soil water conditions at four locations in the T (i.e., instrument Nests TA, TB, TC, and TD) and the TY (i.e., instrument Nests TYA and TYB) Farms beneath the barriers and outside the barrier footprint as well as site meteorological conditions. Nests TA and TYA are placed in the area outside the barrier footprint and serve as controls, providing subsurface conditions outside the influence of the surface barriers. Nest TB provides subsurface measurements to assess surface-barrier edge effects. Nests TC, TD, and TYB are used to assess changes in soil-moisture conditions beneath the interim surface barriers. Except for occasional times for TC and TD and planned dates for TYB, during FY10, the battery voltage at the TMS and instrument Nests in both T and TY tank farms remained above 12.0 V, denoting that the battery voltages were sufficient for the stations to remain functional. All the HDUs were functioning normally, but some pressure-head values were greater than the upper measurement limit. The values that exceeded the upper limit may indicate wet soil conditions and/or measurement error, but they do not imply a malfunction of the sensors. Similar to FY07 through FY09, in FY10, the soil under natural conditions in the T Farm (Nest TA) was generally recharged during the winter period (OctoberMarch), and they discharged during the summer period (AprilSeptember). Soil water conditions above about 1.5-m to 2-m depth from all three types of measurements (i.e., CP, NP, and HDU) showed relatively large variation during the seasonal wetting-drying cycle. For the soil below 2-m depth, the seasonal variation of soil water content was relatively small. The construction of the TISB was completed in April 2008. In the soil below the TISB (Nests TC and TD), the CP-measured water content showed that ? at the soil between 0.6-m and 2.3-m depths was stable, indicating no climatic impacts on soil water conditions beneath the barrier. The NP-measured water content in the soil between about 3.4 m (11 ft) and 12.2 m (40 ft) since the completion of the barrier decreased by 0.007 to 0.014 m3 m-3. The HDU-measured soil-water pressure at 1-m, 2-m, and 5-m depths decreased by 0.7 to 2.4 m, indicating soil water drainage at these depths of the soil. In the soil below the edge of the TISB (Nest TB), the CP-measured water content was relatively stable through the year; the NP-measured water content showed that soil water drainage was occurring in the soil between about 3.4 m (11 ft) and 12.2 m (40 ft) but at a slightly smaller magnitude than in Nests TC and TD; the HDU-measurements show that the pressure head changes at Nest TB since the completion of the barrier were generally less than those at TC and TD, but more than those at TA. These results indicate that the TISB is performing as expected by intercepting the meteoric water from infiltrating into the soil, and the soil is becoming drier gradually. The barrier also had some effects on the soil below the barrier edge, but at a reduced magnitude. There was no significant difference in soil-water regime between the two nests in the TY tank farm because the barrier at the TY Farm was just completed one month before the end of the FY.

  17. SURFACE GEOPHYSICAL EXPLORATION DEVELOPING NONINVASIVE TOOLS TO MONITOR PAST LEAKS AROUND HANFORD TANK FARMS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MYERS DA; RUCKER DF; LEVITT MT; CUBBAGE B; NOONAN GE; MCNEILL M; HENDERSON C

    2011-06-17

    A characterization program has been developed at Hanford to image past leaks in and around the underground storage tank facilities. The program is based on electrical resistivity, a geophysical technique that maps the distribution of electrical properties of the subsurface. The method was shown to be immediately successful in open areas devoid of underground metallic infrastructure, due to the large contrast in material properties between the highly saline waste and the dry sandy host environment. The results in these areas, confirmed by a limited number of boreholes, demonstrate a tendency for the lateral extent of the underground waste plume to remain within the approximate footprint of the disposal facility. In infrastructure-rich areas, such as tank farms, the conventional application of electrical resistivity using small point-source surface electrodes initially presented a challenge for the resistivity method. The method was then adapted to directly use the buried infrastructure as electrodes for both transmission of electrical current and measurements of voltage. For example, steel-cased wells that surround the tanks were used as long electrodes, which helped to avoid much of the infrastructure problems. Overcoming the drawbacks of the long electrode method has been the focus of our work over the past seven years. The drawbacks include low vertical resolution and limited lateral coverage. The lateral coverage issue has been improved by supplementing the long electrodes with surface electrodes in areas devoid of infrastructure. The vertical resolution has been increased by developing borehole electrode arrays that can fit within the small-diameter drive casing of a direct push rig. The evolution of the program has led to some exceptional advances in the application of geophysical methods, including logistical deployment of the technology in hazardous areas, development of parallel processing resistivity inversion algorithms, and adapting the processing tools to accommodate electrodes of all shapes and locations. The program is accompanied by a full set of quality assurance procedures that cover the layout of sensors, measurement strategies, and software enhancements while insuring the integrity of stored data. The data have been shown to be useful in identifying previously unknown contaminant sources and defining the footprint of precipitation recharge barriers to retard the movement of existing contamination.

  18. AIR AND RADON PATHWAY MODELING FOR THE F-AREA TANK FARM

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dixon, K; Mark Phifer, M

    2007-09-17

    The F-Area Tank Farm (FTF) is located within F-Area in the General Separations Area (GSA) of the Savannah River Site (SRS) as seen in Figure 1. The GSA contains the F and H Area Separations Facilities, the S-Area Defense Waste Processing Facility, the Z-Area Saltstone Facility, and the E-Area Low-Level Waste Disposal Facilities. The FTF is a nearly rectangular shaped area and comprises approximately 20 acres, which is bounded by SRS coordinates N 76,604.5 to N 77,560.0 and E 52,435.0 to E 53,369.0. SRS is in the process of preparing a Performance Assessment (PA) to support FTF closure. As part of the PA process, an analysis was conducted to evaluate the potential magnitude of gaseous release of radionuclides from the FTF over the 100-year institutional control period and 10,000-year post-closure compliance period. Specifically, an air and radon pathways analysis has been conducted to estimate the flux of volatile radionuclides and radon at the ground surface due to residual waste remaining in the tanks following closure. This analysis was used as the basis to estimate the dose to the maximally exposed individual (MEI) for the air pathway per Curie (Ci) of each radionuclide remaining in the combined FTF waste tanks. For the air pathway analysis, several gaseous radionuclides were considered. These included carbon-14 (C-14), chlorine-36 (Cl-36), iodine-129 (I-129), selenium-79 (Se-79), antimony-125 (Sb-125), tin-126 (Sn-126), tritium (H-3), and technetium-99 (Tc-99). The dose to the MEI was estimated at the SRS Boundary during the 100 year institutional control period. For the 10,000 year post closure compliance period, the dose to the MEI was estimated at the 100 m compliance point. For the radon pathway analysis, five parent radionuclides and their progeny were analyzed. These parent radionuclides included uranium-238 (U-238), plutonium-238 (Pu-238), uranium-234 (U-234), thorium-230 (Th-230), and radium-226 (Ra-226). The peak flux of radon-222 due to each parent radionuclide was estimated for the simulation period of 10,100 years.

  19. Tank farm surveillance and waste status summary report for May 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hanlon, B.M.

    1993-08-01

    This report is the official inventory for radioactive waste stored in underground tanks in the 200 in the 200 Areas at the Hanford Site. Data that depict the status of stored radioactive waste and tank vessel integrity are contained within the report. This report provides data on each of the existing 177 large underground waste storage tanks and 49 smaller catch tanks and special surveillance facilities, and supplemental information regarding tank surveillance anomalies and ongoing investigations.

  20. Process Options Description for Steam Reforming Flowsheet Model of INEEL Tank Farm Waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Taylor, D.D.; Barnes, C.M.; Nichols, T.T.

    2002-05-21

    Technical information is provided herein that is required for development of a steady-state process simulation of a baseline steam reforming treatment train for Tank Farm waste at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL). This document supercedes INEEL/EXT-2001-173, produced in FY2001 to support simulation of the direct vitrification treatment train which was the previous process baseline. A process block flow diagram for steam reforming is provided, together with a list of unit operations which constitute the process. A detailed description of each unit operation is given which includes its purpose, principal phenomena present, expected pressure and temperature ranges, key chemical species in the inlet steam, and the proposed manner in which the unit operation is to be modeled in the steady state process simulation. Models for the unit operations may be mechanistic (based on first principles), empirical (based solely on pilot test data without extrapolation) , or by correlations (based on extrapolative or statistical schemes applied to pilot test data). Composition data for the expected process feed streams is provided.

  1. LIFE ESTIMATION OF HIGH LEVEL WASTE TANK STEEL FOR F-TANK FARM CLOSURE PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT - 9310

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Subramanian, K; Bruce Wiersma, B; Stephen Harris, S

    2009-01-12

    High level radioactive waste (HLW) is stored in underground carbon steel storage tanks at the Savannah River Site. The underground tanks will be closed by removing the bulk of the waste, chemical cleaning, heel removal, stabilizing remaining residuals with tailored grout formulations, and severing/sealing external penetrations. The life of the carbon steel materials of construction in support of the performance assessment has been completed. The estimation considered general and localized corrosion mechanisms of the tank steel exposed to grouted conditions. A stochastic approach was followed to estimate the distributions of failures based upon mechanisms of corrosion accounting for variances in each of the independent variables. The methodology and results used for one-type of tank is presented.

  2. Waste analysis plan for confirmation or completion of Tank Farms backlog waste designation. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-10-01

    On January 23, 1992, waste management problems in the Tank Farms were acknowledged through an Unusual Occurrence (UO) Report No. RL-WHC-TANKFARM-19920007 (DOE-RL 1992). On March 10, 1993, the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) issued Order 93NM-201 (Order) to the US Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office (DOE-RL) and the Westinghouse Hanford Company (Westinghouse Hanford) asserting that ``DOE-RL and Westinghouse Hanford have failed to designate approximately 2,000 containers of solid waste in violation of WAC 173-303170(l)(a) and the procedures of WAC 173-303-070`` (Ecology 1993). On June 30, 1993, a Settlement Agreement and Order Thereon (Settlement Agreement) among Ecology, DOE-RL, and Westinghouse Hanford was approved by the Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB). Item 3 of the Settlement Agreement requires that DOE-RL and Westinghouse Hanford submit a waste analysis plan (WAP) for the waste subject to the Order by September 1, 1993 (PCHB 1993). This WAP satisfies the requirements of Item 3 of the Order as amended per the Settlement Agreement. Item 3 states: ``Within forty (40) calendar days of receipt of this Order, DOE-RL and WHC provide Ecology with a waste analysis plan for review and approval detailing the established criteria and procedures for waste inspection, segregation, sampling, designation, and repackaging of all containers reported in item No. 1. The report shall include sampling plan criteria for different contaminated media, i.e., soils, compactable waste, high-efficiency particular air (HEPA) filters, etc., and a schedule for completing the work within the time allowed under this Order.``

  3. Waste analysis plan for confirmation or completion of Tank Farms backlog waste designation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-08-01

    This waste analysis plan satisfies the requirements of Item 3 of Ecology Order 93NM-201 as amended per the Settlement Agreement. Item 3 states: ``Within forty (40) calendar days of receipt of this Order, the US Department of Energy Richland Operations (DOE-RL) and Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC) shall provide Ecology with a plan for review and approval detailing the established criteria and procedures for waste inspection, segregation, sampling, designation, and repackaging of all containers reported in item {number_sign}1. The report shall include sampling plan criteria for different contaminated media, i.e., soils, compactable waste, high-efficiency particular air (HEPA) filters, etc., and a schedule for completing the work within the time allowed under this Order.`` Item 3 was amended per the Settlement Agreement as follows: ``In addition to the waste inspection plans for the ``unknowns`` previously provided and currently being supplemented, DOE-RL and WHC shall provide a draft waste analysis plan for the containers reported in Item 1 of the Order to Ecology by July 12, 1993. A final, DOE-RL approved waste analysis plan shall be submitted to Ecology by September 1, 1993, for Ecology`s written approval by September 15, 1993.`` Containers covered by the Order, Settlement Agreement, and this waste analysis plan consist of all those reported under Item 1 of the Order, less any containers that have been identified in unusual occurrences reported by Tank Farms. This waste analysis plan describes the procedures that will be undertaken to confirm or to complete designation of the solid waste identified in the Order.

  4. HANFORD DOUBLE SHELL TANK (DST) THERMAL & SEISMIC PROJECT INCREASED LIQUID LEVEL ANALYSIS FOR 241-AP TANK FARMS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MACKEY TC; DEIBLER JE; JOHNSON KI; PILLI SP; KARRI NK; RINKER MW; ABATT FG; CARPENTER BG

    2007-02-16

    The overall scope of the project is to complete an up-to-date comprehensive analysis of record of the SDT System at Hanford. The "Double-Shell Tank (DST) Integrity Project - DST Thermal and Seismic Project" is in support of Tri-Party Agreement Milestone M-48-14.

  5. T Tank Farm Interim Surface Barrier Demonstration - Vadose Zone Monitoring FY09 Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zhang, Z. F.; Strickland, Christopher E.; Field, Jim G.; Parker, Danny L.

    2010-01-01

    DOEs Office of River Protection constructed a temporary surface barrier over a portion of the T Tank Farm as part of the T Farm Interim Surface Barrier Demonstration Project. As part of the demonstration effort, vadose zone moisture is being monitored to assess the effectiveness of the barrier at reducing soil moisture. A solar-powered system was installed to continuously monitor soil water conditions at four locations (i.e., instrument Nests A, B, C, and D) beneath the barrier and outside the barrier footprint as well as site meteorological conditions. Nest A is placed in the area outside the barrier footprint and serves as a control, providing subsurface conditions outside the influence of the surface barrier. Nest B provides subsurface measurements to assess surface-barrier edge effects. Nests C and D are used to assess changes in soil-moisture conditions beneath the interim surface barrier. Each instrument nest is composed of a capacitance probe (CP) with multiple sensors, multiple heat-dissipation units (HDUs), and a neutron probe (NP) access tube. The monitoring results in FY09 are summarized below. The solar panels functioned normally and could provide sufficient power to the instruments. The CP in Nest C after September 20, 2009, was not functional. The CP sensors in Nest B after July 13 and the 0.9-m CP sensor in Nest D before June 10 gave noisy data. Other CPs were functional normally. All the HDUs were functional normally but some pressure-head values measured by HDUs were greater than the upper measurement-limit. The higher-than-upper-limit values might be due to the very wet soil condition and/or measurement error but do not imply the malfunction of the sensors. Similar to FY07 and FY08, in FY09, the soil under natural conditions (Nest A) was generally recharged during the winter period (October-March) and discharged during the summer period (April-September). Soil water conditions above about 1.5-m to 2-m depth from all three types of measurements (i.e., CP, NP and HDU) showed relatively large variation during the seasonal wetting-drying cycle. For the soil below 2-m depth, the seasonal variation of soil water content was relatively small. The construction of the surface barrier was completed in April 2008. In the soil below the surface barrier (Nests C and D), the CP measurements showed that water content at the soil between 0.6-m and 2.3-m depths was very stable, indicating no climatic impacts on soil water condition beneath the barrier. The NP-measured water content showed that soil water drainage seemed occurring in the soil between about 3.4 m (11 ft) and 9.1 m (30 ft) in FY09. The HDU-measured water pressure decreased consistently in the soil above 5-m depth, indicating soil water drainage at these depths of the soil. In the soil below the edge of the surface barrier (Nest B), the CP-measured water content was relatively stable through the year except at the 0.9-m depth; the NP-measured water content showed that soil water drainage was occurring in the soil between about 3.4 m (11 ft) and 9.1 m (30 ft) but at a slightly smaller magnitude than those in Nests C and D; the HDU-measurements show that the pressure head changes in FY09 in Nest B were less than those for C and D but more than those for A. The soil-water-pressure head was more sensitive to soil water regime changes under dry conditions. In the soil beneath the barrier, the theoretical steady-state values of pressure head is equal to the negative of the distance to groundwater table. Hence, it is expected that, in the future, while the water content become stable, the pressure head will keep decreasing for a long time (e.g., many years). These results indicate that the T Tank Farm surface barrier was performing as expected by intercepting the meteoric water from infiltrating into the soil and the soil was becoming drier gradually. The barrier also has some effects on the soil below the barrier edge but at a reduced magnitude.

  6. Feasibility report on criticality issues associated with storage of K Basin sludge in tanks farms

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Vail, T.S.

    1997-05-29

    This feasibility study provides the technical justification for conclusions about K Basin sludge storage options. The conclusions, solely based on criticality safety considerations, depend on the treatment of the sludge. The two primary conclusions are, (1) untreated sludge must be stored in a critically safe storage tank, and (2) treated sludge (dissolution, precipitation and added neutron absorbers) can be stored in a standard Double Contained Receiver Tank (DCRT) or 241-AW-105 without future restrictions on tank operations from a criticality safety perspective.

  7. High-level waste storage tank farms/242-A evaporator standards/requirements identification document (S/RID), Vol. 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-04-01

    The purpose of this Requirements Identification Document (RID) section is to identify, in one location, all of the facility specific requirements and good industry practices which are necessary or important to establish an effective Issues Management Program for the Tank Farm Facility. The Management Systems Functional Area includes the site management commitment to environmental safety and health (ES&H) policies and controls, to compliance management, to development and management of policy and procedures, to occurrence reporting and corrective actions, resource and issue management, and to the self-assessment process.

  8. Independent Oversight Activity Report, Hanford Waste Tank Farms – October 28 – November 6, 2013

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Follow-up on Previously Identified Items Regarding Positive Ventilation of Hanford Underground Waste Tanks [HIAR-HANFORD-2013-10-28

  9. On-farm production of soybean oil and its properties as a fuel

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Suh, S.R.

    1983-01-01

    This study presents the design of a system for on-farm production of soybean oil for use as a fuel in compression ignition engines. The soybean oil production system consists of a heat exchanger to heat the beans with the exhaust gas of an engine, a screw press and a system for water degumming and drying the expressed crude oil. Optimum parameters of the oil production system were found. The rheological properties of soybean oil, ester of soybean oil and blends of the above with diesel fuel and diesel fuel additives are given. Data on soybean temperature, outlet gas temperature and thermal efficiency were obtained from a developed mathematical model of the heat exchanger. Chemical analyses show that crude oil from the press is similar to that of commercially degummed oil. The degumming process is not needed for the crude oil to be used as a fuel in compression ignition engines. Rheological properties of the soybean oil and soybean oil diesel fuel mixture show that the fluids have viscosities of time independent characteristics and are Newtonian fluids. Diesel fuel additives having low viscosities can be used to lower the viscosity of soybean oil and blends with diesel fuel but the effect is insignificant.

  10. F-Tank Farm Performance Assessment Updates through the Special Analysis Process at Savannah River Site - 12169

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Layton, Mark H.

    2012-07-01

    The F-Area Tank Farm (FTF) is owned by the U.S. Department of Energy and operated by Savannah River Remediation, LLC (SRR), Liquid Waste Operations contractor at DOE's Savannah River Site (SRS). The FTF is in the north-central portion of the SRS and occupies approximately 22 acres within F-Area. The FTF is an active radioactive waste storage facility consisting of 22 carbon steel waste tanks and ancillary equipment such as transfer lines, evaporators and pump tanks. An FTF Performance Assessment (PA) was prepared to support the eventual closure of the FTF underground radioactive waste tanks and ancillary equipment. The PA provides the technical basis and results to be used in subsequent documents to demonstrate compliance with the pertinent requirements identified below for final closure of FTF. The FTank Farm is subject to a state industrial waste water permit and Federal Facility Agreement. Closure documentation will include an F-Tank Farm Closure Plan and tank-specific closure modules utilizing information from the performance assessment. For this reason, the State of South Carolina and the Environmental Protection Agency must be involved in the performance assessment review process. The residual material remaining after tank cleaning is also subject to reclassification prior to closure via a waste determination pursuant to Section 3116 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2005. The projected waste tank inventories in the FTF PA provide reasonably bounding FTF inventory projections while taking into account uncertainties in the effectiveness of future tank cleaning technologies. As waste is removed from the FTF waste tanks, the residual contaminants will be sampled and the remaining residual inventory is characterized. In this manner, tank specific data for the tank inventories at closure will be available to supplement the waste tank inventory projections currently used in the FTF PA. For FTF, the new tank specific data will be evaluated through the Special Analysis process. The FTF Special Analyses process will be utilized to evaluate information regarding the final residual waste that will be grouted in place in the FTF Tanks and assess the potential impact the new inventory information has on the FTF PA assumptions and results. The Special Analysis can then be used to inform decisions regarding FTF tank closure documents. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the Special Analysis process and share insights gained while implementing this process. An example of an area of interest in the revision process is balancing continuous improvement versus configuration control of agreed upon methodologies. Other subjects to be covered include: 1) defining the scope of the revisions included in the Special Analysis, 2) determining which PA results should be addressed in the Special Analysis, and 3) deciding whether the Special Analysis should utilize more qualitative or quantitative assessments. For the SRS FTF, an FTF PA has been prepared to provide the technical basis and results to be used in subsequent documents to demonstrate compliance with the pertinent requirements for final closure of FTF. The FTF Special Analyses process will be utilized to evaluate the impact new information has on the FTF PA assumptions and results. The Special Analysis can then be used to inform decisions regarding FTF tank closure documents. In preparing SAs, it is crucial that the scope of the SA be well defined within the SA, since the specific scope will vary from SA to SA. Since the SAs are essentially addendums to the PA, the SA scope should utilize the PA as the baseline from which the SA scope is defined. The SA needs to focus on evaluating the change associated with the scope, and not let other changes interfere with the ability to perform that evaluation by masking the impact of the change. In preparing the SA, it is also important to let the scope determine whether the Special Analysis should utilize more qualitative or quantitative assessments and also which results from the PA should be addresse

  11. High-level waste storage tank farms/242-A evaporator standards/requirements identification document (S/RID), Vol. 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-04-01

    The Quality Assurance Functional Area Requirements Identification Document (RID), addresses the programmatic requirements that ensure risks and environmental impacts are minimized, ensure safety, reliability, and performance are maximized through the application of effective management systems commensurate with the risks posed by the Tank Farm Facility and its operation. This RID incorporates guidance intended to provide Tank Farms management with the necessary requirements information to develop, upgrade, or assess the effectiveness of a Quality Assurance Program in the performance of organizational and functional activities. Quality Assurance is defined as all those planned and systematic actions necessary to provide adequate confidence that a facility, structure, system, or component will perform satisfactorily and safely in service. This document will provide the specific requirements to meet DNFSB recommendations and the guidance provided in DOE Order 5700.6C, utilizing industry codes, standards, regulatory guidelines, and industry good practices that have proven to be essential elements for an effective and efficient Quality Assurance Program as the nuclear industry has matured over the last thirty years.

  12. Feed tank transfer requirements

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Freeman-Pollard, J.R.

    1998-09-16

    This document presents a definition of tank turnover. Also, DOE and PC responsibilities; TWRS DST permitting requirements; TWRS Authorization Basis (AB) requirements; TWRS AP Tank Farm operational requirements; unreviewed safety question (USQ) requirements are presented for two cases (i.e., tank modifications occurring before tank turnover and tank modification occurring after tank turnover). Finally, records and reporting requirements, and documentation which will require revision in support of transferring a DST in AP Tank Farm to a privatization contractor are presented.

  13. CHEMICAL SLUDGE HEEL REMOVAL AT THE SAVANNAH RIVER SITE F TANK FARM CLOSURE PROJECT 8183

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thaxton, D; Timothy Baughman, T

    2008-01-16

    Chemical Sludge Removal (CSR) is the final waste removal activity planned for some of the oldest nuclear waste tanks located at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in Aiken, SC. In 2008, CSR will be used to empty two of these waste tanks in preparation for final closure. The two waste tanks chosen to undergo this process have previously leaked small amounts of nuclear waste from the primary tank into an underground secondary containment pan. CSR involves adding aqueous oxalic acid to the waste tank in order to dissolve the remaining sludge heel. The resultant acidic waste solution is then pumped to another waste tank where it will be neutralized and then stored awaiting further processing. The waste tanks to be cleaned have a storage capacity of 2.84E+06 liters (750,000 gallons) and a target sludge heel volume of 1.89E+04 liters (5,000 gallons) or less for the initiation of CSR. The purpose of this paper is to describe the CSR process and to discuss the most significant technical issues associated with the development of CSR.

  14. Descriptions and diagrams of the primary and annulus ventilation systems of the double-shell tank farms as of January 1988

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Blackman, A.E.; Waters, E.D.

    1994-12-28

    This document is a compilation of information describing the ventilation systems of the Double-Shell Tank farms (214-AN, -AP, -AW, -AW, -AY, -AZ, and -SY). A general description of the primary tank and annulus ventilation systems is given along with specific information on the high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters, condensers, preheaters, exhaust fans, and piping. This information is considered to be current as of January 1988. 38 refs, 20 figs, 30 tabs.

  15. Installation of a Hydrologic Characterization Network for Vadose Zone Monitoring of a Single-Shell Tank Farm at the U. S. Department of Energy Hanford Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gee, Glendon W. ); Ward, Anderson L. ); Ritter, Jason C. ); Sisson, James B.; Hubbell, Joel M.; Sydnor, Harold A.

    2001-10-30

    The Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, in collaboration with the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory and Duratek Federal Services, deployed a suite of vadose-zone instruments at the B Tank Farm in the 200 E Area of the Hanford Site, near Richland, Washington, during the last quarter of FY 2001. The purpose of the deployment was to obtain in situ hydrologic characterization data within the vadose zone of a high-level-waste tank farm. Eight sensor nests, ranging in depth from 67 m (220 ft) below ground surface (bgs) to 0.9 m (3 ft) bgs were placed in contact with vadose-zone sediments inside a recently drilled, uncased, borehole (C3360) located adjacent to Tank B-110. The sensor sets are part of the Vadose Zone Monitoring System and include advanced tensiometers, heat dissipation units, frequency domain reflectometers, thermal probes, and vadose zone solution samplers. Within the top meter of the surface, a water flux meter was deployed to estimate net infiltration from meteoric water (rain and snowmelt) sources. In addition, a rain gage was located within the tank farm to document on-site precipitation events. All sensor units, with the exception of the solution samplers, were connected to a solar-powered data logger located within the tank farm. Data collected from these sensors are currently being accessed by modem and cell phone and will be analyzed as part of the DOE RL31SS31 project during the coming year (FY 2001).

  16. Characterization of Vadose Zone Sediments Below the T Tank Farm: Boreholes C4104, C4105, 299-W10-196, and RCRA Borehole 299-W11-39

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Serne, R. Jeffrey; Bjornstad, Bruce N.; Horton, Duane G.; Lanigan, David C.; Schaef, Herbert T.; Lindenmeier, Clark W.; Lindberg, Michael J.; Clayton, Ray E.; Legore, Virginia L.; Geiszler, Keith N.; Baum, Steven R.; Valenta, Michelle M.; Kutnyakov, Igor V.; Vickerman, Tanya S.; Orr, Robert D.; Brown, Christopher F.

    2008-09-11

    This report was revised in September 2008 to remove acid-extractable sodium data from Tables 4.8, 4.28, and 4.52. The sodium data was removed due to potential contamination introduced during the acid extraction process. The rest of the text remains unchanged from the original report issued in September 2004. The overall goal of the Tank Farm Vadose Zone Project, led by CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc., is to define risks from past and future single-shell tank farm activities at Hanford. To meet this goal, CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc. tasked scientists from Pacific Northwest National Laboratory to perform detailed analyses on vadose zone sediments from within Waste Management Area (WMA) T-TX-TY. This report is the second of two reports written to present the results of these analyses. Specifically, this report contains all the geologic, geochemical, and selected physical characterization data collected on vadose zone sediment recovered from boreholes C4104 and C4105 in the T Tank Farm, and from borehole 299-W-11-39 installed northeast of the T Tank Farm. Finally, the measurements on sediments from borehole C4104 are compared with a nearby borehole drilled in 1993, 299- W10-196, through the tank T-106 leak plume.

  17. Characterization of Vadose Zone Sediments Below the C Tank Farm: Borehole C4297 and RCRA Borehole 299-E27-22

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brown, Christopher F.; Serne, R. Jeffrey; Bjornstad, Bruce N.; Horton, Duane G.; Lanigan, David C.; Clayton, Ray E.; Valenta, Michelle M.; Vickerman, Tanya S.; Kutnyakov, Igor V.; Geiszler, Keith N.; Baum, Steven R.; Parker, Kent E.; Lindberg, Michael J.

    2008-09-11

    This report was revised in September 2008 to remove acid-extractable sodium data from Tables 4.7 and 4.25. The sodium data was removed due to potential contamination introduced during the acid extraction process. The rest of the text remains unchanged from the original report issued in September 2006. The overall goal of the Tank Farm Vadose Zone Project, led by CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc., is to define risks from past and future single-shell tank farm activities at the Hanford Site. To meet this goal, CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc. tasked scientists from Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) to perform detailed analyses on vadose zone sediments from within Waste Management Area (WMA) C. This report is the first of two reports written to present the results of these analyses. Specifically, this report contains all the geologic, geochemical, and selected physiochemical characterization data collected on vadose zone sediment recovered from borehole C4297, installed adjacent to tank C-105, and from borehole 299-E27-22, installed directly north of the C Tank Farm. This report also presents the interpretation of data in the context of sediment types, the vertical extent of contamination, the migration potential of the contaminants, and the likely source of the contamination in the vadose zone below the C Tank Farm. The information presented in this report supports the WMA A-AX, C, and U field investigation report in preparation by CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc.

  18. An Initial Evaluation Of Characterization And Closure Options For Underground Pipelines Within A Hanford Site Single-Shell Tank Farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Badden, Janet W.; Connelly, Michael P.; Seeley, Paul N.; Hendrickson, Michelle L.

    2013-01-10

    The Hanford Site includes 149 single-shell tanks, organized in 12 'tank farms,' with contents managed as high-level mixed waste. The Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order requires that one tank farm, the Waste Management Area C, be closed by June 30, 2019. A challenge to this project is the disposition and closure of Waste Management Area C underground pipelines. Waste Management Area C contains nearly seven miles of pipelines and 200 separate pipe segments. The pipelines were taken out of service decades ago and contain unknown volumes and concentrations of tank waste residuals from past operations. To understand the scope of activities that may be required for these pipelines, an evaluation was performed. The purpose of the evaluation was to identify what, if any, characterization methods and/or closure actions may be implemented at Waste Management Area C for closure of Waste Management Area C by 2019. Physical and analytical data do not exist for Waste Management Area C pipeline waste residuals. To develop estimates of residual volumes and inventories of contamination, an extensive search of available information on pipelines was conducted. The search included evaluating historical operation and occurrence records, physical attributes, schematics and drawings, and contaminant inventories associated with the process history of plutonium separations facilities and waste separations and stabilization operations. Scoping analyses of impacts to human health and the environment using three separate methodologies were then developed based on the waste residual estimates. All analyses resulted in preliminary assessments, indicating that pipeline waste residuals presented a comparably low long-term impact to groundwater with respect to soil, tank and other ancillary equipment residuals, but exceeded Washington State cleanup requirement values. In addition to performing the impact analyses, the assessment evaluated available sampling technologies and pipeline removal or treatment technologies. The evaluation accounted for the potential high worker risk, high cost, and schedule impacts associated with characterization, removal, or treatment of pipelines within Waste Management Area C for closure. This assessment was compared to the unknown, but estimated low, long-term impacts to groundwater associated with remaining waste residuals should the pipelines be left "as is" and an engineered surface barrier or landfill cap be placed. This study also recommended that no characterization or closure actions be assumed or started for the pipelines within Waste Management Area C, likewise with the premise that a surface barrier or landfill cap be placed over the pipelines.

  19. Type A Investigation of Hanford Tank Farm on September 20, 2007- Memorandum

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    On July 27, 2007, there was a spill of highly radioactive mixed waste from the S-102 Tank waste retrieval pumping system. The cause of the accident was an overpressure of a hose in the dilution line.

  20. Economics of on-farm production and use of vegetable oils for fuel

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McIntosh, C.S.; Withers, R.V.; Smith, S.M.

    1982-01-01

    The technology of oilseed processing, on a small scale, is much simpler than that for ethanol production. This, coupled with the fact that most energy intensive farm operations use diesel powered equipment, has created substantial interest in vegetable oils as an alternative source of liquid fuel for agriculture. The purpose of this study was to estimate the impact on gross margins resulting from vegetable oil production and utilization in two case study areas, Latah and Power Counties, in Iadho. The results indicate that winter rape oil became a feasible alternative to diesel when the price of diesel reached $0.84 per liter in the Latah County model. A diesel price of $0.85 per liter was required in the Power County model before it became feasible to produce sunflower oil for fuel. 5 tables.

  1. Characterization of Vadose Zone Sediments Below the TX Tank Farm: Boreholes C3830, C3831, C3832 and RCRA Borehole 299-W10-27

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Serne, R. Jeffrey; Bjornstad, Bruce N.; Horton, Duane G.; Lanigan, David C.; Lindenmeier, Clark W.; Lindberg, Michael J.; Clayton, Ray E.; Legore, Virginia L.; Orr, Robert D.; Kutnyakov, Igor V.; Baum, Steven R.; Geiszler, Keith N.; Valenta, Michelle M.; Vickerman, Tanya S.

    2008-09-11

    This report was revised in September 2008 to remove acid-extractable sodium data from Tables 4.8, 4.28,4.43, and 4.59. The sodium data was removed due to potential contamination introduced during the acid extraction process. The rest of the text remains unchanged from the original report issued in April 2004. The overall goal of the Tank Farm Vadose Zone Project, led by CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc., is to define risks from past and future single-shell tank farm activities at Hanford. To meet this goal, CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc. tasked scientists from Pacific Northwest National Laboratory to perform detailed analyses on vadose zone sediments from within Waste Management Area (WMA) T-TX-TY. This report is the first of two reports written to present the results of these analyses. Specifically, this report contains all the geologic, geochemical, and selected physical characterization data collected on vadose zone sediment recovered from boreholes C3830, C3831, and C3832 in the TX Tank Farm, and from borehole 299-W-10-27 installed northeast of the TY Tank Farm.

  2. High-level waste storage tank farms/242-A evaporator standards/requirements identification document (S/RID), Vol. 7

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-04-01

    This Requirements Identification Document (RID) describes an Occupational Health and Safety Program as defined through the Relevant DOE Orders, regulations, industry codes/standards, industry guidance documents and, as appropriate, good industry practice. The definition of an Occupational Health and Safety Program as specified by this document is intended to address Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Recommendations 90-2 and 91-1, which call for the strengthening of DOE complex activities through the identification and application of relevant standards which supplement or exceed requirements mandated by DOE Orders. This RID applies to the activities, personnel, structures, systems, components, and programs involved in maintaining the facility and executing the mission of the High-Level Waste Storage Tank Farms.

  3. Implementation of Recommendations from the One System Comparative Evaluation of the Hanford Tank Farms and Waste Treatment Plant Safety Bases

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Garrett, Richard L.; Niemi, Belinda J.; Paik, Ingle K.; Buczek, Jeffrey A.; Lietzow, J.; McCoy, F.; Beranek, F.; Gupta, M.

    2013-11-07

    A Comparative Evaluation was conducted for One System Integrated Project Team to compare the safety bases for the Hanford Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Project (WTP) and Tank Operations Contract (TOC) (i.e., Tank Farms) by an Expert Review Team. The evaluation had an overarching purpose to facilitate effective integration between WTP and TOC safety bases. It was to provide One System management with an objective evaluation of identified differences in safety basis process requirements, guidance, direction, procedures, and products (including safety controls, key safety basis inputs and assumptions, and consequence calculation methodologies) between WTP and TOC. The evaluation identified 25 recommendations (Opportunities for Integration). The resolution of these recommendations resulted in 16 implementation plans. The completion of these implementation plans will help ensure consistent safety bases for WTP and TOC along with consistent safety basis processes. procedures, and analyses. and should increase the likelihood of a successful startup of the WTP. This early integration will result in long-term cost savings and significant operational improvements. In addition, the implementation plans lead to the development of eight new safety analysis methodologies that can be used at other U.S. Department of Energy (US DOE) complex sites where URS Corporation is involved.

  4. Characterization of Direct-Push Vadose Zone Sediments from the 241-B and 241-BX Tank Farms

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brown, Christopher F.; Icenhower, Jonathan P.; Um, Wooyong; Bjornstad, Bruce N.; Valenta, Michelle M.; Iovin, Cristian; Lanigan, David C.; Clayton, Ray E.; Geiszler, Keith N.; Clayton, Eric T.; Kutnyakov, Igor V.; Baum, Steven R.; Lindberg, Michael J.; Orr, Robert D.

    2007-12-21

    Geochemical tests provide evidence for the transit of a plume of caustic waste solution through the sediment column at the Hanford 241-B and -BX Tank Farms. Direct-push samples recovered from boreholes surrounding Tanks 241-B-110 and 241-BX-102 and related waste transfer lines and diversion boxes included sediments typical of those previously recovered from other localities on the Hanford Site. The Hanford formation sediments are dominantly quartzo-feldspathic sands strewn with lithic fragments, displaying a range of particle size distributions and sorting characteristics. Some moderately well-sorted, fine-grained lithologies are interpreted as lenticular bodies irregularly dispersed in coarser-grained, more poorly sorted sediments. Tier I tests conducted on the vadose zone sediments revealed an inverse correlation between moisture content and sediment size fraction (i.e., there is greater moisture content in finer-grained sediments). The Tier I tests also showed that the pore water solutions were likely sodium-rich, moderately saline, and possessed higher pH values than background (untainted) sediments. These data are characteristic of sediments that have encountered sodium-rich, saline, caustic waste solution, as documented in other reports at other suspect contamination sites around Hanford. Analyses of solutions from 1:1 water extracts reveal relatively balanced cation and anion concentrations, indicating that most of the geochemical species have been accounted for. The water extract data for affected sediments also indicate unusually high concentrations of aluminum, iron, and phosphorus. The relatively high concentrations of aluminum and iron may be the result of dissolution of secondary amorphous phases that precipitated after a reactive plume partially dissolved aluminum- and iron-bearing phases as it migrated through the sediment column. On the other hand, the presence of elevated concentrations of phosphorous may be the tell-tale signature of wastes derived from the bismuth phosphate separation process. Elements typically mobile in the geosphere, such as technetium-99, are present at either low concentrations or are below the analytical detection limit. However, we expect that the mobile elements would be present mainly along a narrow plume front, and if this front had passed deeper into the sediment profile than depths sampled, the retention of these elements would be minor. On the other hand for the direct push sediments from around BX Tank Farm, uranium-238 was detected in nearly all sediment specimens (by acid extract experiments) at concentrations above the natural crustal average (0.763 pCi/g), and we also detected the presence of several anthropogenic radioisotopes, such as cobalt-60, cesium-137, europium-154, and europium-155 (by gamma energy analysis). These data are direct confirmation of contamination of the sediments.

  5. Sensitivity analysis of sluicing-leak parameters for the 241-AX tank farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Davis, J.D., Westinghouse Hanford

    1996-12-12

    The scope of this work was to analyze the sensitivity of contaminant fluxes from the vadose zone to the water table, to several parameters. Some of these parameters are controllable. The results were evaluated with respect to their sensitivity to the following types of parameters: hydrostratigraphy and hydraulic properties; volume, duration, and source area of leakage; simultaneous leakage from multiple tanks; pre-existing leaks; barriers to infiltration of meteoric water; and contaminant concentrations and geochemistry.

  6. One System Integrated Project Team Progress in Coordinating Hanford Tank Farms and the Waste Treatment Plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Skwarek, Raymond J.; Harp, Ben J.; Duncan, Garth M.

    2013-12-18

    The One System Integrated Project Team (IPT) was formed at the Hanford Site in late 2011 as a way to improve coordination and itegration between the Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) and the Tank Operations Contractor (TOC) on interfaces between the two projects, and to eliminate duplication and exploit opportunities for synergy. The IPT is composed of jointly staffed groups that work on technical issues of mutal interest, front-end design and project definition, nuclear safety, plant engineering system integration, commissioning, planning and scheduling, and environmental, safety, health and quality (ESH&Q) areas. In the past year important progress has been made in a number of areas as the organization has matured and additional opportunities have been identified. Areas covered in this paper include: Support for development of the Office of Envirnmental Management (EM) framework document to progress the Office of River Protection's (ORP) River Protection Project (RPP) mission; Stewardship of the RPP flowsheet; Collaboration with Savannah River Site (SRS), Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL), and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL); Operations programs integration; and, Further development of the waste acceptance criteria.

  7. Implementation of an Integrated Information Management System for the US DOE Hanford Tank Farms Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Joyner, William Scott; Knight, Mark A.

    2013-11-14

    In its role as the Tank Operations Contractor at the U.S. Department of Energy's site in Hanford, WA, Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC is implementing an integrated document control and configuration management system. This system will combine equipment data with technical document data that currently resides in separate disconnected databases. The new system will provide integrated information, enabling users to more readily identify the documents that relate to a structure, system, or component and vice-versa. Additionally, the new system will automate engineering work processes through electronic workflows, and where practical and feasible provide integration with design authoring tools. Implementation of this system will improve configuration management of the technical baseline, increase work process efficiencies, support the efficient design of future large projects, and provide a platform for the efficient future turnover of technical baseline data and information.

  8. Characterization of Vadose Zone Sediments Below the C Tank Farm: Borehole C4297 and RCRA Borehole 299-E27-22

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brown, Christopher F.; Serne, R. JEFFREY; Bjornstad, Bruce N.; Horton, Duane G.; Lanigan, David C.; Clayton, Ray E.; Valenta, Michelle M.; Vickerman, Tanya S.; Kutnyakov, Igor V.; Geiszler, Keith N.; Baum, Steven R.; Parker, Kent E.; Lindberg, Michael J.

    2006-10-18

    The overall goal of the Tank Farm Vadose Zone Project, led by CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc., is to define risks from past and future single-shell tank farm activities at Hanford. To meet this goal, CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc. tasked scientists from Pacific Northwest National Laboratory to perform detailed analyses on vadose zone sediments from within Waste Management Area (WMA) C. This report is the first of two reports written to present the results of these analyses. Specifically, this report contains all the geologic, geochemical, and selected physical characterization data collected on vadose zone sediment recovered from borehole C4297, installed adjacent to Tank C-105, and from borehole 299-E27-22, installed directly north of the C Tank Farm. Sediments from borehole 299-E27-22 were considered to be background uncontaminated sediments against which to compare contaminated sediments for the C Tank Farm characterization effort. This report also presents our interpretation of the data in the context of sediment types, the vertical extent of contamination, the migration potential of the contaminants, and the likely source of the contamination in the vadose zone and groundwater below the C Tank Farm. The information presented in this report supports the A-AX, C and U Waste Management Area field investigation report(a) in preparation by CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc. A core log was generated for both boreholes and a geologic evaluation of all core samples was performed at the time of opening. Aliquots of sediment from the borehole core samples were analyzed and characterized in the laboratory for the following parameters: moisture content, gamma-emitting radionuclides, one-to-one water extracts (which provide soil pH, electrical conductivity, cation, trace metal, and anion data), total carbon and inorganic carbon content, and 8 M nitric acid extracts (which provide a measure of the total leachable sediment content of contaminants). Two key radiocontaminants, technetium-99 and uranium-238, along with other trace metals were determined in acid and water extracts by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry.

  9. Improved Management of the Technical Interfaces Between the Hanford Tank Farm Operator and the Hanford Waste Treatment Plant - 13383

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Duncan, Garth M.; Saunders, Scott A.

    2013-07-01

    The Department of Energy (DOE) is constructing the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) at the Hanford site in Washington to treat and immobilize approximately 114 million gallons of high level radioactive waste (after all retrievals are accomplished). In order for the WTP to be designed and operated successfully, close coordination between the WTP engineering, procurement, and construction contractor, Bechtel National, Inc. and the tank farms operating contractor (TOC), Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC, is necessary. To develop optimal solutions for DOE and for the treatment of the waste, it is important to deal with the fact that two different prime contractors, with somewhat differing contracts, are tasked with retrieving and delivering the waste and for treating and immobilizing that waste. The WTP and the TOC have over the years cooperated to manage the technical interface. To manage what is becoming a much more complicated interface as the WTP design progresses and new technical issues have been identified, an organizational change was made by WTP and TOC in November of 2011. This organizational change created a co-located integrated project team (IPT) to deal with mutual and interface issues. The Technical Organization within the One System IPT includes employees from both TOC and WTP. This team has worked on a variety of technical issues of mutual interest and concern. Technical issues currently being addressed include: - The waste acceptance criteria; - Waste feed delivery and the associated data quality objectives (DQO); - Evaluation of the effects of performing a riser cut on a single shell tank on WTP operations; - The disposition of secondary waste from both TOC and WTP; - The close coordination of the TOC double shell tank mixing and sampling program and the Large Scale Integrated Test (LSIT) program for pulse jet mixers at WTP along with the associated responses to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Recommendation 2010-2; - Development of a set of alternatives to the current baseline that involve aspects of direct feed, feed conditioning, and design changes. The One System Technical Organization has served WTP, TOC, and DOE well in managing and resolving issues at the interface. This paper describes the organizational structure used to improve the interface and several examples of technical interface issues that have been successfully addressed by the new organization. (authors)

  10. Tank 241-U-204 tank characterization plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bell, K.E.

    1995-03-23

    This document is the tank characterization plan for Tank 241-U-204 located in the 200 Area Tank Farm on the Hanford Reservation in Richland, Washington. This plan describes Data Quality Objectives (DQO) and presents historical information and scheduled sampling events for tank 241-U-204.

  11. Final Report For The Erosion And Corrosion Analysis Of Waste Transfer Primary Pipeline Sections From 241-SY Tank Farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Page, J. S.; Wyrwas, R. B.; Cooke, G. A.

    2012-10-04

    Three sections of primary transfer pipeline removed from the 241-SY Tank Farm in Hanford's 200 West area, labeled as SN-285, SN-286, and SN-278, were analyzed for the presence and amount of corrosion and erosion on the inside surface of the transfer pipe. All three sections of pipe, ranging in length between 6 and 8 in., were received at the 222-S Laboratory still in the pipe-in-pipe assembly. The annular spaces were filled with urethane foam injected into the pipes for as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) purposes. The 3-in. primary transfer pipes were first separated from the outer encasement, 6-in. pipes. The pipes were cut into small sections, or coupons, based upon the results of a non-destructive pipe wall thickness measurement which used an ultrasonic transducer. Following removal of the foam, the coupons were subjected to a series of analytical methods utilizing both optical microscopy and scanning electron microscopy to obtain erosion and corrosion information. The ultrasonic transducer analysis of the SN-285 primary pipe did not show any thinned locations in the pipe wall which were outside the expected range for the 3-in. schedule 40 pipe of 216 mils. A coupon was cut from the thinnest area on the pipe, and analysis of the inside surface, which was in contact with the tank waste, revealed a continuous layer of corrosion ~ 100 11m (4 mils) thick under a semi-continuous layer of tank waste residue ~ 20 11m (1 mil) thick. This residue layer was composed of an amorphous phase rich in chromium, magnesium, calcium, and chlorine. Small pits were detected throughout the inside pipe surface with depths up to ~ 50 11m (2 mils). Similarly, the SN-286 primary pipe did not show, by the ultrasonic transducer measurements, any thinned locations in the pipe wall which were outside the expected range for this pipe. Analysis of the coupon cut from the pipe section showed the presence of a tank waste layer containing sodium aluminate and phases rich in iron, calcium, and chromium. This layer was removed by a cleaning process that left a pipe surface continuous in iron oxide/hydroxide (corrosion) with pockets of aluminum oxide, possibly gibbsite. The corrosion layer was ~ 50 11m (2 mil) thick over non-continuous pits less than ~ 50 11m deep (2 mils). Small particles of aluminum oxide were also detected under the corrosion layer. The ultrasonic transducer analysis of SN-278, like the previous primary pipes, did not reveal any noticeable thinning of the pipe wall. Analysis of the coupon cut from the pipe showed that the inside surface had a layer of tank waste residue that was partially detached from the pipe wall. This layer was easily scraped from the surface and was composed of two separate layers. The underlying layer was ~ 350 11m (14 mils) thick and composed of a cementation of small aluminum oxide (probably gibbsite) particles. A thinner layer on top of the aluminum oxide layer was rich in carbon and chlorine. Scattered pitting was observed on the inside pipe surface with one pit as deep as 200 11m (8 mils).

  12. Feed tank transfer requirements

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Freeman-Pollard, J.R.

    1998-09-16

    This document presents a definition of tank turnover; DOE responsibilities; TWRS DST permitting requirements; TWRS Authorization Basis (AB) requirements; TWRS AP Tank Farm operational requirements; unreviewed safety question (USQ) requirements; records and reporting requirements, and documentation which will require revision in support of transferring a DST in AP Tank Farm to a privatization contractor for use during Phase 1B.

  13. HANFORD DOUBLE SHELL TANK THERMAL AND SEISMIC PROJECT SEISMIC ANALYSIS IN SUPPORT OF INCREASED LIQUID LEVEL IN 241-AP TANK FARMS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    TC MACKEY; FG ABATT; MW RINKER

    2009-01-14

    The essential difference between Revision 1 and the original issue of this report is in the spring constants used to model the anchor bolt response for the anchor bolts that tie the steel dome of the primary tank to the concrete tank dome. Consequently, focus was placed on the changes in the anchor bolt responses, and a full reevaluation of all tank components was judged to be unnecessary. To confirm this judgement, primary tank stresses from the revised analysis of the BES-BEC case are compared to the original analysis and it was verified that the changes are small, as expected.

  14. 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.

  15. Characterization of Vadose Zone Sediments Below the T Tank Farm: Boreholes C4104, C4105, 299-W10-196 and RCRA Borehole 299-W11-39

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Serne, R JEFFREY.; Bjornstad, Bruce N.; Horton, Duane G.; Lanigan, David C.; Lindenmeier, Clark W.; Lindberg, Michael J.; Clayton, Ray E.; LeGore, Virginia L.; Geiszler, Keith N.; Baum, Steven R.; Valenta, Michelle M.; Kutnyakov, Igor V.; Vickerman, Tanya S.; Orr, Robert D.; Brown, Christopher F.

    2004-09-01

    This report contains geologic, geochemical, and physical characterization data collected on sediment recovered from boreholes C4104 and C4105 in the T Tank Farm, and 299-W-11-39 installed northeast of the T Tank Farm. The measurements on sediments from borehole C4104 are compared to a nearby borehole 299-W10-196 placed through the plume from the 1973 T-106 tank leak. This report also presents the data in the context of sediment types, the vertical extent of contamination, the migration potential of the contaminants, and the likely source of the contamination in the vadose zone and groundwater below the T Tank Farm. Sediment samples were characterized for: moisture content, gamma-emission radionuclides, one-to-one water extracts (which provide soil pH, electrical conductivity, cation, trace metal, radionuclide and anion data), total carbon and inorganic carbon content, and 8 M nitric acid extracts (which provide a measure of the total leachable sediment content of contaminants). Overall, our analyses showed that common ion exchange is a key mechanism that influences the distribution of contaminants within that portion of the vadose zone affected by tank liquor. We observed slight elevated pH values in samples from borehole C4104. The sediments from the three boreholes, C4104, C4105, and 299-W10-196 do show that sodium-, nitrate-, and sulfate-dominated fluids are present below tank T-106 and have formed a salt plume. The fluids are more dilute than tank fluids observed below tanks at the SX and BX Tank Farms and slightly less than those from the most saline porewater found in contaminated TX tank farm sediments. The boreholes could not penetrate below the gravel-rich strata of the Ringold Formation Wooded Island member (Rwi) (refusal was met at about 130 ft bgs); therefore, we could not identify the maximum vertical penetration of the tank related plumes. The moisture content, pH, electrical conductivity, nitrate, and technetium-99 profiles versus depth in the three contaminated boreholes around T-106 do not clearly identify the leading edge of the plume. However, the profiles do collectively suggest that bulk of tank-related fluids (center of mass) still resides in Ringold Formation Taylor Flats member fine-grained sediments. Most of the chemical data, especially the nitrate and technetium-99 distributions with depth, support a flow conceptual model that suggests vertical percolation through the Hanford formation H2 unit near T-106 and then a strong horizontal spreading within the CCUu unit followed by more slow vertical percolation, perhaps via diffusion, into the deeper strata. Slow flushing by enhanced recharge and rapid snow melt events (Feb. 1979) appear to lead to more horizontal movement of the tank fluids downgradient towards C4105. The inventories as a function of depth of potential contaminants of concern, nitrate, technetium, uranium, and chromium, are provided. In-situ Kd values were calculated from water and acid extract measurements. For conservative modeling purposes we recommend using Kd values of 0 mL/g for nitrate, Co-60, and technetium-99, a value of 0.1 mL/g for uranium near borehole C4104 and 10 mL/g for U near borehole C4105, and 1 mL/g for chromium to represent the entire vadose zone profile from the bottoms of the tanks to the water table. A technetium-99 groundwater plume exists northeast and east of T WMA. The highest technetium-99 concentration in fiscal year 2003 was 9,200 pCi/L in well 299-W11-39. The most probable source for the technetium-99 is the T waste management area. Groundwater from wells in the west (upgradient) and north of WMA T appear to be highly influenced by wastes disposed to the cribs and trenches on the west side of the WMA. Groundwater from wells at the northeast corner and the east side of the WMA appears to be evolving towards tank waste that has leaked from T-101 or T-106.

  16. SURFACE GEOPHYSICAL EXPLORATION OF B & BX & BY TANK FARMS AT THE HANFORD SITE RESULTS OF BACKGROUND CHARACTERIZATION WITH MAGNETICS AND ELECTROMAGNETICS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MYERS DA

    2007-09-28

    This report documents the results of preliminary surface geophysical exploration activities performed between October and December 2006 at the B, BX, and BY tank farms (B Complex). The B Complex is located in the 200 East Area of the U. S. Department of Energy's Hanford Site in Washington State. The objective of the preliminary investigation was to collect background characterization information with magnetic gradiometry and electromagnetic induction to understand the spatial distribution of metallic objects that could potentially interfere with the results from high resolution resistivity survey. Results of the background characterization show there are several areas located around the site with large metallic subsurface debris or metallic infrastructure.

  17. SURFACE GEOPHYSICAL EXPLORATION OF TX-TY TANK FARMS AT THE HANFORD SITE RESULTS OF BACKGROUND CHARACTERIZATION WITH GROUND PENETRATING RADAR

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MYERS DA; CUBBAGE R; BRAUCHLA R; O'BRIEN G

    2008-07-24

    Ground penetrating radar surveys of the TX and TY tank farms were performed to identify existing infrastructure in the near surface environment. These surveys were designed to provide background information supporting Surface-to-Surface and Well-to-Well resistivity surveys of Waste Management Area TX-TY. The objective of the preliminary investigation was to collect background characterization information with GPR to understand the spatial distribution of metallic objects that could potentially interfere with the results from high resolution resistivity{trademark} surveys. The results of the background characterization confirm the existence of documented infrastructure, as well as highlight locations of possible additional undocumented subsurface metallic objects.

  18. Perched-Water Evaluation for the Deep Vadose Zone Beneath the B, BX, and BY Tank Farms Area of the Hanford Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Truex, Michael J.; Oostrom, Martinus; Carroll, KC; Chronister, Glen B.

    2013-06-28

    Perched-water conditions have been observed in the vadose zone above a fine-grained zone that is located a few meters above the water table within the B, BX, and BY Tank Farms area. The perched water contains elevated concentrations of uranium and technetium-99. This perched-water zone is important to consider in evaluating the future flux of contaminated water into the groundwater. The study described in this report was conducted to examine the perched-water conditions and quantitatively evaluate 1) factors that control perching behavior, 2) contaminant flux toward groundwater, and 3) associated groundwater impact.

  19. Tank Farm Area Closure

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

    ... generating hydroelectric power, providing outdoor ... This zone extends from the facility fence line to a distance ... notices, permits, easements, deed notifications, ...

  20. Tank Farm Area Closure

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

    TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof or its contractors or subcontractors. Printed in the United States of America HANFORD SITE Cleanup Completion Framework Date Published December 2012 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary

  1. Tank Farms - Hanford Site

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

    300 Area 324 Building 325 Building 400 AreaFast Flux Test Facility 618-10 and 618-11 Burial Grounds 700 Area B Plant B Reactor C Reactor Canister Storage Building and Interim ...

  2. CONFIRMATORY SURVEY OF THE FUEL OIL TANK AREA HUMBOLDT BAY POWER PLANT EUREKA, CALIFORNIA

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    WADE C. ADAMS

    2012-04-09

    During the period of February 14 to 15, 2012, ORISE performed radiological confirmatory survey activities for the former Fuel Oil Tank Area (FOTA) and additional radiological surveys of portions of the Humboldt Bay Power Plant site in Eureka, California. The radiological survey results demonstrate that residual surface soil contamination was not present significantly above background levels within the FOTA. Therefore, it is ORISE’s opinion that the radiological conditions for the FOTA surveyed by ORISE are commensurate with the site release criteria for final status surveys as specified in PG&E’s Characterization Survey Planning Worksheet. In addition, the confirmatory results indicated that the ORISE FOTA survey unit Cs-137 mean concentrations results compared favorably with the PG&E FOTA Cs-137 mean concentration results, as determined by ORISE from the PG&E characterization data. The interlaboratory comparison analyses of the three soil samples analyzed by PG&E’s onsite laboratory and the ORISE laboratory indicated good agreement for the sample results and provided confidence in the PG&E analytical procedures and final status survey soil sample data reporting.

  3. An Initial Evaluation of Characterization and Closure Options for Underground Pipelines within a Hanford Site Single-Shell Tank Farm - 13210

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Badden, Janet W.; Connelly, Michael P.; Seeley, Paul N.; Hendrickson, Michelle L.

    2013-07-01

    The Hanford Site includes 149 single-shell tanks, organized in 12 'tank farms,' with contents managed as high-level mixed waste. The Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order requires that one tank farm, the Waste Management Area C, be closed by June 30, 2019. A challenge to this project is the disposition and closure of Waste Management Area C underground pipelines. Waste Management Area C contains nearly seven miles of pipelines and 200 separate pipe segments. The pipelines were taken out of service decades ago and contain unknown volumes and concentrations of tank waste residuals from past operations. To understand the scope of activities that may be required for these pipelines, an evaluation was performed. The purpose of the evaluation was to identify what, if any, characterization methods and/or closure actions may be implemented at Waste Management Area C for closure of Waste Management Area C by 2019. Physical and analytical data do not exist for Waste Management Area C pipeline waste residuals. To develop estimates of residual volumes and inventories of contamination, an extensive search of available information on pipelines was conducted. The search included evaluating historical operation and occurrence records, physical attributes, schematics and drawings, and contaminant inventories associated with the process history of plutonium separations facilities and waste separations and stabilization operations. Scoping analyses of impacts to human health and the environment using three separate methodologies were then developed based on the waste residual estimates. All analyses resulted in preliminary assessments, indicating that pipeline waste residuals presented a comparably low long-term impact to groundwater with respect to soil, tank and other ancillary equipment residuals, but exceeded Washington State cleanup requirement values. In addition to performing the impact analyses, the assessment evaluated available sampling technologies and pipeline removal or treatment technologies. The evaluation accounted for the potential high worker risk, high cost, and schedule impacts associated with characterization, removal, or treatment of pipelines within Waste Management Area C for closure. This assessment was compared to the unknown, but estimated low, long-term impacts to groundwater associated with remaining waste residuals should the pipelines be left 'as is' and an engineered surface barrier or landfill cap be placed. This study also recommended that no characterization or closure actions be assumed or started for the pipelines within Waste Management Area C, likewise with the premise that a surface barrier or landfill cap be placed over the pipelines. (authors)

  4. EVALUATION OF BEST AVAILABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY FOR TOXICS (TBACT) DOUBLE SHELL TANK FARMS PRIMARY VENTILATION SYSTEM SUPPORTING WASTE TRANSFER OPERATIONS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    KELLY SE; HAASS CC; KOVACH JL; TURNER DA

    2010-06-03

    This report is an evaluation of Best Available Control Technology for Toxics (tBACT) for installation and operation of the Hanford double shell (DST) tank primary ventilation systems. The DST primary ventilation systems are being modified to support Hanford's waste retrieval, mixing, and delivery of single shell tank (SST) and DST waste throught the DST storage system to the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP).

  5. EVALUATION OF BEST AVAILABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY FOR TOXICS -TBACT- DOUBLE SHELL TANK FARMS PRIMARY VENTILATION SYSTEMS SUPPORTING WASTE TRANSFER OPERATIONS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HAAS CC; KOVACH JL; KELLY SE; TURNER DA

    2010-06-24

    This report is an evaluation of Best Available Control Technology for Toxics (tBACT) for installation and operation of the Hanford double shell (DST) tank primary ventilation systems. The DST primary ventilation systems are being modified to support Hanford's waste retrieval, mixing, and delivery of single shell tank (SST) and DST waste through the DST storage system to the Waste Treatment and Immobilizaiton Plant (WTP).

  6. Comparison between continuous stirred tank reactor extractor and soxhlet extractor for extraction of El-Lajjun oil shale

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Anabtawi, M.Z. [Univ. of Bahrain, Isa Town (Bahrain)

    1996-02-01

    Extraction on El-Lajjun oil shale in a continuous stirred tank reactor extractor (CSTRE) and a Soxhlet extractor was carried out using toluene and chloroform as solvents. Solvents were recovered using two distillation stages, a simple distillation followed by a fractional distillation. Gas chromotography was used to test for the existence of trapped solvent in the yield. It was found that extraction using a CSTRE gave a 12% increase in yield on average compared with the Soxhlet extractor, and an optimum shale size of 1.0mm offered a better yield and solvent recovery for both techniques. It was also found that an optimum ratio of solvent to oil shale of 2:1 gave the best oil yield. The Soxhlet extractor was found to offer an extraction rate of 1 hour to complete extraction compared with 4 hours in a CSTRE. The yield in a CSTRE was found to increase on increase of stirring. When extraction was carried out at the boiling point of the solvents in a CSTRE, the yield was found to increase by 30% on average compared to that of extraction when the solvent was at room temperature. When toluene was used for extraction, the average amount of bitumen extracted was 0.032 g/g of oil shale and 76.4% of the solvent recovered, compared with 0.037 g/g of oil shale and 84.1% of the solvent recovered using a Soxhlet extractor.

  7. Transition from Consultation to Monitoring-NRC's Increasingly Focused Review of Factors Important to F-Area Tank Farm Facility Performance - 13153

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barr, Cynthia; Grossman, Christopher; Alexander, George; Parks, Leah; Fuhrmann, Mark; Shaffner, James; McKenney, Christepher; Pabalan, Roberto; Pickett, David; Dinwiddie, Cynthia

    2013-07-01

    In consultation with the NRC, DOE issued a waste determination for the F-Area Tank Farm (FTF) facility in March 2012. The FTF consists of 22 underground tanks, each 2.8 to 4.9 million liters in capacity, used to store liquid high-level waste generated as a result of spent fuel reprocessing. The waste determination concluded stabilized waste residuals and associated tanks and auxiliary components at the time of closure are not high-level and can be disposed of as LLW. Prior to issuance of the final waste determination, during the consultation phase, NRC staff reviewed and provided comments on DOE's revision 0 and revision 1 FTF PAs that supported the waste determination and produced a technical evaluation report documenting the results of its multi-year review in October 2011. Following issuance of the waste determination, NRC began to monitor DOE disposal actions to assess compliance with the performance objectives in 10 CFR Part 61, Subpart C. To facilitate its monitoring responsibilities, NRC developed a plan to monitor DOE disposal actions. NRC staff was challenged in developing a focused monitoring plan to ensure limited resources are spent in the most cost-effective manner practical. To address this challenge, NRC prioritized monitoring areas and factors in terms of risk significance and timing. This prioritization was informed by NRC staff's review of DOE's PA documentation, independent probabilistic modeling conducted by NRC staff, and NRC-sponsored research conducted by the Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analyses in San Antonio, TX. (authors)

  8. EVALUATION OF FROST HEAVE ON WASTE TRANSFER LINES WITH SHALLOW DEPTHS IN DST (DOUBLE SHELL TANK) FARMS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HAQ MA

    2009-05-12

    The purpose of this document is to evaluate the effect of frost heave on waste transfer lines with shallow depths in DST farms. Because of the insulation, well compacted sandy material around waste transfer lines, the type of sandy and gravel soil, and relatively low precipitation at Hanford site, it is concluded that waste transfer lines with one foot of soil covers (sandy cushion material and insulation) are not expected to undergo frost heave damaging effects.

  9. Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment, and Disposition Framework...

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

    nuclear waste legacyapproximately 56 million gallons of radioactive and chemical wastes stored in 177 underground tanks (tank farms) located on Hanford's Central Plateau. ...

  10. Basis for Section 3116 Determination for the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility at the Idaho National Laboratory

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This 3116 Basis Document addresses the disposal of stabilized residuals in the TFF, and the TFF tank system, and disposal of the tanks, vaults, and associated piping and ancillary equipment at...

  11. SOLAR HEATING OF TANK BOTTOMS Application of Solar Heating to Asphaltic and Parrafinic Oils Reducing Fuel Costs and Greenhouse Gases Due to Use of Natural Gas and Propane

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eugene A. Fritzler

    2005-09-01

    The sale of crude oil requires that the crude meet product specifications for BS&W, temperature, pour point and API gravity. The physical characteristics of the crude such as pour point and viscosity effect the efficient loading, transport, and unloading of the crude oil. In many cases, the crude oil has either a very high paraffin content or asphalt content which will require either hot oiling or the addition of diluents to the crude oil to reduce the viscosity and the pour point of the oil allowing the crude oil to be readily loaded on to the transport. Marginal wells are significantly impacted by the cost of preheating the oil to an appropriate temperature to allow for ease of transport. Highly paraffinic and asphaltic oils exist throughout the D-J basin and generally require pretreatment during cold months prior to sales. The current study addresses the use of solar energy to heat tank bottoms and improves the overall efficiency and operational reliability of stripper wells.

  12. Hanford Single-Shell Tank Integrity Program

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    production reactors to irradiate fuel and produce plutonium. * Four large ... Type III 100 Series Tanks 241-BY, S, TX, and TY Farms, 48 Tanks 758,000 gallon capacity ...

  13. Planning and care mark repair of 14-year old leak in Kuwait Oil Co. LPG tank 95

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shtayieh, S.

    1983-01-10

    This paper points out that the leak, which had been present for such a long time, completely saturated the perlite insulation with hydrocarbons, thus rendering the entire operation of inspection, repair, and maintenance of the inner tank a hazardous operation. It emphasizes the safety aspects, which were complicated by the saturated perlite as well as by the fact that the tank is situated in the middle of the LPG storage area with LPG tanks on either side. Tank design, making preparations, inspection, and repair are discussed. The fact that the leaking flanges were originally installed damaged, indicated the future need of tighter company quality control of all contractors work.

  14. Decision guide to farm fuel production: ethanol, methanol, or vegetable oils

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kerstetter, J.D.

    1984-09-01

    The purpose of this paper is to inform farmers of the choices they have today regarding production of motor vehicle fuels. Its intent is to inform farmers of what is involved in producing an alternative fuel, its compatibility with existing engines, the costs involved, and the markets for the fuel and any by-products. This paper is not a how-to-do-it manual or a policy document. Some of the data has been developed from the Appropriate Technology Small Grants Program managed by the Washington State Energy Office. Part One provides background information on Washington's fuel use patterns, highlighting the agricultural sector. In Part Two, general considerations common to all alternative fuels are covered. Part Three contains three detailed discussions of the alternative fuels most favored by Washington farmers for production and use - ethanol, vegetable oils, and methanol. The Appendix contains a brief summary of the 11 ethanol projects in Washington funded as a result of the Appropriate Technology Small Grants Program. 5 references, 12 figures, 2 tables.

  15. Tank Waste Committee Page 1

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

    ... close in C Farm, and there is 6.3 miles of contaminated pipeline to go with those tanks. ... (OU) decision, and are identified in the SST closure permit and the current Part B permit. ...

  16. Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...

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

    ... and storage; and waste management and disposal. ... tank farms into high-level radioactive waste (HLW) and low-activity waste (LAW) ... This section primarily discusses criteria and ...

  17. Tank characterization technical sampling basis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brown, T.M.

    1998-04-28

    Tank Characterization Technical Sampling Basis (this document) is the first step of an in place working process to plan characterization activities in an optimal manner. This document will be used to develop the revision of the Waste Information Requirements Document (WIRD) (Winkelman et al. 1997) and ultimately, to create sampling schedules. The revised WIRD will define all Characterization Project activities over the course of subsequent fiscal years 1999 through 2002. This document establishes priorities for sampling and characterization activities conducted under the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Tank Waste Characterization Project. The Tank Waste Characterization Project is designed to provide all TWRS programs with information describing the physical, chemical, and radiological properties of the contents of waste storage tanks at the Hanford Site. These tanks contain radioactive waste generated from the production of nuclear weapons materials at the Hanford Site. The waste composition varies from tank to tank because of the large number of chemical processes that were used when producing nuclear weapons materials over the years and because the wastes were mixed during efforts to better use tank storage space. The Tank Waste Characterization Project mission is to provide information and waste sample material necessary for TWRS to define and maintain safe interim storage and to process waste fractions into stable forms for ultimate disposal. This document integrates the information needed to address safety issues, regulatory requirements, and retrieval, treatment, and immobilization requirements. Characterization sampling to support tank farm operational needs is also discussed.

  18. Hanford A and AX-Farm Leak Assessments Report: 241-A-103, 241-A-104, 241-A-105, 241-AX-102, 241-AX-104 and Unplanned Waste Releases

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Johnson, Michael E.; Field, Jim G.

    2008-08-26

    This report summarizes information on historical waste loss events associated with tanks and piplines in the 241-A and 241-AX tank farms.

  19. Oil

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Energy Department works to ensure domestic and global oil supplies are environmentally sustainable and invests in research and technology to make oil drilling cleaner and more efficient.

  20. EIS-0356: Retrieval, Treatment and Disposal of Tank Wastes and Closure of Single-Shell Tanks at the Hanford Site, Richland, WA

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This EIS analyzes DOE's proposed retrieval, treatment, and disposal of the waste being managed in the high-level waste (HLW) tank farms at the Hanford Site near Richland, Washington, and closure of the 149 single-shell tanks (SSTs) and associated facilities in the HLW tank farms.

  1. Tank Waste Committee Page 1

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

    ... Because of the stress on the tank due to it being bowed up in the middle (or "oil ... There would be no time for annulus pumping. The waste would almost instantly fill the leak ...

  2. The Hanford Story: Tank Waste Cleanup

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This fourth chapter of The Hanford Story explains how the DOE Office of River Protection will use the Waste Treatment Plant to treat the 56 million gallons of radioactive waste in the Tank Farms.

  3. HANFORD DOUBLE SHELL TANK (DST) THERMAL & SEISMIC PROJECT BUCKLING EVALUATION METHODS & RESULTS FOR THE PRIMARY TANKS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MACKEY, T.C.

    2006-03-17

    This report documents a detailed buckling evaluation of the primary tanks in the Hanford double shell waste tanks. The analysis is part of a comprehensive structural review for the Double-Shell Tank Integrity Project. This work also provides information on tank integrity that specifically responds to concerns raise by the Office of Environment, Safety, and Health (ES&H) Oversight (EH-22) during a review (in April and May 2001) of work being performed on the double-shell tank farms, and the operation of the aging waste facility (AWF) primary tank ventilation system.

  4. Radioactive Demonstration Of Mineralized Waste Forms Made From Hanford Low Activity Waste (Tank Farm Blend) By Fluidized Bed Steam Reformation (FBSR)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jantzen, C. M.; Crawford, C. L.; Bannochie, C. J.; Burket, P. R.; Cozzi, A. D.; Daniel, W. E.; Hall, H. K.; Miller, D. H.; Missimer, D. M.; Nash, C. A.; Williams, M. F.

    2013-08-21

    The U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of River Protection (ORP) is responsible for the retrieval, treatment, immobilization, and disposal of Hanford’s tank waste. A key aspect of the River Protection Project (RPP) cleanup mission is to construct and operate the Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP). The WTP will separate the tank waste into high-level and low-activity waste (LAW) fractions, both of which will subsequently be vitrified. The projected throughput capacity of the WTP LAW Vitrification Facility is insufficient to complete the RPP mission in the time frame required by the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, also known as the Tri-Party Agreement (TPA), i.e. December 31, 2047. Supplemental Treatment is likely to be required both to meet the TPA treatment requirements as well as to more cost effectively complete the tank waste treatment mission. The Supplemental Treatment chosen will immobilize that portion of the retrieved LAW that is not sent to the WTP’s LAW Vitrification facility into a solidified waste form. The solidified waste will then be disposed on the Hanford site in the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF). Fluidized Bed Steam Reforming (FBSR) offers a moderate temperature (700-750°C) continuous method by which LAW can be processed irrespective of whether the waste contain organics, nitrates, sulfates/sulfides, chlorides, fluorides, volatile radionuclides or other aqueous components. The FBSR technology can process these wastes into a crystalline ceramic (mineral) waste form. The mineral waste form that is produced by co-processing waste with kaolin clay in an FBSR process has been shown to be comparable to LAW glass, i.e. leaches Tc-99, Re and Na at <2g/m2 during ASTM C1285 (Product Consistency) durability testing. Monolithing of the granular FBSR product was investigated to prevent dispersion during transport or burial/storage. Monolithing in an inorganic geopolymer binder, which is amorphous, macro-encapsulates the granules, and the monoliths pass ANSI/ANS 16.1 and ASTM C1308 durability testing with Re achieving a Leach Index (LI) of 9 (the Hanford Integrated Disposal Facility, IDF, criteria for Tc-99) after a few days and Na achieving an LI of >6 (the Hanford IDF criteria for Na) in the first few hours. The granular and monolithic waste forms also pass the EPA Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) for all Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) components at the Universal Treatment Standards (UTS). Two identical Benchscale Steam Reformers (BSR) were designed and constructed at SRNL, one to treat non-radioactive simulants and the other to treat actual radioactive wastes. The results from the non-radioactive BSR were used to determine the parameters needed to operate the radioactive BSR in order to confirm the findings of non-radioactive FBSR pilot scale and engineering scale tests and to qualify an FBSR LAW waste form for applications at Hanford. Radioactive testing commenced using SRS LAW from Tank 50 chemically trimmed to look like Hanford’s blended LAW known as the Rassat simulant as this simulant composition had been tested in the non-radioactive BSR, the non-radioactive pilot scale FBSR at the Science Applications International Corporation-Science and Technology Applications Research (SAIC-STAR) facility in Idaho Falls, ID and in the TTT Engineering Scale Technology Demonstration (ESTD) at Hazen Research Inc. (HRI) in Denver, CO. This provided a “tie back” between radioactive BSR testing and non-radioactive BSR, pilot scale, and engineering scale testing. Approximately six hundred grams of non-radioactive and radioactive BSR product were made for extensive testing and comparison to the non-radioactive pilot scale tests performed in 2004 at SAIC-STAR and the engineering scale test performed in 2008 at HRI with the Rassat simulant. The same mineral phases and off-gas species were found in the radioactive and non-radioactive testing. The granular ESTD and BSR products (radioactive and non-radioactive) were analyzed for total constituents and durability tested as a granular waste form. A subset of the granular material was stabilized in a clay based geopolymer matrix at 42% and 65% FBSR loadings and durability tested as a monolith waste form. The 65 wt% FBSR loaded monolith made with clay (radioactive) was more durable than the 67-68 wt% FBSR loaded monoliths made from fly ash (non-radioactive) based on short term PCT testing. Long term, 90 to 107 day, ASTM C1308 testing (similar to ANSI/ANS 16.1 testing) was only performed on two fly ash geopolymer monoliths at 67-68 wt% FBSR loading and three clay geopolymer monoliths at 42 wt% FBSR loading. More clay geopolymers need to be made and tested at longer times at higher FBSR loadings for comparison to the fly ash monoliths. Monoliths made with metakaolin (heat treated) clay are of a more constant composition and are very reactive as the heat treated clay is amorphous and alkali activated. The monoliths made with fly ash are subject to the inherent compositional variation found in fly ash as it is a waste product from burning coal and it contains unreactive components such as mullite. However, both the fly ash and the clay based monoliths perform well in long term ASTM C1308 testing. Extensive testing and characterization of the granular and monolith material were made including the following American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) tests: ASTM C1285 testing (Product Consistency Test) of granular and monolithic waste forms; Comparison of granular BSR radioactive to ESTD and pilot scale granular non-radioactive waste form made from the Rassat simulant  Comparison of granular radioactive to granular non-radioactive waste form made from the Rassat simulant made using the SRNL BSR; Comparison of monolithic BSR radioactive waste forms to monolithic BSR and ESTD non-radioactive waste forms made of fly ash; Comparison of granular BSR radioactive waste forms to monolithic BSR non-radioactive waste forms made of fly ash; Comparison of granular BSR radioactive waste forms to monolithic BSR non-radioactive waste forms made of clay; ASTM C1308 Accelerated Leach Test for Diffusive Releases from Solidified Waste and a Computer Program to Model Diffusive, Fractional Leaching from Cylindrical Waste Forms; Comparison of BSR non-radioactive waste forms to monolithic ESTD non-radioactive waste forms made from fly ash; Testing of BSR non-radioactive monoliths made from clay for comparison to non-radioactive monoliths made from fly ash; ASTM C39 Compressive Strength of Cylindrical Concrete Specimens; Comparison of monolithic BSR radioactive waste forms to monolithic BSR and ESTD non-radioactive waste forms; EPA Manual SW-846 Method 1311, Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP); Comparison of granular BSR radioactive to ESTD and pilot scale granular non-radioactive waste form made from the Rassat simulant; Comparison of granular radioactive to granular non-radioactive waste form made from the Rassat simulant made using the SRNL BSR; Comparison of monolithic BSR radioactive waste forms to monolithic BSR non-radioactive waste forms.

  5. Geology Data Package for the Single-Shell Tank Waste Management Areas at the Hanford Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Reidel, Steve P.; Chamness, Mickie A.

    2007-01-01

    This data package discusses the geology of the single-shell tank (SST) farms and the geologic history of the area. The focus of this report is to provide the most recent geologic information available for the SST farms. This report builds upon previous reports on the tank farm geology and Integrated Disposal Facility geology with information available after those reports were published.

  6. Double-Shell Tank Construction: Extent of Condition

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Venetz, Theodore J.; Gunter, Jason R.

    2014-05-13

    This presentation covers: quick recap of Hanford DSTs and the contribution of construction difficulties which led to the leak in tank AY-102; approach to Extent of Condition reviews; typical DST construction sequence; presentation of construction information resulting from extent of condition reviews of other DST farms with comparison to tank AY-102; and overall conclusion and impact of issues on the other DST tank farms.

  7. ANNUAL RADIOACTIVE WASTE TANK INSPECTION PROGRAM 2009

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    West, B.; Waltz, R.

    2010-06-21

    Aqueous radioactive wastes from Savannah River Site (SRS) separations and vitrification processes are contained in large underground carbon steel tanks. Inspections made during 2009 to evaluate these vessels and other waste handling facilities along with evaluations based on data from previous inspections are the subject of this report. The 2009 inspection program revealed that the structural integrity and waste confinement capability of the Savannah River Site waste tanks were maintained. All inspections scheduled per LWO-LWE-2008-00423, HLW Tank Farm Inspection Plan for 2009, were completed. All Ultrasonic measurements (UT) performed in 2009 met the requirements of C-ESG-00006, In-Service Inspection Program for High Level Waste Tanks, Rev. 1, and WSRC-TR-2002-00061, Rev.4. UT inspections were performed on Tank 29 and the findings are documented in SRNL-STI-2009-00559, Tank Inspection NDE Results for Fiscal Year 2009, Waste Tank 29. Post chemical cleaning UT measurements were made in Tank 6 and the results are documented in SRNL-STI-2009-00560, Tank Inspection NDE Results Tank 6, Including Summary of Waste Removal Support Activities in Tanks 5 and 6. A total of 6669 photographs were made and 1276 visual and video inspections were performed during 2009. Twenty-Two new leaksites were identified in 2009. The locations of these leaksites are documented in C-ESR-G-00003, SRS High Level Waste Tank Leaksite Information, Rev.4. Fifteen leaksites at Tank 5 were documented during tank wall/annulus cleaning activities. Five leaksites at Tank 6 were documented during tank wall/annulus cleaning activities. Two new leaksites were identified at Tank 19 during waste removal activities. Previously documented leaksites were reactivated at Tanks 5 and 12 during waste removal activities. Also, a very small amount of additional leakage from a previously identified leaksite at Tank 14 was observed.

  8. Testing of Alternative Abrasives for Water-Jet Cutting at C Tank...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    Testing of Alternative Abrasives for Water-Jet Cutting at C Tank Farm Citation Details In-Document Search Title: Testing of Alternative Abrasives for Water-Jet Cutting at C Tank ...

  9. River Protection Project (RPP) Tank Waste Retrieval and Disposal Mission Technical Baseline Summary Description

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    DOVALLE, O.R.

    1999-12-29

    This document is one of the several documents prepared by Lockheed Martin Hanford Corp. to support the U. S. Department of Energy's Tank Waste Retrieval and Disposal mission at Hanford. The Tank Waste Retrieval and Disposal mission includes the programs necessary to support tank waste retrieval; waste feed, delivery, storage, and disposal of immobilized waste; and closure of the tank farms.

  10. EM’s Office of River Protection Completes Waste Retrieval in Another Hanford Tank

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    RICHLAND, Wash. – The EM Office of River Protection (ORP) and its tank operations contractor Washington River Protection Solutions completed waste retrieval activities in tank C-102, marking the 14th single-shell tank retrieved at C tank farm at the Hanford Site.

  11. Hanford Story: Tank Waste Cleanup - Questions - Hanford Site

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

    The Hanford Story Hanford Story: Tank Waste Cleanup - Questions The Hanford Story Hanford Story: Tank Waste Cleanup - Questions Email Email Page | Print Print Page |Text Increase Font Size Decrease Font Size Why is the Waste Treatment Plant being built? Where did the waste in the Tank Farms come from? How many gallons of waste are contained in the tanks? Why is removing the waste from the tanks so challenging? What is the Mobile Arm Retrieval System (MARS)? How will the tank waste be delivered

  12. Progress Continues Toward Closure of Two Underground Waste Tanks at

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Savannah River Site | Department of Energy Progress Continues Toward Closure of Two Underground Waste Tanks at Savannah River Site Progress Continues Toward Closure of Two Underground Waste Tanks at Savannah River Site October 30, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis Grouting of two Savannah River Site waste tanks began in August. Here, the first trucks with grout arrive at F Tank Farm. Grouting of two Savannah River Site waste tanks began in August. Here, the first trucks with grout arrive at F Tank

  13. Tank Farms Regulator Perspective Hanford Advisory Board

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

    Permit Modifications a graded approach Class 1 Example: fixing typos, increasing monitoring or sampling Permittee notifies Ecology and public. Class 1 prime - ...

  14. Waste Treatment Plant and Tank Farm Program

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This photo shows the Pretreatment Facility control room building pad at the Office of River Protection at the Hanford site. The Low-Activity Waste Facility is in the background.

  15. Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    ... in WMA C for radionuclides, volatile chemicals, non-volatile chemicals, and polychlorinated biphenyls. These are the results from the Phase 1 and Phase 2 characterization efforts. ...

  16. Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Location: (c) Building Number: Structure, System, and Component NNA (SSC) and Building ... EDTECN: DRF UC: Cost Center: Charge Code: ... Office DQO data quality objective ...

  17. Tank Farms Regulator Perspective Hanford Advisory Board

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

    Deborah Singleton, Project Manager Andrea L. Prignano, PhD, Permit Coordinator Nuclear Waste Program Washington State Department of Ecology February 11, 2014 What led to the modification request?  National Enforcement Investigations Center (NEIC) inspection of Solid Waste Operating Complex on March 14-25, 2011  Four violations identified  Storage of hazardous waste without a permit  Failure to meet closure plan requirements  Failure to submit closure notices and closure plans 

  18. Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    danl@nezperce.org Sobczyk, Stan NPT (208) 621-3751 stans@nezperce.org Lowman, Don NRC (301) 415-5452 Donald.lowman@nrc.gov Schwartzman, Adam NRC (301) 415-8172...

  19. Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    davidb@nezperce.org Sobczyk, Stan NPT-ERWM 208-621-3751 stans@nezperce.org Lowman, Don NRC 301-415-5452 donald.lowman@nrc.com McKenney, Chris NRC 301-415-6663...

  20. Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    378-3187 Dirk.a.dunning@state.or.us Arlt, Hans NRC (301) 415-5845 hda@urc.gov Lowman, Don NRC (301) 415-2026 Donald.Lowman@nrc.gov McKenney, Chris NRC (301) 415-6663...

  1. Tank farms compacted low-level waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hetzer, D.C.

    1997-08-01

    This report describes the process of Low-Level Waste (LLW) volume reduction by compaction. Also included is the data used for characterization of LLW destined for compaction. Scaling factors (ratios) are formed based on data contained in this report.

  2. Tank farms compacted low level waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Waters, M.S., Westinghouse Hanford

    1996-07-01

    This report describes the process of Low Level Waste (LLW) volume reduction by compaction. Also included is the data used for characterization of LLW destined for compaction. Scaling factors (ratios) are formed based on data contained in this report.

  3. Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Summary Notes from 24- 25 February 2009 Office of River Protection Waste Management Area C Performance Assessment Input Meeting Attendees: Representatives from Department of...

  4. EA-0881: Tank 241-c-103 Organic Vapor and Liquid Characterization and Supporting Activities, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This EA evaluates the environmental impacts of a proposal to sample the vapor space and liquid waste and perform other supporting activities in Tank 241-C-103 located in the 241-C Tank Farm on the...

  5. ANNUAL RADIOACTIVE WASTE TANK INSPECTION PROGRAM - 2011

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    West, B.; Waltz, R.

    2012-06-21

    Aqueous radioactive wastes from Savannah River Site (SRS) separations and vitrification processes are contained in large underground carbon steel tanks. Inspections made during 2011 to evaluate these vessels and other waste handling facilities along with evaluations based on data from previous inspections are the subject of this report. The 2011 inspection program revealed that the structural integrity and waste confinement capability of the Savannah River Site waste tanks were maintained. All inspections scheduled per SRR-LWE-2011-00026, HLW Tank Farm Inspection Plan for 2011, were completed. Ultrasonic measurements (UT) performed in 2011 met the requirements of C-ESR-G-00006, In-Service Inspection Program for High Level Waste Tanks, Rev. 3, and WSRC-TR-2002-00061, Rev.6. UT inspections were performed on Tanks 25, 26 and 34 and the findings are documented in SRNL-STI-2011-00495, Tank Inspection NDE Results for Fiscal Year 2011, Waste Tanks 25, 26, 34 and 41. A total of 5813 photographs were made and 835 visual and video inspections were performed during 2011. A potential leaksite was discovered at Tank 4 during routine annual inspections performed in 2011. The new crack, which is above the allowable fill level, resulted in no release to the environment or tank annulus. The location of the crack is documented in C-ESR-G-00003, SRS High Level Waste Tank Leaksite Information, Rev.6.

  6. Oil-Fired Boilers and Furnaces | Department of Energy

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

    Diagram of an oil boiler. New tanks are generally double-wall or have a spill container built underneath to reduce the chances of an oil spill. Typically, the tank drip pan shown...

  7. Wind Farm

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The wind farm in Greensburg, Kansas, was completed in spring 2010, and consists of ten 1.25 megawatt (MW) wind turbines that supply enough electricity to power every house, business, and municipal...

  8. 241-AN Double Shell Tanks (DST) Integrity Assessment Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    JENSEN, C.E.

    1999-09-21

    This report presents the results of the integrity assessment of the 241-AN double-shell tank farm facility located in the 200 East Area of the Hanford Site. The assessment included the design evaluation and integrity examinations of the tanks and concluded that the facility is adequately designed, is compatible with the waste, and is fit for use. Recommendations including subsequent examinations, are made to ensure the continued safe operation of the tanks.

  9. 241-SY Double Shell Tanks (DST) Integrity Assessment Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    JENSEN, C.E.

    1999-09-21

    This report presents the results of the integrity assessment of the 241-SY double-shell tank farm facility located in the 200 West Area of the Hanford Site. The assessment included the design evaluation and integrity examinations of the tanks and concluded that the facility is adequately designed, is compatible with the waste, and is fit for use. Recommendations including subsequent examinations, are made to ensure the continued safe operation of the tanks.

  10. SLUDGE BATCH 7 PREPARATION TANK 4 AND 12 CHARACTERIZATION

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bannochie, C.; Click, D.; Pareizs, J.

    2010-05-21

    Samples of PUREX sludge from Tank 4 and HM sludge from Tank 12 were characterized in preparation for Sludge Batch 7 (SB7) formulation in Tank 51. SRNL analyses on Tank 4 and Tank 12 were requested in separate Technical Assistance Requests (TAR). The Tank 4 samples were pulled on January 19, 2010 following slurry operations by F-Tank Farm. The Tank 12 samples were pulled on February 9, 2010 following slurry operations by H-Tank Farm. At the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL), two 200 mL dip samples of Tank 4 and two 200 mL dip samples of Tank 12 were received in the SRNL Shielded Cells. Each tank's samples were composited into clean 500 mL polyethylene storage bottles and weighed. The composited Tank 4 sample was 428.27 g and the composited Tank 12 sample was 502.15 g. As expected there are distinct compositional differences between Tank 4 and Tank 12 sludges. The Tank 12 slurry is much higher in Al, Hg, Mn, and Th, and much lower in Fe, Ni, S, and U than the Tank 4 slurry. The Tank 4 sludge definitely makes the more significant contribution of S to any sludge batch blend. This S, like that observed during SB6 washing, is best monitored by looking at the total S measured by digesting the sample and analyzing by inductively coupled plasma - atomic emission spectroscopy (ICPAES). Alternatively, one can measure the soluble S by ICP-AES and adjust the value upward by approximately 15% to have a pretty good estimate of the total S in the slurry. Soluble sulfate measurements by ion chromatography (IC) will be biased considerably lower than the actual total S, the difference being due to the non-sulfate soluble S and the undissolved S. Tank 12 sludge is enriched in U-235, and hence samples transferred into SRNL from the Tank Farm will need to be placed on the reportable special nuclear material inventory and tracked for total U per SRNL procedure requirements.

  11. Tank waste remediation system fiscal year 1998 multi-year work plan WBS 1.1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lenseigne, D. L.

    1997-09-15

    The TWRS Project Mission is to manage and immobilize for disposal the Hanford Site radioactive tank waste and cesium (Cs)/strontium (Sr) capsules in a safe, environmentally sound, and cost-effective manner. The scope includes all activities needed to (1) resolve safety issues; (2) operate, maintain, and upgrade the tank farms and supporting infrastructure; (3) characterize, retrieve, pretreat, and immobilize the waste for disposal and tank farm closure; and (4) use waste minimization and evaporation to manage tank waste volumes to ensure that the tank capacities of existing DSTs are not exceeded. The TWRS Project is responsible for closure of assigned operable units and D&D of TWRS facilities.

  12. Karen Avenue Wind Farm II (San Gorgonio Farms) | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Farm II (San Gorgonio Farms) Jump to: navigation, search Name Karen Avenue Wind Farm II (San Gorgonio Farms) Facility Karen Avenue Windfarm II (San Gorgonio Farms) Sector Wind...

  13. Dual Tank Fuel System

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Wagner, Richard William; Burkhard, James Frank; Dauer, Kenneth John

    1999-11-16

    A dual tank fuel system has primary and secondary fuel tanks, with the primary tank including a filler pipe to receive fuel and a discharge line to deliver fuel to an engine, and with a balance pipe interconnecting the primary tank and the secondary tank. The balance pipe opens close to the bottom of each tank to direct fuel from the primary tank to the secondary tank as the primary tank is filled, and to direct fuel from the secondary tank to the primary tank as fuel is discharged from the primary tank through the discharge line. A vent line has branches connected to each tank to direct fuel vapor from the tanks as the tanks are filled, and to admit air to the tanks as fuel is delivered to the engine.

  14. Hanford Tank Waste Residuals

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Hanford Tank Waste Residuals DOE HLW Corporate Board November 6, 2008 Chris Kemp, DOE ORP Bill Hewitt, YAHSGS LLC Hanford Tanks & Tank Waste * Single-Shell Tanks (SSTs) - 27 million ...

  15. ANNUAL RADIOACTIVE WASTE TANK INSPECTION PROGRAM 2010

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    West, B.; Waltz, R.

    2011-06-23

    Aqueous radioactive wastes from Savannah River Site (SRS) separations and vitrification processes are contained in large underground carbon steel tanks. Inspections made during 2010 to evaluate these vessels and other waste handling facilities along with evaluations based on data from previous inspections are the subject of this report. The 2010 inspection program revealed that the structural integrity and waste confinement capability of the Savannah River Site waste tanks were maintained. All inspections scheduled per SRR-LWE-2009-00138, HLW Tank Farm Inspection Plan for 2010, were completed. Ultrasonic measurements (UT) performed in 2010 met the requirements of C-ESG-00006, In-Service Inspection Program for High Level Waste Tanks, Rev. 3, and WSRC-TR-2002-00061, Rev.6. UT inspections were performed on Tanks 30, 31 and 32 and the findings are documented in SRNL-STI-2010-00533, Tank Inspection NDE Results for Fiscal Year 2010, Waste Tanks 30, 31 and 32. A total of 5824 photographs were made and 1087 visual and video inspections were performed during 2010. Ten new leaksites at Tank 5 were identified in 2010. The locations of these leaksites are documented in C-ESR-G-00003, SRS High Level Waste Tank Leaksite Information, Rev.5. Ten leaksites at Tank 5 were documented during tank wall/annulus cleaning activities. None of these new leaksites resulted in a release to the environment. The leaksites were documented during wall cleaning activities and the waste nodules associated with the leaksites were washed away. Previously documented leaksites were reactivated at Tank 12 during waste removal activities.

  16. Waste Tank Summary Report for Month ending March 31 2003

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HANLON, B.M.

    2003-05-05

    This report is the official inventory for radioactive waste stored in underground tanks in the 200 Areas at the Hanford Site. Data that depict the status of stored radioactive waste and tank vessel integrity are contained within the report. This report provides data on each of the existing 177 large underground waste storage tanks and 60 smaller miscellaneous underground storage tanks and special surveillance facilities, and supplemental information regarding tank surveillance anomalies and ongoing investigations. This report is intended to meet the requirement of US. Department of Energy Order 435.1 (DOE-HQ, August 28, 2001, Radioactive Waste Management, US. Department of Energy-Washington, D.C.) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for the Hanford Site Tank Farm tanks.

  17. WASTE TANK SUMMARY REPORT FOR MONTH ENDING 01/2004

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HANLON, B.M.

    2004-03-02

    This report is the official inventory for radioactive waste stored in underground tanks in the 200 Areas at the Hanford Site. Data that depict the status of stored radioactive waste and tank vessel integrity are contained within the report. This report provides data on each of the existing 177 large underground waste storage tanks and 60 smaller miscellaneous underground storage tanks and special surveillance facilities, and supplemental information regarding tank surveillance anomalies and ongoing investigations. This report is intended to meet the requirement of U.S. Department of Energy Order 435.1 (DOE-HQ, August 28,2001, Radioactive Waste Management, U.S. Department of Energy-Washington, D.C.) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for the Hanford Site Tank Farm tanks.

  18. EIS-0189: Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS), Richland, WA (Programmatic)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This environmental impact statement evaluates the Department of Energy (DOE)'s, in cooperation with the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology), decisions on how to properly manage and dispose of Hanford Site tank waste and encapsulated cesium and strontium to reduce existing and potential future risk to the public, Site workers, and the environment. The waste includes radioactive, hazardous, and mixed waste currently stored in 177 underground storage tanks, approximately 60 other smaller active and inactive miscellaneous underground storage tanks (MUSTs), and additional Site waste likely to be added to the tank waste, which is part of the tank farm system. In addition, DOE proposes to manage and dispose of approximately 1,930 cesium and strontium capsules that are by-products of tank waste. The tank waste and capsules are located in the 200 Areas of the Hanford Site near Richland, Washington.

  19. Oil-Fired Boilers and Furnaces | Department of Energy

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

    Oil-Fired Boilers and Furnaces Oil-Fired Boilers and Furnaces Diagram of an oil boiler. New tanks are generally double-wall or have a spill container built underneath to reduce the chances of an oil spill. Typically, the tank drip pan shown here is required only for single-wall tanks and would extend the full width of the tank. | Photo courtesy State of Massachusetts. Diagram of an oil boiler. New tanks are generally double-wall or have a spill container built underneath to reduce the chances of

  20. Analysis of vehicle fuel release resulting in waste tank fire

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    STEPHENS, L.S.

    2003-03-21

    This document reevaluates several aspects of the in-tank vehicle fuel fire/deflagration accident formally documented as an independent accident (representative accident [rep acc] 2). This reevaluation includes frequencies for the accidents and incorporates the behavior of gasoline and diesel fuel in more detail than previous analysis. This reevaluation uses data from RPP-13121, ''Historical Summary of Occurrences from the Tank Farm Safety Analysis Report'', Table B-1, ''Tank Farm Events, Off-Normal and Critiques,'' and B-2, ''Summary of Occurrences,'' and from the River Protection Project--Occurrence Reporting & Processing System (ORPS) reports as a basis for changing some of the conclusions formally reported in HNF-SD-WM-CN-037, ''Frequency Analysis of Vehicle Fuel Releases Resulting in Waste Tank Fire''. This calculation note will demonstrate that the in-tank vehicle fuel fire/deflagration accident event may be relocated to other, more bounding accidents.

  1. Tank waste remediation system heat stress control program report, 1995

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Carls, D.R.

    1995-09-28

    Protecting employees from heat stress within tank farms during the summer months is challenging. Work constraints typically experienced in tank farms complicate the measures taken to protect employees from heat stress. TWRS-Industrial Hygiene (IH) has endeavored to control heat stress injuries by anticipating, recognizing, evaluating and controlling the factors which lead or contribute to heat stress in Tank Farms. The TWRS Heat Stress Control Program covers such areas as: employee and PIC training, communication of daily heat stress alerts to tank farm personnel, setting work/rest regimens, and the use of engineering and personal protective controls when applicable. The program has increased worker awareness of heat stress and prevention, established provisions for worker rest periods, increased drinking water availability to help ensure worker hydration, and allowed for the increased use of other protective controls to combat heat stress. The TWRS Heat Stress Control Program is the cornerstone for controlling heat stress among tank farm employees. The program has made great strides since it`s inception during the summer of 1994. Some improvements can still be made to enhance the program for the summer of 1996, such as: (1) procurement and use of personal heat stress monitoring equipment to ensure appropriate application of administrative controls, (2) decrease the need for use of containment tents and anti-contamination clothing, and (3) providing a wider variety of engineering and personal protective controls for heat stress prevention

  2. Tank characterization report for single-shell tank 241-C-109

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    DiCenso, A.T.; Amato, L.C.; Lambie, R.W.; Franklin, J.D.; Seymour, B.J.; Johnson, K.W.; Stevens, R.H.; Remund, K.M.; Sasaki, L.M.; Simpson, B.C.

    1995-02-01

    This document provides the characterization information and interprets the data for Single-Shell Tank 241-C-109. Single-Shell Tank 241-C-109 is an underground storage tank containing high-level radioactive waste. It is located in the C Tank Farm in the Hanford Site`s 200 East Area. The tank was sampled in September of 1992 to address the Ferrocyanide Unreviewed Safety Question. Analyses of tank waste were also performed to support Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order Milestone M-44-08. Tank 241-C-109 went into service in 1946 and received first-cycle decontamination waste from bismuth phosphate process operations at B Plant in 1948. Other waste types added that are expected to contribute to the current contents include ferrocyanide scavenging waste and Strontium Semiworks waste. It is the last tank in a cascade with Tanks 241-C-107 and 241-C-108. The tank has a capacity of 2,010 kL (530 kgal) and currently contains 250 kL (66 kgal) of waste, existing primarily of sludge. Approximately 9.15 kL (4 kgal) of supernate remain. The sludge is heterogeneous, with significantly different chemical compositions depending on waste depth. The major waste constituents include aluminum, calcium, iron, nickel, nitrate, nitrite, phosphate, sodium, sulfate and uranium. The major radionuclides present are Cesium 137 and Strontium 90. The results of this characterization indicate that the waste in this tank is adequately described in the Dangerous Waste Permit Application of the Single-Shell Tank System.

  3. Calculation notes that support accident scenario and consequence of the in-tank fuel fire/deflageration

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Crowe, R.D., Westinghouse Hanford

    1996-09-09

    The purpose of this calculation note is to provide the basis for In-Tank Fuel fire/Deflageration consequence for the Tank Farm Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). Tank Fuel Fire/Deflageration scenario is developed and details and description of the analysis methods are provided.

  4. Calculation notes that support accident scenario and consequence of the in-tank fuel fire/deflagration

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Crowe, R.D.

    1996-09-27

    The purpose of this calculation note is to provide the basis for In-Tank Fuel Fire/Deflageration consequence for the Tank Farm Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). Tank Fuel Fire/Deflageration scenario is developed and details and description of the analysis methods are provided.

  5. Oil-Fired Boilers and Furnaces | Department of Energy

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

    Oil-Fired Boilers and Furnaces Oil-Fired Boilers and Furnaces May 16, 2013 - 3:15pm Addthis Diagram of an oil boiler. New tanks are generally double-wall or have a spill container...

  6. Status of tank 241-SY-101 data analyses

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Anantatmula, R.P.

    1992-09-01

    The Waste Tank Flammable Gas Stabilization Program was established in 1990 to provide for resolution of a major safety issue identified for 23 of the high-level waste tanks at the Hanford Site. The safety issue involves the production, accumulation, and periodic release from these tanks of flammable gases in concentrations exceeding the lower flammability limits. This document deals primarily with tank 241-SY-101 from the SY Tank Farm. The flammable gas condition has existed for this tank since the tank was first filled in the time period from 1977 to 1980. During a general review of waste tank chemical stability in 1988--1989, this situation was re-examined and, in March 1990, the condition was declared to be an unreviewed safety question. Tank 241-SY-101 was placed under special operating restrictions, and a program of investigation was begun to evaluate the condition and determine appropriate courses of action. This report summarizes the data that have become available on tank 241-SY-101 since it was declared as an unreviewed safety question and updates the information reported in an earlier document (WHC-EP-0517). The report provides a technical basis for use in the evaluation of safety risks of the tank and subsequent resolution of the unreviewed safety question.

  7. Tank Waste Strategy Update

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Tank Waste Subcommittee www.em.doe.gov safety performance cleanup closure E M Environmental Management 1 Tank Waste Subcommittee Ken Picha Office of Environmental Management ...

  8. Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval,

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment, and Disposition Framework September 24, 2013 U.S. Department of Energy Washington, D.C. 20585 Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment, and ...

  9. Life-cycle cost analysis 200-West Weather Enclosure: Multi-function Waste Tank Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Umphrey, M.R.

    1995-01-16

    The Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility (MWTF)will provide environmentally safe and acceptable storage capacity for handling wastes resulting from the remediation of existing single-shell and double-shell tanks on the Hanford Site. The MWTF will construct two tank farm facilities at two separate locations. A four-tank complex will be constructed in the 200-East Area of the Hanford Site; a two-tank complex will be constructed in the 200-West Area. This report documents the results of a life-cycle cost analysis performed by ICF Kaiser Hanford Company (ICF KH) for the Weather Enclosure proposed to be constructed over the 200-West tanks. Currently, all tank farm operations on the Hanford Site are conducted in an open environment, with weather often affecting tank farm maintenance activities. The Weather Enclosure is being proposed to allow year-round tank farm operation and maintenance activities unconstrained by weather conditions. Elimination of weather-related delays at the MWTF and associated facilities will reduce operational costs. The life-cycle cost analysis contained in this report analyzes potential cost savings based on historical weather information, operational and maintenance costs, construction cost estimates, and other various assumptions.

  10. Tank 241-AX-104 upper vadose zone cone penetrometer demonstration sampling and analysis plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    FIELD, J.G.

    1999-02-02

    This sampling and analysis plan (SAP) is the primary document describing field and laboratory activities and requirements for the tank 241-AX-104 upper vadose zone cone penetrometer (CP) demonstration. It is written in accordance with Hanford Tank Initiative Tank 241-AX-104 Upper Vadose Zone Demonstration Data Quality Objective (Banning 1999). This technology demonstration, to be conducted at tank 241-AX-104, is being performed by the Hanford Tanks Initiative (HTI) Project as a part of Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Retrieval Program (EM-30) and the Office of Science and Technology (EM-50) Tanks Focus Area. Sample results obtained as part of this demonstration will provide additional information for subsequent revisions to the Retrieval Performance Evaluation (RPE) report (Jacobs 1998). The RPE Report is the result of an evaluation of a single tank farm (AX Tank Farm) used as the basis for demonstrating a methodology for developing the data and analyses necessary to support making tank waste retrieval decisions within the context of tank farm closure requirements. The RPE includes a study of vadose zone contaminant transport mechanisms, including analysis of projected tank leak characteristics, hydrogeologic characteristics of tank farm soils, and the observed distribution of contaminants in the vadose zone in the tank farms. With limited characterization information available, large uncertainties exist as to the nature and extent of contaminants that may exist in the upper vadose zone in the AX Tank Farm. Traditionally, data has been collected from soils in the vadose zone through the installation of boreholes and wells. Soil samples are collected as the bore hole is advanced and samples are screened on site and/or sent to a laboratory for analysis. Some in-situ geophysical methods of contaminant analysis can be used to evaluate radionuclide levels in the soils adjacent to an existing borehole. However, geophysical methods require compensation for well casing interference and soil moisture content and may not be successful in some conditions. In some cases the level of interference must be estimated due to uncertainties regarding the materials used in well construction and soil conditions, Well casing deployment used for many in-situ geophysical methods is relatively expensive and geophysical methods do not generally provide real time values for contaminants. In addition, some of these methods are not practical within the boundaries of the tank farm due to physical constraints, such as underground piping and other hardware. The CP technologies could facilitate future characterization of vadose zone soils by providing vadose zone data in near real-time, reducing the number of soil samples and boreholes required, and reducing characterization costs.

  11. Evaluation of potential releases from single-shell tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ramsdell, J.V. Jr.

    1992-03-01

    Potential toxic chemical concentrations in the air near vents of single-shell tanks have been evaluated using three scenarios. The first scenario duplicates the conditions existing the morning of January 28, 1992, when several workers reported exposure to toxic or irritating gases near the BX and BY tank farms in the 200-East Area at Hanford. The results of this scenario indicate that it is unlikely that a tank in either tank farm could have been the source of the gases associated with the incident. In the other two scenarios, maximum potential concentrations under worst-cast and bounding conditions were examined. The results of theses scenario show that air concentrations of all toxic gases reported to be in the tanks fall below their time-weighted average, threshold limiting values within 5 m of tank vents under worst-case conditions involving a restricted air flow to the tanks. When unrestricted air flow to the tanks and worst-case conditions are assumed, the maximum gas concentrations fall below time-weighted average, threshold limiting values within 15 m of vents.

  12. Calculation notes that support accident scenario and consequence determination of a waste tank criticality

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Crowe, R.D., Westinghouse Hanford

    1996-08-02

    The purpose of this calculation note is to provide the basis forcriticality consequences for the Tank Farm Safety Analysis Report(FSAR). Criticality scenario is developed and details and description of the analysis methods are provided.

  13. Tank Operations Contract Section B Contract No. DE-AC27-08RV14800

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

    ... Sub-CLIN 2.2: Single-Shell Tank Farm (Waste Management ... Sub-CLIN 3.3: Immobilized High-Level Waste (IHLW) Storage and ... of the WTP Low Activity Waste (LAW) Facility: a. ...

  14. Tank Operations Contract Section C Contract No. DE-AC27-08RV14800...

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

    Tank Farm (Waste Management Area) Closure17 C.2.3 ... 3.3: Immobilized High-Level Waste (IHLW) Storage and ... and Operation of the WTP Low Activity Waste Facility (LAW) ..... 30 ...

  15. Calculation notes that support accident scenario and consequence determination of a waste tank criticality

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Crowe, R.D.

    1996-09-27

    The purpose of this calculation note is to provide the basis for criticality consequences for the Tank Farm Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). Criticality scenario is developed and details and description of the analysis methods are provided.

  16. H. R. 3710: A Bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow individuals a credit for expenditures to remove and replace underground home heating oil storage tanks in certain areas. Introduced in the House of Representatives, One Hundredth First Congress, First Session, November 17, 1989

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1989-01-01

    The bill would allow a tax credit in the amount equal to 25 percent of the removal and replacement expenditures made by the taxpayer during the taxable year, not to exceed 2000 dollars. The tank must be located at the principal residence of the taxpayer, be used to store heating oil for the residence, and be located in a critical aquifer protection area, as defined in the Public Health Service Act.

  17. Vegetable oil as fuel

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1980-11-01

    A review is presented of various experiments undertaken over the past few years in the U.S. to test the performance of vegetable oils in diesel engines, mainly with a view to on-farm energy self-sufficiency. The USDA Northern Regional Research Center in Peoria, Illinois, is screening native U.S. plant species as potential fuel oil sources.

  18. Tjaden Farms Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Status In Service Owner Tjaden Farms Energy Purchaser Tjaden Farms Location Charles City IA Coordinates 43.170337, -92.58944 Show Map Loading map... "minzoom":false,"mappingse...

  19. Farms to Fuels

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

    County * Poultry and eggs ranked 6 th in the state Farms to Fuel * Local Agriculture Statistics * 2007 Census of Agriculture - Sonoma County * -1% change of Farms * -15% change ...

  20. Probabilistic safety assessment for Hanford high-level waste tank 241-SY-101

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MacFarlane, D.R.; Bott, T.F.; Brown, L.F.; Stack, D.W.; Kindinger, J.; Deremer, R.K.; Medhekar, S.R.; Mikschl, T.J.

    1994-05-01

    Los Alamos National Laboratory (Los Alamos) is performing a comprehensive probabilistic safety assessment (PSA), which will include consideration of external events for the 18 tank farms at the Hanford Site. This effort is sponsored by the Department of Energy (DOE/EM, EM-36). Even though the methodology described herein will be applied to the entire tank farm, this report focuses only on the risk from the weapons-production wastes stored in tank number 241-SY-101, commonly known as Tank 101-SY, as configured in December 1992. This tank, which periodically releases ({open_quotes}burps{close_quotes}) a gaseous mixture of hydrogen, nitrous oxide, ammonia, and nitrogen, was analyzed first because of public safety concerns associated with the potential for release of radioactive tank contents should this gas mixture be ignited during one of the burps. In an effort to mitigate the burping phenomenon, an experiment is being conducted in which a large pump has been inserted into the tank to determine if pump-induced circulation of the tank contents will promote a slow, controlled release of the gases. At the Hanford Site there are 177 underground tanks in 18 separate tank farms containing accumulated liquid/sludge/salt cake radioactive wastes from 50 yr of weapons materials production activities. The total waste volume is about 60 million gal., which contains approximately 120 million Ci of radioactivity.

  1. Hanford Double-Shell Tank Extent-of-Condition Construction Review

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Venetz, Theodore J.; Johnson, Jeremy M.; Gunter, Jason R.; Barnes, Travis J.; Washenfelder, Dennis J.; Boomer, Kayle D.

    2013-11-14

    During routine visual inspections of Hanford double-shell waste tank 241-AY-102 (AY-102), anomalies were identified on the annulus floor which resulted in further evaluations. Following a formal leak assessment in October 2012, Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC (WRPS) determined that the primary tank of AY-102 was leaking. The formal leak assessment, documented in RPP-ASMT-53793,Tank 241-AY-102 Leak Assessment Report, identified first-of-a-kind construction difficulties and trial-and-error repairs as major contributing factors to tank failure. To determine if improvements in double-shell tank (DST) construction occurred after construction of tank AY-102, a detailed review and evaluation of historical construction records were performed for the first three DST tank farms constructed, which included tanks 241-AY-101, 241-AZ-101, 241-AZ-102, 241-SY-101, 241-SY-102, and 241-SY-103. The review for these six tanks involved research and review of dozens of boxes of historical project documentation. These reviews form a basis to better understand the current condition of the three oldest Hanford DST farms. They provide a basis for changes to the current tank inspection program and also provide valuable insight into future tank use decisions. If new tanks are constructed in the future, these reviews provide valuable "lessons-learned" information about expected difficulties as well as construction practices and techniques that are likely to be successful.

  2. HANFORD TANK CLEANUP UPDATE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BERRIOCHOA MV

    2011-04-07

    Access to Hanford's single-shell radioactive waste storage tank C-107 was significantly improved when workers completed the cut of a 55-inch diameter hole in the top of the tank. The core and its associated cutting equipment were removed from the tank and encased in a plastic sleeve to prevent any potential spread of contamination. The larger tank opening allows use of a new more efficient robotic arm to complete tank retrieval.

  3. Functional design criteria, Project W-211, Initial Tank Retrieval Systems. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rieck, C.A.

    1995-02-07

    This document provides the technical baseline for retrieval of waste from ten double-shell tanks in the SY, AN, AP, AW, AY, and AZ tank farms. In order to retrieve waste from these tanks, systems are needed to mix the sludge with the supernate and pump the waste mixture from the tank. For 101-SY, the existing mitigation pump will be used to mix the waste and Project W-211 will provide for waste removal. The retrieval scope for the other nine tanks includes both the waste mixing and removal functions.

  4. Moray Firth Deepwater Wind Farm Trial | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Firth Deepwater Wind Farm Trial Place: United Kingdom Sector: Wind energy Product: A joint venture to trial deep water wind turbines on the Beatrice Oil Field in the Moray...

  5. Single-shell tank retrieval program mission analysis report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stokes, W.J.

    1998-08-11

    This Mission Analysis Report was prepared to provide the foundation for the Single-Shell Tank (SST) Retrieval Program, a new program responsible for waste removal for the SSTS. The SST Retrieval Program is integrated with other Tank Waste Remediation System activities that provide the management, technical, and operations elements associated with planning and execution of SST and SST Farm retrieval and closure. This Mission Analysis Report provides the basis and strategy for developing a program plan for SST retrieval. This Mission Analysis Report responds to a US Department of Energy request for an alternative single-shell tank retrieval approach (Taylor 1997).

  6. Final Meeting Summary Page 1 Tank Waste Committee Meeting October 10, 2012

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

    Meeting October 10, 2012 FINAL MEETING SUMMARY HANFORD ADVISORY BOARD TANK WASTE COMMITTEE October 10, 2012 Richland, WA Topics in this Meeting Summary Opening ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Integration of Tank Farms and Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP): One System Team .... 1 Washington State's Letter to Energy Secretary

  7. Tank Waste | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Tank Waste Tank Waste May 16, 2016 EM Assistant Secretary Monica Regalbuto, directly left of the Tank Closure Monument, gathers with federal and contractor employees at SRS. Cheers ...

  8. TANK 21 AND TANK 24 BLEND AND FEED STUDY: BLENDING TIMES, SETTLING TIMES, AND TRANSFERS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lee, S.; Leishear, R.; Poirier, M.

    2012-05-31

    The Salt Disposition Integration (SDI) portfolio of projects provides the infrastructure within existing Liquid Waste facilities to support the startup and long term operation of the Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF). Within SDI, the Blend and Feed Project will equip existing waste tanks in the Tank Farms to serve as Blend Tanks where salt solutions of up to 1.2 million gallons will be blended in 1.3 million gallon tanks and qualified for use as feedstock for SWPF. In particular, Tanks 21 and 24 are planned to be used for blending and transferring to the SDI feed tank. These tanks were evaluated here to determine blending times, to determine a range of settling times for disturbed sludge, and to determine that the SWPF Waste Acceptance Criteria that less than 1200 mg/liter of solids will be entrained in salt solutions during transfers from the Tank 21 and Tank 24 will be met. Overall conclusions for Tank 21 and Tank 24 operations include: (1) Experimental correction factors were applied to CFD (computational fluid dynamics) models to establish blending times between approximately two and five hours. As shown in Phase 2 research, blending times may be as much as ten times greater, or more, if lighter fluids are added to heavier fluids (i.e., water added to salt solution). As the densities of two salt solutions converge this effect may be minimized, but additional confirmatory research was not performed. (2) At the current sludge levels and the presently planned operating heights of the transfer pumps, solids entrainment will be less than 1200 mg/liter, assuming a conservative, slow settling sludge simulant. (3) Based on theoretical calculations, particles in the density range of 2.5 to 5.0 g/mL must be greater than 2-4 {micro}m in diameter to ensure they settle adequately in 30-60 days to meet the SWPF feed criterion (<1200 mg/l). (4) Experimental tests with sludge batch 6 simulant and field turbidity data from a recent Tank 21 mixing evolution suggest the solid particles have higher density and/or larger size than indicated by previous analysis of SRS sludge and sludge simulants. (5) Tank 21 waste characterization, laboratory settling tests, and additional field turbidity measurements during mixing evolutions are recommended to better understand potential risk for extended (> 60 days) settling times in Tank 21.

  9. Assessment of chemical vulnerabilities in the Hanford high-level waste tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Meacham, J.E.

    1996-02-15

    The purpose of this report is to summarize results of relevant data (tank farm and laboratory) and analysis related to potential chemical vulnerabilities of the Hanford Site waste tanks. Potential chemical safety vulnerabilities examined include spontaneous runaway reactions, condensed phase waste combustibility, and tank headspace flammability. The major conclusions of the report are the following: Spontaneous runaway reactions are not credible; condensed phase combustion is not likely; and periodic releases of flammable gas can be mitigated by interim stabilization.

  10. DOE Clears Way for Closure of Emptied Waste Tanks at Idaho National

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

    Laboratory | Department of Energy Clears Way for Closure of Emptied Waste Tanks at Idaho National Laboratory DOE Clears Way for Closure of Emptied Waste Tanks at Idaho National Laboratory November 20, 2006 - 9:25am Addthis Secretary Bodman Signs Idaho Waste Determination After Consultation with NRC WASHINGTON, DC - U.S. Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman yesterday signed a waste determination for the Idaho Tank Farm Facility clearing the way for the Department of Energy (DOE) to safely and

  11. Tank evaluation system shielded annular tank application

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Freier, D.A.

    1988-10-04

    TEST (Tank Evaluation SysTem) is a research project utilizing neutron interrogation techniques to analyze the content of nuclear poisons and moderators in tank shielding. TEST experiments were performed on an experimental SAT (Shielded Annular Tank) at the Rocky Flats Plant. The purpose of these experiments was threefold: (1) to assess TEST application to SATs, (2) to determine if Nuclear Safety inspection criteria could be met, and (3) to perform a preliminary calibration of TEST for SATs. Several experiments were performed, including measurements of 11 tank shielding configurations, source-simulated holdup experiments, analysis of three detector modes, resolution studies, and TEST scanner geometry experiments. 1 ref., 21 figs., 4 tabs.

  12. CEMENTITIOUS GROUT FOR CLOSING SRS HIGH LEVEL WASTE TANKS - #12315

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Langton, C.; Burns, H.; Stefanko, D.

    2012-01-10

    In 1997, the first two United States Department of Energy (US DOE) high level waste tanks (Tanks 17-F and 20-F: Type IV, single shell tanks) were taken out of service (permanently closed) at the Savannah River Site (SRS). In 2012, the DOE plans to remove from service two additional Savannah River Site (SRS) Type IV high-level waste tanks, Tanks 18-F and 19-F. These tanks were constructed in the late 1950's and received low-heat waste and do not contain cooling coils. Operational closure of Tanks 18-F and 19-F is intended to be consistent with the applicable requirements of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and will be performed in accordance with South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC). The closure will physically stabilize two 4.92E+04 cubic meter (1.3 E+06 gallon) carbon steel tanks and isolate and stabilize any residual contaminants left in the tanks. The closure will also fill, physically stabilize and isolate ancillary equipment abandoned in the tanks. A Performance Assessment (PA) has been developed to assess the long-term fate and transport of residual contamination in the environment resulting from the operational closure of the F-Area Tank Farm (FTF) waste tanks. Next generation flowable, zero-bleed cementitious grouts were designed, tested, and specified for closing Tanks 18-F and 19-F and for filling the abandoned equipment. Fill requirements were developed for both the tank and equipment grouts. All grout formulations were required to be alkaline with a pH of 12.4 and chemically reduction potential (Eh) of -200 to -400 to stabilize selected potential contaminants of concern. This was achieved by including Portland cement and Grade 100 slag in the mixes, respectively. Ingredients and proportions of cementitious reagents were selected and adjusted, respectively, to support the mass placement strategy developed by closure operations. Subsequent down selection was based on compressive strength and saturated hydraulic conductivity results. Fresh slurry property results were used as the first level of screening. A high range water reducing admixture and a viscosity modifying admixture were used to adjust slurry properties to achieve flowable grouts. Adiabatic calorimeter results were used as the second level screening. The third level of screening was used to design mixes that were consistent with the fill material parameters used in the F-Tank Farm Performance Assessment which was developed to assess the long-term fate and transport of residual contamination in the environment resulting from the operational closures.

  13. Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Technical Baseline Summary Description

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    TEDESCHI, A.R.

    2000-04-21

    This revision notes the supersedure of the subject document by concurrent issuance of HNF-1901 ''Technical Baseline Summary Description for the Tank Farm Contractor'', Revision 2. Safe storage mission technical baseline information was absorbed by the new revision of HNF-1901.

  14. Commercial Submersible Mixing Pump For SRS Tank Waste Removal - 15223

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hubbard, Mike; Herbert, James E.; Scheele, Patrick W.

    2015-01-12

    The Savannah River Site Tank Farms have 45 active underground waste tanks used to store and process nuclear waste materials. There are 4 different tank types, ranging in capacity from 2839 m3 to 4921 m3 (750,000 to 1,300,000 gallons). Eighteen of the tanks are older style and do not meet all current federal standards for secondary containment. The older style tanks are the initial focus of waste removal efforts for tank closure and are referred to as closure tanks. Of the original 51 underground waste tanks, six of the original 24 older style tanks have completed waste removal and are filled with grout. The insoluble waste fraction that resides within most waste tanks at SRS requires vigorous agitation to suspend the solids within the waste liquid in order to transfer this material for eventual processing into glass filled canisters at the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF). SRS suspends the solid waste by use of recirculating mixing pumps. Older style tanks generally have limited riser openings which will not support larger mixing pumps, since the riser access is typically 58.4 cm (23 inches) in diameter. Agitation for these tanks has been provided by four long shafted standard slurry pumps (SLP) powered by an above tank 112KW (150 HP) electric motor. The pump shaft is lubricated and cooled in a pressurized water column that is sealed from the surrounding waste in the tank. Closure of four waste tanks has been accomplished utilizing long shafted pump technology combined with heel removal using multiple technologies. Newer style waste tanks at SRS have larger riser openings, allowing the processing of waste solids to be accomplished with four large diameter SLPs equipped with 224KW (300 HP) motors. These tanks are used to process the waste from closure tanks for DWPF. In addition to the SLPs, a 224KW (300 HP) submersible mixer pump (SMP) has also been developed and deployed within older style tanks. The SMPs are product cooled and product lubricated canned motor pumps designed to fit within available risers and have significant agitation capabilities to suspend waste solids. Waste removal and closure of two tanks has been accomplished with agitation provided by 3 SMPs installed within the tanks. In 2012, a team was assembled to investigate alternative solids removal technologies to support waste removal for closing tanks. The goal of the team was to find a more cost effective approach that could be used to replace the current mixing pump technology. This team was unable to identify an alternative technology outside of mixing pumps to support waste agitation and removal from SRS waste tanks. However, the team did identify a potentially lower cost mixing pump compared to the baseline SLPs and SMPs. Rather than using the traditional procurement using an engineering specification, the team proposed to seek commercially available submersible mixer pumps (CSMP) as alternatives to SLPs and SMPs. SLPs and SMPs have a high procurement cost and the actual cost of moving pumps between tanks has shown to be significantly higher than the original estimates that justified the reuse of SMPs and SLPs. The team recommended procurement of “off-the-shelf” industry pumps which may be available for significant savings, but at an increased risk of failure and reduced operating life in the waste tank. The goal of the CSMP program is to obtain mixing pumps that could mix from bulk waste removal through tank closure and then be abandoned in place as part of tank closure. This paper will present the development, progress and relative advantages of the CSMP.

  15. TANK 4 CHARACTERIZATION, SETTLING, AND WASHING STUDIES

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bannochie, C.; Pareizs, J.; Click, D.; Zamecnik, J.

    2009-09-29

    A sample of PUREX sludge from Tank 4 was characterized, and subsequently combined with a Tank 51 sample (Tank 51-E1) received following Al dissolution, but prior to a supernate decant by the Tank Farm, to perform a settling and washing study to support Sludge Batch 6 preparation. The sludge source for the majority of the Tank 51-E1 sample is Tank 12 HM sludge. The Tank 51-E1 sample was decanted by SRNL prior to use in the settling and washing study. The Tank 4 sample was analyzed for chemical composition including noble metals. The characterization of the Tank 51-E1 sample, used here in combination with the Tank 4 sample, was reported previously. SRNL analyses on Tank 4 were requested by Liquid Waste Engineering (LWE) via Technical Task Request (TTR) HLE-TTR-2009-103. The sample preparation work is governed by Task Technical and Quality Assurance Plan (TTQAP), and analyses were controlled by an Analytical Study Plan and modifications received via customer communications. Additional scope included a request for a settling study of decanted Tank 51-E1 and a blend of decanted Tank 51-E1 and Tank 4, as well as a washing study to look into the fate of undissolved sulfur observed during the Tank 4 characterization. The chemistry of the Tank 4 sample was modeled with OLI Systems, Inc. StreamAnalyzer to determine the likelihood that sulfate could exist in this sample as insoluble Burkeite (2Na{sub 2}SO{sub 4} {center_dot} Na{sub 2}CO{sub 3}). The OLI model was also used to predict the composition of the blended tank materials for the washing study. The following conclusions were drawn from the Tank 4 analytical results reported here: (1) Any projected blend of Tank 4 and the current Tank 51 contents will produce a SB6 composition that is lower in Ca and U than the current SB5 composition being processed by DWPF. (2) Unwashed Tank 4 has a relatively large initial S concentration of 3.68 wt% on a total solids basis, and approximately 10% of the total S is present as an insoluble or undissolved form. (3) There is 19% more S than can be accounted for by IC sulfate measurement. This additional soluble S is detected by ICP-AES analysis of the supernate. (4) Total supernate and slurry sulfur by ICP-AES should be monitored during washing in addition to supernate sulfate in order to avoid under estimating the amount of sulfur species removed or remaining in the supernate. (5) OLI simulation calculations show that the presence of undissolved Burkeite in the Tank 4 sample is reasonable, assuming a small difference in the Na concentration that is well within the analytical uncertainties of the reported value. The following conclusions were drawn from the blend studies of Tank 4 and decanted Tank 51-E1: (1) The addition of Tank 4 slurry to a decanted Tank 51-E1 sample significantly improved the degree and time for settling. (2) The addition of Tank 4 slurry to a decanted Tank 51-E1 sample significantly improved the plastic viscosity and yield stress. (3) The SRNL washing test, where nearly all of the wash solution was decanted from the solids, indicates that approximately 96% or more of the total S was removed from the blend in these tests, and the removal of the sulfur tracks closely with that of Na. Insoluble (undissolved) S remaining in the washed sludge was calculated from an estimate of the final slurry liquid fraction, the S result in the slurry digestion, and the S in the final decant (which was very close to the method detection limit). Based on this calculated result, about 4% of the initial total S remained after these washes; this amount is equivalent to about 18% of the initially undissolved S.

  16. Waste tank summary report for month ending 06/30/2003

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HANLON, B.M.

    2003-08-18

    This report is the official inventory for radioactive waste stored in underground tanks in the 200 Areas at the Hanford Site. Data that depict the status of stored radioactive waste and tank vessel integrity are contained within the report. This report provides data on each of the existing 177 large underground waste storage tanks and 60 smaller miscellaneous underground storage tanks and special surveillance facilities, and supplemental information regarding tank surveillance anomalies and ongoing investigations. This report is intended to meet the requirement of US. Department of Energy Order 435.1 (DOE-HQ, August 28, 2001, Radioactive Waste Management, US Department of Energy-Washington, D.C.) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for the Hanford Site Tank Farm tanks.

  17. WASTE TANK SUMMARY REPORT FOR MONTH ENDING 12/31/2003

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HANLON, B.M.

    2004-02-06

    This report is the official inventory for radioactive waste stored in underground tanks in the 200 Areas at the Hanford Site. Data that depict the status of stored radioactive waste and tank vessel integrity are contained within the report. This report provides data on each of the existing 177 large underground waste storage tanks and 60 smaller miscellaneous underground storage tanks and special surveillance facilities, and supplemental information regarding tank surveillance anomalies and ongoing investigations. This report is intended to meet the requirement of U.S. Department of Energy Order 435.1 (DOE-HQ, August 28, 2001, Radioactive Waste Management, U.S. Department of Energy-Washington, D.C.) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for the Hanford Site Tank Farm tanks.

  18. WASTE TANK SUMMARY REPORT FOR MONTH ENDING 11/30/2003

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HANLON, B.M.

    2004-01-14

    This report is the official inventory for radioactive waste stored in underground tanks in the 200 Areas at the Hanford Site. Data that depict the status of stored radioactive waste and tank vessel integrity are contained within the report. This report provides data on each of the existing 177 large underground waste storage tanks and 60 smaller miscellaneous underground storage tanks and special surveillance facilities, and supplemental information regarding tank surveillance anomalies and ongoing investigations. This report is intended to meet the requirement of U.S. Department of Energy Order 435.1 (DOE-HQ, August 28, 2001, Radioactive Waste Management, U.S. Department of Energy-Washington, D.C.) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for the Hanford Site Tank Farm tanks.

  19. Waste tank summary report for month ending 05/31/2003

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HANLON, B.M.

    2003-07-07

    This report is the official inventory for radioactive waste stored in underground tanks in the 200 Areas at the Hanford Site. Data that depict the status of stored radioactive waste and tank vessel integrity are contained within the report. This report provides data on each of the existing 177 large underground waste storage tanks and 60 smaller miscellaneous underground storage tanks and special surveillance facilities, and supplemental information regarding tank surveillance anomalies and ongoing investigations. This report is intended to meet the requirement of US. Department of Energy Order 435.1 (DOE-HQ, August 28, 2001, Radioactive Waste Management, US Department of Energy-Washington, D.C.) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for the Hanford Site Tank Farm tanks.

  20. Waste tank summary report for month ending 04/30/2003

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HANLON, B.M.

    2003-06-10

    This report is the official inventory for radioactive waste stored in underground tanks in the 200 Areas at the Hanford Site. Data that depict the status of stored radioactive waste and tank vessel integrity are contained within the report. This report provides data on each of the existing 177 large underground waste storage tanks and 60 smaller miscellaneous underground storage tanks and special surveillance facilities, and supplemental information regarding tank surveillance anomalies and ongoing investigations. This report is intended to meet the requirement of US. Department of Energy Order 435.1 (DOE-HQ, August 28, 2001, Radioactive Waste Management, US Department of Energy-Washington, D.C.) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for the Hanford Site Tank Farm tanks.

  1. WASTE TANK SUMMARY REPORT FOR MONTH ENDING 09/30/2003

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HANLON, B.M.

    2003-10-31

    This report is the official inventory for radioactive waste stored in underground tanks in the 200 Areas at the Hanford Site. Data that depict the status of stored radioactive waste and tank vessel integrity are contained within the report. This report provides data on each of the existing 177 large underground waste storage tanks and 60 smaller miscellaneous underground storage tanks and special surveillance facilities. and supplemental information regarding tank surveillance anomalies and ongoing investigations. This report is intended to meet the requirement of US. Department of Energy Order 435.1 (DOE-HQ, August 28, 2001, Radioactive Waste Management, US. Department of Energy, Washington, D. C.) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for the Hanford Site Tank Farm tanks.

  2. Waste tank summary report for month ending 07/30/2003

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HANLON, B.M.

    2003-09-19

    This report is the official inventory for radioactive waste stored in underground tanks in the 200 Areas at the Hanford Site. Data that depict the status of stored radioactive waste and tank vessel integrity are contained within the report. This report provides data on each of the existing 177 large underground waste storage tanks and 60 smaller miscellaneous underground storage tanks and special surveillance facilities, and supplemental information regarding tank surveillance anomalies and ongoing investigations. This report is intended to meet the requirement of US. Department of Energy Order 435.1 (DOE-HQ, August 28, 2001, Radioactive Waste Management, US Department of Energy-Washington, D.C.) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for the Hanford Site Tank Farm tanks.

  3. Waste Tank Summary Report for Month Ending 05/31/2002

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HANLON, B M

    2002-07-25

    This report is the official inventory for radioactive waste stored in underground tanks in the 200 Areas at the Hanford Site. Data that depict the status of stored radioactive waste and tank vessel integrity are contained within the report. This report provides data on each of the existing 177 large underground waste storage tanks and 60 smaller miscellaneous underground storage tanks and special surveillance facilities, and supplemental information regarding tank surveillance anomalies and ongoing investigations. This report is intended to meet the requirement of US Department of Energy Order 435.I (WOE-HQ, August 28, 2001, Radioactive Waste Management, US Department of Energy-Washington, D.C.) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for the Hanford Site Tank Farm tanks.

  4. EIS-0212: Safe Interim Storage of Hanford Tank Wastes, Hanford Site, Richland, WA

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This environmental impact statement asseses Department of Energy and Washington State Department of Ecology maintanence of safe storage of high-level radioactive wastes currently stored in the older single-shell tanks, the Watchlist Tank 101-SY, and future waste volumes associated with tank farm and other Hanford facility operations, including a need to provide a modern safe, reliable, and regulatory-compliant replacement cross-site transfer capability. The purpose of this action is to prevent uncontrolled releases to the environment by maintaining safe storage of high-level tank wastes.

  5. Tank 241-S-102, Core 232 analytical results for the final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    STEEN, F.H.

    1998-11-04

    This document is the analytical laboratory report for tank 241-S-102 push mode core segments collected between March 5, 1998 and April 2, 1998. The segments were subsampled and analyzed in accordance with the Tank 241-S-102 Retained Gas Sampler System Sampling and Analysis Plan (TSAP) (McCain, 1998), Letter of Instruction for Compatibility Analysis of Samples from Tank 241-S-102 (LOI) (Thompson, 1998) and the Data Quality Objectives for Tank Farms Waste Compatibility Program (DQO) (Mulkey and Miller, 1998). The analytical results are included in the data summary table (Table 1).

  6. HANFORD DOUBLE SHELL TANK (DST) THERMAL & SEISMIC PROJECT BUCKLING EVALUATION METHODS & RESULTS FOR THE PRIMARY TANKS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MACKEY TC; JOHNSON KI; DEIBLER JE; PILLI SP; RINKER MW; KARRI NK

    2007-02-14

    This report documents a detailed buckling evaluation of the primary tanks in the Hanford double-shell waste tanks (DSTs), which is part of a comprehensive structural review for the Double-Shell Tank Integrity Project. This work also provides information on tank integrity that specifically responds to concerns raised by the Office of Environment, Safety, and Health (ES&H) Oversight (EH-22) during a review of work performed on the double-shell tank farms and the operation of the aging waste facility (AWF) primary tank ventilation system. The current buckling review focuses on the following tasks: (1) Evaluate the potential for progressive I-bolt failure and the appropriateness of the safety factors that were used for evaluating local and global buckling. The analysis will specifically answer the following questions: (a) Can the EH-22 scenario develop if the vacuum is limited to -6.6-inch water gage (w.g.) by a relief valve? (b) What is the appropriate factor of safety required to protect against buckling if the EH-22 scenario can develop? (c) What is the appropriate factor of safety required to protect against buckling if the EH-22 scenario cannot develop? (2) Develop influence functions to estimate the axial stresses in the primary tanks for all reasonable combinations of tank loads, based on detailed finite element analysis. The analysis must account for the variation in design details and operating conditions between the different DSTs. The analysis must also address the imperfection sensitivity of the primary tank to buckling. (3) Perform a detailed buckling analysis to determine the maximum allowable differential pressure for each of the DST primary tanks at the current specified limits on waste temperature, height, and specific gravity. Based on the I-bolt loads analysis and the small deformations that are predicted at the unfactored limits on vacuum and axial loads, it is very unlikely that the EH-22 scenario (i.e., progressive I-bolt failure leading to global buckling of the tank under increased vacuum) could occur.

  7. Pump Jet Mixing and Pipeline Transfer Assessment for High-Activity Radioactive Wastes in Hanford Tank 241-AZ-102

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Onishi, Yasuo; Recknagle, Kurtis P.; Wells, Beric E.

    2000-08-09

    This report evaluates how two 300-hp mixer pumps would mix solid and liquid radioactive wastes stored in Hanford double-shell Tank 241-AZ-102. It also assesses and confirms the adequacy of a 3-inch pipeline to transfer the resulting mixed waste slurry to the AP Tank Farm and ultimately to a planned waste treatment/vitrification plant on the Hanford Site.

  8. Report on the handling of safety information concerning flammable gases and ferrocyanide at the Hanford waste tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1990-07-01

    This report discusses concerns safety issues, and management at Hanford Tank Farm. Concerns center on the issue of flammable gas generation which could ignite, and on possible exothermic reactions of ferrocyanide compounds which were added to single shell tanks in the 1950's. It is believed that information concerning these issues has been mis-handled and the problems poorly managed. (CBS)

  9. Fuel oil and kerosene sales 1997

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-08-01

    The Fuel Oil and Kerosene Sales 1997 report provides information, illustrations and state-level statistical data on end-use sales of kerosene; No. 1, No. 2, and No. 4 distillate fuel oil; and residual fuel oil. State-level kerosene sales include volumes for residential, commercial, industrial, farm, and all other uses. State-level distillate sales include volumes for residential, commercial, industrial, oil company, railroad, vessel bunkering, military, electric utility, farm, on-highway, off highway construction, and other uses. State-level residual fuel sales include volumes for commercial, industrial, oil company, vessel bunkering, military, electric utility, and other uses. 24 tabs.

  10. Hanford tanks initiative plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McKinney, K.E.

    1997-07-01

    Abstract: The Hanford Tanks Initiative (HTI) is a five-year project resulting from the technical and financial partnership of the U.S. Department of Energy`s Office of Waste Management (EM-30) and Office of Science and Technology Development (EM-50). The HTI project accelerates activities to gain key technical, cost performance, and regulatory information on two high-level waste tanks. The HTI will provide a basis for design and regulatory decisions affecting the remainder of the Tank Waste Remediation System`s tank waste retrieval Program.

  11. Environmental Assessment for the Accelerated Tank Closure Demonstration Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    N /A

    2003-06-16

    The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of River Protection (ORP) needs to collect engineering and technical information on (1) the physical response and behavior of a Phase I grout fill in an actual tank, (2) field deployment of grout production equipment and (3) the conduct of component closure activities for single-shell tank (SST) 241-C-106 (C-106). Activities associated with this Accelerated Tank Closure Demonstration (ATCD) project include placement of grout in C-106 following retrieval, and associated component closure activities. The activities will provide information that will be used in determining future closure actions for the remaining SSTs and tank farms at the Hanford Site. This information may also support preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Retrieval, Treatment, and Disposal of Tank Waste and Closure of Single-Shell Tanks at the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington (Tank Closure EIS). Information will be obtained from the various activities associated with the component closure activities for C-106 located in the 241-C tank farm (C tank farm) under the ''Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976'' (RCRA) and the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (HFFACO) (Ecology et al. 1989). The impacts of retrieving waste from C-106 are bounded by the analysis in the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) EIS (DOE/EIS-0189), hereinafter referred to as the TWRS EIS. DOE has conducted and continues to conduct retrieval activities at C-106 in preparation for the ATCD Project. For major federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, the ''National Environmental Policy Act of 1969'' (NEPA) requires that federal agencies evaluate the environmental effects of their proposed and alternative actions before making decisions to take action. The President's Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) has developed regulations for implementing NEPA. These regulations are found in Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Parts 1500-1508. They require the preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA) that includes an evaluation of alternative means of addressing the problem and a discussion of the potential environmental impacts of a proposed federal action. An EA provides analysis to determine whether an EIS or a finding of no significant impact should be prepared.

  12. Distillate Fuel Oil Sales for Farm Use

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

    660,024 2,928,175 2,942,436 3,031,878 3,026,611 3,209,391 1984-2014 East Coast (PADD 1) 333,748 454,160 375,262 382,639 404,799 401,686 1984-2014 New England (PADD 1A) 13,909...

  13. Compressed/Liquid Hydrogen Tanks

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Currently, DOE's physical hydrogen storage R&D focuses on the development of high-pressure (10,000 psi) composite tanks, cryo-compressed tanks, conformable tanks, and other advanced concepts...

  14. TESTING OF ENHANCED CHEMICAL CLEANING OF SRS ACTUAL WASTE TANK 5F AND TANK 12H SLUDGES

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Martino, C.; King, W.

    2011-08-22

    Forty three of the High Level Waste (HLW) tanks at the Savannah River Site (SRS) have internal structures that hinder removal of the last approximately five thousand gallons of waste sludge solely by mechanical means. Chemical cleaning can be utilized to dissolve the sludge heel with oxalic acid (OA) and pump the material to a separate waste tank in preparation for final disposition. This dissolved sludge material is pH adjusted downstream of the dissolution process, precipitating the sludge components along with sodium oxalate solids. The large quantities of sodium oxalate and other metal oxalates formed impact downstream processes by requiring additional washing during sludge batch preparation and increase the amount of material that must be processed in the tank farm evaporator systems and the Saltstone Processing Facility. Enhanced Chemical Cleaning (ECC) was identified as a potential method for greatly reducing the impact of oxalate additions to the SRS Tank Farms without adding additional components to the waste that would extend processing or increase waste form volumes. In support of Savannah River Site (SRS) tank closure efforts, the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) conducted Real Waste Testing (RWT) to evaluate an alternative to the baseline 8 wt. % OA chemical cleaning technology for tank sludge heel removal. The baseline OA technology results in the addition of significant volumes of oxalate salts to the SRS tank farm and there is insufficient space to accommodate the neutralized streams resulting from the treatment of the multiple remaining waste tanks requiring closure. ECC is a promising alternative to bulk OA cleaning, which utilizes a more dilute OA (nominally 2 wt. % at a pH of around 2) and an oxalate destruction technology. The technology is being adapted by AREVA from their decontamination technology for Nuclear Power Plant secondary side scale removal. This report contains results from the SRNL small scale testing of the ECC process using SRS sludge tank sample material. A Task Technical and Quality Assurance Plan (TTQAP) details the experimental plan as outlined by the Technical Task Request (TTR). The TTR identifies that the data produced by this testing and results included in this report will support the technical baseline with portions having a safety class functional classification. The primary goals for SRNL RWT are as follows: (1) to confirm ECC performance with real tank sludge samples, (2) to determine the impact of ECC on fate of actinides and the other sludge metals, and (3) to determine changes, if any, in solids flow and settling behavior.

  15. Geochemical Processes Data Package for the Vadose Zone in the Single-Shell Tank Waste Management Areas at the Hanford Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cantrell, Kirk J.; Zachara, John M.; Dresel, P. Evan; Krupka, Kenneth M.; Serne, R. Jeffrey

    2007-09-28

    This data package discusses the geochemistry of vadose zone sediments beneath the single-shell tank farms at the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Hanford Site. The purpose of the report is to provide a review of the most recent and relevant geochemical process information available for the vadose zone beneath the single-shell tank farms and the Integrated Disposal Facility. Two companion reports to this one were recently published which discuss the geology of the farms (Reidel and Chamness 2007) and groundwater flow and contamination beneath the farms (Horton 2007).

  16. ADMP Mixing of Tank 18F: History, Modeling, Testing, and Results

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    LEISHEAR, ROBERTA

    2004-03-29

    Residual radioactive waste was removed from Tank 18F in the F-Area Tank Farm at Savannah River Site (SRS), using the advanced design mixer pump (ADMP). Known as a slurry pump, the ADMP is a 55 foot long pump with an upper motor mounted to a steel super structure, which spans the top of the waste tank. The motor is connected by a long vertical drive shaft to a centrifugal pump, which is submerged in waste near the tank bottom. The pump mixes, or slurries, the waste within the tank so that it may be transferred out of the tank. Tank 18F is a 1.3 million gallon, 85 foot diameter underground waste storage tank, which has no internal components such as cooling coils or structural supports. The tank contained a residual 47,000 gallons of nuclear waste, consisting of a gelatinous radioactive waste known as sludge and particulate zeolite. The prediction of the ADMP success was based on nearly twenty five years of research and the application of that research to slurry pump technology. Many personnel at SRS and Pacific Northwest National Laboratories (PNNL) have significantly contributed to these efforts. This report summarizes that research which is pertinent to the ADMP performance in Tank 18F. In particular, a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model was applied to predict the performance of the ADMP in Tank 18F.

  17. Tank Waste Committee Page 1

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

    ... The permit will include a requirement for DOE to prepare a closure plan. Chris said DOE ... including evaluations of tank removal, pipeline closure, diversion boxes, and catch tanks. ...

  18. Reverberant Tank | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Reverberant Tank Jump to: navigation, search Retrieved from "http:en.openei.orgwindex.php?titleReverberantTank&oldid596388" Feedback Contact needs updating Image needs...

  19. Tow Tank | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Tow Tank Jump to: navigation, search Retrieved from "http:en.openei.orgwindex.php?titleTowTank&oldid596389" Feedback Contact needs updating Image needs updating Reference...

  20. A STUDY OF CORROSION AND STRESS CORROSION CRACKING OF CARBON STEEL NUCLEAR WASTE STORAGE TANKS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BOOMER, K.D.

    2007-08-21

    The Hanford reservation Tank Farms in Washington State has 177 underground storage tanks that contain approximately 50 million gallons of liquid legacy radioactive waste from cold war plutonium production. These tanks will continue to store waste until it is treated and disposed. These nuclear wastes were converted to highly alkaline pH wastes to protect the carbon steel storage tanks from corrosion. However, the carbon steel is still susceptible to localized corrosion and stress corrosion cracking. The waste chemistry varies from tank to tank, and contains various combinations of hydroxide, nitrate, nitrite, chloride, carbonate, aluminate and other species. The effect of each of these species and any synergistic effects on localized corrosion and stress corrosion cracking of carbon steel have been investigated with electrochemical polarization, slow strain rate, and crack growth rate testing. The effect of solution chemistry, pH, temperature and applied potential are all considered and their role in the corrosion behavior will be discussed.

  1. Analysis of NaOH releases for Hanford tank farms

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ryan, G.W., Westinghouse Hanford

    1996-07-25

    This document supports the development and presentation of the following accident scenario in the TWRS Final Safety Analysis Report: Caustic Spray Leak. The calculations needed to quantify the risk associated with this accident scenario are included within.

  2. Tank Farms at the Savannah River Site | Department of Energy

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Energy Taking a Tour of Wilmington's Energy-Efficient Spaces Taking a Tour of Wilmington's Energy-Efficient Spaces February 28, 2012 - 11:30am Addthis Roya Stanley (left) on a tour of the Snipes Academy of Arts and Design with the building's architect -- Thomas Hughes. Through interactive real-time energy data tools, Snipes students incorporate energy use data in their classroom projects and studies. | Photo Courtesy of the Cape Fear Green Building Alliance. Roya Stanley (left) on a tour of

  3. Independent Oversight Review, Hanford Site Tank Farms 222-S Laboratory...

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

    of management programs that ensure the safety of workers, the public, and the environment. ... More Documents & Publications Enterprise Assessments Targeted Review, Work Planning and ...

  4. Attachment_2_RadiationControlinTankFarms.pdf

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

  5. Crave Brothers Farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2009-10-01

    This is a combined heat and power (CHP) project profile on a 633 kW biogas CHP application at Crave Brothers Farm in Waterloo, Wisconsin.

  6. DEMONSTRATION OF THE DWPF FLOWSHEET IN THE SRNL SHIELDED CELLS WITH TANK 40 AND H CANYON NEPTUNIUM

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pareizs, J; Bradley Pickenheim, B; Cj Bannochie, C; Michael Stone, M

    2009-04-28

    The Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) is currently processing Sludge Batch 5 (SB5) from Tank 40. SB5 contains the contents of Tank 51 from November 2008, qualified by the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) and the heel in Tank 40 remaining from Sludge Batch 4. Current Liquid Waste Operations (LWO) plans are to (1) decant supernatant from Tank 40 to remove excess liquid caused by a leaking slurry pump and (2) receive a Np stream from H Canyon It should be noted that the Np stream contains significant nitrate requiring addition of nitrite to Tank 40 to maintain a high nitrite to nitrate ratio for corrosion control. SRNL has been requested to qualify the proposed changes; determine the impact on DWPF processability in terms of hydrogen generation, rheology, etc.; evaluate antifoam addition strategy; and evaluate mercury stripping. Therefore, SRNL received a 3 L sample of Tank 40 following the transfer of Tank 51 to Tank 40 (Tank Farm Sample HTF-40-08-157 to be used in testing and to perform the required Waste Acceptance Product Specifications radionuclide analyses). Based on Tank Farm projections, SRNL decanted a portion* of the sample, added sodium nitrite, and added a Np solution from H Canyon representative of the Np to be dispositioned to Tank 40 (neutralized to 0.6 M excess hydroxide). The resulting material was used in a DWPF Chemical Process Cell (CPC) demonstration -- a Sludge Receipt and Adjustment Tank (SRAT) cycle and a Slurry Mix Evaporator (SME) cycle. Preliminary data from the demonstration has been reported previously. This report includes discussion of these results and additional results, including comparisons to Tank Farm projections and the SB5 demonstration.

  7. Hanford Tank Waste - Near Source Treatment of Low Activity Waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ramsey, William Gene

    2013-08-15

    Abstract only. Treatment and disposition of Hanford Site waste as currently planned consists of 100+ waste retrievals, waste delivery through up to 8+ miles of dedicated, in-ground piping, centralized mixing and blending operations- all leading to pre-treatment combination and separation processes followed by vitrification at the Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP). The sequential nature of Tank Farm and WTP operations requires nominally 15-20 years of continuous operations before all waste can be retrieved from many Single Shell Tanks (SSTs). Also, the infrastructure necessary to mobilize and deliver the waste requires significant investment beyond that required for the WTP. Treating waste as closely as possible to individual tanks or groups- as allowed by the waste characteristics- is being investigated to determine the potential to 1) defer, reduce, and/or eliminate infrastructure requirements, and 2) significantly mitigate project risk by reducing the potential and impact of single point failures. The inventory of Hanford waste slated for processing and disposition as LAW is currently managed as high-level waste (HLW), i.e., the separation of fission products and other radionuclides has not commenced. A significant inventory of this waste (over 20M gallons) is in the form of precipitated saltcake maintained in single shell tanks, many of which are identified as potential leaking tanks. Retrieval and transport (as a liquid) must be staged within the waste feed delivery capability established by site infrastructure and WTP. Near Source treatment, if employed, would provide for the separation and stabilization processing necessary for waste located in remote farms (wherein most of the leaking tanks reside) significantly earlier than currently projected. Near Source treatment is intended to address the currently accepted site risk and also provides means to mitigate future issues likely to be faced over the coming decades. This paper describes the potential near source treatment and waste disposition options as well as the impact these options could have on reducing infrastructure requirements, project cost and mission schedule.

  8. Tank 241-BY-105 tank characterization plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Schreiber, R.D.

    1995-02-01

    This document is a plan which serves as the contractual agreement between the Characterization Program, Sampling Operations, PNL 325 Analytical Chemistry Laboratory, and WHC 222-S Laboratory. The scope of this plan is to provide guidance for the sampling and analysis of samples for tank 241-BY-105.

  9. Safety evaluation for packaging transportation of equipment for tank 241-C-106 waste sluicing system

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Calmus, D.B.

    1994-08-25

    A Waste Sluicing System (WSS) is scheduled for installation in nd waste storage tank 241-C-106 (106-C). The WSS will transfer high rating sludge from single shell tank 106-C to double shell waste tank 241-AY-102 (102-AY). Prior to installation of the WSS, a heel pump and a transfer pump will be removed from tank 106-C and an agitator pump will be removed from tank 102-AY. Special flexible receivers will be used to contain the pumps during removal from the tanks. After equipment removal, the flexible receivers will be placed in separate containers (packagings). The packaging and contents (packages) will be transferred from the Tank Farms to the Central Waste Complex (CWC) for interim storage and then to T Plant for evaluation and processing for final disposition. Two sizes of packagings will be provided for transferring the equipment from the Tank Farms to the interim storage facility. The packagings will be designated as the WSSP-1 and WSSP-2 packagings throughout the remainder of this Safety Evaluation for Packaging (SEP). The WSSP-1 packagings will transport the heel and transfer pumps from 106-C and the WSSP-2 packaging will transport the agitator pump from 102-AY. The WSSP-1 and WSSP-2 packagings are similar except for the length.

  10. Pressurizer tank upper support

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Baker, T.H.; Ott, H.L.

    1994-01-11

    A pressurizer tank in a pressurized water nuclear reactor is mounted between structural walls of the reactor on a substructure of the reactor, the tank extending upwardly from the substructure. For bearing lateral loads such as seismic shocks, a girder substantially encircles the pressurizer tank at a space above the substructure and is coupled to the structural walls via opposed sway struts. Each sway strut is attached at one end to the girder and at an opposite end to one of the structural walls, and the sway struts are oriented substantially horizontally in pairs aligned substantially along tangents to the wall of the circular tank. Preferably, eight sway struts attach to the girder at 90[degree] intervals. A compartment encloses the pressurizer tank and forms the structural wall. The sway struts attach to corners of the compartment for maximum stiffness and load bearing capacity. A valve support frame carrying the relief/discharge piping and valves of an automatic depressurization arrangement is fixed to the girder, whereby lateral loads on the relief/discharge piping are coupled directly to the compartment rather than through any portion of the pressurizer tank. Thermal insulation for the valve support frame prevents thermal loading of the piping and valves. The girder is shimmed to define a gap for reducing thermal transfer, and the girder is free to move vertically relative to the compartment walls, for accommodating dimensional variation of the pressurizer tank with changes in temperature and pressure. 10 figures.

  11. Pressurizer tank upper support

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Baker, Tod H. (O'Hara Township, Allegheny County, PA); Ott, Howard L. (Kiski Township, Armstrong County, PA)

    1994-01-01

    A pressurizer tank in a pressurized water nuclear reactor is mounted between structural walls of the reactor on a substructure of the reactor, the tank extending upwardly from the substructure. For bearing lateral loads such as seismic shocks, a girder substantially encircles the pressurizer tank at a space above the substructure and is coupled to the structural walls via opposed sway struts. Each sway strut is attached at one end to the girder and at an opposite end to one of the structural walls, and the sway struts are oriented substantially horizontally in pairs aligned substantially along tangents to the wall of the circular tank. Preferably, eight sway struts attach to the girder at 90.degree. intervals. A compartment encloses the pressurizer tank and forms the structural wall. The sway struts attach to corners of the compartment for maximum stiffness and load bearing capacity. A valve support frame carrying the relief/discharge piping and valves of an automatic depressurization arrangement is fixed to the girder, whereby lateral loads on the relief/discharge piping are coupled directly to the compartment rather than through any portion of the pressurizer tank. Thermal insulation for the valve support frame prevents thermal loading of the piping and valves. The girder is shimmed to define a gap for reducing thermal transfer, and the girder is free to move vertically relative to the compartment walls, for accommodating dimensional variation of the pressurizer tank with changes in temperature and pressure.

  12. Structural Integrity Program for the 300,000-Gallon Radioactive Liquid Waste Storage Tanks at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bryant, Jeffrey W.

    2010-08-12

    This report provides a record of the Structural Integrity Program for the 300,000-gal liquid waste storage tanks and associated equipment at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center, as required by U.S. Department of Energy M 435.1-1, “Radioactive Waste Management Manual.” This equipment is known collectively as the Tank Farm Facility. This report is an update, and replaces the previous report by the same title issued April 2003. The conclusion of this report is that the Tank Farm Facility tanks, vaults, and transfer systems that remain in service for storage are structurally adequate, and are expected to remain structurally adequate over the remainder of their planned service life through 2012. Recommendations are provided for continued monitoring of the Tank Farm Facility.

  13. Alternatives generation and analysis for double-shell tank primary ventilation systems emissions control and monitoring

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    SEDERBURG, J.P.

    1999-09-30

    This AGA addresses the question: ''What equipment upgrades, operational changes, and/or other actions are required relative to the DST tanks farms' ventilation systems to support retrieval, staging (including feed sampling), and delivery of tank waste to the Phase I private contractor?'' Issues and options for the various components within the ventilation subsystem affect each other. Recommended design requirements are presented and the preferred alternatives are detailed.

  14. Hanford Double-Shell Tank Extent-of-Condition Review - 15498

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Johnson, J. M.; Baide, D. D.; Barnes, T. J.; Boomer, K. D.; Gunter, J. R.; Venetz, T. J.

    2014-11-19

    During routine visual inspections of Hanford double-shell waste tank 241-AY-102 (AY-102), anomalies were identified on the annulus floor which resulted in further evaluations. Following a formal leak assessment in October 2012, Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC (WRPS) determined that the primary tank of AY-102 was leaking. A formal leak assessment, documented in RPP-ASMT-53793, Tank 241-AY-102 Leak Assessment Report, identified first-of-a-kind construction difficulties and trial-and-error repairs as major contributing factors to tank failure.1 To determine if improvements in double-shell tank (DST) construction occurred after construction of tank AY-102, a detailed review and evaluation of historical construction records was performed for Hanford’s remaining twenty-seven DSTs. Review involved research of 241 boxes of historical project documentation to better understand the condition of the Hanford DST farms, noting similarities in construction difficulties/issues to tank AY-102. Information gathered provides valuable insight regarding construction difficulties, future tank operations decisions, and guidance of the current tank inspection program. Should new waste storage tanks be constructed in the future, these reviews also provide valuable lessons-learned.

  15. Final report of the systems engineering technical advisory board for the Tank Waste Remediation Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Baranowski, F.P.; Goodlett, C.B.; Beard, S.J.; Duckworth, J.P.; Schneider, A.; Zahn, L.L.

    1993-03-01

    The Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) is one segment of the environmental restoration program at the Hanford site. The scope is to retrieve the contents of both the single shell and double shell tanks and process the wastes into forms acceptable for long term storage and/or permanent disposal. The quantity of radioactive waste in tanks is significantly larger and substantially more complex in composition than the radioactive waste stored in tanks at other DOE sites. The waste is stored in 149 single shell tanks and 28 double shell tanks. The waste was produced over a period from the mid 1940s to the present. The single shell tanks have exceeded their design life and are experiencing failures. The oldest of the double shell tanks are approaching their design life. Spar double shell tank waste volume is limited. The priorities in the Board`s view are to manage safely the waste tank farms, accelerate emptying of waste tanks, provide spare tank capacity and assure a high degree of confidence in performance of the TWRS integrated program. At its present design capacity, the glass vitrification plant (HWVP) will require a period of about 15 years to empty the double shell tanks; the addition of the waste in single shell tanks adds another 100 years. There is an urgent need to initiate now a well focused and centralized development and engineering program on both larger glass melters and advanced separations processes that reduce radioactive constituents in the low-level waste (LLW). The Board presents its conclusions and has other suggestions for the management plan. The Board reviews planning schedules for accelerating the TWRS program.

  16. Tank 48 - Chemical Destruction

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Simner, Steven P.; Aponte, Celia I.; Brass, Earl A.

    2013-01-09

    Small tank copper-catalyzed peroxide oxidation (CCPO) is a potentially viable technology to facilitate the destruction of tetraphenylborate (TPB) organic solids contained within the Tank 48H waste at the Savannah River Site (SRS). A maturation strategy was created that identified a number of near-term development activities required to determine the viability of the CCPO process, and subsequent disposition of the CCPO effluent. Critical activities included laboratory-scale validation of the process and identification of forward transfer paths for the CCPO effluent. The technical documentation and the successful application of the CCPO process on simulated Tank 48 waste confirm that the CCPO process is a viable process for the disposition of the Tank 48 contents.

  17. Use belowground storage tanks to manage stormwater

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Nedrow, J.

    1996-01-01

    To meet performance and operating requirements under Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), BP Oil`s Toledo Refinery installed two 10-million-gallon (MMgal) concrete belowground storage tanks to replace the existing impoundment ponds. Environmental, safety and operating criteria influenced how this older refinery could cost-effectively replace impoundment ponds without interrupting the production schedule. The north stormwater impoundment pond at BP Oil`s Toledo Refinery had received primary sludge, a RCRA-listed hazardous waste and material exceeding the toxic characteristic limit for benzene (0.5 ppm). Because the pond could not be adapted to meet RCRA standards, it had to be replaced by a system that met these standards and New Source Performance Standards (NSPS). Under normal operating conditions, stormwater was commingled with process wastewater and processed at the wastewater treatment unit (WWTU) before final disposal. However, when flow in the sewer system exceeded the capacity of the WWTU, excess flow was stored in an impoundment system. The case history shows how BP Oil`s project engineers, working with a consulting engineering group and a general contractor (GC), cost-effectively replaced the impoundment pond to handle stormwater runoff for the refinery.

  18. On-farm anaerobic digester and fuel alcohol plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1985-01-01

    An anaerobic digestion system was constructed and set up on a southern Illinois farm. The anaerobic digestion system was designed to be coupled with a fuel alcohol plant constructed by the farm family as part of an integrated farm energy system. The digester heating can be done using waste hot water from the alcohol plant and biogas from the digester can be used as fuel for the alcohol production. The anaerobic digestion system is made up of the following components. A hog finishing house, which already had a slotted floor and manure pit beneath it, was fitted with a system to scrape the manure into a feed slurry pit constructed at one end of the hog house. A solids handling pump feeds the manure from the feed slurry pit into the digester, a 13,000 gallon tank car body which has been insulated with styrofoam and buried underground. Another pump transfers effluent (digested manure) from the digester to a 150,000 gallon storage tank. The digested manure is then applied to cropland at appropriate times of the year. The digester temperature is maintained at the required level by automated hot water circulation through an internal heat exchanger. The biogas produced in the digester is pumped into a 32,000 gallon gas storage tank.

  19. Underground motor-fuel storage tanks: a national survey. Vol. 1. Technical report. Vol. 2. Appendices. Final report, February 1984-May 1986

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dietz, S.K.; Flora, J.D.; Strenio, J.F.; Vincent, C.J.

    1986-05-01

    A nationally representative sample of 2,812 establishments were interviewed to determine the presence of underground motor-fuel storage tanks. The sample represented establishments in fuel-related industries (1,612), large establishments in all other industries (600), and farms (600). A total of 890 of these establishments were found to have a total of 2445 underground motor fuel storage tanks. A subsample of 218 establishments was selected for tank tightness testing, using a modification of a commercially available test. The method over-filled the tank system into a standpipe, and thus detected leakage anywhere in the system of tank vessel, pipes, lines, joints, and fittings.

  20. METHODOLOGY & CALCULATIONS FOR THE ASSIGNMENT OF WASTE GROUPS FOR THE LARGE UNDERGROUND WASTE STORAGE TANKS AT THE HANFORD SITE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BARKER, S.A.

    2006-07-27

    Waste stored within tank farm double-shell tanks (DST) and single-shell tanks (SST) generates flammable gas (principally hydrogen) to varying degrees depending on the type, amount, geometry, and condition of the waste. The waste generates hydrogen through the radiolysis of water and organic compounds, thermolytic decomposition of organic compounds, and corrosion of a tank's carbon steel walls. Radiolysis and thermolytic decomposition also generates ammonia. Nonflammable gases, which act as dilutents (such as nitrous oxide), are also produced. Additional flammable gases (e.g., methane) are generated by chemical reactions between various degradation products of organic chemicals present in the tanks. Volatile and semi-volatile organic chemicals in tanks also produce organic vapors. The generated gases in tank waste are either released continuously to the tank headspace or are retained in the waste matrix. Retained gas may be released in a spontaneous or induced gas release event (GRE) that can significantly increase the flammable gas concentration in the tank headspace as described in RPP-7771. The document categorizes each of the large waste storage tanks into one of several categories based on each tank's waste characteristics. These waste group assignments reflect a tank's propensity to retain a significant volume of flammable gases and the potential of the waste to release retained gas by a buoyant displacement event. Revision 5 is the annual update of the methodology and calculations of the flammable gas Waste Groups for DSTs and SSTs.

  1. METHODOLOGY & CALCULATIONS FOR THE ASSIGNMENT OF WASTE FOR THE LARGE UNDERGROUND WASTE STORAGE TANKS AT THE HANFORD SITE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    TU, T.A.

    2007-01-04

    Waste stored within tank farm double-shell tanks (DST) and single-shell tanks (SST) generates flammable gas (principally hydrogen) to varying degrees depending on the type, amount, geometry, and condition of the waste. The waste generates hydrogen through the radiolysis of water and organic compounds, thermolytic decomposition of organic compounds, and corrosion of a tank's carbon steel walls. Radiolysis and thermolytic decomposition also generates ammonia. Nonflammable gases, which act as dilutents (such as nitrous oxide), are also produced. Additional flammable gases (e.g., methane) are generated by chemical reactions between various degradation products of organic chemicals present in the tanks. Volatile and semi-volatile organic chemicals in tanks also produce organic vapors. The generated gases in tank waste are either released continuously to the tank headspace or are retained in the waste matrix. Retained gas may be released in a spontaneous or induced gas release event (GRE) that can significantly increase the flammable gas concentration in the tank headspace as described in RPP-7771, Flammable Gas Safety Isme Resolution. Appendices A through I provide supporting information. The document categorizes each of the large waste storage tanks into one of several categories based on each tank's waste and characteristics. These waste group assignments reflect a tank's propensity to retain a significant volume of flammable gases and the potential of the waste to release retained gas by a buoyant displacement event. Revision 6 is the annual update of the flammable gas Waste Groups for DSTs and SSTs.

  2. WRPS MEETING THE CHALLENGE OF TANK WASTE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BRITTON JC

    2012-02-21

    Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) is the Hanford tank operations contractor, charged with managing one of the most challenging environmental cleanup projects in the nation. The U.S. Department of Energy hired WRPS to manage 56 million gallons of high-level radioactive waste stored in 177 underground tanks. The waste is the legacy of 45 years of plutonium production for the U. S. nuclear arsenal. WRPS mission is three-fold: safely manage the waste until it can be processed and immobilized; develop the tools and techniques to retrieve the waste from the tanks, and build the infrastructure needed to deliver the waste to the Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) when it begins operating. WTP will 'vitrify' the waste by mixing it with silica and other materials and heating it in an electric melter. Vitrification turns the waste into a sturdy glass that will isolate the radioactivity from the environment. It will take more than 20 years to process all the tank waste. The tank waste is a complex highly radioactive mixture of liquid, sludge and solids. The radioactivity, chemical composition of the waste and the limited access to the underground storage tanks makes retrieval a challenge. Waste is being retrieved from aging single-shell tanks and transferred to newer, safer double-shell tanks. WRPS is using a new technology known as enhanced-reach sluicing to remove waste. A high-pressure stream of liquid is sprayed at 100 gallons per minute through a telescoping arm onto a hard waste layer several inches thick covering the waste. The waste is broken up, moved to a central pump suction and removed from the tank. The innovative Mobile Arm Retrieval System (MARS) is also being used to retrieve waste. MARS is a remotely operated, telescoping arm installed on a mast in the center of the tank. It uses multiple technologies to scrape, scour and rake the waste toward a pump for removal. The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA) provided nearly $326 million over two-and-a-half years to modernize the infrastructure in Hanford's tank farms. WRPS issued 850 subcontracts totaling more than $152 million with nearly 76 percent of that total awarded to small businesses. WRPS used the funding to upgrade tank farm infrastructure, develop technologies to retrieve and consolidate tank waste and extend the life of two critical operating facilities needed to feed waste to the WTP. The 222-S Laboratory analyzes waste to support waste retrievals and transfers. The laboratory was upgraded to support future WTP operations with a new computer system, new analytical equipment, a new office building and a new climate-controlled warehouse. The 242-A Evaporator was upgraded with a control-room simulator for operator training and several upgrades to aging equipment. The facility is used to remove liquid from the tank waste, creating additional storage space, necessary for continued waste retrievals and WTP operation. The One System Integrated Project Team is ajoint effort ofWRPS and Bechtel National to identify and resolve common issues associated with commissioning, feeding and operating the Waste Treatment Plant. Two new facilities are being designed to support WTP hot commlsslomng. The Interim Hanford Storage project is planned to store canisters of immobilized high-level radioactive waste glass produced by the vitrification plant. The facility will use open racks to store the 15-foot long, two-foot diameter canisters of waste, which require remote handling. The Secondary Liquid Waste Treatment Project is a major upgrade to the existing Effluent Treatment Facility at Hanford so it can treat about 10 million gallons of liquid radioactive and hazardous effluent a year from the vitrification plant. The One System approach brings the staff of both companies together to identify and resolve WTP safety issues. A questioning attitude is encouraged and an open forum is maintained for employees to raise issues. WRPS is completing its mission safely with record-setting safety performance. Since WRPS took over the Hanford Tank Operations Contract in October 2008, the recordable injury rate has decreased 43 percent, while the lost work-days rate decreased by 30 percent. The company recently surpassed three million hours worked without a lost workday accident.

  3. Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington

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

    -1 TC & WM EIS Proposed Actions (1) Retrieve, treat, and dispose of waste in single-shell tank (SST) and double-shell tank (DST) farms and close the SST system. (2) Decommission the Fast Flux Test Facility, manage the resulting waste, and manage the disposition of the Hanford Site's (Hanford's) inventory of bulk sodium. (3) Manage waste from tank closure and other Hanford activities, as well as limited volumes received from U.S. Department of Energy sites. CHAPTER 2 PROPOSED ACTIONS AND

  4. Tank Waste System Integrated Project Team

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Tank Waste System Tank Waste System Integrated Project Team Integrated Project Team Steve Schneider Office of Engineering and Technology Tank Waste Corporate Board July 29, 2009 2 ...

  5. Farm Opportunities Loan Program

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Farm Opportunity Loan Program (formerly known as the Sustainable Agriculture Loan Program) is designed to finance the purchase of equipment to add value to crops or livestock, adopt best...

  6. Fuel oil and kerosene sales 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1997-08-01

    The Fuel Oil and Kerosene Sales 1996 report provides information, illustrations and State-level statistical data on end-use sales of kerosene; No. 1, No. 2, and No. 4 distillate fuel oil; and residual fuel oil. State-level kerosene sales include volumes for residential, commercial, industrial, farm, and all other uses. State-level distillate sales include volumes for residential, commercial, industrial, oil company, railroad, vessel bunkering, military, electric utility, farm, on-highway, off highway construction, and other uses. State-level residual fuel sales include volumes for commercial, industrial, oil company, vessel bunkering, military, electric utility, and other uses. The Petroleum Marketing Division, Office of Oil and Gas, Energy Information Administration ensures the accuracy, quality, and confidentiality of the published data in the Fuel Oil and Kerosene Sales 1996. 24 tabs.

  7. A Survey of Vapors in the Headspaces of Single-Shell Waste Tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stock, Leon M.; Huckaby, James L.

    2000-10-31

    This report summarizes data on the organic vapors in the single-shell high level radioactive waste tanks at the Hanford site to support a forthcoming toxicological study. All data were obtained from the Tank Characterization Database (PNNL 1999). The TCD contains virtually all the available tank headspace characterization data from 1992 to the present, and includes data for 109 different single-shell waste tanks. Each single-shell tank farm and all major waste types are represented. Descriptions of the sampling and analysis methods have been given elsewhere (Huckaby et al. 1995, Huckaby et al. 1996), and references for specific data are available in the TCD. This is a revision of a report with the same title issued on March 1, 2000 (Stock and Huckaby 2000).

  8. The Gunite and Associated Tanks Remediation Project Tank Waste Retrieval Performance and Lessons Learned, vol. 1 [of 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lewis, BE

    2003-10-07

    The Gunite and Associated Tanks (GAAT) Remediation Project was the first of its kind performed in the United States. Robotics and remotely operated equipment were used to successfully transfer almost 94,000 gal of remote-handled transuranic sludge containing over 81,000 Ci of radioactive contamination from nine large underground storage tanks at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). The sludge was transferred with over 439,000 gal of radioactive waste supernatant and {approx}420,500 gal of fresh water that was used in sluicing operations. The GAATs are located in a high-traffic area of ORNL near a main thoroughfare. A phased and integrated approach to waste retrieval operations was used for the GAAT Remediation Project. The project promoted safety by obtaining experience from low-risk operations in the North Tank Farm before moving to higher-risk operations in the South Tank Farm. This approach allowed project personnel to become familiar with the tanks and waste, as well as the equipment, processes, procedures, and operations required to perform successful waste retrieval. By using an integrated approach to tank waste retrieval and tank waste management, the project was completed years ahead of the original baseline schedule, which resulted in avoiding millions of dollars in associated costs. This report is organized in two volumes. Volume 1 provides information on the various phases of the GAAT Remediation Project. It also describes the different types of equipment and how they were used. The emphasis of Volume 1 is on the description of the tank waste retrieval performance and the lessons learned during the GAAT Remediation Project. Volume 2 provides the appendixes for the report, which include the following information: (A) Background Information for the Gunite and Associated Tanks Operable Unit; (B) Annotated Bibliography; (C) Comprehensive Listing of the Sample Analysis Data from the GAAT Remediation Project; (D) GAAT Equipment Matrix; and (E) Vendor List for the GAAT Remediation Project. The remediation of the GAATs was completed {approx}5.5 years ahead of schedule and {approx}$120,435,000 below the cost estimated in the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study for the project. These schedule and cost savings were a direct result of the selection and use of state-of-the-art technologies and the dedication and drive of the engineers, technicians, managers, craft workers, and support personnel that made up the GAAT Remediation Project Team.

  9. INITIAL SINGLE SHELL TANK (SST) SYSTEM PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT OF THE HANFORD SITE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    JARAYSI, M.N.

    2007-01-08

    The ''Initial Single-Shell Tank System Performance Assessment for the Hanford Site [1] (SST PA) presents the analysis of the long-term impacts of residual wastes assumed to remain after retrieval of tank waste and closure of the SST farms at the US Department of Energy (DOE) Hanford Site. The SST PA supports key elements of the closure process agreed upon in 2004 by DOE, the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology), and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The SST PA element is defined in Appendix I of the ''Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order'' (HFFACO) (Ecology et al. 1989) [2], the document that establishes the overall closure process for the SST and double-shell tank (DST) systems. The approach incorporated in the SST PA integrates substantive features of both hazardous and radioactive waste management regulations into a single analysis. The defense-in-depth approach used in this analysis defined two major engineering barriers (a surface barrier and the grouted tank structure) and one natural barrier (the vadose zone) that will be relied on to control waste release into the accessible environment and attain expected performance metrics. The analysis evaluates specific barrier characteristics and other site features that influence contaminant migration by the various pathways. A ''reference'' case and a suite of sensitivity/uncertainty cases are considered. The ''reference case'' evaluates environmental impacts assuming central tendency estimates of site conditions. ''Reference'' case analysis results show residual tank waste impacts on nearby groundwater, air resources; or inadvertent intruders to be well below most important performance objectives. Conversely, past releases to the soil, from previous tank farm operations, are shown to have groundwater impacts that re significantly above most performance objectives. Sensitivity/uncertainty cases examine single and multiple parameter variability along with plausible alternatives to ''reference'' cases to judge how the proposed closure system performs when changes to important assumptions are made to the hydrogeologic and engineered systems. The estimated impacts from these cases are generally consistent with ''reference'' case results (i.e., performance objectives are exceeded by contaminants from past releases but not tank residuals). This document and its future iterations will play a critical role in the decision making process for the closure of the Hanford Tank Farms. It will support interim decisions related to tank retrievals and interim corrective measures, in addition to supporting the major closure decisions of tanks and tank farms. Hence, it is imperative that the review process of this document is inclusive of the decision makers as well as the Hanford Stakeholders.

  10. Test Report for Permanganate and Cold Strontium Strike for Tank 241-AN-102

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Duncan, James B.; Huber, Heinz J.; Smalley, Colleen S.

    2013-11-27

    Tanks 241-AN-102 and 241-AN-107 supernatants contain soluble Sr-90 and transuranic elements that require removal prior to vitrification to comply with the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant immobilized low-activity waste specification (WTP Contract, DE-AC27-01RV 14136, Specification 2.2.2.8, "Radionuclide Concentration Limitations") and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission provisional agreement on waste incidental to reprocessing (letter, Paperiello, C. J., "Classification of Hanford Low-Activity Tank Waste Fraction"). These two tanks have high concentrations of organics and organic complexants and are referred to as complexant concentrate tanks. A precipitation process using sodium permanganate (NaMnO{sub 4}) and strontium nitrate (Sr(NO{sub 3}){sub 2}) was developed and tested with tank waste samples to precipitate Sr-90 and transuranic elements from the supernate (PNWD-3141, Optimization of Sr/TRU Removal Conditions with Samples of AN-102 Tank Waste). Testing documented in this report was conducted to further evaluate the use of the strontium nitrate/sodium permanganate process in tank farms with a retention time of up to 12 months. Previous testing was focused on developing a process for deployment in the ultrafiltration vessels in the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant. This environment is different from tank farms in two important ways: the waste is diluted in the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant to ~5.5 M sodium, whereas the supernate in the tank farms is ~9 M Na. Secondly, while the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant allows for a maximum treatment time of hours to days, the in-tank farms treatment of tanks 241-AN102 and 241-AN-107 will result in a retention time of months (perhaps up to12 months) before processing. A comparative compilation of separation processes for Sr/transuranics has been published as RPP-RPT-48340, Evaluation of Alternative Strontium and Transuranic Separation Processes. This report also listed the testing needs for the permanganate precipitation process to be field-deployable. A more comprehensive listing of future testing needs to allow the process to be field deployable are contained in RPP-PLAN-51288, Development Test Plan for Sr/TRU Precipitation Process.

  11. Tank Waste Committee

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

    3/15 Tank Waste Committee Priorities for advice on FY17 budget Not in priority order, numbering refers to last year's related advice points, per DOE response  (#1) The Board strongly urges DOE-Headquarters (HQ) to request full funding from Congress to meet all legal requirements of the ongoing cleanup work in FY 2016 and 2017 in addition to the following specific requests.  (#2) The Board advises DOE-ORP continue to request funding to proceed to empty leaking tanks (particularly AY-102 and

  12. TANK SPACE OPTIONS REPORT

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    WILLIS WL; AHRENDT MR

    2009-08-11

    Since this report was originally issued in 2001, several options proposed for increasing double-shell tank (DST) storage space were implemented or are in the process of implementation. Changes to the single-shell tank (SST) waste retrieval schedule, completion of DST space saving options, and the DST space saving options in progress have delayed the projected shortfall of DST storage space from the 2007-2011 to the 2018-2025 timeframe (ORP-11242, River Protection Project System Plan). This report reevaluates options from Rev. 0 and includes evaluations of new options for alleviating projected restrictions on SST waste retrieval beginning in 2018 because of the lack of DST storage space.

  13. Tank depletion flow controller

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Georgeson, Melvin A.

    1976-10-26

    A flow control system includes two bubbler tubes installed at different levels within a tank containing such as radioactive liquid. As the tank is depleted, a differential pressure transmitter monitors pressure differences imparted by the two bubbler tubes at a remote, shielded location during uniform time intervals. At the end of each uniform interval, balance pots containing a dense liquid are valved together to equalize the pressures. The resulting sawtooth-shaped signal generated by the differential pressure transmitter is compared with a second sawtooth signal representing the desired flow rate during each time interval. Variations in the two signals are employed by a control instrument to regulate flow rate.

  14. Tank Waste Committee Page 1

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

    8, 2013 FINAL MEETING SUMMARY HANFORD ADVISORY BOARD TANK WASTE COMMITTEE May 8, 2013 Topics in this Meeting Summary Opening ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Advice Development Regarding Double-Shell Tank AY-102 (Joint with PIC) ........................................... 1 Meeting participants

  15. High-Pressure Hydrogen Tanks

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Presentation on High-Pressure Hydrogen Tanks for the DOE Hydrogen Delivery High-Pressure Tanks and Analysis Project Review Meeting held February 8-9, 2005 at Argonne National Laboratory

  16. Spanish Fork Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Fork Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Spanish Fork Wind Farm Facility Spanish Fork Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In...

  17. Cool Farm Tool | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    aboutussuppliersustainablesourcingtools?WT.LHNAV Cost: Free Language: English Cool Farm Tool Screenshot References: Cool Farm Tool 1 Overview "The Cool Farm Tool...

  18. Tillamook Offshore Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Tillamook Offshore Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Tillamook Offshore Wind Farm Facility Tillamook Offshore Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Offshore Wind...

  19. Galveston Offshore Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Galveston Offshore Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Galveston Offshore Wind Farm Facility Galveston Offshore Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Offshore Wind...

  20. Montfort Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Montfort Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Montfort Wind Farm Facility Montfort Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service...

  1. Express Farms Greenhouse Low Temperature Geothermal Facility...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Express Farms Greenhouse Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Express Farms Greenhouse Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Facility Express Farms...

  2. Opline Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Opline Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Opline Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Facility Opline Farms...

  3. Gray County Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Gray County Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Gray County Wind Farm Facility Gray County Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status...

  4. Hopkins Ridge Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Hopkins Ridge Wind Farm Facility Hopkins Ridge Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In...

  5. Blue Creek Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Creek Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Blue Creek Wind Farm Facility Blue Creek Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In...

  6. Tuana Springs Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Springs Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Tuana Springs Wind Farm Facility Tuana Springs Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status...

  7. Sunset Farms Biomass Facility | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Farms Biomass Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Sunset Farms Biomass Facility Facility Sunset Farms Sector Biomass Facility Type Landfill Gas Location Travis County, Texas...

  8. State Farm Insurance | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Farm Insurance Jump to: navigation, search Name: State Farm Insurance Place: Bloomington, IL Website: www.statefarminsurance.com References: State Farm Insurance1 Information...

  9. Star Point Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Point Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Star Point Wind Farm Facility Star Point Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In...

  10. Shane Cowell Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Shane Cowell Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Shane Cowell Wind Farm Facility Shane Cowell Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility...

  11. Antelope Ridge Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Antelope Ridge Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Antelope Ridge Wind Farm Facility Antelope Ridge Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility...

  12. Locust Ridge Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Locust Ridge Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Locust Ridge Wind Farm Facility Locust Ridge Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility...

  13. Rosiere Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Rosiere Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Rosiere Wind Farm Facility Rosiere Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service...

  14. Paynes Ferry Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Paynes Ferry Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Paynes Ferry Wind Farm Facility Paynes Ferry Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility...

  15. Marengo Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Marengo Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Marengo Wind Farm Facility Marengo Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service...

  16. Stoney Corners Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Stoney Corners Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Stoney Corners Wind Farm Facility Stoney Corners Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility...

  17. Marshall Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Marshall Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Marshall Wind Farm Facility Marshall Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service...

  18. Laredo Ridge Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Laredo Ridge Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Laredo Ridge Wind Farm Facility Laredo Ridge Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility...

  19. Nine Canyon Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Nine Canyon Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Nine Canyon Wind Farm Facility Nine Canyon Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status...

  20. Casper Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Casper Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Casper Wind Farm Facility Casper Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service...

  1. Wallys Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Wallys Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Wallys Wind Farm Facility Wallys Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner...

  2. Cassia Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Cassia Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Cassia Wind Farm Facility Cassia Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner...

  3. Hatchet Ridge Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Hatchet Ridge Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Hatchet Ridge Wind Farm Facility Hatchet Ridge Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility...

  4. Cedar Point Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Cedar Point Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Cedar Point Wind Farm Facility Cedar Point Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status...

  5. Allegheny Ridge Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Allegheny Ridge Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Allegheny Ridge Wind Farm Facility Allegheny Ridge wind farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind...

  6. Greensburg Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Greensburg Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Greensburg Wind Farm Facility Greensburg Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In...

  7. Wheatfield Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Wheatfield Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Wheatfield Wind Farm Facility Wheatfield Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In...

  8. Ewington Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Ewington Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Ewington Wind Farm Facility Ewington Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service...

  9. Uilk Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Uilk Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Uilk Wind Farm Facility Uilk Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Developer...

  10. Octotillo Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Octotillo Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Octotillo Wind Farm Facility Octotillo Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In...

  11. Spring Canyon Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Spring Canyon Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Spring Canyon Wind Farm Facility Spring Canyon Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility...

  12. Red Canyon Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Canyon Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Red Canyon Wind Farm Facility Red Canyon Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In...

  13. Green Mountain Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Green Mountain Wind Farm Facility Green Mountain Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In...

  14. Olsen Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Olsen Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Olsen Wind Farm Facility Olsen Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner...

  15. Flat Water Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Water Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Flat Water Wind Farm Facility Flat Water Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In...

  16. Turkey Track Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Track Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Turkey Track Wind Farm Facility Turkey Track Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In...

  17. Stratification in hot water tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Balcomb, J.D.

    1982-04-01

    Stratification in a domestic hot water tank, used to increase system performance by enabling the solar collectors to operate under marginal conditions, is discussed. Data taken in a 120 gallon tank indicate that stratification can be achieved without any special baffling in the tank. (MJF)

  18. Tank Waste Committee Page 1

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

    10, 2013 FINAL MEETING SUMMARY HANFORD ADVISORY BOARD TANK WASTE COMMITTEE April 10, 2013 Richland, WA Topics in this Meeting Summary Opening ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Integrated Project Team Update on Double-Shell Tank AY-102 ................................................................. 2 Update on Single-Shell Tank (SST) T-111 and SSTs with Decreasing Levels

  19. Tank Waste Committee Page 1

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

    9, 2014 FINAL MEETING SUMMARY HANFORD ADVISORY BOARD TANK WASTE COMMITTEE April 9, 2014 Richland, WA Topics in this Meeting Summary Opening ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Update on Double-Shell Tank Construction-Extent of Conditions Report ................................................ 2 Review of Responses to HAB Advice #271 Leaking Tanks and HAB Advice #273 Openness

  20. Structural analysis of underground gunite storage tanks. Environmental Restoration Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-08-01

    This report documents the structural analysis of the 50-ft diameter underground gunite storage tanks constructed in 1943 and located in the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) South Tank Farm, known as Facility 3507 in the 3500-3999 area. The six gunite tanks (W-5 through W-10) are spaced in a 2 {times} 3 matrix at 60 ft on centers with 6 ft of soil cover. Each tank (Figures 1, 2, and 3) has an inside diameter of 50 ft, a 12-ft vertical sidewall having a thickness of 6 in. (there is an additional 1.5-in. inner liner for much of the height), and a spherical domed roof (nominal thickness is 10 in.) rising another 6 ft, 3 in. at the center of the tank. The thickness of both the sidewall and the domed roof increases to 30 in. near their juncture. The tank floor is nominally 3-in. thick, except at the juncture with the wall where the thickness increases to 9 in. The tanks are constructed of gunite (a mixture of Portland cement, sand, and water in the form of a mortar) sprayed from the nozzle of a cement gun against a form or a solid surface. The floor and the dome are reinforced with one layer of welded wire mesh and reinforcing rods placed in the radial direction. The sidewall is reinforced with three layers of welded wire mesh, vertical {1/2}-in. rods, and 21 horizontal rebar hoops (attached to the vertical rods) post-tensioned to 35,000 psi stress. The haunch at the sidewall/roof junction is reinforced with 17 horizontal rebar hoops post-tensioned with 35,000 to 40,000 psi stress. The yield strength of the post-tensioning steel rods is specified to be 60,000 psi, and all other steel is 40,000 psi steel. The specified 28-day design strength of the gunite is 5,000 psi.

  1. Plating Tank Control Software

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    1998-03-01

    The Plating Tank Control Software is a graphical user interface that controls and records plating process conditions for plating in high aspect ratio channels that require use of low current and long times. The software is written for a Pentium II PC with an 8 channel data acquisition card, and the necessary shunt resistors for measuring currents in the millampere range.

  2. INTERIM BARRIER AT HANFORDS TY FARM TO PROTECT GROUNDWATER AT THE HANFORD SITE WASHINGTON USA

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    PARKER DL; HOLM MJ; HENDERSON JC; LOBER RW

    2011-01-13

    An innovative interim surface barrier was constructed as a demonstration project at the Hanford Site's TY Tank Farm. The purpose of the demonstration barrier is to stop rainwater and snowmelt from entering the soils within the tank farm and driving contamination from past leaks and spills toward the ground water. The interim barrier was constructed using a modified asphalt material with very low permeability developed by MatCon{reg_sign}. Approximately 2,400 cubic yards of fill material were added to the tank farm to create a sloped surface that will gravity drain precipitation to collection points where it will be routed through buried drain lines to an evapotranspiration basin adjacent to the farm. The evapotranspiration basin is a lined basin with a network of perforated drain lines covered with soil and planted with native grasses. The evapotranspiration concept was selected because it prevents the runoff from percolating into the soil column and also avoids potential monitoring and maintenance issues associated with standing water in a traditional evaporation pond. Because of issues associated with using standard excavation and earth moving equipment in the farm a number of alternate construction approaches were utilized to perform excavations and prepare the site for the modified asphalt.

  3. Wind Farm Recommendation Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    John Reisenauer

    2011-05-01

    On April 21, 2011, an Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Land Use Committee meeting was convened to develop a wind farm recommendation for the Executive Council and a list of proposed actions for proceeding with the recommendation. In terms of land use, the INL Land Use Committee unanimously agrees that Site 6 is the preferred location of the alternatives presented for an INL wind farm. However, further studies and resolution to questions raised (stated in this report) by the INL Land Use Committee are needed for the preferred location. Studies include, but are not limited to, wind viability (6 months), bats (2 years), and the visual impact of the wind farm. In addition, cultural resource surveys and consultation (1 month) and the National Environmental Policy Act process (9 to 12 months) need to be completed. Furthermore, there is no documented evidence of developers expressing interest in constructing a small wind farm on INL, nor a specific list of expectations or concessions for which a developer might expect INL to cover the cost. To date, INL assumes the National Environmental Policy Act activities will be paid for by the Department of Energy and INL (the environmental assessment has only received partial funding). However, other concessions also may be expected by developers such as roads, fencing, power line installation, tie-ins to substations, annual maintenance, snow removal, access control, down-time, and remediation. These types of concessions have not been documented, as a request, from a developer and INL has not identified the short and long-term cost liabilities for such concessions should a developer expect INL to cover these costs. INL has not identified a go-no-go funding level or the priority this Wind Farm Project might have with respect to other nuclear-related projects, should the wind farm remain an unfunded mandate. The Land Use Committee recommends Legal be consulted to determine what, if any, liabilities exist with the Wind Farm Project and INLs rights and responsibilities in regards to access to the wind farm once constructed. An expression of interest is expected to go out soon to developers. However, with the potential of 2 years of study remaining for Site 6, the expectation of obtaining meaningful interest from developers should be questioned.

  4. Long Island Solar Farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Anders, R.

    2013-05-01

    The Long Island Solar Farm (LISF) is a remarkable success story, whereby very different interest groups found a way to capitalize on unusual circumstances to develop a mutually beneficial source of renewable energy. The uniqueness of the circumstances that were necessary to develop the Long Island Solar Farm make it very difficult to replicate. The project is, however, an unparalleled resource for solar energy research, which will greatly inform large-scale PV solar development in the East. Lastly, the LISF is a superb model for the process by which the project developed and the innovation and leadership shown by the different players.

  5. Characterization of the SRNL-Washed tank 51 sludge batch 9 qualification sample

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pareizs, J. M.

    2016-01-01

    Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) personnel have been requested to qualify the next sludge batch (Sludge Batch 9 – SB9) for processing at the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF). To accomplish this task, Savannah River Remediation (SRR) sent SRNL a 3-L sample of Tank 51H slurry to be characterized, washed, and then used in a lab-scale demonstration of the DWPF flowsheet (after combining with Tank 40H sludge). SRNL has washed the Tank 51H sample per the Tank Farm washing strategy as of October 20, 2015. A part of the qualification process is extensive radionuclide and chemical characterization of the SRNL-washed Tank 51H slurry. This report documents the chemical characterization of the washed slurry; radiological characterization is in progress and will be documented in a separate report. The analytical results of this characterization are comparable to the Tank Farm projections. Therefore, it is recommended that SRNL use this washed slurry for the ongoing SB9 qualification activities.

  6. Farming: A Climate Change Culprit

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

    Farming: A Climate Change Culprit Farming: A Climate Change Culprit Simulations run at NERSC show impact of land-use change on African monsoon precipitation June 7, 2014 SahelMap ...

  7. Cooper Farms | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Farms Sector Wind energy Facility Type Community Wind Facility Status In Service Owner V.H. Cooper and Co Inc Developer One Energy LLC Energy Purchaser Cooper Farms Location Van...

  8. Oil Stop Valve : Oil Spill Containment Research and Development Project.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bourn, Robert D.

    1982-07-01

    This report summarizes the research and development project conducted by the Civil Engineering Section, Division of Substation and Control Engineering, to determine the effectiveness of the oil stop valve for use in the Bonneville Power Administration's Oil Spill Containment and Countermeasure Program. The most attractive alternative to lagoons and separator tanks was found in the oil stop valve manufactured by AFL/Clark Industries of Riviera Beach, Florida. This small, direct-acting and relatively inexpensive valve requires little maintenance and can either be employed independently, using existing drain lines for effluent storage, or in conjunction with oil separator tanks and lagoon systems. The AFL/Clark valve requires no power and has only one moving part, a ballasted float having a specific gravity between that of oil and water. In water, the float rides above the throat of the discharge pipe allowing water to flow out. When oil enters the water the float begins losing its relative bouyancy and sinks until it seats itself over the throat of the outlet, closing the valve. Usually installed in a manhole within a typical storm drainage system, the valve backs spilled oil into drainways and contains it for temporary storage within the switchyard.

  9. Aqua Farms International Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Farms International Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Aqua Farms International Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility...

  10. Sunnybrook Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Sunnybrook Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Sunnybrook Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Facility...

  11. Refinement of Modeling Techniques for the Structural Evaluation of Hanford Single-Shell Nuclear Waste Storage Tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Karri, Naveen K.; Rinker, Michael W.; Johnson, Kenneth I.; Bapanapalli, Satish K.

    2012-11-10

    ABSTRACT Several tanks at the Hanford Site (in Washington State, USA) belong to the first generation of underground nuclear waste storage tanks known as single shell tanks (SSTs). These tanks were constructed between 1943 and 1964 and are well beyond their design life. This article discusses the structural analysis approach and modeling challenges encountered during the ongoing analysis of record (AOR) for evaluating the structural integrity of the SSTs. There are several geometrical and material nonlinearities and uncertainties to be dealt with while performing the modern finite element analysis of these tanks. The analysis takes into account the temperature history of the tanks and allowable mechanical operating loads of these tanks for proper estimation of creep strains and thermal degradation of material properties. The loads prescribed in the AOR models also include anticipated loads that these tanks may see during waste retrieval and closure. Due to uncertainty in a number of inputs to the models, sensitivity studies were conducted to address questions related to the boundary conditions to realistically or conservatively represent the influence of surrounding tanks in a tank farm, the influence of backfill excavation slope, the extent of backfill and the total extent of undisturbed soil surrounding the backfill. Because of the limited availability of data on the thermal and operating history for many of the individual tanks, some of the data was assumed or interpolated. However, the models developed for the analysis of record represent the bounding scenarios and include the loading conditions that the tanks were subjected to or anticipated. The modeling refinement techniques followed in the AOR resulted in conservative estimates for force and moment demands at various sections in the concrete tanks. This article discusses the modeling aspects related to Type-II and Type-III SSTs. The modeling techniques, methodology and evaluation criteria developed for evaluating the structural integrity of SSTs at Hanford are in general applicable to any similar tanks or underground concrete storage structures.

  12. he Hanford Story Tank Waste Cleanup | Department of Energy

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

    he Hanford Story Tank Waste Cleanup he Hanford Story Tank Waste Cleanup Addthis Description The Hanford Story Tank Waste Cleanup

  13. experimental tank tests

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

    experimental tank tests - Sandia Energy Energy Search Icon Sandia Home Locations Contact Us Employee Locator Energy & Climate Secure & Sustainable Energy Future Stationary Power Energy Conversion Efficiency Solar Energy Wind Energy Water Power Supercritical CO2 Geothermal Natural Gas Safety, Security & Resilience of the Energy Infrastructure Energy Storage Nuclear Power & Engineering Grid Modernization Battery Testing Nuclear Fuel Cycle Defense Waste Management Programs Advanced

  14. Disruption | NISAC

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

    oil fields to fuel distribution terminals. Different components of this system (e.g., crude oil import terminals, refineries, transmission pipelines, and tank farms) can be ...

  15. Tank 241-BY-111, cores 168 and 171 analytical results for the final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Nuzum, J.L.

    1997-05-02

    This document is the final laboratory report for Tank 241-BY-111. Push mode core segments were removed from risers 15 and 12A between August 13, 1996, and September 3, 1996. Segments were received and extruded at 222-S Laboratory. Analyses were performed in accordance with Tank 241-BY-111 Rotary Mode Core Sampling and Analysis Plan (TSAP) (Kruger, 1996) and Safety Screening Data Quality Objective (DQO) (Dukelow, et al., 1995). None of the subsamples submitted for total alpha activity (AT) or differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) analyses exceeded the notification limits stated in DQO. Two cores of nine segments were expected from this tank. Sampling problems prevented the acquisition of complete cores. Attachment 1 illustrates subsamples generated in the laboratory for analysis and identifies their sources. This reference also relates tank farm identification numbers to their corresponding 222-S Laboratory Information Management System (LIMS) sample numbers.

  16. Dynamic simulation of the in-tank precipitation process

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hang, T.; Shanahan, K.L.; Gregory, M.V.; Walker, D.D.

    1993-12-31

    As part of the High-Level Waste Tank Farm at the Savannah River Site (SRS), the In-Tank Precipitation (ITP) facility was designed to decontaminate the radioactive waste supernate by removing cesium as precipitated cesium tetraphenylborate. A dynamic computer model of the ITP process was developed using SPEEDUP{sup TM} software to provide guidance in the areas of operation and production forecast, production scheduling, safety, air emission, and process improvements. The model performs material balance calculations in all phase (solid, liquid, and gas) for 50 key chemical constituents to account for inventory accumulation, depletion, and dilution. Calculations include precipitation, benzene radiolytic reactions, evaporation, dissolution, adsorption, filtration, and stripping. To control the ITP batch operation a customized FORTRAN program was generated and linked to SPEEDUP{sup TM} simulation This paper summarizes the model development and initial results of the simulation study.

  17. ELECTROCHEMICAL CORROSION TESTING OF TANKS 241-AN-102 & 241-AP-107 & 241-AP-108 IN SUPPORT OF ULTRASONIC TESTING

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    WYRWAS RB; DUNCAN JB

    2008-11-20

    This report presents the results of the corrosion rates that were measured using electrochemical methods for tanks 241-AN-102 (AN-102), 241-AP-107 (AP 107), and 241-AP-108 (AP-108) performed under test plant RPP-PLAN-38215. The steel used as materials of construction for AN and AP tank farms was A537 Class 1. Test coupons of A537 Class 1 carbon steel were used for corrosion testing in the AN-107, AP-107, and AP-108 tank waste. Supernate will be tested from AN-102, AP-107, and Ap-108. Saltcake testing was performed on AP-108 only.

  18. Hanford tank waste pretreatment overview

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gasper, K.A.

    1994-12-31

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has established the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) to safely manage and dispose of the Hanford Site tank waste. Pretreatment is one of the major program elements of the TWRS. The scope of the TWRS Tank Waste Pretreatment Program is to treat tank waste to separate it into high- and low-level waste fractions and to provide additional treatment as required to feed low-level and high-level waste immobilization processes. The Pretreatment Program activities include technology development, design, fabrication, construction, and operation of facilities to support the pretreatment of radioactive mixed waste retrieved from 28 large underground double-shell tanks and 149 single-shell tanks.

  19. METHODOLOGY AND CALCULATIONS FOR THE ASSIGNMENT OF WASTE GROUPS FOR THE LARGE UNDERGROUND WASTE STORAGE TANKS AT THE HANFORD SITE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    WEBER RA

    2009-01-16

    The Hanford Site contains 177 large underground radioactive waste storage tanks (28 double-shell tanks and 149 single-shell tanks). These tanks are categorized into one of three waste groups (A, B, and C) based on their waste and tank characteristics. These waste group assignments reflect a tank's propensity to retain a significant volume of flammable gases and the potential of the waste to release retained gas by a buoyant displacement gas release event. Assignments of waste groups to the 177 double-shell tanks and single-shell tanks, as reported in this document, are based on a Monte Carlo analysis of three criteria. The first criterion is the headspace flammable gas concentration following release of retained gas. This criterion determines whether the tank contains sufficient retained gas such that the well-mixed headspace flammable gas concentration would reach 100% of the lower flammability limit if the entire tank's retained gas were released. If the volume of retained gas is not sufficient to reach 100% of the lower flammability limit, then flammable conditions cannot be reached and the tank is classified as a waste group C tank independent of the method the gas is released. The second criterion is the energy ratio and considers whether there is sufficient supernatant on top of the saturated solids such that gas-bearing solids have the potential energy required to break up the material and release gas. Tanks that are not waste group C tanks and that have an energy ratio < 3.0 do not have sufficient potential energy to break up material and release gas and are assigned to waste group B. These tanks are considered to represent a potential induced flammable gas release hazard, but no spontaneous buoyant displacement flammable gas release hazard. Tanks that are not waste group C tanks and have an energy ratio {ge} 3.0, but that pass the third criterion (buoyancy ratio < 1.0, see below) are also assigned to waste group B. Even though the designation as a waste group B (or A) tank identifies the potential for an induced flammable gas release hazard, the hazard only exists for specific operations that can release the retained gas in the tank at a rate and quantity that results in reaching 100% of the lower flammability limit in the tank headspace. The identification and evaluation of tank farm operations that could cause an induced flammable gas release hazard in a waste group B (or A) tank are included in other documents. The third criterion is the buoyancy ratio. This criterion addresses tanks that are not waste group C double-shell tanks and have an energy ratio {ge} 3.0. For these double-shell tanks, the buoyancy ratio considers whether the saturated solids can retain sufficient gas to exceed neutral buoyancy relative to the supernatant layer and therefore have buoyant displacement gas release events. If the buoyancy ratio is {ge} 1.0, that double-shell tank is assigned to waste group A. These tanks are considered to have a potential spontaneous buoyant displacement flammable gas release hazard in addition to a potential induced flammable gas release hazard. This document categorizes each of the large waste storage tanks into one of several categories based on each tank's waste characteristics. These waste group assignments reflect a tank's propensity to retain a significant volume of flammable gases and the potential of the waste to release retained gas by a buoyant displacement event. Revision 8 is the annual update of the calculations of the flammable gas Waste Groups for DSTs and SSTs.

  20. METHODOLOGY AND CALCULATIONS FOR THE ASSIGNMENT OF WASTE GROUPS FOR THE LARGE UNDERGROUND WASTE STORAGE TANKS AT THE HANFORD SITE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    FOWLER KD

    2007-12-27

    This document categorizes each of the large waste storage tanks into one of several categories based on each tank's waste characteristics. These waste group assignments reflect a tank's propensity to retain a significant volume of flammable gases and the potential of the waste to release retained gas by a buoyant displacement event. Revision 7 is the annual update of the calculations of the flammable gas Waste Groups for DSTs and SSTs. The Hanford Site contains 177 large underground radioactive waste storage tanks (28 double-shell tanks and 149 single-shell tanks). These tanks are categorized into one of three waste groups (A, B, and C) based on their waste and tank characteristics. These waste group assignments reflect a tank's propensity to retain a significant volume of flammable gases and the potential of the waste to release retained gas by a buoyant displacement gas release event. Assignments of waste groups to the 177 double-shell tanks and single-shell tanks, as reported in this document, are based on a Monte Carlo analysis of three criteria. The first criterion is the headspace flammable gas concentration following release of retained gas. This criterion determines whether the tank contains sufficient retained gas such that the well-mixed headspace flammable gas concentration would reach 100% of the lower flammability limit if the entire tank's retained gas were released. If the volume of retained gas is not sufficient to reach 100% of the lower flammability limit, then flammable conditions cannot be reached and the tank is classified as a waste group C tank independent of the method the gas is released. The second criterion is the energy ratio and considers whether there is sufficient supernatant on top of the saturated solids such that gas-bearing solids have the potential energy required to break up the material and release gas. Tanks that are not waste group C tanks and that have an energy ratio < 3.0 do not have sufficient potential energy to break up material and release gas and are assigned to waste group B. These tanks are considered to represent a potential induced flammable gas release hazard, but no spontaneous buoyant displacement flammable gas release hazard. Tanks that are not waste group C tanks and have an energy ratio {ge} 3.0, but that pass the third criterion (buoyancy ratio < 1.0, see below) are also assigned to waste group B. Even though the designation as a waste group B (or A) tank identifies the potential for an induced flammable gas release hazard, the hazard only exists for specific operations that can release the retained gas in the tank at a rate and quantity that results in reaching 100% of the lower flammability limit in the tank headspace. The identification and evaluation of tank farm operations that could cause an induced flammable gas release hazard in a waste group B (or A) tank are included in other documents. The third criterion is the buoyancy ratio. This criterion addresses tanks that are not waste group C double-shell tanks and have an energy ratio {ge} 3.0. For these double-shell tanks, the buoyancy ratio considers whether the saturated solids can retain sufficient gas to exceed neutral buoyancy relative to the supernatant layer and therefore have buoyant displacement gas release events. If the buoyancy ratio is {ge} 1.0, that double-shell tank is assigned to waste group A. These tanks are considered to have a potential spontaneous buoyant displacement flammable gas release hazard in addition to a potential induced flammable gas release hazard.

  1. 2020 Vision for Tank Waste Cleanup (One System Integration) - 12506

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Harp, Benton; Charboneau, Stacy; Olds, Erik

    2012-07-01

    The mission of the Department of Energy's Office of River Protection (ORP) is to safely retrieve and treat the 56 million gallons of Hanford's tank waste and close the Tank Farms to protect the Columbia River. The millions of gallons of waste are a by-product of decades of plutonium production. After irradiated fuel rods were taken from the nuclear reactors to the processing facilities at Hanford they were exposed to a series of chemicals designed to dissolve away the rod, which enabled workers to retrieve the plutonium. Once those chemicals were exposed to the fuel rods they became radioactive and extremely hot. They also couldn't be used in this process more than once. Because the chemicals are caustic and extremely hazardous to humans and the environment, underground storage tanks were built to hold these chemicals until a more permanent solution could be found. The Cleanup of Hanford's 56 million gallons of radioactive and chemical waste stored in 177 large underground tanks represents the Department's largest and most complex environmental remediation project. Sixty percent by volume of the nation's high-level radioactive waste is stored in the underground tanks grouped into 18 'tank farms' on Hanford's central plateau. Hanford's mission to safely remove, treat and dispose of this waste includes the construction of a first-of-its-kind Waste Treatment Plant (WTP), ongoing retrieval of waste from single-shell tanks, and building or upgrading the waste feed delivery infrastructure that will deliver the waste to and support operations of the WTP beginning in 2019. Our discussion of the 2020 Vision for Hanford tank waste cleanup will address the significant progress made to date and ongoing activities to manage the operations of the tank farms and WTP as a single system capable of retrieving, delivering, treating and disposing Hanford's tank waste. The initiation of hot operations and subsequent full operations of the WTP are not only dependent upon the successful design and construction of the WTP, but also on appropriately preparing the tank farms and waste feed delivery infrastructure to reliably and consistently deliver waste feed to the WTP for many decades. The key components of the 2020 vision are: all WTP facilities are commissioned, turned-over and operational, achieving the earliest possible hot operations of completed WTP facilities, and supplying low-activity waste (LAW) feed directly to the LAW Facility using in-tank/near tank supplemental treatment technologies. A One System Integrated Project Team (IPT) was recently formed to focus on developing and executing the programs that will be critical to successful waste feed delivery and WTP startup. The team is comprised of members from Bechtel National, Inc. (BNI), Washington River Protection Solutions LLC (WRPS), and DOE-ORP and DOE-WTP. The IPT will combine WTP and WRPS capabilities in a mission-focused model that is clearly defined, empowered and cost efficient. The genesis for this new team and much of the 2020 vision is based on the work of an earlier team that was tasked with identifying the optimum approach to startup, commissioning, and turnover of WTP facilities for operations. This team worked backwards from 2020 - a date when the project will be completed and steady-state operations will be underway - and identified success criteria to achieving safe and efficient operations of the WTP. The team was not constrained by any existing contract work scope, labor, or funding parameters. Several essential strategies were identified to effectively realize the one-system model of integrated feed stream delivery, WTP operations, and product delivery, and to accomplish the team's vision of hot operations beginning in 2016: - Use a phased startup and turnover approach that will allow WTP facilities to be transitioned to an operational state on as short a timeline as credible. - Align Tank Farm (TF) and WTP objectives such that feed can be supplied to the WTP when it is required for hot operations. - Ensure immobilized waste and waste recycle streams can be recei

  2. Estimating Residual Solids Volume In Underground Storage Tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Clark, Jason L.; Worthy, S. Jason; Martin, Bruce A.; Tihey, John R.

    2014-01-08

    The Savannah River Site liquid waste system consists of multiple facilities to safely receive and store legacy radioactive waste, treat, and permanently dispose waste. The large underground storage tanks and associated equipment, known as the 'tank farms', include a complex interconnected transfer system which includes underground transfer pipelines and ancillary equipment to direct the flow of waste. The waste in the tanks is present in three forms: supernatant, sludge, and salt. The supernatant is a multi-component aqueous mixture, while sludge is a gel-like substance which consists of insoluble solids and entrapped supernatant. The waste from these tanks is retrieved and treated as sludge or salt. The high level (radioactive) fraction of the waste is vitrified into a glass waste form, while the low-level waste is immobilized in a cementitious grout waste form called saltstone. Once the waste is retrieved and processed, the tanks are closed via removing the bulk of the waste, chemical cleaning, heel removal, stabilizing remaining residuals with tailored grout formulations and severing/sealing external penetrations. The comprehensive liquid waste disposition system, currently managed by Savannah River Remediation, consists of 1) safe storage and retrieval of the waste as it is prepared for permanent disposition; (2) definition of the waste processing techniques utilized to separate the high-level waste fraction/low-level waste fraction; (3) disposition of LLW in saltstone; (4) disposition of the HLW in glass; and (5) closure state of the facilities, including tanks. This paper focuses on determining the effectiveness of waste removal campaigns through monitoring the volume of residual solids in the waste tanks. Volume estimates of the residual solids are performed by creating a map of the residual solids on the waste tank bottom using video and still digital images. The map is then used to calculate the volume of solids remaining in the waste tank. The ability to accurately determine a volume is a function of the quantity and quality of the waste tank images. Currently, mapping is performed remotely with closed circuit video cameras and still photograph cameras due to the hazardous environment. There are two methods that can be used to create a solids volume map. These methods are: liquid transfer mapping / post transfer mapping and final residual solids mapping. The task is performed during a transfer because the liquid level (which is a known value determined by a level measurement device) is used as a landmark to indicate solids accumulation heights. The post transfer method is primarily utilized after the majority of waste has been removed. This method relies on video and still digital images of the waste tank after the liquid transfer is complete to obtain the relative height of solids across a waste tank in relation to known and usable landmarks within the waste tank (cooling coils, column base plates, etc.). In order to accurately monitor solids over time across various cleaning campaigns, and provide a technical basis to support final waste tank closure, a consistent methodology for volume determination has been developed and implemented at SRS.

  3. Grouting guidelines for Hanford Tanks Initiative cone penetrometer borings

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Iwatate, D.F.

    1998-05-18

    Grouting of an open cone penetrometer (CP) borehole is done to construct a barrier that prevents the vertical migration of fluids and contaminants between geologic units and aquifers intersected by the boring. Whether to grout, the types of grout, and the method of deployment are functions of the site-specific conditions. This report recommends the strategy that should be followed both before and during HTI [Hanford Tanks Initiative] CP deployment to decide specific borehole grouting needs at Hanford SST farms. Topics discussed in this report that bear on this strategy include: Regulatory guidance, hydrogeologic conditions, operational factors, specific CP grouting deployment recommendations.

  4. Wind farm electrical system

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Erdman, William L.; Lettenmaier, Terry M.

    2006-07-04

    An approach to wind farm design using variable speed wind turbines with low pulse number electrical output. The output of multiple wind turbines are aggregated to create a high pulse number electrical output at a point of common coupling with a utility grid network. Power quality at each individual wind turbine falls short of utility standards, but the aggregated output at the point of common coupling is within acceptable tolerances for utility power quality. The approach for aggregating low pulse number electrical output from multiple wind turbines relies upon a pad mounted transformer at each wind turbine that performs phase multiplication on the output of each wind turbine. Phase multiplication converts a modified square wave from the wind turbine into a 6 pulse output. Phase shifting of the 6 pulse output from each wind turbine allows the aggregated output of multiple wind turbines to be a 24 pulse approximation of a sine wave. Additional filtering and VAR control is embedded within the wind farm to take advantage of the wind farm's electrical impedence characteristics to further enhance power quality at the point of common coupling.

  5. Fabrication of a Sludge-Conditioning System for Processing Legacy Wastes from the Gunite and Associated Tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Randolph, J.D.; Lewis, B.E.; Farmer, J.R.; Johnson, M.A.

    2000-08-01

    The Sludge Conditioning System (SCS) for the Gunite and Associated Tanks (GAATs) is designed to receive, monitor, characterize and process legacy waste materials from the South Tank Farm tanks in preparation for final transfer of the wastes to the Melton Valley Storage Tanks (MVSTs), which are located at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. The SCS includes (1) a Primary Conditioning System (PCS) Enclosure for sampling and particle size classification, (2) a Solids Monitoring Test Loop (SMTL) for slurry characterization, (3) a Waste Transfer Pump to retrieve and transfer waste materials from GAAT consolidation tank W-9 to the MVSTs, (4) a PulsAir Mixing System to provide mixing of consolidated sludges for ease of retrieval, and (5) the interconnecting piping and valving. This report presents the design, fabrication, cost, and fabrication schedule information for the SCS.

  6. Tank Waste Remediation System Tank Waste Analysis Plan. FY 1995

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Haller, C.S.; Dove, T.H.

    1994-11-01

    This documents lays the groundwork for preparing the implementing the TWRS tank waste analysis planning and reporting for Fiscal Year 1995. This Tank Waste Characterization Plan meets the requirements specified in the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, better known as the Tri-Party Agreement.

  7. Tank Waste Remediation System retrieval and disposal mission technical baseline summary description

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McLaughlin, T.J.

    1998-01-06

    This document is prepared in order to support the US Department of Energy`s evaluation of readiness-to-proceed for the Waste Retrieval and Disposal Mission at the Hanford Site. The Waste Retrieval and Disposal Mission is one of three primary missions under the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Project. The other two include programs to characterize tank waste and to provide for safe storage of the waste while it awaits treatment and disposal. The Waste Retrieval and Disposal Mission includes the programs necessary to support tank waste retrieval, wastefeed, delivery, storage and disposal of immobilized waste, and closure of tank farms. This mission will enable the tank farms to be closed and turned over for final remediation. The Technical Baseline is defined as the set of science and engineering, equipment, facilities, materials, qualified staff, and enabling documentation needed to start up and complete the mission objectives. The primary purposes of this document are (1) to identify the important technical information and factors that should be used by contributors to the mission and (2) to serve as a basis for configuration management of the technical information and factors.

  8. TANK VAPOR CHEMICALS OF POTENTIAL CONCERN & EXISTING DIRECT READING INSTRUMENTION & PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT CONSIDERATIONS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BUTLER, N.K.

    2004-11-01

    This document takes the newly released Industrial Hygiene Chemical Vapor Technical Basis (RPP-22491) and evaluates the chemicals of potential concern (COPC) identified for selected implementation actions by the industrial hygiene organization. This document is not intended as a hazard analysis with recommended controls for all tank farm activities. Not all of the chemicals listed are present in all tanks; therefore, hazard analyses can and should be tailored as appropriate. Detection of each chemical by current industrial hygiene non-specific instrumentation in use at the tank farms is evaluated. Information gaps are identified and recommendations are made to resolve these needs. Of the 52 COPC, 34 can be detected with existing instrumentation. Three additional chemicals could be detected with a photoionization detector (PID) equipped with a different lamp. Discussion with specific instrument manufacturers is warranted. Consideration should be given to having the SapphIRe XL customized for tank farm applications. Other instruments, sampling or modeling techniques should be evaluated to estimate concentrations of chemicals not detected by direct reading instruments. In addition, relative instrument response needs to be factored in to action levels used for direct reading instruments. These action levels should be correlated to exposures to the COPC and corresponding occupational exposure limits (OELs). The minimum respiratory protection for each of the COPC is evaluated against current options. Recommendations are made for respiratory protection based on each chemical. Until exposures are sufficiently quantified and analyzed, the current use of supplied air respiratory protection is appropriate and protective for the COPC. Use of supplied air respiratory protection should be evaluated once a detailed exposure assessment for the COPC is completed. The established tank farm OELs should be documented in the TFC-PLN-34. For chemicals without an established tank farm OEL, consideration should be given to adopting protective limits from NIOSH, AIHA, or developing OELs. Protective gloves and suits are evaluated for each chemical for which information is available. Information gaps are identified for some of the compounds and materials. Recommendations are made for resolving these needs. Based on available information, Silver Shield{reg_sign} gloves are promising for tank farm applications. However, permeation testing documentation is needed for the COPC and mixtures for Silver Shield{reg_sign} gloves to evaluate their protectiveness. North Safety Products is expected to provide the requested documentation. Multiple Tychem{reg_sign} products are available. There is overlap between chemicals and effective materials. Further hazard evaluation to determine actual hazards and permeation testing documentation is required to assess the efficacy of a single Tychem{reg_sign} product for tank farm applications. All of this chemical specific data is combined into a spreadsheet that will assist the industrial hygienist in the selection of monitoring instruments, respiratory protection selection and protective clothing for performing work at a specific tank(s).

  9. COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS MODELING OF SCALED HANFORD DOUBLE SHELL TANK MIXING - CFD MODELING SENSITIVITY STUDY RESULTS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    JACKSON VL

    2011-08-31

    The primary purpose of the tank mixing and sampling demonstration program is to mitigate the technical risks associated with the ability of the Hanford tank farm delivery and celtification systems to measure and deliver a uniformly mixed high-level waste (HLW) feed to the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) Uniform feed to the WTP is a requirement of 24590-WTP-ICD-MG-01-019, ICD-19 - Interface Control Document for Waste Feed, although the exact definition of uniform is evolving in this context. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) modeling has been used to assist in evaluating scaleup issues, study operational parameters, and predict mixing performance at full-scale.

  10. SRNL report for the tank waste disposition integrated flowsheet: Corrosion testing

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wyrwas, R. B.

    2015-09-30

    A series of cyclic potentiodynamic polarization (CPP) tests were performed in support of the Tank Waste Disposition Integrated Flowsheet (TWDIF). The focus of the testing was to assess the effectiveness of the SRNL model for predicting the amount of nitrite inhibitor needed to prevent pitting induced by increasing halide concentrations. The testing conditions were selected to simulate the dilute process stream that is proposed to be returned to tank farms from treating the off-gas from the low activity waste melter in the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant.

  11. Phase 1 RCRA Facility Investigation and Corrective Measures Study Work Plan for Single Shell Tank Waste Management Areas

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    ROGERS, P.M.

    2000-06-01

    This document is the master work plan for the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) for single-shell tank (SST) farms at the Hanford Site. Evidence indicates that releases at four of the seven SST waste management areas have impacted.

  12. Tank Waste Committee Page 1

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

    April 17, 2012 FINAL MEETING SUMMARY HANFORD ADVISORY BOARD TANK WASTE COMMITTEE MEETING April 17, 2012 Richland, WA Topics in this Meeting Summary Welcome & Introductions ............................................................................................................................. 1 Discussion of Tank-Related Permit Units ..................................................................................................... 1 Discussion of IDF and Risk Budget Tool

  13. High-Pressure Hydrogen Tank Testing

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Many types of compressed hydrogen tanks have been certified worldwide and demonstrated in several prototype fuel cell vehicles. The following information discusses high-pressure hydrogen tank...

  14. Tank Closure & Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...

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

    RODs: Tanks with leaks removed to get at leak contamination. Tank gear, pipes, valves, etc to be removed. RTD contaminated soils where necessary. Watch for...

  15. Organic liner for thermoset composite tank

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Garvey, Raymond E.

    1991-01-01

    A cryogenic tank that is made leak-proof under cryogenic conditions by successive layers of epoxy lining the interior of the tank.

  16. Shelburne Farms | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    VT 05482 Product: Shelburne Farms is a membership-supported, nonprofit environmental education center and National Historic Landmark in Shelburne, Vermont Coordinates:...

  17. Superior Farms | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Windpower Developer Foundation Windpower Energy Purchaser Superior Farms Location Dixon CA Coordinates 38.420103, -121.817506 Show Map Loading map......

  18. Estimation of SX Farm Vadose Zone CS-137 Inventories from Geostatistical Analysis of Drywell and Soil Core Data

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    KNEPP, A.J.

    2000-06-02

    This report provides an estimation of the Cs-137 inventories in the soil under the SX Tank Farm based on measurements obtained from drywell and soil cores. The Cs-137 inventories are estimated separately for distinct volumes of soil associated etc.

  19. Tank Waste Retrieval Lessons Learned at the Hanford Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dodd, R.A.

    2008-07-01

    One of the environmental remediation challenges facing the nation is the retrieval and permanent disposal of approximately 90 million gallons of radioactive waste stored in underground tanks at the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) facilities. The Hanford Site is located in southeastern Washington State and stores roughly 60 percent of this waste. An estimated 53 million gallons of high-level, transuranic, and low-level radioactive waste is stored underground in 149 single-shell tanks (SSTs) and 28 newer double-shell tanks (DSTs) at the Hanford Site. These SSTs range in size from 55,000 gallons to 1,000,000 gallon capacity. Approximately 30 million gallons of this waste is stored in SSTs. The SSTs were constructed between 1943 and 1964 and all have exceeded the nominal 20-year design life. Sixty-seven SSTs are known or suspected to have leaked an estimated 1,000,000 gallons of waste to the surrounding soil. The risk of additional SST leakage has been greatly reduced by removing more than 3 million gallons of interstitial liquids and supernatant and transferring this waste to the DST system. Retrieval of SST salt-cake and sludge waste is underway to further reduce risks and stage feed materials for the Hanford Site Waste Treatment Plant. Regulatory requirements for SST waste retrieval and tank farm closure are established in the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (HFFACO), better known as the Tri- Party Agreement, or TPA. The HFFACO was signed by the DOE, the State of Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology), and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and requires retrieval of as much waste as technically possible, with waste residues not to exceed 360 ft{sup 3} in 530,000 gallon or larger tanks; 30 ft{sup 3} in 55,000 gallon or smaller tanks; or the limit of waste retrieval technology, whichever is less. If residual waste volume requirements cannot be achieved, then HFFACO Appendix H provisions can be invoked to request Ecology and EPA approval of an exception to the waste retrieval criteria for a specific tank. Tank waste retrieval has been conducted at the Hanford Site over the last few decades using a method referred to as Past Practice Hydraulic Sluicing. Past Practice Hydraulic Sluicing employs large volumes of DST supernatant and water to dislodge, dissolve, mobilize, and retrieve tank waste. Concern over the leak integrity of SSTs resulted in the need for tank waste retrieval methods capable of using smaller volumes of liquid in a more controlled manner. Retrieval of SST waste in accordance with HFFACO requirements was initiated at the Hanford Site in April 2003. New and innovative tank waste retrieval methods that minimize and control the use of liquids are being implemented for the first time. These tank waste retrieval methods replace Past Practice Hydraulic Sluicing and employ modified sluicing, vacuum retrieval, and in-tank vehicle techniques. Waste retrieval has been completed in seven Hanford Site SSTs (C-106, C-103, C-201, C-202, C-203, C-204, and S-112) in accordance with HFFACO requirements. Three additional tanks are currently in the process of being retrieved (C-108, C-109 and S-102) Preparation for retrieval of two additional SSTs (C-104 and C-110) is ongoing with retrieval operations forecasted to start in calendar year 2008. Tank C-106 was retrieved to a residual waste volume of 470 ft{sup 3} using oxalic acid dissolution and modified sluicing. An Appendix H exception request for Tank C-106 is undergoing review. Tank C-103 was retrieved to a residual volume of 351 ft{sup 3} using a modified sluicing technology. This approach was successful at reaching the TPA limits for this tank of less than 360 ft{sup 3}and the limits of the technology. Tanks C-201, C-202, C-203, and C-204 are smaller (55,000 gallon) tanks and waste removal was completed in accordance with HFFACO requirements using a vacuum retrieval system. Residual waste volumes in each of these four tanks were less than 25 ft{sup 3}. Tank S-112 retrieval was completed February 28, 2007, meeting the TPA Limits of less than

  20. Peanut varieties: potential for fuel oil

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hammons, R.O.

    1981-01-01

    Research is beginning in farm crushing of peanuts into fuel oil, the high-protein residue being used as livestock feed. Thirty peanut genotypes were investigated for oil and protein yields in field trials in Georgia. For 11 varieties in an irrigated test, mean oil contents (dry base) were in the 49.7-52.7% range, and the level of protein was in the 22.60-26.70% range. Wider variations in oil and protein contents were found in 19 other genotypes selected for possible use as an oil crop. Breeding for high oil yield has not been practiced in US peanut breeding programs. Convergent improvement to attain higher levels of oil content, shell-out percentage, and stable yield will require 6-10 generations of crossing, backcrossing, selection, and testing.

  1. Turning the Corner on Hanford Tank Waste Cleanup-From Safe Storage to Closure

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boston, H. L.; Cruz, E. J.; Coleman, S. J.

    2002-02-25

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of River Protection (ORP) is leading the River Protection Project (RPP) which is responsible for the disposition of 204,000 cubic meters (54 million gallons) of high-level radioactive waste that have accumulated in large underground tanks at the Hanford Site since 1944. ORP continues to make good progress on improving the capability to treat Hanford tank waste. Design of the waste vitrification facilities is proceeding well and construction will begin within the next year. Progress is also being made in reducing risk to the worker and the environment from the waste currently stored in the tank farms. Removal of liquids from single-shell tanks (SSTs) is on schedule and we will begin removing solids (salt cake) from a tank (241-U-107) in 2002. There is a sound technical foundation for the waste vitrification facilities. These initial facilities will be capable of treating (vitrifying) the bulk of Hanford tank waste and are the corners tone of the clean-up strategy. ORP recognizes that as the near-term work is performed, it is vital that there be an equally strong and defensible plan for completing the mission. ORP is proceeding on a three-pronged approach for moving the mission forward. First, ORP will continue to work aggressively to complete the waste vitrification facilities. ORP intends to provide the most capable and robust facilities to maximize the amount of waste treated by these initial facilities by 2028 (regulatory commitment for completion of waste treatment). Second, and in parallel with completing the waste vitrification facilities, ORP is beginning to consider how best to match the hazard of the waste to the disposal strategy. The final piece of our strategy is to continue to move forward with actions to reduce risk in the tank farms and complete cleanup.

  2. Tanks 18 And 19-F Structural Flowable Grout Fill Material Evaluation And Recommendations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Langton, C. A.; Stefanko, D. B.

    2013-04-23

    Cementitious grout will be used to close Tanks 18-F and 19-F. The functions of the grout are to: 1) physically stabilize the final landfill by filling the empty volume in the tanks with a non-compressible material; 2) provide a barrier for inadvertent intrusion into the tank; 3) reduce contaminant mobility by a) limiting the hydraulic conductivity of the closed tank and b) reducing contact between the residual waste and infiltrating water; and 4) providing an alkaline, chemically reducing environment in the closed tank to control speciation and solubility of selected radionuclides. The objective of this work was to identify a single (all-in-one) grout to stabilize and isolate the residual radionuclides in the tank, provide structural stability of the closed tank and serve as an inadvertent intruder barrier. This work was requested by V. A. Chander, High Level Waste (HLW) Tank Engineering, in HLW-TTR-2011-008. The complete task scope is provided in the Task Technical and QA Plan, SRNL-RP-2011-00587 Revision 0. The specific objectives of this task were to: 1) Identify new admixtures and dosages for formulating a zero bleed flowable tank fill material selected by HLW Tank Closure Project personnel based on earlier tank fill studies performed in 2007. The chemical admixtures used for adjusting the flow properties needed to be updated because the original admixture products are no longer available. Also, the sources of cement and fly ash have changed, and Portland cements currently available contain up to 5 wt. % limestone (calcium carbonate). 2) Prepare and evaluate the placement, compressive strength, and thermal properties of the selected formulation with new admixture dosages. 3) Identify opportunities for improving the mix selected by HLW Closure Project personnel and prepare and evaluate two potentially improved zero bleed flowable fill design concepts; one based on the reactor fill grout and the other based on a shrinkage compensating flowable fill mix design. 4) Prepare samples for hydraulic property measurements for comparison to the values in the F and H- Tank Farm Performance Assessments (PAs). 5) Identify a grout mix for the Tanks 18-F and 19-F Grout Procurement Specification [Forty, 2011 a, b, c]. Results for two flowable zero bleed structural fill concepts containing 3/8 inch gravel (70070 Series and LP#8 Series) and a sand only mix (SO Series) are provided in this report. Tank Farm Engineering and SRNL Project Management selected the 70070 mix as the base case for inclusion in Revision 0 of the Tanks 18-F and 19-F grout procurement specification [Forty 2011 a] and requested admixture recommendations and property confirmation for this formulation [Forty, 2011 b]. Lower cementitious paste mixes were formulated because the 70070 mix is over designed with respect to strength and generates more heat from hydration reactions than is desirable for mass pour application. Work was also initiated on a modification of the recommended mix which included shrinkage compensation to mitigate fast pathways caused by shrinkage cracking and poor physical bonding to the tank and ancillary equipment. Testing of this option was postponed to FY12. Mix, LP#8-16 is recommended for inclusion in the specification for furnishing and delivering tank closure grout for Tanks 18-F and 19-F [Forty, 2011 c]. A shrinkage compensating variation of this mix, LP#16C, has not been fully developed and characterized at this time.

  3. Experimental Determination and Thermodynamic Modeling of Electrical Conductivity of SRS Waste Tank Supernate

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pike, J.; Reboul, S.

    2015-06-01

    SRS High Level Waste Tank Farm personnel rely on conductivity probes for detection of incipient overflow conditions in waste tanks. Minimal information is available concerning the sensitivity that must be achieved such that that liquid detection is assured. Overly sensitive electronics results in numerous nuisance alarms for these safety-related instruments. In order to determine the minimum sensitivity required of the probe, Tank Farm Engineering personnel need adequate conductivity data to improve the existing designs. Little or no measurements of liquid waste conductivity exist; however, the liquid phase of the waste consists of inorganic electrolytes for which the conductivity may be calculated. Savannah River Remediation (SRR) Tank Farm Facility Engineering requested SRNL to determine the conductivity of the supernate resident in SRS waste Tank 40 experimentally as well as computationally. In addition, SRNL was requested to develop a correlation, if possible, that would be generally applicable to liquid waste resident in SRS waste tanks. A waste sample from Tank 40 was analyzed for composition and electrical conductivity as shown in Table 4-6, Table 4-7, and Table 4-9. The conductivity for undiluted Tank 40 sample was 0.087 S/cm. The accuracy of OLI Analyzer™ was determined using available literature data. Overall, 95% of computed estimates of electrical conductivity are within ±15% of literature values for component concentrations from 0 to 15 M and temperatures from 0 to 125 °C. Though the computational results are generally in good agreement with the measured data, a small portion of literature data deviates as much as ±76%. A simplified model was created that can be used readily to estimate electrical conductivity of waste solution in computer spreadsheets. The variability of this simplified approach deviates up to 140% from measured values. Generally, this model can be applied to estimate the conductivity within a factor of two. The comparison of the simplified model to pure component literature data suggests that the simplified model will tend to under estimate the electrical conductivity. Comparison of the computed Tank 40 conductivity with the measured conductivity shows good agreement within the range of deviation identified based on pure component literature data.

  4. Category:Wind Farms | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    in category "Wind Farms" The following 5 pages are in this category, out of 5 total. F Foote Creek Rim Wind Farm M Mountain Wind R Rock River LLC Wind Farm Rolling Hills Wind...

  5. Nobles Wind Farm II | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Farm II Jump to: navigation, search Name Nobles Wind Farm II Facility Nobles Wind Farm II Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner...

  6. Desert Sky Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Sky Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Desert Sky Wind Farm Facility Desert Sky Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service...

  7. Rim Rock Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Rim Rock Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Rim Rock Wind Farm Facility Rim Rock Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service...

  8. Broken Bow Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Broken Bow Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Broken Bow Wind Farm Facility Broken Bow Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In...

  9. Moe Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Moe Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Moe Wind Farm Facility Moe Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Developer Two...

  10. Lost Creek Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Lost Creek Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Lost Creek Wind Farm Facility Lost Creek Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In...

  11. JJN Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    JJN Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name JJN Wind Farm Facility JJN Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner JJNWind...

  12. Flat Ridge Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Flat Ridge Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Flat Ridge Wind Farm Facility Flat Ridge Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In...

  13. Red Hills Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Hills Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Red Hills Wind Farm Facility Red Hills Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service...

  14. We Energy Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    We Energy Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name We Energy Wind Farm Facility We Energy Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In...

  15. SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY AND X-RAY DIFFRACTION ANALYSIS OF TANK 18 SAMPLES

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hay, M.; O'Rourke, P.; Ajo, H.

    2012-03-08

    The F-Area Tank Farm (FTF) Performance Assessment (PA) utilizes waste speciation in the waste release model used in the FTF fate and transport modeling. The waste release modeling associated with the residual plutonium in Tank 18 has been identified as a primary contributor to the Tank 18 dose uncertainty. In order to reduce the uncertainty related to plutonium in Tank 18, a better understanding of the plutonium speciation in the Tank 18 waste (including the oxidation state and stoichiometry) is desired. Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) utilized Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) and X-ray Diffraction (XRD) to analyze Tank 18 samples to provide information on the speciation of plutonium in the waste material. XRD analysis of the Tank 18 samples did not identify any plutonium mineral phases in the samples. These indicates the crystalline mineral phases of plutonium are below the detection limits of the XRD method or that the plutonium phase(s) lack long range order and are present as amorphous or microcrystalline solids. SEM analysis of the Tank 18 samples did locate particles containing plutonium. The plutonium was found as small particles, usually <1 {micro}m but ranging up to several micrometers in diameter, associated with particles of an iron matrix and at low concentration in other elemental matrices. This suggests the plutonium has an affinity for the iron matrix. Qualitatively, the particles of plutonium found in the SEM analysis do not appear to account for all of the plutonium in the sample based on concentrations determined from the chemical analysis of the Tank 18 samples. This suggests that plutonium is also distributed throughout the solids in low concentrations.

  16. TANKS 18 AND 19-F EQUIPMENT GROUT FILL MATERIAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stefanko, D.; Langton, C.

    2011-12-15

    The United States Department of Energy (US DOE) intends to remove Tanks 18-F and 19-F at the Savannah River Site (SRS) from service. The high-level waste (HLW) tanks have been isolated from the F-area Tank Farm (FTF) facilities and will be filled with cementitious grout for the purpose of: (1) physically stabilizing the empty volumes in the tanks, (2) limiting/eliminating vertical pathways from the surface to residual waste on the bottom of the tanks, (3) providing an intruder barrier, and (4) providing an alkaline, chemical reducing environment within the closure boundary to limit solubility of residual radionuclides. Bulk waste and heel waste removal equipment will remain in Tanks 18-F and 19-F when the tanks are closed. This equipment includes: mixer pumps, transfer pumps, transfer jets, equipment support masts, sampling masts and dip tube assemblies. The current Tank 18-F and 19-F closure strategy is to grout the internal void spaces in this equipment to eliminate fast vertical pathways and slow water infiltration to the residual material on the tank floor. This report documents the results of laboratory testing performed to identify a grout formulation for filling the abandoned equipment in Tanks 18-F and 19-F. The objective of this work was to formulate a flowable grout for filling internal voids of equipment that will remain in Tanks 18-F and 19-F during the final closures. This work was requested by V. A. Chander, Tank Farm Closure Engineering, in HLW-TTR-2011-008. The scope for this task is provided in the Task Technical and Quality Assurance Plan (TTQAP), SRNL-RP-2011-00587. The specific objectives of this task were to: (1) Prepare and evaluate the SRR cooling coil grout identified in WSRC-STI-2008-00298 per the TTR for this work. The cooling coil grout is a mixture of BASF MasterFlow{reg_sign} 816 cable grout (67.67 wt. %), Grade 100 ground granulated blast furnace slag (7.52 wt. %) and water (24.81 wt. %); (2) Identify equipment grout placement and performance properties; (3) Design up to 2 additional grout systems for filling the Tank 18-F and Tank 19-F equipment; (4) Prepare samples of candidate grouts and measure fresh properties, thermal properties and cured properties; (5) Recommend a grout for the Tier 1A equipment fill mock up - ADMP 4 foot high mock up, 1 inch and 2 inch pipes; (6) Support procurement of materials for the Tier 1A equipment fill mock up test; (7) Prepare samples of the recommended grout for hydraulic property measurements which can be used for comparison to values used in the F- Tank Farm Performance Assessment (PA); and (8) Document equipment fill grout data and recommendations in a report.

  17. Light Duty Vehicle CNG Tanks

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Duty Vehicle CNG Tanks Dane A. Boysen, PhD Program Director Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy, US DOE dane.boysen@doe.gov Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composite Manufacturing Workshop Advanced Manufacturing Office, EERE, US DOE Arlington VA, January 13, 2014 Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy Can I put my luggage in the trunk? Uh, sorry no Commercial CNG Tanks Tank Type I Type IV Material steel carbon fiber Capacity 12 gallon 12 gallon Weight 490 lb 190 lb Cost $1,700 $4,300 50% less

  18. On-farm anaerobic digester and fuel-alcohol plant. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bengtson, H.H.

    1985-12-01

    An anaerobic-digestion system, coupled with a fuel-alcohol plant, was constructed and set up on a southern Illinois farm as part of an integrated farm-energy system. The digester heating can be done using waste hot water from the alcohol plant and biogas from the digester can be used as fuel for the alcohol production. The anaerobic digestion system is made up of the following components; a hog finishing house with a manure pit; a solids handling pump to feed the manure; and a 13,000-gallon railroad tank car as the main digester vessel and pump to transfer effluent from the digester to a 150,000 gallon storage tank. The digester was operated for sufficient time to demonstrate the use of hot water in an automated digester temperature control system. Sufficient biogas was produced to demonstrate the use of biogas in a converted propane boiler.

  19. Forbes Park Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Forbes Park Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Forbes Park Wind Farm Facility Forbes Park Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service...

  20. Ashtabula II Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    II Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Ashtabula II Wind Farm Facility Ashtabula II Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner...

  1. Marengo II Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    II Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Marengo II Wind Farm Facility Marengo II Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner...

  2. Klondike II Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Klondike II Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Klondike II Wind Farm Facility Klondike II Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service...

  3. Harvest Wind Farm II | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    II Jump to: navigation, search Name Harvest Wind Farm II Facility Harvest Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner John...

  4. Wildcat Ridge Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Wildcat Ridge Wind Farm Facility Wildcat Ridge Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Offshore Wind Facility Status Proposed Owner Midwest Wind Energy Developer Midwest Wind...

  5. Radial Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    search Name Radial Wind Farm Facility Radial Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Offshore Wind Facility Status Proposed Owner Radial Wind Developer Radial Wind Location...

  6. Deepwater Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Name Deepwater Wind Farm Facility Deepwater Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Offshore Wind Facility Status Proposed Owner PSEG Renewable Generation Deepwater Wind...

  7. Nobles Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Nobles Wind Farm Facility Nobles Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner Nobles Cooperative...

  8. Sweetwater 5 Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    5 Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Sweetwater 5 Wind Farm Facility Sweetwater 5 Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner...

  9. Campbell Hill Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Hill Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Campbell Hill Wind Farm Facility Campbell Hill Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service...

  10. Hull Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Hull Wind Farm Facility Hull Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner Hull Municipal Light...

  11. Sky River Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    River Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Sky River Wind Farm Facility Sky River Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner...

  12. Stateline Expansion Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Stateline Expansion Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Stateline Expansion Wind Farm Facility Stateline Expansion Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind...

  13. Simplicity Energy Farms Inc | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Simplicity Energy Farms, Inc. Place: Englewood, Colorado Zip: 80113 Sector: Solar, Wind energy Product: Colorado-headquartered developer of farm-based solar and wind energy...

  14. Camp Springs Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Camp Springs Wind Farm Facility Camp Springs Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner...

  15. Hot Springs Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Hot Springs Wind Farm Facility Hot Springs Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner Idaho...

  16. Pebble Springs Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Springs Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Pebble Springs Wind Farm Facility Pebble Springs Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In...

  17. Tholen & Petersen Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Tholen & Petersen Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Tholen & Petersen Wind Farm Facility Tholen & Petersen Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility...

  18. Gulf Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Gulf Wind Farm Facility Gulf Wind Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner Pattern Energy...

  19. Stetson Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Stetson Wind Farm Facility Stetson Wind Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner First Wind...

  20. Zirbel Wind Farm | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    to: navigation, search Name Zirbel Wind Farm Facility Zirbel Wind Farm (Glenmore Wind Energy Facility) Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In...