Powered by Deep Web Technologies
Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank closure alternative" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


1

Hanford tanks initiative alternatives generation and analysis plan for AX tank farm closure basis  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of this document is: (1) to review the HTI Mission Analysis and related documents to determine their suitability for use in developing performance measures for AX Tank Farm closure, (2) to determine the completeness and representativeness of selected alternative closure scenarios, (3) to determine the completeness of current plans for development of tank end-state criteria, and (4) to analyze the activities that are necessary and sufficient to recommend the end-state criteria and performance measures for the AX Tank Farm and recommend activities not currently planned to support establishment of its end-state criteria.

Schaus, P.S., Westinghouse Hanford, Richland, WA

1997-10-22T23:59:59.000Z

2

Tank Closure  

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

Closure Closure Sherri Ross Waste Removal and Tank Closure Waste Disposition Project Programs Division Savannah River Operations Office Presentation to the DOE HLW Corporate Board 2  Overview and Status of SRS Tank Closure Program  Issues/Challenges  Communications  Schedule Performance  Ceasing Waste Removal  Compliance with SC Water Protection Standards  Questions? Topics 3 Overview 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 Facility Agreement (FFA)  DOE, SCDHEC, and EPA  51 Tanks  24 old style tanks (Types I, II and IV)  Do not have full secondary containment  FFA commitments to close by 2022  2 closed in 1997

3

Tank closure reducing grout  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A reducing grout has been developed for closing high level waste tanks at the Savannah River Site in Aiken, South Carolina. The grout has a low redox potential, which minimizes the mobility of Sr{sup 90}, the radionuclide with the highest dose potential after closure. The grout also has a high pH which reduces the solubility of the plutonium isotopes. The grout has a high compressive strength and low permeability, which enhances its ability to limit the migration of contaminants after closure. The grout was designed and tested by Construction Technology Laboratories, Inc. Placement methods were developed by the Savannah River Site personnel.

Caldwell, T.B.

1997-04-18T23:59:59.000Z

4

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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...

5

EIS-0303: Savannah River Site High-Level Waste Tank Closure | Department of  

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

03: Savannah River Site High-Level Waste Tank Closure 03: Savannah River Site High-Level Waste Tank Closure EIS-0303: Savannah River Site High-Level Waste Tank Closure SUMMARY This EIS evaluates alternatives for closing 49 high-level radioactive waste tanks and associated equipment such as evaporator systems, transfer pipelines, diversion boxes, and pump pits. DOE selected the preferred alternative identified in the Final EIS, Stabilize Tanks-Fill with Grout, to guide development and implementation of closure of the high-level waste tanks and associated equipment at the Savannah River Site. PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITIES None available at this time. DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD March 5, 2012 EIS-0303: Supplement Analysis Savannah River Site High-Level Waste Tank Closure, SC July 8, 2011 EIS-0303: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement

6

RECENT PROGRESS IN DOE WASTE TANK CLOSURE  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The USDOE complex currently has over 330 underground storage tanks that have been used to process and store radioactive waste generated from the production of weapons materials. These tanks contain over 380 million liters of high-level and low-level radioactive waste. The waste consists of radioactively contaminated sludge, supernate, salt cake or calcine. Most of the waste exists at four USDOE locations, the Hanford Site, the Savannah River Site, the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center and the West Valley Demonstration Project. A summary of the DOE tank closure activities was first issued in 2001. Since then, regulatory changes have taken place that affect some of the sites and considerable progress has been made in closing tanks. This paper presents an overview of the current regulatory changes and drivers and a summary of the progress in tank closures at the various sites over the intervening six years. A number of areas are addressed including closure strategies, characterization of bulk waste and residual heel material, waste removal technologies for bulk waste, heel residuals and annuli, tank fill materials, closure system modeling and performance assessment programs, lessons learned, and external reviews.

Langton, C

2008-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

7

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

for Retrieval, Treatment, and Disposal of Tank Waste and Closure of Single-Shell Tanks at the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington" and "Environmental Impact Statement for the...

8

Engineering study of tank fill options for landfill closure  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

To prepare single-shell tanks for closure, it will be necessary to piece some type of load- bearing fill material inside the tanks to support the domes. Provision of internal support permits the simplifying assumption that the combined weight of the dome, the existing operational soil cover, and the surface barrier will eventually transfer to and be carried by the fill. This engineering study provides descriptions and evaluations of four alternative concepts for fitting and stabilizing nominally empty SSTs with fill materials. For this study it is assumed that 99 percent (or more) of tank wastes will be retrieved before closure is undertaken. The alternatives are: Gravel: tanks would be fitted with crushed aggregate using a rotating stinger apparatus installed in the central riser; Grout: tanks would be fitted with a pumpable, ex-situ mixed grout formulation; Hybrid: tanks would be fitted first with coarse aggregate, then with grout, producing a pre-placed aggregate concrete material; or Concrete: tank. would be filled with a highly-flowable, ex-situ mixed concrete formulation.

Skelly, W.A.

1996-09-27T23:59:59.000Z

9

Permanent Closure of the TAN-664 Underground Storage Tank  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This closure package documents the site assessment and permanent closure of the TAN-664 gasoline underground storage tank in accordance with the regulatory requirements established in 40 CFR 280.71, 'Technical Standards and Corrective Action Requirements for Owners and Operators of Underground Storage Tanks: Out-of-Service UST Systems and Closure.'

Bradley K. Griffith

2011-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

10

SRS Reaches Significant Milestone with Waste Tank Closure  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The Savannah River Site (SRS) achieved a significant milestone with the operational closure of tanks 18 and 19, meeting a federal agreement before the December 31, 2012, deadline.

11

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

V RECHARGE SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS In the Draft Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington (Draft TC & WM EIS),...

12

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

three key areas: 1. Retrieval, treatment, and disposal of waste from 149 single-shell tanks (SSTs) and 28 double-shell tanks (DSTs) and closure of the SST system. In this TC & WM...

13

EIS-0391: Hanford Tank Closure and Waste Management, Richland, Washington |  

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

391: Hanford Tank Closure and Waste Management, Richland, 391: Hanford Tank Closure and Waste Management, Richland, Washington EIS-0391: Hanford Tank Closure and Waste Management, Richland, Washington Summary This EIS evaluates the environmental impacts for the following three key areas: (1) retrieval, treatment, and disposal of waste from 149 single-shell tanks (SSTs) and 28 double-shell tanks and closure of the SST system, (2) decommissioning of the Fast Flux Test Facility, a nuclear test reactor, and (3) disposal of Hanford's waste and other DOE sites' low-level and mixed low-level radioactive waste. Public Comment Opportunities No public comment opportunities available at this time. Documents Available for Download December 13, 2013 EIS-0391: Record of Decision Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for

14

Issuance of the Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental  

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

Issuance of the Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Issuance of the Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement Issuance of the Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement December 5, 2012 - 12:00pm Addthis Media Contacts Carrie Meyer, DOE (509) 376-0810 Carrie_C_Meyer@orp.doe.gov Erika Holmes, Ecology (509) 372-7880 Erika.Holmes@ecy.wa.gov Richland, WA - The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is issuing its Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement Hanford Site, Richland, Washington" (Final TC & WM EIS, DOE/EIS-0391), prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Washington State Department of Ecology are cooperating agencies on this Final EIS, which analyzes

15

Underground storage tank 253-D1U1 Closure Plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report is a closure plan for a diesel fuel tank at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Included are maps of the site, work plans, and personnel information regarding training and qualification.

Mancieri, S.; Giuntoli, N.

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

16

Underground storage tank 511-D1U1 closure plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document contains the closure plan for diesel fuel underground storage tank 511-D1U1 and appendices containing supplemental information such as staff training certification and task summaries. Precision tank test data, a site health and safety plan, and material safety data sheets are also included.

Mancieri, S.; Giuntoli, N.

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

17

Savannah River Site Celebrates Historic Closure of Radioactive Waste Tanks:  

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

Savannah River Site Celebrates Historic Closure of Radioactive Savannah River Site Celebrates Historic Closure of Radioactive Waste Tanks: Senior DOE Officials and South Carolina Congressional Leadership Gather to Commemorate Historic Cleanup Milestone Savannah River Site Celebrates Historic Closure of Radioactive Waste Tanks: Senior DOE Officials and South Carolina Congressional Leadership Gather to Commemorate Historic Cleanup Milestone October 1, 2012 - 12:00pm Addthis U.S. Energy Under Secretary for Nuclear Security Thomas D'Agostino, left, South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control Director Catherine Templeton and U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) unveil a marker to commemorate the closing of waste tanks at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina. U.S. Energy Under Secretary for Nuclear Security Thomas D'Agostino, left,

18

Savannah River Site Celebrates Historic Closure of Radioactive Waste Tanks:  

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

Savannah River Site Celebrates Historic Closure of Radioactive Savannah River Site Celebrates Historic Closure of Radioactive Waste Tanks: Senior DOE Officials and South Carolina Congressional Leadership Gather to Commemorate Historic Cleanup Milestone Savannah River Site Celebrates Historic Closure of Radioactive Waste Tanks: Senior DOE Officials and South Carolina Congressional Leadership Gather to Commemorate Historic Cleanup Milestone October 1, 2012 - 12:00pm Addthis U.S. Energy Under Secretary for Nuclear Security Thomas D'Agostino, left, South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control Director Catherine Templeton and U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) unveil a marker to commemorate the closing of waste tanks at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina. U.S. Energy Under Secretary for Nuclear Security Thomas D'Agostino, left,

19

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

4-165, 4-166, 4-168-4-172, 4-173, 4-174, 4-176- Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington 12-2 4-183, 4-185,...

20

RCRA closure plan for underground storage tank 105-C  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A Reactor Department program for repairing heat exchangers created a low level radioactive waste, which was held in underground storage tank (UST) 105-C, hereafter referred to as the tank. According to Procedures used at the facility, the waste`s pH was adjusted to the 8.0--12.0 range before shipping it to the SRS Waste Management Department. For this reason, area personnel did not anticipate that the waste which is currently contained in the tank would have corrosive hazardous characteristic. However, recent analysis indicates that waste contained in the tank has a pH of greater than 12.5, thereby constituting a hazardous waste. Because the Department of Energy-Savannah River Office (DOE-SR) could not prove that the hazardous waste had been stored in the tank for less than 90 days, the State of South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) alleged that DOE-SR was in violation of the 1976 Code of Laws of South Carolina. As agreed in Settlement Agreement 90-74-SW between the DOE and SCDHEC, this is the required closure plan for Tank 105-C. The purpose of this document is to present SCDHEC with an official plan for closing the underground storage tank. Upon approval by SCDHEC, the schedule for closure will be an enforceable portion of this agreement.

Miles, W.C. Jr.

1990-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank closure alternative" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


21

Savannah River Site High-Level Waste Tank Closure, Final Environmental Impact Statement  

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

TANK FARM DESCRIPTION AND CLOSURE PROCESS TANK FARM DESCRIPTION AND CLOSURE PROCESS DOE/EIS-0303 Tank Farm Description FINAL May 2002 and Closure Process A-iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page A.1 Introduction........................................................................................................................... A-1 A.2 Overview of SRS HLW Management .................................................................................. A-1 A.3 Description of the Tank Farms ............................................................................................. A-4 A.3.1 Tanks........................................................................................................................ A-4 A.3.2 Evaporator Systems .................................................................................................

22

Single-shell tank closure work plan. Revision A  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

In January 1994, the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Conset Order (Tri-Party Agreement) was amended to reflect a revised strategy for remediation of radioactive waste in underground storage tanks. These amendments include milestones for closure of the single-shell tank (SST) operable units, to be initiated by March 2012 and completed by September 2024. This SST-CWP has been prepared to address the principal topical areas identified in Tri-Party Agreement Milestone M-45-06 (i.e., regulatory pathway, operable unit characterization, waste retrieval, technology development, and a strategy for achieving closure). Chapter 2.0 of this SST-CWP provides a brief description of the environmental setting, SST System, the origin and characteristics of SST waste, and ancillary equipment that will be remediated as part of SST operable unit closure. Appendix 2A provides a description of the hydrogeology of the Hanford Site, including information on the unsaturated sediments (vadose zone) beneath the 200 Areas Plateau. Chapter 3.0 provides a discussion of the laws and regulations applicable to closure of the SST farm operable units. Chapter 4.0 provides a summary description of the ongoing characterization activities that best align with the proposed regulatory pathway for closure. Chapter 5.0 describes aspects of the SST waste retrieval program, including retrieval strategy, technology, and sequence, potential tank leakage during retrieval, and considerations of deployment of subsurface barriers. Chapter 6.0 outlines a proposed strategy for closure. Chapter 7.0 provides a summary of the programs underway or planned to develop technologies to support closure. Ca. 325 refs.

NONE

1995-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

23

Underground storage tank 291-D1U1: Closure plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The 291-D1U1 tank system was installed in 1983 on the north side of Building 291. It supplies diesel fuel to the Building 291 emergency generator and air compressor. The emergency generator and air compressor are located southwest and southeast, respectively, of the tank (see Appendix B, Figure 2). The tank system consists of a single-walled, 2,000- gallon, fiberglass tank and a fuel pump system, fill pipe, vent pipe, electrical conduit, and fuel supply and return piping. The area to be excavated is paved with asphalt and concrete. It is not known whether a concrete anchor pad is associated with this tank. Additionally, this closure plan assumes that the diesel tank is below the fill pad. The emergency generator and air compressor for Building 291 and its associated UST, 291-D1U1, are currently in use. The generator and air compressor will be supplied by a temporary above-ground fuel tank prior to the removal of 291-D1U1. An above-ground fuel tank will be installed as a permanent replacement for 291-D1U1. The system was registered with the State Water Resources Control Board on June 27, 1984, as 291-41D and has subsequently been renamed 291-D1U1. Figure 1 (see Appendix B) shows the location of the 291-D1U1 tank system in relation to the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). Figure 2 (see Appendix B) shows the 291-D1U1 tank system in relation to Building 291. Figure 3 (see Appendix B) shows a plan view of the 291-D1U1 tank system.

Mancieri, S.; Giuntoli, N.

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

24

Relationship Between Flowability And Tank Closure Grout Quality  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

After completion of waste removal and chemical cleaning operations, Tanks 5-F and 6-F await final closure. The project will proceed with completing operational closure by stabilizing the tanks with grout. Savannah River Remediation's (SRR) experience with grouting Tanks 18-F and 19-F showed that slump-flow values were correlated with flow/spread inside these tanks. Less mounding was observed when using grouts with higher slump-flow. Therefore, SRNL was requested to evaluate the relationship between flowability and cured properties to determine whether the slump-flow maximum spread of Mix LP#8-16 could be increased from 28 inches to 30 inches without impacting the grout quality. A request was also made to evaluate increasing the drop height from 5 feet to 10 feet with the objective of enhancing the flow inside the tank by imparting more kinetic energy to the placement. Based on a review of the grout property data for Mix LP#8-16 collected from Tank 18-F and 19-F quality control samples, the upper limit for slump-flow measured per ASTM C 1611 can be increased from 28 to 30 inches without affecting grout quality. However, testing should be performed prior to increasing the drop height from 5 to 10 feet or observations should be made during initial filling operations to determine whether segregation occurs as a function of drop heights between 5 and 10 feet. Segregation will negatively impact grout quality. Additionally, increasing the delivery rate of grout into Tanks 5-F and 6-F by using a higher capacity concrete/grout pump will result in better grout spread/flow inside the tanks.

Langton, C. A.; Stefanko, D. B.; Hay, M. S.

2012-10-08T23:59:59.000Z

25

Permanent Closure of MFC Biodiesel Underground Storage Tank 99ANL00013  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This closure package documents the site assessment and permanent closure of the Materials and Fuels Complex biodiesel underground storage tank 99ANL00013 in accordance with the regulatory requirements established in 40 CFR 280.71, Technical Standards and Corrective Action Requirements for Owners and Operators of Underground Storage Tanks: Out-of-Service UST Systems and Closure.

Kerry L. Nisson

2012-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

26

Joint Tank Closure News Release Final.docx  

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

RIVER OPERATIONS OFFICE AIKEN, SC 29802 RIVER OPERATIONS OFFICE AIKEN, SC 29802 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE September 13, 2012 NEWS MEDIA CONTACTS: Amy Caver, (803) 952-7213 Dean Campbell, (803) 208-8270 Amy.Caver@srs.gov Dean.Campbell@srs.gov Robert Pope, (404) 562-8538 Mark Plowden, (803) 898-9518 pope.robert@epa.gov plowdemw@dhec.sc.gov Savannah River Site Reaches Significant Milestone with Waste Tank Closure AIKEN, S.C. - The Savannah River Site (SRS) achieved a significant milestone this week with the

27

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Promulgation of Renewable Fuel Storage Tank  

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

Promulgation of Promulgation of Renewable Fuel Storage Tank Regulations to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Promulgation of Renewable Fuel Storage Tank Regulations on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Promulgation of Renewable Fuel Storage Tank Regulations on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Promulgation of Renewable Fuel Storage Tank Regulations on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Promulgation of Renewable Fuel Storage Tank Regulations on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Promulgation of Renewable Fuel Storage Tank Regulations on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Promulgation of Renewable Fuel Storage Tank Regulations on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal

28

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Jolly, R

2009-01-06T23:59:59.000Z

29

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Filling CNG Fuel Tanks  

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

Filling CNG Fuel Tanks Filling CNG Fuel Tanks to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Filling CNG Fuel Tanks on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Filling CNG Fuel Tanks on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Filling CNG Fuel Tanks on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Filling CNG Fuel Tanks on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Filling CNG Fuel Tanks on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Filling CNG Fuel Tanks on AddThis.com... More in this section... Natural Gas Basics Benefits & Considerations Stations Vehicles Availability Conversions Emissions Maintenance & Safety Fuel System & Cylinders Fuel Safety Traffic Accident Filling CNG Tanks Laws & Incentives Filling CNG Fuel Tanks Unlike liquid fuel, which consistently holds about the same volume of fuel

30

Grouting Operation to Lead to First SRS Waste Tank Closures Since 1997 |  

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

Grouting Operation to Lead to First SRS Waste Tank Closures Since Grouting Operation to Lead to First SRS Waste Tank Closures Since 1997 Grouting Operation to Lead to First SRS Waste Tank Closures Since 1997 April 1, 2012 - 12:00pm Addthis DOE and Savannah River Remediation team members gather in front of the first cement truck containing grout for Tank 18 at the Savannah River Site. DOE and Savannah River Remediation team members gather in front of the first cement truck containing grout for Tank 18 at the Savannah River Site. A specially formulated grout was poured into a hopper and transferred through lines to Tank 19. A specially formulated grout was poured into a hopper and transferred through lines to Tank 19. The first cement truck with the specially formulated grout arrives at the Savannah River Site earlier this month.

31

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

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

DOE Clears Way for Closure of Emptied Waste Tanks at Idaho National DOE 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 permanently close the 15 waste storage tanks at the Idaho National Laboratory near Arco, Idaho. DOE will begin grouting the first 11 cleaned and emptied tanks at Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC) and plans to complete all 15 tanks by December 2012. Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environmental Management James Rispoli

32

AN OVERVIEW COMPARISON OF TANK CLOSURE ACTIVITIES AT CERTAIN DOE SITES  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This paper presents a summary-level comparison of the similarities and differences of tank closure programs at the four primary radioactive waste tank sites in the US Department of Energy (DOE) complex. The sites are Hanford, Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR), and the Savannah River Site (SRS). The depth of our understanding of the closure programs varies with the amount of detailed information each of the four sites has provided to date. This paper was prepared using the best available information, including direct communications with key tank closure personnel at each of the sites. Many of the current schedules are under review for possible acceleration.

Sams, T. L.; Luke, J. J.; McClure, L. W.

2003-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

33

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Propane Tank Overfill Safety Advisory  

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

Publications » Technology Bulletins Publications » Technology Bulletins Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to Alternative Fuels Data Center: Propane Tank Overfill Safety Advisory to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Propane Tank Overfill Safety Advisory on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Propane Tank Overfill Safety Advisory on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Propane Tank Overfill Safety Advisory on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Propane Tank Overfill Safety Advisory on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Propane Tank Overfill Safety Advisory on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Propane Tank Overfill Safety Advisory on AddThis.com... Propane Tank Overfill Safety Advisory

34

STATUS OF CHEMICAL CLEANING OF WASTE TANKS AT THE SAVANNAH RIVER SITE F TANK FARM CLOSURE PROJECT - 9114  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Chemical Cleaning is currently in progress for Tanks 5 and 6 at the Savannah River Site. The Chemical Cleaning process is being utilized to remove the residual waste heel remaining after completion of Mechanical Sludge Removal. This work is required to prepare the tanks for closure. Tanks 5 and 6 are 1950s vintage carbon steel waste tanks that do not meet current containment standards. These tanks are 22.9 meters (75 feet) in diameter, 7.5 meters (24.5 feet) in height, and have a capacity of 2.84E+6 liters (750,000 gallons). Chemical Cleaning adds 8 wt % oxalic acid to the carbon steel tank to dissolve the remaining sludge heel. The resulting acidic waste solution is transferred to Tank 7 where it is pH adjusted to minimize corrosion of the carbon steel tank. The Chemical Cleaning flowsheet includes multiple strikes of acid in each tank. Acid is delivered by tanker truck and is added to the tanks through a hose assembly connected to a pipe penetration through the tank top. The flowsheet also includes spray washing with acid and water. This paper includes an overview of the configuration required for Chemical Cleaning, the planned flowsheet, and an overview of technical concerns associated with the process. In addition, the current status of the Chemical Cleaning process in Tanks 5 and 6, lessons learned from the execution of the process, and the path forward for completion of cleaning in Tanks 5 and 6 will also be discussed.

Thaxton, D; Geoff Clendenen, G; Willie Gordon, W; Samuel Fink, S; Michael Poirier, M

2008-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

35

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

which includes disposition of the SSTs, ancillary equipment, and soils. The SST (149 tanks) and DST (28 tanks) systems contain both hazardous and radioactive waste (mixed...

36

Microsoft PowerPoint - 3-03_pt 1_Davis_Waste Removal & Tank Closures.ppt  

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

Waste Removal & Tank Closure Waste Removal & Tank Closure New Technologies Neil Davis Deputy Program Manager Waste Removal & Tank Closure November 16, 2010 Print Close 2 * SRR baseline is to use 2 mechanical and 1 chemical technology on each tank - Large slurry mixer pumps - Hydrolancing/Robotic vacuum system - Oxalic acid * Technologies in hand * Incremental improvements to meet evolving mission needs and to have a defendable Maximum Extent Practical basis Point of View Print Close 3 Program Status Bulk Waste Removal Mechanical Heel Removal Chemical Cleaning Annulus Cleaning Isolation/Final Sampling Grout Tank Cooling Coil Flushing Tanks 4, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, & 15 in progress 2 tanks closed 15 more in progress Tank 8 being prepped for chemical cleaning Tanks 5, 6 & 16 in progress Tanks 5&6 in progress

37

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

provides information on the basis for the chemical and radionuclide composition in the tanks, as well as equipment, soils, and waste forms. These data, along with information...

38

Secretary's Honor Awards Recognize EM's Tank Cleanup, Closure...  

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

honored EM for achievements in its work to close high-level radioactive waste tanks as part of the annual Secretarial Honor Awards Ceremony Monday. The Honor Awards...

39

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

due to releases of radionuclides and chemicals from the high-level radioactive waste tanks, Fast Flux Test Facility decommissioning, and waste management activities over long...

40

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.

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank closure alternative" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


41

Completion of the Operational Closure of Tank 18F and Tank 19F at the Savannah River Site by Grouting - 13236  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Radioactive waste is stored in underground waste tanks at the Savannah River Site (SRS). The low-level fraction of the waste is immobilized in a grout waste form, and the high level fraction is disposed of in a glass waste form. Once the waste is removed, the tanks are prepared for closure. Operational closure of the tanks consists of filling with grout for the purpose of chemically stabilizing residual material, filling the tank void space for long-term structural stability, and discouraging future intrusion. Two of the old-style single-shell tanks at the SRS have received regulatory approval confirming waste removal had been completed, and have been stabilized with grout as part of completing operational closure and removal from service. Consistent with the regulatory framework, two types of grout were used for the filling of Tanks 18F and 19F. Reducing grout was used to fill the entire volume of Tanks 18F and 19F (bulk fill grout) and a more flowable grout was used to fill equipment that was left in the tank (equipment fill grout). The reducing grout was added to the tanks using portable grout pumps filled from concrete trucks, and delivered the grout through slick lines to the center riser of each tank. Filling of the two tanks has been completed, and all equipment has been filled. The final capping of riser penetrations brings the operation closure of Tanks 18F and 19F to completion. (authors)

Tisler, Andrew J. [Savannah River Remediation, LLC, Aiken, SC 29808 (United States)] [Savannah River Remediation, LLC, Aiken, SC 29808 (United States)

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

42

Remedial Alternative Selection for the F Area Tank Farm,  

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

Notice of Availability: Notice of Availability: Explanation of Significant Difference for Incorporating Tanks 18 and 19 into Revision 1 Interim Record Of Decision Remedial Alternative Selection for the F Area Tank Farm, Waste Tanks 17 and 20 at the Savannah River Site The Explanation of Significant Difference for Incorporating Tanks 18 and 19 into Revision 1 Interim Record of Decision Remedial Alternative Selection for the F Area Tank Farm, (hereafter referred to as the Tank 18 and 19 ESD) is being issued by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the lead agency for the Savannah River Site (SRS), with concurrence by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Region 4 (EPA), and South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC). The Tank 18 and 19 ESD modifies

43

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

Information on the basis for the chemical and radionuclide composition (1) in the tanks, as well as on equipment and soils and in waste forms; (2) for the decommissioning of...

44

Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact...  

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

and treat the waste remaining in 177 underground storage tanks; store the high-level radioactive waste (HLW); dispose of the low-activity waste (LAW) at the Hanford Site...

45

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Jolly, R; Bruce Martin, B

2008-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

46

Record of Decision Issued for the Hanford Tank Closure and Waste Management EIS  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The U.S. Department of Energy has issued the first in a series of Records of Decision (RODs) pursuant to the Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington (TC&WM EIS, DOE/EIS-0391, December 2012).

47

Idaho HWMA/RCRA Closure Plan for Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tanks WM-182 and WM-183 - Rev. 2  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document presents the plan for the closure of the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility tanks WM-182 and WM-183 in accordance with Idaho Hazardous Waste Management Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act interim status closure requirements. Closure of these two tanks is the first in a series of closures leading to the final closure of the eleven 300,000-gal tanks in the Tank Farm Facility. As such, closure of tanks WM-182 and WM-183 will serve as a proof-of-process demonstration of the waste removal, decontamination, and sampling techniques for the closure of the remaining Tank Farm Facility tanks. Such an approach is required because of the complexity and uniqueness of the Tank Farm Facility closure. This plan describes the closure units, objectives, and compliance strategy as well as the operational history and current status of the tanks. Decontamination, closure activities, and sampling and analysis will be performed with the goal of achieving clean closure of the tanks. Coordination with other regulatory requirements, such as U.S. Department of Energy closure requirements, is also discussed.

Evans, Susan Kay; unknown

2000-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

48

DOE Identifies its Preferred Alternative for Certain Hanford...  

Energy Savers [EERE]

its preferred alternative for wastes contained in underground radioactive waste storage tanks evaluated in the Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact...

49

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

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

2001-09-28T23:59:59.000Z

50

EBR-II Primary Tank Wash-Water Alternatives Evaluation  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The EBR-II reactor at Idaho National Laboratory was a liquid sodium metal cooled reactor that operated for 30 years. It was shut down in 1994; the fuel was removed by 1996; and the bulk of sodium metal coolant was removed from the reactor by 2001. Approximately 1100 kg of residual sodium remained in the primary system after draining the bulk sodium. To stabilize the remaining sodium, both the primary and secondary systems were treated with a purge of moist carbon dioxide. Most of the residual sodium reacted with the carbon dioxide and water vapor to form a passivation layer of primarily sodium bicarbonate. The passivation treatment was stopped in 2005 and the primary system is maintained under a blanket of dry carbon dioxide. Approximately 670 kg of sodium metal remains in the primary system in locations that were inaccessible to passivation treatment or in pools of sodium that were too deep for complete penetration of the passivation treatment. The EBR-II reactor was permitted by the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) in 2002 under a RCRA permit that requires removal of all remaining sodium in the primary and secondary systems by 2022. The proposed baseline closure method would remove the large components from the primary tank, fill the primary system with water, react the remaining sodium with the water and dissolve the reaction products in the wash water. This method would generate a minimum of 100,000 gallons of caustic, liquid, low level radioactive, hazardous waste water that must be disposed of in a permitted facility. On February 19-20, 2008, a workshop was held in Idaho Falls, Idaho, to look at alternatives that could meet the RCRA permit clean closure requirements and minimize the quantity of hazardous waste generated by the cleanup process. The workshop convened a panel of national and international sodium cleanup specialists, subject matter experts from the INL, and the EBR-II Wash Water Project team that organized the workshop. The workshop was conducted by a trained facilitator using Value Engineering techniques to elicit the most technically sound solutions from the workshop participants. The path forward includes developing the OBA into a well engineered solution for achieving RCRA clean closure of the EBR-II Primary Reactor Tank system. Several high level tasks are also part of the path forward such as reassigning responsibility of the cleanup project to a dedicated project team that is funded by the DOE Office of Environmental Management, and making it a priority so that adequate funding is available to complete the project. Based on the experience of the sodium cleanup specialists, negotiations with the DEQ will be necessary to determine a risk-based de minimus quantity for acceptable amount of sodium that can be left in the reactor systems after cleanup has been completed.

Demmer, R. L.; Heintzelman, J. B.; Merservey, R. H.; Squires, L. N.

2008-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

51

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Thaxton, D; Timothy Baughman, T

2008-01-16T23:59:59.000Z

52

CLOSURE OF HLW TANKS PHASE 2 FULL SCALE COOLING COILS GROUT FILL DEMONSTATIONS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report documents the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) support for the Tank Closure and Technology Development (TCTD) group's strategy for closing high level radioactive waste (HLW) tanks at the Savannah River Site (SRS). Specifically, this task addresses the ability to successfully fill intact cooling coils, presently within the HLW tanks, with grout that satisfies the fresh and cured grout requirements [1] under simulated field conditions. The overall task was divided into two phases. The first phase was the development of a grout formulation that satisfies the processing requirements for filling the HLW tank cooling coils [5]. The second phase of the task, which is documented in this report, was the filling of full scale cooling coils under simulated field conditions using the grout formulation developed in the first phase. SRS Type I tank cooling coil assembly design drawings and pressure drop calculations were provided by the Liquid Waste (LW) customer to be used as the basis for configuring the test assemblies. The current concept for closing tanks equipped with internal cooling coils is to pump grout into the coils to inhibit pathways for infiltrating water. Access to the cooling coil assemblies is through the existing supply/return manifold headers located on top of the Type I tanks. The objectives for the second phase of the testing, as stated in the Task Technical and Quality Assurance plan (TTQAP) [2], were to: (1) Perform a demonstration test to assess cooling coil grout performance in simulated field conditions, and (2) Measure relevant properties of samples prepared under simulated field conditions. SRNL led the actual work of designing, fabricating and filling two full-scale cooling coil assemblies which were performed at Clemson Engineering Technologies Laboratory (CETL) using the South Carolina University Research and Education Foundation (SCUREF) program. A statement of work (SOW) was issued to CETL [6] to perform this work.

Hansen, E; Alex Cozzi, A

2008-06-19T23:59:59.000Z

53

Basis for Section 3116 Determination for Closure of F-Tank Farm at the Savannah River Site  

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

SRS-WD-2012-001 SRS-WD-2012-001 Revision 0 Basis for Section 3116 Determination for Closure of F-Tank Farm at the Savannah River Site March 2012 Basis for Section 3116 Determination DOE/SRS-WD-2012-001 for Closure of F-Tank Farm Revision 0 at the Savannah River Site March 2012 Page ii REVISION SUMMARY REV. # DESCRIPTION DATE OF ISSUE 0 Initial Issue March 2012 Basis for Section 3116 Determination DOE/SRS-WD-2012-001 for Closure of F-Tank Farm Revision 0 at the Savannah River Site March 2012 Page iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page REVISION SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................. ii LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................................ vi

54

Draft Basis for Section 3116 Determination for Closure of F-Tank Farm at the Savannah River Site.  

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

SRS-WD-2010-001 SRS-WD-2010-001 Revision 0 Draft Basis for Section 3116 Determination for Closure of F-Tank Farm at the Savannah River Site September 30, 2010 Draft Basis for Section 3116 Determination DOE/SRS-WD-2010-001 for Closure of F-Tank Farm Revision 0 at the Savannah River Site September 30, 2010 Page ii REVISION SUMMARY REV. # DESCRIPTION DATE OF ISSUE 0 Initial Issue 09/30/2010 Draft Basis for Section 3116 Determination DOE/SRS-WD-2010-001 for Closure of F-Tank Farm Revision 0 at the Savannah River Site September 30, 2010 Page iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page REVISION SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................. ii LIST OF TABLES .........................................................................................................................................

55

Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 124, Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada with Errata Sheet, Revision 0  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Closure Report (CR) presents information supporting closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 124, Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site (NTS), Nevada. This report complies with the requirements of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) that was agreed to by the State of Nevada; U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Environmental Management; U.S. Department of Defense; and DOE, Legacy Management (FFACO, 1996; as amended January 2007). This CR provides documentation and justification for the closure of CAU 124 without further corrective action. This justification is based on process knowledge and the results of the investigative activities conducted in accordance with the Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan for Corrective Action Unit 124: Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada (NNSA/NSO, 2007). The SAFER Plan provides information relating to site history as well as the scope and planning of the investigation. Therefore, this information will not be repeated in this CR.

Alfred Wickline

2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

56

Request for closure, underground storage tank 2130-U: Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Facility ID {number_sign}0-010117  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document presents a summary of the activities and analytical data related to the removal of underground storage tank (UST) 2130-U, previously located at the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant. Removal of this tank was conducted in accordance with Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) regulation 1200-1-15 (1992). A completed copy of the State of Tennessee, Division of Underground Storage Tanks, Permanent Closure Report Form is included as Appendix A of this document Based on the information and data presented herein, the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant requests permanent closure for the tank 2130-U site.

Not Available

1993-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

57

Quality Assurance Project Plan for the HWMA/RCRA Closure Certification of the TRA-731 Caustic and Acid Storage Tank System - 1997 Notice of Violation Consent Order  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Quality Assurance Project Plan for the HWMA/RCRA Closure Certification of the TRA- 731 Caustic and Acid Storage Tank System is one of two documents that comprise the Sampling and Analysis Plan for the HWMA/RCRA closure certification of the TRA-731 caustic and acid storage tank system at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory. This plan, which provides information about the project description, project organization, and quality assurance and quality control procedures, is to be used in conjunction with the Field Sampling Plan for the HWMA/RCRA Closure Certification of the TRA-731 Caustic and Acid Storage Tank System. This Quality Assurance Project Plan specifies the procedures for obtaining the data of known quality required by the closure activities for the TRA-731 caustic and acid storage tank system.

Evans, S.K.

2002-01-31T23:59:59.000Z

58

Quality Assurance Project Plan for the HWMA/RCRA Closure Certification of the TRA-731 Caustic and Acid Storage Tank System - 1997 Notice of Violation Consent Order  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Quality Assurance Project Plan for the HWMA/RCRA Closure Certification of the TRA-731 Caustic and Acid Storage Tank System is one of two documents that comprise the Sampling and Analysis Plan for the HWMA/RCRA closure certification of the TRA-731 caustic and acid storage tank system at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory. This plan, which provides information about the project description, project organization, and quality assurance and quality control procedures, is to be used in conjunction with the Field Sampling Plan for the HWMA/RCRA Closure Certification of the TRA-731 Caustic and Acid Storage Tank System. This Quality Assurance Project Plan specifies the procedures for obtaining the data of known quality required by the closure activities for the TRA-731 caustic and acid storage tank system.

Evans, Susan Kay; Orchard, B. J.

2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

59

DOE/EIS-0303D; High-Level Waste Tank Closure Draft Environmental Impact Statement (November 2000)  

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

EIS-0303D EIS-0303D DRAFT November 2000 Summary S-iii COVER SHEET RESPONSIBLE AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) TITLE: Savannah River Site, High-Level Waste Tank Closure Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0303D), Aiken, SC. CONTACT: For additional information or to submit comments on this environmental impact statement (EIS), write or call: Andrew R. Grainger, NEPA Compliance Officer U.S. Department of Energy, Savannah River Operations Office Building 742A, Room 183 Aiken, South Carolina 29802 Attention: Tank Closure EIS Local and Nationwide Telephone: (800) 881-7292 Email: nepa@srs.gov The EIS is also available on the internet at: http://tis.eh.doe.gov/nepa/docs/docs.htm For general information on the process that DOE follows in complying with the National Environmental

60

C-104 Solid Phase Characterization of Sample 4C-13-1 From Tank 241-C-104 Closure Sampling Event  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

One solid grab sample from closure sampling in Riser 7 of tank 214-C-I04 (C-I04) was examined to determine the solid phases that were present. The sample was analyzed using X-ray diffraction (XRD) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The purpose of this analysis was to see if the presence of hydrated phases could provide a possible explanation for the high moisture content obtained from thermogravimetric analysis (TGA).

Cooke, Gary A.; Pestovich, John A.

2013-06-12T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank closure alternative" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


61

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Badden, Janet W. [Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC, Richland, WA (United States); Connelly, Michael P. [Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC, Richland, WA (United States); Seeley, Paul N. [Cenibark International, Inc., Kennewick (United States); Hendrickson, Michelle L. [Washington State Univ., Richland (United States). Dept. of Ecology

2013-01-10T23:59:59.000Z

62

TANK FARM INTERIM SURFACE BARRIER MATERIALS AND RUNOFF ALTERNATIVES STUDY  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

HOLM MJ

2009-06-25T23:59:59.000Z

63

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT TO SUPPORT CLOSURE OF SINGLE-SHELL TANK WASTE MANAGEMENT AREA C AT THE HANFORD SITE  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Current proposed regulatory agreements (Consent Decree) at the Hanford Site call for closure of the Single-Shell Tank (SST) Waste Management Area (WMA) C in the year 2019. WMA C is part of the SST system in 200 East area ofthe Hanford Site and is one of the first tank farm areas built in mid-1940s. In order to close WMA C, both tank and facility closure activities and corrective actions associated with existing soil and groundwater contamination must be performed. Remedial activities for WMA C and corrective actions for soils and groundwater within that system will be supported by various types of risk assessments and interim performance assessments (PA). The U.S. Department of Energy, Office of River Protection (DOE-ORP) and the State ofWashington Department of Ecology (Ecology) are sponsoring a series of working sessions with regulators and stakeholders to solicit input and to obtain a common understanding concerning the scope, methods, and data to be used in the planned risk assessments and PAs to support closure of WMA C. In addition to DOE-ORP and Ecology staff and contractors, working session members include representatives from the U.S. Enviromnental Protection Agency, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), interested tribal nations, other stakeholders groups, and members of the interested public. NRC staff involvement in the working sessions is as a technical resource to assess whether required waste determinations by DOE for waste incidental to reprocessing are based on sound technical assumptions, analyses, and conclusions relative to applicable incidental waste criteria.

BERGERON MP

2010-01-14T23:59:59.000Z

64

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Propane Tank Overfill Safety Advisory  

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

throughout the United States. There has been some concern over reported cases of fuel tanks on propane vehicles being overfilled, potentially resulting in emissions from pressure...

65

E-Print Network 3.0 - accelerated tank closure Sample Search...  

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

guide Summary: compromise its integrity. Vegetation facilitates moisture reaching the tanks, accelerating rust... Purdue extension PPP-73 A pictorial guide Aboveground Petroleum...

66

Progress Continues Toward Closure of Two Underground Waste Tanks at Savannah River Site  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

AIKEN, S.C. The EM program at the Savannah River Site (SRS) is filling two radioactive liquid waste tanks with a cement-like grout in an effort to operationally close them this fall.

67

Clean option: An alternative strategy for Hanford Tank Waste Remediation  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Plans for remediation of the Hanford underground storage tanks are currently undergoing reevaluation. As part of this process, many options are being considered for the Tank Waste Remediation System (MRS). The clean option'' described here proposes an aggressive waste processing strategy to achieve the three ma or objectives: Greatly reduce the volume of high-level waste (HLW) to lessen demands on geologic repository space; decrease by several orders of magnitude the amount of radioactivity and toxicity now in the waste tanks that will be left permanently onsite as low-level solid waste (LLW); and accomplish the first two objectives without significantly increasing the total amount of waste for disposal. The study discussed here focuses on process chemistry, as it provides the foundation for achieving the clean option objectives. Because demonstrated separation steps have been identified and connected in a way that meets these objectives, the study concludes that the process chemistry rests on a firm technical basis.

Straalsund, J.L.; Swanson, J.L.; Baker, E.G.; Jones, E.O.; Kuhn, W.L. (Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, WA (United States)); Holmes, J.J. (Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States))

1992-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

68

Engineering evaluation of alternatives: Managing the assumed leak from single-shell Tank 241-T-101  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

At mid-year 1992, the liquid level gage for Tank 241-T-101 indicated that 6,000 to 9,000 gal had leaked. Because of the liquid level anomaly, Tank 241-T-101 was declared an assumed leaker on October 4, 1992. SSTs liquid level gages have been historically unreliable. False readings can occur because of instrument failures, floating salt cake, and salt encrustation. Gages frequently self-correct and tanks show no indication of leak. Tank levels cannot be visually inspected and verified because of high radiation fields. The gage in Tank 241-T-101 has largely corrected itself since the mid-year 1992 reading. Therefore, doubt exists that a leak has occurred, or that the magnitude of the leak poses any immediate environmental threat. While reluctance exists to use valuable DST space unnecessarily, there is a large safety and economic incentive to prevent or mitigate release of tank liquid waste into the surrounding environment. During the assessment of the significance of the Tank 241-T-101 liquid level gage readings, Washington State Department of Ecology determined that Westinghouse Hanford Company was not in compliance with regulatory requirements, and directed transfer of the Tank 241-T-101 liquid contents into a DST. Meanwhile, DOE directed WHC to examine reasonable alternatives/options for safe interim management of Tank 241-T-101 wastes before taking action. The five alternatives that could be used to manage waste from a leaking SST are: (1) No-Action, (2) In-Tank Stabilization, (3) External Tank Stabilization, (4) Liquid Retrieval, and (5) Total Retrieval. The findings of these examinations are reported in this study.

Brevick, C.H. [ICF Kaiser Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States); Jenkins, C. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

1996-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

69

Treatment, storage, and disposal alternatives for the gunite and associated tanks at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The gunite and associated tanks (GAAT) are inactive, liquid low-level waste tanks located in and around the North and South Tank Farms at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. These underground tanks are the subject of an ongoing treatability study that will determine the best remediation alternatives for the tanks. As part of the treatability study, an assessment of viable treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD) alternatives has been conducted. The report summarizes relevant waste characterization data and statistics obtained to date. The report describes screening and evaluation criteria for evaluating TSD options. Individual options that pass the screening criteria are described in some detail. Order-or-magnitude cost estimates are presented for each of the TSD system alternatives. All alternatives are compared to the baseline approach of pumping all of the GAAT sludge and supernate to the Melton Valley Storage Tank (MVST) facility for eventual TSD along with the existing MOST waste. Four TSD systems are identified as alternatives to the baseline approach. The baseline is the most expensive of the five identified alternatives. The least expensive alternative is in-situ grouting of all GAAT sludge followed by in-situ disposal. The other alternatives are: (1) ex-situ grouting with on-site storage and disposal at Nevada Test Site (NTS); (2) ex-situ grouting with on-site storage and disposal at NTS and the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP); and (3) ex-situ vitrification with on-site storage and disposal at NTS and WIPP.

DePew, R.E.; Rickett, K. [Advanced Systems Technology, Inc., Oak Ridge, TN (United States); Redus, K.S. [MACTEC, Oak Ridge, TN (United States); DuMont, S.P. [Hazardous and Medical Waste Services, Inc. (United States); Lewis, B.E.; DePaoli, S.M.; Van Hoesen, S.D. Jr. [Oak Ridge National Lab., TN (United States)

1996-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

70

Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 557: Spills and Tank Sites, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, Revision 0  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report has been prepared for Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 557, Spills and Tank Sites, in Areas 1, 3, 6, and 25 of the Nevada Test Site, Nevada, in accordance with the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order. Corrective Action Unit 557 comprises the following corrective action sites (CASs): 01-25-02, Fuel Spill 03-02-02, Area 3 Subdock UST 06-99-10, Tar Spills 25-25-18, Train Maintenance Bldg 3901 Spill Site The purpose of this Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report is to identify and provide the justification and documentation that supports the recommendation for closure of the CAU 557 CASs with no further corrective action. To achieve this, a corrective action investigation (CAI) was conducted from May 5 through November 24, 2008. The CAI activities were performed as set forth in the Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 557: Spills and Tank Sites, Nevada Test Site, Nevada.

Alfred Wickline

2009-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

71

Cost benefit and risk assessment for selected tank waste process testing alternatives  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The US Department of Energy has established the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) program to safely manage wastes currently stored in underground tank at the Hanford Site. A TWRS testing and development strategy was recently developed to define long-range TWRS testing plans. The testing and development strategy considered four alternatives. The primary variable in the alternatives is the level of pilot-scale testing involving actual waste. This study evaluates the cost benefit and risks associated with the four alternatives. Four types of risk were evaluated: programmatic schedule risk, process mishap risk, worker risk, and public health risk. The structure of this report is as follows: Section 1 introduces the report subject; Section 2 describes the test strategy alternative evaluation; Section 3 describes the approach used in this study to assess risk and cost benefit; Section 4 describes the assessment methodologies for costs and risks; Section 5 describes the bases and assumptions used to estimate the costs and risks; Section 6 presents the detailed costs and risks; and Section 7 describes the results of the cost benefit analysis and presents conclusions.

Gasper, K.A. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

1995-05-22T23:59:59.000Z

72

Office of River Protection (DOE-ORP) Hanford Tank Waste Treatment Alternatives March 2000  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is currently planning to retrieve, pretreat, immobilize and safely dispose of 53 million gallons of highly radioactive waste currently stored in underground tanks at Hanford Site. The DOE plan is a two-phased approach to privatizing the processing of hazardous and radioactive waste. Phase 1 is a proof-of-concept/commercial demonstration-scale effort whose objectives are to: demonstrate, the technical and business viability of using privatized facilities to treat Hanford tank waste; define and maintain required levels of radiological, nuclear, process and occupational safety; maintain environmental protection and compliance; and substantially reduce life-cycle costs and time required to treat Hanford tank waste. The Phase 1 effort consists of Part A and Part B. On September 25, 1996 (Reference 1), DOE signed a contract with BNFL, Inc. (BNFL) to commence with Phase 1, Part A. In August 1998, BNFL was authorized to proceed with Phase I, Part 6-1, a 24-month design phase that will-provide sufficient engineering and financial maturity to establish fixed-unit prices and financing terms for tank waste processing services in privately-owned and -operated facilities. By August 2000, DOE will decide whether to authorize BNFL to proceed with construction and operation of the proposed processing facilities, or pursue a different path. To support of the decision, DOE is evaluating alternatives to potentially enhance the BNFL tank waste processing contract, as well as, developing an alternate path forward should DOE decide to not continue the BNFL contract. The decision on whether to continue with the current privatization strategy (BNFL contract) or to pursue an alternate can not be made until the evaluation process leading up to the decision on whether to authorize BNFL to proceed with construction and operation (known as the Part 8-2 decision) is completed. The evaluation process includes reviewing and evaluating the information BNFL is scheduled to submit in April 2000, and negotiating the best mutually acceptable contract terms. The alternatives studies completed to-date are summarized in Reference 2.

WODRICH, D.D.

2000-03-24T23:59:59.000Z

73

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Krogstad, Eirik J.

2013-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

74

Laboratory and Field Testing of High Performance-Zero Bleed CLSM Mixes for Future Tank Closure Applications  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This work performed in this project is intended to support the SRS and DOE complex effort to close high-level waste tanks.

Langton, C.A.

1998-10-26T23:59:59.000Z

75

U. S. Department of Energy Savannah River Operations Office - F and H Tank  

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

F and H Tank Farm Closure Documents F and H Tank Farm Closure Documents F and H Tank Farm Closure Documents F Tank Farm Closure Documents F Tank Farm Performance Assessment F Tank Farm Performance Assessment -- Revision 1 Tank 18/Tank 19 Special Analysis Industrial Wastewater General Closure Plan for F-Area Waste Tank System -- Final Industrial Wastewater Closure Module for the Liquid Waste Tanks 18 and 19 DOE agreement to cease waste removal SC approval to Closure Module and agreement to cease waste removal EPA agreement to cease waste removal Tanks 17 and 20 Closure Errata Industrial Wastewater Closure Module for the High-Level Waste Tank 17 System Industrial Wastewater Closure Module for the High-Level Waste Tank 20 System Draft Basis for Section 3116 Determination for Closure of F Tank Farm at SRS

76

DOE Selects Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC for Tank...  

Energy Savers [EERE]

Plateau. The scope of the tank operations contract includes base operations of the tanks, analytical laboratory support, single-shell tank retrieval and closure, Waste...

77

REVIEW OF ALTERNATIVE ENHANCED CHEMICAL CLEANING OPTIONS FOR SRS WASTE TANKS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A literature review was conducted to support the Task Technical and Quality Assurance Plan for Alternative Enhanced Chemical Cleaning (AECC) for sludge heel removal funded as part of the EM-21 Engineering and Technology program. The goal was to identify potential technologies or enhancements to the baseline oxalic acid cleaning process for chemically dissolving or mobilizing Savannah River Site (SRS) sludge heels. The issues with the potentially large volume of oxalate solids generated from the baseline process have driven an effort to find an improved or enhanced chemical cleaning technology for the tank heels. This literature review builds on a previous review conducted in 2003. A team was charged with evaluating the information in these reviews and developing recommendations of alternative technologies to pursue. The new information in this report supports the conclusion of the previous review that oxalic acid remains the chemical cleaning agent of choice for dissolving the metal oxides and hydroxides found in sludge heels in carbon steel tanks. The potential negative impact of large volumes of sodium oxalate on downstream processes indicates that the amount of oxalic acid used for chemical cleaning needs to be minimized as much as possible or the oxalic acid must be destroyed prior to pH adjustment in the receipt tank. The most straightforward way of minimizing the volume of oxalic acid needed for chemical cleaning is through more effective mechanical cleaning. Using a mineral acid to adjust the pH of the sludge prior to adding oxalic acid may also help to minimize the volume of oxalic acid used in chemical cleaning. If minimization of oxalic acid proves insufficient in reducing the volume of oxalate salts, several methods were found that could be used for oxalic acid destruction. For some waste tank heels, another acid or even caustic treatment (or pretreatment) might be more appropriate than the baseline oxalic acid cleaning process. Caustic treatment of high aluminum sludge heels may be appropriate as a means of reducing oxalic acid usage. Reagents other than oxalic acid may also be needed for removing actinide elements from the tank heels. A systems engineering evaluation (SEE) was performed on the various alternative chemical cleaning reagents and organic oxidation technologies discussed in the literature review. The objective of the evaluation was to develop a short list of chemical cleaning reagents and oxalic acid destruction methods that should be the focus of further research and development. The results of the SEE found that eight of the thirteen organic oxidation technologies scored relatively close together. Six of the chemical cleaning reagents were also recommended for further investigation. Based on the results of the SEE and plan set out in the TTQAP the following broad areas are recommended for future study as part of the AECC task: (1) Basic Chemistry of Sludge Dissolution in Oxalic Acid: A better understanding of the variables effecting dissolution of sludge species is needed to efficiently remove sludge heels while minimizing the use of oxalic acid or other chemical reagents. Tests should investigate the effects of pH, acid concentration, phase ratios, temperature, and kinetics of the dissolution reactions of sludge components with oxalic acid, mineral acids, and combinations of oxalic/mineral acids. Real waste sludge samples should be characterized to obtain additional data on the mineral phases present in sludge heels. (2) Simulant Development Program: Current sludge simulants developed by other programs for use in waste processing tests, while compositionally similar to real sludge waste, generally have more hydrated forms of the major metal phases and dissolve more easily in acids. Better simulants containing the mineral phases identified by real waste characterization should be developed to test chemical cleaning methods. (3) Oxalic Acid Oxidation Technologies: The two Mn based oxidation methods that scored highly in the SEE should be studied to evaluate long term potential. One of the AOP's

Hay, M.; Koopman, D.

2009-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

78

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...

79

EIS-0391: Notice of Preferred Alternative | Department of Energy  

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

Notice of Preferred Alternative Notice of Preferred Alternative EIS-0391: Notice of Preferred Alternative DOE's Preferred Alternative for Certain Tanks Evaluated in the Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is announcing its preferred alternative for wastes contained in underground radioactive waste storage tanks evaluated in the Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington (Final TC & WM EIS, DOE/EIS-0391, December 2012). With regard to those wastes that, in the future, may be properly and legally classified as mixed transuranic waste (mixed TRU waste). DOE's preferred alternative is to retrieve, treat,

80

Memorandum of Understanding Between the United States Department of Energy and the Washington State Department of Ecology for Development of the Hanford Site Tank Closure and Waste Management EIS ("TC&WM EIS")  

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

THE THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, AND THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY, FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE HANFORD SITE TANK CLOSURE AND WASTE MANAGEMENT EIS ("TC&WM EIS") I. INTRODUCTION The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) have mutual responsibilities for accomplishing cleanup of the Hanford Site as well as continuing ongoing waste management activities consistent with applicable federal and state laws and regulations. The Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (otherwise called the "Tri-Party Agreement", or "TPA") contains various enforceable milestones that apply to tank waste management activities. DOE is also required to comply with applicable requirements of

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank closure alternative" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


81

AX Tank Farm tank removal study  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

SKELLY, W.A.

1998-10-14T23:59:59.000Z

82

Office of River Protection, plan for Developing Hanford Tank Waste Processing Alternatives, Revision 1, December 15, 1999  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

In August 2000, The Department of Energy (DOE) must decide whether to authorize BNFL Inc. (BNFL) to construct and operate tank waste processing facilities as proposed or to take another path. This will be a multi-billion dollar commitment, requiring that the best path forward be chosen. The plan for reaching this decision is described in reference 1. The alternative evaluations in this plan are directed toward acquiring information needed for the August 2000 decision and for preparing an alternate path plan, should an acceptable agreement with BNFL not be reached. Many of the alternatives considered may still be applicable for failures that could occur after the year 2000, however, depending on the cause of later failures, others alternatives may need to be developed.

WODRICH, D.D.

2000-01-03T23:59:59.000Z

83

Clean option: An alternative strategy for Hanford Tank Waste Remediation. Volume 1, Overview  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Plans for remediation of the Hanford underground storage tanks are currently undergoing reevaluation. As part of this process, many options are being considered for the Tank Waste Remediation System (MRS). The ``clean option`` described here proposes an aggressive waste processing strategy to achieve the three ma or objectives: Greatly reduce the volume of high-level waste (HLW) to lessen demands on geologic repository space; decrease by several orders of magnitude the amount of radioactivity and toxicity now in the waste tanks that will be left permanently onsite as low-level solid waste (LLW); and accomplish the first two objectives without significantly increasing the total amount of waste for disposal. The study discussed here focuses on process chemistry, as it provides the foundation for achieving the clean option objectives. Because demonstrated separation steps have been identified and connected in a way that meets these objectives, the study concludes that the process chemistry rests on a firm technical basis.

Straalsund, J.L.; Swanson, J.L.; Baker, E.G.; Jones, E.O.; Kuhn, W.L. [Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, WA (United States); Holmes, J.J. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

1992-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

84

Feasibility study of tank leakage mitigation using subsurface barriers. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document reflects the evaluations and analyses performed in response to Tri-Party Agreement Milestone M-45-07A - {open_quotes}Complete Evaluation of Subsurface Barrier Feasibility{close_quotes} (September 1994). In addition, this feasibility study was revised reflecting ongoing work supporting a pending decision by the DOE Richland Operations Office, the Washington State Department of Ecology, and the US Environmental Protection Agency regarding further development of subsurface barrier options for SSTs and whether to proceed with demonstration plans at the Hanford Site (Tri-Party Agreement Milestone M-45-07B). Analyses of 14 integrated SST tank farm remediation alternatives were conducted in response to the three stated objectives of Tri-Party Agreement Milestone M-45-07A. The alternatives include eight with subsurface barriers and six without. Technologies used in the alternatives include three types of tank waste retrieval, seven types of subsurface barriers, a method of stabilizing the void space of emptied tanks, two types of in situ soil flushing, one type of surface barrier, and a clean-closure method. A no-action alternative and a surface-barrier-only alternative were included as nonviable alternatives for comparison. All other alternatives were designed to result in closure of SST tank farms as landfills or in clean-closure. Revision 1 incorporates additional analyses of worker safety, large leak scenarios, and sensitivity to the leach rates of risk controlling constituents. The additional analyses were conducted to support TPA Milestone M-45-07B.

Treat, R.L.; Peters, B.B.; Cameron, R.J. [Enserch Environmental, Inc., Richland, WA (United States)] [and others

1995-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

85

Addendum to the Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 452: Historical Underground Storage Tank Release Sites, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, Revision 0  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document constitutes an addendum to the Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 452: Historical Underground Storage Tank Release Sites, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, April 1998 as described in the document Supplemental Investigation Report for FFACO Use Restrictions, Nevada Test Site, Nevada (SIR) dated November 2008. The SIR document was approved by NDEP on December 5, 2008. The approval of the SIR document constituted approval of each of the recommended UR removals. In conformance with the SIR document, this addendum consists of: This page that refers the reader to the SIR document for additional information The cover, title, and signature pages of the SIR document The NDEP approval letter The corresponding section of the SIR document This addendum provides the documentation justifying the cancellation of the URs for CASs: 25-25-09, Spill H940825C (from UST 25-3101-1) 25-25-14, Spill H940314E (from UST 25-3102-3) 25-25-15, Spill H941020E (from UST 25-3152-1) These URs were established as part of Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) corrective actions and were based on the presence of contaminants at concentrations greater than the action levels established at the time of the initial investigation (FFACO, 1996). Since these URs were established, practices and procedures relating to the implementation of risk-based corrective actions (RBCA) have changed. Therefore, these URs were re-evaluated against the current RBCA criteria as defined in the Industrial Sites Project Establishment of Final Action Levels (NNSA/NSO, 2006). This re-evaluation consisted of comparing the original data (used to define the need for the URs) to risk-based final action levels (FALs) developed using the current Industrial Sites RBCA process. The re-evaluation resulted in a recommendation to remove these URs because contamination is not present at these sites above the risk-based FALs. Requirements for inspecting and maintaining these URs will be canceled, and the postings and signage at each site will be removed. Fencing and posting may be present at these sites that are unrelated to the FFACO URs such as for radiological control purposes as required by the NV/YMP Radiological Control Manual (NNSA/NSO, 2004). This modification will not affect or modify any non-FFACO requirements for fencing, posting, or monitoring at these sites.

Grant Evenson

2009-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

86

Addendum 2 to the Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 454: Historical Underground Storage Tank Release Sites, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, Revision 0  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document constitutes an addendum to the Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 454: Historical Underground Storage Tank Release Sites, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, April 1998 as described in the document Supplemental Investigation Report for FFACO Use Restrictions, Nevada Test Site, Nevada (SIR) dated November 2008. The SIR document was approved by NDEP on December 5, 2008. The approval of the SIR document constituted approval of each of the recommended UR removals. In conformance with the SIR document, this addendum consists of: This page that refers the reader to the SIR document for additional information The cover, title, and signature pages of the SIR document The NDEP approval letter The corresponding section of the SIR document This addendum provides the documentation justifying the cancellation of the URs for CASs: 12-25-08, Spill H950524F (from UST 12-B-1) 12-25-10, Spill H950919A (from UST 12-COMM-1) These URs were established as part of Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) corrective actions and were based on the presence of contaminants at concentrations greater than the action levels established at the time of the initial investigation (FFACO, 1996). Since these URs were established, practices and procedures relating to the implementation of risk-based corrective actions (RBCA) have changed. Therefore, these URs were re-evaluated against the current RBCA criteria as defined in the Industrial Sites Project Establishment of Final Action Levels (NNSA/NSO, 2006). This re-evaluation consisted of comparing the original data (used to define the need for the URs) to risk-based final action levels (FALs) developed using the current Industrial Sites RBCA process. The re-evaluation resulted in a recommendation to remove these URs because contamination is not present at these sites above the risk-based FALs. Requirements for inspecting and maintaining these URs will be canceled, and the postings and signage at each site will be removed. Fencing and posting may be present at these sites that are unrelated to the FFACO URs such as for radiological control purposes as required by the NV/YMP Radiological Control Manual (NNSA/NSO, 2004). This modification will not affect or modify any non-FFACO requirements for fencing, posting, or monitoring at these sites.

Grant Evenson

2009-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

87

Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 543: Liquid Disposal Units, Nevada Test Site, Nevada  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Closure Report (CR) documents closure activities for Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 543, Liquid Disposal Units, according to the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO, 1996) and the Corrective Action Plan (CAP) for CAU 543 (U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office [NNSA/NSO], 2007). CAU 543 is located at the Nevada Test Site (NTS), Nevada (Figure 1), and consists of the following seven Corrective Action Sites (CASs): CAS 06-07-01, Decon Pad; CAS 15-01-03, Aboveground Storage Tank; CAS 15-04-01, Septic Tank; CAS 15-05-01, Leachfield; CAS 15-08-01, Liquid Manure Tank; CAS 15-23-01, Underground Radioactive Material Area; CAS 15-23-03, Contaminated Sump, Piping; and CAS 06-07-01 is located at the Decontamination Facility in Area 6, adjacent to Yucca Lake. The remaining CASs are located at the former U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Farm in Area 15. The purpose of this CR is to provide a summary of the completed closure activities, to document waste disposal, and to present analytical data confirming that the remediation goals were met. The closure alternatives consisted of closure in place for two of the CASs, and no further action with implementation of best management practices (BMPs) for the remaining five CASs.

NSTec Environmental Restoration

2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

88

FINAL CLOSURE PLAN SURFACE IMPOUNDMENTS CLOSURE, SITE 300  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory of the University of California (LLNL) operates two Class II surface impoundments that store wastewater that is discharged from a number of buildings located on the Site 300 Facility (Site 300). The wastewater is the by-product of explosives processing. Reduction in the volume of water discharged from these buildings over the past several years has significantly reduced the wastewater storage needs. In addition, the impoundments were constructed in 1984, and the high-density polyethylene (HDPE) geomembrane liners are nearing the end of their service life. The purpose of this project is to clean close the surface impoundments and provide new wastewater storage using portable, above ground storage tanks at six locations. The tanks will be installed prior to closure of the impoundments and will include heaters for allowing evaporation during relatively cool weather. Golder Associates (Golder) has prepared this Final Closure Plan (Closure Plan) on behalf of LLNL to address construction associated with the clean closure of the impoundments. This Closure Plan complies with State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Section 21400 of the California Code of Regulations Title 27 (27 CCR {section}21400). As required by these regulations and guidance, this Plan provides the following information: (1) A site characterization, including the site location, history, current operations, and geology and hydrogeology; (2) The regulatory requirements relevant to clean closure of the impoundments; (3) The closure procedures; and, (4) The procedures for validation and documentation of clean closure.

Lane, J E; Scott, J E; Mathews, S E

2004-09-29T23:59:59.000Z

89

Tank Waste Strategy Update  

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

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 December 5, 2011 Background Tank Waste Subcommittee (TWS)originally chartered, in response to Secretary's request to perform a technical review of Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) in May 2010. Three tasks: o Verification of closure of WTP External Flowsheet Review Team (EFRT) issues. o WTP Technical Design Review o WTP potential improvements Report completed and briefed to DOE in September 2010 www.em.doe.gov safety performance cleanup closure E M Environmental Management 2 Report completed and briefed to DOE in September 2010 Follow-on scope for TWS identified immediately after briefing to DOE and

90

Polymers for subterranean containment barriers for underground storage tanks (USTs). Letter report on FY 1992 activities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The US Department of Energy (DOE) set up the Underground Storage Tank Integrated Demonstration Program (USTID) to demonstrate technologies for the retrieval and treatment of tank waste, and closure of underground storage tanks (USTs). There are more than 250 underground storage tanks throughout the DOE complex. These tanks contain a wide variety of wastes including high level, low level, transuranic, mixed and hazardous wastes. Many of the tanks have performed beyond the designed lifetime resulting in leakage and contamination of the local geologic media and groundwater. To mitigate this problem it has been proposed that an interim subterranean containment barrier be placed around the tanks. This would minimize or prevent future contamination of soil and groundwater in the event that further tank leakages occur before or during remediation. Use of interim subterranean barriers can also provide sufficient time to evaluate and select appropriate remediation alternatives. The DOE Hanford site was chosen as the demonstration site for containment barrier technologies. A panel of experts for the USTID was convened in February, 1992, to identify technologies for placement of subterranean barriers. The selection was based on the ability of candidate grouts to withstand high radiation doses, high temperatures and aggressive tank waste leachates. The group identified and ranked nine grouting technologies that have potential to place vertical barriers and five for horizontal barriers around the tank. The panel also endorsed placement technologies that require minimal excavation of soil surrounding the tanks.

Heiser, J.H.; Colombo, P.; Clinton, J.

1992-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

91

Hanford Tank Waste Residuals  

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

Hanford 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 gallons of waste* - 149 SSTs located in 12 SST Farms - Grouped into 7 Waste Management Areas (WMAs) for RCRA closure purposes: 200 West Area S/SX T TX/TY U 200 East Area A/AX B/BX/BY C * Double-Shell Tanks (DSTs) - ~26 million gallons of waste* - 28 DSTs located in 6 DST Farms (1 West/5 East) * 17 Misc Underground Storage Tanks (MUST) * 43 Inactive MUST (IMUST) 200 East Area A/AX B/BX/BY C * Volumes fluctuate as SST retrievals and 242-A Evaporator runs occur. Major Regulatory Drivers * Radioactive Tank Waste Materials - Atomic Energy Act - DOE M 435.1-1, Ch II, HLW - Other DOE Orders * Hazardous/Dangerous Tank Wastes - Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (TPA) - Retrieval/Closure under State's implementation

92

Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 516: Septic Systems and Discharge Points  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 516 is located in Areas 3, 6, and 22 of the Nevada Test Site. CAU 516 is listed in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order of 1996 as Septic Systems and Discharge Points, and is comprised of six Corrective Action Sites (CASs): {sm_bullet} CAS 03-59-01, Bldg 3C-36 Septic System {sm_bullet} CAS 03-59-02, Bldg 3C-45 Septic System {sm_bullet} CAS 06-51-01, Sump and Piping {sm_bullet} CAS 06-51-02, Clay Pipe and Debris {sm_bullet} CAS 06-51-03, Clean Out Box and Piping {sm_bullet} CAS 22-19-04, Vehicle Decontamination Area The Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP)-approved corrective action alternative for CASs 06-51-02 and 22-19-04 is no further action. The NDEP-approved corrective action alternative for CASs 03-59-01, 03-59-02, 06-51-01, and 06-51-03 is clean closure. Closure activities included removing and disposing of total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH)-impacted septic tank contents, septic tanks, distribution/clean out boxes, and piping. CAU 516 was closed in accordance with the NDEP-approved CAU 516 Corrective Action Plan (CAP). The closure activities specified in the CAP were based on the recommendations presented in the CAU 516 Corrective Action Decision Document (U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office, 2004). This Closure Report documents CAU 516 closure activities. During closure activities, approximately 186 tons of hydrocarbon waste in the form of TPH-impacted soil and debris, as well as 89 tons of construction debris, were generated and managed and disposed of appropriately. Waste minimization techniques, such as field screening of soil samples and the utilization of laboratory analysis to characterize and classify waste streams, were employed during the performance of closure work.

NSTec Environmental Restoration

2007-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

93

H-Tank Farm Waste Determination | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

(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...

94

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 supplemental statement to evaluate the environmental impacts associated with a modified design of a proposed 250,000 barrels per day crude oil conveyance system from Navel Petroleum Reserve No. 1 to connect to the proposed SOHIO West Coast to Midcontinent Pipeline at Rialto, California. This SEIS is a supplement to DOE/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.

95

Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 224: Decon Pad and Septic Systems, Nevada Test Site, Nevada  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 224 is located in Areas 02, 03, 05, 06, 11, and 23 of the Nevada Test Site, which is situated approximately 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. CAU 224 is listed in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) of 1996 as Decon Pad and Septic Systems and is comprised of the following nine Corrective Action Sites (CASs): CAS 02-04-01, Septic Tank (Buried); CAS 03-05-01, Leachfield; CAS 05-04-01, Septic Tanks (4)/Discharge Area; CAS 06-03-01, Sewage Lagoons (3); CAS 06-05-01, Leachfield; CAS 06-17-04, Decon Pad and Wastewater Catch; CAS 06-23-01, Decon Pad Discharge Piping; CAS 11-04-01, Sewage Lagoon; and CAS 23-05-02, Leachfield. The Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP)-approved corrective action alternative for CASs 02-04-01, 03-05-01, 06-03-01, 11-04-01, and 23-05-02 is no further action. As a best management practice, the septic tanks and distribution box were removed from CASs 02-04-01 and 11-04-01 and disposed of as hydrocarbon waste. The NDEP-approved correction action alternative for CASs 05-04-01, 06-05-01, 06-17-04, and 06-23-01 is clean closure. Closure activities for these CASs included removing and disposing of radiologically and pesticide-impacted soil and debris. CAU 224 was closed in accordance with the NDEP-approved CAU 224 Corrective Action Plan (CAP). The closure activities specified in the CAP were based on the recommendations presented in the CAU 224 Corrective Action Decision Document (U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office, 2005). This Closure Report documents CAU 224 closure activities. During closure activities, approximately 60 cubic yards (yd3) of mixed waste in the form of soil and debris; approximately 70 yd{sup 3} of sanitary waste in the form of soil, liquid from septic tanks, and concrete debris; approximately 10 yd{sup 3} of hazardous waste in the form of pesticide-impacted soil; approximately 0.5 yd{sup 3} of universal waste in the form of fluorescent light bulbs; and approximately 0.5 yd{sup 3} of low-level waste in the form of a radiologically impacted fire hose rack were generated, managed, and disposed of appropriately. Waste minimization techniques, such as the utilization of laboratory analysis and field screening to guide the extent of excavations, were employed during the performance of closure work.

NSTec Environmental Restoration

2007-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

96

Alternative methods for proposed explosive demolition of large, obsolete pol storage tanks, Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri. Technical report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A desk study was undertaken to assess explosion demolition methodologies that would allow Army Explosive Ordinance Demolition (EOD) engineer teams assigned to Ft. Leonard Wood to safely and effectively demolish to ground level three very large metal POL (petroleum, oil, and lubricant) storage tanks. These tanks have outlived their usefulness and are scheduled for removal by the most rapid and cost effective method. An analysis by Ft. Leonard Wood determined explosive demolition to be the method of choice. A primary concern was possible corollary damage to nearby military and civilian housing and occupants. This study investigated several explosive sources and methodologies and provided predictions of corollary damage effects versus distance from the charge to be expected for explosive charge weights ranging from 10 to 500 lb. Prediction curves were developed for both ideal and average weather conditions.

Ingram, J.K.; Cheek, J.B.

1993-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

97

Record of Decision for Savannah River Site High-Level Waste Tank Closure Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0303)(August 19, 2002)  

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

4 4 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 160 / Monday, August 19, 2002 / Notices ACTION: Notice of meeting. SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the schedule and proposed agenda for a forthcoming meeting of the National Educational Research Policy and Priorities Board. Notice of this meeting is required under Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. This document is intended to notify the general public of their opportunity to attend the meeting. Individuals who will need accommodations for a disability in order to attend the meeting (i.e., interpreting services, assistive listening devices, materials in alternative format) should notify Mary Grace Lucier at (202) 219-2253 by August 27. We will attempt to meet requests after this date, but cannot

98

Tanks focus area. Annual report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management is tasked with a major remediation project to treat and dispose of radioactive waste in hundreds of underground storage tanks. These tanks contain about 90,000,000 gallons of high-level and transuranic wastes. We have 68 known or assumed leaking tanks, that have allowed waste to migrate into the soil surrounding the tank. In some cases, the tank contents have reacted to form flammable gases, introducing additional safety risks. These tanks must be maintained in the safest possible condition until their eventual remediation to reduce the risk of waste migration and exposure to workers, the public, and the environment. Science and technology development for safer, more efficient, and cost-effective waste treatment methods will speed up progress toward the final remediation of these tanks. The DOE Office of Environmental Management established the Tanks Focus Area to serve as the DOE-EM`s technology development program for radioactive waste tank remediation in partnership with the Offices of Waste Management and Environmental Restoration. The Tanks Focus Area is responsible for leading, coordinating, and facilitating science and technology development to support remediation at DOE`s four major tank sites: the Hanford Site in Washington State, Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory in Idaho, Oak Ridge Reservation in Tennessee, and the Savannah River Site in South Carolina. The technical scope covers the major functions that comprise a complete tank remediation system: waste retrieval, waste pretreatment, waste immobilization, tank closure, and characterization of both the waste and tank. Safety is integrated across all the functions and is a key component of the Tanks Focus Area program.

Frey, J.

1997-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

99

SRS Waste Tanks 5 and 6 Are Operationally Closed | Department of Energy  

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

SRS Waste Tanks 5 and 6 Are Operationally Closed SRS Waste Tanks 5 and 6 Are Operationally Closed SRS Waste Tanks 5 and 6 Are Operationally Closed December 19, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis The final amount of grout is poured into Tank 6, marking the operational closure of Tanks 5 and 6. The final amount of grout is poured into Tank 6, marking the operational closure of Tanks 5 and 6. Media Contacts Amy Caver, Amy.Caver@srs.gov, 803-952-7213 Rick Kelley, Rick.Kelley@srs.gov, 803-208-0198 AIKEN, S.C. - Savannah River Remediation (SRR), the liquid waste contractor at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Savannah River Site, has removed from service two more Cold War-era liquid radioactive waste tanks, marking the third and fourth tanks operationally closed by SRR in the last 14 months. Grouting and closure of Tanks 5 and 6 were completed approximately two

100

Underground Storage Tanks: New Fuels and Compatibility  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Breakout Session 1CFostering Technology Adoption I: Building the Market for Renewables with High Octane Fuels Underground Storage Tanks: New Fuels and Compatibility Ryan Haerer, Program Analyst, Alternative Fuels, Office of Underground Storage Tanks, Environmental Protection Agency

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank closure alternative" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


101

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

DOVALLE, O.R.

1999-12-29T23:59:59.000Z

102

Grouting at the Idaho National Laboratory Tank Farm Facility, R. Mark Shaw  

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

Grouting at the Grouting at the Idaho National Laboratory Tank Farm Facility R. Mark Shaw, U. S. Department of Energy safety v performance v cleanup v closure M E Environmental Management Environmental Management 2 Topics/Agenda * Tank Farm Overview * Tank and Vault Grouting * Cooling Coil and Transfer Line Grouting safety v performance v cleanup v closure M E Environmental Management Environmental Management 3 INTEC TANK FARM CLOSURE INTEC TANK FARM CLOSURE VES-WM-103 VES-WM-104 VES-WM-105 VES-WM-106 182 183 185 186 187 189 190 188 184 181 180 Tank Farm Facility Octagon Vaults: WM-180, WM-181 Pillar and Panel Vaults: WM-182, WM-183, WM-184, WM-185, WM-186 Square Vaults: WM-187, WM-188, WM-189, WM-190 GV99 0008 safety v performance v cleanup v closure M E Environmental Management

103

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)

This report investigates five technical areas for stabilization of decommissioned waste tanks and contaminated soils at the Hanford Site AX Farm. The investigations are part of a preliminary evacuation of end-state options for closure of the AX Tanks. The five technical areas investigated are: (1) emplacement of cementations grouts and/or other materials; (2) injection of chemicals into contaminated soils surrounding tanks (soil mixing); (3) emplacement of grout barriers under and around the tanks; (4) the explicit recognition that natural attenuation processes do occur; and (5) combined geochemical and hydrological modeling. Research topics are identified in support of key areas of technical uncertainty, in each of the five areas. Detailed cost-benefit analyses of the technologies are not provided. This investigation was conducted by Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico, during FY 1997 by tank Focus Area (EM-50) funding.

Becker, D.L.

1997-11-03T23:59:59.000Z

104

Engineering study of the potential uses of salts from selective crystallization of Hanford tank wastes  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Clean Salt Process (CSP) is the fractional crystallization of nitrate salts from tank waste stored on the Hanford Site. This study reviews disposition options for a CSP product made from Hanford Site tank waste. These options range from public release to onsite low-level waste disposal to no action. Process, production, safety, environment, cost, schedule, and the amount of CSP material which may be used are factors considered in each option. The preferred alternative is offsite release of clean salt. Savings all be generated by excluding the material from low-level waste stabilization. Income would be received from sales of salt products. Savings and income from this alternative amount to $1,027 million, excluding the cost of CSP operations. Unless public sale of CSP products is approved, the material should be calcined. The carbonate form of the CSP could then be used as ballast in tank closure and stabilization efforts. Not including the cost of CSP operations, savings of $632 million would be realized. These savings would result from excluding the material from low-level waste stabilization and reducing purchases of chemicals for caustic recycle and stabilization and closure. Dose considerations for either alternative are favorable. No other cost-effective alternatives that were considered had the capacity to handle significant quantities of the CSP products. If CSP occurs, full-scale tank-waste stabilization could be done without building additional treatment facilities after Phase 1 (DOE 1996). Savings in capital and operating cost from this reduction in waste stabilization would be in addition to the other gains described.

Hendrickson, D.W.

1996-04-30T23:59:59.000Z

105

Regulated underground storage tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This guidance package is designed to assist DOE Field operations by providing thorough guidance on the underground storage tank (UST) regulations. (40 CFR 280). The guidance uses tables, flowcharts, and checklists to provide a roadmap'' for DOE staff who are responsible for supervising UST operations. This package is tailored to address the issues facing DOE facilities. DOE staff should use this guidance as: An overview of the regulations for UST installation and operation; a comprehensive step-by-step guidance for the process of owning and operating an UST, from installation to closure; and a quick, ready-reference guide for any specific topic concerning UST ownership or operation.

Not Available

1992-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

106

Regulated underground storage tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This guidance package is designed to assist DOE Field operations by providing thorough guidance on the underground storage tank (UST) regulations. [40 CFR 280]. The guidance uses tables, flowcharts, and checklists to provide a ``roadmap`` for DOE staff who are responsible for supervising UST operations. This package is tailored to address the issues facing DOE facilities. DOE staff should use this guidance as: An overview of the regulations for UST installation and operation; a comprehensive step-by-step guidance for the process of owning and operating an UST, from installation to closure; and a quick, ready-reference guide for any specific topic concerning UST ownership or operation.

Not Available

1992-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

107

Alternative Fuels Data Center  

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

Safety, enforces rules concerning the placement of underground and aboveground storage tanks that contain alternative and renewable fuel. For the purpose of these regulations, an...

108

Hanford Tanks Initiative fiscal year 1997 retrieval technology demonstrations  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Hanford Tanks Initiative was established in 1996 to address a range of retrieval and closure issues associated with radioactive and hazardous waste stored in Hanford`s single shell tanks (SSTs). One of HTI`s retrieval goals is to ``Successfully demonstrate technology(s) that provide expanded capabilities beyond past practice sluicing and are extensible to retrieve waste from other SSTS.`` Specifically, HTI is to address ``Alternative technologies to past practice sluicing`` ... that can ... ``successfully remove the hard heel from a sluiced tank or to remove waste from a leaking SST`` (HTI Mission Analysis). During fiscal year 1997, the project contracted with seven commercial vendor teams to demonstrate retrieval technologies using waste simulants. These tests were conducted in two series: three integrated tests (IT) were completed in January 1997, and four more comprehensive Alternative Technology Retrieval Demonstrations (ARTD) were completed in July 1997. The goal of this testing was to address issues to minimize the risk, uncertainties, and ultimately the overall cost of removing waste from the SSTS. Retrieval technologies can be separated into three tracks based on how the tools would be deployed in the tank: globally (e.g., sluicing) or using vehicles or robotic manipulators. Accordingly, the HTI tests included an advanced sluicer (Track 1: global systems), two different vehicles (Track 2: vehicle based systems), and three unique manipulators (Track 3: arm-based systems), each deploying a wide range of dislodging tools and conveyance systems. Each industry team produced a system description as envisioned for actual retrieval and a list of issues that could prevent using the described system; defined the tests to resolve the issues; performed the test; and reported the results, lessons learned, and state of issue resolution. These test reports are cited in this document, listed in the reference section, and summarized in the appendices. This report analyzes the retrieval testing issues and describes what has been learned and issues that need further resolution. As such, it can serve as a guide to additional testing that must be performed before the systems are used in-tank. The major issues discussed are tank access, deployment, mining strategy, waste retrieval, liquid scavenging (liquid usage), maneuverability, positioning, static and dynamic performance, remote operations, reliability, availability, maintenance, tank safety, and cost.

Berglin, E.J.

1998-02-05T23:59:59.000Z

109

Notice of Intent to Prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for Alternatives to the In-Tank Precipitation Process at the Savannah River Site, Aiken, SC, February 19, 1999  

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

8 8 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 34 / Monday, February 22, 1999 / Notices Decision and publish it in the Federal Register. Signed in Washington, DC, this 16th day of February 1999. Peter N. Brush, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Environment, Safety and Health. [FR Doc. 99-4289 Filed 2-19-99; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Notice of Intent To Prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for Alternatives to the In- Tank Precipitation Process at the Savannah River Site, Aiken, SC AGENCY: Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of intent. SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE) intends to prepare a supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) on the proposed replacement of the in-tank precipitation (ITP) process at the Savannah River Site

110

Alternative Fuels Data Center  

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

Decals An individual may place alternative fuel (defined as liquefied petroleum gas or propane) into the fuel tank of a motor vehicle only if the vehicle has a valid alternative...

111

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Lenseigne, D.L., Westinghouse Hanford, Richland, WA

1997-09-15T23:59:59.000Z

112

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

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

2012-01-10T23:59:59.000Z

113

High-Level Liquid Waste Tank Integrity Workshop - 2008  

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

Liquid Waste Tank Integrity Liquid Waste Tank Integrity Workshop - 2008 Karthik Subramanian Bruce Wiersma November 2008 High Level Waste Corporate Board Meeting karthik.subramanian@srnl.doe.gov bruce.wiersma@srnl.doe.gov 2 Acknowledgements * Bruce Wiersma (SRNL) * Kayle Boomer (Hanford) * Michael T. Terry (Facilitator) * SRS - Liquid Waste Organization * Hanford Tank Farms * DOE-EM 3 Background * High level radioactive waste (HLW) tanks provide critical interim confinement for waste prior to processing and permanent disposal * Maintaining structural integrity (SI) of the tanks is a critical component of operations 4 Tank Integrity Workshop - 2008 * Discuss the HLW tank integrity technology needs based upon the evolving waste processing and tank closure requirements along with its continued storage mission

114

Microsoft PowerPoint - 3-02_ King_Alternative Chemical Cleaning.ppt  

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

725 725 EM-31 Alternative and Enhanced Chemical Cleaning Program Bill King, Mike Hay, Bruce Wiersma, Frank Pennebaker SRNL Environmental and Chemical Process Technology November 16, 2010 EM Waste Processing Technical Exchange Meeting Print Close 2 SRNL-STI-2010-00725 Introduction Numerous SRS tanks scheduled for closure (contract commitments) Cannot remove all sludge by mechanical means due to obstructions Chemical removal technology needed (likely oxalic acid) Post-dissolution neutralization required prior to transfer to compliant tanks Sodium oxalate salts precipitate on neutralization and have negative downstream impacts Currently three SRS chemical cleaning programs Baseline: 8 wt. % OA batch contact (Tanks 5 and 6) ECC: 1-3 wt. % OA with oxalate destruction

115

F-Area Tank Farm, Savannah River Site Available for Public Comment  

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

2 2 February 20, 2013 Industrial Wastewater Closure Module for Liquid Waste Tanks 5F and 6F F-Area Tank Farm, Savannah River Site Available for Public Comment Background: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Savannah River Operations Office has requested approval from the South Carolina De- partment of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) of the Industrial Wastewater Closure Module for Waste Tanks 5F and 6F to support removal from service of these subject tanks located in the F-Area Tank Farm (FTF) at the Savannah River Site (SRS). The FTF General Closure Plan, approved on January 24, 2011, established the protocols by which DOE would: (1) close SRS FTF waste tank systems in accordance with South Carolina Regulations R.61-82, "Proper Closeout of Wastewater

116

Tanks focus area multiyear program plan FY97-FY99  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) continues to face a major tank remediation problem with approximately 332 tanks storing over 378,000 ml of high-level waste (HLW) and transuranic (TRU) waste across the DOE complex. Most of the tanks have significantly exceeded their life spans. Approximately 90 tanks across the DOE complex are known or assumed to have leaked. Some of the tank contents are potentially explosive. These tanks must be remediated and made safe. How- ever, regulatory drivers are more ambitious than baseline technologies and budgets will support. Therefore, the Tanks Focus Area (TFA) began operation in October 1994. The focus area manages, coordinates, and leverages technology development to provide integrated solutions to remediate problems that will accelerate safe and cost-effective cleanup and closure of DOE`s national tank system. The TFA is responsible for technology development to support DOE`s four major tank sites: Hanford Site (Washington), INEL (Idaho), Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) (Tennessee), and Savannah River Site (SRS) (South Carolina). Its technical scope covers the major functions that comprise a complete tank remediation system: safety, characterization, retrieval, pretreatment, immobilization, and closure.

NONE

1996-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

117

Underground Storage Tanks (West Virginia) | Department of Energy  

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

Tanks (West Virginia) Tanks (West Virginia) Underground Storage Tanks (West Virginia) < Back Eligibility Utility Fed. Government Commercial Agricultural Investor-Owned Utility State/Provincial Govt Industrial Construction Municipal/Public Utility Local Government Residential Installer/Contractor Rural Electric Cooperative Tribal Government Low-Income Residential Schools Retail Supplier Institutional Multi-Family Residential Systems Integrator Fuel Distributor Nonprofit General Public/Consumer Transportation Program Info State West Virginia Program Type Siting and Permitting Provider Department of Environmental Protection This rule governs the construction, installation, upgrading, use, maintenance, testing, and closure of underground storage tanks, including certification requirements for individuals who install, repair, retrofit,

118

324 Building special-case waste assessment in support of the 324 Building closure (TPA milestone M-89-05)  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, also known as the Tri-Party Agreement Milestone M-89-05 requires US Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office to complete a 324 Building Special Case Waste Assessment in Support of the 324 Building Closure. This document has been prepared with the intent of meeting this regulatory commitment. Alternatives for the Special Case Wastes located in the 324 Building were defined and analyzed. Based on the criteria of safety, environmental, complexity of interfaces, risk, cost, schedule, and long-term operability and maintainability, the best alternative was chosen. Waste packaging and transportation options are also included in the recommendations. The waste disposition recommendations for the B-Cell dispersibles/tank heels and High-Level Vault packaged residuals are to direct them to the Plutonium Uranium Extraction Facility (PUREX) Number 2 storage tunnel.

Hobart, R.L.

1998-05-12T23:59:59.000Z

119

324 Facility special-case waste assessment in support of 324 closure (TPA milestone M-89-05)  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, also known as the Tri-Party Agreement Milestone M-89-05, requires US Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office to complete a 324 Facility Special-Case Waste Assessment in Support of 324 Closure. This document, HNF-1270, has been prepared with the intent of meeting this regulatory commitment. Alternatives for the special-case wastes located in the 324 Building were defined and analyzed. Based on the criteria of safety, environmental, complexity of interfaces, risk, cost, schedule, and long-term operability and maintainability, the best alternative was chosen. Waste packaging and transportation options are also included in the recommendations. The waste disposition recommendations for the B-Cell dispersibles/tank heels and High-Level Vault packaged residuals are to direct them to the Plutonium Uranium Extraction Facility (PUREX) Number 2 storage tunnel.

Hobart, R.L.

1998-06-25T23:59:59.000Z

120

Dual Tank Fuel System  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

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.

Wagner, Richard William (Albion, NY); Burkhard, James Frank (Churchville, NY); Dauer, Kenneth John (Avon, NY)

1999-11-16T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank closure alternative" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


121

Enhanced Tank Waste Strategy Update  

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

Reduce the life-cycle costs and accelerate the cleanup of the Cold War environmental legacy www.em.doe.gov safety performance cleanup closure E M Environmental Management 1 cleanup of the Cold War environmental legacy Shirley J. Olinger Associate Principal Deputy for Corporate Operations EMAB Presentation June 23, 2011 EM Priorities: Activities to maintain a safe, secure, and compliant posture in the EM complex Radioactive tank waste stabilization, treatment, and disposal Spent (used) nuclear fuel storage, receipt, and disposition "To-Go Life-Cycle Costs" ($185B - $218B as of the FY 2012 Request) Programmatic support activities* 10% Radioactive tank waste stabilization, treatment and disposal 38% Excess facilities decontamination and decommissioning

122

18 - Tanks  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Publisher Summary This chapter presents various nomographs, which are based on the guidelines presented in American Petroleum Institute (API) Publication No. 2519, and used to estimate the average evaporation loss from internal floating-roof tanks. The loss determined from the charts can be used to evaluate the economies of seal conversion and to reconcile refinery, petrochemical plant, and storage terminal losses. The losses represent average standing losses only and they do not cover losses associated with the movement of product into or out of the tank. The nomographs can estimate evaporation loss for product true vapor pressures (TVP) ranging from 1.5 to 14 psia, the most commonly used seals for average and tight fit conditions, tank diameters ranging from 50-250 ft, welded and bolted designs, and both self-supporting and column-supported fixed roof designs. Typical values of the deck fitting loss factors presented as a function of tank diameters in the API Publication 2519 have been used in the preparation of these nomographs. In addition, for the calculations of the evaporation loss for the bolted deck design, a typical deck seam loss factor value of 0.2 has been assumed.

2005-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

123

Modeling the Performance of Engineered Systems for Closure and Near-Surface Disposal  

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

performance cleanup closure performance cleanup closure M E Environmental Management Environmental Management Performance Assessment Community of Practice Technical Exchange July 13-14, 2009 Modeling the Performance of Engineered Systems for Closure and Near-Surface Disposal - Overview and Focused Discussions David S. Kosson CRESP and Vanderbilt University Tank Waste Corporate Board Meeting July 29, 2009 1 safety performance cleanup closure M E Environmental Management Environmental Management Agenda * Overview of DOE Performance Assessment Practices * Focused Discussions - Role of PA Process in Risk Communication and Decisions - Modeling Improvements - PA Assumption Validation - Uncertainty Evaluation - Evolving EPA Developments - Related IAEA Activities * Looking forward

124

Underground Storage Tank Regulations | Department of Energy  

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

Underground Storage Tank Regulations Underground Storage Tank Regulations Underground Storage Tank Regulations < Back Eligibility Agricultural Commercial Construction Developer Fed. Government Fuel Distributor General Public/Consumer Industrial Installer/Contractor Institutional Investor-Owned Utility Local Government Low-Income Residential Multi-Family Residential Municipal/Public Utility Nonprofit Residential Retail Supplier Rural Electric Cooperative Schools State/Provincial Govt Systems Integrator Transportation Tribal Government Utility Savings Category Alternative Fuel Vehicles Hydrogen & Fuel Cells Program Info State Mississippi Program Type Environmental Regulations Siting and Permitting Provider Department of Environmental Quality The Underground Storage Tank Regulations is relevant to all energy projects

125

Feed tank transfer requirements  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Freeman-Pollard, J.R.

1998-09-16T23:59:59.000Z

126

TANK DEIS TITLE PG.psd  

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

Cover Sheet Cover Sheet iii COVER SHEET RESPONSIBLE AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) TITLE: Savannah River Site High-Level Waste Tank Closure Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0303), Aiken, South Carolina CONTACT: For additional information on this environmental impact statement (EIS), write or call: Andrew R. Grainger, NEPA Compliance Officer U.S. Department of Energy, Savannah River Operations Office Building 730B, Room 2418 Aiken, South Carolina 29802 Attention: Tank Closure EIS Local and Nationwide Telephone: (800) 881-7292 Email: nepa@srs.gov For general information on DOE's National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), write or call: Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom, Director Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance, EH-42 U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.

127

Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary  

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

Summary Notes from 24- 25 February 2009 Office of River Protection Waste Management Area C Performance Assessment Input Meeting Attendees: Representatives from Department of Energy-Office of River Protection (DOE-ORP), DOE Richland Operations Office (DOE-RL), DOE-Headquarters (DOE-HQ), the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology), and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), met at the Ecology offices in Richland, Washington on 24 & 25 February 2009. EPA Region X staff participated on 25 February 2009 via teleconference. Discussion: DOE is pursuing closure of Waste Management Area C (WMA-C) located at the Hanford Site. At some point in the future, DOE and NRC will consult on waste determinations for these tank closures; additionally these tanks will be closed in coordination with EPA and

128

TANK DEIS SUMMARY TITLE PG.psd  

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

Summary Summary S-iii COVER SHEET RESPONSIBLE AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) TITLE: Savannah River Site High-Level Waste Tank Closure Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0303), Aiken, South Carolina. CONTACT: For additional information on this environmental impact statement (EIS), write or call: Andrew R. Grainger, NEPA Compliance Officer U.S. Department of Energy, Savannah River Operations Office Building 730B, Room 2418 Aiken, South Carolina 29802 Attention: Tank Closure EIS Local and Nationwide Telephone: (800) 881-7292 Email: nepa@srs.gov For general information on DOE's National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process, write or call: Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom, Director Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance, EH-42 U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W.

129

Storage Tanks (Arkansas) | Department of Energy  

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

Storage Tanks (Arkansas) Storage Tanks (Arkansas) Storage Tanks (Arkansas) < Back Eligibility Commercial Construction Fuel Distributor Industrial Utility Savings Category Alternative Fuel Vehicles Hydrogen & Fuel Cells Program Info State Arkansas Program Type Environmental Regulations Siting and Permitting Provider Department of Environmental Quality The Storage Tanks regulations is a set of rules and permit requirements mandated by the Arkansas Pollution and Ecology Commission in order to protect the public health and the lands and the waters of the State of Arkansas. They are promulgated pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated 8-7-801 and the Petroleum Storage Trust Fund Act 8-7-901. It covers all storage tanks, above (AST) and underground (UST). Most importantly these regulations establish that all owners and operators of storage tanks must

130

Decontamination and inspection plan for Phase 3 closure of the 300 area waste acid treatment system  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This decontamination and inspection plan (DIP) describes decontamination and verification activities in support of Phase 3 closure of the 300 Area Waste Acid Treatment System (WATS). Phase 3 is the third phase of three WATS closure phases. Phase 3 attains clean closure conditions for WATS portions of the 334 and 311 Tank Farms (TF) and the 333 and 303-F Buildings. This DIP also describes designation and management of waste and debris generated during Phase 3 closure activities. Information regarding Phase 1 and Phase 2 for decontamination and verification activities closure can be found in WHC-SD-ENV-AP-001 and HNF-1784, respectively. This DIP is provided as a supplement to the closure plan (DOE/RL-90-11). This DIP provides the documentation for Ecology concurrence with Phase 3 closure methods and activities. This DIP is intended to provide greater detail than is contained in the closure plan to satisfy Ecology Dangerous Waste Regulations, Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173-303-610 requirement that closure documents describe the methods for removing, transporting, storing, and disposing of all dangerous waste at the unit. The decontamination and verification activities described in this DIP are based on the closure plan and on agreements reached between Ecology and the U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office (DOE-RL) during Phase 3 closure activity workshops and/or project manager meetings (PMMs).

LUKE, S.N.

1999-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

131

Small Site Closures  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

CO 1997 Old Rifle, CO 1997 Slick Rock Old North Continent, CO 1997 Slick Rock Union Carbide, CO 1997 New Brunswick Site, NJ 1997 List of Small Site Closures by Year 2 Site Name,...

132

AREA 5 RWMS CLOSURE  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

153 CLOSURE STRATEGY NEVADA TEST SITE AREA 5 RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT SITE Revision 0 Prepared by Under Contract No. DE-AC52-06NA25946 March 2007 DISCLAIMER Reference herein to...

133

Tank Waste Corporate Board Meeting 07/29/09 | Department of Energy  

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

9/09 9/09 Tank Waste Corporate Board Meeting 07/29/09 The following documents are associated with the Tank Waste Corporate Board Meeting held on July 29th, 2009. Fuel Cycle Research and Development Program Retrieval and Repackaging of RH-TRU Waste - General Presentation Modular Hot Cell Technology Tank Waste System Integrated Project Team Gunite Tanks Waste Retrieval and Closure Operations at Oak Ridge Nattional Laboratory Integrated Facilities Disposition Program Oak Ridge National Laboratory TRU Waste Processing Center Tank Waste Processing Supernate Processing System Chemical Cleaning Program Review Enhanced Chemical Cleaning Hanford Single-Shell Tank Integrity Program Modeling the Performance of Engineered Systems for Closure and Near-Surface Disposal Nuclear Safety R&D in the Waste Processing Technology Development &

134

F-Tank Farm Performance Assessment, Rev 1 | Department of Energy  

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

F-Tank Farm Performance Assessment, Rev 1 F-Tank Farm Performance Assessment, Rev 1 F-Tank Farm Performance Assessment, Rev 1 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 high-level waste if the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the NRC, determines that the criteria in NDAA Section 3116(a) are met. This Draft FTF 3116 Basis Document shows that those criteria are satisfied, to support a potential determination by the Secretary pursuant Section 3116. This Draft FTF 3116 Basis Document concerns the stabilized residuals in waste tanks and ancillary structures, those waste tanks, and the ancillary structures (including integral equipment) at the SRS FTF at the time of closure.

135

F-Tank Farm Performance Assessment, Rev 1 | Department of Energy  

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

F-Tank Farm Performance Assessment, Rev 1 F-Tank Farm Performance Assessment, Rev 1 F-Tank Farm Performance Assessment, Rev 1 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 high-level waste if the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the NRC, determines that the criteria in NDAA Section 3116(a) are met. This Draft FTF 3116 Basis Document shows that those criteria are satisfied, to support a potential determination by the Secretary pursuant Section 3116. This Draft FTF 3116 Basis Document concerns the stabilized residuals in waste tanks and ancillary structures, those waste tanks, and the ancillary structures (including integral equipment) at the SRS FTF at the time of closure.

136

Type I Tanks  

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

I Tanks I Tanks * 12 Type I tanks were built between 1951-53 * 750,000 gallon capacity; 75 feet in diameter by 24 ½ feet high * Partial secondary containment with leak detection * Contain approximately 10 percent of the waste volume * 7 Type I tanks have leaked waste into the tank annulus; the amount of waste stored in these tanks is kept below the known leak sites that have appeared over the decades of

137

Chemical Stabilization of Hanford Tank Residual Waste  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Three different chemical treatment methods were tested for their ability to stabilize residual waste from Hanford tank C-202 for reducing contaminant release (Tc, Cr, and U in particular). The three treatment methods tested were lime addition [Ca(OH)2], an in-situ Ceramicrete waste form based on chemically bonded phosphate ceramics, and a ferrous iron/goethite treatment. These approaches rely on formation of insoluble forms of the contaminants of concern (lime addition and ceramicrete) and chemical reduction followed by co-precipitation (ferrous iron/goethite incorporation treatment). The results have demonstrated that release of the three most significant mobile contaminants of concern from tank residual wastes can be dramatically reduced after treatment compared to contact with simulated grout porewater without treatment. For uranium, all three treatments methods reduced the leachable uranium concentrations by well over three orders of magnitude. In the case of uranium and technetium, released concentrations were well below their respective MCLs for the wastes tested. For tank C-202 residual waste, chromium release concentrations were above the MCL but were considerably reduced relative to untreated tank waste. This innovative approach has the potential to revolutionize Hanfords tank retrieval process, by allowing larger volumes of residual waste to be left in tanks while providing an acceptably low level of risk with respect to contaminant release that is protective of the environment and human health. Such an approach could enable DOE to realize significant cost savings through streamlined retrieval and closure operations.

Cantrell, Kirk J.; Um, Wooyong; Williams, Benjamin D.; Bowden, Mark E.; Gartman, Brandy N.; Lukens, Wayne W.; Buck, Edgar C.; Mausolf, Edward J.

2014-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

138

ROBOTIC TANK INSPECTION END EFFECTOR  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The objective of this contract between Oceaneering Space Systems (OSS) and the Department of Energy (DOE) was to provide a tool for the DOE to inspect the inside tank walls of underground radioactive waste storage tanks in their tank farms. Some of these tanks are suspected to have leaks, but the harsh nature of the environment within the tanks precludes human inspection of tank walls. As a result of these conditions only a few inspection methods can fulfill this task. Of the methods available, OSS chose to pursue Alternating Current Field Measurement (ACFM), because it does not require clean surfaces for inspection, nor any contact with the Surface being inspected, and introduces no extra by-products in the inspection process (no coupling fluids or residues are left behind). The tool produced by OSS is the Robotic Tank Inspection End Effector (RTIEE), which is initially deployed on the tip of the Light Duty Utility Arm (LDUA). The RTEE combines ACFM with a color video camera for both electromagnetic and visual inspection The complete package consists of an end effector, its corresponding electronics and software, and a user's manual to guide the operator through an inspection. The system has both coarse and fine inspection modes and allows the user to catalog defects and suspected areas of leakage in a database for further examination, which may lead to emptying the tank for repair, decommissioning, etc.. The following is an updated report to OSS document OSS-21100-7002, which was submitted in 1995. During the course of the contract, two related subtasks arose, the Wall and Coating Thickness Sensor and the Vacuum Scarifying and Sampling Tool Assembly. The first of these subtasks was intended to evaluate the corrosion and wall thinning of 55-gallon steel drums. The second was retrieved and characterized the waste material trapped inside the annulus region of the underground tanks on the DOE's tank farms. While these subtasks were derived from the original intent of the contract, the focus remains on the RTIEE.

Rachel Landry

1999-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

139

Tank Waste Disposal Program redefinition  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The record of decision (ROD) (DOE 1988) on the Final Environmental Impact Statement, Hanford Defense High-Level, Transuranic and Tank Wastes, Hanford Site, Richland Washington identifies the method for disposal of double-shell tank waste and cesium and strontium capsules at the Hanford Site. The ROD also identifies the need for additional evaluations before a final decision is made on the disposal of single-shell tank waste. This document presents the results of systematic evaluation of the present technical circumstances, alternatives, and regulatory requirements in light of the values of the leaders and constitutents of the program. It recommends a three-phased approach for disposing of tank wastes. This approach allows mature technologies to be applied to the treatment of well-understood waste forms in the near term, while providing time for the development and deployment of successively more advanced pretreatment technologies. The advanced technologies will accelerate disposal by reducing the volume of waste to be vitrified. This document also recommends integration of the double-and single-shell tank waste disposal programs, provides a target schedule for implementation of the selected approach, and describes the essential elements of a program to be baselined in 1992.

Grygiel, M.L.; Augustine, C.A.; Cahill, M.A.; Garfield, J.S.; Johnson, M.E.; Kupfer, M.J.; Meyer, G.A.; Roecker, J.H. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States); Holton, L.K.; Hunter, V.L.; Triplett, M.B. [Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, WA (United States)

1991-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

140

Corrective Action Decision Document for Corrective Action Unit 127: Areas 25 and 26 Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada: Revision 0  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Corrective Action Decision Document identifies and rationalizes the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office's selection of recommended corrective action alternatives (CAAs) appropriate to facilitate the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 127: Areas 25 and 26 Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, under the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order. Corrective Action Unit 127 consists of twelve corrective action sites (CASs). Corrective action investigation (CAI) activities were performed from February 24, 2003, through May 2, 2003, with additional sampling conducted on June 6, 2003, June 9, 2003, and June 24, 2003. Analytes detected during these investigation activities were evaluated against preliminary action levels to identify contaminants of concern (COCs) for each CAS, resulting in the determination that only two of the CASs did not have COCs exceeding regulatory levels. Based on the evaluation of analytical data from the CAI, review of future and current operations in Areas 25 and 26 of the Nevada Test Site, and the detailed and comparative analysis of the potential CAAs, the following alternatives were developed for consideration: (1) No Further Action is the preferred corrective action for the two CASs (25-02-13, 26-02-01) identified with no COCs; (2) Clean Closure is the preferred corrective action for eight of the CASs (25-01-05, 25-23-11, 25-12-01, 25-01-06, 26-01-01, 26-01-02, 26-99-01, 26-23-01); and (3) Closure in Place is the preferred corrective action for the remaining two CASs (25-01-07, 25-02-02). These three alternatives were judged to meet all requirements for the technical components evaluated. Additionally, these alternatives meet all applicable state and federal regulations for closure of the sites at CAU 127 and will reduce potential future exposure pathways to the contaminated media.

U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office

2003-09-26T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank closure alternative" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


141

OXALATE MASS BALANCE DURING CHEMICAL CLEANING IN TANK 6F  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Savannah River Remediation (SRR) is preparing Tank 6F for closure. The first step in preparing the tank for closure is mechanical sludge removal. Following mechanical sludge removal, SRS performed chemical cleaning with oxalic acid to remove the sludge heel. Personnel are currently assessing the effectiveness of the chemical cleaning to determine whether the tank is ready for closure. SRR personnel collected liquid samples during chemical cleaning and submitted them to Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) for analysis. Following chemical cleaning, they collected a solid sample (also known as 'process sample') and submitted it to SRNL for analysis. The authors analyzed these samples to assess the effectiveness of the chemical cleaning process. Analysis of the anions showed the measured oxalate removed from Tank 6F to be approximately 50% of the amount added in the oxalic acid. To close the oxalate mass balance, the author collected solid samples, leached them with nitric acid, and measured the concentration of cations and anions in the leachate. Some conclusions from this work are: (1) Approximately 65% of the oxalate added as oxalic acid was removed with the decanted liquid. (2) Approximately 1% of the oxalate (added to the tank as oxalic acid) formed precipitates with compounds such as nickel, manganese, sodium, and iron (II), and was dissolved with nitric acid. (3) As much as 30% of the oxalate may have decomposed forming carbon dioxide. The balance does not fully account for all the oxalate added. The offset represents the combined uncertainty in the analyses and sampling.

Poirier, M.; Fink, S.

2011-07-22T23:59:59.000Z

142

Underground Storage Tank Regulations for the Certification of Persons Who  

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

Underground Storage Tank Regulations for the Certification of Underground Storage Tank Regulations for the Certification of Persons Who Install, Alter, and Remove Underground Storage Tanks (Mississippi) Underground Storage Tank Regulations for the Certification of Persons Who Install, Alter, and Remove Underground Storage Tanks (Mississippi) < Back Eligibility Agricultural Commercial Construction Developer Fed. Government Fuel Distributor General Public/Consumer Industrial Installer/Contractor Institutional Investor-Owned Utility Local Government Low-Income Residential Multi-Family Residential Municipal/Public Utility Nonprofit Residential Retail Supplier Rural Electric Cooperative Schools State/Provincial Govt Systems Integrator Transportation Tribal Government Utility Savings Category Alternative Fuel Vehicles Hydrogen & Fuel Cells

143

HANFORD TANK CLEANUP UPDATE  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

BERRIOCHOA MV

2011-04-07T23:59:59.000Z

144

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

from off site, while others suggested that the Final Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Managing Treatment, Storage, and Disposal of Radioactive and...

145

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

of Public Lands LOCAL GOVERNMENT Idaho Mayors Jared Fuhriman, Idaho Falls Tracy Armstrong, Kimberly Brian Blad, Pocatello Oregon Mayors Bob Severson, Hermiston Arthur...

146

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

in the context of cumulative impacts. The effects of uncertainties and gaps in input data (e.g., spatial distribution of well borings across the study area), modeling...

147

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

10 CFR 830 Facility Safety DOE Order 420.1B (December 22, 2005; Change 1, April 19, 2010) Conduct of Operations DOE Order 422.1 (June 29, 2010) Verification of Readiness to Start...

148

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

9 GLOSSARY absorbed dose - The energy imparted to matter by ionizing radiation per unit mass of the irradiated material (e.g., biological tissue). The units of absorbed dose...

149

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

... 20 Figure 13. Carbon Tetrachloride Concentration Versus Time at the Core Zone Boundary (Three Cases)...

150

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

reported for these sites and are now provided in the final inventory database. Sites with carbon tetrachloride inventories - Although a site may have a carbon tetrachloride...

151

Savannah River Tank Waste Residuals  

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

Savannah Savannah River Savannah River Tank Waste Residuals HLW Corporate Board November 6, 2008 1 November 6, 2008 Presentation By Sherri R. Ross Department of Energy Savannah River Operations Office The Issue * How clean is clean? * Ultimate Challenge - Justify highly radioactive radionuclides have been removed to the maximum extent practical? 2 removed to the maximum extent practical? - Building compelling regulatory documentation that will withstand intense scrutiny §3116 Requirements 1. Does not require disposal in deep geological repository 2. Highly radioactive radionuclides removed to the maximum extent practical 3. Meet the performance objectives in 10 CFR Part 3 3. Meet the performance objectives in 10 CFR Part 61, Subpart C 4. Waste disposed pursuant to a State-approved closure plan or permit Note: If it is anticipated that Class C disposal limits will be exceeded, additional

152

Safer Work Plan for CAUs 452, 454, 456, and 464 Closure of Historical UST Release Sites Nevada Test Site  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This plan addresses characterization and closure of nine underground storage tank petroleum hydrocarbon release sites. The sites are located at the Nevada Test Site in Areas 2, 9, 12, 23, and 25. The underground storage tanks associated with the release sites and addressed by this plan were closed between 1990 and 1996 by the U. S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office. One underground storage tank was closed in place (23-111-1) while the remaining eight were closed by removal. Hydrocarbon releases were identified at each of the sites based upon laboratory analytical data samples collected below the tank bottoms. The objective of this plan is to provide a method for implementing characterization and closure of historical underground storage tank hydrocarbon release sites.

Jerry Bonn

1997-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

153

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Decals  

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

Alternative Fuel Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Decals to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Decals on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Decals on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Decals on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Decals on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Decals on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Decals on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Decals An individual may place alternative fuel into the fuel tank of a motor

154

Engineering study of 50 miscellaneous inactive underground radioactive waste tanks located at the Hanford Site, Washington  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This engineering study addresses 50 inactive underground radioactive waste tanks. The tanks were formerly used for the following functions associated with plutonium and uranium separations and waste management activities in the 200 East and 200 West Areas of the Hanford Site: settling solids prior to disposal of supernatant in cribs and a reverse well; neutralizing acidic process wastes prior to crib disposal; receipt and processing of single-shell tank (SST) waste for uranium recovery operations; catch tanks to collect water that intruded into diversion boxes and transfer pipeline encasements and any leakage that occurred during waste transfer operations; and waste handling and process experimentation. Most of these tanks have not been in use for many years. Several projects have, been planned and implemented since the 1970`s and through 1985 to remove waste and interim isolate or interim stabilize many of the tanks. Some tanks have been filled with grout within the past several years. Responsibility for final closure and/or remediation of these tanks is currently assigned to several programs including Tank Waste Remediation Systems (TWRS), Environmental Restoration and Remedial Action (ERRA), and Decommissioning and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Closure (D&RCP). Some are under facility landlord responsibility for maintenance and surveillance (i.e. Plutonium Uranium Extraction [PUREX]). However, most of the tanks are not currently included in any active monitoring or surveillance program.

Freeman-Pollard, J.R.

1994-03-02T23:59:59.000Z

155

Tank characterization report: Tank 241-C-109  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Single-shell tank 241-C-109 is a Hanford Site Ferrocyanide Watch List tank that was most recently sampled in September 1992. Analyses of materials obtained from tank 241-C-109 were conducted to support the resolution of the ferrocyanide unreviewed safety question (USQ) and to support Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and consent Order (Tri- Party Agreement) Milestone M-10-00. This report describes this analysis.

Simpson, B.C.; Borshiem, G.L.; Jensen, L.

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

156

Washington Closure Hanford, LLC  

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

August 19,2010 August 19,2010 CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Mr. Neil Brosee President Washington Closure Hanford, LLC 2620 Fermi Avenue Richland, Washington 99354 WEA-201 0-02 Dear Mr. Brosee: This letter refers to the Office of Health, Safety and Security's Office of Enforcement investigation into the facts and circumstances surrounding the employee fall that occurred at the Hanford High Bay Testing Facility (336 Building) on July 1, 2009. The worker sustained serious injury to his back and broke bones in both legs. Based on an evaluation of the evidence in this matter, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has concluded that violations of 10 C.F.R. Part 851, Worker Safety and Health Program, by Washington Closure Hanford, LLC (WCH) occurred. Accordingly, DOE is issuing the enclosed Preliminary Notice of

157

THE RETRIEVAL KNOWLEDGE CENTER EVALUATION OF LOW TANK LEVEL MIXING TECHNOLOGIES FOR DOE HIGH LEVEL WASTE TANK RETRIEVAL 10516  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Department of Energy (DOE) Complex has over two-hundred underground storage tanks containing over 80-million gallons of legacy waste from the production of nuclear weapons. The majority of the waste is located at four major sites across the nation and is planned for treatment over a period of almost forty years. The DOE Office of Technology Innovation & Development within the Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM) sponsors technology research and development programs to support processing advancements and technology maturation designed to improve the costs and schedule for disposal of the waste and closure of the tanks. Within the waste processing focus area are numerous technical initiatives which included the development of a suite of waste removal technologies to address the need for proven equipment and techniques to remove high level radioactive wastes from the waste tanks that are now over fifty years old. In an effort to enhance the efficiency of waste retrieval operations, the DOE-EM Office of Technology Innovation & Development funded an effort to improve communications and information sharing between the DOE's major waste tank locations as it relates to retrieval. The task, dubbed the Retrieval Knowledge Center (RKC) was co-lead by the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) and the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) with core team members representing the Oak Ridge and Idaho sites, as well as, site contractors responsible for waste tank operations. One of the greatest challenges to the processing and closure of many of the tanks is complete removal of all tank contents. Sizeable challenges exist for retrieving waste from High Level Waste (HLW) tanks; with complications that are not normally found with tank retrieval in commercial applications. Technologies currently in use for waste retrieval are generally adequate for bulk removal; however, removal of tank heels, the materials settled in the bottom of the tank, using the same technology have proven to be difficult. Through the RKC, DOE-EM funded an evaluation of adaptable commercial technologies that could assist with the removal of the tank heels. This paper will discuss the efforts and results of developing the RKC to improve communications and discussion of tank waste retrieval through a series of meetings designed to identify technical gaps in retrieval technologies at the DOE Hanford and Savannah River Sites. This paper will also describe the results of an evaluation of commercially available technologies for low level mixing as they might apply to HLW tank heel retrievals.

Fellinger, A.

2009-12-08T23:59:59.000Z

158

Sampling and Analysis Plan for Old Solvent Tanks S1-S22 to Address Waste Acceptance Criteria  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Environmental Restoration Department (ERD) assumed custody of the Old Solvent Tanks (Tanks S1-S22) in the Old Radioactive Waste Burial Ground (ORWBG, 643-E) from Waste Management in January 1991. The purpose of this Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) is to collect and analyze samples of the sludge solids, organic and aqueous phases to determine the level of radioactivity, the isotopic constituents, the specific gravity, and other physical parameters. These data must be obtained to evaluate the process safety of remediating the tanks, to determine the disposal path for the material in the tanks, and to determine the most viable closure technology for the tanks.

Filpus-Luyckx, P.E. [Westinghouse Savannah River Company, AIKEN, SC (United States)

1997-10-02T23:59:59.000Z

159

Oxalate Mass Balance During Chemical Cleaning in Tank 5F  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Savannah River Site (SRS) is preparing Tank 5F for closure. The first step in preparing the tank for closure is mechanical sludge removal. Following mechanical sludge removal, SRS performed chemical cleaning with oxalic acid to remove the sludge heel. Personnel are currently assessing the effectiveness of the chemical cleaning to determine whether the tank is ready for closure. SRS personnel collected liquid samples during chemical cleaning and submitted them to Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) for analysis. Following chemical cleaning, they collected a solid sample (also known as 'process sample') and submitted it to SRNL for analysis. The authors analyzed these samples to assess the effectiveness of the chemical cleaning process. Analysis of the anions showed the measured oxalate removed from Tank 5F to be approximately 50% of the amount added in the oxalic acid. To close the oxalate mass balance, the author collected solid samples, leached them with nitric acid, and measured the concentration of cations and anions in the leachate.

Poirier, M.; Fink, S.

2011-07-08T23:59:59.000Z

160

Septic Tanks (Oklahoma)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

A license from the Department of Environmental Quality is required for cleaning or pumping of septic tanks or holding tanks and disposing of sewage or septage. The rules for the license are...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank closure alternative" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


161

Onboard Storage Tank Workshop  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Sandia National Laboratories co-hosted the Onboard Storage Tank Workshop on April 29th, 2010. Onboard storage tank experts gathered to share lessons learned...

162

Tank 241-TX-105 tank characterization plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document is a plan which serves as the contractual agreement between the Characterization Program, Sampling Operations, WHC 222-S Laboratory, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and PNL tank vapor program. The scope of this plan is to provide guidance for the sampling and analysis of vapor samples from tank 241-TX-105.

Carpenter, B.C.

1995-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

163

Tank 241-T-111 tank characterization plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document is a plan which serves as the contractual agreement between the Characterization Program, Sampling Operations, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and PNL tank vapor program. The scope of this plan is to provide guidance for the sampling and analysis of vapor samples from tank 241-T-111.

Homi, C.S.

1995-01-10T23:59:59.000Z

164

Caustic Leaching of Hanford Tank S-110 Sludge  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report describes the Hanford Tank S-110 sludge caustic leaching test conducted in FY 2001 at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. The data presented here can be used to develop the baseline and alternative flowsheets for pretreating Hanford tank sludge. The U.S. Department of Energy funded the work through the Efficient Separations and Processing Crosscutting Program (ESP; EM?50).

Lumetta, Gregg J.; Carson, Katharine J.; Darnell, Lori P.; Greenwood, Lawrence R.; Hoopes, Francis V.; Sell, Richard L.; Sinkov, Sergey I.; Soderquist, Chuck Z.; Urie, Michael W.; Wagner, John J.

2001-10-31T23:59:59.000Z

165

Feed tank transfer requirements  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Freeman-Pollard, J.R.

1998-09-16T23:59:59.000Z

166

Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary  

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

3622, Rev. 0 3622, Rev. 0 Summary Notes from 1 - 3 September 2009 Office of River Protection Waste Management Area C Tank Farm Performance Assessment Input Meeting MP Connelly Washington River Protection Solutions LLC Richland, WA 99352 U.S. Department of Energy Contract DE-AC27-08RV1 4800 EDT/ECN: DRF UC: Cost Center: Charge Code: B&R Code: Total Pages: 13 Key Words: Waste Management Area C, Performance Assessment, tank closure, waste inventory Abstract: Summary of meeting between DOE-ORP and Hanford Site regulators/stakeholders regarding Waste Management Area C performance assessment 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

167

Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary  

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

1878, Rev. 0 1878, Rev. 0 Summary Notes from 5 - 7 May 2009 Office of River Protection Waste Management Area C Tank Farm Performance Assessment Input Meeting MP Connelly Washington River Protection Solutions LLC Richland, WA 99352 U.S. Department of Energy Contract DE-AC27-08RV14800 EDT/EON: DRF UC: Cost Center: Charge Code: B&R Code: Total Pages: 15 Key Words: Waste Management Area C, Performance Assessment, tank closure, waste inventory Abstract: Summary of meeting between DOE-ORP and Hanford Site regulators/stakeholders regarding Waste Management Area C performance assessment 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

168

Contaminant Release from Residual Waste in Closed Single-Shell Tanks and Other Waste Forms Associated with the Tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This chapter describes the release of contaminants from the various waste forms that are anticipated to be associated with closure of the single-shell tanks. These waste forms include residual sludge or saltcake that will remain in the tanks after waste retrieval. Other waste forms include engineered glass and cementitious materials as well as contaminated soil impacted by previous tank leaks. This chapter also describes laboratory testing to quantify contaminant release and how the release data are used in performance/risk assessments for the tank waste management units and the onsite waste disposal facilities. The chapter ends with a discussion of the surprises and lessons learned to date from the testing of waste materials and the development of contaminant release models.

Deutsch, William J.

2008-01-17T23:59:59.000Z

169

SLUDGE BATCH 7 PREPARATION TANK 4 AND 12 CHARACTERIZATION  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

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

2010-05-21T23:59:59.000Z

170

System for closure of a physical anomaly  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

Systems for closure of a physical anomaly. Closure is accomplished by a closure body with an exterior surface. The exterior surface contacts the opening of the anomaly and closes the anomaly. The closure body has a primary shape for closing the anomaly and a secondary shape for being positioned in the physical anomaly. The closure body preferably comprises a shape memory polymer.

Bearinger, Jane P; Maitland, Duncan J; Schumann, Daniel L; Wilson, Thomas S

2014-11-11T23:59:59.000Z

171

DOE Announces Preference for Disposal of Hanford Transuranic Tank Waste at  

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

Announces Preference for Disposal of Hanford Transuranic Tank Announces Preference for Disposal of Hanford Transuranic Tank Waste at WIPP DOE Announces Preference for Disposal of Hanford Transuranic Tank Waste at WIPP March 6, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announced its preferred alternative to retrieve, treat, package, characterize and certify certain Hanford tank waste for disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in Carlsbad, New Mexico, if such waste is properly classified in the future as defense-related mixed transuranic tank waste (mixed TRU waste). This preferred alternative, which may cover up to approximately 3.1 million gallons of tank waste contained in up to 20 tanks, will provide DOE with an option to deal with recent information about possible tank leaks and to

172

Tank waste remediation system vadose zone program plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The objective of the vadose zone characterization under this program is to develop a better conceptual geohydrologic model of identified tank farms which will be characterized so that threats to human health and the environment from past leaks and spills, intentional liquid discharges, potential future leaks during retrieval, and from residual contaminants that may remain in tank farms at closure can be explicitly addressed in decision processes. This model will include geologic, hydrologic, and hydrochemical parameters as defined by the requirements of each of the TWRS programs identified here. The intent of this TWRS Vadose Zone Program Plan is to provide justification and an implementation plan for the following activities: Develop a sufficient understanding of subsurface conditions and transport processes to support decisions on management, cleanup, and containment of past leaks, spills, and intentional liquid discharges; Develop a sufficient understanding of transport processes to support decisions on controlling potential retrieval leaks; Develop a sufficient understanding of transport processes to support decisions on tank farm closure, including allowable residual waste that may remain at closure; and Provide new information on geotechnical properties in the 200 Area to supplement data used for design and performance assessment for immobilized low-activity waste disposal facilities.

Fredenburg, E.A.

1998-07-27T23:59:59.000Z

173

Closure report for N Reactor  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report has been prepared to satisfy Section 3156(b) of Public Law 101-189 (Reports in Connection with Permanent Closures of Department of Energy Defense Nuclear Facilities), which requires submittal of a Closure Report to Congress by the Secretary of Energy upon the permanent cessation of production operations at a US Department of Energy (DOE) defense nuclear facility (Watkins 1991). This closure report provides: (1) A complete survey of the environmental problems at the facility; (2) Budget quality data indicating the cost of environmental restoration and other remediation and cleanup efforts at the facility; (3) A proposed cleanup schedule.

Not Available

1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

174

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...

175

Tank Waste Committee Page 1  

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

Tank Waste Committee Page 2 Final Meeting Summary January 8, 2014 and integrity of the tanks with a focus on tank AY-102. In his presentation, Glyn noted the following points: *...

176

F-Area Type IV Tank Liner Life Estimation  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Savannah River Site (SRS) is proceeding with closure of the Type IV waste tanks that are located in F-area. These tanks are underground concrete vaults and have been in service since the early 1960's. The interior of the concrete vault is lined with carbon steel plate. The time necessary for the carbon steel plate to disintegrate was estimated. These calculations assumed that the concrete structure was degraded and therefore the exterior of the liner is exposed to the soil conditions. Two corrosion mechanisms were examined: pitting and general corrosion. Data from soil corrosion studies performed by the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) was utilized to estimate the corrosion rate of the carbon steel liner. The following conclusions were made: (1) Cecil Clay Loam in Atlanta, Georgia, a soil tested by the NBS, is representative of the SRS soil conditions near the F-Area Type IV tanks. (2) The time to tank wall disintegration due to general corrosion only was estimated to be 770 years after concrete vault failure. (3) The time to tank wall disintegration due to pitting corrosion was estimated to be 675 years after concrete vault failure. (4) The lower bound estimate for the time to tank wall disintegration is 675 years.

Wiersman, B. J.

2005-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

177

Hanford tank residual waste contaminant source terms and release models  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Residual waste is expected to be left in 177 underground storage tanks after closure at the U.S. Department of Energys Hanford Site in Washington State (USA). In the long term, the residual wastes represent a potential source of contamination to the subsurface environment. Residual materials that cannot be completely removed during the tank closure process are being studied to identify and characterize the solid phases and estimate the release of contaminants from these solids to water that might enter the closed tanks in the future. As of the end of 2009, residual waste from five tanks has been evaluated. Residual wastes from adjacent tanks C-202 and C-203 have high U concentrations of 24 and 59 wt%, respectively, while residual wastes from nearby tanks C-103 and C-106 have low U concentrations of 0.4 and 0.03 wt%, respectively. Aluminum concentrations are high (8.2 to 29.1 wt%) in some tanks (C-103, C-106, and S-112) and relatively low (<1.5 wt%) in other tanks (C-202 and C-203). Gibbsite is a common mineral in tanks with high Al concentrations, while non-crystalline U-Na-C-O-PH phases are common in the U-rich residual wastes from tanks C-202 and C-203. Iron oxides/hydroxides have been identified in all residual waste samples studied to date. Contaminant release from the residual wastes was studied by conducting batch leach tests using distilled deionized water, a Ca(OH)2-saturated solution, or a CaCO3-saturated water. Uranium release concentrations are highly dependent on waste and leachant compositions with dissolved U concentrations one or two orders of magnitude higher in the tests with high U residual wastes, and also higher when leached with the CaCO3-saturated solution than with the Ca(OH)2-saturated solution. Technetium leachability is not as strongly dependent on the concentration of Tc in the waste, and it appears to be slightly more leachable by the Ca(OH)2-saturated solution than by the CaCO3-saturated solution. In general, Tc is much less leachable (<10 wt% of the available mass in the waste) than previously predicted. This may be due to the coprecipitation of trace concentrations of Tc in relatively insoluble phases such as Fe oxide/hydroxide solids.

Deutsch, William J.; Cantrell, Kirk J.; Krupka, Kenneth M.; Lindberg, Michael J.; Serne, R. Jeffrey

2011-08-23T23:59:59.000Z

178

Tank Waste Committee Page 1  

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

... 2 Review of Responses to HAB Advice 271 Leaking Tanks and HAB Advice 273 Openness and Transparency Related to Tank Waste Treatment...

179

Reverberant Tank | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Reverberant Tank Jump to: navigation, search Retrieved from "http:en.openei.orgwindex.php?titleReverberantTank&oldid596388" Category: Hydrodynamic Testing Facility Type...

180

Tank characterization reference guide  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Characterization of the Hanford Site high-level waste storage tanks supports safety issue resolution; operations and maintenance requirements; and retrieval, pretreatment, vitrification, and disposal technology development. Technical, historical, and programmatic information about the waste tanks is often scattered among many sources, if it is documented at all. This Tank Characterization Reference Guide, therefore, serves as a common location for much of the generic tank information that is otherwise contained in many documents. The report is intended to be an introduction to the issues and history surrounding the generation, storage, and management of the liquid process wastes, and a presentation of the sampling, analysis, and modeling activities that support the current waste characterization. This report should provide a basis upon which those unfamiliar with the Hanford Site tank farms can start their research.

De Lorenzo, D.S.; DiCenso, A.T.; Hiller, D.B.; Johnson, K.W.; Rutherford, J.H.; Smith, D.J. [Los Alamos Technical Associates, Kennewick, WA (United States); Simpson, B.C. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

1994-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank closure alternative" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


181

Closure Sites | Department of Energy  

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

Closure Sites Closure Sites Closure Sites View a list of the compliance agreements for the many EM closure sites, such as Mound and Rocky Flats, below. Associated summaries are also included. Pinellas Remediation Agreement Pinellas Remediation Agreement Summary Maxey Flats Consent Decree -Part 1, April 18, 1996 Maxey Flats Consent Decree -Part 2, April 18, 1996 Maxey Flats Consent Decree April 18, 1996 Summary Monticello Mill site Federal Facility Agreement, December 22, 1988 Monticello Mill site Federal Facility Agreement, December 22, 1988 Summary Battelle Columbus Laboratories Director's Final Findings and Orders, October 4, 1995 Battelle Columbus Laboratories Director's Final Findings and Orders, October 4, 1995 Summary Fernald Environmental Management Project Consent Agreement and Final Order,

182

Proceedings of the tenth annual DOE low-level waste management conference: Session 6: Closure and decommissioning  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document contains eight papers on various aspects of low-level radioactive waste management. Topics include: site closure; ground cover; alternate cap designs; performance monitoring of waste trenches; closure options for a mixed waste site; and guidance for environmental monitoring. Individual papers were processed separately for the data base. (TEM)

Not Available

1988-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

183

Hanford Tank Waste Information Enclosure 1 Hanford Tank Waste Information  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Hanford Tank Waste Information Enclosure 1 1 Hanford Tank Waste Information 1.0 Summary This information demonstrates the wastes in the twelve Hanford Site tanks meet the definition of transuranic (TRU. The wastes in these twelve (12) tanks are not high-level waste (HLW), and contain more than 100 nanocuries

184

Phase chemistry and radionuclide retention of high level radioactive waste tank sludges  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The US Department of Energy (DOE) has millions of gallons of high level nuclear waste stored in underground tanks at Hanford, Washington and Savannah River, South Carolina. These tanks will eventually be emptied and decommissioned. This will leave a residue of sludge adhering to the interior tank surfaces that may contaminate groundwaters with radionuclides and RCRA metals. Experimentation on such sludges is both dangerous and prohibitively expensive so there is a great advantage to developing artificial sludges. The US DOE Environmental Management Science Program (EMSP) has funded a program to investigate the feasibility of developing such materials. The following text reports on the success of this program, and suggests that much of the radioisotope inventory left in a tank will not move out into the surrounding environment. Ultimately, such studies may play a significant role in developing safe and cost effective tank closure strategies.

KRUMHANSL,JAMES L.; BRADY,PATRICK V.; ZHANG,PENGCHU; ARTHUR,SARA E.; HUTCHERSON,SHEILA K.; LIU,J.; QIAN,M.; ANDERSON,HOWARD L.

2000-05-19T23:59:59.000Z

185

Hanford ETR - Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant - Hanford Tank  

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

- Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant - - Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant - Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Technical Review - Estimate at Completion (Cost) Report Hanford ETR - Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant - Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Technical Review - Estimate at Completion (Cost) Report This is a comprehensive review ofthe Hanford WTP estimate at completion - assessing the project scope, contract requirements, management execution plant, schedule, cost estimates, and risks. Hanford ETR - Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant - Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Technical Review - Estimate at Completion (Cost) Report More Documents & Publications TBH-0042 - In the Matter of Curtis Hall

186

Hanford ETR Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant - Hanford Tank  

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

ETR Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant - Hanford ETR Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant - Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Technical Review - External Flowsheet Review Team (Technical) Report Hanford ETR Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant - Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Technical Review - External Flowsheet Review Team (Technical) Report Full Document and Summary Versions are available for download Hanford ETR Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant - Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Technical Review - External Flowsheet Review Team (Technical) Report Summary - Flowsheet for the Hanford Waste Treatment Plant More Documents & Publications Waste Treatment and Immobilation Plant HLW Waste Vitrification Facility

187

TFA Tank Focus Area - multiyear program plan FY98-FY00  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) continues to face a major radioactive waste tank remediation problem with hundreds of waste tanks containing hundreds of thousands of cubic meters of high-level waste (HLW) and transuranic (TRU) waste across the DOE complex. Approximately 80 tanks are known or assumed to have leaked. Some of the tank contents have reacted to form flammable gases, introducing additional safety risks. These tanks must be maintained in a safe condition and eventually remediated to minimize the risk of waste migration and/or exposure to workers, the public, and the environment. However, programmatic drivers are more ambitious than baseline technologies and budgets will support. Science and technology development investments are required to reduce the technical and programmatic risks associated with the tank remediation baselines. The Tanks Focus Area (TFA) was initiated in 1994 to serve as the DOE`s Office of Environmental Management`s (EM`s) national technology development program for radioactive waste tank remediation. The national program was formed to increase integration and realize greater benefits from DOE`s technology development budget. The TFA is responsible for managing, coordinating, and leveraging technology development to support DOE`s four major tank sites: Hanford Site (Washington), Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) (Idaho), Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) (Tennessee), and Savannah River Site (SRS) (South Carolina). Its technical scope covers the major functions that comprise a complete tank remediation system: waste retrieval, waste pretreatment, waste immobilization, tank closure, and characterization of both the waste and tank with safety integrated into all the functions. The TFA integrates program activities across organizations that fund tank technology development EM, including the Offices of Waste Management (EM-30), Environmental Restoration (EM-40), and Science and Technology (EM-50).

NONE

1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

188

ROCKY FLATS CLOSURE PROJECT EM, AUG 2006 | Department of Energy  

Energy Savers [EERE]

ROCKY FLATS CLOSURE PROJECT EM, AUG 2006 ROCKY FLATS CLOSURE PROJECT EM, AUG 2006 Rocky Flats Closure Project-Lessons Learned-August 2006.pdf More Documents & Publications...

189

Cementitious Grout for Closing SRS High Level Waste Tanks - 12315  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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. Ancillary equipment abandoned in the tanks will also be filled to the extent practical. 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 to be chemically reducing with a reduction potential (Eh) of -200 to -400. Grouts with this chemistry stabilize 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 to support the mass placement strategy developed by Savannah River Remediation (SRR) 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. The cement and slag contents of a mix selected for filling Tanks 18-F and 19-F should be limited to no more than 125 and 210 lbs/cyd, respectively, to limit the heat generated as the result of hydration reaction during curing and thereby enable mass pour placement. Trial mixes with water to total cementitious materials ratios of 0.550 to 0.580 and 125 lbs/cyd of cement and 210 lbs/cyd of slag met the strength and permeability requirements. Mix LP no.8-16 was selected for closing SRS Tanks 18-F and 19-F because it meets or exceeds the design requirements with the least amount of Portland cement and blast furnace slag. This grout is expected to flow at least 45 feet. A single point of discharge should be sufficient for unrestricted flow conditions. However, additional entry points should be identified as back-up in case restrictions in the tank impede flow. The LP no.8 series of trial mixes had surprisingly high design compressive strengths (2000 to 4000/5000 psi) which were achieved at extended curing times (28 to 90 days, respectively) given the small amount of Portland cement in the mixes (100 to 185 lbs/cyd). The grouts were flowable structural fills containing 3/8 inch gravel and concrete sand aggregate. These grouts did not segregate and require no compaction. They have low permeabilities (? 10{sup -9} cm/s) and are consequen

Langton, C.A.; Stefanko, D.B.; Burns, H.H. [Savannah River National Laboratory (United States); Waymer, J.; Mhyre, W.B. [URS Quality and Testing (United States); Herbert, J.E.; Jolly, J.C. Jr. [Savannah River Remediation, LLC, Savannah River Site, Aiken, SC 29808 (United States)

2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

190

Tank Waste Remediation System fiscal year 1996 multi-year program plan WBS 1.1. Revision 1, Appendix A  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document is a compilation of data relating to the Tank Waste Remediation System Multi-Year Program. Topics discussed include: management systems; waste volume, transfer and evaporation management; transition of 200 East and West areas; ferricyanide, volatile organic vapor, and flammable gas management; waste characterization; retrieval from SSTs and DSTs; heat management; interim storage; low-level and high-level radioactive waste management; and tank farm closure.

NONE

1995-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

191

Estimating Residual Solids Volume In Underground Storage Tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Clark, Jason L.; Worthy, S. Jason; Martin, Bruce A.; Tihey, John R.

2014-01-08T23:59:59.000Z

192

Characterization of Samples from Old Solvent Tanks S1 through S22  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Old Radioactive Waste Burial Ground (ORWBG, 643-E) contains 22 old solvent tanks (S1 - S22) which were used to receive and store spent PUREX solvent from F- and H-Canyons. The tanks are cylindrical, carbon-steel, single-wall vessels buried at varying depths. A detailed description of the tanks and their history can be found in Reference 1. A Sampling and Analysis Plan for the characterization of the material contained in the old solvent tanks was developed by the Analytical Development Section (ADS) in October of 19972. The Sampling and Analysis Plan identified several potential disposal facilities for the organic and aqueous phases present in the old solvent tanks which included the Solvent Storage Tank Facility (SSTF), the Mixed Waste Storage Facilities (MWSF), Transuranic (TRU) Pad, and/or the Consolidated Incineration Facility (CIF). In addition, the 241-F/H Tank Farms, TRU Pads, and/or the MWSF were identified as potential disposal facilities for the sludge phases present in the tanks. The purpose of this sampling and characterization was to obtain sufficient data on the material present in the old solvent tanks so that a viable path forward could be established for the closure of the tanks. Therefore, the parameters chosen for the characterization of the various materials present in the tanks were based upon the Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) of the SSTF3, TRU Pads4, MWSF5, CIF6, and/or 241-F/H Tank Farms7. Several of the WAC's have been revised, canceled, or replaced by new procedures since October of 1997 and hence where required, the results of this characterization program were compared against the latest revision of the appropriate WAC.

Leyba, J.D.

1999-03-25T23:59:59.000Z

193

Ferrocyanide tank waste stability  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Ferrocyanide wastes were generated at the Hanford Site during the mid to late 1950s as a result of efforts to create more tank space for the storage of high-level nuclear waste. The ferrocyanide process was developed to remove [sup 137]CS from existing waste and newly generated waste that resulted from the recovery of valuable uranium in Hanford Site waste tanks. During the course of research associated with the ferrocyanide process, it was recognized that ferrocyanide materials, when mixed with sodium nitrate and/or sodium nitrite, were capable of violent exothermic reaction. This chemical reactivity became an issue in the 1980s, when safety issues associated with the storage of ferrocyanide wastes in Hanford Site tanks became prominent. These safety issues heightened in the late 1980s and led to the current scrutiny of the safety issues associated with these wastes, as well as current research and waste management programs. Testing to provide information on the nature of possible tank reactions is ongoing. This document supplements the information presented in Summary of Single-Shell Tank Waste Stability, WHC-EP-0347, March 1991 (Borsheim and Kirch 1991), which evaluated several issues. This supplement only considers information particular to ferrocyanide wastes.

Fowler, K.D.

1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

194

EIS-0062: Double-Shell Tanks for Defense High Level Waste Storage, Savannah River Site, Aiken, SC  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This EIS analyzes the impacts of the various design alternatives for the construction of fourteen 1.3 million gallon high-activity radioactive waste tanks. The EIS further evaluates the effects of these alternative designs on tank durability, on the ease of waste retrieval from such tanks, and the choice of technology and timing for long-term storage or disposal of the wastes.

195

Chapter 18 - Tanks  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Publisher Summary This chapter describes the tank's vapor formation rate. When sizing the vapor piping for a manifold expansion roof tank system, the rate of vapor formation must be known. While the rate of vapor formation can be computed by longhand methods, the calculation is tedious and takes much valuable time. The chapter also explains the hand-held calculator program that simplifies dike computations. Earthen dikes are widely used all over the world to contain flammable volumes of above-ground storage. They perform two vital functions: to prevent loss of fluid into the environment and to reduce the likelihood of fire spreading from one tank to another. Sizing dikes by conventional methods is a time-consuming, trial-and-error process. A complete assessment of the problem involves: applicable codes and regulations; land area available; topography of the area; soil characteristics; and the stipulated volume contained by dike and other dimensions of the dike section.

E.W. McAllister

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

196

Thermodynamic Model for Uranium Release from Hanford Site Tank Residual Waste  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A thermodynamic model of U phase solubility and paragenesis was developed for Hanford tank residual waste that will remain after tank closure. The model was developed using a combination of waste composition data, waste leach test data, and thermodynamic modeling of the leach test data. The testing and analyses were conducted using actual Hanford tank residual waste. Positive identification of the U phases by X-ray diffraction (XRD) was generally not possible because solids in the waste were amorphous, or below the detection limit of XRD for both as-received residual waste and leached residual waste. Three leachant solutions were used in the studies, dionized water, CaCO3 saturated solution, and Ca(OH)2 saturated solution. Thermodynamic modeling verified that equilibrium between U phases in the initial residual waste samples and the leachants was attained in less than a month. The paragenetic sequence of secondary phases that occur as waste leaching progresses for two closure scenarios was identified. These results have significant implications for tank closure design.

Cantrell, Kirk J.; Deutsch, William J.; Lindberg, Michael J.

2011-01-26T23:59:59.000Z

197

TANK SPACE OPTIONS REPORT  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

WILLIS WL; AHRENDT MR

2009-08-11T23:59:59.000Z

198

TANK FARM RETRIEVAL LESSONS LEARNED AT THE HANFORD SITE  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

DODD RA

2008-01-22T23:59:59.000Z

199

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

200

SAVANNAH RIVER SITE TANK 18 AND TANK 19 WALL SAMPLER PERFORMANCE  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A sampling tool was required to evaluate residual activity ({mu}Curies per square foot) on the inner wall surfaces of underground nuclear waste storage tanks. The tool was required to collect a small sample from the 3/8 inch thick tank walls. This paper documents the design, testing, and deployment of the remotely operated sampling device. The sampler provides material from a known surface area to estimate the overall surface contamination in the tank prior to closure. The sampler consisted of a sampler and mast assembly mast assembly, control system, and the sampler, or end effector, which is defined as the operating component of a robotic arm. The mast assembly consisted of a vertical 30 feet long, 3 inch by 3 inch, vertical steel mast and a cantilevered arm hinged at the bottom of the mast and lowered by cable to align the attached sampler to the wall. The sampler and mast assembly were raised and lowered through an opening in the tank tops, called a riser. The sampler is constructed of a mounting plate, a drill, springs to provide a drive force to the drill, a removable sampler head to collect the sample, a vacuum pump to draw the sample from the drill to a filter, and controls to operate the system. Once the sampler was positioned near the wall, electromagnets attached it to the wall, and the control system was operated to turn on the drill and vacuum to remove and collect a sample from the wall. Samples were collected on filters in removable sampler heads, which were readily transported for further laboratory testing.

Leishear, R.; Thaxton, D.; Minichan, R.; France, T.; Steeper, T.; Corbett, J.; Martin, B.; Vetsch, B.

2009-12-19T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank closure alternative" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


201

Tank Waste Committee Page 1  

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

... 1 Single Shell Tank WMA-C Resource Conservation and Recovery ActComprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act...

202

Tank Waste Corporate Board Meeting 11/18/10 | Department of Energy  

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

18/10 18/10 Tank Waste Corporate Board Meeting 11/18/10 The following documents are associated with the Tank Waste Corporate Board Meeting held on November 18th, 2010. High-Level Waste Corporate Board Meeting Agenda Journey to Excellence Goal 2 and Enhanced Tank Waste Strategy Introduction to Tc/I in Hanford Flowsheet Fate of Tc99 at WTP and Current Work on Capture Technetium Retention During LAW Vitrification Impacts of Feed Composition and Recycle on Hanford Low-Activity Waste Glass Mass Secondary Waste Forms and Technetium Management Hanford Low Activity Waste (LAW) Fluidized Bed Steam Reformer (FBSR) Na-Al-Si (NAS) Waste Form Qualification Salt Waste Processing Initiatives Recap and Conclusions to Tc/I in Hanford Flowsheet Presentations Tank Closure More Documents & Publications

203

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

T. M. Blakley; W. D. Schofield

2007-09-10T23:59:59.000Z

204

CURRICULUM VITAE David W. Tank  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

CURRICULUM VITAE David W. Tank Personal Birthdate: June 3, 1953 Citizenship : U.S. Address: Dept Physical Society Biophysical Society #12;Research Publications 1. Tank, D.W., Wu, E.-S., and Webb, W, 207-212 (1982). 2. Webb, W.W., Barak, L.S., Tank, D.W. and Wu, E.-S., Molecular mobility on the cell

Tank, David

205

Identification of potential transuranic waste tanks at the Hanford Site  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of this document is to identify potential transuranic (TRU) material among the Hanford Site tank wastes for possible disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) as an alternative to disposal in the high-level waste (HLW) repository. Identification of such material is the initial task in a trade study suggested in WHC-EP-0786, Tank Waste Remediation System Decisions and Risk Assessment (Johnson 1994). The scope of this document is limited to the identification of those tanks that might be segregated from the HLW for disposal as TRU, and the bases for that selection. It is assumed that the tank waste will be washed to remove soluble inert material for disposal as low-level waste (LLW), and the washed residual solids will be vitrified for disposal. The actual recommendation of a disposal strategy for these materials will require a detailed cost/benefit analysis and is beyond the scope of this document.

Colburn, R.P.

1995-05-05T23:59:59.000Z

206

Annual report of tank waste treatability  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report has been prepared as part of the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) and constitutes completion of Tri-Party Agreement milestone M-04-00C for fiscal year 1992. This report provides a summary of treatment activities for newly generated waste, existing double-shell tank waste, and existing single-shell tank waste, as well as a summary of grout disposal feasibility, glass disposal feasibility, alternate methods for disposal, and safety issues which may impact the treatment and disposal of existing defense nuclear wastes. This report is an update of the 1991 report and is intended to provide traceability for the documentation of the areas listed above by statusing the studies, activities, and issues which occurred in these areas over the period of March 1, 1991, through February 29, 1992.

Barker, S.A. (Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)); Lane, A.G. (Los Alamos Technical Associates, Inc., NM (United States))

1992-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

207

Annual report of tank waste treatability  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report has been prepared as part of the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order* (Tri-Party Agreement) and constitutes completion of Tri-Party Agreement milestone M-04-00D for fiscal year 1993. This report provides a summary of treatment activities for newly generated waste, existing double-shell tank waste, and existing single-shell tank waste, as well as a summary of grout disposal feasibility, glass disposal feasibility, alternate methods for disposal, and safety issues which may impact the treatment and disposal of existing defense nuclear wastes. This report is an update of the 1992 report and is intended to provide traceability for the documentation by statusing the studies, activities, and issues which occurred in these areas listed above over the period of March 1, 1992, through February 28, 1993. Therefore, ongoing studies, activities, and issues which were documented in the previous (1992) report are addressed in this (1993) report.

Lane, A.G. [Los Alamos Technical Associates, Inc., NM (United States); Kirkbride, R.A. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

208

Rulison Site Surface Closure Report  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

Nevada Operations Office Nevada Operations Office DOE/NV- -510 UC-700 Nevada Environmental Restoration Project Rulison Site Surface Closure Report July 1998 Environmental Restoration Division DOE/NV--510 UC-700 RULISON SITE SURFACE CLOSURE REPORT DOE Nevada Operations Office Las Vegas, Nevada July 1998 This report has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; prices available from (423) 576-8401. Available to the public from the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 22161, telephone (703) 487-4650. i Table of Contents List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

209

NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY - INTERIM RECORD OF DECISION FOR THE F-AREA TANK FARM, WASTE TANKS 17 AND 20  

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

5 5 April 30, 2013 NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY - INTERIM RECORD OF DECISION FOR THE F-AREA TANK FARM, WASTE TANKS 17 AND 20 The Interim Record of Decision (IROD) Remedial Alternative Selection for the F-Area Tank Farm (FTF), Waste Tanks 17 and 20, is being issued by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the lead agency for the Savannah River Site (SRS), with concur- rence by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Region 4 (EPA), and South Carolina Department of Health and Environ- mental Control (SCDHEC). The IROD was completed to facilitate the terms of the Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) for SRS governing the investigation and cleanup of waste units. The FFA integrates the requirements of Resource Conservation and Re- covery Act and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act.

210

Risk and Performance Analyses Supporting Closure of WMA C at the Hanford Site in Southeast Washington  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Office of River Protection under the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is pursuing closure of the Single-Shell Tank (SST) Waste Management Area (WMA) C as stipulated by the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (HFFACO) under federal requirements and work tasks will be done under the State-approved closure plans and permits. An initial step in meeting the regulatory requirements is to develop a baseline risk assessment representing current conditions based on available characterization data and information collected at the WMA C location. The baseline risk assessment will be supporting a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) Field Investigation (RFI)/Corrective Measures Study (CMS) for WMA closure and RCRA corrective action. Complying with the HFFACO conditions also involves developing a long-term closure Performance Assessment (PA) that evaluates human health and environmental impacts resulting from radionuclide inventories in residual wastes remaining in WMA C tanks and ancillary equipment. This PA is being developed to meet the requirements necessary for closure authorization under DOE Order 435.1 and Washington State Hazardous Waste Management Act. To meet the HFFACO conditions, the long-term closure risk analysis will include an evaluation of human health and environmental impacts from hazardous chemical inventories along with other performance Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act Appropriate and Applicable Requirements (CERCLA ARARs) in residual wastes left in WMA C facilities after retrieval and removal. This closure risk analysis is needed to needed to comply with the requirements for permitted closure. Progress to date in developing a baseline risk assessment of WMA C has involved aspects of an evaluation of soil characterization and groundwater monitoring data collected as a part of the RFI/CMS and RCRA monitoring. Developing the long-term performance assessment aspects has involved the construction of detailed numerical models of WMA C using the Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (STOMP) computer code, the development of a technical approach for abstraction of a range of representative STOMP simulations into a system-level model based on the GoldSim system-level model software.The STOMP-based models will be used to evaluate local-scale impacts and closed facility performance over a sufficient range of simulations to allow for development of the system-level model of the WMA C. The GoldSim-based system-level model will be used to evaluate overall sensitivity of modeled parameters and the estimate the uncertainty in potential future impacts from a closed WMA C facility.

Eberlein, Susan J. [Washington River Protection Systems, Richland, WA (United States); Bergeron, Marcel P. [Washington River Protection Systems, Richland, WA (United States); Kemp, Christopher J. [USDOE Office of River Protection, Richland, WA (United States); Hildebrand, R. Douglas [USDOE Office of River Protection, Richland, WA (United States); Aly, Alaa [INTERA, Inc., Richland, WA (United States); Kozak, Matthew [INTERA, Inc., Richland, WA (United States); Mehta, Sunil [INTERA, Inc., Richland, WA (United States); Connelly, Michael [Freestone Environmental Services, Richland, WA (United States)

2013-11-11T23:59:59.000Z

211

Tank farm nuclear criticality review  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The technical basis for the nuclear criticality safety of stored wastes at the Hanford Site Tank Farm Complex was reviewed by a team of senior technical personnel whose expertise covered all appropriate aspects of fissile materials chemistry and physics. The team concluded that the detailed and documented nucleonics-related studies underlying the waste tanks criticality safety basis were sound. The team concluded that, under current plutonium inventories and operating conditions, a nuclear criticality accident is incredible in any of the Hanford single-shell tanks (SST), double-shell tanks (DST), or double-contained receiver tanks (DCRTS) on the Hanford Site.

Bratzel, D.R., Westinghouse Hanford

1996-09-11T23:59:59.000Z

212

Underground Storage Tank Program (Vermont)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

These rules are intended to protect public health and the environment by establishing standards for the design, installation, operation, maintenance, monitoring, and closure of underground storage...

213

Molecular Fuel Tanks  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

...University of Florida. The Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Web site of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) offers...Numbered Hypernotes Alternative fuel technologies. DOE's EERE Web site offers an introduction to alternative fuels. The DOE's...

Michael D. Ward

2003-05-16T23:59:59.000Z

214

Hanford Tanks 241-AY-102 and 241-BX-101: Sludge Composition and Contaminant Release Data  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report describes the results of testing sludge samples from Hanford tanks 241-AY-102 (AY-102) and 241-BX-101 (BX-101). These tests were conducted to characterize the sludge and assess the water leachability of contaminants from the solids. This work is being conducted to support the tank closure risk assessments being performed by CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc. for the U.S. Department of Energy. This is the first report of testing of BX-101 sludge and the second report of testing of AY-102. Lindberg and Deutsch (2003) described the first phase of testing on AY-102 material.

Krupka, Kenneth M.; Deutsch, William J.; Lindberg, Michael J.; Cantrell, Kirk J.; Hess, Nancy J.; Schaef, Herbert T.; Arey, Bruce W.

2004-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

215

Tank characterization data report: Tank 241-C-112  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Tank 241-C-112 is a Hanford Site Ferrocyanide Watch List tank that was most recently sampled in March 1992. Analyses of materials obtained from tank 241-C-112 were conducted to support the resolution of the Ferrocyanide Unreviewed Safety Question (USQ) and to support Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) Milestone M-10-00. Analysis of core samples obtained from tank 241-C-112 strongly indicates that the fuel concentration in the tank waste will not support a propagating exothermic reaction. It is probable that tank 241-C-112 exceeds the 1,000 g-mol inventory criteria established for the Ferrocyanide USQ; however, extensive energetic analysis of the waste has determined a maximum exothermic value of -9 cal/g dry waste. This value is substantially below any levels of concern (-75 cal/g). In addition, an investigation of potential mechanisms to generate concentration levels of radionuclides high enough to be of concern was performed. No credible mechanism was postulated that could initiate the formation of such concentration levels in the tank. Tank 241-C-112 waste is a complex material made up primarily of water and inert salts. The insoluble solids are a mixture of phosphates, sulfates, and hydroxides in combination with aluminum, calcium, iron, nickel, and uranium. Disodium nickel ferrocyanide and sodium cesium nickel ferrocyanide probably exist in the tank; however, there appears to have been significant degradation of this material since the waste was initially settled in the tank.

Simpson, B.C.; Borsheim, G.L.; Jensen, L.

1993-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

216

Post-Closure Benefits | Department of Energy  

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

Post-Closure Benefits Post-Closure Benefits Post-Closure Benefits The Legacy Management Post-Closure Benefits (PCB) Program includes the development, implementation, and oversight of the Department's policy concerning the continuation of contractor pension and medical benefits after the closure of applicable DOE sites/facilities. This includes oversight of the administration and management of legacy contractor benefits in a fiscally responsible and effective manner. The primary program objective is to ensure a seamless transition of benefits administration after closure. The Benefit Continuity Team (BCT) within Legacy Management is responsible for this program. Legacy PCBs are benefits earned and accrued by contractor employees while in active employment at DOE facilities and are payable after their

217

Tanks Focus Area retrieval process development and enhancements FY96 technology development summary report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Retrieval Process Development and Enhancements (RPD&E) activities are part of the Retrieval and Closure Program of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) EM-50 Tanks Focus Area. The purposes of RPD&E are to understand retrieval processes, including emerging and existing technologies, and to gather data on those processes, so that end users have the requisite technical basis to make retrieval decisions. Work has been initiated to support the need for multiple retrieval technologies across the DOE complex. Technologies addressed during FY96 focused on enhancements to sluicing, borehole mining, confined sluicing retrieval end effectors, the lightweight scarifier, and pulsed air mixing. Furthermore, a decision tool and database have been initiated to link retrieval processes with tank closure to assist end users in making retrieval decisions.

Rinker, M.W.; Bamberger, J.A.; Hatchell, B.K. [and others

1996-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

218

River Corridor Closure Project Partnering Performance Agreement...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

- March 2009 Voluntary Protection Program Onsite Review, River Corridor Closure Project - June 2012 Indoctrinating Subcontractors into the DOE Safety Culture and Expectations...

219

Remedial Action Work Plan Amchitka Island Mud Pit Closures  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This remedial action work plan presents the project organization and construction procedures developed for the performance of the remedial actions at U.S. Department of Energy (DOE's) sites on Amchitka Island, Alaska. During the late1960s and early 1970s, the U.S. Department of Defense and the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (the predecessor agency to DOE) used Amchitka Island as a site for underground nuclear tests. A total of nine sites on the Island were considered for nuclear testing; however, tests were only conducted at three sites (i.e., Long Shot in 1965, Milrow in 1969, and Cannikin in 1971). In addition to these three sites, large diameter emplacement holes were drilled in two other locations (Sites D and F) and an exploratory hole was in a third location (Site E). It was estimated that approximately 195 acres were disturbed by drilling or preparation for drilling in conjunction with these activities. The disturbed areas include access roads, spoil-disposal areas, mud pits which have impacted the environment, and an underground storage tank at the hot mix plant which was used to support asphalt-paving operations on the island. The remedial action objective for Amchitka Island is to eliminate human and ecological exposure to contaminants by capping drilling mud pits, removing the tank contents, and closing the tank in place. The remedial actions will meet State of Alaska regulations, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service refuge management goals, address stakeholder concerns, and address the cultural beliefs and practices of the native people. The U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office will conduct work on Amchitka Island under the authority of the Comprehensive Emergency Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. Field activities are scheduled to take place May through September 2001. The results of these activities will be presented in a subsequent Closure Report.

DOE/NV

2001-04-05T23:59:59.000Z

220

Clamshell closure for metal drum  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

Closure ring to retain a lid in contact with a metal drum in central C-section conforming to the contact area between a lid and the rim of a drum and further having a radially inwardly directed flange and a vertically downwardly directed flange attached to the opposite ends of the C-section. The additional flanges reinforce the top of the drum by reducing deformation when the drum is dropped and maintain the lid in contact with the drum. The invention is particularly valuable in transportation and storage of fissile material.

Blanton, Paul S

2014-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank closure alternative" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


221

Savannah River Site - Tank 48 Transmittal Letter of SRS Tank...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

carried forward by WSRC as leading candidates for Tank 48 applications, Fluidized Bed Steam Reforming and Wet-Air Oxidation (WAO), are technically sound, are likely to prove...

222

Tank characterization data report: Tank 241-C-112  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Tank 241-C-112 is a Hanford Site Ferrocyanide Watch List tank that was most recently sampled in March 1992. Analyses of materials obtained from tank 241-C-112 were conducted to support the resolution of the Ferrocyanide Unreviewed Safety Question (USQ) and to support Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) Milestone M-10-00. Analysis of core samples obtained from tank 241-C-112 strongly indicates that the fuel concentration in the tank waste will not support a propagating exothermic reaction. Analysis of the process history of the tank as well as studies of simulants provided valuable information about the physical and chemical condition of the waste. This information, in combination with the analysis of the tank waste, sup ports the conclusion that an exothermic reaction in tank 241-C-112 is not plausible. Therefore, the contents of tank 241-C-112 present no imminent threat to the workers at the Hanford Site, the public, or the environment from its forrocyanide inventory. Because an exothermic reaction is not credible, the consequences of this accident scenario, as promulgated by the General Accounting Office, are not applicable.

Simpson, B.C.; Borsheim, G.L.; Jensen, L.

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

223

Closure  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Factions develop in social movements and new leaders often propose new agendas. For example, a few prominent figures in the environmental movement have expressed support for the inclusion of nuclear energy in a p...

Stephen Lilley

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

224

Accelerating cleanup: Paths to closure  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document was previously referred to as the Draft 2006 Plan. As part of the DOE`s national strategy, the Richland Operations Office`s Paths to Closure summarizes an integrated path forward for environmental cleanup at the Hanford Site. The Hanford Site underwent a concerted effort between 1994 and 1996 to accelerate the cleanup of the Site. These efforts are reflected in the current Site Baseline. This document describes the current Site Baseline and suggests strategies for further improvements in scope, schedule and cost. The Environmental Management program decided to change the name of the draft strategy and the document describing it in response to a series of stakeholder concerns, including the practicality of achieving widespread cleanup by 2006. Also, EM was concerned that calling the document a plan could be misconstrued to be a proposal by DOE or a decision-making document. The change in name, however, does not diminish the 2006 vision. To that end, Paths to Closure retains a focus on 2006, which serves as a point in time around which objectives and goals are established.

Edwards, C.

1998-06-30T23:59:59.000Z

225

Tank Waste Committee Page 1  

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

7, 2014 FINAL MEETING SUMMARY HANFORD ADVISORY BOARD TANK WASTE COMMITTEE May 7, 2014 Richland, WA Topics in this Meeting Summary Opening ......

226

Tank Waste Committee Page 1  

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

June 9, 2011 FINAL MEETING SUMMARY HANFORD ADVISORY BOARD TANK WASTE COMMITTEE MEETING June 9, 2011 Richland, WA Topics in this Meeting Summary Welcome and Introductions...

227

Tank Waste Committee Page 1  

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

Waste Permit (Permit), introduced the discussion of Permit units that relate to tanks. Liz said the Permit was last available for review in 1994. There have been revisions...

228

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NSTec Environmental Restoration

2009-07-31T23:59:59.000Z

229

Tank Waste Remediation System Tank Waste Analysis Plan. FY 1995  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Haller, C.S.; Dove, T.H.

1994-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

230

Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan for Corrective Action Unit 130: Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, Revision 0  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan addresses the actions needed to achieve closure for Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 130, Storage Tanks, identified in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) (1996, as amended February 2008). Corrective Action Unit 130 consists of the seven following corrective action sites (CASs) located in Areas 1, 7, 10, 20, 22, and 23 of the Nevada Test Site: 01-02-01, Underground Storage Tank 07-02-01, Underground Storage Tanks 10-02-01, Underground Storage Tank 20-02-03, Underground Storage Tank 20-99-05, Tar Residue 22-02-02, Buried UST Piping 23-02-07, Underground Storage Tank This plan provides the methodology for field activities needed to gather the necessary information for closing each CAS. There is sufficient information and process knowledge from historical documentation and investigations of similar sites regarding the expected nature and extent of potential contaminants to recommend closure of CAU 130 using the SAFER process. Additional information will be obtained by conducting a field investigation before selecting the appropriate corrective action for each CAS. The results of the field investigation will support a defensible recommendation that no further corrective action is necessary. This will be presented in a Closure Report that will be prepared and submitted to the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) for review and approval. The sites will be investigated based on the data quality objectives (DQOs) finalized on April 3, 2008, by representatives of NDEP; U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office; Stoller-Navarro Joint Venture; and National Security Technologies, LLC. The DQO process was used to identify and define the type, amount, and quality of data needed to determine and implement appropriate corrective actions for each CAS in CAU 130. The DQO process developed for this CAU identified the following expected closure options: (1) investigation and confirmation that no contamination exists above the final action levels, leading to a no further action declaration; (2) characterization of the nature and extent of contamination, leading to closure in place with use restrictions; or (3) clean closure by remediation and verification. The following text summarizes the SAFER activities that will support the closure of CAU 130: Perform site preparation activities (e.g., utilities clearances, geophysical surveys). Move or remove and dispose of debris at various CASs, as required. Collect environmental samples from designated target populations (e.g., stained soil) to confirm or disprove the presence of contaminants of concern (COCs) as necessary to supplement existing information. If no COCs are present at a CAS, establish no further action as the corrective action. If COCs exist, collect environmental samples from designated target populations (e.g., clean soil adjacent to contaminated soil) and submit for laboratory analyses to define the extent of COC contamination. If a COC is present at a CAS, either: - Establish clean closure as the corrective action. The material to be remediated will be removed, disposed of as waste, and verification samples will be collected from remaining soil, or - Establish closure in place as the corrective action and implement the appropriate use restrictions. Obtain consensus from NDEP that the preferred closure option is sufficient to protect human health and the environment. Close the underground storage tank(s) and their contents, if any, in accordance with Nevada Administrative Code regulations. Remove the lead brick(s) found at any CAS in accordance with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.

Alfred Wickline

2008-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

231

Numerical Simulation of Single- and Dual-media Thermocline Tanks for Energy Storage in Concentrating Solar Power Plants  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Abstract A single molten-salt thermocline tank is a low-cost alternative to conventional multiple-tank systems for concentrating solar power thermal energy storage. Thermocline tanks are typically composed of molten salt and a filler material that provides sensible heat capacity at reduced cost; such tanks are referred to as a dual-media thermocline (DMT). However, inclusion of quartzite rock filler introduces the potential for mechanical ratcheting of the tank wall during thermal cycling. To avoid this potential thermomechanical mode of failure, the tank can be operated solely with molten salt, as a single-medium thermocline (SMT) tank. In the absence of a filler material to suppress formation of tank-scale convection eddies, the SMT tank may exhibit undesirable internal fluid flows in the tank cross-section. The performance of DMT and SMT tanks is compared under cyclic operation, assuming adiabatic external wall boundary conditions. A computational fluid dynamics model is used to solve for the spatial temperature and velocity distributions within the tank. For the DMT tank, a two-temperature model is used to account for the non-thermal equilibrium between the molten salt and the filler material, and Forchheimer's extension of Darcy's Law is added to the porous-medium formulation of the laminar momentum equation. The governing equations are solved numerically using a finite volume approach. For adiabatic external boundaries, the SMT tank yields a percentage point increase in the first and second law efficiencies relative to the DMT tank. Future work is needed to compare the thermocline tank designs with respect to capital cost and storage performance under non-adiabatic wall boundaries.

C. Mira-Hernndez; S.M. Flueckiger; S.V. Garimella

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

232

Letter: Transition of Closure Sites from the Office of Environmental...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Transition of Closure Sites from the Office of Environmental Management to other DOE Organizations Letter: Transition of Closure Sites from the Office of Environmental Management...

233

Independent Oversight Special Review, Rocky Flats Closure Project...  

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

Independent Oversight Special Review, Rocky Flats Closure Project Site - April 2001 Independent Oversight Special Review, Rocky Flats Closure Project Site - April 2001 April 2001...

234

CFD Combustion Modeling with Conditional Moment Closure using...  

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

Combustion Modeling with Conditional Moment Closure using Tabulated Chemistry CFD Combustion Modeling with Conditional Moment Closure using Tabulated Chemistry A method is...

235

Organic liner for thermoset composite tank  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

A cryogenic tank that is made leak-proof under cryogenic conditions by successive layers of epoxy lining the interior of the tank.

Garvey, Raymond E. (Knoxville, TN)

1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

236

Estimating Waste Inventory and Waste Tank Characterization |...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Estimating Waste Inventory and Waste Tank Characterization Estimating Waste Inventory and Waste Tank Characterization Summary Notes from 28 May 2008 Generic Technical Issue...

237

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

238

Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Tank Integrity Workshop  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The production of nuclear weapons in the United States to help defeat the Axis Powers in World War II and to maintain national security during the Cold War required the construction of a vast nuclear facility complex in the 1940's and 1950's. These facilities housed nuclear reactors needed for the production of plutonium and chemical plants required to separate the plutonium from fission products and to convert plutonium compounds to pure plutonium metal needed for weapons. The chemical separation processes created ''high-level waste'' that was eventually stored in metal tanks at each site. These wastes and other nuclear wastes still reside at sites throughout the United States. At the Savannah River Site, a facility (the Defense Waste Processing Facility) has been constructed to vitrify stored high-level waste that will be transferred to the national high-level waste repository. The liquid wastes at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory have largely been stabilized as a mixture of oxide particles (calcines) but liquid wastes remain to be treated and the calcined waste will probably require further processing into a final, stable form. The Hanford Site is now in the initial stages of waste treatment facility design and has a large number of single-shell tanks, many of which are known to be leaking into the subsurface. The Oak Ridge Site, which did not produce ''high-level waste'' as defined by DOE, continues to rely upon tank storage for nuclear wastes although most of its older liquid wastes have been successfully stabilized. The site at West Valley, near Buffalo, NY, marks the location of the nation's only commercial fuel reprocessing facility. As a result of an agreement with the state of New York, the DOE assumed a major role in the stabilization of the high-level waste stored at this site and its eventual closure. A feature common to many of these sites is that they must continue to rely upon large underground tanks to store dangerously radioactive wastes and, in many cases, these tanks are at or have already exceeded their design lives. The DOE Tanks Focus Area (TFA) was created in 1996 to help develop new technologies to, in part, measure the integrity of these tanks so that their continued safe use could be assured.

M.C. Edelson; R. Bruce Thompson

2001-11-13T23:59:59.000Z

239

Tank 241-Z-361 vapor sampling and analysis plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Tank 241-Z-361 is identified in the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (commonly referred to as the Tri-Party Agreement), Appendix C, (Ecology et al. 1994) as a unit to be remediated under the authority of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA). As such, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will serve as the lead regulatory agency for remediation of this tank under the CERCLA process. At the time this unit was identified as a CERCLA site under the Tri-Party Agreement, it was placed within the 200-ZP-2 Operable Unit. In 1997, The Tri-parties redefined 200 Area Operable Units into waste groupings (Waste Site Grouping for 200 Areas Soils Investigations [DOE-RL 1992 and 1997]). A waste group contains waste sites that share similarities in geological conditions, function, and types of waste received. Tank 241-Z-361 is identified within the CERCLA Plutonium/Organic-rich Process Condensate/Process Waste Group (DOE-RL 1992). The Plutonium/Organic-rich Process Condensate/Process Waste Group has been prioritized for remediation beginning in the year 2004. Results of Tank 216-Z-361 sampling and analysis described in this Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) and in the SAP for sludge sampling (to be developed) will determine whether expedited response actions are required before 2004 because of the hazards associated with tank contents. Should data conclude that remediation of this tank should occur earlier than is planned for the other sites in the waste group, it is likely that removal alternatives will be analyzed in a separate Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis (EE/CA). Removal actions would proceed after the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) signs an Action Memorandum describing the selected removal alternative for Tank 216-Z-361. If the data conclude that there is no immediate threat to human health and the environment from this tank, remedial actions for the tank will be defined in a feasibility study for the entire waste group.

BANNING, D.L.

1999-02-23T23:59:59.000Z

240

Supporting document for the Southeast Quadrant historical tank content estimate report for SY-tank farm  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Historical Tank Content Estimate of the Southeast Quadrant provides historical evaluations on a tank by tank basis of the radioactive mixed wastes stored in the underground double-shell tanks of the Hanford 200 East and West Areas. This report summarizes historical information such as waste history, temperature profiles, psychrometric data, tank integrity, inventory estimates and tank level history on a tank by tank basis. Tank Farm aerial photos and in-tank photos of each tank are provided. A brief description of instrumentation methods used for waste tank surveillance are included. Components of the data management effort, such as Waste Status and Transaction Record Summary, Tank Layer Model, Supernatant Mixing Model, Defined Waste Types, and Inventory Estimates which generate these tank content estimates, are also given in this report.

Brevick, C.H.; Gaddis, L.A.; Consort, S.D. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

1995-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank closure alternative" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


241

EIS-0063: Waste Management Operations, Double-Shell Tanks for Defense High Level Radioactive Waste Storage, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The U.S. Department of Energy developed this statement to evaluate the existing tank design and consider additional specific design and safety feature alternatives for the thirteen tanks being constructed for storage of defense high-level radioactive liquid waste at the Hanford Site in Richland, Washington. This statement supplements ERDA-1538, "Final Environmental Statement on Waste Management Operation."

242

1,153-ton Waste Vault Removed from 300 Area- Vault held waste tanks with contamination from Hanfords former laboratory facilities  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Today, the Department of Energys (DOEs) Richland Operations Office announced the removal of a massive concrete vault that once held two 15,000-gallon stainless steel tanks used to collect highly contaminated waste from Hanfords 300 Area laboratories as part of the River Corridor Closure project.

243

Cornell University's Online Aboveground Petroleum Tank Inspection Program  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Cornell University's Online Aboveground Petroleum Tank Inspection Program How To's What is Cornell University's Online Aboveground Petroleum Tank Inspection Program? Cornell University's Online Aboveground Petroleum Tank Inspection Program enables assigned tank inspectors to record their monthly aboveground tank

Pawlowski, Wojtek

244

Tank Waste Corporate Board | Department of Energy  

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

Tank Waste Corporate Board Tank Waste Corporate Board Tank Waste Corporate Board The Tank Waste Corporate Board is a chartered group of senior DOE, contractor, and laboratory managers and staff that meets approximately semi-annually to formulate and coordinate implementation of an effective and efficient national Tank Waste program. August 1, 2012 Tank Waste Corporate Board Meeting 08/01/12 The following documents are associated with the Tank Waste Corporate Board Meeting held on August 1st, 2012. November 18, 2010 Tank Waste Corporate Board Meeting 11/18/10 The following documents are associated with the Tank Waste Corporate Board Meeting held on November 18th, 2010. July 29, 2009 Tank Waste Corporate Board Meeting 07/29/09 The following documents are associated with the Tank Waste Corporate Board

245

DOE HydrogenDOE Hydrogen Composite Tank ProgramComposite Tank Program  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

DOE HydrogenDOE Hydrogen Composite Tank ProgramComposite Tank Program Dr. Neel Sirosh DIRECTOR and validate 5,000 psi storage tanks ­ Tank efficiency: 7.5 ­ 8.5 wt% · Validate 5,000 psi in-tank-pressure regulators ­ Total storage system efficiency: 5.7 wt% · Develop and validate 10,000 psi storage tanks ­ Tank

246

SCALING SOLID RESUSPENSION AND SORPTION FOR THE SMALL COLUMN ION EXCHANGE PROCESSING TANK  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Small Column Ion Exchange (SCIX) process is being developed to remove cesium, strontium, and actinides from Savannah River Site (SRS) Liquid Waste using an existing 1.3 million gallon waste tank (i.e., Tank 41H) to house the process. Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) is conducting pilot-scale mixing tests to determine the pump requirements for suspending and resuspending Monosodium Titanate (MST), Crystalline Silicotitanate (CST), and simulated sludge. In addition, SRNL will also be conducting pilot-scale tests to determine the mixing requirements for the strontium and actinide sorption. As part of this task, the results from the pilot-scale tests must be scaled up to a full-scale waste tank. This document describes the scaling approach. The pilot-scale tank is a 1/10.85 linear scale model of Tank 41H. The tank diameter, tank liquid level, pump nozzle diameter, pump elevation, and cooling coil diameter are all 1/10.85 of their dimensions in Tank 41H. The pump locations correspond to the proposed locations in Tank 41H by the SCIX Program (Risers B5 and B2 for two pump configurations and Risers B5, B3, and B1 for three pump configurations). MST additions are through Riser E1, the proposed MST addition riser in Tank 41H. To determine the approach to scaling the results from the pilot-scale tank to Tank 41H, the authors took the following approach. They reviewed the technical literature for methods to scale mixing with jets and suspension of solid particles with jets, and the technical literature on mass transfer from a liquid to a solid particle to develop approaches to scaling the test data. SRNL assembled a team of internal experts to review the scaling approach and to identify alternative approaches that should be considered.

Poirier, M.; Qureshi, Z.

2010-12-14T23:59:59.000Z

247

A STRUCTURAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF FLAWS DETECTED DURING ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION OF TANK 15  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Ultrasonic (UT) inspection of Tank 15 was conducted between April and July 2007 in accordance with the Tank 15 UT inspection plan. This was a planned re-inspection of this tank, the previous one was performed in 2002. Ten cracks were characterized in the previous examination. The re-inspection was performed to verify the present models and understanding for stress corrosion cracking. During this re-examination, one indication that was initially reported as a 'possible perpendicular crack <25% through wall' in 2002, was clearly shown not to be a crack. Additionally, examination of a new area immediately adjacent to other cracks along a vertical weld revealed three new cracks. It is not known when these new cracks formed as they could very well have been present in 2002 as well. Therefore, a total of twelve cracks were evaluated during the re-examination. A critical review of the information describing stress corrosion crack behavior for the SRS waste tanks, as well as a summary review of the service history of Tank 15, was performed. Each crack was then evaluated for service exposure history, consistency of the crack behavior with the current understanding of stress corrosion cracking, and present and future impact to the structural integrity of the tank. Crack instability calculations were performed on each crack for a bounding waste removal loading condition in Tank 15. In all cases, the crack behavior was determined to be consistent with the previous understanding of stress corrosion cracking in the SRS waste tank environment. The length of the cracks was limited due to the short-range nature of the residual stresses near seam, repair and attachment welds. Of the twelve cracks, nine were located in the vapor space above the sludge layer, including the three new cracks. Comparison of the crack lengths measured in 2002 and 2007 revealed that crack growth had occurred in four of the six previously measured vapor space cracks. However, the growth remained within the residual stress zone. None of the three cracks beneath the sludge showed evidence of growth. The impact of the cracks that grew on the future service of Tank 15 was also assessed. Tank 15 is expected to undergo closure activities including sludge waste removal. A bounding loading condition for waste removal of the sludge at the bottom of Tank 15 was considered for this analysis. The analysis showed that the combination of hydrostatic, seismic, pump and weld residual stresses are not expected to drive any of the cracks identified during the Tank 15 UT inspection to instability. Wall thickness mapping for general thinning and pitting was also performed. No significant wall thinning was observed. The average wall thickness values were well above nominal. Two isolated pit-like indications were observed. Both were approximately 30 mils deep. However, the remaining wall thickness was still greater than nominal specified for the original construction plate material. It was recommended that a third examination of selected cracks in Tank 15 be performed in 2014. This examination would provide information to determine whether any additional detectable degradation is occurring in Tank 15 and to supplement the basis for characterization of conditions that are non-aggressive to tank corrosion damage. The in-service inspection program is re-evaluated on a three year periodicity. The Type I and II tanks are not active receipt tanks at present, and are therefore not a part of the In-Service Inspection Program for the Type III Tanks [1]. Changes to the mission for Tank 15 and other Type I and II tanks may be considered by the In-Service Inspection Review Committee (ISIRC) and the program adjusted accordingly.

Wiersma, B; James Elder, J

2008-08-21T23:59:59.000Z

248

TANKS 18 AND 19-F STRUCTURAL FLOWABLE GROUT FILL MATERIAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Stefanko, D.; Langton, C.

2011-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

249

FEMA Think Tank Call Meeting  

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

FEMA Think Tank Call Meeting FEMA Think Tank Call Meeting Minimize Date: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 Time: 1:00 - 2:30 p.m. (Eastern Time) Location: Y-12 New Hope Center, 602 Scarboro Rd, Oak Ridge, TN 37830 Overview Description: The FEMA Think Tank is a mechanism to formally collect, discuss, evaluate, and develop innovative ideas in the emergency management community - state, local, and tribal governments, as well as members of the public, including the private sector, the disability community, and volunteer groups. It ensures whole community partners and federal employees are motivated and encouraged to innovate, actively solicit and discuss ideas, and oversee the implementation of promising ideas. The FEMA Think Tank is designed to act as a forum where good ideas are shared, discussed, and become innovative solutions. There are currently two components to the think tank. The first, an online component, can be accessed at any time at, http://fema.ideascale.com. The second component is a conference call that includes both a nationwide telephone audience and an audience at the FEMA Think Tank Call site. This second component is described in more detail at the following website: http://www.fema.gov/fema-think-tank.

250

April 29, 2004: Fernald Closure Site  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

April 29, 2004Demolition crews bring down the Pilot Plant at DOE's Fernald Closure Site in Ohio. The plant was the last to be torn down of ten former uranium production complexes that produced high...

251

Preliminary Notice of Violation, Washington Closure Hanford,...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Issued to Washington Closure Hanford, LLC related an Employee Fall at the High Bay Testing Facility (336 Building) at the Hanford Site On August 19, 2010, the U.S. Department...

252

Hanford Determines Double-Shell Tank Leaked Waste From Inner Tank |  

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

Determines Double-Shell Tank Leaked Waste From Inner Tank Determines Double-Shell Tank Leaked Waste From Inner Tank Hanford Determines Double-Shell Tank Leaked Waste From Inner Tank October 22, 2012 - 12:00pm Addthis Media Contacts Lori Gamache, ORP 509-372-9130 John Britton, WRPS 509-376-5561 RICHLAND - The Department of Energy's Office of River Protection (ORP), working with its Hanford tank operations contractor Washington River Protection Solutions, has determined that there is a slow leak of chemical and radioactive waste into the annulus space in Tank AY-102, the approximately 30-inch area between the inner primary tank and the outer tank that serves as the secondary containment for these types of tanks. This is the first time a double-shell tank (DST) leak from the primary tank into the annulus has been identified. There is no indication of waste in

253

First Draft Performance Assessment for the H-Area Tank Farm at the Savannah River Site - Part 1  

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

SRR-CWDA-2010-00128 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 Disposal Authority Aiken, SC 29808 Prepared for U.S. Department of Energy Under Contract No. DE-AC09-09SR22505 Performance Assessment for the SRR-CWDA-2010-00128 H-Area Tank Farm at the Revision 0 Savannah River Site March 2011 Page ii of 864 REVISION SUMMARY REV. # DESCRIPTION DATE OF ISSUE 0a Initial issue to DOE-SR 09/17/2010

254

Monthly Tank Inspection Log Name of Campus  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Monthly Tank Inspection Log Name of Campus Street Address of Campus City, State, and Zip Code of Campus 1 of 2 1. Facility PBS Registration Number 6. DISTRIBUTE TO : 2. Tank Number 3. Tank Registered(S) Satisfactory Repair or Adjustment Required Not Applicable Additional Comments Attached ABOVEGROUND STORAGE TANK

Rosen, Jay

255

Tips For Residential Heating Oil Tank Owners  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Tips For Residential Heating Oil Tank Owners Source: DEP Fact Sheet Residential heating oil tanks are used to store fuel for furnaces or boilers to heat homes. The tanks can either be aboveground tanks, normally located in basements or utility rooms

Maroncelli, Mark

256

Cornell University's Online Aboveground Petroleum Tank  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Cornell University's Online Aboveground Petroleum Tank Inspection Program How To's Petroleum Bulk-material-storage/petroleum-bulk-storage/Documents/Inspect_GD.pdf What is Cornell University's Online Aboveground Petroleum Tank Inspection Program? Cornell University's Online Aboveground Petroleum Tank Inspection Program enables assigned tank inspectors to record

Pawlowski, Wojtek

257

Buffer Tank Design for Acceptable Control Performance  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Buffer Tank Design for Acceptable Control Performance Audun Faanes and Sigurd Skogestad for the design of buffer tanks. We consider mainly the case where the objective of the buffer tank is to dampen- trol system. We consider separately design procedures for (I) mixing tanks to dampen quality

Skogestad, Sigurd

258

DOE Vehicular Tank Workshop Sandia National Laboratories  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

DOE Vehicular Tank Workshop Sandia National Laboratories Livermore, CA April 29, 2010 Thursday the deployment of hydrogen storage tanks in early market fuel cell applications for vehicles Workshop Objectives at the first workshop in more detail, including Type 4 tank and PRD testing, tank service life and tracking

259

Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan for Corrective Action Unit 124: Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada (Draft), Revision 0  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan addresses closure for Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 124, Areas 8, 15, and 16 Storage Tanks, identified in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order. Corrective Action Unit 124 consists of five Corrective Action Sites (CASs) located in Areas 8, 15, and 16 of the Nevada Test Site as follows: 08-02-01, Underground Storage Tank 15-02-01, Irrigation Piping 16-02-03, Underground Storage Tank 16-02-04, Fuel Oil Piping 16-99-04, Fuel Line (Buried) and UST This plan provides the methodology of field activities necessary to gather information to close each CAS. There is sufficient information and process knowledge from historical documentation and investigations of similar sites regarding the expected nature and extent of potential contaminants to recommend closure of CAU 124 using the SAFER process.

Alfred Wickline

2007-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

260

High-Pressure Hydrogen Tanks  

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

February 8 February 8 th , 2005 Mark J. Warner, P.E. Principal Engineer Quantum Technologies, Inc. Irvine, CA Low Cost, High Efficiency, Low Cost, High Efficiency, High Pressure Hydrogen Storage High Pressure Hydrogen Storage This presentation does not contain any proprietary or confidential information. 70 MPa Composite Tanks Vent Line Ports Defueling Port (optional) Fill Port Filter Check Valve Vehicle Interface Bracket with Stone Shield In Tank Regulator with Solenoid Lock-off Pressure Relief Device Manual Valve Compressed Hydrogen Storage System In-Tank Regulator Pressure Sensor (not visible here) Pressure Relief Device (thermal) In Tank Gas Temperature Sensor Carbon Composite Shell (structural) Impact Resistant Outer Shell (damage resistant) Gas Outlet Solenoid Foam Dome (impact protection)

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank closure alternative" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


261

Enhanced Integrity LNG Storage Tanks  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

In recent years close attention has been given to increasing the integrity of LNG storage tanks. The M.W. Kellogg Company is a participant in four major LNG projects that incorporate enhanced integrity LNG storag...

W. S. Jacobs; S. E. Handman

1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

262

Tank Waste Committee Page 1  

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

September 13, 2011 Report, which includes the use of in-tank RMF and small column ion exchange. SRNL's testing is being done on a 25 disc rotary system which would be similar to...

263

Light Duty Vehicle CNG Tanks  

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

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...

264

Tank Waste Committee Page 1  

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

of a PA is to examine the final waste disposition at Hanford, such as waste in the tanks at C-Farm. Vince said the quest is to model waste movement over 10,000 years,...

265

DOE Vehicular Tank Workshop Agenda  

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

Vehicular Tank Workshop Sandia National Laboratories Livermore, CA April 29, 2010 Thursday April 29: (312) 878-0222, Access code: 621-488-137 https:www1.gotomeeting.comregister...

266

Data Quality Issues Associated with the Presence of Chlorinated Hydrocarbons in Tank Vapor Samples  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Characterization data for the gases and vapors in the Hanford Site high-level radioactive waste tank headspaces are compiled and available via the TWINS interface (TWINS 2006). A recent re-examination of selected data from TWINS has shown a number of anomalies with respect to compounds that are (1) not expected to be present in the tank based on operational knowledge and (2) not found consistently in the same tank by alternative analysis methods or repeat sampling. Numerous results for two chemicals in particular, cis- and trans-1,2-dichloropropane, are determined here to be suspect based on evidence that they were laboratory contaminants.

Evans, John C.; Huckaby, James L.

2006-02-13T23:59:59.000Z

267

Systems engineering study: tank 241-C-103 organic skimming,storage, treatment and disposal options  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report evaluates alternatives for pumping, storing, treating and disposing of the separable phase organic layer in Hanford Site Tank 241-C-103. The report provides safety and technology based preferences and recommendations. Two major options and several varations of these options were identified. The major options were: 1) transfer both the organic and pumpable aqueous layers to a double-shell tank as part of interim stabilization using existing salt well pumping equipment or 2) skim the organic to an above ground before interim stabilization of Tank 241-C-103. Other options to remove the organic were considered but rejected following preliminary evaluation.

Klem, M.J.

1996-10-23T23:59:59.000Z

268

Investigating leaking underground storage tanks  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

INVESTIGATING LEAKING UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS A Thesis by DAVID THOMPSON UPTON Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE August 1989... Major Subject: Geology INVESTIGATING LEAKING UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS A Thesis by DAVID THOMPSON UPTON Approved as to sty)e and content by: P. A, Domenico (Chair of Committee) jj K. W. Brown (Member) C. C Mathewson (Member) J. H. S ng Head...

Upton, David Thompson

1989-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

269

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Use and Alternative Fuel  

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

Fuel Use Fuel Use and Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Acquisition Requirements to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Use and Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Acquisition Requirements on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Use and Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Acquisition Requirements on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Use and Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Acquisition Requirements on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Use and Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Acquisition Requirements on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Use and Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Acquisition Requirements on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative

270

Annual report of tank waste treatability  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report has been prepared as part of the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) and constitutes completion of Tri-Party Agreement Milestone M-04-00 for fiscal year 1991. This report provides a summary of treatment activities for newly generated waste, existing double-shell tank waste, and existing single-shell tank waste, as well as a summary of grout disposal feasibility, glass disposal feasibility, alternate methods of disposal, and safety issues which may impact the treatment and disposal of existing defense nuclear wastes. This report is an update of the 1990 report and is intended to provide traceability for the documentation of the areas listed above by statusing the studies, activities, and issues which occurred in these areas over the period of March 1, 1990, through February 28, 1991. Therefore, ongoing studies, activities, and issues which were documented in the previous (1990) report are addressed in this subsequent (1991) report. 40 refs., 4 figs., 3 tabs.

Giese, K.A.

1991-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

271

Accelerating cleanup: Paths to closure  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report describes the status of Environmental Management`s (EM`s) cleanup program and a direction forward to complete achievement of the 2006 vision. Achieving the 2006 vision results in significant benefits related to accomplishing EM program objectives. As DOE sites accelerate cleanup activities, risks to public health, the environment, and worker safety and health are all reduced. Finding more efficient ways to conduct work can result in making compliance with applicable environmental requirements easier to achieve. Finally, as cleanup activities at sites are completed, the EM program can focus attention and resources on the small number of sites with more complex cleanup challenges. Chapter 1 describes the process by which this report has been developed and what it hopes to accomplish, its relationship to the EM decision-making process, and a general background of the EM mission and program. Chapter 2 describes how the site-by-site projections were constructed, and summarizes, for each of DOE`s 11 Operations/Field Offices, the projected costs and schedules for completing the cleanup mission. Chapter 3 presents summaries of the detailed cleanup projections from three of the 11 Operations/Field Offices: Rocky Flats (Colorado), Richland (Washington), and Savannah River (South Carolina). The remaining eight Operations/Field Office summaries are in Appendix E. Chapter 4 reviews the cost drivers, budgetary constraints, and performance enhancements underlying the detailed analysis of the 353 projects that comprise EM`s accelerated cleanup and closure effort. Chapter 5 describes a management system to support the EM program. Chapter 6 provides responses to the general comments received on the February draft of this document.

NONE

1998-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

272

Safe interim storage of Hanford tank wastes, draft environmental impact statement, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Draft EIS is prepared pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). DOE and Ecology have identified the need to resolve near-term tank safety issues associated with Watchlist tanks as identified pursuant to Public Law (P.L.) 101-510, Section 3137, ``Safety Measures for Waste Tanks at Hanford Nuclear Reservation,`` of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1991, while continuing to provide safe storage for other Hanford wastes. This would be an interim action pending other actions that could be taken to convert waste to a more stable form based on decisions resulting from the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) EIS. The purpose for this action is to resolve safety issues concerning the generation of unacceptable levels of hydrogen in two Watchlist tanks, 101-SY and 103-SY. Retrieving waste in dilute form from Tanks 101-SY and 103-SY, hydrogen-generating Watchlist double shell tanks (DSTs) in the 200 West Area, and storage in new tanks is the preferred alternative for resolution of the hydrogen safety issues.

Not Available

1994-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

273

Contaminant Release Data Package for Residual Waste in Single-Shell Hanford Tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order requires that a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Facility Investigation report be submitted to the Washington State Department of Ecology. The RCRA Facility Investigation report will provide a detailed description of the state of knowledge needed for tank farm performance assessments. This data package provides detailed technical information about contaminant release from closed single-shell tanks necessary to support the RCRA Facility Investigation report. It was prepared by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) for CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc., which is tasked by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) with tank closure. This data package is a compilation of contaminant release rate data for residual waste in the four Hanford single-shell tanks (SSTs) that have been tested (C-103, C-106, C-202, and C-203). The report describes the geochemical properties of the primary contaminants of interest from the perspective of long-term risk to groundwater (uranium, technetium-99, iodine-129, chromium, transuranics, and nitrate), the occurrence of these contaminants in the residual waste, release mechanisms from the solid waste to water infiltrating the tanks in the future, and the laboratory tests conducted to measure release rates.

Deutsch, William J.; Cantrell, Kirk J.; Krupka, Kenneth M.

2007-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

274

EM-50 Tanks Focus Area retrieval process development and enhancements. FY97 technology development summary report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Retrieval Process Development and Enhancements (RPD and E) activities are part of the US Department of Energy (DOE) EM-50 Tanks Focus Area, Retrieval and Closure program. The purpose of RPD and E is to understand retrieval processes, including emerging and existing technologies, and to gather data on these processes, so that end users have requisite technical bases to make retrieval decisions. Technologies addressed during FY97 include enhancements to sluicing, the use of pulsed air to assist mixing, mixer pumps, innovative mixing techniques, confined sluicing retrieval end effectors, borehole mining, light weight scarification, and testing of Russian-developed retrieval equipment. Furthermore, the Retrieval Analysis Tool was initiated to link retrieval processes with tank waste farms and tank geometric to assist end users by providing a consolidation of data and technical information that can be easily assessed. The main technical accomplishments are summarized under the following headings: Oak Ridge site-gunite and associated tanks treatability study; pulsed air mixing; Oak Ridge site-Old Hydrofracture Facility; hydraulic testbed relocation; cooling coil cleaning end effector; light weight scarifier; innovative tank mixing; advanced design mixer pump; enhanced sluicing; Russian retrieval equipment testing; retrieval data analysis and correlation; simulant development; and retrieval analysis tool (RAT).

Rinker, M.W.; Bamberger, J.A. [Pacific Northwest National Lab., Richland, WA (United States); Alberts, D.G. [Waterjet Technology, Inc., Kent, WA (United States)] [and others

1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

275

ANNUAL RADIOACTIVE WASTE TANK INSPECTION PROGRAM 2009  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

West, B.; Waltz, R.

2010-06-21T23:59:59.000Z

276

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 Hanford Site C Tank...

277

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 Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary More Documents & Publications Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary - September...

278

High-Pressure Hydrogen Tank Testing | Department of Energy  

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

Tank Testing High-Pressure Hydrogen Tank Testing Many types of compressed hydrogen tanks have been certified worldwide and demonstrated in several prototype fuel cell...

279

-1 -RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THINK TANK CONVENORS December 7, 2011  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

- 1 - RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THINK TANK CONVENORS of our expert think tank 'Managing for Uncertainty: Pathogens and Disease Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC), Australia's Invitational Scientists' Think Tank Managing

280

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

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

tour the Hanford Tank Farms, observe video inspection of single shell and double shell tanks, and observe Tank Farm project and staff meetings. Independent Activity Report,...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank closure alternative" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


281

Acoustic Method for Fish Counting and Fish Sizing in Tanks  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Counting and Fish Sizing in Tanks W.A. Kuperman and Philippedistributed among its 97 tanks to maximize feed-conversionrequires inventory- ing tanks regularly. Currently, this is

Kuperman, William A.; Roux, Philippe

2004-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

282

A Cost Benefit Analysis of California's Leaking Underground Fuel Tanks  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

s Leaking Underground Fuel Tanks (LUFTs). Submitted to theCalifornias Underground Storage Tank Program. Submitted tos Leaking Underground Fuel Tanks by Samantha Carrington

Carrington-Crouch, Robert

1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

283

Acoustic Method for Fish Counting and Fish Sizing in Tanks  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

measurements in an echoic tank. ICES Journal of Marineto fish counting in a tank. Journal of the Acousticaland materials of the cylindrical tanks for the experiments.

Roux, Philippe; Conti, Stphane; Demer, David; Maurer, Benjamin D.

2005-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

284

241-AY-101 Tank Construction Extent of Condition Review for Tank Integrity  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report provides the results of an extent of condition construction history review for tank 241-AY-101. The construction history of tank 241-AY-101 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 tank 241-AY-101, the second double-shell tank constructed, similar issues as those with tank 241-AY-102 construction reoccurred. The overall extent of similary and affect on tank 241-AY-101 integrity is described herein.

Barnes, Travis J.; Gunter, Jason R.

2013-08-26T23:59:59.000Z

285

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

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

2014-04-04T23:59:59.000Z

286

Evaluation of Tank 241-T-111 Level Data and In-Tank Video Inspection  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document summarizes the status of tank T-111 as of January 1, 2014 and estimates a leak rate and post-1994 leak volume for the tank.

Schofield, John S. [Columbia Energy and Environmental Services (United States); Feero, Amie J. [Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC (United States)

2014-03-17T23:59:59.000Z

287

DEPOSITION TANK CORROSION TESTING FOR ENHANCED CHEMICAL CLEANING POST OXALIC ACID DESTRUCTION  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

An Enhanced Chemical Cleaning (ECC) process is being developed to aid in the high level waste tank closure at the Savannah River Site. The ECC process uses an advanced oxidation process (AOP) to destroy the oxalic acid that is used to remove residual sludge from a waste tank prior to closure. The AOP process treats the dissolved sludge with ozone to decompose the oxalic acid through reactions with hydroxyl radicals. The effluent from this oxalic acid decomposition is to be sent to a Type III waste tank and may be corrosive to these tanks. As part of the hazardous simulant testing that was conducted at the ECC vendor location, corrosion testing was conducted to determine the general corrosion rate for the deposition tank and to assess the susceptibility to localized corrosion, especially pitting. Both of these factors impact the calculation of hydrogen gas generation and the structural integrity of the tanks, which are considered safety class functions. The testing consisted of immersion and electrochemical testing of A537 carbon steel, the material of construction of Type III tanks, and 304L stainless steel, the material of construction for transfer piping. Tests were conducted in solutions removed from the destruction loop of the prototype ECC set up. Hazardous simulants, which were manufactured at SRNL, were used as representative sludges for F-area and H-area waste tanks. Oxalic acid concentrations of 1 and 2.5% were used to dissolve the sludge as a feed to the ECC process. Test solutions included the uninhibited effluent, as well as the effluent treated for corrosion control. The corrosion control options included mixing with an inhibited supernate and the addition of hydroxide. Evaporation of the uninhibited effluent was also tested since it may have a positive impact on reducing corrosion. All corrosion testing was conducted at 50 C. The uninhibited effluent was found to increase the corrosion rate by an order of magnitude from less than 1 mil per year (mpy) for an inhibited waste to a range of 5 to 23.4 mpy, depending on sludge chemistry. F-area-based effluents were, in general, more corrosive. Effective corrosion control measures included evaporation, hydroxide additions and mixing with supernates containing a representative supernate chemistry (5 M hydroxide and 1.5 M nitrite). Corrosion rates with these measures were generally 0.2 mpy. The A537 carbon steel was found to be susceptible to pitting when the corrosion control measure involved mixing the ECC effluent with a supernate chemistry having minimal inhibitor concentrations (0.5 M hydroxide and 0.3 M nitrite). Corrosion rates in this case were near 1 mpy.

Mickalonis, J.

2011-08-29T23:59:59.000Z

288

www.water-alternatives.org Volume 4 | Issue 3 Aubriot, O. and Prabhakar, P.I. 2011. Water institutions and  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

www.water-alternatives.org Volume 4 | Issue 3 Aubriot, O. and Prabhakar, P.I. 2011. Water institutions and the 'revival' of tanks in South India: What is at stake locally? Water Alternatives 4(3): 325-346 Aubriot and Prabhakar: The 'revival' of tanks in South India Page | 325 Water Institutions

289

Taking Closure to the Next Level - 13030  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The River Corridor Closure Project (RCCP) is the Hanford Site's first closure project and when it is complete, in 2015, it will have cleaned up 220 mi{sup 2} of contaminated land adjacent to the Columbia River. Washington Closure Hanford (WCH) was selected by the DOE to manage the removal and cleanup of Hanford's nuclear legacy along the River Corridor. Work began in 2005 and is now more than 85% complete with more than 2 years left in the contract. A Closure Team was commissioned in December 2009 and has since issued a closure strategy and a disciplined three-phase approach to transition land parcels to DOE, Richland Operations Office (DOE-RL) as cleanup is completed. This process supports DOE-RL objectives for progressive footprint reduction based on the division of the River Corridor into geographical land parcels. It also allows for incremental area-by-area transition and turnover to the Long-Term Stewardship program. Several important milestones stand between now and the successful end of the RCCP. They include overall funding impacts, working with DOE-RL on new scope additions, meeting regulatory milestones, and maintaining a strong safety performance. (authors)

Feist, E.T. [Washington Closure Hanford, 2620 Fermi Avenue, Richland, WA, 99354 (United States)] [Washington Closure Hanford, 2620 Fermi Avenue, Richland, WA, 99354 (United States)

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

290

TANK48 CFD MODELING ANALYSIS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The process of recovering the waste in storage tanks at the Savannah River Site (SRS) typically requires mixing the contents of the tank to ensure uniformity of the discharge stream. Mixing is accomplished with one to four dual-nozzle slurry pumps located within the tank liquid. For the work, a Tank 48 simulation model with a maximum of four slurry pumps in operation has been developed to estimate flow patterns for efficient solid mixing. The modeling calculations were performed by using two modeling approaches. One approach is a single-phase Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) model to evaluate the flow patterns and qualitative mixing behaviors for a range of different modeling conditions since the model was previously benchmarked against the test results. The other is a two-phase CFD model to estimate solid concentrations in a quantitative way by solving the Eulerian governing equations for the continuous fluid and discrete solid phases over the entire fluid domain of Tank 48. The two-phase results should be considered as the preliminary scoping calculations since the model was not validated against the test results yet. A series of sensitivity calculations for different numbers of pumps and operating conditions has been performed to provide operational guidance for solids suspension and mixing in the tank. In the analysis, the pump was assumed to be stationary. Major solid obstructions including the pump housing, the pump columns, and the 82 inch central support column were included. The steady state and three-dimensional analyses with a two-equation turbulence model were performed with FLUENT{trademark} for the single-phase approach and CFX for the two-phase approach. Recommended operational guidance was developed assuming that local fluid velocity can be used as a measure of sludge suspension and spatial mixing under single-phase tank model. For quantitative analysis, a two-phase fluid-solid model was developed for the same modeling conditions as the single-phase model. The modeling results show that the flow patterns driven by four pump operation satisfy the solid suspension requirement, and the average solid concentration at the plane of the transfer pump inlet is about 12% higher than the tank average concentrations for the 70 inch tank level and about the same as the tank average value for the 29 inch liquid level. When one of the four pumps is not operated, the flow patterns are satisfied with the minimum suspension velocity criterion. However, the solid concentration near the tank bottom is increased by about 30%, although the average solid concentrations near the transfer pump inlet have about the same value as the four-pump baseline results. The flow pattern results show that although the two-pump case satisfies the minimum velocity requirement to suspend the sludge particles, it provides the marginal mixing results for the heavier or larger insoluble materials such as MST and KTPB particles. The results demonstrated that when more than one jet are aiming at the same position of the mixing tank domain, inefficient flow patterns are provided due to the highly localized momentum dissipation, resulting in inactive suspension zone. Thus, after completion of the indexed solids suspension, pump rotations are recommended to avoid producing the nonuniform flow patterns. It is noted that when tank liquid level is reduced from the highest level of 70 inches to the minimum level of 29 inches for a given number of operating pumps, the solid mixing efficiency becomes better since the ratio of the pump power to the mixing volume becomes larger. These results are consistent with the literature results.

Lee, S.

2011-05-17T23:59:59.000Z

291

Addendum to the post-closure permit application for the Bear Creek Hydrogeologic Regime at the Y-12 Plant: Walk-in pits. Revision 2  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The revised Closure Plan was initially intended to apply to A Area, C-West, B Area, and the Walk-In Pits (WIPs) of the Bear Creek Burial Grounds (BCBG). However, a strategy was developed to include the B Area [a solid waste management unit (SWMU)] with the WIPs so that both areas would be closed under one cap. The plan was presented to the State of Tennessee on March 8, 1990, and the Department of Energy was requested to review other unique alternatives to close the site. Therefore, in November 1992, the Closure Plan for B Area and the WIPs was prepared separately from that of the other sites associated with the BCBG and was presented in a RCRA Closure Plan. The Closure Plan revision issued April 1993 was intended to reflect the placement of the Kerr Hollow Quarry debris at the WIPs, revise the closure data, and acknowledge that the disposition of a monitoring well within the closure site could not be verified. A Post-Closure Permit Application (PCPA) was to include the WIPs; however, at the time of submittal, closure of the WIPs had not been certified. This addendum contains information on the WIPs to accompany the BCBG PCPA. The purpose of this document is to supplement the information provided in the BCBG PCPA. This document is not intended to be a stand-alone document. Only additional information regarding the WIPs is included in the sections of this document, which correspond to sections of the PCPA submitted in June 1994.

NONE

1995-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

292

In-tank recirculating arsenic treatment system  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

A low-cost, water treatment system and method for reducing arsenic contamination in small community water storage tanks. Arsenic is removed by using a submersible pump, sitting at the bottom of the tank, which continuously recirculates (at a low flow rate) arsenic-contaminated water through an attached and enclosed filter bed containing arsenic-sorbing media. The pump and treatment column can be either placed inside the tank (In-Tank) by manually-lowering through an access hole, or attached to the outside of the tank (Out-of-Tank), for easy replacement of the sorption media.

Brady, Patrick V. (Albuquerque, NM); Dwyer, Brian P. (Albuquerque, NM); Krumhansl, James L. (Albuquerque, NM); Chwirka, Joseph D. (Tijeras, NM)

2009-04-07T23:59:59.000Z

293

Alternative Fuels Data Center  

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

Dakota Incentives and Laws Dakota Incentives and Laws The following is a list of expired, repealed, and archived incentives, laws, regulations, funding opportunities, or other initiatives related to alternative fuels and vehicles, advanced technologies, or air quality. Biofuels Infrastructure Grants Expired: 04/30/2013 Through the Biofuels Blender Pump Program, the North Dakota Department of Commerce offers cost-share grants of up to $5,000 per fueling pump, up to $20,000 per retail location, to motor fuel retailers who install qualified biofuel blender pumps and associated equipment. Qualified retailers are also eligible for grants of up to $14,000 at each retail location for tanks and piping installed at the same time the blender pump is installed. A qualified ethanol retail blender pump must:

294

Ohio Closure Projects Ceremony | Department of Energy  

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

Ohio Closure Projects Ceremony Ohio Closure Projects Ceremony Ohio Closure Projects Ceremony January 19, 2007 - 9:59am Addthis Remarks for Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman Thank you, Alan Boeckmann for that kind introduction. It is a privilege to be with you today. I am pleased to be joined by my cabinet colleague Stephen Johnson, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. It's also good to see Sen. George Voinovich. Senator, thank you for your leadership on so many issues critical to America's energy security and for all you've done to make today a reality. I'd also like to recognize the thousands of dedicated people, many of whom are with us today, involved in the cleanup projects here at Fernald and in Ashtabula and Columbus. If not for your tireless efforts, as well as the support of many, federal,

295

Hanford Patrol Academy demolition sites closure plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Hanford Site is owned by the U.S. Government and operated by the U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office. Westinghouse Hanford Company is a major contractor to the U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office and serves as co-operator of the Hanford Patrol Academy Demolition Sites, the unit addressed in this paper. This document consists of a Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Part A Permit Application, Form 3 (Revision 4), and a closure plan for the site. An explanation of the Part A Form 3 submitted with this closure plan is provided at the beginning of the Part A section. This Hanford Patrol Academy Demolition Sites Closure Plan submittal contains information current as of December 15, 1994.

Not Available

1993-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

296

EIS-0303: Record of Decision | Department of Energy  

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

Record of Decision Record of Decision EIS-0303: Record of Decision Savannah River Site High-Level Waste Tank Closure In the Savannah River Site (SRS) High-Level Waste Tank Closure Environmental Impact Statement (Tank Closure EIS, DOE/EIS-0303) DOE considered alternatives for closure of 49 high-level radioactive waste (HLW) tanks and associated equipment such as evaporator systems, transfer pipelines, diversion boxes, and pump pits. DOE has selected the preferred alternative identified in the Final EIS, Stabilize Tanks-Fill with Grout, to guide development and implementation of closure of the high-level waste tanks and associated equipment at the SRS. Following bulk waste removal, DOE will clean the tanks if necessary to meet the performance objectives contained in the General Closure Plan and the tank-specific Closure Module,

297

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Promotion  

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

Alternative Fuel Alternative Fuel Promotion to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Promotion on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Promotion on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Promotion on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Promotion on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Promotion on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Promotion on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type Alternative Fuel Promotion The Missouri Alternative Fuels Commission (Commission) promotes the continued production and use of alternative transportation fuels in

298

2401-W Waste storage building closure plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This plan describes the performance standards met and closure activities conducted to achieve clean closure of the 2401-W Waste Storage Building (2401-W) (Figure I). In August 1998, after the last waste container was removed from 2401-W, the U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office (DOE-RL) notified Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) in writing that the 2401-W would no longer receive waste and would be closed as a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 treatment, storage, and/or disposal (TSD) unit (98-EAP-475). Pursuant to this notification, closure activities were conducted, as described in this plan, in accordance with Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173-303-610 and completed on February 9, 1999. Ecology witnessed the closure activities. Consistent with clean closure, no postclosure activities will be necessary. Because 2401-W is a portion of the Central Waste Complex (CWC), these closure activities become the basis for removing this building from the CWC TSD unit boundary. The 2401-W is a pre-engineered steel building with a sealed concrete floor and a 15.2-centimeter concrete curb around the perimeter of the floor. This building operated from April 1988 until August 1998 storing non-liquid containerized mixed waste. All waste storage occurred indoors. No potential existed for 2401-W operations to have impacted soil. A review of operating records and interviews with cognizant operations personnel indicated that no waste spills occurred in this building (Appendix A). After all waste containers were removed, a radiation survey of the 2401-W floor for radiological release of the building was performed December 17, 1998, which identified no radiological contamination (Appendix B).

LUKE, S.M.

1999-07-15T23:59:59.000Z

299

Hanford immobilized low-activity tank waste performance assessment  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Hanford Immobilized Low-Activity Tank Waste Performance Assessment examines the long-term environmental and human health effects associated with the planned disposal of the vitrified low-level fraction of waste presently contained in Hanford Site tanks. The tank waste is the by-product of separating special nuclear materials from irradiated nuclear fuels over the past 50 years. This waste has been stored in underground single and double-shell tanks. The tank waste is to be retrieved, separated into low and high-activity fractions, and then immobilized by private vendors. The US Department of Energy (DOE) will receive the vitrified waste from private vendors and plans to dispose of the low-activity fraction in the Hanford Site 200 East Area. The high-level fraction will be stored at Hanford until a national repository is approved. This report provides the site-specific long-term environmental information needed by the DOE to issue a Disposal Authorization Statement that would allow the modification of the four existing concrete disposal vaults to provide better access for emplacement of the immobilized low-activity waste (ILAW) containers; filling of the modified vaults with the approximately 5,000 ILAW containers and filler material with the intent to dispose of the containers; construction of the first set of next-generation disposal facilities. The performance assessment activity will continue beyond this assessment. The activity will collect additional data on the geotechnical features of the disposal sites, the disposal facility design and construction, and the long-term performance of the waste. Better estimates of long-term performance will be produced and reviewed on a regular basis. Performance assessments supporting closure of filled facilities will be issued seeking approval of those actions necessary to conclude active disposal facility operations. This report also analyzes the long-term performance of the currently planned disposal system as a basis to set requirements on the waste form and the facility design that will protect the long-term public health and safety and protect the environment.

Mann, F.M.

1998-03-26T23:59:59.000Z

300

Experimental Breeder Reactor-II Primary Tank System Wash Water Workshop  

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

Pre-Developmental Pre-Developmental INL EBR-II Wash Water Treatment Technologies (PBS # ADSHQTD0100 (0003199)) EBR-II Wash Water Workshop - The majority of the sodium has been removed, remaining material is mostly passivated. Similar closure projects have been successfully completed. Engineering needs to be developed to apply the OBA path. Page 1 of 2 Idaho National Laboratory Idaho Experimental Breeder Reactor-II Primary Tank System Wash Water Workshop Challenge In 1994 Congress ordered the shutdown of the Experimental Breeder Reactor-II (EBR-II) and a closure project was initiated. The facility was placed in cold shutdown, engineering began on sodium removal, the sodium was drained in 2001 and the residual sodium chemically passivated to render it less reactive in 2005. Since that time, approximately 700 kg of metallic sodium and 3500 kg of sodium bicarbonate remain in the facility. The

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank closure alternative" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


301

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel and Alternative Fuel  

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

Alternative Fuel and Alternative Fuel and Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Fund to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel and Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Fund on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel and Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Fund on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel and Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Fund on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel and Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Fund on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel and Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Fund on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel and Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Fund on AddThis.com... More in this section...

302

Alternative fuels  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This paper presents the preliminary results of a review, of the experiences of Brazil, Canada, and New Zealand, which have implemented programs to encourage the use of alternative motor fuels. It will also discuss the results of a separate completed review of the Department of Energy's (DOE) progress in implementing the Alternative Motor Fuels Act of 1988. The act calls for, among other things, the federal government to use alternative-fueled vehicles in its fleet. The Persian Gulf War, environmental concerns, and the administration's National Energy Strategy have greatly heightened interest in the use of alternative fuels in this country.

Not Available

1991-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

303

Tank 241-BY-103 Tank Characterization Plan. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document is a plan which serves as the contractual agreement between the Characterization Program, Sampling Operations 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-103.

Schreiber, R.D.

1995-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

304

Comparative safety analysis of LNG storage tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

LNG storage tank design and response to selected release scenarios were reviewed. The selection of the scenarios was based on an investigation of potential hazards as cited in the literature. A review of the structure of specific LNG storage facilities is given. Scenarios initially addressed included those that most likely emerge from the tank facility itself: conditions of overfill and overflow as related to liquid LNG content levels; over/underpressurization at respective tank vapor pressure boundaries; subsidence of bearing soil below tank foundations; and crack propagation in tank walls due to possible exposure of structural material to cryogenic temperatures. Additional scenarios addressed include those that result from external events: tornado induced winds and pressure drops; exterior tank missile impact with tornado winds and rotating machinery being the investigated mode of generation; thermal response due to adjacent fire conditions; and tank response due to intense seismic activity. Applicability of each scenario depended heavily on the specific tank configurations and material types selected. (PSB)

Fecht, B.A.; Gates, T.E.; Nelson, K.O.; Marr, G.D.

1982-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

305

High-Pressure Tube Trailers and Tanks  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

306

Disposal of Hanford Site Tank Wastes  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Between 1943 and 1986, 149 single-shell tanks (SSTs) and 28 double-shell tanks (DSTs) were built and used to store radioactive wastes generated during reprocessing of irradiated uranium metal fuel elements at ...

M. J. Kupfer

1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

307

Technical requirements specification for tank waste retrieval  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document provides the technical requirements specification for the retrieval of waste from the underground storage tanks at the Hanford Site. All activities covered by this scope are conducted in support of the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) mission.

Lamberd, D.L.

1996-09-26T23:59:59.000Z

308

Milagro Tank Temperature Study: w/ and w/o Tank Insulation  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Milagro Tank Temperature Study: w/ and w/o Tank Insulation John A.J. Matthews and Bill Miller johnm/24 #12;Tank Temperature Study for Northern Auger · Auger North site (Colorado) is colder than Auger South. · Sept 2006: instrument Milargo outrigger tank to study freezing issues (Left photo) (Milagro experiment

309

Savannah River Site- Tank 48 Briefing on SRS Tank 48 Independent Technical Review  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This presentation outlines the SRS Tank 48 ITR listing observations, conclusions, and TPB processing.

310

The Fuel Tank Consider a cylindrical fuel tank of radius r and length L, that is  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

The Fuel Tank Question Consider a cylindrical fuel tank of radius r and length L, that is lying on its side. Suppose that fuel is being pumped into the tank at a rate q. At what rate is the fuel level rising? r L Solution Here is an end view of the tank. The shaded part of the circle is filled with fuel

Feldman, Joel

311

Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 523: Housekeeping Waste, Nevada Test Site, Nevada  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This closure report documents the closure activities conducted for Corrective Action Unit 523: Housekeeping Waste, Nevada Test Site, Nevada.

U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office; Bechtel Nevada

2003-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

312

Tank 241-BY-104 vapor sampling and analysis tank characterization report. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Tank 241-BY-104 headspace gas and vapor samples were collected and analyzed to help determine the potential risks to tank farm workers due to fugitive emissions from the tank. The drivers and objectives of waste tank headspace sampling and analysis are discussed in {open_quotes}Program Plan for the Resolution of Tank Vapor Issues.{close_quotes} Tank 241-BY-104 was vapor sampled in accordance with {open_quotes}Data Quality Objectives for Generic In-Tank Health and Safety Issue Resolution.{close_quotes}

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

313

Tank 241-BY-103 vapor sampling and analysis tank characterization report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Tank 241-BY-103 headspace gas and vapor samples were collected and analyzed to help determine the potential risks to tank farm workers due to fugitive emissions from the tank. The drivers and objectives of waste tank headspace sampling and analysis are discussed in {open_quotes}Program Plan for the Resolution of Tank Vapor Issues.{close_quotes} Tank 241-BY-103 was vapor sampled in accordance with {open_quotes}Data Quality Objectives for Generic In-Tank Health and Safety Issue Resolution.{close_quotes}

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-05T23:59:59.000Z

314

Tank 241-BY-108 vapor sampling and analysis tank characterization report. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Tank 241-BY-108 headspace gas and vapor samples were collected and analyzed to help determine the potential risks to tank farm workers due to fugitive emissions from the tank. The drivers and objectives of waste tank headspace sampling and analysis are discussed in ``Program Plan for the Resolution of Tank Vapor Issues`` (Osborne and Huckaby 1994). Tank 241-BY-108 was vapor sampled in accordance with ``Data Quality Objectives for Generic In-Tank Health and Safety Issue Resolution (Osborne et al., 1994).

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

315

Tank 241-BY-105 vapor sampling and analysis tank characterization report. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Tank 241-BY-105 headspace gas and vapor samples were collected and analyzed to help determine the potential risks to tank farm workers due to fugitive emissions from the tank. The drivers and objectives of waste tank headspace sampling and analysis are discussed in {open_quotes}Program Plan for the Resolution of Tank Vapor Issues.{close_quotes} Tank 241-BY-105 was vapor sampled in accordance with {open_quotes}Data Quality Objectives for Generic In-Tank Health and Safety Issue Resolution.{close_quotes}

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

316

Tank 241-BY-107 vapor sampling and analysis tank characterization report. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Tank 241-BY-107 headspace gas and vapor samples were collected and analyzed to help determine the potential risks to tank farm workers due to fugitive emissions from the tank. The drivers and objectives of waste tank headspace sampling and analysis are discussed in {open_quotes}Program Plan for the Resolution of Tank Vapor Issues.{close_quotes} Tank 241-BY-107 was vapor sampled in accordance with {open_quotes}Data Quality Objectives for Generic In-Tank Health and Safety Issue Resolution.{close_quotes}

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

317

Tank 241-BY-107 vapor sampling and analysis tank characterization report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Tank 241-BY-107 headspace gas and vapor samples were collected and analyzed to help determine the potential risks to tank farm workers due to fugitive emissions from the tank. The drivers and objectives of waste tank headspace sampling and analysis are discussed in {open_quotes}Program Plan for the Resolution of Tank Vapor Issues{close_quotes}. Tank 241-BY-107 was vapor sampled in accordance with {open_quotes}Data Quality Objectives for Generic In-Tank Health and Safety Issue Resolution{close_quotes}.

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-05T23:59:59.000Z

318

Tank 241-BY-106 vapor sampling and analysis tank characterization report. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Tank 241-BY-106 headspace gas and vapor samples were collected and analyzed to help determine the potential risks to tank farm workers due to fugitive emissions from the tank. The drivers and objectives of waste tank headspace sampling and analysis are discussed in {open_quotes}Program Plan for the Resolution of Tank Vapor Issues.{close_quotes} Tank 241-BY-106 was vapor sampled in accordance with {open_quotes}Data Quality Objectives for Generic In-Tank Health and Safety Issue Resolution.{close_quotes}

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

319

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Propane Tax Exemption  

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

Exemption Exemption to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Propane Tax Exemption on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Propane Tax Exemption on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Propane Tax Exemption on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Propane Tax Exemption on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Propane Tax Exemption on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Propane Tax Exemption on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type Propane Tax Exemption Liquefied petroleum gas (propane) is exempt from the state fuel excise tax when sold from a licensed propane vendor to a licensed propane user or a propane vehicle owner if it is delivered into a bulk storage tank that can

320

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Biodiesel Storage Regulations  

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

Biodiesel Storage Biodiesel Storage Regulations to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Biodiesel Storage Regulations on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Biodiesel Storage Regulations on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Biodiesel Storage Regulations on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Biodiesel Storage Regulations on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Biodiesel Storage Regulations on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Biodiesel Storage Regulations on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type Biodiesel Storage Regulations Underground storage tank regulations apply to all biodiesel blends with the exception of 100% biodiesel (B100). An owner changing the use of an

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank closure alternative" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


321

300 Area Process Trenches Closure Plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Since 1987, Westinghouse Hanford Company has been a major contractor to the US Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office and has served as co-operator of the 300 Area Process Trenches, the waste management unit addressed in this closure plan. For the purposes of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Westinghouse Hanford Company is identified as ``co-operator.`` The 300 Area Process Trenches Closure Plan (Revision 0) consists of a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Part A Dangerous Waste Permit Application, Form 3 and a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Closure Plan. An explanation of the Part A Permit Application, Form 3 submitted with this document is provided at the beginning of the Part A Section. The closure plan consists of nine chapters and six appendices. The 300 Area Process Trenches received dangerous waste discharges from research and development laboratories in the 300 Area and from fuels fabrication processes. This waste consisted of state-only toxic (WT02), corrosive (D002), chromium (D007), spent halogenated solvents (F001, F002, and F003), and spent nonhalogented solvent (F005). Accurate records are unavailable concerning the amount of dangerous waste discharged to the trenches. The estimated annual quantity of waste (item IV.B) reflects the total quantity of both regulated and nonregulated waste water that was discharged to the unit.

Luke, S.N.

1994-08-15T23:59:59.000Z

322

Automatically closing swing gate closure assembly  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

A swing gate closure assembly for nuclear reactor tipoff assembly wherein the swing gate is cammed open by a fuel element or spacer but is reliably closed at a desired closing rate primarily by hydraulic forces in the absence of a fuel charge.

Chang, Shih-Chih (Richland, WA); Schuck, William J. (Richland, WA); Gilmore, Richard F. (Kennewick, WA)

1988-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

323

YUCCA MOUNTAIN WASTE PACKAGE CLOSURE SYSTEM  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The method selected for dealing with spent nuclear fuel in the US is to seal the fuel in waste packages and then to place them in an underground repository at the Yucca Mountain Site in Nevada. This article describes the Waste Package Closure System (WPCS) currently being designed for sealing the waste packages.

G. Housley; C. Shelton-davis; K. Skinner

2005-08-26T23:59:59.000Z

324

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.

325

Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems: Pump Tank  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Pump tanks are concrete, fiberglass or polyethylene containers that collect wastewater to be dosed into the soil at intervals. This publication explains the design and maintenance of pump tanks, and it offers advice on what to do if a pump tank...

Lesikar, Bruce J.

2008-10-23T23:59:59.000Z

326

Above Ground Storage Tank (AST) Inspection Form  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Above Ground Storage Tank (AST) Inspection Form Petroleum Bulk Storage Form Facility Name: ______________________ Tank No:_______________ Date:_____________ Inspection Parameter Result Comments/Corrective Actions 1. Is there leaking in the interstitial space (not DRY)? YES/NO/NA 2. Tank surface shows signs of leakage? YES/NO/NA 3

Pawlowski, Wojtek

327

EM Tank Waste Subcommittee Report for SRS / Hanford Tank Waste Review |  

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

Tank Waste Subcommittee Report for SRS / Hanford Tank Waste Tank Waste Subcommittee Report for SRS / Hanford Tank Waste Review EM Tank Waste Subcommittee Report for SRS / Hanford Tank Waste Review Environmental Management Advisory Board EM Tank Waste Subcommittee Report for SRS / Hanford Tank Waste Review Report Number TWS #003 EMAB EM-TWS SRS / Hanford Tank Waste June 23, 2011 This is the second report of the Environmental Management Tank Waste Subcommittee (EMTWS) of the Environmental Management Advisory Board (EMAB). The first report was submitted and accepted by the Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management (EM-1) in September 2010. The EM-TWS responded to three charges from EM-1 regarding the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant at Hanford (WTP) under construction in Richland, Washington. EM's responses were timely, and efforts have been

328

Savannah River Site - Tank 48 Briefing on SRS Tank 48 Independent Technical Review  

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

Tank 48 Tank 48 Independent Technical Review August 2006 2 SRS Tank 48 ITR SRS Tank 48 ITR Key ITR Observation Two distinct problems: Removing tetraphenylborate (TPB) waste and then cleaning the tank sufficiently to support return to service Processing contents to eliminate TPB hazard August 2006 3 SRS Tank 48 ITR SRS Tank 48 ITR Overarching ITR Conclusions 1. TPB Processing is on the right track - DOE/WSRC have selected the most promising candidates - Fluidized Bed Steam Reforming (FBSR) is the most technically attractive and mature of the candidate processes August 2006 4 SRS Tank 48 ITR SRS Tank 48 ITR Overarching Conclusions (continued) 2. Heel removal and tank cleanout will be a very challenging task. Compounding issues: - Physical difficulties in cleanout (access, congestion, etc.)

329

Tank Farms and Waste Feed Delivery - 12507  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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)

Fletcher, Thomas; Charboneau, Stacy; Olds, Erik [US DOE (United States)

2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

330

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel and Alternative Fuel  

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

Fuel and Fuel and Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Tax Exemption to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel and Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Tax Exemption on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel and Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Tax Exemption on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel and Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Tax Exemption on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel and Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Tax Exemption on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel and Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Tax Exemption on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel and Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Tax Exemption on AddThis.com...

331

Rocky Flats Closure Unit Cost Data  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Rocky Flats Closure Project has completed the process of stabilizing residual nuclear materials, decommissioning nuclear facilities, remediating environmental media and closing the Rocky Flats Site (Site). The project cost approximately $4.1 B and included the decommissioning of over 700 structures including 5 major plutonium facilities and 5 major uranium facilities, shipping over 14,600 cubic meters of transuranic and 565,000 cubic meters of low level radioactive waste, and remediating a 385-acre industrial area and the surrounding land. Actual costs were collected for a large variety of closure activities. These costs can be correlated with metrics associated with the facilities and environmental media to capture cost factors from the project that could be applicable to a variety of other closure projects both within and outside of the Department of Energy's weapons complex. The paper covers four general topics: the process to correlate the actual costs and metrics, an example of the correlated data for one large sub-project, a discussion of the results, and the additional activities that are planned to correlate and make this data available to the public. The process to collect and arrange the project control data of the Closure Project relied on the actual Closure Project cost information. It was used to correlate these actual costs with the metrics for the physical work, such as building area or waste generated, to support the development of parametric cost factors. The example provides cost factors for the Industrial Sites Project. The discussion addresses the strengths and weaknesses of the data, followed by a section identifying future activities to improve and extend the analyses and integrate it within the Department's Environmental Cost Analysis System. (authors)

Sanford, P.C. [1129 Business Parkway South, Westminister, MD (United States); Skokan, B. [United States Department of Energy, Washington, DC (United States)

2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

332

Tools for Closure Project and Contract Management: Development of the Rocky Flats Integrated Closure Project Baseline  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This paper details the development of the Rocky Flats Integrated Closure Project Baseline - an innovative project management effort undertaken to ensure proactive management of the Rocky Flats Closure Contract in support of the Department's goal for achieving the safe closure of the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site (RFETS) in December 2006. The accelerated closure of RFETS is one of the most prominent projects within the Department of Energy (DOE) Environmental Management program. As the first major former weapons plant to be remediated and closed, it is a first-of-kind effort requiring the resolution of multiple complex technical and institutional challenges. Most significantly, the closure of RFETS is dependent upon the shipment of all special nuclear material and wastes to other DOE sites. The Department is actively working to strengthen project management across programs, and there is increasing external interest in this progress. The development of the Rocky Flats Integrated Closure Project Baseline represents a groundbreaking and cooperative effort to formalize the management of such a complex project across multiple sites and organizations. It is original in both scope and process, however it provides a useful precedent for the other ongoing project management efforts within the Environmental Management program.

Gelles, C. M.; Sheppard, F. R.

2002-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

333

A Comparison of Immersive HMD, Fish Tank VR and Fish Tank with Haptics Displays for Volume Visualization  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

A Comparison of Immersive HMD, Fish Tank VR and Fish Tank with Haptics Displays for Volume: (1) head-mounted display (HMD); (2) fish tank VR (fish tank); and (3) fish tank VR augmented its structure. Fish tank and haptic participants saw the entire volume on-screen and rotated

Healey, Christopher G.

334

Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 326: Areas 6 and 27 Release Sites, Nevada Test Site, Nevada  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Closure Report (CR) documents the activities undertaken to close Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 326, Areas 6 and 27 Release Sites, in accordance with the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) of 1996. Site closure was performed in accordance with the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP)-approved Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Plan (SAFER) Plan for CAU 326 (US Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office [DOE/NV, 2001]). CAU 326 consists of four Corrective Action Sites (CASs), 06-25-01, 06-25-02, 06-25-04, and 27-25-01. CAS 06-25-01 is a release site associated with an underground pipeline that carried heating oil from the heating oil underground storage tank (UST), Tank 6-CP-1, located to the west of Building CP-70 to the boiler in Building CP-1 located in the Area 6 Control Point (CP) compound. This site was closed in place administratively by implementing use restrictions. CAS 06-25-02 is a hydrocarbon release associated with an active heating oil UST, Tank 6-DAF-5, located west of Building 500 at the Area 6 Device Assembly Facility. This site was closed in place administratively by implementing use restrictions. CAS 06-25-04 was a hydrocarbon release associated with Tank 6-619-4. This site was successfully remediated when Tank 6-619-4 was removed. No further action was taken at this site. CAS 27-25-01 is an excavation that was created in an attempt to remove hydrocarbon-impacted soil from the Site Maintenance Yard in Area 27. Approximately 53 cubic meters (m{sup 3}) (70 cubic yards [yd{sup 3}]) of soil impacted by total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) was excavated from the site in August of 1994. Clean closure of this site was completed in 2002 by the excavation and disposal of approximately 160 m{sup 3} (210 yd{sup 3}) of PCB-impacted soil.

K. B. Campbell

2002-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

335

Alternative Fuels Data Center  

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

construction, and installation costs. Eligible property includes pumps, storage tanks, and related equipment used exclusively for distributing, dispensing, and storing...

336

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Definition  

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

Fuel Fuel Definition to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Definition on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Definition on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Definition on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Definition on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Definition on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Definition on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type Alternative Fuel Definition The definition of an alternative fuel includes natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, electricity, hydrogen, fuel mixtures containing not less

337

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fueling Infrastructure  

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

Alternative Fueling Alternative Fueling Infrastructure Development to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fueling Infrastructure Development on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fueling Infrastructure Development on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fueling Infrastructure Development on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fueling Infrastructure Development on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fueling Infrastructure Development on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fueling Infrastructure Development on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type

338

Mechanisms of gas retention and release: Experimental results for Hanford waste tanks 241-AW-101 and 241-AN-103  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The 177 storage tanks at Hanford contain a vast array of radioactive waste forms resulting, primarily, from nuclear materials processing. Through radiolytic, thermal, and other decomposition reactions of waste components, gaseous species including hydrogen, ammonia, and the oxidizer nitrous oxide are generated within the waste tanks. Many of these tanks are known to retain and periodically release quantities of these flammable gas mixtures. The primary focus of the Flammable Gas Project is the safe storage of Hanford tank wastes. To this end, we strive to develop an understanding of the mechanisms of flammable gas retention and release in Hanford tanks through laboratory investigations on actual tank wastes. These results support the closure of the Flammable Gas Unreviewed Safety Question (USQ) on the safe storage of waste tanks known to retain flammable gases and support resolution of the broader Flammable Gas Safety Issue. The overall purpose of this ongoing study is to develop a comprehensive and thorough understanding of the mechanisms of flammable gas retention and release. The first objective of the current study was to classify bubble retention and release mechanisms in two previously untested waste materials from Tanks 241-AN-103 (AN-103) and 241-AW-101 (AW-101). Results were obtained for retention mechanisms, release characteristics, and the maximum gas retention. In addition, unique behavior was also documented and compared with previously studied waste samples. The second objective was to lengthen the duration of the experiments to evaluate the role of slowing bubble growth on the retention and release behavior. Results were obtained for experiments lasting from a few hours to a few days.

Rassat, S.D.; Gauglitz, P.A.; Bredt, P.R.; Mahoney, L.A.; Forbes, S.V.; Tingey, S.M.

1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

339

Microsoft PowerPoint - HAB_TCWM-EISAdviceSJH.pptx  

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

5 describes hundreds of impact analyses from combinations of the 11 tank closure, 3 FFTF decommissioning, and 3 waste management alternatives. DOE believes the three evaluated...

340

Life Extension of Aging High-Level Waste Tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Double Shell Tanks (DSTs) play a critical role in the Hanford High-Level Waste Treatment Complex, and therefore activities are underway to protect and better understand these tanks. The DST Life Extension Program is focused on both tank life extension and on evaluation of tank integrity. Tank life extension activities focus on understanding tank failure modes and have produced key chemistry and operations controls to minimize tank corrosion and extend useful tank life. Tank integrity program activities have developed and applied key technologies to evaluate the condition of the tank structure and predict useful tank life. Program results to date indicate that DST useful life can be extended well beyond the original design life and allow the existing tanks to fill a critical function within the Hanford High-Level Waste Treatment Complex. In addition the tank life may now be more reliably predicted, facilitating improved planning for the use and possible future replacement of these tanks.

Bryson, D.; Callahan, V.; Ostrom, M.; Bryan, W.; Berman, H.

2002-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank closure alternative" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


341

Replacement inhibitors for high level waste tank cooling coils  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Sodium chromate has been an effective corrosion inhibitor for the cooling coil systems in Savannah River Site (SRS) waste tanks for over 40 years. Due to age and operating history, cooling coils occasionally fail allowing chromated water to leak into the environment. The costs of reporting and cleaning up chromate spills became significant enough for SRS to consider alternate inhibitors. Confirmatory tests were performed to assess the effectiveness of three alternative corrosion inhibitor systems for the waste tank cooling water systems: (1) sodium molybdate (250 ppm as Mo)/sodium hydroxide (pH 10), (2) sodium molybdate (50 ppm as Mo)/sodium silicate (50 ppm as Si), and (3) sodium nitrite (500 ppm)/ sodium hydroxide (0.01 M). The tests were conducted under stagnant conditions to simulate a worst-case scenario. The results showed that these inhibitors were as effective as chromate at minimizing general corrosion at solution temperatures between 30--70 C. However, the initiation of localized attack in crevice regions, in solutions containing the alternative inhibitors at 70 C, was observed. Also, for the nitrite and the molybdate systems to be effective, suitable biocide is needed. On the other hand, interval coupon tests showed that the molybdate inhibitor systems prevented significant propagation of the localized attack.

Wiersma, B.J.; Hsu, T.C. [Westinghouse Savannah River Co., Aiken, SC (United States)

1996-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

342

High Pressure Hydrogen Tank Manufacturing  

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

Workshop Workshop High Pressure Hydrogen Tank Manufacturing Mark Leavitt Quantum Fuel Systems Technologies Worldwide, Inc. August 11, 2011 This presentation does not contain any proprietary, confidential, or otherwise restricted information History of Innovations... Announced breakthrough in all-composite lightweight, high capacity, low-cost fuel storage technologies. * Developed a series of robust, OEM compatible electronic control products. Developed H 2 storage system for SunLine Tran-sit Hythane® bus. Awarded patent for integrated module including in-tank regulator * Developed high efficiency H 2 fuel storage systems for DOE Future Truck programs Developed H 2 storage and metering system for Toyota's FCEV platform. First to certify 10,000 psi systems in Japan

343

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

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

2013-07-30T23:59:59.000Z

344

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Part B permit application for tank storage units at the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

In compliance with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), this report discusses information relating to permit applications for three tank storage units at Y-12. The storage units are: Building 9811-1 RCRA Tank Storage Unit (OD-7); Waste Oil/Solvent Storage Unit (OD-9); and Liquid Organic Solvent Storage Unit (OD-10). Numerous sections discuss the following: Facility description; waste characteristics; process information; groundwater monitoring; procedures to prevent hazards; contingency plan; personnel training; closure plan, post closure plan, and financial requirements; record keeping; other federal laws; organic air emissions; solid waste management units; and certification. Sixteen appendices contain such items as maps, waste analyses and forms, inspection logs, equipment identification, etc.

Not Available

1994-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

345

Stochastic particle acceleration and statistical closures  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

In a recent paper, Maasjost and Elsasser (ME) concluded, from the results of numerical experiments and heuristic arguments, that the Bourret and the direct-interaction approximation (DIA) are ''of no use in connection with the stochastic acceleration problem'' because (1) their predictions were equivalent to that of the simpler Fokker-Planck (FP) theory, and (2) either all or none of the closures were in good agreement with the data. Here some analytically tractable cases are studied and used to test the accuracy of these closures. The cause of the discrepancy (2) is found to be the highly non-Gaussian nature of the force used by ME, a point not stressed by them. For the case where the force is a position-independent Ornstein-Uhlenbeck (i.e., Gaussian) process, an effective Kubo number K can be defined. For K << 1 an FP description is adequate, and conclusion (1) of ME follows; however, for K greater than or equal to 1 the DIA behaves much better qualitatively than the other two closures. For the non-Gaussian stochastic force used by ME, all common approximations fail, in agreement with (2).

Dimits, A.M.; Krommes, J.A.

1985-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

346

Chemical composition of Hanford Tank SY-102  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The US Department of Energy established the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) to safely manage and dispose of the radioactive waste, both current and future, stored in double-shell and single-shell tanks at the Hanford sites. One major program element in TWRS is pretreatment which was established to process the waste prior to disposal using the Hanford Waste Vitrification Plant. In support of this program, Los Alamos National Laboratory has developed a conceptual process flow sheet which will remediate the entire contents of a selected double-shelled underground waste tank, including supernatant and sludge, into forms that allow storage and final disposal in a safe, cost-effective and environmentally sound manner. The specific tank selected for remediation is 241-SY-102 located in the 200 West Area. As part of the flow sheet development effort, the composition of the tank was defined and documented. This database was built by examining the history of liquid waste transfers to the tank and by performing careful analysis of all of the analytical data that have been gathered during the tank`s lifetime. In order to more completely understand the variances in analytical results, material and charge balances were done to help define the chemistry of the various components in the tank. This methodology of defining the tank composition and the final results are documented in this report.

Birnbaum, E.; Agnew, S.; Jarvinen, G.; Yarbro, S.

1993-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

347

Closure Operators and Galois Connections 1. A collection C of subsets of a set A is a closure system if it is closed under arbitrary intersections  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

(C(B)). Show : For every closure system C, C(B) = {M|M B, M C} is a closure operator, and for every closure operator C, the system C = {M|M = C(M)} is a closure system and this defines a bijection between closure systems and closure operators. 2. Let (S, ) and (T, ) be posets. A pair (g, d) of functions g : S T, d

Kaiser, Klaus

348

Waste acceptance and waste loading for vitrified Oak Ridge tank waste  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Office of Science and Technology of the DOE has funded a joint project between the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and the Savannah River Technology Center (SRTC) to evaluate vitrification and grouting for the immobilization of sludge from ORNL tank farms. The radioactive waste is from the Gunite and Associated Tanks (GAAT), the Melton Valley Storage Tanks (MVST), the Bethel Valley Evaporator Service Tanks (BVEST), and the Old Hydrofractgure Tanks (OHF). Glass formulation development for sludge from these tanks is discussed in an accompanying article for this conference (Andrews and Workman). The sludges contain transuranic radionuclides at levels which will make the glass waste form (at reasonable waste loadings) TRU. Therefore, one of the objectives for this project was to ensure that the vitrified waste form could be disposed of at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). In order to accomplish this, the waste form must meet the WIPP Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC). An alternate pathway is to send the glass waste forms for disposal at the Nevada Test Site (NTS). A sludge waste loading in the feed of 6 wt percent will lead to a waste form which is non-TRU and could potentially be disposed of at NTS. The waste forms would then have to meet the requirements of the NTS WAC. This paper presents SRTC`s efforts at demonstrating that the glass waste form produced as a result of vitrification of ORNL sludge will meet all the criteria of the WIPP WAC or NTS WAC.

Harbour, J.R.; Andrews, M.K.

1997-06-06T23:59:59.000Z

349

Localized weld metal corrosion in stainless steel water tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The rapidly developed leaks within the TFC and TFD tanks (LLNL groundwater treatment facilities) were caused by localized corrosion within the resolidified weld metal. The corrosion was initiated by the severe oxidation of the backsides of the welds which left the exposed surfaces in a condition highly susceptible to aqueous corrosion. The propagation of surface corrosion through the thickness of the welds occurred by localized corrosive attack. This localized attack was promoted by the presence of shielded aqueous environments provided by crevices at the root of the partial penetration welds. In addition to rapid corrosion of oxidized surfaces, calcium carbonate precipitation provided an additional source of physical shielding from the bulk tank environment. Qualification testing of alternate weld procedures showed that corrosion damage can be prevented in 304L stainless steel GTA welds by welding from both sides while preventing oxidation of the tank interior through the use of an inert backing gas such as argon. Corrosion resistance was also satisfactory in GMA welds in which oxidized surfaces were postweld cleaned by wire brushing and chemically passivated in nitric acid. Further improvements in corrosion resistance are expected from a Mo-containing grade of stainless steel such as type 316L, although test results were similar for type 304L sheet welded with type 308L filler metal and type 316L sheet welded with type 316L filler metal.

Strum, M.J.

1995-05-25T23:59:59.000Z

350

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax  

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

Alternative Fuels Tax Alternative Fuels Tax to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type Alternative Fuels Tax Excise taxes on alternative fuels are imposed on a gasoline gallon equivalent basis. The tax rate for each alternative fuel type is based on the number of motor vehicles licensed in the state that use the specific

351

Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 214: Bunkers and Storage Areas, Nevada Test Site, Nevada  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 214 is located in Areas 5, 11, and 25 of the Nevada Test Site (NTS). CAU 214 is listed in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO, 1996) as ''Corrective Action Unit 214: Bunkers and Storage Areas,'' and is comprised of nine Corrective Action Sites (CASs): {sm_bullet} CAS 05-99-01, Fallout Shelters {sm_bullet} CAS 11-22-03, Drum {sm_bullet} CAS 25-23-01, Contaminated Materials {sm_bullet} CAS 25-23-19, Radioactive Material Storage {sm_bullet} CAS 25-34-03, Motor Dr/Gr Assembly (Bunker) {sm_bullet} CAS 25-34-04, Motor Dr/Gr Assembly (Bunker) {sm_bullet} CAS 25-34-05, Motor Dr/Gr Assembly (Bunker) {sm_bullet} CAS 25-99-12, Fly Ash Storage {sm_bullet} CAS 25-99-18, Storage Area The Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP)-approved corrective action alternative for CASs 11-22-03, 25-34-03, 25-34-04, 25-34-05, 25-99-12, and 25-99-18 is No Further Action. Closure activities included: {sm_bullet} Removing and disposing of the fly ash and surrounding wooden structure at CAS 25-99-12 as a best management practice The NDEP-approved corrective action alternative for CAS 05-99-01 in CAU 214 is Clean Closure. Closure activities included: {sm_bullet} Removing and disposing of soil contaminated with the pesticide dieldrin The NDEP-approved corrective action alternative for CASs 25-23-01 and 25-23-19 is Closure in Place with Administrative Controls. Closure activities included: {sm_bullet} Removing and disposing of soil contaminated with chromium and soil impacted with the pesticides chlordane and heptachlor {sm_bullet} Implementing use restrictions (UR) at both CASs as detailed in the CAU 214 Corrective Action Plan (CAP) (U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office [NNSA/NSO], 2005) {sm_bullet} Posting UR warning signs around CASs 25-23-01 and 25-23-19 on the existing chain link fence

NSTec Environmental Restoration

2006-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

352

Alternative generation and analysis for phase I privatization transfer system needs  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This decision document provides input for the Phase I Privatization waste staging plans for the High-Level Waste (HLW)and Low-Level Waste (LLW) Disposal Programs. This AGA report evaluates what infrastructure upgrades to existing 200 East waste transfer systems are necessary for delivery of HLW and LLW streams to the Phase I Privatization vendor. The AGA identifies the transfer routing alternatives for supernatant waste transfers from the 241-AN, 241-AW, and 241-AP Tank Farms to the 241-AP-102 tank and/or the 241-AP-104 tank. These two tanks have been targeted as the initial LLW feed staging tanks. In addition,this report addresses the transfer of slurry waste from the 241-AY and 241-AZ Tank Farms to the Phase I Privatization vendor`s facilities for HLW immobilization.

Galbraith, J.D.

1996-09-10T23:59:59.000Z

353

LITERATURE REVIEW ON THE SORPTION OF PLUTONIUM, URANIUM, NEPTUNIUM, AMERICIUM AND TECHNETIUM TO CORROSION PRODUCTS ON WASTE TANK LINERS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Savannah River Site (SRS) has conducted performance assessment (PA) calculations to determine the risk associated with closing liquid waste tanks. The PA estimates the risk associated with a number of scenarios, making various assumptions. Throughout all of these scenarios, it is assumed that the carbon-steel tank liners holding the liquid waste do not sorb the radionuclides. Tank liners have been shown to form corrosion products, such as Fe-oxyhydroxides (Wiersma and Subramanian 2002). Many corrosion products, including Fe-oxyhydroxides, at the high pH values of tank effluent, take on a very strong negative charge. Given that many radionuclides may have net positive charges, either as free ions or complexed species, it is expected that many radionuclides will sorb to corrosion products associated with tank liners. The objective of this report was to conduct a literature review to investigate whether Pu, U, Np, Am and Tc would sorb to corrosion products on tank liners after they were filled with reducing grout (cementitious material containing slag to promote reducing conditions). The approach was to evaluate radionuclides sorption literature with iron oxyhydroxide phases, such as hematite ({alpha}-Fe{sub 2}O{sub 3}), magnetite (Fe{sub 3}O{sub 4}), goethite ({alpha}-FeOOH) and ferrihydrite (Fe{sub 2}O{sub 3} {center_dot} 0.5H{sub 2}O). The primary interest was the sorption behavior under tank closure conditions where the tanks will be filled with reducing cementitious materials. Because there were no laboratory studies conducted using site specific experimental conditions, (e.g., high pH and HLW tank aqueous and solid phase chemical conditions), it was necessary to extend the literature review to lower pH studies and noncementitious conditions. Consequently, this report relied on existing lower pH trends, existing geochemical modeling, and experimental spectroscopic evidence conducted at lower pH levels. The scope did not include evaluating the appropriateness of K{sub d} values for the Fe-oxyhydroxides, but instead to evaluate whether it is a conservative assumption to exclude this sorption process of radionuclides onto tank liner corrosion products in the PA model. This may identify another source for PA conservatism since the modeling did not consider any sorption by the tank liner.

Li, D.; Kaplan, D.

2012-02-29T23:59:59.000Z

354

Tank characterization report for single-shell tank 241-U-110  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This tank characterization report for Tank 241-U-110 was initially released as WHC-EP-0643. This document is now being released as WHC- SD-WM-ER-551 in order to accommodate internet publishing.

Brown, T.M., Westinghouse Hanford

1996-05-23T23:59:59.000Z

355

Optimal Tank Farm Operation Sebastian Terrazas-Moreno  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Optimal Tank Farm Operation Sebastian Terrazas-Moreno Ignacio E. Grossmann John M. Wassick EWOIn collaboration with The Dow Chemical Company #12;A tank farm is a set of storage tanks that hold finished product until it is shipped Each tank can only hold one Loading of product takes place only from storage tanks

Grossmann, Ignacio E.

356

DEPARTMENf OF NUCLEAR PHYSICS TANK OPENING REPORT NO 62  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

DEPARTMENf OF NUCLEAR PHYSICS TANK OPENING REPORT NO 62 This report covers three tank openings; 2 history. We were plagued throughout these tank openings by poor beam transmission and spent most of our have, were manufactured and installed. The first tank opening2 May t.o 6 May 1988. This tank opening

Chen, Ying

357

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Narbutovskih, Susan M.

2006-09-29T23:59:59.000Z

358

REMOVING SLUDGE HEELS FROM SAVANNAH RIVER SITE WASTE TANKS BY OXALIC ACID DISSOLUTION  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Savannah River Site (SRS) will remove sludge as part of waste tank closure operations. Typically the bulk sludge is removed by mixing it with supernate to produce a slurry, and transporting the slurry to a downstream tank for processing. Experience shows that a residual heel may remain in the tank that cannot be removed by this conventional technique. In the past, SRS used oxalic acid solutions to disperse or dissolve the sludge heel to complete the waste removal. To better understand the actual conditions of oxalic acid cleaning of waste from carbon steel tanks, the authors developed and conducted an experimental program to determine its effectiveness in dissolving sludge, the hydrogen generation rate, the generation rate of other gases, the carbon steel corrosion rate, the impact of mixing on chemical cleaning, the impact of temperature, and the types of precipitates formed during the neutralization process. The test samples included actual SRS sludge and simulated SRS sludge. The authors performed the simulated waste tests at 25, 50, and 75 C by adding 8 wt % oxalic acid to the sludge over seven days. They conducted the actual waste tests at 50 and 75 C by adding 8 wt % oxalic acid to the sludge as a single batch. Following the testing, SRS conducted chemical cleaning with oxalic acid in two waste tanks. In Tank 5F, the oxalic acid (8 wt %) addition occurred over seven days, followed by inhibited water to ensure the tank contained enough liquid to operate the mixer pumps. The tank temperature during oxalic acid addition and dissolution was approximately 45 C. The authors analyzed samples from the chemical cleaning process and compared it with test data. The conclusions from the work are: (1) Oxalic acid addition proved effective in dissolving sludge heels in the simulant demonstration, the actual waste demonstration, and in SRS Tank 5F. (2) The oxalic acid dissolved {approx} 100% of the uranium, {approx} 100% of the iron, and {approx} 40% of the manganese during a single contact in the simulant demonstration. (The iron dissolution may be high due to corrosion of carbon steel coupons.) (3) The oxalic acid dissolved {approx} 80% of the uranium, {approx} 70% of the iron, {approx} 50% of the manganese, and {approx} 90% of the aluminum in the actual waste demonstration for a single contact. (4) The oxalic acid dissolved {approx} 100% of the uranium, {approx} 15% of the iron, {approx} 40% of the manganese, and {approx} 80% of the aluminum in Tank 5F during the first contact cycle. Except for the iron, these results agree well with the demonstrations. The data suggest that a much larger fraction of the iron in the sludge dissolved, but it re-precipitated with the oxalate added to Tank 5F. (5) The demonstrations produced large volumes (i.e., 2-14 gallons of gas/gallon of oxalic acid) of gas (primarily carbon dioxide) by the reaction of oxalic acid with sludge and carbon steel. (6) The reaction of oxalic acid with carbon steel produced hydrogen in the simulant and actual waste demonstrations. The volume produced varied from 0.00002-0.00100 ft{sup 3} hydrogen/ft{sup 2} carbon steel. The hydrogen production proved higher in unmixed tanks than in mixed tanks.

Poirier, M; David Herman, D; Fernando Fondeur, F; John Pareizs, J; Michael Hay, M; Bruce Wiersma, B; Kim Crapse, K; Thomas Peters, T; Samuel Fink, S; Donald Thaxton, D

2009-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

359

FY 1996 Tank waste analysis plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Tank Waste Analysis Plan (TWAP) describes the activities of the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Characterization Project to plan, schedule, obtain, and document characterization information on Hanford waste tanks. This information is required to meet several commitments of Programmatic End-Users and the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, also known as the Tri-Party Agreement. This TWAP applies to the activities scheduled to be completed in fiscal year 1996.

Homi, C.S.

1996-09-18T23:59:59.000Z

360

ANNUAL RADIOACTIVE WASTE TANK INSPECTION PROGRAM 2010  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

West, B.; Waltz, R.

2011-06-23T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank closure alternative" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


361

Microsoft Word - S05767_PostClosureInspRpt.doc  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

09 Doc. No. S05767 09 Doc. No. S05767 Page A-1 Post-Closure Inspection & Monitoring Report for CAU 417 U.S. Department of Energy Doc. No. S05767 October 2009 Page A-2 U.S. Department of Energy Post-Closure Inspection & Monitoring Report for CAU 417 October 2009 Doc. No. S05767 Page A-3 Post-Closure Inspection & Monitoring Report for CAU 417 U.S. Department of Energy Doc. No. S05767 October 2009 Page A-4 U.S. Department of Energy Post-Closure Inspection & Monitoring Report for CAU 417 October 2009 Doc. No. S05767 Page A-5 Post-Closure Inspection & Monitoring Report for CAU 417 U.S. Department of Energy Doc. No. S05767 October 2009 Page A-6 U.S. Department of Energy Post-Closure Inspection & Monitoring Report for CAU 417 October 2009 Doc. No. S05767

362

Tank 241-C-107 vapor sampling and analysis tank characterization report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report presents the details of the Hanford waste tank characterization study for tank 241-C-107. The drivers and objectives of the headspace vapor sampling and analysis were in accordance with procedures that were presented in other reports. The vapor and headspace gas samples were collected and analyzed to determine the potential risks to tank farm workers due to fugitive emissions from the tank.

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

363

Tank 241-TY-103 vapor sampling and analysis tank characterization report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report presents the details of the Hanford waste tank characterization study for tank 241-TY-103. The drivers and objectives of the headspace vapor sampling and analysis were in accordance with procedure that were presented in other reports. The vapor and headspace gas samples were collected and analyzed to determine the potential risks to tank farm workers due to fugitive emissions from the tank.

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

364

Tank 241-T-107 vapor sampling and analysis tank characterization report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report presents the details of the Hanford waste tank characterization study for tank 241-T-107. The drivers and objectives of the headspace vapor sampling and analysis were in accordance with procedure that were presented in other reports. The vapor and headspace gas samples were collected and analyzed to determine the potential risks to tank farm workers due to fugitive emissions from the tank.

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

365

Tank 241-C-105 vapor sampling and analysis tank characterization report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report presents the details of the Hanford waste tank characterization study for tank 241-C-105. The drivers and objectives of the headspace vapor sampling and analysis were in accordance with procedures that were presented in other reports. The vapor and headspace gas samples were collected and analyzed to determine the potential risks to tank farm workers due to fugitive emissions from the tank.

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

366

Tank 241-C-102 vapor sampling and analysis tank characterization report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report presents the details of the Hanford waste tank characterization study for tank 241-C-102. The drivers and objectives of the headspace vapor sampling and analysis were in accordance with procedures that were presented in other reports. The vapor and headspace gas samples were collected and analyzed to determine the potential risks to tank farm workers due to fugitive emissions from the tank.

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

367

Tank 241-C-106 vapor sampling and analysis tank characterization report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report presents the details of the Hanford waste tank characterization study for tank 241-C-106. The drivers and objectives of the headspace vapor sampling and analysis were in accordance with procedures that were presented in other reports. The vapor and headspace gas samples were collected and analyzed to determine the potential risks to tank farm workers due to fugitive emissions from the tank.

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

368

Tank 241-B-103 vapor sampling and analysis tank characterization report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report presents the details of the Hanford waste tank characterization study for tank 241-B-103. The drivers and objectives of the headspace vapor sampling and analysis were in accordance with procedure that were presented in other reports. The vapor and headspace gas samples were collected and analyzed to determine the potential risks to tank farm workers due to fugitive emissions from the tank.

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

369

Tank 241-BX-104 vapor sampling and analysis tank characterization report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report presents the details of the Hanford waste tank characterization study for tank 241-BX-104. The drivers and objectives of the headspace vapor sampling and analysis were in accordance with procedure that were presented in other reports. The vapor and headspace gas samples were collected and analyzed to determine the potential risks to tank farm workers due to fugitive emissions from the tank.

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

370

Tank 241-C-109 vapor sampling and analysis tank characterization report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report presents the details of the Hanford waste tank characterization study for tank 241-C-109. The drivers and objectives of the headspace vapor sampling and analysis were in accordance with procedures that were presented in other reports. The vapor and headspace gas samples were collected and analyzed to determine the potential risks to tank farm workers due to fugitive emissions from the tank.

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-10T23:59:59.000Z

371

Tank 241-C-111 vapor sampling and analysis tank characterization report. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report presents the details of the Hanford waste tank characterization study for tank 241-C-111. The drivers and objectives of the headspace vapor sampling and analysis were in accordance with procedures that were presented in other reports. The vapor and headspace gas samples were collected and analyzed to determine the potential risks to tank farm workers due to fugitive emissions from the tank.

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

372

Tank 241-C-110 vapor sampling and analysis tank characterization report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report presents the details of the Hanford waste tank characterization study for tank 241-C-110. The drivers and objectives of the headspace vapor sampling and analysis were in accordance with procedure that were presented in other reports. The vapor and headspace gas samples were collected and analyzed to determine the potential risks to tank farm workers due to fugitive emissions from the tank.

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

373

Tank 241-BY-110 vapor sampling and analysis tank characterization report. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report presents the details of the Hanford waste tank characterization study for tank 241-BY-110. The drivers and objectives of the headspace vapor sampling and analysis were in accordance with procedures that were presented in other reports. The vapor and headspace gas samples were collected and analyzed to determine the potential risks to the tank farm workers due to fugitive emissions from the tank.

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

374

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Definition  

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

Alternative Fuel Alternative Fuel Definition to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Definition on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Definition on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Definition on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Definition on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Definition on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Definition on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type Alternative Fuel Definition The following fuels are defined as alternative fuels by the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 1992: pure methanol, ethanol, and other alcohols; blends of

375

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel License  

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

Fuel Fuel License to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel License on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel License on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel License on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel License on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel License on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel License on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type Alternative Fuel License Any person acting as an alternative fuels dealer must hold a valid alternative fuel license and certificate from the Wisconsin Department of Administration. Except for alternative fuels that a dealer delivers into a

376

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax  

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

Alternative Fuel Tax Alternative Fuel Tax to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type Alternative Fuel Tax The Minnesota Department of Revenue imposes an excise tax on the first licensed distributor that receives E85 fuel products in the state and on distributors, special fuel dealers, or bulk purchasers of other alternative

377

High-Pressure Tube Trailers and Tanks  

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

bending stress: continuous fiber vessels and vessels made of replicants Conformable tanks require internal stiffeners (ribs) to efficiently support the pressure and minimize...

378

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Brevick, C.H.

1996-06-28T23:59:59.000Z

379

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Brevick, C.H., Fluor Daniel Hanford

1997-02-25T23:59:59.000Z

380

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Brevick, C.H.

1996-06-28T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank closure alternative" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


381

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

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

1997-03-12T23:59:59.000Z

382

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Brevick, C.H., Fluor Daniel Hanford

1997-02-25T23:59:59.000Z

383

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Brevick, C.H.

1996-06-28T23:59:59.000Z

384

Supporting document for the historical tank content estimate of U-tank fram  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Supporting Document provides historical in-depth characterization information on U-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.

Brevick, C.H., Fluor Daniel Hanford

1997-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

385

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

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

1997-03-06T23:59:59.000Z

386

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

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

1997-03-06T23:59:59.000Z

387

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Brevick, C.H.

1996-06-28T23:59:59.000Z

388

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Brevick, C.H., Westinghouse Hanford

1996-06-28T23:59:59.000Z

389

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Brevick, C.H.

1996-06-28T23:59:59.000Z

390

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

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

1997-03-06T23:59:59.000Z

391

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

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

1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

392

Tank 241-C-101 vapor sampling and analysis tank characterization report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Tank C-101 headspace gas and vapor samples were collected and analyzed to help determine the potential risks of fugitive emissions to tank farm workers. Gas and vapor samples from the Tank C-101 headspace were collected on July 7, 1994 using the in situ sampling (ISS) method, and again on September 1, 1994 using the more robust vapor sampling system (VSS). Gas and vapor concentrations in Tank C-101 are influenced by its connections to other tanks and its ventilation pathways. At issue is whether the organic vapors in Tank C-101 are from the waste in that tank, or from Tanks C-102 or C-103. Tank C-103 is on the Organic Watch List; the other two are not. Air from the Tank C-101 headspace was withdrawn via a 7.9-m long heated sampling probe mounted in riser 8, and transferred via heated tubing to the VSS sampling manifold. The tank headspace temperature was determined to be 34.0 C, and all heated zones of the VSS were maintained at approximately 50 C. Sampling media were prepared and analyzed by WHC, Oak Ridge National Laboratories, Pacific Northwest Laboratories, and Oregon Graduate Institute of Science and Technology through a contract with Sandia National Laboratories. The 39 tank air samples and 2 ambient air control samples collected are listed in Table X-1 by analytical laboratory. Table X-1 also lists the 14 trip blanks and 2 field blanks provided by the laboratories.

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

393

Math 315 Exam #3 Solutions in Brief 1. (20 points) Two tanks contain 10 liters of water each. Initially tank  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Math 315 Exam #3 Solutions in Brief 1. (20 points) Two tanks contain 10 liters of water each. Initially tank 1 contains no salt and tank 2 contains 246 grams of salt. Water con- taining 50 grams of salt per liter is added to tank 1 at the rate 2 liters/minute. Water containing no salt is added to tank 2

394

Type B Accident Investigation At Washington Closure Hanford,...  

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

Investigation At Washington Closure Hanford, LLC, Employee Fall Injury on July 1, 2009, At The 336 Building, Hanford Site, Washington Type B Accident Investigation At Washington...

395

PERFORMANCE OF A CONTAINMENT VESSEL CLOSURE FOR RADIOACTIVE GAS CONTENTS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This paper presents a summary of the design and testing of the containment vessel closure for the Bulk Tritium Shipping Package (BTSP). This package is a replacement for a package that has been used to ship tritium in a variety of content configurations and forms since the early 1970s. The containment vessel closure incorporates features specifically designed for the containment of tritium when subjected to the normal and hypothetical conditions required of Type B radioactive material shipping Packages. The paper discusses functional performance of the containment vessel closure of the BTSP prototype packages and separate testing that evaluated the performance of the metallic C-Rings used in a mock BTSP closure.

Blanton, P.; Eberl, K.

2010-07-09T23:59:59.000Z

396

DOE Cites Washington Closure Hanford for Safety Violations |...  

Energy Savers [EERE]

contractor Washington Closure Hanford (WCH) for violations of DOE's worker safety and health program regulations in 2009 at the Hanford Site in southeast Washington State. In a...

397

CFD Combustion Modeling with Conditional Moment Closure using Tabulated Chemistry  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

A method is presented that allows for efficient conditional moment closure combustion simulations through the use of a progress variable based parameterization of the combustion chemistry.

398

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax  

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

Fuels Tax Fuels Tax to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type Alternative Fuels Tax A state excise tax is imposed on the use of alternative fuels. Alternative fuels include liquefied petroleum gas (LPG or propane), compressed natural gas (CNG), and liquefied natural gas (LNG). The current tax rates are as

399

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Promotion  

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

Alternative Fuels Alternative Fuels Promotion to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Promotion on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Promotion on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Promotion on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Promotion on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Promotion on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Promotion on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type Alternative Fuels Promotion The state of Hawaii has signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the U.S. Department of Energy to collaborate to produce 70% of the state's

400

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax  

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

Alternative Fuel Tax Alternative Fuel Tax to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type Alternative Fuel Tax The excise tax imposed on compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied natural gas (LNG), and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG or propane) used to operate a vehicle can be paid through an annual flat rate sticker tax based on the

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank closure alternative" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


401

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel License  

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

Fuel Fuel License to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel License on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel License on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel License on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel License on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel License on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel License on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type Alternative Fuel License Alternative fuel providers, bulk users, and retailers, or any person who fuels an alternative fuel vehicle from a private source that does not pay

402

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax  

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

Fuels Tax Fuels Tax to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type Alternative Fuels Tax The excise tax imposed on an alternative fuel distributed in New Mexico is $0.12 per gallon. Alternative fuels subject to the excise tax include liquefied petroleum gas (or propane), compressed natural gas, and liquefied

403

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Study  

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

Alternative Fuel Study Alternative Fuel Study to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Study on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Study on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Study on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Study on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Study on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Study on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type Alternative Fuel Study As directed by the Nevada Legislature, the Legislative Commission (Commission) conducted an interim study in 2011 concerning the production and use of energy in the state. The study included information on the use

404

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

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

2013-11-27T23:59:59.000Z

405

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 Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting...

406

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 Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting...

407

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

408

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

409

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 Hanford Site C Tank Farm...

410

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

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

Tank Farms - 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...

411

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 Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting...

412

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 Hanford Site C Tank Farm...

413

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

414

Hydrogen Tank Testing R&D | Department of Energy  

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

Hydrogen Tank Testing R&D Hydrogen Tank Testing R&D These slides were presented at the Onboard Storage Tank Workshop on April 29, 2010. hydrogentanktestingostw.pdf More Documents...

415

First Draft Performance Assessment for the H-Area Tank Farm at the Savannah River Site - Part 4  

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

238 of 864 238 of 864 4.0 ANALYSIS OF PERFORMANCE The purpose of this section is to provide the technical basis for the analyses of performance for the closed HTF facilities over time based on the total remaining inventory. Section 4.1 provides an overview of the ICM comprised of three components: 1) closure cap, 2) vadose zone, and 3) saturated zone. Section 4.2 describes the ICM approach for contaminant release.  4.2.1 presents details of the source term release, the analyses performed to estimate the leaching of contaminants from the CZ by the pore fluid, based on solubility controls used for modeling the transport of contaminants from their initial closure locations within the waste tanks and ancillary equipment to the underground aquifers.

416

Double-Shell Tank Visual Inspection Changes Resulting from the Tank 241-AY-102 Primary Tank Leak  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

As part of the Double-Shell Tank (DST) Integrity Program, remote visual inspections are utilized to perform qualitative in-service inspections of the DSTs in order to provide a general overview of the condition of the tanks. During routine visual inspections of tank 241-AY-102 (AY-102) in August 2012, anomalies were identified on the annulus floor which resulted in further evaluations. In October 2012, Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC determined that the primary tank of AY-102 was leaking. Following identification of the tank AY-102 probable leak cause, evaluations considered the adequacy of the existing annulus inspection frequency with respect to the circumstances of the tank AY-102 1eak and the advancing age of the DST structures. The evaluations concluded that the interval between annulus inspections should be shortened for all DSTs, and each annulus inspection should cover > 95 percent of annulus floor area, and the portion of the primary tank (i.e., dome, sidewall, lower knuckle, and insulating refractory) that is visible from the annulus inspection risers. In March 2013, enhanced visual inspections were performed for the six oldest tanks: 241-AY-101, 241-AZ-101,241-AZ-102, 241-SY-101, 241-SY-102, and 241-SY-103, and no evidence of leakage from the primary tank were observed. Prior to October 2012, the approach for conducting visual examinations of DSTs was to perform a video examination of each tank's interior and annulus regions approximately every five years (not to exceed seven years between inspections). Also, the annulus inspection only covered about 42 percent of the annulus floor.

Girardot, Crystal L. [Washington River Protection Solutions, Richland, WA (United States); Washenfelder, Dennis J. [Washington River Protection Solutions, Richland, WA (United States); Johnson, Jeremy M. [USDOE Office of River Protection, Richland, WA (United States); Engeman, Jason K. [Washington River Protection Solutions, Richland, WA (United States)

2013-11-14T23:59:59.000Z

417

Alternative Fuels Data Center  

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

providers to install biofuel fueling facilities. Fueling facilities include storage tanks and fuel pumps dedicated to dispensing E85 and biodiesel blends of 20% (B20). TDOT...

418

Alternative Fuels Data Center  

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

kitchen grease, or biofuel at any one time, excluding biofuel contained in vehicle fuel tanks. Other restrictions apply. For more information, see the Virginia Department of...

419

Alternative Fuels Data Center  

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

assessor. For more information, see the Department's Biodiesel In Underground Storage Tanks fact sheet. (Reference Washington Administrative Code 173-360) Point of Contact...

420

Alternative Fuels Data Center  

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

for the Program are met. Funds are also available for replacing on-board natural gas tanks on older school buses and for updating deteriorating natural gas fueling...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank closure alternative" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


421

Alternative Fuels Data Center  

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

retrofitted with an auxiliary fuel tank to enable the use of biodiesel, waste vegetable oil, or straight vegetable oil. Eligible buses must pass inspection in accordance with the...

422

CLOSURE REPORT FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION UNIT165: AREA 25 AND 26 DRY WELL AND WASH DOWN AREAS, NEVADA TEST SITE, NEVADA  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Closure Report (CR) documents the closure activities for Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 165, Area 25 and 26 Dry Well and Washdown Areas, according to the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) of 1996. CAU 165 consists of 8 Corrective Action Sites (CASs) located in Areas 25 and 26 of the Nevada Test Site (NTS). The NTS is located approximately 105 kilometers (65 miles) northwest of Las Vegas, nevada. Site closure activities were performed according to the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP)-approved Corrective Action Plan (CAP) for CAU 165. CAU 165 consists of the following CASs: (1) CAS 25-07-06, Train Decontamination Area; (2) CAS 25-07-07, Vehicle Washdown; (3) CAS 25-20-01, Lab Drain Dry Well; (4) CAS 25-47-01, Reservoir and French Drain; (5) CAS 25-51-02, Drywell; (6) CAS 25-59-01, Septic System; (7) CAS 26-07-01, Vehicle Washdown Station; and (8) CAS 26-59-01, Septic System. CAU 165, Area 25 and 26 Dry Well and Washdown Areas, consists of eight CASs located in Areas 25 and 26 of the NTS. The approved closure alternatives included No Further Action, Clean Closure, and Closure in Place with Administrative Controls.

BECHTEL NEVADA

2005-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

423

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Loans  

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

Fuel Loans Fuel Loans to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Loans on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Loans on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Loans on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Loans on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Loans on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Loans on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type Alternative Fuel Loans The Oregon Department of Energy administers the State Energy Loan Program (SELP) which offers low-interest loans for qualified projects. Eligible alternative fuel projects include fuel production facilities, dedicated

424

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax  

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

Fuels Tax Fuels Tax to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type Alternative Fuels Tax Alternative fuels are subject to an excise tax at a rate of $0.205 per gasoline gallon equivalent, with a variable component equal to at least 5% of the average wholesale price of the fuel. (Reference Senate Bill 454,

425

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Definition  

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

Definition to someone by E-mail Definition to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Definition on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Definition on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Definition on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Definition on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Definition on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Definition on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type Alternative Fuel Definition Alternative fuel is defined as compressed natural gas, propane, ethanol, or any mixture containing 85% or more ethanol (E85) with gasoline or other

426

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax  

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

Fuels Tax Fuels Tax to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuels Tax on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type Alternative Fuels Tax Alternative fuels used to propel vehicles of any kind on public highways are taxed at a rate determined on a gasoline gallon equivalent basis. The tax rates are posted in the Pennsylvania Bulletin. (Reference Title 75

427

Tanks Focus Area annual report FY2000  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) continues to face a major radioactive waste tank remediation effort with tanks containing hazardous and radioactive waste resulting from the production of nuclear materials. With some 90 million gallons of waste in the form of solid, sludge, liquid, and gas stored in 287 tanks across the DOE complex, containing approximately 650 million curies, radioactive waste storage tank remediation is the nation's highest cleanup priority. Differing waste types and unique technical issues require specialized science and technology to achieve tank cleanup in an environmentally acceptable manner. Some of the waste has been stored for over 50 years in tanks that have exceeded their design lives. The challenge is to characterize and maintain these contents in a safe condition and continue to remediate and close each tank to minimize the risks of waste migration and exposure to workers, the public, and the environment. In 1994, the DOE's Office of Environmental Management (EM) created a group of integrated, multiorganizational teams focusing on specific areas of the EM cleanup mission. These teams have evolved into five focus areas managed within EM's Office of Science and Technology (OST): Tanks Focus Area (TFA); Deactivation and Decommissioning Focus Area; Nuclear Materials Focus Area; Subsurface Contaminants Focus Area; and Transuranic and Mixed Waste Focus Area.

None

2000-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

428

Phase Chemistry of Tank Sludge Residual Components  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The US Department of Energy (DOE) has millions of gallons of high level nuclear waste stored in underground tanks at Hanford, Washington and Savannah River, South Carolina. These tanks will eventually be emptied and decommissioned. This will leave a residue of sludge adhering to the interior tank surfaces that may contaminate nearby groundwaters with radionuclides and RCRA metals. Performance assessment (PA) calculations must be carried out prior to closing the tanks. This requires developing radionuclide release models from the sludges so that the PA calculations can be based on credible source terms. These efforts continued to be hindered by uncertainties regarding the actual nature of the tank contents and the distribution of radionuclides among the various phases. In particular, it is of vital importance to know what radionuclides are associated with solid sludge components. Experimentation on actual tank sludges can be difficult, dangerous and prohibitively expensive. The research funded under this grant for the past three years was intended to provide a cost-effective method for developing the needed radionuclide release models using non-radioactive artificial sludges. Insights gained from this work will also have more immediate applications in understanding the processes responsible for heel development in the tanks and in developing effective technologies for removing wastes from the tanks.

J.L. Krumhansl

2002-04-02T23:59:59.000Z

429

Application of infrared imaging in ferrocyanide tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report analyzes the feasibility of using infrared imaging techniques and scanning equipment to detect potential hot spots within ferrocyanide waste tanks at the Hanford Site. A hot spot is defined as a volumetric region within a waste tank with an excessively warm temperature that is generated by radioactive isotopes. The thermal image of a hot spot was modeled by computer. this model determined the image an IR system must detect. Laboratory and field tests of the imaging system are described, and conclusions based on laboratory and field data are presented. The report shows that infrared imaging is capable of detecting hot spots in ferrocyanide waste tanks with depths of up to 3.94 m (155 in.). The infrared imaging system is a useful technology for initial evaluation and assessment of hot spots in the majority of ferrocyanide waste tanks at the Hanford Site. The system will not allow an exact hot spot and temperature determination, but it will provide the necessary information to determine the worst-case hot spot detected in temperature patterns. Ferrocyanide tanks are one type of storage tank on the Watch List. These tanks are identified as priority 1 Hanford Site Tank farm Safety Issues.

Morris, K.L.; Mailhot, R.B. Jr.; McLaren, J.M.; Morris, K.L.

1994-09-28T23:59:59.000Z

430

Annual radioactive waste tank inspection program: 1995  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Aqueous radioactive wastes from Savannah River Site (SRS) separations processes are contained in large underground carbon steel tanks. Inspections made during 1995 to evaluate these vessels and evaluations based on data accrued by inspections performed since the tanks were constructed are the subject of this report

McNatt, F.G. Sr.

1996-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

431

DEVELOPING AN OPTIMIZED PROCESS STRATEGY FOR ACID CLEANING OF THE SAVANNAH RIVERSITE HLW TANKS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

At the Savannah River Site (SRS), there remains approximately 35 million gallons of High Level Waste (HLW) that was mostly created from Purex and SRS H-Area Modified (HM) nuclear fuel cycles. The waste is contained in approximately forty-nine tanks fabricated from commercially available carbon steel. In order to minimize general corrosion, the waste is maintained as very-alkaline solution. The very-alkaline chemistry has caused hydrated metal oxides to precipitate and form a sludge heel. Over the years, the sludge waste has aged, with some forming a hardened crust. To aid in the removal of the sludge heels from select tanks for closure the use of oxalic acid to dissolve the sludge is being investigated. Developing an optimized process strategy based on laboratory analyses would be prohibitively costly. This research, therefore, demonstrates that a chemical equilibrium based software program can be used to develop an optimized process strategy for oxalic acid cleaning of the HLW tanks based on estimating resultant chemistries, minimizing resultant oxalates sent to the evaporator, and minimizing resultant solids sent to the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF).

Ketusky, E

2006-12-04T23:59:59.000Z

432

Fuel Cell Technologies Office: Onboard Storage Tank Workshop  

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

Onboard Storage Tank Onboard Storage Tank Workshop to someone by E-mail Share Fuel Cell Technologies Office: Onboard Storage Tank Workshop on Facebook Tweet about Fuel Cell Technologies Office: Onboard Storage Tank Workshop on Twitter Bookmark Fuel Cell Technologies Office: Onboard Storage Tank Workshop on Google Bookmark Fuel Cell Technologies Office: Onboard Storage Tank Workshop on Delicious Rank Fuel Cell Technologies Office: Onboard Storage Tank Workshop on Digg Find More places to share Fuel Cell Technologies Office: Onboard Storage Tank Workshop on AddThis.com... Publications Program Publications Technical Publications Educational Publications Newsletter Program Presentations Multimedia Conferences & Meetings Annual Merit Review Proceedings Workshop & Meeting Proceedings

433

Utah Underground Storage Tank Installation Permit | Open Energy...  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Underground Storage Tank Installation Permit Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Form: Utah Underground Storage Tank Installation Permit Form Type...

434

Independent Oversight Review, Hanford Site Tank Farms - February...  

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

- February 2014 Independent Oversight Review, Hanford Site Tank Farms - February 2014 February 2014 Review of the Hanford Tank Farms Safety Management Program Implementation for...

435

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 Meeting Summary for...

436

Lightweight Sealed Steel Fuel Tanks for Advanced Hybrid Electric...  

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

Sealed Steel Fuel Tanks for Advanced Hybrid Electric Vehicles Lightweight Sealed Steel Fuel Tanks for Advanced Hybrid Electric Vehicles 2012 DOE Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Program and...

437

Bonfire Tests of High Pressure Hydrogen Storage Tanks | Department...  

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

Bonfire Tests of High Pressure Hydrogen Storage Tanks Bonfire Tests of High Pressure Hydrogen Storage Tanks These slides were presented at the International Hydrogen Fuel and...

438

Pump targets hydrogen risk in nuclear waste tank  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Pump targets hydrogen risk in nuclear waste tank ... Researchers believe that thermal and radiolytic breakdown of organic compounds in the tank's wastes produces the hydrogen. ...

DEBORAH ILLMAN

1993-07-12T23:59:59.000Z

439

Technical Assessment of Compressed Hydrogen Storage Tank Systems...  

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

Technical Assessment of Compressed Hydrogen Storage Tank Systems for Automotive Applications Technical Assessment of Compressed Hydrogen Storage Tank Systems for Automotive...

440

Technical Assessment of Cryo-Compressed Hydrogen Storage Tank...  

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

Technical Assessment of Cryo-Compressed Hydrogen Storage Tank Systems for Automotive Applications Technical Assessment of Cryo-Compressed Hydrogen Storage Tank Systems for...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank closure alternative" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


441

Tank waste remediation system retrieval and disposal mission readiness-to-proceed responses to internal independent assessment  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The US Department of Energy (DOE) is planning to make critical decisions during fiscal year (FY) 1998 regarding privatization contracts for the treatment of Hanford tank waste. Specifically, DOE, Richland Operations Office (RL), will make decisions related to proceeding with Phase 1 Privatization. In support of these decisions, the management and integration (M+I) contractor must be able to meet the requirements to support the Phase 1 privatization contractors. As part of the assessment of the Tank Waste Retrieval (TWR) Readiness-To-Proceed (RTP), an independent review of their process and products was required by the RL letter of August 8, 1997. The Independent Review Team reviewed the adequacy of the planning that has been done by the M+I contractor to validate that, if the plans are carried out, there is reasonable assurance of success. Overall, the RTP Independent Review Team concluded that, if the planning by the M+I contractor team is carried out with adequate funding, there is reasonable assurance that the M+I contractor will be able to deliver waste to the privatization contractor for the duration of Phase 1. This conclusion was based on addressing the recommendations contained in the Independent Review Team`s Final Report and in the individual Criteria and Review Approach (CRA) forms completed during the assessment. The purpose of this report is to formally document the independent assessment and the RTP team responses to the Independent Review Team recommendations. It also provides closure logics for selected recommendations from a Lockheed Martin Hanford Corporation (LMHC) internal assessment of the Technical Basis Review (TBR) packages. This report contains the RTP recommendation closure process (Section 2.0); the closure tables (Section 3.0) which provide traceability between each review team recommendation and its corresponding Project Hanford Management Contract closure logic; and two attachments that formally document the Independent Review Team Final Report and the Internal Assessment Final Report.

Schaus, P.S.

1998-01-06T23:59:59.000Z

442

Haynes Tow Tank | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Haynes Tow Tank Haynes Tow Tank Jump to: navigation, search Basic Specifications Facility Name Haynes Tow Tank Overseeing Organization Texas A&M (Haynes) Hydrodynamic Testing Facility Type Tow Tank Length(m) 45.7 Beam(m) 3.7 Depth(m) 3.0 Water Type Freshwater Cost(per day) $150/hour (excluding labor) Special Physical Features The tank includes a 7.6m by 3.7m by 1.5m deep sediment pit. Towing Capabilities Towing Capabilities Yes Maximum Velocity(m/s) 1.8 Length of Effective Tow(m) 24.4 Wavemaking Capabilities Wavemaking Capabilities None Channel/Tunnel/Flume Channel/Tunnel/Flume None Wind Capabilities Wind Capabilities None Control and Data Acquisition Description National Instruments LabView Number of channels 40 Cameras Yes Number of Color Cameras 6 Description of Camera Types 3 video; 3 digital

443

Hydrogen Tank Testing R&D  

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

04.29.2010 | Presented by Joe Wong, P.Eng. 04.29.2010 | Presented by Joe Wong, P.Eng. DOE Tank Safety Workshop Hydrogen Tank Safety Testing 1 POWERTECH - Hydrogen & CNG Services  Certification testing of individual high pressure components  Design Verification, Performance, End-of-Life testing of complete fuel systems  Design, construction, and operation of Hydrogen Fill Stations  Safety Studies  Standards Development 2 PRESENTATION  Discuss CNG Field Performance Data  Discuss Safety Testing of Type 4 Tanks  Current work to support Codes & Standards Development 3 Storage Tank Technologies 4 basic types of tank designs  Type 1 - all metal  Type 2 - metal liner with hoop wrapped composite  Type 3 - metal liner with fully wrapped composite  Type 4 - Plastic liner with

444

E-Print Network 3.0 - aboveground storage tanks Sample Search...  

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

tanks Search Powered by Explorit Topic List Advanced Search Sample search results for: aboveground storage tanks...

445

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Disposal of Hanford Defense High-Level, Transuranic, and Tank Wastes, Hanford  

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

Disposal of Hanford Defense High-Level, Transuranic, and Tank Wastes, Hanford Disposal of Hanford Defense High-Level, Transuranic, and Tank Wastes, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington; Record of Decision (ROO). This Record of Decision has been prepared pursuant to the Council on Environme~tal Quality ~egulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Pol icy Act (NEPAl (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508) and the Department of Energy NEPA Guidelines (52 FR 47662, December 15, 1987). It is based on DOE's "Environmental Impact Statement for the Oi sposal of Hanford Defense High-Level, Transuranic, and Tank Wastes'' (OOE/EIS-0113) and consideration of ~11 public and agency comments received on the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). fJECISION The decision is to implement the ''Preferred Alternative'' as discussed in

446

PROBABILITY BASED CORROSION CONTROL FOR LIQUID WASTE TANKS - PART III  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The liquid waste chemistry control program is designed to reduce the pitting corrosion occurrence on tank walls. The chemistry control program has been implemented, in part, by applying engineering judgment safety factors to experimental data. However, the simple application of a general safety factor can result in use of excessive corrosion inhibiting agents. The required use of excess corrosion inhibitors can be costly for tank maintenance, waste processing, and in future tank closure. It is proposed that a probability-based approach can be used to quantify the risk associated with the chemistry control program. This approach can lead to the application of tank-specific chemistry control programs reducing overall costs associated with overly conservative use of inhibitor. Furthermore, when using nitrite as an inhibitor, the current chemistry control program is based on a linear model of increased aggressive species requiring increased protective species. This linear model was primarily supported by experimental data obtained from dilute solutions with nitrate concentrations less than 0.6 M, but is used to produce the current chemistry control program up to 1.0 M nitrate. Therefore, in the nitrate space between 0.6 and 1.0 M, the current control limit is based on assumptions that the linear model developed from data in the <0.6 M region is applicable in the 0.6-1.0 M region. Due to this assumption, further investigation of the nitrate region of 0.6 M to 1.0 M has potential for significant inhibitor reduction, while maintaining the same level of corrosion risk associated with the current chemistry control program. Ongoing studies have been conducted in FY07, FY08, FY09 and FY10 to evaluate the corrosion controls at the SRS tank farm and to assess the minimum nitrite concentrations to inhibit pitting in ASTM A537 carbon steel below 1.0 molar nitrate. The experimentation from FY08 suggested a non-linear model known as the mixture/amount model could be used to predict the probability of corrosion in ASTM A537 in varying solutions as shown in Figure 1. The mixture/amount model takes into account not only the ratio (or mixture) of inhibitors and aggressive species, but also the total concentration (or amount) of species in a solution. Historically, the ratio was the only factor taken into consideration in the development of the current chemistry control program. During FY09, an experimental program was undertaken to refine the mixture/amount model by further investigating the risk associated with reducing the minimum molar nitrite concentration required to confidently inhibit pitting in dilute solutions. The results of FY09, as shown in Figure 2, quantified the probability for a corrosion free outcome for combinations of nitrate and nitrite. The FY09 data predict probabilities up to 70%. Additional experimental data are needed to increase the probability to an acceptable percentage.

Hoffman, E.; Edwards, T.

2010-12-09T23:59:59.000Z

447

Tank characterization report for single-shell tank 241-BY-104  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This characterization report summarizes the available information on the historical uses, current status, and the sampling and analysis results of waste contained in underground storage tank 241-BY-104. This report supports the requirements of the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, Milestone M-44-09. Tank 241-BY-104 is one of 12 single-shell tanks located in the BY-Tank Farm in the 200 East Area of the Hanford Site. Tank 241-BY-104 entered service in the first quarter of 1950 with a transfer of metal waste from an unknown source. Through cascading, the tank was full of metal waste by the second quarter of 1951. The waste was sluiced in the second quarter of 1954. Uranium recovery (tributyl phosphate) waste was sent from tank 241-BY-107 during the second quarter of 1955 and from tank 241-BY-110 during the third quarter of 1955. Most of this waste was sent to a crib during the fourth quarter of 1955. During the third and fourth quarters of 1956 and the second and third quarters of 1957, the tank received waste from the in-plant ferrocyanide scavenging process (PFeCN2) from tanks 241-BY-106, -107, -108, and -110. This waste type is predicted to compose the bottom layer of waste currently in the tank. The tank received PUREX cladding waste (CWP) periodically from 1961 to 1968. Ion-exchange waste from cesium recovery operations was received from tank 241-BX-104 during the second and third quarters of 1968. Tank 241-BY-104 received evaporator bottoms waste from the in-tank solidification process that was conducted in the BY-Tank Farm 0247from tanks 241 -BY- 109 and 241 -BY- 1 12 from 1970 to 1974. The upper portion of tank waste is predicted to be composed of BY saltcake. Tank 241-BY-104 was declared inactive in 1977. Waste was saltwell pumped from the tank during the third quarter of 1982 and the fourth quarter of 1985. Table ES-1 and Figure ES-1 describe tank 241-BY-104 and its status. The tank has an operating capacity of 2,869 kL and presently contains an estimated 1,234 kL of noncomplexed waste. Of this total volume, 568 kL are estimated to be sludge and 666 kL are estimated to be saltcake. The Hanlon values are not used because they are inconsistent with waste surface level measurements, and they will not be updated until the tank level stabilizes and the new surface photos are taken. This report summarizes the collection and analysis of two rotary-mode core samples obtained in October and November 1995 and reported in the Final Report for Tank 241-BY-104, Rotary Mode Cores 116 and 117. Cores 116 and 117 were obtained from risers 5 and IIA, respectively. The sampling event was performed to satisfy the requirements listed in the following documents: Tank Safety Screening Data Quality Objective , Data Requirements for the Ferrocyanide Safety Issue Developed through the Data Quality Objective Process, Data Quality Objective to Support Resolution of the Organic Fuel Rich Tank Safety Issue, Test Plan for Samples from Hanford Waste Tanks 241-BY-103, BY-104, BY-105, BY-106, BY-108, BY-110, YY-103, U-105, U-107, U-108, and U-109.

Benar, C.J.

1996-09-26T23:59:59.000Z

448

Drop Tests of the Closure Ring for the 9975 Package  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The drop tests of the closure ring for 9975 packages, described here, were performed to answer questions raised by the regulatory authority as a result of deformation of the closure ring and drum rim observed during drop tests conducted in September 1998.

Smith, A.C

1999-09-29T23:59:59.000Z

449

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

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

8 of 864 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 (DOE) Order 435.1 Change 1  Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 61 Subpart C as identified in "Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2005," Section 3116  South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC)

450

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax  

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

Fuel Tax Fuel Tax to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type Alternative Fuel Tax Special fuels, including biodiesel, biodiesel blends, biomass-based diesel, biomass-based diesel blends, and liquefied natural gas, have a reduced tax rate of $0.27 per gallon. Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG or propane) and

451

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax  

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

Fuel Tax Fuel Tax to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Tax on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type Alternative Fuel Tax The state road tax for vehicles that operate on propane (liquefied petroleum gas, or LPG) or natural gas is paid through the purchase of an annual flat fee sticker, and the amount is based on the vehicle's gross

452

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Use  

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

Fuel Use Fuel Use to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Use on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Use on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Use on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Use on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Use on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fuel Use on AddThis.com... More in this section... Federal State Advanced Search All Laws & Incentives Sorted by Type Alternative Fuel Use All state employees operating flexible fuel or diesel vehicles as part of the state fleet must use E85 or biodiesel blends whenever reasonably available. Additionally, the Nebraska Transportation Services Bureau and