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

Tank Closure  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of Energy Power.pdf11-161-LNGInternational EnergyCommitteeRenewable1234 OF THE ENERGYDepartment ofon

2

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

3

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

at Hanford under Waste Management Alternative 1. Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington 5-1164 Table...

4

Tank Farm Area Closure  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1Reader's GuideCoverFarm

5

Tank Farm Area Closure  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1Reader's GuideCoverFarm

6

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...

7

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

8

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...

9

Environmental Assessment for the Accelerated Tank Closure Demonstration Project  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

N /A

2003-06-16T23:59:59.000Z

10

ICPP tank farm closure study. Volume 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Spaulding, B.C.; Gavalya, R.A.; Dahlmeir, M.M. [and others

1998-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

11

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

12

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

13

PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES FOR TANK FARM CLOSURE PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2005-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

14

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

Site and lists the plants and animals evaluated in this Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington. Potential...

15

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

cumulative impacts presented in Chapter 6 of this Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington. The cumulative...

16

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

orders of magnitude within the same series of figures. Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington 5-396 Figure...

17

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

describes the public comment process for the Draft Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington (Draft TC & WM...

18

Accelerated Tank Closure Demonstrations at the Hanford Site  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Among the highest priorities for action under the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Ecology et al. 1989a), hereafter referred to as the Tri-Party Agreement, is the retrieval, treatment and disposal of Hanford Site tank waste. Tank waste is recognized as one of the primary threats to the Columbia River and one of the most complex technical challenges. Progress has been made in resolving safety issues, characterizing tank waste and past tank leaks, enhancing double-shell tank waste transfer and operations systems, retrieving single-shell tank waste, deploying waste treatment facilities, and planning for the disposal of immobilized waste product. However, limited progress has been made in developing technologies and providing a sound technical basis for tank system closure. To address this limitation the Accelerated Tank Closure Demonstration Project was created to develop information through technology demonstrations in support of waste retrieval and closure decisions. To complete its mission the Accelerated Tank Closure Demonstration Project has adopted performance objectives that include: Protecting human health and the environment; Minimizing/eliminating potential waste releases to the soil and groundwater; Preventing water infiltration into the tank; Maintaining accessibility of surrounding tanks for future closure; Maintaining tank structural integrity; Complying with applicable waste retrieval, disposal, and closure regulations; Maintaining flexibility for final closure options in the future. This paper provides an overview of the Hanford Site tank waste mission with emphasis on the Accelerated Tank Closure Demonstration Project. Included are discussions of single-shell tank waste retrieval and closure challenges, progress made to date, lessons learned, regulatory approach, data acquisition, near-term retrieval opportunities, schedule, and cost.

Sams, Terry L.; Riess, Mark J.; Cammann, Jerry W.; Lee, Timothy A.; Nichols, David

2003-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

19

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Hommel, S.; Fountain, D.

2012-03-28T23:59:59.000Z

20

100-N Area underground storage tank closures  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report describes the removal/characterization actions concerning underground storage tanks (UST) at the 100-N Area. Included are 105-N-LFT, 182-N-1-DT, 182-N-2-DT, 182-N-3-DT, 100-N-SS-27, and 100-N-SS-28. The text of this report gives a summary of remedial activities. In addition, correspondence relating to UST closures can be found in Appendix B. Appendix C contains copies of Unusual Occurrence Reports, and validated sampling data results comprise Appendix D.

Rowley, C.A.

1993-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1998-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

22

Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 127: Areas 25 and 26 Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

CAU 127, Areas 25 and 26 Storage Tanks, consists of twelve CASs located in Areas 25 and 26 of the NTS. The closure alternatives included no further action, clean closure, and closure in place with administrative controls. The purpose of this Closure Report is to provide a summary of the completed closure activities, documentation of waste disposal, and analytical data to confirm that the remediation goals were met.

NSTec Environmental Restoration

2008-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

23

Underground storage tank 431-D1U1, Closure Plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document contains information about the decommissioning of Tank 431-D1U1. This tank was installed in 1965 for diesel fuel storage. This tank will remain in active usage until closure procedures begin. Soils and ground water around the tank will be sampled to check for leakage. Appendices include; proof of proper training for workers, health and safety briefing record, task hazard analysis summary, and emergency plans.

Mancieri, S.

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

24

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

25

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

26

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

27

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

28

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

29

HANFORD SITE RIVER PROTECTION PROJECT (RPP) TANK FARM CLOSURE  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2006-01-30T23:59:59.000Z

30

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

31

TANK SPACE ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORT  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report addresses the projected shortfall of double-shell tank (DST) space starting in 2018. Using a multi-variant methodology, a total of eight new-term options and 17 long-term options for recovering DST space were evaluated. These include 11 options that were previously evaluated in RPP-7702, Tank Space Options Report (Rev. 1). Based on the results of this evaluation, two near-term and three long-term options have been identified as being sufficient to overcome the shortfall of DST space projected to occur between 2018 and 2025.

TURNER DA; KIRCH NW; WASHENFELDER DJ; SCHAUS PS; WODRICH DD; WIEGMAN SA

2010-04-27T23:59:59.000Z

32

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

LEHMAN LL

2008-01-23T23:59:59.000Z

33

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) predecessor agency, established the Savannah River Site (SRS) near Aiken, South Carolina, in the early 1950s. The primary mission of SRS was to produce nuclear materials for national defense. With the end of the Cold War and the reduction in the size of the United States stockpile of nuclear weapons, the SRS mission has changed. While national defense is still an important facet of the mission, SRS no longer produces nuclear materials and the mission is focused on material stabilization, environmental restoration, waste management, and decontamination and decommissioning of facilities that are no longer needed. As a result of its nuclear materials production mission, SRS generated large quantities of high-level radioactive waste (HLW). The HLW resulted from dissolving spent reactor fuel and nuclear targets to recover the valuable radioactive isotopes. DOE had stored the HLW in 51 large underground storage tanks located in the F- and H-Area Tank Farms at SRS. DOE has emptied and closed two of those tanks. DOE is treating the HLW, using a process called vitrification. The highly radioactive portion of the waste is mixed with a glass like material and stored in stainless steel canisters at SRS, pending shipment to a geologic repository for disposal. This process is currently underway at SRS in the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF). The HLW tanks at SRS are of four different types, which provide varying degrees of protection to the environment due to different degrees of containment. The tanks are operated under the authority of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (AEA) and DOE Orders issued under the AEA. The tanks are permitted by the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) under South Carolina wastewater regulations, which require permitted facilities to be closed after they are removed from service. DOE has entered into an agreement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and SCDHEC to close the HLW tanks after they have been removed from service. Closure of the HLW tanks would comply with DOE's responsibilities under the AEA and the South Carolina closure requirements and be carried out under a schedule agreed to by DOE, EPA, and SCDHEC. There are several ways to close the HLW tanks. DOE has prepared this Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to ensure that the public and DOE's decision makers have a thorough understanding of the potential environmental impacts of alternative means of closing the tanks. This Summary: (1) describes the HLW tanks and the closure process, (2) describes the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process that DOE is using to aid in decision making, (3) summarizes the alternatives for closing the HLW tanks and identifies DOE.s preferred alternative, and (4) identifies the major conclusions regarding environmental impacts, areas of controversy, and issues that remain to be resolved as DOE proceeds with the HLW tank closure process.

N /A

2002-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

34

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

35

HIGH LEVEL WASTE TANK CLOSURE PROJECT AT THE IDAHO NATIONAL ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Department of Energy, Idaho Operations Office (DOE-ID) is in the process of closing two underground high-level waste (HLW) storage tanks at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) to meet Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulations and Department of Energy orders. Closure of these two tanks is scheduled for 2004 as the first phase in closure of the eleven 1.14 million liter (300,000 gallon) tanks currently in service at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC). The INTEC Tank Farm Facility (TFF) Closure sequence consists of multiple steps to be accomplished through the existing tank riser access points. Currently, the tank risers contain steam and process waste lines associated with the steam jets, corrosion coupons, and liquid level indicators. As necessary, this equipment will be removed from the risers to allow adequate space for closure equipment and activities. The basic tank closure sequence is as follows: Empty the tank to the residual heel using the existing jets; Video and sample the heel; Replace steam jets with new jet at a lower position in the tank, and remove additional material; Flush tank, piping and secondary containment with demineralized water; Video and sample the heel; Evaluate decontamination effectiveness; Displace the residual heel with multiple placements of grout; and Grout piping, vaults and remaining tank volume. Design, development, and deployment of a remotely operated tank cleaning system were completed in June 2002. The system incorporates many commercially available components, which have been adapted for application in cleaning high-level waste tanks. The system is cost-effective since it also utilizes existing waste transfer technology (steam jets), to remove tank heel solids from the tank bottoms during the cleaning operations. Remotely operated directional spray nozzles, automatic rotating wash balls, video monitoring equipment, decontamination spray-rings, and tank -specific access interface devices have been integrated to provide a system that efficiently cleans tank walls and heel solids in an acidic, radioactive environment. Through the deployment of the tank cleaning system, the INEEL High Level Waste Program has cleaned tanks to meet RCRA clean closure standards and DOE closure performance measures. Design, development, and testing of tank grouting delivery equipment were completed in October 2002. The system incorporates lessons learned from closures at other DOE facilities. The grout will be used to displace the tank residuals remaining after the cleaning is complete. To maximize heel displacement to the discharge pump, grout was placed in a sequence of five positions utilizing two riser locations. The project is evaluating the use of six positions to optimize the residuals removed. After the heel has been removed and the residuals stabilized, the tank, piping, and secondary containment will be grouted.

Quigley, K.D.; Wessman, D

2003-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

36

High Level Waste Tank Closure Project at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Department of Energy, Idaho Operations Office (DOE-ID) is making preparations to close two underground high-level waste (HLW) storage tanks at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) to meet Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulations and Department of Energy orders. Closure of these two tanks is scheduled for 2004 as the first phase in closure of the eleven 300,000 gallon tanks currently in service at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC). The INTEC Tank Farm Facility (TFF) Closure sequence consists of multiple steps to be accomplished through the existing tank riser access points. Currently, the tank risers contain steam and process waste lines associated with the steam jets, corrosion coupons, and liquid level indicators. As necessary, this equipment will be removed from the risers to allow adequate space for closure equipment and activities.

Wessman, D. L.; Quigley, K. D.

2002-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

37

An Overview Comparison of Tank Closure Activities at Certain DOE Site  

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.

LUKE, J.J.

2003-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

38

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Becker, D.L.

1998-09-02T23:59:59.000Z

39

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...

40

Design Alternative Evaluation No. 3: Post-Closure Ventilation  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The objective of this study is to provide input to the Enhanced Design Alternatives (EDA) for License Application Design Selection (LADS). Its purpose is to develop and evaluate conceptual designs for post-closure ventilation alternatives that enhance repository performance. Post-closure ventilation is expected to enhance repository performance by limiting the amount of water contacting the waste packages. Limiting the amount of water contacting the waste packages will reduce corrosion.

Logan, R.C.

1999-06-22T23:59:59.000Z

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.


41

TECHNOLOGY NEEDS AND STATUS ON CLOSURE OF DOE RADIOACTIVE WASTE TANK ANCILLARY SYSTEMS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This paper summarizes the current state of art of sampling, characterizing, retrieving, transferring and treating the incidental waste and stabilizing the void space in tank ancillary systems and the needs involved with closure of these systems. The overall effort for closing tank and ancillary systems is very large and is in the initial stages of being addressed in a systematic manner. It was recognized in doing this effort, that gaps in both technology and material application for characterization and removal of residual waste and closure of ancillary systems would be identified. Great efficiencies are to be gained by defining the technology need areas early in the closure process and providing recommendations for technical programs to improve the closure strategies. Therefore, this paper will not only summarize the state of closure of ancillary systems but also provide recommendations to address the technology gaps identified in this assessment.

Burns, H; Sharon Marra, S; Christine Langton, C

2009-01-21T23:59:59.000Z

42

Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington--Frequent Asked Questions  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmospheric Optical Depth7-1D: Vegetation ProposedUsing ZirconiaPolicyFeasibilityField Office Final Tank Closure and Waste Management

43

Summary of Group Development and Testing for Single Shell Tank Closure at Hanford  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report is a summary of the bench-scale and large scale experimental studies performed by Savannah River National Laboratory for CH2M HILL to develop grout design mixes for possible use in producing fill materials as a part of Tank Closure of the Single-Shell Tanks at Hanford. The grout development data provided in this report demonstrates that these design mixes will produce fill materials that are ready for use in Hanford single shell tank closure. The purpose of this report is to assess the ability of the proposed grout specifications to meet the current requirements for successful single shell tank closure which will include the contracting of services for construction and operation of a grout batch plant. The research and field experience gained by SRNL in the closure of Tanks 17F and 20F at the Savannah River Site was leveraged into the grout development efforts for Hanford. It is concluded that the three Hanford grout design mixes provide fill materials that meet the current requirements for successful placement. This conclusion is based on the completion of recommended testing using Hanford area materials by the operators of the grout batch plant. This report summarizes the regulatory drivers and the requirements for grout mixes as tank fill material. It is these requirements for both fresh and cured grout properties that drove the development of the grout formulations for the stabilization, structural and capping layers.

Harbour, John, R.

2005-04-28T23:59:59.000Z

44

Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 121: Storage Tanks and Miscellaneous Sites, Nevada Test Site, Nevada  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 121 is identified in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) (1996, as amended February 2008) as Storage Tanks and Miscellaneous Sites. CAU 121 consists of the following three Corrective Action Sites (CASs) located in Area 12 of the Nevada Test Site, which is approximately 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada: (1) CAS 12-01-01, Aboveground Storage Tank; (2) CAS 12-01-02, Aboveground Storage Tank; and (3) CAS 12-22-26, Drums; 2 AST's. CAU 121 closure activities were conducted according to the FFACO and the Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Plan for CAU 121 (U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office, 2007). Field work took place from February through September 2008. Samples were collected to determine the path forward to close each site. Closure activities were completed as defined in the plan based on sample analytical results and site conditions. No contaminants of concern (COCs) were present at CAS 12-01-01; therefore, no further action was chosen as the corrective action alternative. As a best management practice (BMP), the empty aboveground storage tank (AST) was removed and disposed as sanitary waste. At CAS 12-01-02, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were present above the preliminary action level (PAL) in the soil beneath the AST that could possibly have originated from the AST contents. Therefore, PCBs were considered COCs, and the site was clean closed by excavating and disposing of soil containing PCBs. Approximately 5 cubic yards (yd{sup 3}) of soil were excavated and disposed as petroleum hydrocarbon PCB remediation waste, and approximately 13 yd3 of soil were excavated and disposed as PCB remediation waste. Cleanup samples were collected to confirm that the remaining soil did not contain PCBs above the PAL. Other compounds detected in the soil above PALs (i.e., total petroleum hydrocarbons [TPH] and semi-volatile organic compounds [SVOCs]) were determined to not likely have originated from the tank. Additional sample results showed that the compounds were likely present as a result of degraded asphalt around the adjacent, active water tank and not from the abandoned AST; therefore, they were not considered COCs. As a BMP, the empty AST was removed and disposed as sanitary waste. No COCs were present at CAS 12-22-26; therefore, no further action was chosen as the corrective action alternative. Although TPH was present at concentrations that exceeded the PAL, the volatile organic compound and SVOC hazardous constituents of TPH did not exceed the final action levels (FALs); therefore, TPH was not considered a COC. As a BMP, the empty AST was removed and disposed as sanitary waste. Closure activities generated sanitary waste, petroleum hydrocarbon PCB remediation waste, PCB remediation waste, and hazardous waste. Waste was appropriately managed and disposed. Waste that is currently staged on site is being appropriately managed and will be disposed under approved waste profiles in permitted landfills. Waste minimization activities included waste characterization sampling and segregation of waste streams.

NSTec Environmental Restoration

2008-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

45

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...

46

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...

47

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

48

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.

49

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

50

Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 130: Storage Tanks Nevada Test Site, Nevada, Revision 0  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Closure Report (CR) presents information supporting the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 130: Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada. This CR complies with the requirements of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order that was agreed to by the State of Nevada; U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Environmental Management; U.S. Department of Defense; and DOE, Legacy Management. The corrective action sites (CASs) within CAU 130 are located within Areas 1, 7, 10, 20, 22, and 23 of the Nevada Test Site. Corrective Action Unit 130 is comprised of the following CASs: • 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 CR provides documentation supporting the completed corrective action investigations and provides data confirming that the closure objectives for CASs within CAU 130 were met. To achieve this, the following actions were performed: • Reviewed the current site conditions, including the concentration and extent of contamination. • Implemented any corrective actions necessary to protect human health and the environment. • Properly disposed of corrective action and investigation-derived wastes. From August 4 through September 30, 2008, closure activities were performed as set forth in the Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Plan for CAU 130, Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada. The purposes of the activities as defined during the data quality objectives process were: • Determine whether contaminants of concern (COCs) are present. • If COCs are present, determine their nature and extent, implement appropriate corrective actions, confirm that no residual contamination is present, and properly dispose of wastes. Constituents detected during the closure activities were evaluated against final action levels to identify COCs for CAU 130. Assessment of the data generated from closure activities indicates that no further action is necessary because no COCs were identified at any CAU 130 CAS. Debris removal from these CASs was considered a best management practice because no contamination was detected. The DOE, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office provides the following recommendations: • No further corrective action is required at all CAU 130 CASs. • A Notice of Completion to DOE, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office, is requested from the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection for closure of CAU 130. • Corrective Action Unit 130 should be moved from Appendix III to Appendix IV of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order.

Alfred Wickline

2009-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

51

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

52

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Quigley, K.D. [CH2M..WG Idaho, LLC, Idaho Falls, ID (United States); Butterworth, St.W. [CH2M..WG Idaho, LLC, Idaho Falls, ID (United States); Lockie, K.A. [U.S. Department of Energy, Idaho Operations Office, Idaho Falls, ID (United States)

2008-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

53

Regulatory Closure Options for the Residue in the Hanford Site Single-Shell Tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Liquid, mixed, high-level radioactive waste (HLW) has been stored in 149 single-shell tanks (SSTS) located in tank farms on the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) Hanford Site. The DOE is developing technologies to retrieve as much remaining HLW as technically possible prior to physically closing the tank farms. In support of the Hanford Tanks Initiative, Sandia National Laboratories has addressed the requirements for the regulatory closure of the radioactive component of any SST residue that may remain after physical closure. There is significant uncertainty about the end state of each of the 149 SSTS; that is, the nature and amount of wastes remaining in the SSTS after retrieval is uncertain. As a means of proceeding in the face of these uncertainties, this report links possible end-states with associated closure options. Requirements for disposal of HLW and low-level radioactive waste (LLW) are reviewed in detail. Incidental waste, which is radioactive waste produced incidental to the further processing of HLW, is then discussed. If the low activity waste (LAW) fraction from the further processing of HLW is determined to be incidental waste, then DOE can dispose of that incidental waste onsite without a license from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissions (NRC). The NRC has proposed three Incidental Waste Criteria for determining if a LAW fraction is incidental waste. One of the three Criteria is that the LAW fraction should not exceed the NRC's Class C limits.

Cochran, J.R. Shyr, L.J.

1998-10-05T23:59:59.000Z

54

Savannah River Site Celebrates Historic Closure of Radioactive Waste Tanks:  

Energy Savers [EERE]

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Office of Inspector GeneralDepartment of Energy fromCommentsRevolving STATEMENT OFSanEnergyWasteSenior DOE

55

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

56

Issuance of the Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE:Year in3.pdfEnergy Health andofIan KalinResearch,IntroducingIonic LiquidIs a SmallImpact

57

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious RankCombustion |Energy Usage » SearchEnergyDepartment of Energy Moniz: What theSecretary of

58

HWMA/RCRA Closure Plan for the TRA/MTR Warm Waste System Voluntary Consent Order SITE-TANK-005 Tank System TRA-007  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Hazardous Waste Management Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Closure Plan was developed for portions of the Test Reactor Area/Materials Test Reactor Warm Waste System located in the Materials Test Reactor Building (TRA-603) at the Reactor Technology Complex, Idaho National Laboratory Site, to meet a further milestone established under Voluntary Consent Order Action Plan SITE-TANK-005 for the Tank System TRA-007. The reactor drain tank and canal sump to be closed are included in the Test Reactor Area/Materials Test Reactor Warm Waste System. The reactor drain tank and the canal sump will be closed in accordance with the interim status requirements of the Hazardous Waste Management Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act as implemented by the Idaho Administrative Procedures Act 58.01.05.009 and Code of Federal Regulations 265. This closure plan presents the closure performance standards and methods for achieving those standards.

K. Winterholler

2007-01-30T23:59:59.000Z

59

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "ofEarly Career Scientists'Montana.Program - LibbyofThis EIS evaluates theOrangeImpactTheStatementDepartment of

60

Progress Continues Toward Closure of Two Underground Waste Tanks at  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of Energy Power Systems Engineering Research and Development (PSEEnergy Progress Continues

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

SRS Reaches Significant Milestone with Waste Tank Closure | Department of  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security Administration the1 -the Mid-Infrared0 ResourceAwards SAGE Awards ,#2446SmallnAboutEducationEnergy

62

Joint Tank Closure News Release Final.docx  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May JunDatastreamsmmcrcalgovInstrumentsruc DocumentationP-SeriesFlickrinformation forTechnologies |JenniferB.ImagingImagingRIVER

63

Draft Tank Closure & Waste Management EIS - Summary  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of EnergyEnergy CooperationRequirements Matrix U.S.7685 Vol. 76, No. Training ReciprocityFRONT COVER Draft

64

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

65

Citizen Contributions to the Closure of High-Level Waste (HLW) Tanks 18 and 19 at the Department of Energy's (DOE) Savannah River Site (SRS) - 13448  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Citizen involvement in DOE's decision-making for the environmental cleanup from DOE's management of its nuclear wastes across the DOE complex has had a positive effect on the cleanup of its SRS site, characterized by an acceleration of cleanup not only for the Transuranic wastes at SRS, but also for DOE's first two closures of HLW tanks, both of which occurred at SRS. The Citizens around SRS had pushed successfully for the closures of Tanks 17 and 20 in 1997, becoming the first closures of HLW tanks under regulatory guidance in the USA. However, since then, HLW tank closures ceased due to a lawsuit, the application of new tank clean-up technology, interagency squabbling between DOE and NRC over tank closure criteria, and finally and almost fatally, from budget pressures. Despite an agreement with its regulators for the closure of Tanks 18 and 19 by the end of calendar year 2012, the outlook in Fall 2011 to close these two tanks had dimmed. It was at this point that the citizens around SRS became reengaged with tank closures, helping DOE to reach its agreed upon milestone. (authors)

Lawless, W.F. [Paine College, Departments of Math and Psychology, 1235 15th Street, Augusta, GA 30901 (United States)] [Paine College, Departments of Math and Psychology, 1235 15th Street, Augusta, GA 30901 (United States)

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

66

Regulatory Framework for Salt Waste Disposal and Tank Closure at the Savannah River Site - 13663  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The end of the Cold War has left a legacy of approximately 37 million gallons of radioactive waste in the aging waste tanks at the Department of Energy's Savannah River Site (SRS). A robust program is in place to remove waste from these tanks, treat the waste to separate into a relatively small volume of high-level waste and a large volume of low-level waste, and to actively dispose of the low-level waste on-site and close the waste tanks and associated ancillary structures. To support performance-based, risk-informed decision making and to ensure compliance with all regulatory requirements, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and its current and past contractors have worked closely with the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to develop and implement a framework for on-site low-level waste disposal and closure of the SRS waste tanks. The Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, provides DOE the authority to manage defense-related radioactive waste. DOE Order 435.1 and its associated manual and guidance documents detail this radioactive waste management process. The DOE also has a requirement to consult with the NRC in determining that waste that formerly was classified as high-level waste can be safely managed as either low-level waste or transuranic waste. Once DOE makes a determination, NRC then has a responsibility to monitor DOE's actions in coordination with SCDHEC to ensure compliance with the Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 61 (10CFR61), Subpart C performance objectives. The management of hazardous waste substances or components at SRS is regulated by SCDHEC and the EPA. The foundation for the interactions between DOE, SCDHEC and EPA is the SRS Federal Facility Agreement (FFA). Managing this array of requirements and successfully interacting with regulators, consultants and stakeholders is a challenging task but ensures thorough and thoughtful processes for disposing of the SRS low-level waste and the closure of the tank farm facilities. (authors)

Thomas, Steve; Dickert, Ginger [Savannah River Remediation LLC, Savannah River Site, Aiken, SC 29808 (United States)] [Savannah River Remediation LLC, Savannah River Site, Aiken, SC 29808 (United States)

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

67

HWMA/RCRA Closure Plan for the CPP-648 Radioactive Solid and Liquid Waste Storage Tank System (VES-SFE-106)  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Hazardous Waste Management Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act closure plan for the Radioactive Solid and Liquid Waste Storage Tank System located in the adjacent to the Sludge Tank Control House (CPP-648), Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center, Idaho National Laboratory, was developed to meet the interim status closure requirements for a tank system. The system to be closed includes a tank and associated ancillary equipment that were determined to have managed hazardous waste. The CPP-648 Radioactive Solid and Liquid Waste Storage Tank System will be "cleaned closed" in accordance with the requirements of the Hazardous Waste Management Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act as implemented by the Idaho Administrative Procedures Act and 40 Code of Federal Regulations 265. This closure plan presents the closure performance standards and methods of acheiving those standards for the CPP-648 Radioactive Solid and Liquid Waste Storage Tank System.

S. K. Evans

2006-08-15T23:59:59.000Z

68

AX Tank Farm tank removal study  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report examines the feasibility of remediating ancillary equipment associated with the 241-AX Tank Farm at the Hanford Site. Ancillary equipment includes surface structures and equipment, process waste piping, ventilation components, wells, and pits, boxes, sumps, and tanks used to make waste transfers to/from the AX tanks and adjoining tank farms. Two remedial alternatives are considered: (1) excavation and removal of all ancillary equipment items, and (2) in-situ stabilization by grout filling, the 241-AX Tank Farm is being employed as a strawman in engineering studies evaluating clean and landfill closure options for Hanford single-shell tanks. This 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.

1999-02-24T23:59:59.000Z

69

TRA Closure Plan REV 0-9-20-06 HWMA/RCRA Closure Plan for the TRA/MTR Warm Waste System Voluntary Consent Order SITE-TANK-005 Tank System TRA-007  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Hazardous Waste Management Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act closure plan was developed for portions of the Test Reactor Area/Materials Test Reactor Warm Waste System located in the Materials Test Reactor Building (TRA-603) at the Reactor Technology Complex, Idaho National Laboratory Site, to meet a further milestone established under Voluntary Consent Order Action Plan SITE-TANK-005 for Tank System TRA-007. The reactor drain tank and canal sump to be closed are included in the Test Reactor Area/Materials Test Reactor Warm Waste System. The reactor drain tank and the canal sump were characterized as having managed hazardous waste. The reactor drain tank and canal sump will be closed in accordance with the interim status requirements of the Hazardous Waste Management Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act as implemented by the Idaho Administrative Procedures Act 58.01.05.009 and 40 Code of Federal Regulations 265. This closure plan presents the closure performance standards and methods for achieving those standards.

Winterholler, K.

2007-01-31T23:59:59.000Z

70

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Propane Tank Overfill Safety Advisory  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmospheric Optical Depth (AOD)ProductssondeadjustsondeadjustAbout theOFFICE OFFuelsPropane Tank Overfill Safety Advisory to someone by

71

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

72

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

73

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

74

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

75

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

76

High Performance Zero-Bleed CLSM/Grout Mixes for High-Level Waste Tank Closures Strategic Research and Development - FY99 Report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The overall objective of this program, SRD-99-08, was to design and test suitable materials, which can be used to close high-level waste tanks at SRS. Fill materials can be designed to perform several functions including chemical stabilization and/or physical encapsulation of incidental waste so that the potential for transport of contaminants into the environment is reduced. Also they are needed to physically stabilize the void volume in the tanks to prevent/minimize future subsidence and inadvertent intrusion. The intent of this work was to develop a zero-bleed soil CLSM (ZBS-CLSM) and a zero-bleed concrete mix (ZBC) which meet the unique placement and stabilization/encapsulation requirements for high-level waste tank closures. These mixes in addition to the zero-bleed CLSM mixes formulated for closure of Tanks 17-F and 20-F provide design engineers with a suite of options for specifying materials for future tank closures.

Langton, C.A.

2000-08-11T23:59:59.000Z

77

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

78

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

79

Hanford tanks initiative work plan -- subsurface characterization to support the closure-readiness demonstration for tank 241-AX-104  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document presents a plan for subsurface investigation near 241-AX-104 Single-Shell tank. Objectives of the investigation are soil sampling and analyses (physical and chemical), local stratigraphic correlation, groundwater background characterization, and geophysical surveys. The primary purpose of the investigation is to supply physical and hydraulic properties for numerical modeling of vadose zone flow and transport.

Barnett, D.B.

1996-09-27T23:59:59.000Z

80

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...

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

Closure report for underground storage tank 141-R3U1 and its associated underground piping  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Underground storage tank UST 141-R3U1 at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), was registered with the State Water Resources Control Board on June 27, 1984. This tank system consisted of a concrete tank, lined with polyvinyl chloride, and approximately 100 feet of PVC underground piping. UST 141-R3U1 had a capacity of 450 gallons. The underground piping connected three floor drains and one sink inside Building 141 to UST 141-R3U1. The wastewater collected in UST 141-R3U1 contained organic solvents, metals, and inorganic acids. On November 30, 1987, the 141-R3U1 tank system failed a precision tank test. The 141-R3U1 tank system was subsequently emptied and removed from service pending further precision tests to determine the location of the leak within the tank system. A precision tank test on February 5, 1988, was performed to confirm the November 30, 1987 test. Four additional precision tests were performed on this tank system between February 25, 1988, and March 6, 1988. The leak was located where the inlet piping from Building 141 penetrates the concrete side of UST 141-R3U1. The volume of wastewater that entered the backfill and soil around and/or beneath UST 141-R3U1 is unknown. On December 13, 1989, the LLNL Environmental Restoration Division submitted a plan to close UST 141-R3U1 and its associated piping to the Alameda County Department of Environmental Health. UST 141-R3U1 was closed as an UST, and shall be used instead as additional secondary containment for two aboveground storage tanks.

Mallon, B.J.; Blake, R.G.

1994-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

82

Streamlined approach for environmental restoration work plan for Corrective Action Unit 126: Closure of aboveground storage tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This plan addresses the closure of several aboveground storage tanks in Area 25 of the Nevada Test Site. The unit is currently identified as Corrective Action Unit 126 in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order and is listed as having six Corrective Action Sites. This plan addresses the Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration closure for five of the six sites. Four of the CASs are located at the Engine Test Stand complex and one is located in the Central Support Area. The sites consist of aboveground tanks, two of which were used to store diesel fuel and one stored Nalcool (an antifreeze mixture). The remaining tanks were used as part of a water demineralization process and stored either sulfuric acid or sodium hydroxide, and one was used as a charcoal adsorption furnace. Closure will be completed by removal of the associated piping, tank supports and tanks using a front end loader, backhoe, and/or crane. When possible, the tanks will be salvaged as scrap metal. The piping that is not removed will be sealed using a cement grout.

NONE

1998-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

83

Streamlined approach for environmental restoration workplan for Corrective Action Unit 198: Test Cell C filter tank closure, Nevada Test Site, Nevada. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This plan addresses characterization and closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 198 identified in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order. The site is located at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) Area 25 Test Cell C Complex. The CAU consists of one Corrective Action Site (CAS) 25-23-12 which includes two aboveground radioactive wastewater filter tanks. The tanks have an estimated capacity of 2,271 liters (600 gallons) each and were used to filter radioactive wastewater originating from the Test Cell C ``Nuclear Furnace 1`` testing. The tanks contain radioisotopes. Process knowledge indicates that the most likely isotopes of concern include {sup 90}Strontium and {sup 137}Cesium.

NONE

1998-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

84

Turning the Corner on Hanford Tank Waste Cleanup-From Safe Storage to Closure  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of River Protection (ORP) is leading the River Protection Project (RPP) which is responsible for the disposition of 204,000 cubic meters (54 million gallons) of high-level radioactive waste that have accumulated in large underground tanks at the Hanford Site since 1944. ORP continues to make good progress on improving the capability to treat Hanford tank waste. Design of the waste vitrification facilities is proceeding well and construction will begin within the next year. Progress is also being made in reducing risk to the worker and the environment from the waste currently stored in the tank farms. Removal of liquids from single-shell tanks (SSTs) is on schedule and we will begin removing solids (salt cake) from a tank (241-U-107) in 2002. There is a sound technical foundation for the waste vitrification facilities. These initial facilities will be capable of treating (vitrifying) the bulk of Hanford tank waste and are the corners tone of the clean-up strategy. ORP recognizes that as the near-term work is performed, it is vital that there be an equally strong and defensible plan for completing the mission. ORP is proceeding on a three-pronged approach for moving the mission forward. First, ORP will continue to work aggressively to complete the waste vitrification facilities. ORP intends to provide the most capable and robust facilities to maximize the amount of waste treated by these initial facilities by 2028 (regulatory commitment for completion of waste treatment). Second, and in parallel with completing the waste vitrification facilities, ORP is beginning to consider how best to match the hazard of the waste to the disposal strategy. The final piece of our strategy is to continue to move forward with actions to reduce risk in the tank farms and complete cleanup.

Boston, H. L.; Cruz, E. J.; Coleman, S. J.

2002-02-25T23:59:59.000Z

85

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

86

Closure report for underground storage tank 161-R1U1 and its associated underground piping  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Underground storage tank (UST) 161-31 R at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) was registered with the State Water Resources Control Board on June 27, 1984. UST 161-31R was subsequently renamed UST 161-R1U1 (Fig. A-1, Appendix A). UST 161-R1U1 was installed in 1976, and had a capacity of 383 gallons. This tank system consisted of a fiberglass reinforced plastic tank, approximately 320 feet of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) underground piping from Building 161, and approximately 40 feet of PVC underground piping from Building 160. The underground piping connected laboratory drains and sinks inside Buildings 160 and 161 to UST 161-R1U1. The wastewater collected in UST 161-R1U1, contained organic solvents, metals, inorganic acids, and radionuclides, most of which was produced within Building 161. On June 28, 1989, the UST 161-R1U1 piping system.around the perimeter of Building 161 failed a precision test performed by Gary Peters Enterprises (Appendix B). The 161-R1U1 tank system was removed from service after the precision test. In July 1989, additional hydrostatic tests and helium leak detection tests were performed (Appendix B) to determine the locations of the piping failures in the Building 161 piping system. The locations of the piping system failures are shown in Figure A-2 (Appendix A). On July 11, 1989, LLNL submitted an Unauthorized Release Report to Alameda County Department of Environmental Health (ACDEH), Appendix C.

Mallon, B.J.; Blake, R.G.

1994-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

87

DOE Identifies its Preferred Alternative for Certain Hanford Tank Wastes |  

Energy Savers [EERE]

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Deliciouscritical_materials_workshop_presentations.pdf MoreProgram |DOE Exercises OptionDOE Hydrogen and FuelDOE

88

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

SEDERBURG, J.P.

1999-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

89

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Filling CNG Fuel Tanks  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May JunDatastreamsmmcrcalgovInstrumentsruc Documentation RUCProductstwrmrAreSmartWayElectricity Fuel Basics to someoneEthanol

90

Draft HAB Advice on Delaying Decisions Associated with the Final Tank Closure and Waste  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmospheric Optical Depth7-1D: Vegetation Proposed Newcatalyst phasesDataTranslocationDiurnal

91

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProvedDecember 2005DepartmentDecemberGlossary ofGroundwater Cleanup Progresses

92

Tank Closure & Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement Groundwater Model Impacts  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamas Vargaproteins

93

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamas VargaproteinsB CONTRACTOR

94

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamas VargaproteinsB

95

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamas VargaproteinsBE-1

96

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamas VargaproteinsBE-1

97

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamas VargaproteinsBE-1G-1

98

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamas VargaproteinsBE-1G-1H-1

99

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamas VargaproteinsBE-1G-1H-1

100

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamas

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

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1 APPENDIX K SHORT-TERM

102

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1 APPENDIX K

103

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1 APPENDIX KP-1 APPENDIX

104

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1 APPENDIX KP-1

105

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1 APPENDIX KP-1R-1

106

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1 APPENDIX KP-1R-1

107

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1 APPENDIX KP-1R-1T-1

108

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1 APPENDIX KP-1R-1T-11

109

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1 APPENDIX KP-1R-1T-111

110

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1 APPENDIX

111

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1 APPENDIX-1 CHAPTER 10

112

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1 APPENDIX-1 CHAPTER

113

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1 APPENDIX-1 CHAPTER-1

114

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1 APPENDIX-1 CHAPTER-1-1

115

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1 APPENDIX-1

116

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1 APPENDIX-14-1 Dates

117

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1 APPENDIX-14-1

118

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1 APPENDIX-14-1for the

119

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1 APPENDIX-14-1for the-1

120

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1 APPENDIX-14-1for

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

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1 APPENDIX-14-1for-1

122

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1 APPENDIX-14-1for-11

123

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1

124

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1Reader's Guide U.S.

125

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1Reader's Guide U.S.1

126

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1Reader's Guide U.S.12

127

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1Reader's Guide U.S.12 3

128

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1Reader's Guide U.S.12

129

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1Reader's Guide

130

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1Reader's GuideCover

131

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1Reader's GuideCover

132

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1Reader's GuideCover for

133

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1Reader's GuideCover for

134

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR TableE9.securityTamasK-1Reader's GuideCover

135

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of Energy Power Systems EngineeringDepartmentSmartDepartment of1 Ingrid A.C.of EnergyLaboratory |

136

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "ofEarly Career Scientists' Research | DepartmentDepartmentHatch,DepartmentDeliveryMay 1, 1997 EIS-0251:EIS |

137

Tank Closure & Waste Management (DOE/EIS-0391) FINAL - Hanford Site  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May JunDatastreamsmmcrcalgovInstrumentsrucLas ConchasPassiveSubmittedStatus TomAboutManus Site-Inactive TWPCarbonTake aTalentTammy Ma

138

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

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May JunDatastreamsmmcrcalgovInstrumentsrucLas ConchasPassiveSubmittedStatus TomAboutManus Site-Inactive TWPCarbonTake aTalentTammy

139

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

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. (authors)

Badden, Janet W.; Connelly, Michael P. [Washington River Protection Services, P.O. Box 850, Richland, Washington, 99352 (United States)] [Washington River Protection Services, P.O. Box 850, Richland, Washington, 99352 (United States); Seeley, Paul N. [Cenibark International, Inc., 104318 Nicole Drive, Kennewick, Washington, 99338-7596 (United States)] [Cenibark International, Inc., 104318 Nicole Drive, Kennewick, Washington, 99338-7596 (United States); Hendrickson, Michelle L. [Washington State Department of Ecology, 3100 Port of Benton Blvd, Richland, Washington, 99354 (United States)] [Washington State Department of Ecology, 3100 Port of Benton Blvd, Richland, Washington, 99354 (United States)

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

140

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

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

EVOLUTION OF CHEMICAL CONDITIONS AND ESTIMATED SOLUBILITY CONTROLS ON RADIONUCLIDES IN THE RESIDUAL WASTE LAYER DURING POST-CLOSURE AGING OF HIGH-LEVEL WASTE TANKS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document provides information specific to H-Area waste tanks that enables a flow and transport model with limited chemical capabilities to account for varying waste release from the tanks through time. The basis for varying waste release is solubilities of radionuclides that change as pore fluids passing through the waste change in composition. Pore fluid compositions in various stages were generated by simulations of tank grout degradation. The first part of the document describes simulations of the degradation of the reducing grout in post-closure tanks. These simulations assume flow is predominantly through a water saturated porous medium. The infiltrating fluid that reacts with the grout is assumed to be fluid that has passed through the closure cap and into the tank. The results are three stages of degradation referred to as Reduced Region II, Oxidized Region II, and Oxidized Region III. A reaction path model was used so that the transitions between each stage are noted by numbers of pore volumes of infiltrating fluid reacted. The number of pore volumes to each transition can then be converted to time within a flow and transport model. The bottoms of some tanks in H-Area are below the water table requiring a different conceptual model for grout degradation. For these simulations the reacting fluid was assumed to be 10% infiltrate through the closure cap and 90% groundwater. These simulations produce an additional four pore fluid compositions referred to as Conditions A through D and were intended to simulate varying degrees of groundwater influence. The most probable degradation path for the submerged tanks is Condition C to Condition D to Oxidized Region III and eventually to Condition A. Solubilities for Condition A are estimated in the text for use in sensitivity analyses if needed. However, the grout degradation simulations did not include sufficient pore volumes of infiltrating fluid for the grout to evolve to Condition A. Solubility controls for use in a flow and transport model were estimated for 27 elements in each of the chemical stages generated in the grout simulations plus local groundwater. The grout simulations were run with the initial infiltrating fluid in equilibrium with atmospheric oxygen to account for degradation of the reduction capacity of the grout. However, a lower Eh was used in pore fluids in the oxidizing conditions used to estimate solubilities to be more consistent with measured Eh values and natural systems. Solubilities of plutonium are affected by this decision, but those of other elements are not. In addition, the baseline for H-Area tanks is that they will be washed with oxalic acid prior to being filled with grout. Hence, oxalate was included in the pore fluids by assuming equilibrium with calcium oxalate. Solubility estimates were done by equilibrating a solubility controlling phase for each element with the pore fluid compositions using The Geochemist’s Workbench®. Condition B pore fluids are similar to Condition D. Therefore, solubilities for Condition B were not estimated, but assumed to be the same as in Condition D. In general solubility controlling phases were selected to bias solubilities to higher values. Several elements had no solubility controls and solubility estimates for other elements were omitted because the elements had short half-lives or were present in residual waste in very low amounts. For these it is recommended that release from the tank be instantaneous when the tank liner is breached. There is considerable uncertainty in this approach to enabling a flow and transport model to account for variable waste release. Yet, it is also flexible and requires much less computing time than a fully coupled reactive transport model. This allows some of the uncertainty to be addressed by multiple flow and transport sensitivity cases. Some of the uncertainties are addressed within this document. These include uncertainty in infiltrate composition, grout mineralogy, and disposition of certain components during the simulations. Uncertainty in the solubility estima

Denham, M.; Millings, M.

2012-08-28T23:59:59.000Z

142

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

143

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

144

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

145

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 Energy’s 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

146

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...

147

ICPP tank farm closure study. Volume 3: Cost estimates, planning schedules, yearly cost flowcharts, and life-cycle cost estimates  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This volume contains information on cost estimates, planning schedules, yearly cost flowcharts, and life-cycle costs for the six options described in Volume 1, Section 2: Option 1 -- Total removal clean closure; No subsequent use; Option 2 -- Risk-based clean closure; LLW fill; Option 3 -- Risk-based clean closure; CERCLA fill; Option 4 -- Close to RCRA landfill standards; LLW fill; Option 5 -- Close to RCRA landfill standards; CERCLA fill; and Option 6 -- Close to RCRA landfill standards; Clean fill. This volume is divided into two portions. The first portion contains the cost and planning schedule estimates while the second portion contains life-cycle costs and yearly cash flow information for each option.

NONE

1998-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

148

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

149

Alternatives evaluation and decommissioning study on shielded transfer tanks at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The shielded transfer tanks (STTs) are five obsolete cylindrical shipping casks which were used to transport high specific activity radioactive solutions by rail during the 1960s and early 1970s. The STTs are currently stored at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory under a shed roof. This report is an evaluation to determine the preferred alternative for the final disposition of the five STTs. The decommissioning alternatives assessed include: (1) the no action alternative to leave the STTs in their present location with continued surveillance and maintenance; (2) solidification of contents within the tanks and holding the STTs in long term retrievable storage; (3) sale of one or more of the used STTs to private industry for use at their treatment facility with the remaining STTs processed as in Alternative 4; and (4) removal of tank contents for de-watering/retrievable storage, limited decontamination to meet acceptance criteria, smelting the STTs to recycle the metal through the DOE contaminated scrap metal program, and returning the shielding lead to the ORNL lead recovery program because the smelting contractor cannot reprocess the lead. To completely evaluate the alternatives for the disposition of the STTs, the contents of the tanks must be characterized. Shielding and handling requirements, risk considerations, and waste acceptance criteria all require that the radioactive inventory and free liquids residual in the STTs be known. Because characterization of the STT contents in the field was not input into a computer model to predict the probable inventory and amount of free liquid. The four alternatives considered were subjected to a numerical scoring procedure. Alternative 4, smelting the STTs to recycle the metal after removal/de-watering of the tank contents, had the highest score and is, therefore, recommended as the preferred alternative. However, if a buyer for one or more STT could be found, it is recommended that Alternative 3 be reconsidered.

DeVore, J.R.; Hinton, R.R.

1994-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

150

Alternatives Generation and Analysis for Heat Removal from High Level Waste Tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document addresses the preferred combination of design and operational configurations to provide heat removal from high-level waste tanks during Phase 1 waste feed delivery to prevent the waste temperature from exceeding tank safety requirement limits. An interim decision for the preferred method to remove the heat from the high-level waste tanks during waste feed delivery operations is presented herein.

WILLIS, W.L.

2000-06-15T23:59:59.000Z

151

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

Energy Savers [EERE]

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Office of Inspector General Office of Audit ServicesMirant Potomac River Compliance

152

Underground Storage Tanks (West Virginia)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This rule governs the construction, installation, upgrading, use, maintenance, testing, and closure of underground storage tanks, including certification requirements for individuals who install,...

153

Translation--Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington - FAQs  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear SecurityTensile Strain Switched Ferromagnetism in Layered NbS2Topo II: AnTraining andfor aOxideTransitioning

154

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of EnergyEnergy Cooperation |South42.2 (April 2012)Tie LtdAttend AMODepartment ofBagdadSRS-WD-2012-001

155

Deployment of an alternative cover and final closure of the Mixed Waste Landfill, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico.  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

An alternative cover design consisting of a monolithic layer of native soil is proposed as the closure path for the Mixed Waste Landfill at Sandia National Laboratories, New Mexico. The proposed design would rely upon soil thickness and evapotranspiration to provide long-term performance and stability, and would be inexpensive to build and maintain. The proposed design is a 3-ft-thick, vegetated soil cover. The alternative cover meets the intent of RCRA Subtitle C regulations in that: (a) water migration through the cover is minimized; (b) maintenance is minimized by using a monolithic soil layer; (c) cover erosion is minimized by using erosion control measures; (d) subsidence is accommodated by using a ''soft'' design; and (e) the permeability of the cover is less than or equal to that of natural subsurface soil present. Performance of the proposed cover is integrated with natural site conditions, producing a ''system performance'' that will ensure that the cover is protective of human health and the environment. Natural site conditions that will produce a system performance include: (a) extremely low precipitation and high potential evapotranspiration; (b) negligible recharge to groundwater; (c) an extensive vadose zone; (d) groundwater approximately 500 ft below the surface; and (e) a versatile, native flora that will persist indefinitely as a climax ecological community with little or no maintenance.

Peace, Gerald (Jerry) L.; Goering, Timothy James (GRAM, Inc., Albuquerque, NM); McVey, Michael David (GRAM, Inc., Albuquerque, NM); Borns, David James

2003-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

156

Single-shell tank retrieval program mission analysis report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Stokes, W.J.

1998-08-11T23:59:59.000Z

157

Tanks Focus Area Alternative Salt Processing Research and Development Program Plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

In March 2000, DOE-Headquarters (HQ) requested the Tanks Focus Area (TFA) to assume management responsibility for the Salt Processing Project technology development program at Savannah River Site. The TFA was requested to conduct several activities, including review and revision of the technology development roadmaps, development of down-selection criteria, and preparation of a comprehensive Research and Development (R&D) Program Plan for three candidate cesium removal technologies, as well as the Alpha and strontium removal processes that must also be carried out. The three cesium removal candidate technologies are Crystalline Silicotitanate (CST) Non-Elutable Ion Exchange, Caustic Side Solvent Extraction (CSSX), and Small Tank Tetraphenylborate Precipitation (STTP). This plan describes the technology development needs for each process that must be satisfied in order to reach a down-selection decision, as well as continuing technology development required to support conceptual design activities.

Harmon, Harry D.

2000-11-30T23:59:59.000Z

158

Tanks Focus Area Alternative Salt Processing Research and Development Program Plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

In March 2000, DOE-Headquarters (HQ) requested the Tanks Focus Area (TFA)to assume management responsibility for the Salt Processing Project technology development program at Savannah River Site. The TFA was requested to conduct several activities, including review and revision of the technology development roadmaps, development of down-selection criteria, and preparation of a comprehensive Research and Development (R&D) Program Plan for three candidate cesium removal technologies, as well as the Alpha and strontium removal processes that must also be carried out. The three cesium removal candidate technologies are Crystalline Silicotitanate (CST) Non-Elutable Ion Exchange, Caustic Side Solvent Extraction (CSSX), and Small Tank Tetraphenylborate Precipitation (STTP). This plan describes the technology development needs for each process that must be satisfied in order to reach a down-selection decision, as well as continuing technology development required to support conceptual design activities.

Harmon, Harry D.

2000-05-15T23:59:59.000Z

159

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

160

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

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

HWMA/RCRA Closure Plan for the Fluorinel Dissolution Process Makeup and Cooling and Heating Systems Voluntary Consent Order SITE-TANK-005 Action Plan Tank Systems INTEC-066, INTEC-067, INTEC-068, and INTEC-072  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Hazardous Waste Management Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act closure plan for the fluorinel dissolution process makeup and cooling and heating systems located in the Fluorinel Dissolution Process and Fuel Storage Facility (CPP-666), Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center, Idaho National Laboratory Site, was developed to meet milestones established under the Voluntary Consent Order. The systems to be closed include waste piping associated with the fluorinel dissolution process makeup systems. This closure plan presents the closure performance standards and methods of achieving those standards.

M.E. Davis

2007-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

162

Alternative concepts for treatment and disposal of Hanford site high-level waste in tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Some innovative approaches have recently been proposed that may have significant schedule, cost, or environmental advantages which could improve the current HLW program strategy. Three general categories of alternative concepts are now under consideration: (1) process/product alternatives, (2) facility layout options, and (3) contracting strategies. This report compares the alternate approaches to the current program baseline to illustrate their potential significance and to identify the risks associated with each approach.

Claghorn, R.D.; Powell, W.J.

1994-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

163

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

164

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

165

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

166

Initial Single-Shell Tank System Performance Assessment for the Hanford Site  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Jaraysi, M.N.; Kristofzski, J.G.; Connelly, M.P. [CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc., Richland, WA (United States); Wood, M.I. [Fluor Hanford Inc., Richland WA (United States); Knepp, A.J. [YAHSGS LLC, Richland WA (United States); Quintero, R.A. [Office of River Protection, United States Department of Energy, Richland, WA (United States)

2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

167

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

JARAYSI, M.N.

2007-01-08T23:59:59.000Z

168

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

169

EVOLUTION OF CHEMICAL CONDITIONS AND ESTIMATED PLUTONIUM SOLUBILITY IN THE RESIDUAL WASTE LAYER DURING POST-CLOSURE AGING OF TANK 18  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document updates the Eh-pH transitions from grout aging simulations and the plutonium waste release model of Denham (2007, Rev. 1) based on new data. New thermodynamic data for cementitious minerals are used for the grout simulations. Newer thermodynamic data, recommended by plutonium experts (Plutonium Solubility Peer Review Report, LA-UR-12-00079), are used to estimate solubilities of plutonium at various pore water compositions expected during grout aging. In addition, a new grout formula is used in the grout aging simulations and apparent solubilities of coprecipitated plutonium are estimated using data from analysis of Tank 18 residual waste. The conceptual model of waste release and the grout aging simulations are done in a manner similar to that of Denham (2007, Rev. 1). It is assumed that the pore fluid composition passing from the tank grout into the residual waste layer controls the solubility, and hence the waste release concentration of plutonium. Pore volumes of infiltrating fluid of an assumed composition are reacted with a hypothetical grout block using The Geochemist's Workbench{reg_sign} and changes in pore fluid chemistry correspond to the number of pore fluid volumes reacted. As in the earlier document, this results in three states of grout pore fluid composition throughout the simulation period that are termed Reduced Region II, Oxidized Region II, and Oxidized Region III. The one major difference from the earlier document is that pyrite is used to account for reducing capacity of the tank grout rather than pyrrhotite. This poises Eh at -0.47 volts during Reduced Region II. The major transitions in pore fluid composition are shown. Plutonium solubilities are estimated for discrete PuO2(am,hyd) particles and for plutonium coprecipitated with iron phases in the residual waste. Thermodynamic data for plutonium from the Nuclear Energy Agency are used to estimate the solubilities of the discrete particles for the three stages of pore fluid evolution. In Denham (2007, Rev. 1), the solubilities in the oxidized regions were estimated at Eh values in equilibrium with dissolved oxygen. Here, these are considered to be maximum possible solubilities because Eh values are unlikely to be in equilibrium with dissolved oxygen. More realistic Eh values are estimated here and plutonium solubilities calculated at these are considered more realistic. Apparent solubilities of plutonium that coprecipitated with iron phases are estimated from Pu:Fe ratios in Tank 18 residual waste and the solubilities of the host iron phases. The estimated plutonium solubilities are shown. Uncertainties in the grout simulations and plutonium solubility estimates are discussed. The primary uncertainty in the grout simulations is that little is known about the physical state of the grout as it ages. The simulations done here are pertinent to a porous medium, which may or may not be applicable to fractured grout, depending on the degree and nature of the fractures. Other uncertainties that are considered are the assumptions about the reducing capacity imparted by blast furnace slag, the effects of varying dissolved carbon dioxide and oxygen concentrations, and the treatment of silica in the simulations. The primary uncertainty in the estimates of plutonium solubility is that little is known about the exact form of plutonium in the residual waste. Other uncertainties include those inherent in the thermodynamic data, pH variations from those estimated in the grout simulations, the effects of the treatment of silica in the grout simulations, and the effect of varying total dissolved carbonate concentrations. The objective of this document is to update the model for solubility controls on release of plutonium from residual waste in closed F-Area waste tanks. The update is based on new information including a new proposed grout formulation, chemical analysis of Tank 18 samples and more current thermodynamic data for plutonium and grout minerals. In addition, minor changes to the modeling of the grout chemical evolution have been made. It shoul

Denham, M.

2012-02-29T23:59:59.000Z

170

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

171

Clean option: An alternative strategy for Hanford Tank Waste Remediation. Volume 2, Detailed description of first example flowsheet  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Disposal of high-level tank wastes at the Hanford Site is currently envisioned to divide the waste between two principal waste forms: glass for the high-level waste (HLW) and grout for the low-level waste (LLW). The draft flow diagram shown in Figure 1.1 was developed as part of the current planning process for the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS), which is evaluating options for tank cleanup. The TWRS has been established by the US Department of Energy (DOE) to safely manage the Hanford tank wastes. It includes tank safety and waste disposal issues, as well as the waste pretreatment and waste minimization issues that are involved in the ``clean option`` discussed in this report. This report describes the results of a study led by Pacific Northwest Laboratory to determine if a more aggressive separations scheme could be devised which could mitigate concerns over the quantity of the HLW and the toxicity of the LLW produced by the reference system. This aggressive scheme, which would meet NRC Class A restrictions (10 CFR 61), would fit within the overall concept depicted in Figure 1.1; it would perform additional and/or modified operations in the areas identified as interim storage, pretreatment, and LLW concentration. Additional benefits of this scheme might result from using HLW and LLW disposal forms other than glass and grout, but such departures from the reference case are not included at this time. The evaluation of this aggressive separations scheme addressed institutional issues such as: radioactivity remaining in the Hanford Site LLW grout, volume of HLW glass that must be shipped offsite, and disposition of appropriate waste constituents to nonwaste forms.

Swanson, J.L.

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

172

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.

173

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

174

Evaluation of West Valley High-Level Waste Tank Lay-Up Strategies  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The primary objective of the task summarized in this paper was to demonstrate a methodology for evaluating alternative strategies for preclosure lay-up of the two high-level waste (HLW) storage tanks at the West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP). Lay-up is defined as the period between operational use of tanks for waste storage and final closure. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is planning to separate the environmental impact statement (EIS) for completion of closure of the WVDP into two separate EISs. The first EIS will cover only waste management and decontamination. DOE expects to complete this EIS in about 18 months. The second EIS will cover final decommissioning and closure and may take up to five years to complete. This approach has been proposed to expedite continued management of the waste and decontamination activities in advance of the final EIS and its associated Record of Decision on final site closure. Final closure of the WVDP site may take 10 to 15 years; therefore, the tanks need to be placed in a safe, stable condition with minimum surveillance during an extended lay-up period. The methodology developed for ranking the potential strategies for lay-up of the WVDP tanks can be used to provide a basis for a decision on the preferred path forward. The methodology is also applicable to determining preferred lay-up approaches at other DOE sites. Some of the alternative strategies identified for the WVDP should also be considered for implementation at the other DOE sites. Each site has unique characteristics that would require unique considerations for lay-up.

McClure, L. W.; Henderson, J. C.; Elmore, M. R.

2002-02-25T23:59:59.000Z

175

Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 151: Septic Systems and Discharge Area, Nevada Test Site, Nevada  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 151 is identified in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) as Septic Systems and Discharge Area. CAU 151 consists of the following eight Corrective Action Sites (CASs), located in Areas 2, 12, and 18 of the Nevada Test Site, approximately 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada: (1) CAS 02-05-01, UE-2ce Pond; (2) CAS 12-03-01, Sewage Lagoons (6); (3) CAS 12-04-01, Septic Tanks; (4) CAS 12-04-02, Septic Tanks; (5) CAS 12-04-03, Septic Tank; (6) CAS 12-47-01, Wastewater Pond; (7) CAS 18-03-01, Sewage Lagoon; and (8) CAS 18-99-09, Sewer Line (Exposed). CAU 151 closure activities were conducted according to the FFACO (FFACO, 1996; as amended February 2008) and the Corrective Action Plan for CAU 151 (U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office, 2007) from October 2007 to January 2008. The corrective action alternatives included no further action, clean closure, and closure in place with administrative controls. CAU 151 closure activities are summarized in Table 1. Closure activities generated liquid remediation waste, sanitary waste, hydrocarbon waste, and mixed waste. Waste generated was appropriately managed and disposed. Waste that is currently staged onsite is being appropriately managed and will be disposed under approved waste profiles in permitted landfills. Waste minimization activities included waste characterization sampling and segregation of waste streams. Some waste exceeded land disposal restriction limits and required offsite treatment prior to disposal. Other waste meeting land disposal restrictions was disposed of in appropriate onsite or offsite landfills. Waste disposition documentation is included as Appendix C.

NSTec Environmental Restoration

2008-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

176

AREA 5 RWMS CLOSURE  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "ofEarlyEnergyDepartmentNationalRestart of the Review of theOFFICEACME | National Nuclear153 CLOSURE STRATEGY

177

HWMA/RCRA Closure Plan for the TRA Fluorinel Dissolution Process Mockup and Gamma Facilities Waste System  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Hazardous Waste Management Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act closure plan was developed for the Test Reactor Area Fluorinel Dissolution Process Mockup and Gamma Facilities Waste System, located in Building TRA-641 at the Reactor Technology Complex (RTC), Idaho National Laboratory Site, to meet a further milestone established under the Voluntary Consent Order SITE-TANK-005 Action Plan for Tank System TRA-009. The tank system to be closed is identified as VCO-SITE-TANK-005 Tank System TRA-009. This closure plan presents the closure performance standards and methods for achieving those standards.

K. Winterholler

2007-01-31T23:59:59.000Z

178

TANK FARM REMEDIATION TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AN EXERCISE IN TECHNICAL & REGULATORY COLLABORATION  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Tank Farm Remediation Technology Development Project at the Hanford Site focuses on waste storage tanks, pipelines and associated ancillary equipment that are part of the C-200 single-shell tank (SST) farm system located in the C Tank Farm. The purpose of the project is to obtain information on the implementation of a variety of closure activities and to answer questions on technical, operational and regulatory issues associated with closure.

JARAYSI, M.N.

2007-01-08T23:59:59.000Z

179

ALTERNATE  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "ofEarlyEnergyDepartment ofDepartment ofof EnergyYou areDowntown Site -MiamiYVE r 'Xxy";^it !

180

ALTERNATE  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "ofEarlyEnergyDepartment ofDepartment ofof EnergyYou areDowntown Site -MiamiYVE r 'Xxy";^it

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

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

182

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)

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

Balsley, S.D.; Krumhansl, J.L.; Borns, D.J. [Sandia National Labs., Albuquerque, NM (United States); McKeen, R.G. [Alliance for Transportation Research, Albuquerque, NM (United States)

1998-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

183

Underground Storage Tanks: New Fuels and Compatibility  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Breakout Session 1C—Fostering 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

184

CLOSURE REPORT  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "ofEarlyEnergyDepartment ofDepartment ofof EnergyYou$0.C. 20545 OCTTO:March_BayoRECORD OF DECISION:L ,_CI

185

Feasibility study of tank leakage mitigation using subsurface barriers  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The US Department of Energy (DOE) has established the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) to satisfy manage and dispose of the waste currently stored in the underground storage tanks. The retrieval element of TWRS includes a work scope to develop subsurface impermeable barriers beneath SSTs. The barriers could serve as a means to contain leakage that may result from waste retrieval operations and could also support site closure activities by facilitating cleanup. Three types of subsurface barrier systems have emerged for further consideration: (1) chemical grout, (2) freeze walls, and (3) desiccant, represented in this feasibility study as a circulating air barrier. This report contains analyses of the costs and relative risks associated with combinations retrieval technologies and barrier technologies that from 14 alternatives. Eight of the alternatives include the use of subsurface barriers; the remaining six nonbarrier alternative are included in order to compare the costs, relative risks and other values of retrieval with subsurface barriers. Each alternative includes various combinations of technologies that can impact the risks associated with future contamination of the groundwater beneath the Hanford Site to varying degrees. Other potential risks associated with these alternatives, such as those related to accidents and airborne contamination resulting from retrieval and barrier emplacement operations, are not quantitatively evaluated in this report.

Treat, R.L.; Peters, B.B.; Cameron, R.J.; McCormak, W.D.; Trenkler, T.; Walters, M.F. [Ensearch Environmental, Inc. (United States); Rouse, J.K.; McLaughlin, T.J. [Bovay Northwest, Inc., Richland, WA (United States); Cruse, J.M. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

1994-09-21T23:59:59.000Z

186

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

187

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

188

Object Closure Conversion * Neal Glew  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

of closure conversion. This paper argues that a direct formulation of object closure conversio* *n Object Closure Conversion * Neal into closed code and auxiliary data* * structures. Closure conversion has been extensively studied

Glew, Neal

189

Progress in High-Level Waste Tank Cleaning at the Idaho National Environmental and Engineering Laboratory  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Department of Energy Idaho Operations Office (DOE-ID) is making preparations to close two underground high-level waste (HLW) storage tanks at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) to meet Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulations and Department of Energy (DOE) orders. Closure of these two tanks is scheduled for 2004 as the first phase in closure of the eleven 300,000 gallon tanks currently in service at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC). Design, development, and deployment of a remotely operated tank cleaning system were completed in August 2001. The system incorporates many commercially available components, which have been adapted for application in cleaning high-level waste tanks. The system also uses existing waste transfer technology (steam-jets) to remove tank heel solids from the tank bottoms during the cleaning operations. By using this existing transfer system and commercially available equipment, the cost of developing custom designed cleaning equipment can be avoided. Remotely operated directional spray nozzles, automatic rotating wash balls, video monitoring equipment, decontamination spray-rings, and tank specific access interface devices have been integrated to provide a system that efficiently cleans tank walls and heel solids in an acidic, radioactive environment. This system is also compliant with operational and safety performance requirements at INTEC. Through the deployment of the tank cleaning system, the INEEL High Level Waste Program has demonstrated the capability to clean tanks to meet RCRA clean closure standards and DOE closure performance measures. The tank cleaning system deployed at the INTEC offers unique advantages over other approaches evaluated at the INEEL and throughout the DOE Complex. The system's ability to agitate and homogenize the tank heel sludge will simplify verification-sampling techniques and reduce the total quantity of samples required to demonstrate compliance with the performance standards. This will reduce tank closure budget requirements and improve closure-planning schedules.

Lockie, K. A.; McNaught, W. B.

2002-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

190

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

191

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

192

CLOSURE REPORT FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION UNIT 528: POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS CONTAMINATION NEVADA TEST SITE, NEVADA  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Closure Report (CR) describes the closure activities performed at CAU 528, Polychlorinated Biphenyls Contamination, as presented in the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP)-approved Corrective Action Plan (CAP) (US. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office [NNSAINSO], 2005). The approved closure alternative was closure in place with administrative controls. This CR provides a summary of the completed closure activities, documentation of waste disposal, and analytical data to confirm that the remediation goals were met.

BECHTEL NEVADA

2006-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

193

SST Retrieval & Closure Update  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security Administration the1 -the Mid-Infrared0 ResourceAwards SAGE AwardsNA-00197-1USERS'Minutes |Shell Tank

194

Hanford Tank Cleanup Update  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmospheric Optical Depth7-1D: Vegetation ProposedUsingFun with Bigfront.jpgcommunity200cell 9 Hanford Traffic Safety144 December Tank

195

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

196

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")  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of Energy Power.pdf11-161-LNG | DepartmentEnergyMagna: ProductEnergy onDecemberAugustFederal BETWEEN

197

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

198

Ohio Closure Projects Ceremony | Department of Energy  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE:Year in3.pdfEnergyDepartment of Energy(National1EnergyFederalaimsOffshore WindClosure

199

Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 166: Storage Yards and Contaminated Materials, Nevada Test Site, Nevada  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 166 is identified in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) as 'Storage Yards and Contaminated Materials' and consists of the following seven Corrective Action Sites (CASs), located in Areas 2, 3, 5, and 18 of the Nevada Test Site: CAS 02-42-01, Condo Release Storage Yd - North; CAS 02-42-02, Condo Release Storage Yd - South; CAS 02-99-10, D-38 Storage Area; CAS 03-42-01, Conditional Release Storage Yard; CAS 05-19-02, Contaminated Soil and Drum; CAS 18-01-01, Aboveground Storage Tank; and CAS 18-99-03, Wax Piles/Oil Stain. Closure activities were conducted from March to July 2009 according to the FF ACO (1996, as amended February 2008) and the Corrective Action Plan for CAU 166 (U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office, 2007b). The corrective action alternatives included No Further Action and Clean Closure. Closure activities are summarized. CAU 166, Storage Yards and Contaminated Materials, consists of seven CASs in Areas 2, 3, 5, and 18 of the NTS. The closure alternatives included No Further Action and Clean Closure. 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 166 as documented in this CR: (1) At CAS 02-99-10, D-38 Storage Area, approximately 40 gal of lead shot were removed and are currently pending treatment and disposal as MW, and approximately 50 small pieces of DU were removed and disposed as LLW. (2) At CAS 03-42-01, Conditional Release Storage Yard, approximately 7.5 yd{sup 3} of soil impacted with lead and Am-241 were removed and disposed as LLW. As a BMP, approximately 22 ft{sup 3} of asbestos tile were removed from a portable building and disposed as ALLW, approximately 55 gal of oil were drained from accumulators and are currently pending disposal as HW, the portable building was removed and disposed as LLW, and accumulators, gas cylinders, and associated debris were removed and are currently pending treatment and disposal as MW. (3) At CAS 05-19-02, Contaminated Soil and Drum, as a BMP, an empty drum was removed and disposed as sanitary waste. (4) At CAS 18-01-01, Aboveground Storage Tank, approximately 165 gal of lead-impacted liquid were removed and are currently pending disposal as HW, and approximately 10 gal of lead shot and 6 yd{sup 3} of wax embedded with lead shot were removed and are currently pending treatment and disposal as MW. As a BMP, approximately 0.5 yd{sup 3} of wax were removed and disposed as hydrocarbon waste, approximately 55 gal of liquid were removed and disposed as sanitary waste, and two metal containers were grouted in place. (5) At CAS 18-99-03, Wax Piles/Oil Stain, no further action was required; however, as a BMP, approximately l.5 yd{sup 3} of wax were removed and disposed as hydrocarbon waste, and one metal container was grouted in place.

NSTec Environmental Restoration

2009-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

200

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

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

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

202

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

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

Washington Closure Hanford, LLC - WEA-2010-02 Preliminary Notice of Violation, Washington Closure Hanford, LLC - WEA-2010-02 August 19, 2010 Issued to Washington Closure Hanford,...

203

Hanford Tank 241-C-106: Residual Waste Contaminant Release Model and Supporting Data  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

CH2M HILL is producing risk/performance assessments to support the closure of single-shell tanks at the DOE's Hanford Site. As part of this effort, staff at PNNL were asked to develop release models for contaminants of concern that are present in residual sludge remaining in tank 241-C-106 (C-106) after final retrieval of waste from the tank. This report provides the information developed by PNNL.

Deutsch, William J.; Krupka, Kenneth M.; Lindberg, Michael J.; Cantrell, Kirk J.; Brown, Christopher F.; Schaef, Herbert T.

2005-06-03T23:59:59.000Z

204

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 Hanford’s 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

205

Calcined solids storage facility closure study  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The disposal of radioactive wastes now stored at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory is currently mandated under a {open_quotes}Settlement Agreement{close_quotes} (or {open_quotes}Batt Agreement{close_quotes}) between the Department of Energy and the State of Idaho. Under this agreement, all high-level waste must be treated as necessary to meet the disposal criteria and disposed of or made road ready to ship from the INEEL by 2035. In order to comply with this agreement, all calcined waste produced in the New Waste Calcining Facility and stored in the Calcined Solids Facility must be treated and disposed of by 2035. Several treatment options for the calcined waste have been studied in support of the High-Level Waste Environmental Impact Statement. Two treatment methods studied, referred to as the TRU Waste Separations Options, involve the separation of the high-level waste (calcine) into TRU waste and low-level waste (Class A or Class C). Following treatment, the TRU waste would be sent to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) for final storage. It has been proposed that the low-level waste be disposed of in the Tank Farm Facility and/or the Calcined Solids Storage Facility following Resource Conservation and Recovery Act closure. In order to use the seven Bin Sets making up the Calcined Solids Storage Facility as a low-level waste landfill, the facility must first be closed to Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) standards. This study identifies and discusses two basic methods available to close the Calcined Solids Storage Facility under the RCRA - Risk-Based Clean Closure and Closure to Landfill Standards. In addition to the closure methods, the regulatory requirements and issues associated with turning the Calcined Solids Storage Facility into an NRC low-level waste landfill or filling the bin voids with clean grout are discussed.

Dahlmeir, M.M.; Tuott, L.C.; Spaulding, B.C. [and others] [and others

1998-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

206

Tanks Focus Area FY98 midyear technical review  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Tanks Focus Area (TFA) serves as the DOE`s Office of Environmental Management`s national technology and solution development program for radioactive waste tank remediation. 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. In total, 17 technologies and technical solutions were selected for review. The purpose of each review was to understand the state of development of each technology selected for review and to identify issues to be resolved before the technology or technical solution progressed to the next level of maturity. The reviewers provided detailed technical and programmatic recommendations and comments. The disposition of these recommendations and comments and their impact on the program is documented in this report.

Schlahta, S.N.; Brouns, T.M.

1998-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

207

Preliminary characterization of abandoned septic tank systems. Volume 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report documents the activities and findings of the Phase I Preliminary Characterization of Abandoned Septic Tank Systems. The purpose of the preliminary characterization activity was to investigate the Tiger Team abandoned septic systems (tanks and associated leachfields) for the purpose of identifying waste streams for closure at a later date. The work performed was not to fully characterize or remediate the sites. The abandoned systems potentially received wastes or effluent from buildings which could have discharged non-domestic, petroleum hydrocarbons, hazardous, radioactive and/or mixed wastes. A total of 20 sites were investigated for the preliminary characterization of identified abandoned septic systems. Of the 20 sites, 19 were located and characterized through samples collected from each tank(s) and, where applicable, associated leachfields. The abandoned septic tank systems are located in Areas 5, 12, 15, 25, and 26 on the Nevada Test Site.

NONE

1995-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

208

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

209

Object Closure Conversion Cornell University  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

that a direct formulation of object closure conversion is interesting and gives further insight into generalObject Closure Conversion Neal Glew Cornell University 24 August 1999 Abstract An integral part of implementing functional languages is closure conversion--the process of converting code with free variables

Glew, Neal

210

New Construction Road Closures  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

New Construction Remodel Utility Road Closures 11 Keiss 12 Keiss 13 Stoddard 14 Stoddard Scott? Martha Coleman: 491-0101 Colorado State University - Fall 2013 Major Construction BRT Mason Corridor Facilitites Management Haberecht Haberecht Construction Work Zones 13 12 14 21 23 22 32 Æa #12;

211

WASTE PACKAGE OPERATIONS FY99 CLOSURE METHODS REPORT  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The waste package (WP) closure weld development task is part of a larger engineering development program to develop waste package designs. The purpose of the larger waste package engineering development program is to develop nuclear waste package fabrication and closure methods that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission will find acceptable and will license for disposal of spent nuclear fuel (SNF), non-fuel components, and vitrified high-level waste within a Monitored Geologic Repository (MGR). Within the WP closure development program are several major development tasks, which, in turn, are divided into subtasks. The major tasks include: WP fabrication development, WP closure weld development, nondestructive examination (NDE) development, and remote in-service inspection development. The purpose of this report is to present the objectives, technical information, and work scope relating to the WP closure weld development.and NDE tasks and subtasks and to report results of the closure weld and NDE development programs for fiscal year 1999 (FY-99). The objective of the FY-99 WP closure weld development task was to develop requirements for closure weld surface and volumetric NDE performance demonstrations, investigate alternative NDE inspection techniques, and develop specifications for welding, NDE, and handling system integration. In addition, objectives included fabricating several flat plate mock-ups that could be used for NDE development, stress relief peening, corrosion testing, and residual stress testing.

M. C. Knapp

1999-09-23T23:59:59.000Z

212

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

Danaan Annett Hal Anthony Carol Apperson Judith Arcana John Ardner Kathy Arias Chris Armstrong Mary Armstrong Dana Arnim Diane Arnold Jim Arnold Susan Arnold Tom Arnold David...

213

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...

214

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...

215

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

showed no gurarentees that it wouldn't leak into the water. Water is to be the next oil so why would we contanimnate this. Did I mention the seismic ativity in the area? Are...

216

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

Site, Richland, Washington F-6 F.4 AIR QUALITY F.4.1 Description of Affected Resources Air pollution refers to the direct or indirect introduction of any substance into the air...

217

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)...

218

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...

219

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

path, followed by enhanced growth of all plants in the same area as a result of the infusion of nitrates into the typically nitrogen-poor desert soils. Because essentially all of...

220

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

Activities, FFTF Project, Hanford Site (DOE 2006b) FONSI, "EA, Sodium Residuals ReactionRemoval and Other Deactivation Work Activities, FFTF Project, Hanford Site" (DOE 2006c)...

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

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

would also be reduced by keeping vehicles and equipment in good working order to prevent oil and fuel leaks. Soil erosion and sediment control plans and stormwater pollution...

222

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

223

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

224

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

225

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

226

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

227

Performance requirements for the double-shell tank system: Phase 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document establishes performance requirements for the double-shell tank system. These requirements, in turn, will be incorporated in the System Specification for the Double-Shell Tank System (Grenard and Claghorn 1998). This version of the document establishes requirements that are applicable to the first phase (Phase 1) of the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) mission described in the TWRS Mission Analysis Report (Acree 1998). It does not specify requirements for either the Phase 2 mission or the double-shell tank system closure period.

Claghorn, R.D.

1998-03-05T23:59:59.000Z

228

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

229

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

230

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...

231

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

232

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

233

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

234

DIESEL FUEL TANK FOUNDATIONS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of this analysis is to design structural foundations for the Diesel Fuel Tank and Fuel Pumps.

M. Gomez

1995-01-18T23:59:59.000Z

235

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

236

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

237

HOOTS99 Preliminary Version Object Closure Conversion  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

classes is an exam* *ple of closure conversion. This paper argues that a direct formulation of object HOOTS99 Preliminary Version Object Closure Conversion __________________________________________________________________________ Abstract An integral part of implementing functional languages is closure conversion_the process

Glew, Neal

238

HWMA/RCRA Closure Plan for the CPP-602 Laboratory Lines  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Hazardous Waste Management Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Closure (HWMA/RCRA) Plan for the CPP-602 laboratory lines was developed to meet the tank system closure requirements of the Idaho Administrative Procedures Act 58.01.05.008 and 40 Code of Federal Regulations 264, Subpart G. CPP-602 is located at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center at the Idaho National Laboratory Site. The lines in CPP-602 were part of a liquid hazardous waste collection system included in the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Liquid Waste Management System Permit. The laboratory lines discharged to the Deep Tanks System in CPP-601 that is currently being closed under a separate closure plan. This closure plan presents the closure performance standards and the methods for achieving those standards. The closure approach for the CPP-602 laboratory lines is to remove the lines, components, and contaminants to the extent practicable. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Site CPP-117 includes the CPP-602 waste trench and the area beneath the basement floor where waste lines are direct-buried. Upon completion of rinsing or mopping to remove contamination to the extent practicable from the waste trench and rinsing the intact buried lines (i.e., stainless steel sections), these areas will be managed as part of CERCLA Site CPP-117 and will not be subject to further HWMA/RCRA closure activities. The CPP-602 building is being decontaminated and decommissioned under CERCLA as a non-time critical removal action in accordance with the Federal Facility Agreement/Consent Order. As such, all waste generated by this CERCLA action, including closure-generated waste, will be managed in coordination with that CERCLA action in substantive compliance with HWMA/RCRA regulations. All waste will be subject to a hazardous waste determination for the purpose of supporting appropriate management and will be managed in accordance with this plan. ii

Idaho Cleanup Project

2009-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

239

Photogrammetry and Laser Imagery Tests for Tank Waste Volume Estimates: Summary Report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Feasibility tests were conducted using photogrammetry and laser technologies to estimate the volume of waste in a tank. These technologies were compared with video Camera/CAD Modeling System (CCMS) estimates; the current method used for post-retrieval waste volume estimates. This report summarizes test results and presents recommendations for further development and deployment of technologies to provide more accurate and faster waste volume estimates in support of tank retrieval and closure.

Field, Jim G. [Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC, Richland, WA (United States)

2013-03-27T23:59:59.000Z

240

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

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

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

242

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

243

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

244

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 Energy’s 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-P±H 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

245

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

246

Small Site Closures  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of Energy Power.pdf11-161-LNGInternational Energy AgencyImpact of Teaming Arrangements onModular ReactorSite

247

Stennis Tow Tank | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home5b9fcbce19 No revisionEnvReviewNonInvasiveExplorationUT-g GrantAtlas (PACA RegionSpringviewNameGeothermalStennis Tow Tank Jump

248

Ohmsett Tow Tank | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home5b9fcbce19 No revision hasInformation Earth's HeatMexico:CommunityNorthwestInformation GreatersourceOhmsett Tow Tank

249

Ice Towing Tank | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home5b9fcbce19 No revision hasInformation Earth's Heat Jump to:PhotonHolyName HousingIIIDrive LtdINDEX JumpISEIXYSIbTank

250

REMOTE AREA RADIATION MONITORING (RARM) ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Remote Area Radiation Monitoring (RARM) system will be used to provide real-time radiation monitoring information to the operations personnel during tank retrieval and transfer operations. The primary focus of the system is to detect potential anomalous (waste leaks) or transient radiological conditions. This system will provide mobile, real-time radiological monitoring, data logging, and status at pre-selected strategic points along the waste transfer route during tank retrieval operations. The system will provide early detection and response capabilities for the Retrieval and Closure Operations organization and Radiological Control personnel.

NELSON RL

2008-07-18T23:59:59.000Z

251

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

252

Pressurizer tank upper support  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

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

1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

253

Pressurizer tank upper support  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

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

1994-01-11T23:59:59.000Z

254

Corrosion Control during Closure Activities at the Savannah River Site - 13514  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Liquid radioactive wastes from the Savannah River Site (SRS) separation process are stored in large underground carbon steel tanks. Until the waste is removed from storage, transferred, and processed, the materials and structures of the tanks must maintain a confinement function by providing a barrier to the environment and by maintaining acceptable structural stability during normal service and design basis events (e.g., earthquake conditions). A corrosion control program is in place to ensure that degradation of the steel does not impact the structural and leak integrity functions of these waste tanks. The SRS is currently retrieving waste from older waste tanks and processing the waste through the vitrification for long term stabilization. The retrieval processes prepare the tanks for ultimate closure (i.e., grouting) by removing sludge by mechanical and/or sluicing methods, dissolving salt cake by adding water, and chemical cleaning of the residual sludge with oxalic acid. Each of these retrieval methods will result in waste chemistry that does not meet the requirements of the current corrosion control program. Given the short-term exposure and limited remaining service life for the tanks in which retrievals are being performed, an assessment of the need for corrosion controls in these tanks was performed. The assessment reviewed the corrosion rates in the more aggressive environments and the postulated loads on the structure during the closure activities. The assessment concluded that the current corrosion control program may be suspended for a short period of time while final retrieval of the waste is performed. (authors)

Wiersma, Bruce J. [Savannah River National Laboratory, Aiken, SC (United States)] [Savannah River National Laboratory, Aiken, SC (United States); Subramanian, Karthik H.; Martin, Keisha B. [Savannah River Remediation, Aiken, SC (United States)] [Savannah River Remediation, Aiken, SC (United States)

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

255

TFA Tanks Focus Area Multiyear Program Plan FY00-FY04  

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 68 tanks are known or assumed to have leaked contamination to the soil. 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 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 five major tank sites: Hanford Site (Washington), Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) (Idaho), Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) (Tennessee), Savannah River Site (SRS) (South Carolina), and West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) (New York). 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 EM organizations that fund tank technology development, including the Offices of Waste Management (EM-30), Environmental Restoration (EM-40), and Science and Technology (EM-50 or OST).

BA Carteret; JH Westsik; LR Roeder-Smith; RL Gilchrist; RW Allen; SN Schlahta; TM Brouns

1999-10-12T23:59:59.000Z

256

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

257

The Ashland tank collapse  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The estimated 3.9-million-gallon diesel oil spill from a collapsed storage tank at the Floreffe, Pa., terminal of Ashland Oil Co. has received a lot of attention, and for good reason. On Jan. 2, 1988 a 40-year-old, 48-ft-high, 120-ft-in diameter, reassembled tank suddenly ruptured and emptied its contents in a massive inland-water way fuel spill. An EPA-estimated 750,000 gallons washed over the 10-foot-high dike (with a holding capacity 110 percent that of the tank) into a drainage system on adjacent property to storm sewers that eventually empty into the Monongahela River, which runs into the Ohio River. More than 180,000 gal were recovered by cleanup, while 2.5 to 3.1 MMgal were contained by the tank farm's dike system.

Prokop, J.

1988-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

258

Tank 48 - Chemical Destruction  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2013-01-09T23:59:59.000Z

259

Underground Storage Tank Regulations  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The Underground Storage Tank Regulations is relevant to all energy projects that will require the use and building of pipelines, underground storage of any sorts, and/or electrical equipment. The...

260

Storage Tanks (Arkansas)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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...

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

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

262

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

263

Kinetic Modeling and Thermodynamic Closure Approximation of ...  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Oct 5, 2007 ... Kinetic Modeling and Thermodynamic Closure. Approximation of Liquid Crystal Polymers. Haijun Yu. Program in Applied and Computational ...

2007-10-03T23:59:59.000Z

264

Rethinking the Hanford Tank Waste Program  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The program to treat and dispose of the highly radioactive wastes stored in underground tanks at the U.S. Department of Energy's Hanford site has been studied. A strategy/management approach to achieve an acceptable (technically sound) end state for these wastes has been developed in this study. This approach is based on assessment of the actual risks and costs to the public, workers, and the environment associated with the wastes and storage tanks. Close attention should be given to the technical merits of available waste treatment and stabilization methodologies, and application of realistic risk reduction goals and methodologies to establish appropriate tank farm cleanup milestones. Increased research and development to reduce the mass of non-radioactive materials in the tanks requiring sophisticated treatment is highly desirable. The actual cleanup activities and milestones, while maintaining acceptable safety standards, could be more focused on a risk-to-benefit cost effectiveness, as agreed to by the involved stakeholders and in accordance with existing regulatory requirements. If existing safety standards can be maintained at significant cost savings under alternative plans but with a change in the Tri-Party Agreement (a regulatory requirement), those plans should be carried out. The proposed strategy would also take advantage of the lessons learned from the activities and efforts in the first phase of the two-phased cleanup of the Hanford waste tank farms.

Parker, F. L.; Clark, D. E.; Morcos, N.

2002-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

265

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

266

HOOTS99 Preliminary Version Object Closure Conversion  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

is an example of closure conversion. This paper argues that a direct formulation of object closure conversionHOOTS99 Preliminary Version Object Closure Conversion Neal Glew 1 Department of Computer Science conversion--the process of converting code with free variables into closed code and auxiliary data structures

Glew, Neal

267

HOOTS99 Preliminary Version Object Closure Conversion  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

classes is an example of closure conversion. This paper argues that a direct formulation of object closureHOOTS99 Preliminary Version Object Closure Conversion Neal Glew 1 Department of Computer Science conversion---the process of converting code with free variables into closed code and auxiliary data

Glew, Neal

268

In-Tank Elutriation Test Report And Independent Assessment  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM) funded Technology Development and Deployment (TDD) to solve technical problems associated with waste tank closure for sites such as Hanford Site and Savannah River Site (SRS). One of the tasks supported by this funding at Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) and Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNNL) was In-Tank Elutriation. Elutriation is the process whereby physical separation occurs based on particle size and density. This report satisfies the first phase of Task WP_1.3.1.1 In-Tank Elutriation, which is to assess the feasibility of this method of separation in waste tanks at Hanford Site and SRS. This report includes an analysis of scoping tests performed in the Engineering Development Laboratory of SRNL, analysis of Hanford's inadvertent elutriation, the viability of separation methods such as elutriation and hydrocyclones and recommendations for a path forward. This report will demonstrate that the retrieval of Hanford salt waste tank S-112 very successfully decreased the tank's inventories of radionuclides. Analyses of samples collected from the tank showed that concentrations of the major radionuclides Cs-136 and Sr-90 were decreased by factors of 250 and 6 and their total curie tank inventories decreased by factors of 60,000 and 2000. The total tank curie loading decreased from 300,000 Ci to 55 Ci. The remaining heel was nearly all innocuous gibbsite, Al(OH){sub 3}. However, in the process of tank retrieval approximately 85% of the tank gibbsite was also removed. Significant amounts of money and processing time could be saved if more gibbsite could be left in tanks while still removing nearly all of the radionuclides. There were factors which helped to make the elutriation of Tank S-112 successful which would not necessarily be present in all salt tanks. 1. The gibbsite particles in the tank were surprisingly large, as much as 200 {micro}m. The gibbsite crystals had probably grown in size over a period of decades. 2. The radionuclides were apparently either in the form of soluble compounds, like cesium, or micrometer sized particles of actinide oxides or hydroxides. 3. After the initial tank retrieval the tank contained cobble which is not conducive to elutriation. Only after the tank contents were treated with thousands of gallons of 50 wt% caustic, were the solids converted to sand which is compatible with elutriation. Discussions between SRNL and PNNL resulted in plans to test elutriation in two phases; in Phase 1 particles would be separated by differences in settling velocity in an existing scaled tank with its associated hardware and in Phase 2 additional hardware, such as a hydrocyclone, would be added downstream to separate slow settling partciels from liquid. Phase 1 of in-tank elutriation was tested for Proof of Principle in theEngineering Development Laboratory of SRNL in a 41" diameter, 87 gallon tank. The tank had been previously used as a 1/22 scale model of Hanford Waste Tank AY-102. The objective of the testing was to determine which tank operating parameters achieved the best separation between fast- and slow-settling particles. For Phase 1 testing a simulated waste tank supernatant, slow-settling particles and fast-settling particles were loaded to the scaled tank. Because this was a Proof of Principle test, readily available solids particles were used that represented fast-settling and slow-settling particles. The tank contents were agitated using rotating mixer jet pumps (MJP) which suspended solids while liquids and solids were drawn out of the tank with a suction tube. The goal was to determine the optimum hydraulic operating conditions to achieve clean separation in which the residual solids in the tank were nearly all fast-settling particles and the solids transferred out of the tank were nearly all slow-settling particles. Tests were conducted at different pump jet velocities, suction tube diameters and suction tube elevations. Testing revealed that the most important variable was jet velocity which translates to a d

Burns, H. H.; Adamson, D. J.; Qureshi, Z. H.; Steeper, T. J.

2011-04-13T23:59:59.000Z

269

HWMA/RCRA CLOSURE PLAN FOR THE MATERIALS TEST REACTOR WING (TRA-604) LABORATORY COMPONENTS VOLUNTARY CONSENT ORDER ACTION PLAN VCO-5.8 D REVISION2  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Hazardous Waste Management Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act closure plan was developed for the laboratory components of the Test Reactor Area Catch Tank System (TRA-630) that are located in the Materials Test Reactor Wing (TRA-604) at the Reactor Technology Complex, Idaho National Laboratory Site, to meet a further milestone established under Voluntary Consent Order Action Plan VCO-5.8.d. The TRA-604 laboratory components addressed in this closure plan were deferred from the TRA-630 Catch Tank System closure plan due to ongoing laboratory operations in the areas requiring closure actions. The TRA-604 laboratory components include the TRA-604 laboratory warm wastewater drain piping, undersink drains, subheaders, and the east TRA-604 laboratory drain header. Potentially contaminated surfaces located beneath the TRA-604 laboratory warm wastewater drain piping and beneath the island sinks located in Laboratories 126 and 128 (located in TRA-661) are also addressed in this closure plan. The TRA-604 laboratory components will be closed in accordance with the interim status requirements of the Hazardous Waste Management Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act as implemented by the Idaho Administrative Procedures Act 58.01.05.009 and 40 Code of Federal Regulations 265, Subparts G and J. This closure plan presents the closure performance standards and the methods for achieving those standards.

KIRK WINTERHOLLER

2008-02-25T23:59:59.000Z

270

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

271

Hawaii Department of Health Underground Storage Tank Webpage | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia, Virginia: Energy Resources Jump to: navigation,Ohio:Greer CountyCorridor | Open EnergySection WebpageInformation Tank

272

Idaho DEQ Storage Tanks Webpage | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data CenterFranconia, Virginia: Energy Resources Jump to: navigation,Ohio:GreerHiCalifornia:ISI Solar Jump to:InformationOpen|Tanks Webpage

273

RCRA/UST, superfund, and EPCRA hotline training module. Introduction to: RCRA subtitle I. Underground storage tanks (40 cfr part 280). Updated as of July 1996  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This module explains the Underground Storage Tank Regulatory Program established in 1988, that includes technical requirements to prevent, protect, and clean up releases from Underground Storage Tanks (USTs), as well as financial responsibility requirements to guarantee that UST owners and operators have enough money set aside to clean up releases and compensate third parties. Describes the Universe of USTs and the technical and financial requirements that apply to them. Defines underground storage tank and provides criteria for determining which USTs are subject to regulation. Discusses deadlines for upgrading tanks and the closure and corrective action requirements.

NONE

1996-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

274

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

275

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

276

Tank Waste Committee Summaries - Hanford Site  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May JunDatastreamsmmcrcalgovInstrumentsrucLas ConchasPassiveSubmittedStatus TomAboutManus Site-Inactive TWPCarbonTakeRV 14800TankSection

277

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

278

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

279

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. Mix, LP#8-16 is recommended for inclusion in the specification for furnishing and delivering tank closure grout for Tanks 18-F and 19-F [Forty, 2011 c]. A shrinkage compensating variation of this mix, LP#16C, has not been fully developed and characterized at this time.

Langton, C. A.; Stefanko, D. B.

2013-04-23T23:59:59.000Z

280

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

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

Stratification in hot water tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Stratification in a domestic hot water tank, used to increase system performance by enabling the solar collectors to operate under marginal conditions, is discussed. Data taken in a 120 gallon tank indicate that stratification can be achieved without any special baffling in the tank. (MJF)

Balcomb, J.D.

1982-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

282

Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 261: Area 25 Test Cell A Leachfield System, Nevada Test Site, Nevada  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of this Closure Report (CR) is to provide documentation of the completed corrective action at the Test Cell A Leachfield System and to provide data confirming the corrective action. The Test Cell A Leachfield System is identified in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) of 1996 as Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 261. Remediation of CAU 261 is required under the FFACO (1996). CAU 261 is located in Area 25 of the Nevada Test Site (NTS) which is approximately 140 kilometers (87 miles) northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada (Figure 1). CAU 261 consists of two Corrective Action Sites (CASS): CAS 25-05-01, Leachfield; and CAS 25-05-07, Acid Waste Leach Pit (AWLP) (Figures 2 and 3). Test Cell A was operated during the 1960s and 1970s to support the Nuclear Rocket Development Station. Various operations within Building 3124 at Test Cell A resulted in liquid waste releases to the Leachfield and the AWLP. The following existing site conditions were reported in the Corrective Action Decision Document (CADD) (U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office [DOE/NV], 1999): Soil in the leachfield was found to exceed the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) Action Level for petroleum hydrocarbons, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) preliminary remediation goals for semi volatile organic compounds, and background concentrations for strontium-90; Soil below the sewer pipe and approximately 4.5 meters (m) (15 feet [ft]) downstream of the initial outfall was found to exceed background concentrations for cesium-137 and strontium-90; Sludge in the leachfield septic tank was found to exceed the NDEP Action Level for petroleum hydrocarbons and to contain americium-241, cesium-137, uranium-234, uranium-238, potassium-40, and strontium-90; No constituents of concern (COC) were identified at the AWLP. The NDEP-approved CADD (DOWNV, 1999) recommended Corrective Action Alternative 2, ''Closure of the Septic Tank and Distribution Box, Partial Excavation, and Administrative Controls.'' The corrective action was performed following the NDEP-approved Corrective Action Plan (CAP) (DOE/NV, 2000).

T. M. Fitzmaurice

2001-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

283

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

FIELD, J.G.

1999-02-02T23:59:59.000Z

284

TANKS 18 AND 19-F EQUIPMENT GROUT FILL MATERIAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The United States Department of Energy (US DOE) intends to remove Tanks 18-F and 19-F at the Savannah River Site (SRS) from service. The high-level waste (HLW) tanks have been isolated from the F-area Tank Farm (FTF) facilities and will be filled with cementitious grout for the purpose of: (1) physically stabilizing the empty volumes in the tanks, (2) limiting/eliminating vertical pathways from the surface to residual waste on the bottom of the tanks, (3) providing an intruder barrier, and (4) providing an alkaline, chemical reducing environment within the closure boundary to limit solubility of residual radionuclides. Bulk waste and heel waste removal equipment will remain in Tanks 18-F and 19-F when the tanks are closed. This equipment includes: mixer pumps, transfer pumps, transfer jets, equipment support masts, sampling masts and dip tube assemblies. The current Tank 18-F and 19-F closure strategy is to grout the internal void spaces in this equipment to eliminate fast vertical pathways and slow water infiltration to the residual material on the tank floor. This report documents the results of laboratory testing performed to identify a grout formulation for filling the abandoned equipment in Tanks 18-F and 19-F. The objective of this work was to formulate a flowable grout for filling internal voids of equipment that will remain in Tanks 18-F and 19-F during the final closures. This work was requested by V. A. Chander, Tank Farm Closure Engineering, in HLW-TTR-2011-008. The scope for this task is provided in the Task Technical and Quality Assurance Plan (TTQAP), SRNL-RP-2011-00587. The specific objectives of this task were to: (1) Prepare and evaluate the SRR cooling coil grout identified in WSRC-STI-2008-00298 per the TTR for this work. The cooling coil grout is a mixture of BASF MasterFlow{reg_sign} 816 cable grout (67.67 wt. %), Grade 100 ground granulated blast furnace slag (7.52 wt. %) and water (24.81 wt. %); (2) Identify equipment grout placement and performance properties; (3) Design up to 2 additional grout systems for filling the Tank 18-F and Tank 19-F equipment; (4) Prepare samples of candidate grouts and measure fresh properties, thermal properties and cured properties; (5) Recommend a grout for the Tier 1A equipment fill mock up - ADMP 4 foot high mock up, 1 inch and 2 inch pipes; (6) Support procurement of materials for the Tier 1A equipment fill mock up test; (7) Prepare samples of the recommended grout for hydraulic property measurements which can be used for comparison to values used in the F- Tank Farm Performance Assessment (PA); and (8) Document equipment fill grout data and recommendations in a report.

Stefanko, D.; Langton, C.

2011-12-15T23:59:59.000Z

285

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...

286

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

287

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

288

Hanford Tank 241-C-106: Impact of Cement Reactions on Release of Contaminants from Residual Waste  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc. (CH2M HILL) is producing risk/performance assessments to support the closure of single-shell tanks at the U.S. Department of Energy's Hanford Site. As part of this effort, staff at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory were asked to develop release models for contaminants of concern that are present in residual sludge remaining in tank 241-C-106 (C-106) after final retrieval of waste from the tank. Initial work to produce release models was conducted on residual tank sludge using pure water as the leaching agent. The results were reported in an earlier report. The decision has now been made to close the tanks after waste retrieval with a cementitious grout to minimize infiltration and maintain the physical integrity of the tanks. This report describes testing of the residual waste with a leaching solution that simulates the composition of water passing through the grout and contacting the residual waste at the bottom of the tank.

Deutsch, William J.; Krupka, Kenneth M.; Lindberg, Michael J.; Cantrell, Kirk J.; Brown, Christopher F.; Schaef, Herbert T.

2006-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

289

100-D Ponds closure plan. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The 100-D Ponds is a Treatment, Storage, and Disposal (TSD) unit on the Hanford Facility that received both dangerous and nonregulated waste. This Closure Plan (Rev. 1) for the 100-D Ponds TSD unit consists of a RCRA Part A Dangerous Waste Permit Application (Rev. 3), a RCRA Closure Plan, and supporting information contained in the appendices to the plan. The closure plan consists of eight chapters containing facility description, process information, waste characteristics, and groundwater monitoring data. There are also chapters containing the closure strategy and performance standards. The strategy for the closure of the 100-D Ponds TSD unit is clean closure. Appendices A and B of the closure plan demonstrate that soil and groundwater beneath 100-D Ponds are below cleanup limits. All dangerous wastes or dangerous waste constituents or residues associated with the operation of the ponds have been removed, therefore, human health and the environment are protected. Discharges to the 100-D Ponds, which are located in the 100-DR-1 operable unit, were discontinued in June 1994. Contaminated sediment was removed from the ponds in August 1996. Subsequent sampling and analysis demonstrated that there is no contamination remaining in the ponds, therefore, this closure plan is a demonstration of clean closure.

Petersen, S.W.

1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

290

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

291

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

292

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

293

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

294

ANALYSIS OF SAMPLES FROM TANK 5F CHEMICAL CLEANING  

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. 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. The conclusions from this work are: (1) With the exception of iron, the dissolution of sludge components from Tank 5F agreed with results from the actual waste demonstration performed in 2007. The fraction of iron removed from Tank 5F by chemical cleaning was significantly less than the fraction removed in the SRNL demonstrations. The likely cause of this difference is the high pH following the first oxalic acid strike. (2) Most of the sludge mass remaining in the tank is iron and nickel. (3) The remaining sludge contains approximately 26 kg of barium, 37 kg of chromium, and 37 kg of mercury. (4) Most of the radioactivity remaining in the residual material is beta emitters and {sup 90}Sr. (5) The chemical cleaning removed more than {approx} 90% of the uranium isotopes and {sup 137}Cs. (6) The chemical cleaning removed {approx} 70% of the neptunium, {approx} 83% of the {sup 90}Sr, and {approx} 21% of the {sup 60}Co. (7) The chemical cleaning removed less than 10% of the plutonium, americium, and curium isotopes. (8) The chemical cleaning removed more than 90% of the aluminium, calcium, and sodium from the tank. (9) The cleaning operations removed 61% of lithium, 88% of non-radioactive strontium, and 65% of zirconium. The {sup 90}Sr and non-radioactive strontium were measured by different methods, and the differences in the fraction removed are not statistically significant. (10) Chemical cleaning removed 10-50% of the barium, chromium, iron, magnesium, manganese, and silicon. (11) Chemical cleaning removed only {approx}1% of the nickel.

Poirier, M.; Fink, S.

2011-03-07T23:59:59.000Z

295

TANK 18 AND 19-F TIER 1A EQUIPMENT FILL MOCK UP TEST SUMMARY  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The United States Department of Energy (US DOE) has determined that Tanks 18-F and 19-F have met the F-Tank Farm (FTF) General Closure Plan Requirements and are ready to be permanently closed. The high-level waste (HLW) tanks have been isolated from FTF facilities. To complete operational closure they will be filled with grout for the purpose of: (1) physically stabilizing the tanks, (2) limiting/eliminating vertical pathways to residual waste, (3) discouraging future intrusion, and (4) providing an alkaline, chemical reducing environment within the closure boundary to control speciation and solubility of select radionuclides. Bulk waste removal and heel removal equipment remain in Tanks 18-F and 19-F. This equipment includes the Advance Design Mixer Pump (ADMP), transfer pumps, transfer jets, standard slurry mixer pumps, equipment-support masts, sampling masts, dip tube assemblies and robotic crawlers. The present Tank 18 and 19-F closure strategy is to grout the equipment in place and eliminate vertical pathways by filling voids in the equipment to vertical fast pathways and water infiltration. The mock-up tests described in this report were intended to address placement issues identified for grouting the equipment that will be left in Tank 18-F and Tank 19-F. The Tank 18-F and 19-F closure strategy document states that one of the Performance Assessment (PA) requirements for a closed tank is that equipment remaining in the tank be filled to the extent practical and that vertical flow paths 1 inch and larger be grouted. The specific objectives of the Tier 1A equipment grout mock-up testing include: (1) Identifying the most limiting equipment configurations with respect to internal void space filling; (2) Specifying and constructing initial test geometries and forms that represent scaled boundary conditions; (3) Identifying a target grout rheology for evaluation in the scaled mock-up configurations; (4) Scaling-up production of a grout mix with the target rheology (16 second flow cone value) from 0.25 cubic feet to 4.3 cubic feet. (Ten 0.43 cubic batches were produced because full-scale equipment was not available for the Tier 1A test.); (5) Demonstrating continuous gravity filling of the ADMP mock up test form; (6) Demonstrating continuous gravity filling of 1 inch and 2 inch schedule 40 pipe; and (7) Demonstrating filling of 1 inch and 2 inch schedule 40 pipe from the bottom up by discharging through a tube inserted into the pipes. The Tier 1A mock-up test focused on the ADMP and pipes at least one inch in diameter. The ADMP which is located in center riser of Tank 18-F is a concern because the column for this long-shaft (55 ft) pump is unique and modification to the pump prior to placing it in service limited the flow path options for filling by creating a single flow path for filling and venting the ADMP support column. The large size, vertical orientation, and complicated flow path in the ADMP warrants a detailed description of this piece of ancillary equipment.

Stefanko, D.; Langton, C.

2011-11-04T23:59:59.000Z

296

Hanford Site Tank Waste Remediation System. Waste management 1993 symposium papers and viewgraphs  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The US Department of Energy`s (DOE) Hanford Site in southeastern Washington State has the most diverse and largest amount of highly radioactive waste of any site in the US. High-level radioactive waste has been stored in large underground tanks since 1944. A Tank Waste Remediation System Program has been established within the DOE to safely manage and immobilize these wastes in anticipation of permanent disposal in a geologic repository. The Hanford Site Tank Waste Remediation System Waste Management 1993 Symposium Papers and Viewgraphs covered the following topics: Hanford Site Tank Waste Remediation System Overview; Tank Waste Retrieval Issues and Options for their Resolution; Tank Waste Pretreatment - Issues, Alternatives and Strategies for Resolution; Low-Level Waste Disposal - Grout Issue and Alternative Waste Form Technology; A Strategy for Resolving High-Priority Hanford Site Radioactive Waste Storage Tank Safety Issues; Tank Waste Chemistry - A New Understanding of Waste Aging; Recent Results from Characterization of Ferrocyanide Wastes at the Hanford Site; Resolving the Safety Issue for Radioactive Waste Tanks with High Organic Content; Technology to Support Hanford Site Tank Waste Remediation System Objectives.

Not Available

1993-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

297

Transitional nuclei near shell closures  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

High spin states in Bismuth and Thallium nuclei near the Z = 82 shell closure and Cesium nuclei near the N = 82 shell closure in A = 190 and A = 130 regions, respectively, have been experimentally investigated using heavy-ion fusion evaporation reaction and by detecting the gamma rays using the Indian National Gamma Array (INGA). Interesting shape properties in these transitional nuclei have been observed. The results were compared with the neighboring nuclei in these two regions. The total Routhian surface (TRS) calculations have been performed for a better understanding of the observed properties. In mass region A = 190, a change in shape from spherical to deformed has been observd around neutron number N = 112 for the Bi (Z = 83) isotopes with proton number above the magic gap Z = 82, whereas, the shape of Tl (Z = 81) isotopes with proton number below the magic gap Z = 82 remains stable as a function of neutron number. An important transition from aplanar to planar configuration of angular momentum vectors leading to the occurance of nuclar chirality and magnetic rotation, respectively, has been proposed for the unique parity ?h{sub 11/2}??h{sub 11/2} configuration in Cs isotopes in the mass region A ? 130 around neutron number N = 79. These results are in commensurate with the TRS calculations.

Mukherjee, G. [Variable Energy Cyclotron Centre, 1/AF Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata 700064 (India); Pai, H. [Variable Energy Cyclotron Centre, 1/AF Bidhan Nagar, Kolkata 700064, India and Present Address: Institut für Kernphysik, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Schlossgartenstrasse 9, 64289 Darmstadt (Germany)

2014-08-14T23:59:59.000Z

298

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

299

Hanford Tanks 241-C-202 and 241-C-203 Residual Waste Contaminant Release Models and Supporting Data  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

As directed by Congress, the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) established the Office of River Protection in 1998 to manage DOE's largest, most complex environmental cleanup project – retrieval of radioactive waste from Hanford tanks for treatment and eventual disposal. Sixty percent by volume of the nation's high-level radioactive waste is stored at Hanford in aging deteriorating tanks. If not cleaned up, this waste is a threat to the Columbia River and the Pacific Northwest. CH2M Hill Hanford Group, Inc., is the Office of River Protection's prime contractor responsible for the storage, retrieval, and disposal of Hanford's tank waste. As part of this effort, CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc. contracted with Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) to develop release models for key contaminants that are present in residual sludge remaining after closure of Hanford Tanks 241-C-203 (C-203) and 241-C-204 (C-204). The release models were developed from data generated by laboratory characterization and testing of samples from these two tanks. These release models are being developed to support the tank closure risk assessments performed by CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc., for DOE.

Deutsch, William J.; Krupka, Kenneth M.; Lindberg, Michael J.; Cantrell, Kirk J.; Brown, Christopher F.; Mattigod, Shas V.; Schaef, Herbert T.; Arey, Bruce W.

2007-09-13T23:59:59.000Z

300

AN EVALUATION OF HANFORD SITE TANK FARM SUBSURFACE CONTAMINATION FY2007  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Tank Farm Vadose Zone (TFVZ) Project conducts activities to characterize and analyze the long-term environmental and human health impacts from tank waste releases to the vadose zone. The project also implements interim measures to mitigate impacts, and plans the remediation of waste releases from tank farms and associated facilities. The scope of this document is to report data needs that are important to estimating long-term human health and environmental risks. The scope does not include technologies needed to remediate contaminated soils and facilities, technologies needed to close tank farms, or management and regulatory decisions that will impact remediation and closure. This document is an update of ''A Summary and Evaluation of Hanford Site Tank Farm Subsurface Contamination''. That 1998 document summarized knowledge of subsurface contamination beneath the tank farms at the time. It included a preliminary conceptual model for migration of tank wastes through the vadose zone and an assessment of data and analysis gaps needed to update the conceptual model. This document provides a status of the data and analysis gaps previously defined and discussion of the gaps and needs that currently exist to support the stated mission of the TFVZ Project. The first data-gaps document provided the basis for TFVZ Project activities over the previous eight years. Fourteen of the nineteen knowledge gaps identified in the previous document have been investigated to the point that the project defines the current status as acceptable. In the process of filling these gaps, significant accomplishments were made in field work and characterization, laboratory investigations, modeling, and implementation of interim measures. The current data gaps are organized in groups that reflect Components of the tank farm vadose zone conceptual model: inventory, release, recharge, geohydrology, geochemistry, and modeling. The inventory and release components address residual wastes that will remain in the tanks and tank-farm infrastructure after closure and potential losses from leaks during waste retrieval. Recharge addresses the impacts of current conditions in the tank farms (i.e. gravel covers that affect infiltration and recharge) as well as the impacts of surface barriers. The geohydrology and geochemistry components address the extent of the existing subsurface contaminant inventory and drivers and pathways for contaminants to be transported through the vadose zone and groundwater. Geochemistry addresses the mobility of key reactive contaminants such as uranium. Modeling addresses conceptual models and how they are simulated in computers. The data gaps will be used to provide input to planning (including the upcoming C Farm Data Quality Objective meetings scheduled this year).

MANN, F.M.

2007-07-10T23:59:59.000Z

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.


301

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

302

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

303

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

304

Using closures for code generation Marc Feeley  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

which offers the advantages of an interpreter with the speed of compiled code. Code generation relies - environment (i.e. the set of current variable bindings). This operation is called closure. We speakUsing closures for code generation Marc Feeley Guy Lapalme D´epartement d'informatique et de

Feeley, Marc

305

Characterization of Direct Push Vadose Zone Sediments from the 241-U Single-Shell Tank Farm  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The overall goals of the Tank Farm Vadose Zone Project, led by CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc., are 1) to define risks from past and future single-shell tank farm activities, 2) to identify and evaluate the efficacy of interim measures, and 3) to aid, via collection of geochemical information and data, the future decisions that must be made by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) regarding the near-term operations, future waste retrieval, and final closure activities for the single-shell tank Waste Management Areas (WMAs). For a more complete discussion of the goals of the Tank Farm Vadose Zone Project, see the overall work plan, Phase 1 RCRA Facility Investigation/Corrective Measures Study Work Plan for the Single-Shell Tank Waste Management Areas (DOE 1999). Specific details on the rationale for activities performed at WMA U are found in Crumpler (2003). To meet these goals, CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc., asked scientists from Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) to perform detailed analyses of vadose zone sediment collected within the U Single-Shell Tank Farm. Specifically, this report contains all the geochemical and selected physical characterization data collected on vadose zone sediment recovered from ten direct push characterization holes emplaced to investigate vadose zone contamination associated with potential leaks within the 241-U Single-Shell Tank Farm. Specific tanks targeted during this characterization campaign included tanks 241-U-104/241-U-105, 241-U-110, and 241-U-112. Additionally, this report compiles data from direct push samples collected north of tank 241-U-201, as well as sediment collected from the background borehole (C3393). After evaluating all the characterization and analytical data, there is no question that the vadose zone in the vicinity of tanks 241-U-104 and 241-U-105 has been contaminated by tank-related waste. This observation is not new, as gamma logging of drywells in the area has identified uranium contamination at the same depths interrogated by push hole C5602. Given that the deepest sample string analyzed from push hole C5602 contained trace activities of technetium-99, it is obvious that tank waste contamination has impacted the vadose zone to at least a depth of 92 ft bgs at this location. However, the scope of the sampling campaign was to acquire additional samples to better understand the aerial extent of contamination in the U Tank Farm; therefore, future characterization activities (i.e., a borehole) will be required to understand the total vertical depth of contamination at this location.

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

2007-12-20T23:59:59.000Z

306

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...

307

Closure for the Seventh Generation - A Report from the Stewardship...  

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

Closure for the Seventh Generation - A Report from the Stewardship Committee of the State and Tribal Government Working Group (February 1999) Closure for the Seventh Generation - A...

308

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.

309

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

310

DOE Vehicular Tank Workshop Agenda  

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

948744369 GoalCharter: Identify key issues, including R&D needs, regulations, codes and standards, and a path forward to enable the deployment of hydrogen storage tanks...

311

Underground Storage Tanks (New Jersey)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This chapter constitutes rules for all underground storage tank facilities- including registration, reporting, permitting, certification, financial responsibility and to protect human health and...

312

Investigation of low-cost LNG vehicle fuel tank concepts. Final report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The objective of this study was to investigate development of a low-cost liquid natural gas (LNG) vehicle fuel storage tank with low fuel boil-off, low tank pressure, and high safety margin. One of the largest contributors to the cost of converting a vehicle to LNG is the cost of the LNG fuel tank. To minimize heat leak from the surroundings into the low-temperature fuel, these tanks are designed as cryogenic dewars with double walls separated by an evacuated insulation space containing multi-layer insulation. The cost of these fuel tanks is driven by this double-walled construction, both in terms of materials and labor. The primary focus of the analysis was to try to devise a fuel tank concept that would allow for the elimination of the double-wall requirement. Results of this study have validated the benefit of vacuum/MLI insulation for LNG fuel tanks and the difficulty in identifying viable alternatives. The thickness of a non-vacuum insulation layer would have to be unreasonably large to achieve an acceptable non-venting hold time. Reasonable hold times could be achieved by using an auxiliary tank to accept boil-off vapor from a non-vacuum insulated primary tank, if the vapor in the auxiliary tank can be stored at high pressure. The primary focus of the analysis was to try to devise a fuel tank concept that allowed for the elimination of the double-wall requirement. Thermodynamic relations were developed for analyzing the fuel tank transient response to heat transfer, venting of vapor, and out-flow of either vapor or liquid. One of the major costs associated with conversion of a vehicle to LNG fuel is the cost of the LNG fuel tank. The cost of these tanks is driven by the cryogenic nature of the fuel and by the fundamental design requirements of long non-venting hold times and low storage pressure.

O`Brien, J.E.; Siahpush, A. [Lockheed Martin Idaho Technologies Co., Idaho Falls, ID (United States). Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Lab.

1998-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

313

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

314

Closure for milliliter scale bioreactor  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

A closure for a microreactor includes a cap that is configured to be inserted into a well of the microreactor. The cap, or at least a portion of the cap, is compliant so as to form a seal with the well when the cap is inserted. The cap includes an aperture that provides an airway between the inside of the well to the external environment when the cap is inserted into the well. A porous plug is inserted in the aperture, e.g., either directly or in tube that extends through the aperture. The porous plug permits gas within the well to pass through the aperture while preventing liquids from passing through to reduce evaporation and preventing microbes from passing through to provide a sterile environment. A one-way valve may also be used to help control the environment in the well.

Klein, David L. (Palo Alto, CA); Laidlaw, Robert D. (Albany, CA); Andronaco, Gregory (Palo Alto, CA); Boyer, Stephen G. (Moss Beach, CA)

2010-12-14T23:59:59.000Z

315

HWMA/RCRA Closure Plan for the Basin Facility Basin Water Treatment System - Voluntary Consent Order NEW-CPP-016 Action Plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Hazardous Waste Management Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act closure plan for the Basin Water Treatment System located in the Basin Facility (CPP-603), Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC), Idaho National Laboratory Site, was developed to meet future milestones established under the Voluntary Consent Order. The system to be closed includes units and associated ancillary equipment included in the Voluntary Consent Order NEW-CPP-016 Action Plan and Voluntary Consent Order SITE-TANK-005 Tank Systems INTEC-077 and INTEC-078 that were determined to have managed hazardous waste. The Basin Water Treatment System will be closed in accordance with the requirements of the Hazardous Waste Management Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, as implemented by the Idaho Administrative Procedures Act 58.01.05.009 and 40 Code of Federal Regulations 265, to achieve "clean closure" of the tank system. This closure plan presents the closure performance standards and methods of achieving those standards for the Basin Water Treatment Systems.

Evans, S. K.

2007-11-07T23:59:59.000Z

316

Rulison Site Surface Closure Report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Closure Report provides documentation for closure of the Rulison Site surface and summarizes the data from groundwater monitoring conducted quarterly in 1996 and 1997. The quarterly groundwater monitoring was conducted to demonstrate that no contaminants are migrating from the pond after completion of the pond remediation activities. The Rulison Site is located in the North 1/2 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 25, Township 7 South, Range 95 West of the 6` Principal Meridian, Garfield County, Colorado, approximately 19 kilometers (km) (12 miles [mi]) southwest of Rifle, Colorado, and approximately 65 km (40 mi) northeast of Grand Junction, Colorado (Figure I - 1). The site is situated on the north slope of Battlement Mesa on the upper reaches of Battlement Creek at an elevation of approximately 2,500 meters (m) (8,200 feet [ft]). The valley is open to the north-northwest and is bounded on the other three sides by steep mountain slopes that rise to elevations above 2,927 m (9,600 ft). Project Rulison was a joint U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and Austral Oil Company (Austral) experiment. It was conducted under the AEC`s Plowshare Program to evaluate the feasibility of using a nuclear device to stimulate natural gas production in low- permeability, gas-producing geologic formations. The experiment consisted of detonating a 40-kiloton nuclear device at a depth of 2, 568 m (8,426 ft) below ground surface on September 10, 1969, followed by natural gas production testing in 1970 and 1971 (AEC, 1973).

NONE

1998-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

317

324 Building radiochemical engineering cells, high-level vault, low-level vault, and associated areas closure plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Hanford Site, located adjacent to and north of Richland, Washington, is operated by the US Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office (RL). The 324 Building is located in the 300 Area of the Hanford Site. The 324 Building was constructed in the 1960s to support materials and chemical process research and development activities ranging from laboratory/bench-scale studies to full engineering-scale pilot plant demonstrations. In the mid-1990s, it was determined that dangerous waste and waste residues were being stored for greater than 90 days in the 324 Building Radiochemical Engineering Cells (REC) and in the High-Level Vault/Low-Level Vault (HLV/LLV) tanks. [These areas are not Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) permitted portions of the 324 Building.] Through the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) Milestone M-89, agreement was reached to close the nonpermitted RCRA unit in the 324 Building. This closure plan, managed under TPA Milestone M-20-55, addresses the identified building areas targeted by the Tri-Party Agreement and provides commitments to achieve the highest degree of compliance practicable, given the special technical difficulties of managing mixed waste that contains high-activity radioactive materials, and the physical limitations of working remotely in the areas within the subject closure unit. This closure plan is divided into nine chapters. Chapter 1.0 provides the introduction, historical perspective, 324 Building history and current mission, and the regulatory basis and strategy for managing the closure unit. Chapters 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, and 5.0 discuss the detailed facility description, process information, waste characteristics, and groundwater monitoring respectively. Chapter 6.0 deals with the closure strategy and performance standard, including the closure activities for the B-Cell, D-Cell, HLV, LLV; piping and miscellaneous associated building areas. Chapter 7.0 addresses the closure activities identified in Chapter 6.0, and also adds information on closure activities for the soil directly beneath the unit, regulated material removed during closure, and the schedule for closure. Chapter 8.0 provides Surveillance, monitoring and post-closure information and Chapter 9.0 provides a list of references used throughout the document.

Barnett, J.M.

1998-03-25T23:59:59.000Z

318

Hanford Tank 241-C-106: Residual Waste Contaminant Release Model and Supporting Data  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report was revised in May 2007 to correct values in Section 3.4.1.7, second paragraph, last sentence; 90Sr values in Tables 3.22 and 3.32; and 99Tc values Table 4.3 and in Chapter 5. In addition, the tables in Appendix F were updated to reflect corrections to the 90Sr values. The rest of the text remains unchanged from the original report issued in May 2005. CH2M HILL is producing risk/performance assessments to support the closure of single-shell tanks at the DOE's Hanford Site. As part of this effort, staff at PNNL were asked to develop release models for contam¬inants of concern that are present in residual sludge remaining in tank 241-C-106 (C-106) after final retrieval of waste from the tank. This report provides the information developed by PNNL.

Deutsch, William J.; Krupka, Kenneth M.; Lindberg, Michael J.; Cantrell, Kirk J.; Brown, Christopher F.; Schaef, Herbert T.

2007-05-23T23:59:59.000Z

319

Closure Sites | Department of Energy  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE:YearRound-Up fromDepartmentTieCelebrate Earth DayFuelsDepartmentPolicyClean, EEREClosure Sites

320

Underground Storage Tank Act (West Virginia)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

New underground storage tank construction standards must include at least the following requirements: (1) That an underground storage tank will prevent releases of regulated substances stored...

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

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

322

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

323

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

324

Closure End States for Facilities, Waste Sites, and Subsurface Contamination  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE) manages the largest groundwater and soil cleanup effort in the world. DOE’s Office of Environmental Management (EM) has made significant progress in its restoration efforts at sites such as Fernald and Rocky Flats. However, remaining sites, such as Savannah River Site, Oak Ridge Site, Hanford Site, Los Alamos, Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant, and West Valley Demonstration Project possess the most complex challenges ever encountered by the technical community and represent a challenge that will face DOE for the next decade. Closure of the remaining 18 sites in the DOE EM Program requires remediation of 75 million cubic yards of contaminated soil and 1.7 trillion gallons of contaminated groundwater, deactivation & decommissioning (D&D) of over 3000 contaminated facilities and thousands of miles of contaminated piping, removal and disposition of millions of cubic yards of legacy materials, treatment of millions of gallons of high level tank waste and disposition of hundreds of contaminated tanks. The financial obligation required to remediate this volume of contaminated environment is estimated to cost more than 7% of the to-go life-cycle cost. Critical in meeting this goal within the current life-cycle cost projections is defining technically achievable end states that formally acknowledge that remedial goals will not be achieved for a long time and that residual contamination will be managed in the interim in ways that are protective of human health and environment. Formally acknowledging the long timeframe needed for remediation can be a basis for establishing common expectations for remedy performance, thereby minimizing the risk of re-evaluating the selected remedy at a later time. Once the expectations for long-term management are in place, remedial efforts can be directed towards near-term objectives (e.g., reducing the risk of exposure to residual contamination) instead of focusing on long-term cleanup requirements. An acknowledgement of the long timeframe for complete restoration and the need for long-term management can also help a site transition from the process of pilot testing different remedial strategies to selecting a final remedy and establishing a long-term management and monitoring approach. This approach has led to cost savings and the more efficient use of resources across the Department of Defense complex and at numerous industrial sites across the U.S. Defensible end states provide numerous benefits for the DOE environmental remediation programs including cost-effective, sustainable long-term monitoring strategies, remediation and site transition decision support, and long-term management of closure sites.

Gerdes, Kurt D.; Chamberlain, Grover S.; Wellman, Dawn M.; Deeb, Rula A.; Hawley, Elizabeth L.; Whitehurst, Latrincy; Marble, Justin

2012-11-21T23:59:59.000Z

325

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

326

Tank Farms at the Savannah River Site | Department of Energy  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious RankCombustion |Energy Usage »of Energy StrainClient updateTRI-STATE GENERATION 1.Take aStepsTank Farms

327

Tank Manufacturing, Testing, Deployment and Field Performance | Department  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious RankCombustion |Energy Usage »of Energy StrainClient updateTRI-STATE GENERATION 1.Take aStepsTank

328

Alaska Underground Storage Tanks Website | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home5b9fcbce19 NoPublic Utilities Address: 160 East 300 SouthWaterBrasilInformation 5-01 EndStatutes: Title 38 Jump to:Tanks

329

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

330

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

331

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

332

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

333

Hanford Tanks 241-C-203 and 241 C 204: Residual Waste Contaminant Release Model and Supporting Data  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report was revised in May 2007 to correct 90Sr values in Chapter 3. The changes were made on page 3.9, paragraph two and Table 3.10; page 3.16, last paragraph on the page; and Tables 3.21 and 3.31. The rest of the text remains unchanged from the original report issued in October 2004. This report describes the development of release models for key contaminants that are present in residual sludge remaining after closure of Hanford Tanks 241-C-203 (C-203) and 241-C-204 (C-204). The release models were developed from data generated by laboratory characterization and testing of samples from these two tanks. Key results from this work are (1) future releases from the tanks of the primary contaminants of concern (99Tc and 238U) can be represented by relatively simple solubility relationships between infiltrating water and solid phases containing the contaminants; and (2) high percentages of technetium-99 in the sludges (20 wt% in C-203 and 75 wt% in C-204) are not readily water leachable, and, in fact, are very recalcitrant. This is similar to results found in related studies of sludges from Tank AY-102. These release models are being developed to support the tank closure risk assessments performed by CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc., for the U.S. Department of Energy.

Deutsch, William J.; Krupka, Kenneth M.; Lindberg, Michael J.; Cantrell, Kirk J.; Brown, Christopher F.; Schaef, Herbert T.

2007-05-23T23:59:59.000Z

334

Hanford Tanks 241-C-203 and 241-C-204: Residual Waste Contaminant Release Model and Supporting Data  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report describes the development of release models for key contaminants that are present in residual sludge remaining after closure of Hanford Tanks 241-C-203 (C-203) and 241-C-204 (C-204). The release models were developed from data generated by laboratory characterization and testing of samples from these two tanks. Key results from this work are (1) future releases from the tanks of the primary contaminants of concern (99Tc and 238U) can be represented by relatively simple solubility relationships between infiltrating water and solid phases containing the contaminants; and (2) high percentages of technetium-99 in the sludges (20 wt% in C-203 and 75 wt% in C-204) are not readily water leachable, and, in fact, are very recalcitrant. This is similar to results found in related studies of sludges from Tank AY-102. These release models are being developed to support the tank closure risk assessments performed by CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc., for the U.S. Department of Energy.

Deutsch, William J.; Krupka, Kenneth M.; Lindberg, Michael J.; Cantrell, Kirk J.; Brown, Christopher F.; Schaef, Herbert T.

2004-10-28T23:59:59.000Z

335

Extender for securing a closure  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

An apparatus for securing a closure such as door or a window that opens and closes by movement relative to a fixed structure such as a wall or a floor. Many embodiments provide a device for relocating a padlock from its normal location where it secures a fastener (such as a hasp) to a location for the padlock that is more accessible for locking and unlocking the padlock. Typically an extender is provided, where the extender has a hook at a first end that is disposed through the eye of the staple of the hasp, and at an opposing second end the extender has an annulus, such as a hole in the extender or a loop or ring affixed to the extender. The shackle of the padlock may be disposed through the annulus and may be disposed through the eye of a second staple to secure the door or window in a closed or open position. Some embodiments employ a rigid sheath to enclose at least a portion of the extender. Typically the rigid sheath has an open state where the hook is exposed outside the sheath and a closed state where the hook is disposed within the sheath.

Thomas, II, Patrick A.

2012-10-02T23:59:59.000Z

336

Alternative Fuels Data Center: State Alternative Fuel and Advanced Vehicle  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmospheric Optical Depth (AOD)ProductssondeadjustsondeadjustAbout theOFFICE OFFuelsPropane Tank OverfillSan Diego LeadsRunLaws and

337

Waste tank characterization sampling limits  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document is a result of the Plant Implementation Team Investigation into delayed reporting of the exotherm in Tank 241-T-111 waste samples. The corrective actions identified are to have immediate notification of appropriate Tank Farm Operations Shift Management if analyses with potential safety impact exceed established levels. A procedure, WHC-IP-0842 Section 12.18, ``TWRS Approved Sampling and Data Analysis by Designated Laboratories`` (WHC 1994), has been established to require all tank waste sampling (including core, auger and supernate) and tank vapor samples be performed using this document. This document establishes levels for specified analysis that require notification of the appropriate shift manager. The following categories provide numerical values for analysis that may indicate that a tank is either outside the operating specification or should be evaluated for inclusion on a Watch List. The information given is intended to translate an operating limit such as heat load, expressed in Btu/hour, to an analysis related limit, in this case cesium-137 and strontium-90 concentrations. By using the values provided as safety flags, the analytical laboratory personnel can notify a shift manager that a tank is in potential violation of an operating limit or that a tank should be considered for inclusion on a Watch List. The shift manager can then take appropriate interim measures until a final determination is made by engineering personnel.

Tusler, L.A.

1994-09-02T23:59:59.000Z

338

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

339

Tank vapor mitigation requirements for Hanford Tank Farms  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Westinghouse Hanford Company has contracted Los Alamos Technical Associates to listing of vapors and aerosols that are or may be emitted from the High Level Waste (HLW) tanks at Hanford. Mitigation requirements under Federal and State law, as well as DOE Orders, are included in the listing. The lists will be used to support permitting activities relative to tank farm ventilation system up-grades. This task is designated Task 108 under MJB-SWV-312057 and is an extension of efforts begun under Task 53 of Purchase Order MPB-SVV-03291 5 for Mechanical Engineering Support. The results of that task, which covered only thirty-nine tanks, are repeated here to provide a single source document for vapor mitigation requirements for all 177 HLW tanks.

Rakestraw, L.D.

1994-11-15T23:59:59.000Z

340

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Publications  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmospheric Optical Depth (AOD)ProductssondeadjustsondeadjustAbout theOFFICE OFFuelsPropane Tank Overfill Safety Advisory to someone

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

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Publications  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmospheric Optical Depth (AOD)ProductssondeadjustsondeadjustAbout theOFFICE OFFuelsPropane Tank Overfill Safety Advisory to

342

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Publications  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmospheric Optical Depth (AOD)ProductssondeadjustsondeadjustAbout theOFFICE OFFuelsPropane Tank Overfill Safety Advisory toalternative

343

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

344

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

345

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

346

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

347

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

348

Rulison Site Surface Closure Report  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "ofEarlyEnergyDepartment ofDepartment ofof EnergyYou$0.C. 20545*.MSE

349

Washington Closure Hanford - Hanford Site  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May JunDatastreamsmmcrcalgovInstrumentsrucLasDelivered energy consumption byAbout Printable Version BookmarkHanford Contractors >

350

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

351

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Propane Tank Overfill Safety Advisory  

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

The AFDC is a resource of the U.S. Department of Energy's Clean Cities program. Contacts | Web Site Policies | U.S. Department of Energy | USA.gov Content Last Updated: 0806...

352

An eddy closure for potential vorticity  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Gent-McWilliams (GM) parameterization is extended to include a direct influence in the momentum equation. The extension is carried out in two stages; an analysis of the inviscid system is followed by an analysis of the viscous system. In the inviscid analysis the momentum equation is modified such that potential vorticity is conserved along particle trajectories following a transport velocity that includes the Bolus velocity in a manner exactly analogous to the continuity and tracer equations. In addition (and in contrast to traditional GM closures), the new formulation of the inviscid momentum equation results in a conservative exchange between potential and kinetic forms of energy. The inviscid form of the eddy closure conserves total energy to within an error proportional to the time derivative of the Bolus velocity. The hypothesis that the viscous term in the momentum equation should give rise to potential vorticity being diffused along isopycnals in a manner analogous to other tracers is examined in detail. While the form of the momentum closure that follows from a strict adherence to this hypothesis is not immediately interpretable within the constructs of traditional momentum closures, three approximations to this hypothesis results in a form of dissipation that is consistent with traditional Laplacian diffusion. The first two approximations are that relative vorticity, not potential vorticity, is diffused along isopyncals and that the flow is in approximate geostrophic balance. An additional approximation to the Jacobian term is required when the dissipation coefficient varies in space. More importantly, the critique of this hypothesis results in the conclusion that the viscosity parameter in the momentum equation should be identical to the tradition GM closure parameter {Kappa}. Overall, we deem the viscous form of the eddy closure for potential vorticity as a viable closure for use in ocean circulation models.

Ringler, Todd D [Los Alamos National Laboratory

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

353

Improvement in LNG storage tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

To develop and produce natural gas fuel tanks for medium duty truck and transit bus end-use to overcome the weight and range problems inherent in current fuel systems.

NONE

1999-11-20T23:59:59.000Z

354

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...

355

Evolving Robocode Tank Jacob Eisenstein  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Evolving Robocode Tank Fighters Jacob Eisenstein AI Memo 2003-023 October 2003 © 2 0 0 3 m into things hurts. FANTASY · Sensors and actuators are noiseless. · Radar sensor detects velocity, bearing

Fernandez, Thomas

356

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

357

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

358

RCRA/UST, superfund, and EPCRA hotline training module. Introduction to: Closure/post-closure (40 CFR parts 264/265, subpart G) updated as of July 1995  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The module explains the difference between closure and post-closure and lists the types of facilities that are subject to closure/post-closure. It defines the difference between partial and final closure. It specifies who submits a closure plan and when a closure plan must be submitted, listed the steps in the process, states the time frame for submittal and identifies when and how a closure must be amended. It explains the time frame for notification of closure and the deadlines for beginning and completing closure. It specifies which facilities need contingent post-closure plans, lists the elements of post-closure, and cites the requirements. It specifies the conditions and timing for amending a post-closure plan, and states who must certify closure/post-closure.

NONE

1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

359

RCRA, superfund and EPCRA hotline training module. Introduction to: Closure/post-closure (40 cfr parts 264/265, subpart g) updated July 1996  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The module explains the difference between closure and post-closure. It lists the types of facilities that are subject to closure/post-closures and defines the difference between partial and final closure. It specifies who submits a closure plan and when a closure plan must be submitted, lists the steps in the process, and states the time frame for submittal. It identifies when and how a closure must be amended. It explains the time frame for notification of closure and the deadlines for beginning and completing closure. It specifies which facilities need contingent post-closure plans and lists and the elements of post-closure and cites the requirements. It specifies the conditions and timing for amending a post-closure plan and states who must certify closure/post-closure.

NONE

1996-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

360

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

KRISTOFZSKI, J.G.

2007-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

362

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

363

Hanford Tank Waste Residuals  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of Energy Power.pdf11-161-LNG | Department ofHTS Cable Projects HTS CableMay 2009 Hanford

364

Tank Waste Strategy Update  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of Energy Power.pdf11-161-LNGInternational EnergyCommitteeRenewable1234 OF THE ENERGYDepartment ofonUnited

365

Tank Farms - Hanford Site  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May JunDatastreamsmmcrcalgovInstrumentsrucLas ConchasPassiveSubmittedStatus TomAboutManus Site-Inactive TWPCarbonTake aTalentTammyProjects

366

Tank Operations Contract  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May JunDatastreamsmmcrcalgovInstrumentsrucLas ConchasPassiveSubmittedStatus TomAboutManus Site-Inactive TWPCarbonTakeRV 14800 Modification

367

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

368

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

369

AIR AND RADON PATHWAY MODELING FOR THE F AREA TANK FARM  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Dixon, K.; Phifer, M.

2010-07-30T23:59:59.000Z

370

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

371

-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

372

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

373

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Carrington-Crouch, Robert

1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

374

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, Stéphane; Demer, David; Maurer, Benjamin D.

2005-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

375

Alternative Fuels Data Center: Virginia Information  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmospheric Optical Depth (AOD)ProductssondeadjustsondeadjustAbout theOFFICE OFFuelsPropane Tank

376

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

377

Appurtenance Influence on Type III Hanford Single-Shell Tank Structural Integrity - 12255  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The interim stabilized Hanford Single-Shell Tanks (SSTs) are currently undergoing a state of the art analysis to assess the structural integrity of the waste storage tanks, for cleanup and closure operations, considering their adverse thermal histories and an updated seismic hazard for the Hanford Site near Richland, Washington. The SSTs contain a variety of ancillary pits, piping, piping supports, risers, equipment, and penetrations known as appurtenances. These appurtenances may alter the structural response and ultimately could affect the structural integrity of the SSTs. An important challenge to the structural analysis of the SSTs is to determine the impact of these appurtenances on structural integrity. To achieve this, the various appurtenances were reviewed and a bounding appurtenance configuration for the SST Type III tanks was analyzed using finite element models for both thermal and operating loads as well as seismic loads. Tank structural demands from the finite element analyses were evaluated according to American Concrete Institute (ACI-349) code requirements to determine the tank structural integrity. The appurtenances configuration is found to increase the demand to capacity ratios in local regions near the appurtenances. Away from the appurtenances the influence on structural integrity is minor. The ACI-349-06 evaluation of the Type III SST bounding appurtenance configuration shows the tank is still structurally sound under all evaluated load combinations. When the appurtenance model D/C ratios were compared to those from the baseline axisymmetric model it was found that there were significant differences in the results, particularly under seismic loading conditions. This indicates that the effect of appurtenances on tank structural integrity should at least be considered in all SST AORs. (authors)

Sanborn, Scott E.; Johnson, Kenneth I. [Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington 99352 (United States); Larsen, Brian M.; Julyk, Larry J. [M and D Professional Services, Inc., Richland, Washington 99352 (United States)

2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

378

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

379

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

380

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

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

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

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

2013-11-19T23:59:59.000Z

382

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

383

Auxiliary resonant DC tank converter  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

An auxiliary resonant dc tank (ARDCT) converter is provided for achieving soft-switching in a power converter. An ARDCT circuit is coupled directly across a dc bus to the inverter to generate a resonant dc bus voltage, including upper and lower resonant capacitors connected in series as a resonant leg, first and second dc tank capacitors connected in series as a tank leg, and an auxiliary resonant circuit comprising a series combination of a resonant inductor and a pair of auxiliary switching devices. The ARDCT circuit further includes first clamping means for holding the resonant dc bus voltage to the dc tank voltage of the tank leg, and second clamping means for clamping the resonant dc bus voltage to zero during a resonant period. The ARDCT circuit resonantly brings the dc bus voltage to zero in order to provide a zero-voltage switching opportunity for the inverter, then quickly rebounds the dc bus voltage back to the dc tank voltage after the inverter changes state. The auxiliary switching devices are turned on and off under zero-current conditions. The ARDCT circuit only absorbs ripples of the inverter dc bus current, thus having less current stress. In addition, since the ARDCT circuit is coupled in parallel with the dc power supply and the inverter for merely assisting soft-switching of the inverter without participating in real dc power transmission and power conversion, malfunction and failure of the tank circuit will not affect the functional operation of the inverter; thus a highly reliable converter system is expected.

Peng, Fang Z. (Knoxville, TN)

2000-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

384

Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 116: Area 25 Test Cell C Facility, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Closure Report (CR) presents information supporting closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 116, Area 25 Test Cell C Facility. This CR complies with the requirements of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) that was agreed to by the State of Nevada; the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Environmental Management; the U.S. Department of Defense; and DOE, Legacy Management (FFACO, 1996 [as amended March 2010]). CAU 116 consists of the following two Corrective Action Sites (CASs), located in Area 25 of the Nevada National Security Site: (1) CAS 25-23-20, Nuclear Furnace Piping and (2) CAS 25-41-05, Test Cell C Facility. CAS 25-41-05 consisted of Building 3210 and the attached concrete shield wall. CAS 25-23-20 consisted of the nuclear furnace piping and tanks. Closure activities began in January 2007 and were completed in August 2011. Activities were conducted according to Revision 1 of the Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Plan for CAU 116 (U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office [NNSA/NSO], 2008). This CR provides documentation supporting the completed corrective actions and provides data confirming that closure objectives for CAU 116 were met. Site characterization data and process knowledge indicated that surface areas were radiologically contaminated above release limits and that regulated and/or hazardous wastes were present in the facility.

NSTec Environmental Restoration

2011-09-29T23:59:59.000Z

385

Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 254: Area 25, R-MAD Decontamination Facility, Nevada Test Site, Nevada  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 254 is located in Area 25 of the Nevada Test Site (NTS), approximately 100 kilometers (km) (62 miles) northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. The site is located within the Reactor Maintenance, Assembly and Disassembly (R-MAD) compound and consists of Building 3126, two outdoor decontamination pads, and surrounding areas within an existing fenced area measuring approximately 50 x 37 meters (160 x 120 feet). The site was used from the early 1960s to the early 1970s as part of the Nuclear Rocket Development Station program to decontaminate test-car hardware and tooling. The site was reactivated in the early 1980s to decontaminate a radiologically contaminated military tank. This Closure Report (CR) describes the closure activities performed to allow un-restricted release of the R-MAD Decontamination Facility.

G. N. Doyle

2002-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

386

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

387

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

388

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."

389

Fiscal Year 2006 Washington Closure Hanford Science & Technology Plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Washington Closure Hanford science and technology (S&T) plan documents the activities associated with providing S&T support to the River Corridor Closure Project for fiscal year 2006.

K.J. Kroegler, M. Truex, D.J. McBride

2006-01-19T23:59:59.000Z

390

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

391

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

392

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

393

Tank Waste and Waste Processing | Department of Energy  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security AdministrationcontrollerNanocrystallineForeign ObjectOUR8, 2013 FINAL MEETING SUMMARY7,Tank Waste and

394

High-Level Liquid Waste Tank Integrity Workshop - 2008  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of Energy Power.pdf11-161-LNG | Department ofHTS Cable Projects HTSSeparationHelping toLiquid Waste Tank

395

FINAL MEETING SUMMARY HANFORD ADVISORY BOARD TANK WASTE COMMITTEE  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmospheric Optical Depth7-1D: Vegetation ProposedUsing ZirconiaPolicy andExsolutionFES Committees of9, 2011 FINAL MEETING11,5,6,TANK

396

Radiation Control in Tank farms discussion with HAB  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security Administration the1 -the Mid-Infrared at 278, 298, and 323 RS-PO-0001-001.docW. J:. ShawControl in Tank

397

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

398

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

399

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

400

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

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 Compliance  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May JunDatastreamsmmcrcalgovInstrumentsruc Documentation RUCProductstwrmrAre theAdministratorCFMFusionReviewAlternate Watch Office |

402

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

403

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

404

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

405

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

406

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

407

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

408

Tank 241-U-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-U-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 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

409

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

410

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

411

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

412

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

413

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

414

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

415

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

416

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

417

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

418

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

419

A summary of methods for approximating salt creep and disposal room closure in numerical models of multiphase flow  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Eight alternative methods for approximating salt creep and disposal room closure in a multiphase flow model of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) were implemented and evaluated: Three fixed-room geometries three porosity functions and two fluid-phase-salt methods. The pressure-time-porosity line interpolation method is the method used in current WIPP Performance Assessment calculations. The room closure approximation methods were calibrated against a series of room closure simulations performed using a creep closure code, SANCHO. The fixed-room geometries did not incorporate a direct coupling between room void volume and room pressure. The two porosity function methods that utilized moles of gas as an independent parameter for closure coupling. The capillary backstress method was unable to accurately simulate conditions of re-closure of the room. Two methods were found to be accurate enough to approximate the effects of room closure; the boundary backstress method and pressure-time-porosity line interpolation. The boundary backstress method is a more reliable indicator of system behavior due to a theoretical basis for modeling salt deformation as a viscous process. It is a complex method and a detailed calibration process is required. The pressure lines method is thought to be less reliable because the results were skewed towards SANCHO results in simulations where the sequence of gas generation was significantly different from the SANCHO gas-generation rate histories used for closure calibration. This limitation in the pressure lines method is most pronounced at higher gas-generation rates and is relatively insignificant at lower gas-generation rates. Due to its relative simplicity, the pressure lines method is easier to implement in multiphase flow codes and simulations have a shorter execution time.

Freeze, G.A.; Larson, K.W. [INTERA, Inc., Albuquerque, NM (United States); Davies, P.B. [Sandia National Labs., Albuquerque, NM (United States)

1995-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

420

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.

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.