Sample records for tank closure alternative

  1. Tank Closure

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

  2. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic2Uranium Transferon the PassingRouting TECFinish Line |PaulTable

  3. Tank closure reducing grout

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Caldwell, T.B.

    1997-04-18T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1Reader's GuideCoverFarm

  6. RECENT PROGRESS IN DOE WASTE TANK CLOSURE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Langton, C

    2008-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  7. Environmental Assessment for the Accelerated Tank Closure Demonstration Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    N /A

    2003-06-16T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  8. ICPP tank farm closure study. Volume 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1998-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  9. Engineering study of tank fill options for landfill closure

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Skelly, W.A.

    1996-09-27T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  10. Permanent Closure of the TAN-664 Underground Storage Tank

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bradley K. Griffith

    2011-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.'

  11. 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...

  12. Accelerated Tank Closure Demonstrations at the Hanford Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2003-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  13. 100-N Area underground storage tank closures

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rowley, C.A.

    1993-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1998-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  15. Underground storage tank 511-D1U1 closure plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mancieri, S.; Giuntoli, N.

    1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  16. 324 Building REC and HLV Tank Closure Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Becker-Khaleel, B; Schlick, K. [Scienfific Ecology Group, Inc. Richland, WA (United States)

    1995-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This closure plan describes the activities necessary to close the 324 Radiochemical Engineering Cells (REC) and High-Level Vault (HLV) in accordance with the Washington State Dangerous Waste regulations. To provide a complete description of the activities required, the closure plan relies on information contained in the 324 Building B-Cell Safety Cleanout Project (BCCP) plans, the 324 Building REC HLV Interim Waste Management Plan (IWMP), the Project Management Plan for Nuclear Facilities Management 300 Area Compliance Program, and the 324 High Level Vault Interim Removal Action Project (project management plan [PMP]). The IWMP addresses the management of mixed waste in accordance with state and federal hazardous waste regulations. It provides a strategy for managing high-activity mixed waste in compliance with Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) requirements or provides for an alternative management approach for the waste. The BCCP outlines the past, present, and future activities necessary for removing from B-Cell the solid waste, including mixed waste generated as a result of historical research and development (R&D) activities conducted in the cell. The BCCP also includes all records and project files associated with the B-Cell cleanout. This information is referenced throughout the closure plan. The PMP sets forth the plans, organization, and systems that Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) will use to direct and control the 324 High-Level Vault Interim Removal Action Project. This project will develop and implement a treatment strategy that will remove and stabilize the inventory of liquid waste from the 324 HLV tanks. The PMP also provides for flushing and sampling the flush solution.

  17. Single-shell tank closure work plan. Revision A

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  18. Relationship Between Flowability And Tank Closure Grout Quality

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2012-10-08T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lockie, K.A. [U.S. Department of Energy, Idaho Operations Office, Idaho Falls, ID (United States); Suttora, L.C. [U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C. (United States); Quigley, K.D. [CH2M..WG Idaho, LLC, Idaho Falls, ID (United States); Stanisich, N. [Portage Environmental, Inc., Idaho Falls, ID (United States)

    2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Significant progress has been made at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Idaho National Laboratory (INL) to clean and close emptied 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 and cleaned in preparation of final closure. 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. In November 2006, three of the 113.5-kL (30,000-gal) tanks were filled with grout to provide long-term stability. It is currently planned that all seven cleaned 1,135.6-kL (300,000-gal) tanks, as well as the four 113.5-kL (30,000-gal) tanks and all associated tank vaults and interconnecting piping, will be stabilized with grout as early as 2008. (authors)

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2006-01-30T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  1. Permanent Closure of MFC Biodiesel Underground Storage Tank 99ANL00013

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kerry L. Nisson

    2012-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.”

  2. TANK SPACE ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORT

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2010-04-27T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    N /A

    2002-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jolly, R

    2009-01-06T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Quigley, K.D.; Wessman, D

    2003-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2002-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  7. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011AT&T,Office of Policy,Policy ActDetroit7471Site-Wide Environmental91 Draft Tank

  8. Savannah River Site Celebrates Historic Closure of Radioactive Waste Tanks:

    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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial602 1,397 125Energy ServicesReportingWaste Management » TankSenior

  9. An Overview Comparison of Tank Closure Activities at Certain DOE Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    LUKE, J.J.

    2003-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Becker, D.L.

    1998-09-02T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  11. Design Alternative Evaluation No. 3: Post-Closure Ventilation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Logan, R.C.

    1999-06-22T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2009-01-21T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Harbour, John, R.

    2005-04-28T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2008-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

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

    fiscal year 2013, which ended Sept. 30, SRR reached contract milestones in the Interim Salt Disposition Process, which treats salt waste from the underground storage tanks. Salt...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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)

  17. 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.

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

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

    of radioactive and chemical waste. The hole is the largest cut into an active DOE radioactive waste storage tank and provides access for the largest robotic arm (the AMS)...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jolly, R; Bruce Martin, B

    2008-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Alfred Wickline

    2009-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Evans, Susan Kay; unknown

    2000-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  2. EIS-0303: Savannah River Site High-Level Waste Tank Closure

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This EIS evaluates alternatives for closing 49 high-level radioactive waste tanks and associated equipment such as evaporator systems, transfer pipelines, diversion boxes, and pump pits. DOE...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1998-10-05T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bamberger, Judith A.; Burks, Barry L.; Quigley, Keith D.; Butterworth, S. W.; Falter, Diedre D.

    2001-09-28T23:59:59.000Z

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

  6. Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 135: Areas 25 Underground Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    D. H. Cox

    2001-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 135, Area 25 Underground Storage Tanks, was closed in accordance with the approved Corrective Action Plan (DOE/NV, 2000). CAU 135 consists of three Corrective Action Sites (CAS). Two of these CAS's were identified in the Corrective Action Investigation Data Quality Objective meeting as being improperly identified as underground storage tanks. CAS 25-02-03 identified as the Deluge Valve Pit was actually an underground electrical vault and CAS 25-02-10 identified as an Underground Storage Tank was actually a former above ground storage tank filled with demineralized water. Both of these CAS's are recommended for a no further action closure. CAS 25-02-01 the Underground Storage Tanks commonly referred to as the Engine Maintenance Assembly and Disassembly Waste Holdup Tanks and Vault was closed by decontaminating the vault structure and conducting a radiological verification survey to document compliance with the Nevada Test Site unrestricted use release criteria. The Area 25 Underground Storage Tanks, (CAS 25-02-01), referred to as the Engine Maintenance, Assembly, and Disassembly (E-MAD) Waste Holdup Tanks and Vault, were used to receive liquid waste from all of the radioactive and cell service area drains at the E-MAD Facility. Based on the results of the Corrective Action Investigation conducted in June 1999, discussed in ''The Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 135: Area 25 Underground Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada'' (DOE/NV, 199a), one sample from the radiological survey of the concrete vault interior exceeded radionuclide preliminary action levels. The analytes from the sediment samples exceeded the preliminary action levels for polychlorinated biphenyls, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act metals, total petroleum hydrocarbons as diesel-range organics, and radionuclides. The CAU 135 closure activities consisted of scabbling radiological ''hot spots'' from the concrete vault, and the drilling removal of the cement-lined vault sump. Field activities began on November 28, 2000, and ended on December 4, 2000. After verification samples were collected, the vault was repaired with cement. The concrete vault sump, soil excavated beneath the sump, and compactable hot line trash were disposed at the Area 23 Sanitary Landfill. The vault interior was field surveyed following the removal of waste to verify that unrestricted release criteria had been achieved. Since the site is closed by unrestricted release decontamination and verification, post-closure care is not required.

  7. 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 onYouTube YouTube Note: Since the.pdfBreaking ofOil & Gas » Methane HydrateEnergyIs a Small WindImpact Statement

  8. 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 DataDepartment of Energy Your Density Isn'tOriginEducationVideo »UsageSecretary of Energy Advisory Board Follow UpResearchDepartment of

  9. EBR-II Primary Tank Wash-Water Alternatives Evaluation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2008-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    K. Winterholler

    2007-01-30T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  11. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What's PossibleRadiation Protection245C Unlimited ReleaseWelcome ton n u a l rProgramEducationEnergy

  12. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic2 OPAM615_CostNSAR - TProcuring Solar for FederalProgram

  13. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742Energy Chinaof Energy operate,DepartmentDepartment ofnoticeAsThe

  14. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC)Integrated Codes |Is Your Home as Ready for(SC)Joint Genome Institute (JGI)

  15. 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)

    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

    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)

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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)

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    S. K. Evans

    2006-08-15T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  18. AX Tank Farm tank removal study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    SKELLY, W.A.

    1999-02-24T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  19. 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)

    Winterholler, K.

    2007-01-31T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Alfred Wickline

    2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  1. Field Sampling 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)

    Evans, S.K.

    2002-01-31T23:59:59.000Z

    This Field Sampling 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 sampling design, required analyses, and sample collection and handling procedures, is to be used in conjunction with the Quality Assurance Project Plan for the HWMA/RCRA Closure Certification of the TRA-731 Caustic and Acid Storage Tank System.

  2. Field Sampling 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)

    Evans, Susan Kay; Orchard, B. J.

    2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Field Sampling 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 sampling design, required analyses, and sample collection and handling procedures, is to be used in conjunction with the Quality Assurance Project Plan for the HWMA/RCRA Closure Certification of the TRA-731 Caustic and Acid Storage Tank System.

  3. 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)

    Evans, S.K.

    2002-01-31T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  4. 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)

    Evans, Susan Kay; Orchard, B. J.

    2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cooke, Gary A.; Pestovich, John A.

    2013-06-12T23:59:59.000Z

    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).

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Langton, C.A.

    2000-08-11T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Badden, Janet W. [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

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HOLM MJ

    2009-06-25T23:59:59.000Z

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

  9. Environmental Assessment for the Closure of the High-Level Waste Tanks in F- & H-Areas at the Savannah River Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    N /A

    1996-07-31T23:59:59.000Z

    This Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared by the Department of Energy (DOE) to assess the potential environmental impacts associated with the closure of 51 high-level radioactive waste tanks and tank farm ancillary equipment (including transfer lines, evaporators, filters, pumps, etc) at the Savannah River Site (SRS) located near Aiken, South Carolina. The waste tanks are located in the F- and H-Areas of SRS and vary in capacity from 2,839,059 liters (750,000 gallons) to 4,921,035 liters (1,300,000 gallons). These in-ground tanks are surrounded by soil to provide shielding. The F- and H-Area High-Level Waste Tanks are operated under the authority of Industrial Wastewater Permits No.17,424-IW; No.14520, and No.14338 issued by the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC). In accordance with the Permit requirements, DOE has prepared a Closure Plan (DOE, 1996) and submitted it to SCDHEC for approval. The Closure Plan identifies all applicable or relevant and appropriate regulations, statutes, and DOE Orders for closing systems operated under the Industrial Wastewater Permits. When approved by SCDHEC, the Closure Plan will present the regulatory process for closing all of the F- and H-Area High Level Waste Tanks. The Closure Plan establishes performance objectives or criteria to be met prior to closing any tank, group of tanks, or ancillary tank farm equipment. The proposed action is to remove the residual wastes from the tanks and to fill the tanks with a material to prevent future collapse and bind up residual waste, to lower human health risks, and to increase safety in and around the tanks. If required, an engineered cap consisting of clay, backfill (soil), and vegetation as the final layer to prevent erosion would be applied over the tanks. The selection of tank system closure method will be evaluated against the following Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) criteria described in 40 CFR 300.430(e)(9): ( 1) overall protection of human health and the environment; (2) compliance with applicable or relevant and appropriated requirement: (ARARs); (3) long-term effectiveness and permanence; (4) reduction of toxicity, mobility, or volume through treatment; (5) short-term effectiveness; (6) implementability; (7) cost; (8) state acceptable; and (9) community acceptance. Closure of each tank involves two separate operations after bulk waste removal has been accomplished: (1) cleaning of the tank (i.e., removing the residual contaminants), and (2) the actual closure or filling of the tank with an inert material, (e.g., grout). This process would continue until all the tanks and ancillary equipment and systems have been closed. This is expected to be about year 2028 for Type I, II, and IV tanks and associated systems. Subsequent to that, Type III tanks and systems will be closed.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barnett, D.B.

    1996-09-27T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1994-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  12. 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)

    NONE

    1998-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2002-02-25T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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.

  15. D and D (System Closure) Mockup Testing Demonstration. Remediation of Legacy Radioactive Piping and Tank Systems at the Reactor Technology Complex (RTC) (2007)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Byrne-Kelly, D.; Brown, Ch.; Hart, A. [MSE Technology Applications, Inc., Butte, Montana (United States); Welty, B. [Portage, Inc., Idaho Falls, ID (United States); Winterholler, K. [CWI, Idaho Falls, ID (United States)

    2008-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This paper presents the results of an integrated mockup demonstration of technologies and equipment designed to remove radioactively contaminated piping systems from underground vaults and pipe trenches at the Idaho National Laboratory. The integrated mockup demonstration included performing a bench scale wax fixative study and field demonstrations of the remotely operated equipment that will be used to remove radioactively contaminated pipe systems. The bench-scale wax fixative study involved defining optimum temperature and moisture conditions for effectively filling pipe sections containing residual wastes with a wax based fixative. The field demonstrations involved dismantling underground vault and trench piping systems, including pipe sections filled with the wax fixative. The purpose of the demonstration was to ensure the selected technologies and equipment would be effective prior to field deployment. The demonstration was conducted as a joint effort by MSE Technology Applications, Inc., and CWI on behalf of the U.S. Department of Energy at the Mike Mansfield Advanced Technology Center in Butte Montana. In summary: The mockup included two main tests at the MSE facility: 1) a vault mockup that included stainless and carbon steel pipe cutting and removal; and 2) a trench mockup that included cutting and removing buried Duriron and ductile iron piping. Both mockups included cutting and removing a pipe filled with the WAXFIX stabilizing material. Based on the MSE moisture tests, project personnel concluded that the WAXFIX product would be effective when used on wastes with different moisture contents that may be encountered in piping systems during the closure of the TRA-630 Catch Tank System at INL. A section of stainless steel pipe was also used to test a number of leak stop alternatives for wax leaks that may be encountered in a degraded piping system. Both the vault and the trench mockup demonstration proved successful for ICP, DOE, and MSE. The ICP operators received valuable hands-on training using the selected equipment and tooling in situations very similar to what they will encounter at INL. Proper tool selection and tool change procedures were defined as situations requiring these operations were encountered. Methodologies for approaching similar trench and vault situations (including safety concerns) were identified and experienced, and wax filled pipes were successfully cut and removed without spilling the surrogate materials within the pipes. All of the tools performed well except the band saw tool. The band saw was specifically designed to cut pipe; however, it was not robust enough and generally the shear was used in its place. Mockups are essential in gaining actual hands on training before going to the field. Mockups improve efficiency and safety that results in cost effective remediation. The MSE facility provides a valuable resource for demonstration of mockups. The facility has several acres of available space and a highly qualified support staff. The integrated mockup demonstration was considered a great success by all involved parties. ICP operators received valuable experience using the equipment selected for catch tank system closure before field deployment in a radiological contaminated environment. The selected equipment proved to be applicable to the safe and effective closure of the catch tank systems, and MSE demonstrated the ability to provide facility and services necessary to support closure mockup demonstrations. (authors)

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1994-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    SEDERBURG, J.P.

    1999-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  18. DOE Identifies its Preferred Alternative for Certain Hanford Tank Wastes |

    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 DataDepartment of Energy Your Density Isn't Your Destiny: Theof"Wave theJulyD&DDepartment of Energy Identifies its Preferred

  19. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOE Office511041cloth DocumentationProductsAlternative Fuels CleanReduceNewPropane Printable Version

  20. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625govInstrumentstdmadapInactiveVisiting the TWP TWP RelatedCellulase C.Tier 2North

  1. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTaking

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

    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 onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov You are being directed offOCHCO2: FinalOffers3.pdf0-45.pdf0 BudgetGoals andSenate | DepartmentGroundwater

  3. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613PortsmouthBartlesvilleAbout »Department of Energy Safety and

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

    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 onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov You are being directed offOCHCO Overview OCHCO Overview OCHCODepartmentEnergy AprilEnvironmentalRecommendations:

  5. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTaking AdvantageTandeep

  6. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTaking AdvantageTandeepB

  7. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTaking AdvantageTandeepBD-1

  8. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTaking AdvantageTandeepBD-1E-1

  9. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTaking AdvantageTandeepBD-1E-1

  10. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX H

  11. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX H APPENDIX I

  12. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX H APPENDIX

  13. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX H APPENDIXK-1

  14. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX H

  15. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX HP-1 APPENDIX

  16. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX HP-1

  17. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX HP-1R-1

  18. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX HP-1R-1

  19. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX HP-1R-1T-1

  20. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX HP-1R-1T-11

  1. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX HP-1R-1T-111

  2. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX

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

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

    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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX-1 CHAPTER 10

  4. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX-1 CHAPTER

  5. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX-1 CHAPTER-1

  6. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX-1 CHAPTER-1-1

  7. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX-1

  8. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX-14-1 Dates

  9. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX-14-1

  10. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX-14-1for the

  11. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX-14-1for the-1

  12. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX-14-1for

  13. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX-14-1for-1

  14. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1 APPENDIX-14-1for-1-1

  15. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1

  16. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1Reader's Guide U.S.

  17. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1Reader's Guide U.S.1

  18. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1Reader's Guide U.S.12

  19. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1Reader's Guide U.S.12 3

  20. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1Reader's Guide U.S.12

  1. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1Reader's Guide

  2. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1Reader's GuideCover

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

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

    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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1Reader's GuideCover

  4. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1Reader's GuideCover for

  5. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1Reader's GuideCover for

  6. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over Our InstagramStructureProposedPAGESafety Tag: SafetyTakingH-1Reader's GuideCover

  7. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOE Office of ScienceandMesa del SolStrengthening a solidSynthesis of 2D AlloysTrails Taking CareNEPA -

  8. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOE Office of ScienceandMesa del SolStrengthening a solidSynthesis of 2D AlloysTrails Taking CareNEPA

  9. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOEThe Bonneville Power AdministrationField Campaign:INEA : Papers69Christopher FeckoDraftDraft For-ProfitCommittee

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Badden, Janet W.; Connelly, Michael P. [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

    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)

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Alfred Wickline

    2009-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  12. Closure report: Nevada Test Site Underground Storage Tank (UST) number 25-3123-1: Nevada Division of Emergency Management case number H940825D corrective action unit 450

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document has been prepared as a final closure report documenting the assessment and corrective actions taken for the petroleum hydrocarbon release associated with underground storage tank (UST) UST25-3123-1. UST25-3123-1 was located at Area 25 within the Nevada Test Site. The UST was identified as abandoned to be closed under the U.S. Department of Energy/Nevada Operations Office Environmental Restoration Division Program during Fiscal Year 1994. The scope of work for closure of the UST included evaluating site conditions and closing the tank in accordance with all applicable regulations. Site evaluation analytic results of a soil sample collected below the tank showed a diesel concentration of 120 mg/kg at a depth of 3 meters. During remedial excavation, approximately 3.8 cubic meters of hydrocarbon impacted soil was removed. Laboratory analysis of the soil sample collected from the excavation bottom confirms that total petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations greater than 100 mg/kg are no longer present. Therefore, it is requested that the site be closed without further action. 4 refs., 2 figs., 3 tabs.

  13. 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)

    Denham, M.; Millings, M.

    2012-08-28T23:59:59.000Z

    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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    WODRICH, D.D.

    2000-03-24T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Krogstad, Eirik J.

    2013-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1998-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  17. REVIEW OF ALTERNATIVE ENHANCED CHEMICAL CLEANING OPTIONS FOR SRS WASTE TANKS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hay, M.; Koopman, D.

    2009-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1994-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    WILLIS, W.L.

    2000-06-15T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  20. 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,...

  1. AX Tank Farm tank removal study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    SKELLY, W.A.

    1998-10-14T23:59:59.000Z

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

  2. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over OurThe Iron Spin Transition in2, 2003Tool ofTopoCarbon| DepartmentTransitioning

  3. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011AT&T, Inc.'s ReplyApplication ofTribal Renewable EnergyFuellSRS-WD-2012-001 Revision 0

  4. Draft 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011AT&T,Office of Policy,Policy ActDetroit7471 FederalDonnaDraft

  5. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOEThe Bonneville Power AdministrationField8,Dist.New Mexico Feb.Information 91,Security Complex | National

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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.

  7. Single-shell tank retrieval program mission analysis report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stokes, W.J.

    1998-08-11T23:59:59.000Z

    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).

  8. Tanks Focus Area Alternative Salt Processing Research and Development Program Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Harmon, Harry D.

    2000-11-30T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  9. Tanks Focus Area Alternative Salt Processing Research and Development Program Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Harmon, Harry D.

    2000-05-15T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  10. 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)

    Grant Evenson

    2009-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  11. 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)

    Grant Evenson

    2009-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  12. 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)

    M.E. Davis

    2007-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1994-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  14. Alternatives Generation and Analysis for Phase 1 High Level Waste Feed Tanks Selection

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    CRAWFORD, T.W.

    1999-08-16T23:59:59.000Z

    A recent revision of the US. Department of Energy privatization contract for the immobilization of high-level waste (HLW) at Hanford necessitates the investigation of alternative waste feed sources to meet contractual feed requirements. This analysis identifies wastes to be considered as HLW feeds and develops and conducts alternative analyses to comply with established criteria. A total of 12,426 cases involving 72 waste streams are evaluated and ranked in three cost-based alternative models. Additional programmatic criteria are assessed against leading alternative options to yield an optimum blended waste feed stream.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1995-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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)

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    JARAYSI, M.N.

    2007-01-08T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  19. Controlling landfill closure costs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Millspaugh, M.P.; Ammerman, T.A. [Spectra Engineering, Latham, NY (United States)

    1995-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Landfill closure projects are significant undertakings typically costing well over $100,000/acre. Innovative designs, use of alternative grading and cover materials, and strong project management will substantially reduce the financial impact of a landfill closure project. This paper examines and evaluates the various elements of landfill closure projects and presents various measures which can be employed to reduce costs. Control measures evaluated include: the beneficial utilization of alternative materials such as coal ash, cement kiln dust, paper mill by-product, construction surplus soils, construction debris, and waste water treatment sludge; the appropriate application of Mandate Relief Variances to municipal landfill closures for reduced cover system requirements and reduced long-term post closure monitoring requirements; equivalent design opportunities; procurement of consulting and contractor services to maximize project value; long-term monitoring strategies; and grant loan programs. An analysis of closure costs under differing assumed closure designs based upon recently obtained bid data in New York State, is also provided as a means for presenting the potential savings which can be realized.

  20. TANK 5 SAMPLING

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Vrettos, N; William Cheng, W; Thomas Nance, T

    2007-11-26T23:59:59.000Z

    Tank 5 at the Savannah River Site has been used to store high level waste and is currently undergoing waste removal processes in preparation for tank closure. Samples were taken from two locations to determine the contents in support of Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) development for chemical cleaning. These samples were obtained through the use of the Drop Core Sampler and the Snowbank Sampler developed by the Engineered Equipment & Systems (EES) group of the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL).

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1992-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Denham, M.

    2012-02-29T23:59:59.000Z

    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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2007-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Swanson, J.L.

    1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2007-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  6. 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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2002-02-25T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  8. Evaluation of West Valley High-Level Waste Tank Lay-up Strategies

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mcclure, Lloyd W.; Henderson, J C.; Elmore, Monte R.

    2002-06-28T23:59:59.000Z

    The primary objective of this task 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 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 West Valley should also be considered for implementation at the other sites. Each site has unique characteristics that would require unique considerations for lay-up.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Martino, C.; King, W.

    2011-08-22T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2008-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  11. Tanks focus area. Annual report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Frey, J.

    1997-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    K. Winterholler

    2007-01-31T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    JARAYSI, M.N.

    2007-01-08T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    DOVALLE, O.R.

    1999-12-29T23:59:59.000Z

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

  15. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA group currentBradleyTableSelling Corp -KWatertown Arsenal'.I Y.it ! ( , .

  16. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA group currentBradleyTableSelling Corp -KWatertown Arsenal'.I Y.it ! ( ,

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1998-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  18. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA group currentBradleyTableSelling7111A Lithologic andRECORD OF DECISION:L ,_ -*

  19. 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

  20. Post-Closure Benefits: DOE Complex vs Closure Sites | Department...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Post-Closure Benefits: DOE Complex vs Closure Sites Status of Contractor Pension and PRB Benefit Programs - September 30, 2013 DOE Wide Closure Sites Defined Benefit Pension...

  1. Closure Sites | Department of Energy

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov You are being directed offOCHCO OverviewAttachments4 Chairs Meeting - AprilEvents CleanSeattle, WAClosingClosure Sites

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lenseigne, D. L.

    1997-09-15T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  3. CLOSURE REPORT FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION UNIT 214: BUNKERS AND STORAGE AREAS NEVADA TEST SITE, NEVADA

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    2006-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The purpose of this Closure Report is to document that the closure of CAU 214 complied with the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection-approved Corrective Action Plan closure requirements. The closure activities specified in the Corrective Action Plan were based on the approved corrective action alternatives presented in the CAU 214 Corrective Action Decision Document.

  4. Object Closure Conversion * Neal Glew

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Glew, Neal

    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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2002-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  6. Closure for Jason Frank

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Wirosoetisno, Djoko

    Closure for HPM Onno Bokhove & Jason Frank Introduction Hamiltonian Parcel Vlasov Dynamics.leeds.ac.uk/~obokhove/ & http://www.staff.science.uu.nl/~frank011/ December 9, 2013 #12;Closure for HPM Onno Bokhove & Jason References #12;Closure for HPM Onno Bokhove & Jason Frank Introduction Hamiltonian Parcel Vlasov Dynamics

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2012-01-10T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  8. Legislation pertaining to underground storage tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Goth, W. (Ventura County Environmental Health Division, CA (United States))

    1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Statutory authority in California for cleanup of contaminated soil and groundwater to protect water quality is the Porter Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Water Code 1967). Two state laws regulating underground hazardous material storage tanks, passed in late 1983 and effective on January 1, 1984, were AB-2013 (Cortese) and AB-1362 (Sher). Both require specific actions by the tank owners. AB-2013 requires all tank owners to register them with the state Water Resources Control Board (SWCB) and to pay a registration fee. AB-1362, Health and Safety Code Section 25280 et seq., requires tank owners to obtain a Permit to Operate, pay a fee to the local agency, and to install a leak detection system on all existing tanks. New tanks installation requires a Permit to install and provide provide secondary containment for the tank and piping. For tank closures, a permit must be obtained from the local agency to clean out the tank, remove it from the ground, and collect samples from beneath the tank for evidence of contamination. In 1988, state law AB-853 appropriated state funds to be combined with federal EPA money to allow SWRCB to initiate rapid cleanups of leaks from underground tank sites by contracting with local agencies to oversee assessment and cleanup of underground tank releases. Locally, in Ventura County, there are more than 400 leaking underground tank sites in which petroleum products have entered the groundwater. To date, no public water supplies have been contaminated; however, action in necessary to prevent any future contamination to our water supply. Over 250 leaking tank sites have completed cleanup.

  9. Post-Closure Benefits | 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What's Possible forPortsmouth/Paducah Project Office Press ReleasesPost-Closure Benefits Post-Closure

  10. Corrective Action Decision Document for Corrective Action Unit 135: Area 25 Underground Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office

    1999-12-23T23:59:59.000Z

    This corrective action decision document identifies and rationalizes the US Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office's selection of a recommended corrective action alternative (CAA) appropriate to facilitate the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 135, Area 25 Underground Storage Tanks, under the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order. Located on the Nevada Test Site (NTS), CAU 135 consists of three Corrective Action Sites (CASs): 25-02-01, Underground Storage Tanks, referred to as the Engine, Maintenance, Assembly, and Disassembly Waste Holdup Tanks and Vault; 25-02-03, Underground Electrical Vault, referred to as the Deluge Valve Pit at the Test Cell A Facility; and 25-02-10, Underground Storage Tank, referred to as the former location of an aboveground storage tank for demineralized water at the Test Cell A Facility. Two of these CASs (25-02-03 and 25-02-10) were originally considered as underground storage tanks, but were found to be misidentified. Further, radio logical surveys conducted by Bechtel Nevada in January 1999 found no radiological contamination detected above background levels for these two sites; therefore, the closure report for CAU 135 will recommend no further action at these two sites. A corrective action investigation for the one remaining CAS (25-02-01) was conducted in June 1999, and analytes detected during this investigation were evaluated against preliminary action levels. It was determined that contaminants of potential concern included polychlorinated biphenyls, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act metals, total petroleum hydrocarbons as diesel-range organics, and radionuclides. Two corrective action objectives were identified for this CAS (i.e., prevention and mitigation of human exposure to sediments and surrounding areas), and subsequently two CAAs developed for consideration based on a review of existing data, future use, and current operations at the NTS. These CAAs were: Alternative 1 - No Further Action, and Alternative 2 - Unrestricted Release Decontamination and Verification Survey. Alternative 2 was chosen as the preferred CAA, after evaluation of technical merit which focused on performance, reliability, feasibility, and safety. This alternative was judged to meet all applicable state and federal regulations for closure of the site and reduces the potential future exposure pathways to the contaminated surfaces at this site.

  11. Hanford Tanks Initiative fiscal year 1997 retrieval technology demonstrations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Berglin, E.J.

    1998-02-05T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  12. Industrial engineering study of tank farm access qualifications and validations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sterling, S.G., Westinghouse Hanford

    1996-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Engineering study of alternatives to reduce costs of validation worker`s qualification prior to Tank Farm area access.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BECHTEL NEVADA

    2006-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  14. Tank Mania!

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    2015-02-09T23:59:59.000Z

    (4) In an oil refinery, a storage tank contains 2000 gal of gasoline that initially has 100 ... In preparation for winter weather, gasoline containing 2lb of additive per ...

  15. Technology Successes in Hanford Tank Waste Storage and Retrieval

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cruz, E. J.

    2002-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

    The U. S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of River Protection (ORP) is leading the River Protection Project (RPP), which is responsible for dispositioning approximately 204,000 cubic meters (54 million gallons) of high-level radioactive waste that has accumulated in 177 large underground tanks at the Hanford Site since 1944. The RPP is comprised of five major elements: storage of the waste, retrieval of the waste from the tanks, treatment of the waste, disposal of treated waste, and closure of the tank facilities. Approximately 3785 cubic meters (1 million gallons) of waste have leaked from the older ''single-shell tanks.'' Sixty-seven of the 147 single shell tanks are known or assumed ''leakers.'' These leaks have resulted in contaminant plumes that extend from the tank to the groundwater in a number of tank farms. Retrieval and closure of the leaking tanks complicates the ORP technical challenge because cleanup decisions must consider the impacts of past leaks along with a strategy for retrieving the waste in the tanks. Completing the RPP mission as currently planned and with currently available technologies will take several decades and tens of billions of dollars. RPP continue to pursue the benefits from deploying technologies that reduce risk to human health and the environment, as well as, the cost of cleanup. This paper discusses some of the recent technology partnering activities with the DOE Office of Science and Technology activities in tank waste retrieval and storage.

  16. Tanks focus area multiyear program plan FY97-FY99

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  17. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic2 OPAM Flash2011-12Approvedof6,Projects38, 1) AgendaMemoAugustU.S Department of

  18. Dual Tank Fuel System

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

    1999-11-16T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  19. Alternative Fuels Data Center

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

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    LUKE, S.N.

    1999-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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).

  1. Tank 241-S-111: Tank characterization plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Homi, C.S.

    1995-03-07T23:59:59.000Z

    This document is a plan which serves as the contractual agreement between the Characterization Program, Sampling Operations, ORNL, and PNL tank vapor program. Scope of this plan is to provide guidance for sampling and analysis of vapor samples from tank 241-S-111 (this tank is on the organic and flammable gas watch list). This tank received Redox plant waste, among other wastes.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2009-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2005-06-03T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  4. Tank waste remediation system dangerous waste training plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    POHTO, R.E.

    1999-05-13T23:59:59.000Z

    This document outlines the dangerous waste training program developed and implemented for all Treatment, Storage, and Disposal (TSD) Units operated by Lockheed Martin Hanford Corporation (LMHC) Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) in the Hanford 200 East, 200 West and 600 Areas and the <90 Day Accumulation Area at 209E. Operating TSD Units operated by TWRS are: the Double-Shell Tank (DST) System (including 204-AR Waste Transfer Building), the 600 Area Purgewater Storage and the Effluent Treatment Facility. TSD Units undergoing closure are: the Single-Shell Tank (SST) System, 207-A South Retention Basin, and the 216-B-63 Trench.

  5. Chemical Stabilization of Hanford Tank Residual Waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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.

  6. Hanford Tanks Initiative quality assurance implementation plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Huston, J.J.

    1998-06-23T23:59:59.000Z

    Hanford Tanks Initiative (HTI) Quality Assurance Implementation Plan for Nuclear Facilities defines the controls for the products and activities developed by HTI. Project Hanford Management Contract (PHMC) Quality Assurance Program Description (QAPD)(HNF-PRO599) is the document that defines the quality requirements for Nuclear Facilities. The QAPD provides direction for compliance to 10 CFR 830.120 Nuclear Safety Management, Quality Assurance Requirements. Hanford Tanks Initiative (HTI) is a five-year activity resulting from the technical and financial partnership of the US Department of Energy`s Office of Waste Management (EM-30), and Office of Science and Technology Development (EM-50). HTI will develop and demonstrate technologies and processes for characterization and retrieval of single shell tank waste. Activities and products associated with HTI consist of engineering, construction, procurement, closure, retrieval, characterization, and safety and licensing.

  7. Calcined solids storage facility closure study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1998-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  8. Tanks Focus Area FY98 midyear technical review

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1998-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  9. Preliminary characterization of abandoned septic tank systems. Volume 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  10. OXALATE MASS BALANCE DURING CHEMICAL CLEANING IN TANK 6F

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Poirier, M.; Fink, S.

    2011-07-22T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  11. Object Closure Conversion Cornell University

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Glew, Neal

    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

  12. 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;

  13. WASTE PACKAGE OPERATIONS FY99 CLOSURE METHODS REPORT

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    M. C. Knapp

    1999-09-23T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jerry Bonn

    1997-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

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

    cumulative effects analysis focuses on what is needed to ensure long-term productivity or sustainability of the resource. In Recommendations for the Preparation of Environmental...

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

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

    for Source Categories 40 CFR 63 Washington Clean Air Act RCW 70.94 Washington State Air Pollution Control Regulations WAC 173-400 through 173-495 -Ambient Air Quality...

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

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

    disturbed land areas and revegetate land as soon as possible. Incorporate best available air pollution control technologies into design of new facilities. Use containment...

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

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

    decommissioning; waste proposed for disposal at IDF-East, IDF-West, and the RPPDF; and contamination in place at cumulative analysis sites. In reviewing constituents at a given...

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

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

    radioactive or chemical constituents of potential concern (COPCs) above de minimis contamination levels. Approximately 403 sites were identified as sites expected to contain...

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

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

    special components (RH-SCs); and to manage the disposition of the Hanford inventory of radioactively contaminated bulk sodium from FFTF, as well as other onsite...

  1. 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...

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

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

    should be less than 5 meters (16.4 feet), approximately 10 percent of the gradient in the water table elevation. The residual distribution should meet the needs of this TC & WM...

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

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

    Chapter 5 Long-Term Environmental Consequences 5-1163 5.3.3 Ecological Risk This section presents the results of the evaluation of long-term impacts on ecological resources of...

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

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

    the environmental impacts of construction and operation of a new facility at Hanford equivalent to the Remote Treatment Project (RTP) at INL. Response: This TC & WM EIS provides...

  5. 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...

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

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

    waste NEPA National Environmental Policy Act RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act RH-SC remote-handled special component ROD Record of Decision RPPDF River...

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

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

    factor, unitless Per the Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment Protocol for Hazardous Waste Combustion Facilities (EPA 1999), BAF-S values for organic chemical COPCs were...

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

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

    Washington, August. DOE (U.S. Department of Energy), 2006a, Environmental Assessment, Sodium Residuals ReactionRemoval and Other Deactivation Work Activities, Fast Flux Test...

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

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

    CWC's main buildings are shown in Figure 2-23, including Building 2403-WD, which has a radioactive waste storage capacity of 17,500 drums. Other structures include the...

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

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

    up. Sincerely, Chuck Cruise 105 sw 122nd st Seattle, WA 98146 A13-1 A13-1 Regarding the radioactive waste storage site's location relative to the Columbia River, the purpose of...

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

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

    Stewart Patrick Stickney Joan Stiehl John Stimatz Craig Stimson Karen Stingle Michael Stirling Heather Stites Ann Stockdale Cindy Stoddard Jeffrey Stoddard Wade Stoddard Anna Stone...

  12. ROBOTIC TANK INSPECTION END EFFECTOR

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rachel Landry

    1999-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  13. HANFORD TANK CLEANUP UPDATE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BERRIOCHOA MV

    2011-04-07T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Freeman-Pollard, J.R.

    1994-03-02T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  15. Tank Waste Disposal Program redefinition

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Claghorn, R.D.

    1998-03-05T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  17. Tank characterization report: Tank 241-C-109

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  18. Tank Characterization Report for Single Shell Tank 241-C-104

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    ADAMS, M.R.

    2000-04-06T23:59:59.000Z

    Interprets information about the tank answering a series of six questions covering areas such as information drivers, tank history, tank comparisons, disposal implications, data quality and quantity, and unique aspects of the tank.

  19. Oxalate Mass Balance During Chemical Cleaning in Tank 5F

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Poirier, M.; Fink, S.

    2011-07-08T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  20. System for closure of a physical anomaly

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2014-11-11T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  1. 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...

  2. Tank 241-TY-101 Tank Characterization Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Homi, C.S.

    1995-03-20T23:59:59.000Z

    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-TY-101.

  3. Tank 241-SX-103 tank characterization plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Homi, C.S.

    1995-03-08T23:59:59.000Z

    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-SX-103.

  4. Tank 241-U-111 tank characterization plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Carpenter, B.C.

    1995-01-24T23:59:59.000Z

    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-U-111.

  5. Tank 241-T-107 tank characterization plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Homi, C.S.

    1995-01-05T23:59:59.000Z

    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-107.

  6. DIESEL FUEL TANK FOUNDATIONS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    M. Gomez

    1995-01-18T23:59:59.000Z

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

  7. HOOTS99 Preliminary Version Object Closure Conversion

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Glew, Neal

    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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Idaho Cleanup Project

    2009-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

    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

  9. Tank 241-B-103 tank characterization plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Carpenter, B.C. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

    1995-01-23T23:59:59.000Z

    The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) has advised the US Department of Energy (DOE) to concentrate the near-term sampling and analysis activities on identification and resolution of safety issues. The data quality objective (DQO) process was chosen as a tool to be used to identify sampling and analytical needs for the resolution of safety issues. As a result, a revision in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement or TPA) milestone M-44-00 has been made, which states that ``A Tank Characterization Plan (TCP) will also be developed for each double-shell tank (DST) and single-shell tank (SST) using the DQO process... Development of TCPs by the DQO process is intended to allow users (e.g., Hanford Facility user groups, regulators) to ensure their needs will be met and that resources are devoted to gaining only necessary information.`` This document satisfies that requirement for Tank 241-B-103 (B-103) sampling activities. Tank B-103 was placed on the Organic Watch List in January 1991 due to review of TRAC data that predicts a TOC content of 3.3 dry weight percent. The tank was classified as an assumed leaker of approximately 30,280 liters (8,000 gallons) in 1978 and declared inactive. Tank B-103 is passively ventilated with interim stabilization and intrusion prevention measures completed in 1985.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2013-03-27T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  11. SLUDGE BATCH 7 PREPARATION TANK 4 AND 12 CHARACTERIZATION

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2010-05-21T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  12. Tank waste remediation system operational scenario

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Johnson, M.E.

    1995-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) mission is to store, treat, and immobilize highly radioactive Hanford waste (current and future tank waste and the strontium and cesium capsules) in an environmentally sound, safe, and cost-effective manner (DOE 1993). This operational scenario is a description of the facilities that are necessary to remediate the Hanford Site tank wastes. The TWRS Program is developing technologies, conducting engineering analyses, and preparing for design and construction of facilities necessary to remediate the Hanford Site tank wastes. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is being prepared to evaluate proposed actions of the TWRS. This operational scenario is only one of many plausible scenarios that would result from the completion of TWRS technology development, engineering analyses, design and construction activities and the TWRS EIS. This operational scenario will be updated as the development of the TWRS proceeds and will be used as a benchmark by which to evaluate alternative scenarios.

  13. Closure report for N Reactor

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  14. HLW Tank Space Management, Final Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Miller, M.S.; Abell, G.; Garrett, R.; d'Entremont, P.; Fowler, J.R.; Mahoney, M.; Poe, L.

    1999-09-20T23:59:59.000Z

    The HLW Tank Space Management Team (SM Team) was chartered to select and recommend an HLW Tank Space Management Strategy (Strategy) for the HLW Management Division of Westinghouse Savannah River Co. (WSRC) until an alternative salt disposition process is operational. Because the alternative salt disposition process will not be available to remove soluble radionuclides in HLW until 2009, the selected Strategy must assure that it safely receives and stores HLW at least until 2009 while continuing to supply sludge slurry to the DWPF vitrification process.

  15. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA Approved:AdministrationAnalysisDarby/%2AO 474.2 Chg 1KANSAS CITY FIELD

  16. Draft Closure Plan

    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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic Plan Department ofNotices | Department of Energy 29DepartmentNatural

  17. Draft Closure Plan

    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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic Plan Department ofNotices | Department of Energy 29DepartmentNatural8

  18. Draft Closure Plan

    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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic Plan Department ofNotices | Department of Energy 29DepartmentNatural89

  19. Draft Closure Plan

    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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic Plan Department ofNotices | Department of Energy 29DepartmentNatural890

  20. Draft Closure Plan

    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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic Plan Department ofNotices | Department of Energy 29DepartmentNatural8902

  1. Draft Closure Plan

    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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic Plan Department ofNotices | Department of Energy 29DepartmentNatural89026

  2. Draft Closure Plan

    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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic Plan Department ofNotices | Department of Energy 29DepartmentNatural890261

  3. Draft Closure Plan

    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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic Plan Department ofNotices | Department of Energy 29DepartmentNatural890261

  4. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic2Uranium Transfer toSensor TechnologiesProjects | Department ofEnergySite

  5. Hanford tanks initiative plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McKinney, K.E.

    1997-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2000-05-19T23:59:59.000Z

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

  7. SAFETY EVALUATION OF THE SINGLE SHELL TANKS (SST) MODIFIED SLUICING WASTE RETRIEVAL SYSTEM

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    SMITH, R.D.

    2005-03-21T23:59:59.000Z

    The purpose of this safety evaluation is to determine if the potential risk associated with using the single-shell tank (SST) modified sluicing system for retrieval of the 100-series SSTs in the tank farms is adequately addressed and bounded by the current tank farms safety basis (documented safety analysis [DSA]) and to determine if additional controls may be required. This safety evaluation also supports the requirement to perform a generic safety basis amendment for the retrieval of any additional SSTs (other than 241-S-112, and 241-U-107) by modified sluicing from the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of River Protection (ORP) Safety Evaluation Report (SER) 03-TED-066, ''Safety Evaluation Report (SER) for Approval of Justification for Continued Operation (JCO) for Tank Farms Single-Shell Tank (SST) Retrieval/Closure Modified Sluicing''.

  8. REMOTE AREA RADIATION MONITORING (RARM) ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NELSON RL

    2008-07-18T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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)

  10. TFA Tank Focus Area - multiyear program plan FY98-FY00

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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).

  11. TFA Tanks Focus Area Multiyear Program Plan FY00-FY04

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1999-10-12T23:59:59.000Z

    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).

  12. Pressurizer tank upper support

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

    1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  13. Pressurizer tank upper support

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

    1994-01-11T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  14. West Coast Port Closure Enforcement Policy | Department of Energy

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742Energy China 2015ofDepartment of EnergyThe U.S. Department ofFebruary 27, 2015 Closures at 29

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  16. Cementitious Grout for Closing SRS High Level Waste Tanks - 12315

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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

  17. 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 onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov You are beingZealand Jump to: navigation, search OpenEIHesperia,IDGWP Wind Farm Jump to:ILab IncubatorISESpursIbIberiaTank

  18. Lakefront 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 onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov You are beingZealand Jump to: navigation, searchOf Kilauea Volcano,Lakefront Tow Tank Jump to: navigation, search Basic

  19. Davidson Laboratory 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 onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov You are beingZealand JumpConceptual Model,DOE Facility Database DataDatatechnic International SA JumpLaboratory Tow Tank

  20. Carderock Tow Tank 1 | 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 onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov You are being directedAnnualProperty EditCalifornia:Power LPInformation 8thCalwind IICaneyNW1CirculatingArm Tow Tank

  1. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOE Office of ScienceandMesa del SolStrengthening a solidSynthesis of 2D AlloysTrails TakingR Vi4800TankHanford

  2. Kinetic Modeling and Thermodynamic Closure Approximation of ...

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    2007-10-03T23:59:59.000Z

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

  3. CHARACTERIZATION OF SAMPLES FROM TANK 16H ANNULUS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hay, M

    2008-05-22T23:59:59.000Z

    In support of the closure of Tank 16H, the remaining waste material in the tank annulus must be removed. Samples of the waste material from Tank 16H annulus were obtained and sent to Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) to determine the chemical and radiochemical composition prior to further waste removal. The three samples obtained from the Tank 16H annulus show some similarity as to the types of mineral phases present in the materials but differ in the relative amounts of each phase present. The samples from outside the dehumidification duct at two locations in the annulus show very different compositions and estimated solubility in water. This indicates the waste material in Tank 16H annulus may have a wide range of compositions at different locations. The table below provides a simplified description of the composition of each sample. The limited characterization techniques conducted and the complex mixture of materials in each sample makes assigning a definitive composition for each sample difficult. Given the variability in composition with just the three small samples characterized, a more detailed description of any single sample may be of limited value.

  4. Tank 48 - Chemical Destruction

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2013-01-09T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  5. The Ashland tank collapse

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Prokop, J.

    1988-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  6. 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...

  7. 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...

  8. Preliminary assessment of blending Hanford tank wastes

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Geeting, J.G.H.; Kurath, D.E.

    1993-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A parametric study of blending Hanford tank wastes identified possible benefits from blending wastes prior to immobilization as a high level or low level waste form. Track Radioactive Components data were used as the basis for the single-shell tank (SST) waste composition, while analytical data were used for the double-shell tank (DST) composition. Limiting components were determined using the existing feed criteria for the Hanford Waste Vitrification Plant (HWVP) and the Grout Treatment Facility (GTF). Results have shown that blending can significantly increase waste loading and that the baseline quantities of immobilized waste projected for the sludge-wash pretreatment case may have been drastically underestimated, because critical components were not considered. Alternatively, the results suggest further review of the grout feed specifications and the solubility of minor components in HWVP borosilicate glass. Future immobilized waste estimates might be decreased substantially upon a thorough review of the appropriate feed specifications.

  9. HOOTS99 Preliminary Version Object Closure Conversion

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Glew, Neal

    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

  10. HOOTS99 Preliminary Version Object Closure Conversion

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Glew, Neal

    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

  11. Fourier's Law from Closure Equations

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Jean Bricmont; Antti Kupiainen

    2006-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    We give a rigorous derivation of Fourier's law from a system of closure equations for a nonequilibrium stationary state of a Hamiltonian system of coupled oscillators subjected to heat baths on the boundary. The local heat flux is proportional to the temperature gradient with a temperature dependent heat conductivity and the stationary temperature exhibits a nonlinear profile.

  12. Estimating Residual Solids Volume In Underground Storage Tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2014-01-08T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  13. 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)

    KIRK WINTERHOLLER

    2008-02-25T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  14. Rethinking the Hanford Tank Waste Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2002-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1988-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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)

  16. In-Tank Elutriation Test Report And Independent Assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2011-04-13T23:59:59.000Z

    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

  17. 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)

    NONE

    1996-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  18. Helium bubble distributions in reactor tank repair specimens

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tosten, M.H.; Kestin, P.A.

    1992-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report discusses the Reactor Tank Repair (RTR) program was initiated to develop an in-tank repair process capable of repairing stress corrosion cracks within the SRS reactor tank walls, in the event that such a repair is needed. Previous attempts to repair C-reactor tank with a gas tungsten arc (GTA) welding process were unsuccessful due to significant cracking that occurred in the heat-affected-zones adjacent to the repair welds. It was determined that this additional cracking was a result of helium embrittlement caused by the combined effects of helium (existing within the tank walls), the high heat input associated with the GTA process, and weld shrinkage stresses. Based on the results of earlier studies it was suggested that the effects of helium embrittlement could be minimized by using a low heat input GMA process. Metallographic analysis played an important role throughout the investigation of alternative welding methods for the repair of helium-containing materials.

  19. Material selection for Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Larrick, A.P.; Blackburn, L.D.; Brehm, W.F.; Carlos, W.C.; Hauptmann, J.P. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States); Danielson, M.J.; Westerman, R.E. [Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, WA (United States); Divine, J.R. [ChemMet Ltd., West Richland, WA (United States); Foster, G.M. [ICF Kaiser Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

    1995-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This paper briefly summarizes the history of the materials selection for the US Department of Energy`s high-level waste carbon steel storage tanks. It also provides an evaluation of the materials for the construction of new tanks at the evaluation of the materials for the construction of new tanks at the Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility. The evaluation included a materials matrix that summarized the critical design, fabrication, construction, and corrosion resistance requirements: assessed. each requirement: and cataloged the advantages and disadvantages of each material. This evaluation is based on the mission of the Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility. On the basis of the compositions of the wastes stored in Hanford waste tanks, it is recommended that tanks for the Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility be constructed of ASME SA 515, Grade 70, carbon steel.

  20. Single shell tank waste characterization for Tank 241-BX-101

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kocher, K.L.

    1994-08-10T23:59:59.000Z

    This document provides the characterization information and interprets the data for Double-Shell Tank AP-102.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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.

  2. TANK SPACE OPTIONS REPORT

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    WILLIS WL; AHRENDT MR

    2009-08-11T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  3. Tanks 18 And 19-F Structural Flowable Grout Fill Material Evaluation And Recommendations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2013-04-23T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    T. M. Fitzmaurice

    2001-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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).

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    FIELD, J.G.

    1999-02-02T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  6. Stratification in hot water tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Balcomb, J.D.

    1982-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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)

  7. Grout and glass performance in support of stabilization/solidification of ORNL tank sludges

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Spence, R.D.; Mattus, C.H.; Mattus, A.J.

    1998-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Wastewater at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is collected, evaporated, and stored in the Melton Valley Storage Tanks (MVST) and Bethel Valley Evaporator Storage Tanks (BVEST) pending treatment for disposal. In addition, some sludges and supernatants also requiring treatment remain in two inactive tank systems: the gunite and associated tanks (GAAT) and the old hydrofracture (OHF) tank. The waste consists of two phases: sludge and supernatant. The sludges contain a high amount of radioactivity, and some are classified as TRU sludges. Some Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) metal concentrations are high enough to be defined as RCRA hazardous; therefore, these sludges are presumed to be mixed TRU waste. Grouting and vitrification are currently two likely stabilization/solidification alternatives for mixed wastes. Grouting has been used to stabilize/solidify hazardous and low-level radioactive waste for decades. Vitrification has been developed as a high-level radioactive alternative for decades and has been under development recently as an alternative disposal technology for mixed waste. The objective of this project is to define an envelope, or operating window, for grout and glass formulations for ORNL tank sludges. Formulations will be defined for the average composition of each of the major tank farms (BVEST/MVST, GAAT, and OHF) and for an overall average composition of all tank farms. This objective is to be accomplished using surrogates of the tank sludges with hot testing of actual tank sludges to check the efficacy of the surrogates.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stefanko, D.; Langton, C.

    2011-12-15T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  9. 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...

  10. Tank characterization report for Single-Shell Tank T-102

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Remund, K.M.; Hartley, S.A.; Toth, J.J.; Tingey, J.M.; Heasler, P.G.; Ryan, F.M.; Simpson, B.C.

    1994-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Tank 241-T-102 (hereafter referred to as T-102) is a 530,000 gallon single-shell waste tank located in the 200 West T Tank farm at the Hanford Site. In 1993, two cores were taken from this tank and analysis of the cores was conducted by Battelle`s 325-A Laboratory. Characterization of the waste in this tank was conducted to support Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) Milestone M-44-05. Tank T-102 was constructed in 1943 and put into service in 1945; it is the second tank in a cascade system with Tanks T-101 and T-103. During its process history, Tank T-102 received mostly Metal Waste (MW) from the Bismuth Phosphate Process and Coating Waste (CW) from the REDOX Process via the cascade from Tank T-101 and in transfers from Tank C-102. In 1956, the MW was removed from T-102 by pumping and sluicing`. This tank was declared inactive and retired from service in 1976. In 1981, intrusion prevention and stabilization measures were taken to isolate the waste in T-102. The tank presently contains approximately 121,100 liters (32,000 gallons) of liquid and sludge-like waste. Historically, there are no unreviewed safety issues associated with this tank and none were revealed after reviewing the data from the latest core sampling event in 1993. An extensive set of analytical measurements was performed on the core composites. The major constituents (>0.5 wt%) of the waste are water, aluminum, sodium, iron, and nitrate, ordered from the largest concentration to the smallest. The concentrations and inventories of these and other constituents are given. The results of the chemical analyses have been compared to the dangerous waste codes in the Washington Dangerous Waste Regulations (WAC 173-303).

  11. 100-D Ponds closure plan. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Petersen, S.W.

    1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  12. Summative Mass Closure: Laboratory Analytical Procedure (LAP...

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

    the appropriate combinations of LAPs allows for the summative mass closure of biomass feedstocks and process intermediates. By combining the appropriate LAPs, the goal is to...

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

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

    Notice of Violation, Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC - WEA-2012-04 Type B Accident Investigation At Washington Closure Hanford, LLC, Employee Fall Injury on July 1,...

  14. Remedial Action Work Plan Amchitka Island Mud Pit Closures

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    DOE/NV

    2001-04-05T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2006-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  16. Clamshell closure for metal drum

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Blanton, Paul S

    2014-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1996-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stefanko, D.; Langton, C.

    2011-11-04T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  19. ANALYSIS OF SAMPLES FROM TANK 5F CHEMICAL CLEANING

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Poirier, M.; Fink, S.

    2011-03-07T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  20. Transitional nuclei near shell closures

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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.

  3. Using closures for code generation Marc Feeley

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Feeley, Marc

    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

  4. Identification of potential transuranic waste tanks at the Hanford Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Colburn, R.P.

    1995-05-05T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  5. AN EVALUATION OF HANFORD SITE TANK FARM SUBSURFACE CONTAMINATION FY2007

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MANN, F.M.

    2007-07-10T23:59:59.000Z

    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).

  6. Closure models for turbulent reacting flows

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dutta, A.; Tarbell, J.M. (Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park, PA (USA). Dept. of Chemical Engineering)

    1989-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In this paper, a simple procedure based on fast and slow reaction asymptotics has been employed to drive first-order closure models for the nonlinear reaction terms in turbulent mass balances from mechanistic models of turbulent mixing and reaction. The coalescence-redispersion (CRD) model, the interaction by exchange with the mean (IEM) model, the three-environment (3E) model, and the four-environment (4E) model have been used to develop closure equations. The closure models have been tested extensively against experimental data for both single and multiple reactions. The closures based on slow asymptotics for the CRD, 3E and 4E models provide very good predictions of all of the experimental data, while other models available either in the literature or derived here are not adequate. The simple new closure equations developed in this paper may be useful in modeling systems involving turbulent mixing and complex chemical reactions.

  7. 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...

  8. approaching site closure: Topics by E-print Network

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

    Summary: Cloudy sky shortwave radiative closure for a Baseline Surface Radiation Network site Ping Wang,1 2011; published 16 April 2011. 1 A shortwave radiative closure analysis...

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

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    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...

  10. Tank characterization data report: Tank 241-C-112

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  11. Annual report of tank waste treatability

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Alfred Wickline

    2008-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  13. 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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Evans, S. K.

    2007-11-07T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  15. Closure for milliliter scale bioreactor

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    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

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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.

  17. Rulison Site Surface Closure Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1998-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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).

  18. 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...

  19. 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...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    T. M. Blakley; W. D. Schofield

    2007-09-10T23:59:59.000Z

    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).

  1. 324 Building radiochemical engineering cells, high-level vault, low-level vault, and associated areas closure plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barnett, J.M.

    1998-03-25T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  2. Engineering study - installation of new risers in Single-Shell Tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Magruder, W.J.

    1994-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A sampling program is being developed to characterize the 149 underground SSTs on the Hanford Site. The sampling effort will require access to the tank interior in a minimum of two locations per tank. Some of the risers suitable for sampling are either unavailable or are not in locations for proper characterization of the tank contents. Additional risers will be required in the SSTs to support the tank characterization sampling program. The purpose of this engineering study is to review alternatives for installation of new riser in the SSTs.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2007-05-23T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2009-07-31T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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.

  6. Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Tank Integrity Workshop

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    M.C. Edelson; R. Bruce Thompson

    2001-11-13T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  7. 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

  8. 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...

  9. MODIFICATIONS TO THE WIPP PANEL CLOSURE

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

    panel closure design. FLAC3D implements the Callahan and DeVries (1991) crushed salt creep constitutive model. This model is based on Sjaardema and Krieg (1987) and was...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1995-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  11. 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 DataDepartment of Energy Your Density Isn'tOriginEducationVideoStrategic| Department of EnergyFOREnergy IV:Tank Farms at theof

  12. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What's PossibleRadiation Protection245C Unlimited ReleaseWelcome ton n u May 23, 200122/04 Run

  13. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOE Office of ScienceandMesa del SolStrengthening aTurbulenceUtilizeRural PublicRates > RateWannier90

  14. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA groupTuba City, Arizona, DisposalFourthN V O 1 8 7 +NewAugustr* RControl

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stefanko, D.; Langton, C.

    2011-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  16. Extender for securing a closure

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Thomas, II, Patrick A.

    2012-10-02T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Alfred Wickline

    2007-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  18. Waste tank characterization sampling limits

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tusler, L.A.

    1994-09-02T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  19. CLOSURE REPORT FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION UNIT 115: AREA 25 TEST CELL A FACILITY, NEVADA TEST SITE, NEVADA

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NA

    2006-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Closure Report (CR) describes the activities performed to close CAU 115, Area 25 Test Cell A Facility, as presented in the NDEP-approved SAFER Plan (NNSA/NSO, 2004). The SAFER Plan includes a summary of the site history, process knowledge, and closure standards. This CR provides a summary of the completed closure activities, documentation of waste disposal, and analytical and radiological data to confirm that the remediation goals were met and to document final site conditions. The approved closure alternative as presented in the SAFER Plan for CAU 115 (NNSA/NSO, 2004) was clean closure; however, closure in place was implemented under a Record of Technical Change (ROTC) to the SAFER Plan when radiological surveys indicated that the concrete reactor pad was radiologically activated and could not be decontaminated to meet free release levels. The ROTC is included as Appendix G of this report. The objectives of closure were to remove any trapped residual liquids and gases, dispose regulated and hazardous waste, decontaminate removable radiological contamination, demolish and dispose aboveground structures, remove the dewar as a best management practice (BMP), and characterize and restrict access to all remaining radiological contamination. Radiological contaminants of concern (COCs) included cobalt-60, cesium-137, strontium-90, uranium-234/235/236/238, and plutonium-239/240. Additional COCs included Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) metals, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and asbestos.

  20. Tank vapor mitigation requirements for Hanford Tank Farms

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rakestraw, L.D.

    1994-11-15T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  1. Accelerating cleanup: Paths to closure

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1998-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  2. An eddy closure for potential vorticity

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ringler, Todd D [Los Alamos National Laboratory

    2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  3. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic2 OPAM Flash2011-12 OPAMGeneralGuiding Documents andNR-2MayStatus |

  4. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic2Uranium Transferon the PassingRouting TECFinish Line |PaulTableUnited States

  5. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOEThe Bonneville PowerCherries 82981-1cn SunnybankD.jpgHanford LEED&soil Hanford Traffic Department of144TDR

  6. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOE Office of ScienceandMesa del SolStrengthening a solidSynthesis of 2D AlloysTrails Taking CareNEPAProjects &

  7. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOE Office of ScienceandMesa del SolStrengthening a solidSynthesis of 2D AlloysTrails Taking CareNEPAProjectsRV

  8. 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)

    NONE

    1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  9. 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)

    NONE

    1996-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Poirier, M.; Qureshi, Z.

    2010-12-14T23:59:59.000Z

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

  11. H-Tank Farm Waste Determination | Department of Energy

    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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic2 OPAM Flash2011-12 OPAMGeneralGuiding Documents and Links GuidingTank Farm

  12. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOEThe Bonneville Power AdministrationField8,Dist. Category UC-lFederal ColumbiaASCR2 FINALRIVER ANDJanuary6,TANK

  13. 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 onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov You are8COaBulkTransmissionSitingProcess.pdfGetecGtel JumpCounty, Texas:ITC TransmissionIdaho DEQ Storage Tanks Webpage

  14. Tank Waste and Waste Processing | Department of Energy

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33Frequently20,000 RussianBy:Whether you're a home builder or remodeling professional, aYourTank

  15. Texas Petroleum 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 onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghuraji Agro Industries PvtStratosolar JumpTennessee/WindPetroleum Storage Tanks Webpage Jump to:

  16. Carderock Rotating Arm 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 onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov You are being directedAnnualProperty EditCalifornia:Power LPInformation 8thCalwind IICaneyNW1CirculatingArm Tow Tank

  17. Montana Underground 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 onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere I Geothermal Pwer Plant JumpMarysville,Missoula, Montana:Northeast AsiaAir|Underground Storage Tanks Webpage

  18. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What's Possible forPortsmouth/Paducah47,193.70COMMUNITYResponses:December562JeffersonControl in Tank

  19. Tank 241-Z-361 vapor sampling and analysis plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BANNING, D.L.

    1999-02-23T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  20. Data reconcilation study of Tank 241-AN-105 at the Hanford Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kubic, W.L. Jr.; Pillay, G.

    1998-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    The Project Hanford Management Contractor gave the Los Alamos National Laboratory Nuclear Systems Design and Analysis Group (TSA-10) the task of performing data reconciliation studies on flammable-gas watchlist tanks at the Hanford Site. This task is being performed in support of the flammable-gas programs at the Hanford Site and for closure of the flammable-gas unreviewed safety question. In our data reconciliation studies, we examine all available data from a global point of view. Our goal is to find an explanation, or conceptual model, of the tank behavior that is consistent with all available data. Our primary tool in this study of Tank 241-AN-105 is the maximum likelihood method of data reconciliation, which we have applied successfully to other tanks in the past. This method helps us (1) determine whether a model is consistent with the data, and (2) obtain quantitative estimates that are consistent with the data. A release of a flammable quantity of hydrogen in Tank 241-AN-105 is possible but unlikely at the current time. Any changes to the waste that could cause large releases would be accompanied by a measurable increase in the surface level of the waste. We also theorize that a significant increase in the waste temperature may signal a qualitative change in the behavior of the waste and an increase in the flammability hazard.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    KRISTOFZSKI, J.G.

    2007-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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).

  3. Mixed waste removal from a hazardous waste storage tank

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Geber, K.R.

    1993-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The spent fuel transfer canal at the Oak Ridge Graphite Reactor was found to be leaking 400 gallons of water per day into the surrounding soil. Sampling of the sediment layer on the floor of the canal to determine the environmental impact of the leak identified significant radiological contamination and elevated levels of cadmium and lead which are hazardous under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Under RCRA regulations and Rules of Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, the canal was considered a hazardous waste storage tank. This paper describes elements of the radiological control program established in support of a fast-track RCRA closure plan that involved underwater mapping of the radiation fields, vacuuming, and ultra-filtration techniques that were successfully used to remove the mixed waste sediments and close the canal in a method compliant with state and federal regulations.

  4. Retooling Michigan: Tanks to Turbines

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    A company that has manufactured geared systems for the M1 Abrams tank for more than 20 years is now part of the forces working toward energy security and independence.

  5. Improvement in LNG storage tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1999-11-20T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  6. Tank Farms Technical Safety Requirements

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    DANNA, M.A.

    2003-10-24T23:59:59.000Z

    The TSRs define the acceptable conditions, safe boundaries, bases thereof, and controls to ensure safe operation during authorized activities, for facilities within the scope of the Tank Farms Documented Safety Analysis (DSA), in parallel with the DSA.

  7. Evolving Robocode Tank Jacob Eisenstein

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Fernandez, Thomas

    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

  8. Light Duty Vehicle CNG Tanks

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

    Light Duty Vehicle CNG Tanks Dane A. Boysen, PhD Program Director Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy, US DOE dane.boysen@doe.gov Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composite...

  9. Taking Closure to the Next Level - 13030

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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)

  10. Stress-free tank cleaning

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Haimowitz, S.

    1993-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In the fall of 1991, sludge buildup in a 690,000-bbl crude-oil storage tank caused measurement and loading problems for the Mobil Oil refinery in Paulsboro, N.J. Four ft of sludge had accumulated at the bottom of the tank, which holds oil prior to refining. Faced with operating and environmental constraints, Mobil cleaned the tank with Nalco 5601, a system made by Nalco Chemical Co., (Sugar Land, Texas). The system, which employs chemicals, water and heat, removed 58,000 bbl of sludge from the tank and recovered 37,500 bbl of oil from it without generating hazardous wastes. This oil contained only trace amounts of sediments and water, and was processed without requiring further treatment. Water was also recovered from the sludge: 11,000 bbl were treated biologically onsite. There were 3,700 bbl of solids remaining, which were left in the tank, as they only took up 4 in. and no longer affected level measurement. The system cleaned the tank in 10 days and recovered 99% of the oil in the sludge without generating hazardous wastes. The value of the recovered oil is $646,000, and Mobil estimates that its return on investment for the project is nearly 300%.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dixon, K.; Phifer, M.

    2010-07-30T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  12. Adapting MARSSIM for FUSRAP site closure.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Johnson, R.; Durham, L.; Rieman, C.; Hoover, R.

    2001-12-21T23:59:59.000Z

    The Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM) provides a coherent, technically defensible process for establishing that exposed surfaces satisfy site cleanup requirements. Unfortunately, many sites have complications that challenge a direct application of MARSSIM. Example complications include Record of Decision (ROD) requirements that are not MARSSIM-friendly, the potential for subsurface contamination, and incomplete characterization information. These types of complications are typically the rule, rather than the exception, for sites undergoing radiologically-driven remediation and closure. One such site is the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) Linde site in Tonawanda, New York. Cleanup of the site is currently underway. The Linde site presented a number of challenges to designing and implementing a closure strategy consistent with MARSSIM. This paper discusses some of the closure issues confronted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Buffalo District at the Linde site, and describes how MARSSIM protocols were adapted to address these issues.

  13. Closure device for lead-acid batteries

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Ledjeff, Konstantin (Schwalbach, DE)

    1983-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A closure device for lead-acid batteries includes a filter of granulated activated carbon treated to be hydrophobic combined with means for preventing explosion of emitted hydrogen and oxygen gas. The explosion prevention means includes a vertical open-end tube within the closure housing for maintaining a liquid level above side wall openings in an adjacent closed end tube. Gases vent from the battery through a nozzle directed inside the closed end tube against an impingement surface to remove acid droplets. The gases then flow through the side wall openings and the liquid level to quench any possible ignition prior to entering the activated carbon filter. A wick in the activated carbon filter conducts condensed liquid back to the closure housing to replenish the liquid level limited by the open-end tube.

  14. Hanford Patrol Academy demolition sites closure plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mickalonis, J.

    2011-08-29T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  16. ANNUAL RADIOACTIVE WASTE TANK INSPECTION PROGRAM 2009

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    West, B.; Waltz, R.

    2010-06-21T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  17. Microsoft Word - N01401_NE and 4-5 Closure Mon Plan.doc

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA group currentBradleyTableSelling CorpNewCFRemediation Agreement for8Closure

  18. 2401-W Waste storage building closure plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    LUKE, S.M.

    1999-07-15T23:59:59.000Z

    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).

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2011-09-29T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  20. TANK 7 CHARACTERIZATION AND WASHING STUDIES

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2010-02-04T23:59:59.000Z

    A 3-L PUREX sludge sample from Tank 7 was characterized and then processed through a series of inhibited water washes to remove oxalate, sodium, and other soluble ions. Current plans use Tank 7 as one of the feed sources for Sludge Batch 7 (SB7). Tank 7 is high in oxalate due to the oxalic acid cleaning of the sludge heels from Tanks 5 and 6 and subsequent transfer to Tank 7. Ten decant and nine wash cycles were performed over a 47 day period at ambient temperature. Initially, seven decants and seven washes were completed based on preliminary estimates of the number of wash cycles required to remove the oxalate in the sludge. After reviewing the composition data, SRNL recommended the completion of 2 or 3 more decant/wash cycles to ensure all of the sodium oxalate had redissolved. In the first 7 washes, the slurry oxalate concentration was 12,300 mg/kg (69.6% oxalate removal compared to 96.1% removal of the other soluble ions). After all ten decants were complete, the slurry oxalate concentration was 3,080 mg/kg (89.2% oxalate removal compared to 99.0% of the other soluble ions). The rate of dissolution of oxalate increased significantly with subsequent washes until all of the sodium oxalate had been redissolved after seven decant/wash cycles. The measured oxalate concentrations agreed very well with LWO predictions for washing of the Tank 7 sample. Highlights of the analysis and washing of the Tank 7 sample include: (1) Sodium oxalate was detected in the as-received filtered solids. 95% of the oxalate was insoluble (undissolved) in the as-received slurry. (2) No sodium oxalate was detected in the post-wash filtered solids. (3) Sodium oxalate is the last soluble species that redissolves during washing with inhibited water. In order to significantly reduce the sodium oxalate concentration, the sludge must be highly washed, leaving the other soluble anions and cations (including sodium) very low in concentration. (4) The post-wash slurry had 1% of the soluble anions and cations remaining, with the exception of sodium and oxalate, for which the percentages were 2.8% and 10.8% respectively. The post-wash sodium concentration was 9.25 wt% slurry total solids basis and 0.15 M supernate. (5) The settling rate of slurry was very fast allowing the completion of one decant/wash cycle each day. (6) The measured yield stress of as-received (6.42 wt% undissolved solids) and post-wash (7.77 wt% undissolved solids) slurry was <1 Pa. For rapidly settling slurries, it can be hard to measure the yield stress of the slurry so this result may be closer to the supernate result than the slurry. The recommended strategy for developing the oxalate target for sludge preparation for Sludge Batch 7 includes the following steps: (1) CPC simulant testing to determine the percent oxalate destruction and acid mix needed to produce a predicted redox of approximately 0.2 Fe{sup +2}/{Sigma}Fe in a SME product while meeting all DWPF processing constraints. (2) Perform a DWPF melter flammability assessment to ensure that the additional carbon in the oxalate together with other carbon sources will not lead to a flammability issue. (3) Perform a DWPF glass paper assessment to ensure the glass produced will meet all DWPF glass limits due to the sodium concentration in the sludge batch. The testing would need to be repeated if a significant CPC processing change, such as an alternative reductant to formic acid, is implemented.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    G. N. Doyle

    2002-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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.

  3. 241-AW Tank Farm Construction Extent of Condition Review for Tank Integrity

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2013-11-19T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  4. 241-AY-101 Tank Construction Extent of Condition Review for Tank Integrity

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barnes, Travis J.; Gunter, Jason R.

    2013-08-26T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  5. 241-AP Tank Farm Construction Extent of Condition Review for Tank Integrity

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2014-04-04T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  6. Fiscal Year 2006 Washington Closure Hanford Science & Technology Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2006-01-19T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  7. Auxiliary resonant DC tank converter

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Peng, Fang Z. (Knoxville, TN)

    2000-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  8. 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."

  9. In-tank recirculating arsenic treatment system

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    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

    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.

  10. TANK48 CFD MODELING ANALYSIS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lee, S.

    2011-05-17T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  11. Hanford immobilized low-activity tank waste performance assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mann, F.M.

    1998-03-26T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  12. MAE Seminar Series Boundary Closures for

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Krovi, Venkat

    ) boundary layer stability and transition. 206 Furnas Hall Thursday, April 8th, 2010 11:00 am ­ 12:00 pmMAE Seminar Series Boundary Closures for ESWENO Schemes Mark H. Carpenter, Ph.D. Computational AeroSciences Branch NASA Langley Research Center Abstract Energy Stable Weighted Essentially Non--Oscillatory (ESWENO

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  14. 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)

    NONE

    1995-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  15. Annual report of tank waste treatability

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Giese, K.A.

    1991-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2002-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Klem, M.J.

    1996-10-23T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  18. Technical requirements specification for tank waste retrieval

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lamberd, D.L.

    1996-09-26T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  19. DOE HydrogenDOE Hydrogen Composite Tank ProgramComposite Tank Program

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Device (thermal) In Tank Gas Temperature Sensor Carbon Composite Shell (structural) Gas Outlet SolenoidDOE HydrogenDOE Hydrogen Composite Tank ProgramComposite Tank Program Dr. Neel Sirosh DIRECTOR materials, design, process to improve weight efficiency (5,000 psi tanks) · Develop & validate

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Feldman, Joel

    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

  1. Hanford Tank Waste Information Enclosure 1 Hanford Tank Waste Information

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    ) and the definition of HLW from the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended (NWPA). The WIPP Land Withdrawal Act by the disposal regulations; or #12;Hanford Tank Waste Information Enclosure 1 2 (C) waste that the Nuclear 10, Code of Federal Regulations. The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (42 U.S.C. 10101

  2. Tank Characterization Report for Single Shell Tank 241-U-103

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    ADAMS, M.R.

    2000-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document summarizes the information on the historical uses, present status, and the sampling and analysis results of waste stored in Tank 241-U-103. This report supports the requirements of the Tri-Party Agreement Milestone M-44-15B.

  3. Global Intermodal Tank Container Management for the Chemical Industry

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Erera, Alan

    transport multiple cargoes. Tank containers, also referred to as ISO tanks, intermodal tanks, or IMOGlobal Intermodal Tank Container Management for the Chemical Industry Alan L. Erera, Juan C on asset management problems faced by tank container operators, and formulates an operational tank

  4. 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.

  5. Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems: Pump Tank

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Lesikar, Bruce J.

    2008-10-23T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Healey, Christopher G.

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  8. Project Execution Plan for Project W-211 Initial Tank Retrieval Systems (ITRS)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    VAN BEEK, J.E.

    2000-04-19T23:59:59.000Z

    This Project Execution Plan documents the methodology for managing Project W-211. Project W-211, Initial Tank Retrieval Systems (ITRS), is a fiscal year 1994 Major Systems Acquisition that will provide systems for retrieval of radioactive wastes from selected double-shell tanks (DST). The contents of these tanks are a combination of supernatant liquids and settled solids. To retrieve waste from the tanks, it is first necessary to mix the liquid and solids prior to transferring the slurry to alternative storage or treatment facilities. The ITRS will provide systems to mobilize the settled solids and transfer the wastes out of the tanks. In so doing, ITRS provides feed for the future waste treatment plant, allows for consolidation of tank solids to manage space within existing DST storage capacity, and supports continued safe storage of tank waste. The ITRS scope has been revised to include waste retrieval systems for tanks AP-102, AP-104, AN-102, AN-103, AN-104, AN-105, AY-102, AZ-102, and SY-102. This current tank selection and sequence provides retrieval systems supporting the River Protection Project (RF'P) Waste Treatment Facility and sustains the ability to provide final remediation of several watch list DSTs via treatment. The ITRS is configured to support changing program needs, as constrained by available budget, by maintaining the flexibility for exchanging tanks requiring mixer pump-based retrieval systems and shifting the retrieval sequence. Preliminary design was configured such that an adequate basis exists for initiating Title II design of a mixer pump-based retrieval system for any DST. This Project Execution Plan (PEP), derived from the predecessor Project Management Plan, documents the methodology for managing the ITRS, formalizes organizational responsibilities and interfaces, and identifies project requirements such as change control, design verification, systems engineering, and human factors engineering.

  9. Project Execution Plan for Project W-211 Initial Tank Retrieval Systems (ITRS)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    VAN BEEK, J.E.

    1999-09-02T23:59:59.000Z

    Project W-211, Initial Tank Retrieval Systems (ITRS), is a fiscal year 1994 Major Systems Acquisition that will provide systems for retrieval of radioactive wastes from selected double-shell tanks (DST). The contents of these tanks are a combination of supernatant liquids and settled solids. To retrieve waste from the tanks, it is first necessary to mix the liquid and solids prior to transferring the slurry to alternative storage or treatment facilities. The ITRS will provide systems to mobilize the settled solids and transfer the wastes out of the tanks. In so doing, ITRS provides feed for future processing plants, allows for consolidation of tank solids to manage space within existing DST storage capacity, and supports continued safe storage of tank waste. The ITRS scope has been revised to include waste retrieval systems for tanks AP-102, AP-104, AP-108, AN-103, AN-104, AN-105, AY-102, AZ-102, and SY-102. This current tank selection and sequence provides retrieval systems supporting the Privatized waste processing plant and sustains the ability to provide final remediation of several watch list DSTs via treatment. The ITRS is configured to support changing program needs, as constrained by available budget, by maintaining the flexibility for exchanging tanks requiring mixer pump-based retrieval systems and shifting the retrieval sequence. Preliminary design was configured such that an adequate basis exists for initiating Title II design of a mixer pump based retrieval system for any DST. This Project Management Plan (PMP) documents the methodology for managing the ITRS, formalizes organizational responsibilities and interfaces, and identifies project requirements such as change control, design verification, systems engineering, and human factors engineering.

  10. ICPP Tank Farm planning through 2012

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Palmer, W.B.; Millet, C.B.; Staiger, M.D.; Ward, F.S.

    1998-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Historically, liquid high-level waste (HLW) generated at the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant has been stored in the Tank Farm after which it is calcined with the calcine being stored in stainless steel bins. Following the curtailment of spent nuclear fuel reprocessing in 1992, the HLW treatment methods were re-evaluated to establish a path forward for producing a final waste form from the liquid sodium bearing wastes (SBW) and the HLW calcine. Projections for significant improvements in waste generation, waste blending and evaporation, and calcination were incorporated into the Tank Farm modeling. This optimized modeling shows that all of the SBW can be calcined by the end of 2012 as required by the Idaho Settlement Agreement. This Tank Farm plan discusses the use of each of the eleven HLW tanks and shows that two tanks can be emptied, allowing them to be Resource Conservation and Recovery Act closed by 2006. In addition, it describes the construction of each tank and vault, gives the chemical concentrations of the contents of each tank, based on historical input and some sampling, and discusses the regulatory drivers important to Tank Farm operation. It also discusses new waste generation, the computer model used for the Tank Farm planning, the operating schedule for each tank, and the schedule for when each tank will be empty and closed.

  11. Alternative Compliance

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

    Compliance Individual Permit: Alternative Compliance When permittees believe they have installed measures to minimize pollutants but are unable to certify completion of corrective...

  12. 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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625govInstrumentstdmadapInactiveVisiting the TWP TWP RelatedCellulase C. bescii CelA,PortalCompliance Individual

  13. ALTERNATE CITY:

    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: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA group currentBradleyTableSelling Corp -KWatertown Arsenal'.I Y.it ! ( ,E;;;: 61c

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  15. Analysis of tank deformation from fire induced ruptures and BLEVEs of 400 l propane tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kielec, D.J.; Birk, A.M. [Queen`s Univ., Kingston, Ontario (Canada). Dept. of Mechanical Engineering

    1996-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A series of fire tests were conducted to study the thermal rupture of propane tanks. The tests involved 400 liter ASME automotive propane tanks filled to 80% capacity with commercial propane. The tanks were brought to failure using torches and pool fires. the resulting thermal ruptures varied in severity from minor fissures, measuring a few centimeters in length, to catastrophic failures where the tank was flattened on the ground. The catastrophic failures would typically be called Boiling Liquid Expanding Vapour Explosions (BLEVE). The objective of this work was to develop a correlation between the failure severity and the tank condition at failure. The deformed propane tanks were measured in detail and the extent of deformation was quantified. The tank failure severity was found to be a complex function of a number of tank and lading properties at failure. this paper presents the measured data from the tanks and a step by step description of how the correlation was determined.

  16. Recharge Data Package for Hanford Single-Shell Tank Waste Management Areas

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fayer, Michael J.; Keller, Jason M.

    2007-09-24T23:59:59.000Z

    Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) assists CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc., in its preparation of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Facility Investigation report. One of the PNNL tasks is to use existing information to estimate recharge rates for past and current conditions as well as future scenarios involving cleanup and closure of tank farms. The existing information includes recharge-relevant data collected during activities associated with a host of projects, including those of RCRA, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), the CH2M HILL Tank Farm Vadose Zone Project, and the PNNL Remediation and Closure Science Project. As new information is published, the report contents can be updated. The objective of this data package was to use published data to provide recharge estimates for the scenarios being considered in the RCRA Facility Investigation. Recharge rates were estimated for areas that remain natural and undisturbed, areas where the vegetation has been disturbed, areas where both the vegetation and the soil have been disturbed, and areas that are engineered (e.g., surface barrier). The recharge estimates supplement the estimates provided by PNNL researchers in 2006 for the Hanford Site using additional field measurements and model analysis using weather data through 2006.

  17. 241-SY Tank Farm Construction Extent of Condition Review for Tank Integrity

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2013-07-25T23:59:59.000Z

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

  18. 241-AZ Tank Farm Construction Extent of Condition Review for Tank Integrity

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2013-07-30T23:59:59.000Z

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

  19. 3718-F Alkali Metal Treatment and Storage Facility Closure Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    1991-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Since 1987, Westinghouse Hanford Company has been a major contractor to the U.S. Department of Energy-Richland Operations Office and has served as co-operator of the 3718-F Alkali Metal Treatment and Storage Facility, the waste management unit addressed in this closure plan. The closure plan consists of a Part A Dangerous waste Permit Application and a RCRA Closure Plan. An explanation of the Part A Revision (Revision 1) submitted with this document is provided at the beginning of the Part A section. The closure plan consists of 9 chapters and 5 appendices. The chapters cover: introduction; facility description; process information; waste characteristics; groundwater; closure strategy and performance standards; closure activities; postclosure; and references.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dixon, K; Mark Phifer, M

    2007-09-17T23:59:59.000Z

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

  1. ANNUAL RADIOACTIVE WASTE TANK INSPECTION PROGRAM - 2011

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    West, B.; Waltz, R.

    2012-06-21T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Li, D.; Kaplan, D.

    2012-02-29T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Narbutovskih, Susan M.

    2006-09-29T23:59:59.000Z

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

  4. PERFORMANCE OF A CONTAINMENT VESSEL CLOSURE FOR RADIOACTIVE GAS CONTENTS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Blanton, P.; Eberl, K.

    2010-07-09T23:59:59.000Z

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

  5. The Chvátal-Gomory Closure of a Strictly Convex Body

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Megiddo

    2010-05-02T23:59:59.000Z

    Key words: nonlinear integer programming; cutting planes; Chvatal-Gomory closure. MSC2000 ... OR/MS subject classification: Primary: Integer - Nonlinear. 1

  6. News Release Closure of Russian Nuclear Plant.PDF

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    CONTACTS: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Jonathan Kiell, 202586-7371 September 27, 2001 Date Set for Closure of Russian Nuclear Weapons Plant U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration...

  7. Date Set for Closure of Russian Nuclear Weapons Plant - NNSA...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Date Set for Closure of Russian Nuclear Weapons Plant - NNSA Is Helping Make It Happen | National Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS People Mission...

  8. LABORATORY NEW HIRE NOTICE: LABORATORY DELAYED OPENING OR CLOSURE...

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

    LABORATORY NEW HIRE NOTICE: LABORATORY DELAYED OPENING OR CLOSURE DUE TO INCLEAMENT WEATHER During the winter months, the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) may at times...

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

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

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

  10. Impact Assessment of Existing Vadose Zone Contamination at the Hanford Site SX Tank Farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Khaleel, Raziuddin; White, Mark D.; Oostrom, Martinus; Wood, Marcus I.; Mann, Frederick M.; Kristofzski, John G.

    2007-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The USDOE has initiated an impact assessment of existing vadose zone contamination at the Hanford Site SX tank farm in southeastern Washington State. The assessment followed the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Corrective Action process to address the impacts of past tank waste releases to the vadose zone at the single-shell tank farm. Numerical models were developed that consider the extent of contamination presently within the vadose zone and predict contaminant movement through the vadose zone to groundwater. The transport of representative mobile (technetium-99) and immobile (cesium-137) constituents was evaluated in modeling. The model considered the accelerated movement of moisture around and beneath single-shell tanks that is attributed to bare, gravel surfaces resulting from the construction of the underground storage tanks. Infiltration, possibly nearing 100 mm yr–1, is further amplified in the tank farm because of the umbrella effect created by percolating moisture being diverted by the impermeable, sloping surface of the large, 24-m-diameter, buried tank domes. For both the base case (no-action alternative) simulation and a simulation that considered placement of an interim surface barrier to minimize infiltration, predicted groundwater concentrations for technetium-99 at the SX tank farm boundary were exceedingly high, on the order of 106 pCi L–1. The predicted concentrations are, however, somewhat conservative because of our use of two-dimensional modeling for a three-dimensional problem. A series of simulations were performed, using recharge rates of 50, 30, and 10 mm yr–1, and compared to the base case (100 mm yr–1) results. As expected, lowering meteoric recharge delayed peak arrival times and reduced peak concentrations at the tank farm boundary.

  11. IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF EXISTING VADOSE ZONE CONTAMINATION AT THE HANFORD SITE SX TANK FARM

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    KHALEEL R

    2007-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The USDOE has initiated an impact assessment of existing vadose zone contamination at the Hanford Site SX tank farm in southeastern Washington State. The assessment followed the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Corrective Action process to address the impacts of past tank waste releases to the vadose zone at the single-shell tank farm. Numerical models were developed that consider the extent of contamination presently within the vadose zone and predict contaminant movement through the vadose zone to groundwater. The transport of representative mobile (technetium-99) and immobile (cesium-137) constituents was evaluated in modeling. The model considered the accelerated movement of moisture around and beneath single-shell tanks that is attributed to bare, gravel surfaces resulting from the construction of the underground storage tanks. Infiltration, possibly nearing 100 mm yr{sup -1}, is further amplified in the tank farm because of the umbrella effect created by percolating moisture being diverted by the impermeable, sloping surface of the large, 24-m-diameter, buried tank domes. For both the base case (no-action alternative) simulation and a simulation that considered placement of an interim surface barrier to minimize infiltration, predicted, groundwater concentrations for technetium-99 at the SX tank farm boundary were exceedingly high, on the order of 10{sup 6} pCi L{sup -1}. The predicted concentrations are, however, somewhat conservative because of our use of two-dimensional modeling for a three-dimensional problem. A series of simulations were performed, using recharge rates of 50, 30, and 10 mm yr{sup -1}, and compared to the basecase(100 mm yr{sup -1}) results. As expected, lowering meteoric recharge delayed peak arrival times and reduced peak concentrations at the tank farm boundary.

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

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

  13. Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 127: Areas 25 and 26 Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada (Rev. No.: 0, August 2002)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NNSA /NV

    2002-08-27T23:59:59.000Z

    This Corrective Action Investigation Plan (CAIP) contains the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Operations Offices's approach to collect the data necessary to evaluate corrective action alternatives appropriate for the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 127 under the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order. Corrective Action Unit 127 is located on the Nevada Test Site approximately 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. This CAU is comprised of 12 Corrective Action Sites (CASs) located at Test Cell C; the Engine Maintenance, Assembly, and Disassembly (E-MAD) Facility; the X-Tunnel in Area 25; the Pluto Disassembly Facility; the Pluto Check Station; and the Port Gaston Training Facility in Area 26. These CASs include: CAS 25-01-05, Aboveground Storage Tank (AST); CAS 25-02-02, Underground Storage Tank (UST); CAS 25-23-11, Contaminated Materials; CAS 25-12-01, Boiler; CAS 25-01-06, AST; CAS 25-01-07, AST; CAS 25-02-13, UST; CAS 26- 01-01, Filter Tank (Rad) and Piping; CAS 26-01-02, Filter Tank (Rad); CAS 26-99-01, Radioactively Contaminated Filters; CAS 26-02-01, UST; CAS 26-23-01, Contaminated Liquids Spreader. Based on site history, process knowledge, and previous field efforts, contaminants of potential concern for CAU 127 include radionuclides, metals, total petroleum hydrocarbons, volatile organic compounds, asbestos, and polychlorinated biphenyls. Additionally, beryllium may be present at some locations. The sources of potential releases are varied, but releases of contaminated liquids may have occurred and may have migrated into and impacted soil below and surrounding storage vessels at some of the CASs. Also, at several CASs, asbestos-containing materials may be present on the aboveground structures and may be friable. Exposure pathways are limited to ingestion, inhalation, and dermal contact (adsorption) of soils/sediments or liquids, or inhalation of contaminants by site workers due to disturbance of contaminated materials. Future land-use scenarios limit subsequent uses of the CASs to various nonresidential (i.e., industrial) activities. Field activities will consist of radiological walkover and screening surveys, and field-screening and collecting of both tank content and soil samples, and further sample testing as appropriate. A two-step data quality objective strategy will be followed: (1) Phase I will be to collect environmental samples for laboratory analysis to confirm the presence or absence of contaminants at concentrations exceeding preliminary action levels; and (2) Phase II will be to collect additional environmental samples for laboratory analysis to determine the extent of contamination identified in Phase I. The results of this field investigation will support a defensible evaluation of corrective action alternatives in the corrective action decision document.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sanborn, Scott E.; Larsen, Brian M.; Julyk, Larry J.; Johnson, Kenneth I.

    2012-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

    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 determining the impact of these appurtenances on structural integrity. To achieve this, the various appurtenances were reviewed and bounding appurtenance configurations for SST Types II and III tank designs were analyzed using finite element software. The bounding configurations for the Type II tanks considered four heavy offset pits with a central pit with and without a 36-inch diameter central post-construction penetration and four 42-inch diameter offset penetrations. The bounding configuration for the Type III tanks is a tank with two heavy offset pits and one heavy central pit. For each bounding configuration two finite element models are developed: a seismic analysis model and a thermal and operating loads analysis (TOLA) model. The TOLA models include a Type II or III thermal history, concrete cracking and thermal degradation, reinforcement yielding, and soil plasticity. Additionally, operating loads such as internal waste pressure and concentrated and distributed soil surface loads are applied to the TOLA model. The seismic model treats the tank concrete as linear elastic based on the present day degraded concrete properties. Also, in the seismic model the soil is treated as linear elastic while special techniques are used in the soil above the tank dome and along the tank wall to avoid soil arching and achieve the proper soil pressure on the tank walls. Seismic time histories (in the horizontal and vertical directions) are applied to the seismic model. The American Concrete Institute (ACI) has code requirements for nuclear safety-related concrete structures (ACI-349-06) that are used to evaluate the structural integrity of the SSTs. ACI-349-06 recommends evaluating factored load combinations against reduced tank section capacities to account for both loading and material uncertainties. From both the TOLA and seismic models the structural demands (forces and moments) are extracted from sections throughout the tank under the appropriate load combinations. These demands are compared against the ACI-349-06 capacities at each of the sections. This ratio of demand to capacity is reported as a measure of structural integrity. The Type II and Type III appurtenances configurations are 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. A comparison of the Type II and III results show that even though the Type II offset pits weight less, they have a larger impact on the structural integrity of the tanks due to their locations. Finally, lessons learned from the Type II and Type III appurtenance analysis, and their application to the more complex Type IV structural integrity analysis, will be discussed.

  15. Russian Pulsating Mixer Pump Deployment in the Gunite and Associated Tanks at ORNL

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hatchell, Brian K.; Lewis, Ben; Johnson, Marshall A.; Randolph, J. G.

    2001-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In FY 1998, Pulsating Mixer Pump (PMP) technology, consisting of a jet mixer powered by a reciprocating air supply, was selected for deployment in one of the Gunite and Associated Tanks at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) to mobilize settled solids. The pulsating mixer pump technology was identified during FY 1996 and FY 1997 technical exchanges between the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Tanks Focus Area Retrieval and Closure program, the DOE Environmental Management International Programs, and delegates from Russia as a promising technology that could be implemented in the DOE complex. During FY 1997, the pulsating mixer pump technology, provided by the Russian Integrated Mining Chemical Company, was tested at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) to observe its ability to suspend settled solids. Based on the results of this demonstration, ORNL and DOE staff determined that a modified pulsating mixer pump would meet project needs for remote sludge mobilization of Gunite tank sludge and reduce the cost of operation and maintenance of more expensive mixing systems. The functions and requirements of the system were developed by combining the results and recommendations from the pulsating mixer pump demonstration at PNNL with the requirements identified by staff at ORNL involved with the remediation of the Gunite and Associated Tanks. The PMP is comprised of a pump chamber, check valve, a working gas supply pipe, a discharge manifold, and four jet nozzles. The pump uses two distinct cycles, fill and discharge, to perform its mixing action. During the fill cycle, vacuum is applied to the pump chamber by an eductor, which draws liquid into the pump. When the liquid level inside the chamber reaches a certain level, the chamber is pressurized with compressed air to discharge the liquid through the jet nozzles and back into the tank to mobilize sludge and settled solids.

  16. Wisconsin E85 Tank Regulation

    Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center [Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (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 Delicious Rank EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home PageStationGreenhouse GasCaliforniaNew England MEDIA CONTACT:

  17. Alternative Fuels Data Center

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

    Storage Tank Regulations The Colorado Department of Labor and Employment, Division of Oil and Public Safety, enforces rules concerning the placement of underground and...

  18. ANNUAL RADIOACTIVE WASTE TANK INSPECTION PROGRAM 2010

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    West, B.; Waltz, R.

    2011-06-23T23:59:59.000Z

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

  19. Tank Manufacturing, Testing, Deployment and Field Performance...

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

    Hydrogen Fuel and Pressure Vessel Forum on September 27 - 29, 2010, in Beijing, China. ihfpvnewhouse.pdf More Documents & Publications Fuel Tank Manufacturing, Testing,...

  20. Tank farm backlog soil sample analysis plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ahlers, J.D., Westinghouse Hanford

    1996-07-17T23:59:59.000Z

    This document describes the measures to collect samples, perform testing on samples, and make decisions to obtain a Contained- in Determination for tank farms backlog soil.

  1. Tank waste remediation system (TWRS) mission analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rieck, R.H.

    1996-10-03T23:59:59.000Z

    The Tank Waste Remediation System Mission Analysis provides program level requirements and identifies system boundaries and interfaces. Measures of success appropriate to program level accomplishments are also identified.

  2. Georgia Underground Storage Tank Act (Georgia)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Georgia Underground Storage Act (GUST) provides a comprehensive program to prevent, detect, and correct releases from underground storage tanks (“USTs”) of “regulated substances” other than...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  4. ATR/OTR-SY Tank Camera Purge System and in Tank Color Video Imaging System

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Werry, S.M.

    1995-06-06T23:59:59.000Z

    This procedure will document the satisfactory operation of the 101-SY tank Camera Purge System (CPS) and 101-SY in tank Color Camera Video Imaging System (CCVIS). Included in the CPRS is the nitrogen purging system safety interlock which shuts down all the color video imaging system electronics within the 101-SY tank vapor space during loss of nitrogen purge pressure.

  5. 45Fuel Level in a Spherical Tank Spherical tanks are found in many

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    45Fuel Level in a Spherical Tank Spherical tanks are found in many different situations, from the storage of cryogenic liquids, to fuel tanks. Under the influence of gravity, or acceleration, the liquid then be designed to measure where the surface of the liquid is, and from this derive h. Problem 1 - Slice the fluid

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H.

    1996-06-28T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H.

    1996-06-28T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H., Westinghouse Hanford

    1996-06-28T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H.

    1996-06-28T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H.

    1996-06-28T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H.

    1996-06-28T23:59:59.000Z

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

  12. Tank characterization report for single-shell tank 241-BY-112

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Baldwin, J.H.

    1997-08-22T23:59:59.000Z

    This document summarizes the information on the historical uses, present status, and the sampling and analysis results of waste stored in Tank 241-BY-112. This report supports the requirements of the Tri-Party Agreement Milestone M-44-10. (This tank has been designated a Ferrocyanide Watch List tank.)

  13. Supporting document for the historical tank content estimate for B Tank Farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H.; Gaddis, L.A.; Johnson, E.D.

    1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  14. Supporting document for the historical tank content estimate for BY Tank Farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  15. Supporting document for the historical tank content estimate for A Tank Farm

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H., Fluor Daniel Hanford

    1997-02-25T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H., Fluor Daniel Hanford

    1997-02-25T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1997-03-06T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1997-03-06T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1997-03-06T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1997-03-12T23:59:59.000Z

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

  2. Remote controlled vacuum joint closure mechanism

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Doll, David W. (San Diego, CA); Hager, E. Randolph (La Jolla, CA)

    1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A remotely operable and maintainable vacuum joint closure mechanism for a noncircular aperture is disclosed. The closure mechanism includes an extendible bellows coupled at one end to a noncircular duct and at its other end to a flange assembly having sealed grooves for establishing a high vacuum seal with the abutting surface of a facing flange which includes an aperture forming part of the system to be evacuated. A plurality of generally linear arrangements of pivotally coupled linkages and piston combinations are mounted around the outer surface of the duct and aligned along the length thereof. Each of the piston/linkage assemblies is adapted to engage the flange assembly by means of a respective piston and is further coupled to a remote controlled piston drive shaft to permit each of the linkages positioned on a respective flat outer surface of the duct to simultaneously and uniformly displace a corresponding piston and the flange assembly with which it is in contact along the length of the duct in extending the bellows to provide a high vacuum seal between the movable flange and the facing flange. A plurality of latch mechanisms are also pivotally mounted on the outside of the duct. A first end of each of the latch mechanisms is coupled to a remotely controlled latch control shaft for displacing the latch mechanism about its pivot point. In response to the pivoting displacement of the latch mechanism, a second end thereof is displaced so as to securely engage the facing flange.

  3. CLOSURE WELD DEVELOPMENT FOR 3013 OUTER CONTAINERS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Daugherty, W.; Howard, S.; Peterson, K.; Stokes, M.

    2009-11-10T23:59:59.000Z

    Excess plutonium materials in the DOE complex are packaged and stored in accordance with DOE-STD-3013. This standard specifies requirements for the stabilization of such materials and subsequent packaging in dual nested seal-welded containers. Austenitic stainless steels have been selected for container fabrication. The inner 3013 container provides contamination control while the outer 3013 container is the primary containment vessel and is the focus of this paper. Each packaging site chose a process for seal welding the outer 3013 containers in accordance with its needs and expertise. The two processes chosen for weld closure were laser beam welding (LBW) and gas tungsten arc welding (GTAW). Following development efforts, each system was qualified in accordance with DOE-STD-3013 prior to production use. The 3013 outer container closure weld joint was designed to accommodate the characteristics of a laser weld. This aspect of the joint design necessitated some innovative process and equipment considerations in the application of the GTAW process. Details of the weld requirements and the development processes are presented and several potential enhancements for the GTAW system are described.

  4. Axion alternatives

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    I. Antoniadis; A. Boyarsky; Oleg Ruchayskiy

    2006-06-29T23:59:59.000Z

    If recent results of the PVLAS collaboration proved to be correct, some alternative to the traditional axion models are needed. We present one of the simplest possible modifications of axion paradigm, which explains the results of PVLAS experiment, while avoiding all the astrophysical and cosmological restrictions. We also mention other possible models that possess similar effects.

  5. Tank Waste Remediation System Guide

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Robershotte, M.A.; Dirks, L.L.; Seaver, D.A.; Bothers, A.J.; Madden, M.S.

    1995-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The scope, number and complexity of Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) decisions require an integrated, consistent, and logical approach to decision making. TWRS has adopted a seven-step decision process applicable to all decisions. Not all decisions, however, require the same degree of rigor/detail. The decision impact will dictate the appropriate required detail. In the entire process, values, both from the public as well as from the decision makers, play a key role. This document concludes with a general discussion of the implementation process that includes the roles of concerned parties.

  6. Screening the Hanford tanks for trapped gas

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Whitney, P.

    1995-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Hanford Site is home to 177 large, underground nuclear waste storage tanks. Hydrogen gas is generated within the waste in these tanks. This document presents the results of a screening of Hanford`s nuclear waste storage tanks for the presence of gas trapped in the waste. The method used for the screening is to look for an inverse correlation between waste level measurements and ambient atmospheric pressure. If the waste level in a tank decreases with an increase in ambient atmospheric pressure, then the compressibility may be attributed to gas trapped within the waste. In this report, this methodology is not used to estimate the volume of gas trapped in the waste. The waste level measurements used in this study were made primarily to monitor the tanks for leaks and intrusions. Four measurement devices are widely used in these tanks. Three of these measure the level of the waste surface. The remaining device measures from within a well embedded in the waste, thereby monitoring the liquid level even if the liquid level is below a dry waste crust. In the past, a steady rise in waste level has been taken as an indicator of trapped gas. This indicator is not part of the screening calculation described in this report; however, a possible explanation for the rise is given by the mathematical relation between atmospheric pressure and waste level used to support the screening calculation. The screening was applied to data from each measurement device in each tank. If any of these data for a single tank indicated trapped gas, that tank was flagged by this screening process. A total of 58 of the 177 Hanford tanks were flagged as containing trapped gas, including 21 of the 25 tanks currently on the flammable gas watch list.

  7. THE INTEGRATION OF A PROPOSED ZONE CLOSURE APPROACH FOR THE PLUTONIUM FINISHING PLANT (PFP) DECOMMISSIONING & THE PFP ZONE HANFORD SITE WASHINGTON

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HOPKINS, A.M.

    2005-02-23T23:59:59.000Z

    The Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) and associated processing facilities are located in the 200 area of the Hanford Site in Eastern Washington. This area is part of what is now called the Central Plateau. In order to achieve closure of the contaminated facilities and waste sites at Hanford on the Central Plateau (CP), a geographic re-districting of the area into zones has been proposed in the recently published Plan for Central Plateau Closure. One of the 22 zones proposed in the Central Plateau encompasses the PFP and ancillary facilities. Approximately eighty six buildings are included in the PFP Zone. This paper addresses the approach for the closure of the PFP Zone within the Central Plateau. The PFP complex of buildings forms the bulk of the structures in the PFP Zone. For closure of the above-grade portion of structures within the PFP complex, the approach is to remove them to a state called ''slab-on-grade'' per the criteria contained in PFP End Point Criteria document and as documented in action memoranda. For below-grade portions of the structures (such as below-grade rooms, pipe trenches and underground ducts), the approach is to remove as much residual contamination as practicable and to fill the void spaces with clean fill material such as sand, grout, or controlled density fill. This approach will be modified as planning for the waste sites progresses to ensure that the actions of the PFP decommissioning projects do not negatively impact future planned actions under the CERCLA. Cribs, settling tanks, septic tanks and other miscellaneous below-grade void spaces will either be cleaned to the extent practicable and filled or will be covered with an environmental barrier as determined by further studies and CERCLA decision documents. Currently, between two and five environmental barriers are proposed to be placed over waste sites and remaining building slabs in the PFP Zone.

  8. Alternative Energy Development and China's Energy Future

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Zheng, Nina

    2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    integrated water heaters and use a water tank that acts asthe water tanks and pipes of solar water heaters installed

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2013-11-14T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

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

    10-12, 2014, at the Hanford Tank Farms. The activity consisted of HSS staff observing Hanford Tank Farm operations and a Department of Energy Facility Representative training...

  11. Renewable Energy Plants in Your Gas Tank: From Photosynthesis...

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

    Renewable Energy Plants in Your Gas Tank: From Photosynthesis to Ethanol (4 Activities) Renewable Energy Plants in Your Gas Tank: From Photosynthesis to Ethanol (4 Activities)...

  12. Technical Assessment of Cryo-Compressed Hydrogen Storage Tank...

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

    Cryo-Compressed Hydrogen Storage Tank Systems for Automotive Applications Technical Assessment of Cryo-Compressed Hydrogen Storage Tank Systems for Automotive Applications...

  13. Technical Assessment of Compressed Hydrogen Storage Tank Systems...

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

    Compressed Hydrogen Storage Tank Systems for Automotive Applications Technical Assessment of Compressed Hydrogen Storage Tank Systems for Automotive Applications Technical report...

  14. actual tank 48h: Topics by E-print Network

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

    of the THINK TANK Ziurys, Lucy M. 36 Department of Energy Workshop High Pressure Hydrogen Tank Manufacturing Renewable Energy Websites Summary: Department of Energy Workshop...

  15. Statement of Work (SOW) for FY 2001 to FY 2006 for the Hanford Low Activity Tank Waste Performance Assessment Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    PUIGH, R.J.

    2000-07-25T23:59:59.000Z

    This document describes the tasks included in the Hanford Low-Activity Tank Waste Performance Assessment activity though the close of the project in 2028. Near-term (2001-2006) tasks are described in detail, while tasks further in the future are simply grouped by year. The major tasks are displayed in the table provided. The major goals of the performance assessment activity are to provide the technical basis for the Department of Energy to continue to authorize the construction of disposal facilities, the onsite disposal of immobilized low-activity Hanford tank waste in those facilities, and the closure of the disposal facilities. Other significant goals are to provide the technical basis for the setting of the specifications of the immobilized waste and to support permitting of the disposal facilities.

  16. Hanford site tank waste remediation system programmatic environmental review report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Haass, C.C.

    1998-09-03T23:59:59.000Z

    The US Department of Energy (DOE) committed in the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Record of Decision (ROD) to perform future National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis at key points in the Program. Each review will address the potential impacts that new information may have on the environmental impacts presented in the TWRS EIS and support an assessment of whether DOE`s plans for remediating the tank waste are still pursuing the appropriate plan for remediation or whether adjustments to the program are needed. In response to this commitment, DOE prepared a Supplement Analysis (SA) to support the first of these reevaluations. Subsequent to the completion of the SA, the Phase IB negotiations process with private contractors resulted in several changes to the planned approach. These changes along with other new information regarding the TWRS Program have potential implications for Phase 1 and Phase 2 of tank waste retrieval and waste storage and/or disposal that may influence the environmental impacts of the Phased Implementation alternative. This report focuses on identifying those potential environmental impacts that may require NEPA analysis prior to authorization to begin facility construction and operations.

  17. Permitting plan for Hanford Tanks Initiative

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bloom, J.W.

    1998-03-19T23:59:59.000Z

    This plan describes all the permitting actions that have been identified as required to implement the Hanford Tanks Initiative. It reflects changes in the scope to the Hanford Tanks Initiative since the Rev. 0 plan was issued. The cost and schedule for the permitting actions are included.

  18. Annual radioactive waste tank inspection program - 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McNatt, F.G.

    1997-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Aqueous radioactive wastes from Savannah River Site (SRS) separations processes are contained in large underground carbon steel tanks. Inspections made during 1996 to evaluate these vessels, and evaluations based on data accrued by inspections performed since the tanks were constructed, are the subject of this report.

  19. Annual Radioactive Waste Tank Inspection Program - 1998

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McNatt, F.G.

    1999-10-27T23:59:59.000Z

    Aqueous radioactive wastes from Savannah River Site separations processes are contained in large underground carbon steel tanks. Inspections made during 1998 to evaluate these vessels and auxiliary appurtenances, along with evaluations based on data accrued by inspections performed since the tanks were constructed, are the subject of this report.

  20. Annual radioactive waste tank inspection program - 1999

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Moore, C.J.

    2000-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

    Aqueous radioactive wastes from Savannah River Site (SRS) separations processes are contained in large underground carbon steel tanks. Inspections made during 1999 to evaluate these vessels and auxiliary appurtenances along with evaluations based on data accrued by inspections performed since the tanks were constructed are the subject of this report.