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


1

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

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

2

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

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

3

Issuance of the Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental  

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

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

4

Tank Closure  

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

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

5

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

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

6

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

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

7

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

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

8

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

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

9

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

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

10

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

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

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

11

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

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

12

Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact...  

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

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

13

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

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

14

Tank closure reducing grout  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Caldwell, T.B.

1997-04-18T23:59:59.000Z

15

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

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

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

16

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

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

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

17

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

18

RECENT PROGRESS IN DOE WASTE TANK CLOSURE  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Langton, C

2008-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

19

Savannah River Site Celebrates Historic Closure of Radioactive Waste Tanks:  

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

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

20

Savannah River Site Celebrates Historic Closure of Radioactive Waste Tanks:  

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

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

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


21

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

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

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

22

RCRA closure plan for underground storage tank 105-C  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Miles, W.C. Jr.

1990-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

23

Single-shell tank closure work plan. Revision A  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1995-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

24

Permanent Closure of the TAN-664 Underground Storage Tank  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Bradley K. Griffith

2011-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

25

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

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

DOE Clears Way for Closure of Emptied Waste Tanks at Idaho National DOE Clears Way for Closure of Emptied Waste Tanks at Idaho National Laboratory DOE Clears Way for Closure of Emptied Waste Tanks at Idaho National Laboratory November 20, 2006 - 9:25am Addthis Secretary Bodman Signs Idaho Waste Determination After Consultation with NRC WASHINGTON, DC - U.S. Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman yesterday signed a waste determination for the Idaho Tank Farm Facility clearing the way for the Department of Energy (DOE) to safely and permanently close the 15 waste storage tanks at the Idaho National Laboratory near Arco, Idaho. DOE will begin grouting the first 11 cleaned and emptied tanks at Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC) and plans to complete all 15 tanks by December 2012. Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environmental Management James Rispoli

26

SRS Reaches Significant Milestone with Waste Tank Closure  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

27

AN OVERVIEW COMPARISON OF TANK CLOSURE ACTIVITIES AT CERTAIN DOE SITES  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2003-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

28

Underground storage tank 253-D1U1 Closure Plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Mancieri, S.; Giuntoli, N.

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

29

Underground storage tank 511-D1U1 closure plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Mancieri, S.; Giuntoli, N.

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

30

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Grant Evenson

2009-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

31

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Grant Evenson

2009-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

32

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

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

33

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1997-10-22T23:59:59.000Z

34

Engineering study of tank fill options for landfill closure  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Skelly, W.A.

1996-09-27T23:59:59.000Z

35

Underground storage tank 291-D1U1: Closure plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Mancieri, S.; Giuntoli, N.

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

36

Relationship Between Flowability And Tank Closure Grout Quality  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2012-10-08T23:59:59.000Z

37

Permanent Closure of MFC Biodiesel Underground Storage Tank 99ANL00013  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Kerry L. Nisson

2012-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

38

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

39

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2001-09-28T23:59:59.000Z

40

Joint Tank Closure News Release Final.docx  

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

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

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


41

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Alfred Wickline

2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

42

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Jolly, R

2009-01-06T23:59:59.000Z

43

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Evans, S.K.

2002-01-31T23:59:59.000Z

44

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Evans, Susan Kay; Orchard, B. J.

2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

45

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

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

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

46

Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for Closure of High-Level Waste Tanks at the Savannah RIver Site  

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

628 628 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 249 / Tuesday, December 29, 1998 / Notices and recommendations regarding these proposed priorities. All comments submitted in response to this notice will be available for public inspection during and after the comment period, in Room 3E228, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, Washington, DC between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday of each week except Federal holidays. Program Authority: Sections 9205 and 9209 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (20 U.S.C. 7905 and 7909). Dated: December 22, 1998. Gerald N. Tirozzi, Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education. [FR Doc. 98-34331 Filed 12-28-98; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for

47

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2008-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

48

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

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

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

49

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

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

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

50

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.

51

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

52

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Jolly, R; Bruce Martin, B

2008-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

53

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Evans, Susan Kay; unknown

2000-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

54

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Thaxton, D; Timothy Baughman, T

2008-01-16T23:59:59.000Z

55

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Hansen, E; Alex Cozzi, A

2008-06-19T23:59:59.000Z

56

Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

an Environmental Impact Statement for Retrieval, Treatment, and Disposal of Tank Waste and Closure of Single- Shell Tanks at the Hanford Site, Richland, WA AGENCY:...

57

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

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

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

58

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

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

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

59

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Alfred Wickline

2008-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

60

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1993-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


61

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

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

62

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

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

63

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

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

64

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

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

65

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

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

66

Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...  

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

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

67

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Cooke, Gary A.; Pestovich, John A.

2013-06-12T23:59:59.000Z

68

Environmental Program Description for the Tank Farm Contractor  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Environmental Program Description has been developed in support of the Integrated Environmental, Safety, and Health Management System and consistent with the goals of DOE/RL-96-50, Hanford Strategic Plan. This Environmental Program Plan was developed in support of the Integrated Environment, Safety, and Health Management System Description for the Tank Farm Contractor (ISMS) (RPP-MP-003), which establishes a single, defined environmental, safety, and health management system that integrates requirements into the work planning and execution processes to protect workers, the public, and the environment. The ISMS also provides mechanisms for increasing worker involvement in work planning, including hazard and environmental impact identification, analysis, and control; work execution; and feedback/improvement processes. The ISMS plan consists of five core functions. Each section of this plan describes the activities (formerly known as the Tank Waste Remediation System) of the Tank Farm Contractor (TFC) environmental organization according to the following core functions: Establish Environmental Policy and Define Work Scope; Identify Hazards, Environmental Impacts, and Requirements; Analyze Hazards and Environmental Impacts and Implement Controls; Provide Feedback and Continuous Improvement; and Perform Work within Controls.

POWELL, P.A.

2000-04-20T23:59:59.000Z

69

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2013-01-10T23:59:59.000Z

70

Tank Waste Strategy Update  

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

Tank Waste Subcommittee www.em.doe.gov safety performance cleanup closure E M Environmental Management 1 Tank Waste Subcommittee Ken Picha Office of Environmental Management December 5, 2011 Background Tank Waste Subcommittee (TWS)originally chartered, in response to Secretary's request to perform a technical review of Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) in May 2010. Three tasks: o Verification of closure of WTP External Flowsheet Review Team (EFRT) issues. o WTP Technical Design Review o WTP potential improvements Report completed and briefed to DOE in September 2010 www.em.doe.gov safety performance cleanup closure E M Environmental Management 2 Report completed and briefed to DOE in September 2010 Follow-on scope for TWS identified immediately after briefing to DOE and

71

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

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

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

72

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

BERGERON MP

2010-01-14T23:59:59.000Z

73

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Alfred Wickline

2007-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

74

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

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

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

75

Closure  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

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

Stephen Lilley

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

76

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

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

77

ME 4171 Environmentally Conscious Design & Manufacturing (Bras) Assignment Aircraft Fuel Tank Production Pollution Prevention  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

ME 4171 ­ Environmentally Conscious Design & Manufacturing (Bras) Assignment ­ Aircraft Fuel Tank Production Pollution Prevention A local company manufactures a wide variety of fabric fuel tanks for use mainly in the aircraft industry. The main reasons for using fabric in the construction of these tanks

78

State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) environmental checklist forms for 304 Concretion Facility Closure Plan. Revision 2  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The 300 Area of the Hanford Site contains reactor fuel manufacturing facilities and several research and development laboratories. Recyclable scrap uranium with zircaloy-2 and copper silicon alloy, uranium-titanium alloy, beryllium/zircaloy-2 alloy, and zircaloy-2 chips and fines were secured in concrete billets (7.5-gallon containers) in the 304 Facility, located in the 300 Area. The beryllium/zircaloy-2 alloy and zircaloy-2 chips and fines are designated as mixed waste with the characteristic of ignitability. The concretion process reduced the ignitability of the fines and chips for safe storage and shipment. This process has been discontinued and the 304 Facility is now undergoing closure as defined in the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Dangerous Waste Regulations, WAC 173-303-040. This closure plan presents a description of the 304 Facility, the history of materials and waste managed, and the procedures that will be followed to close the 304 Facility. The 304 Facility is located within the 300-FF-3 (source) and 300-FF-5 (groundwater) operable units, as designated in the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) (Ecology et al. 1992). Contamination in the operable units 300-FF-3 and 300-FF-5 is scheduled to be addressed through the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980 remedial action process. Therefore, all soil remedial action at the 304 Facility will be conducted as part of the CERCLA remedial action of operable units 300-FF-3 and 300-FF-5.

Not Available

1993-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

79

Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Plan for Corrective Action Unit 134: Aboveground Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan identifies the activities required for the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 134, Aboveground Storage Tanks. CAU 134 is currently listed in Appendix III of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) (FFACO, 1996; as amended February 2008) and consists of four Corrective Action Sites (CASs) located in Areas 3, 15, and 29 of the Nevada Test Site (NTS) (Figure 1): (1) CAS 03-01-03, Aboveground Storage Tank; (2) CAS 03-01-04, Tank; (3) CAS 15-01-05, Aboveground Storage Tank; and (4) CAS 29-01-01, Hydrocarbon Stain. CAS 03-01-03 consists of a mud tank that is located at the intersection of the 3-07 and the 3-12 Roads in Area 3 of the NTS. The tank and its contents are uncontaminated and will be dispositioned in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations. This CAS will be closed by taking no further action. CAS 03-01-04 consists of a potable water tank that is located at the Core Complex in Area 3 of the NTS. The tank will be closed by taking no further action. CAS 15-01-05 consists of an aboveground storage tank (AST) and associated impacted soil, if any. This CAS is located on a steep slope near the Climax Mine in Area 15 of the NTS. The AST is empty and will be dispositioned in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations. Soil below the AST will be sampled to identify whether it has been impacted by chemicals at concentrations exceeding the action levels. It appears that the tank is not at its original location. Soil will also be sampled at the original tank location, if it can be found. If soil at either location has been impacted at concentrations that exceed the action levels, then the extent of contamination will be identified and a use restriction (UR) will be implemented. The site may be clean closed if contamination is less than one cubic yard in extent and can be readily excavated. If action levels are not exceeded, then no further action is required. CAS 29-01-01 consists of soil that has been impacted by a release or operations from an active diesel AST that fuels the generator at the Shoshone Receiver Site in Area 29 of the NTS. Soil below the AST will be sampled to identify whether it has been impacted at concentrations exceeding the action levels. If it is, then the extent of contamination will be identified and a UR will be implemented. The site may be clean closed if contamination is less than one cubic yard in extent, can be readily excavated, and it is determined that clean closure is feasible based upon site conditions. If action levels are not exceeded, then no further action is required. Based on review of the preliminary assessment information for CAU 134 and recent site inspections, there is sufficient process knowledge to close CAU 134 using the SAFER process.

NSTec Environmental Restoration

2008-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

80

Tanks focus area. Annual report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Frey, J.

1997-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

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


81

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

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

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

82

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Alfred Wickline

2009-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

83

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1997-09-15T23:59:59.000Z

84

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1994-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

85

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Langton, C.A.

1998-10-26T23:59:59.000Z

86

Investigation of the organic matter in inactive nuclear tank liquids. Environmental Restoration Program  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) methodology for regulatory organics fails to account for the organic matter that is suggested by total organic carbon (TOC) analysis in the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) inactive nuclear waste-tank liquids and sludges. Identification and measurement of the total organics are needed to select appropriate waste treatment technologies. An initial investigation was made of the nature of the organics in several waste-tank liquids. This report details the analysis of ORNL wastes.

Schenley, R.L.; Griest, W.H.

1990-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

87

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

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

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

88

EIS-0356: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement |  

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

356: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact 356: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement EIS-0356: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement Retrieval, Treatment, and Disposal of Tank Waste and Closure of Single-Shell Tanks at the Hanford Site, Richland, WA, The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) intends to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) on the 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. DOE/EIS-0356, Department of Energy, Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for Retrieval, Treatment, and Disposal of Tank Waste and Closure of Single-Shell Tanks at the Hanford Site, Richland,

89

EIS-0356: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement |  

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

56: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact 56: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement EIS-0356: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement Retrieval, Treatment, and Disposal of Tank Waste and Closure of Single-Shell Tanks at the Hanford Site, Richland, WA, The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) intends to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) on the 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. DOE/EIS-0356, Department of Energy, Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for Retrieval, Treatment, and Disposal of Tank Waste and Closure of Single-Shell Tanks at the Hanford Site, Richland,

90

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

Energy Savers [EERE]

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

91

State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Environmental Checklist Form 216-B-3 Expansion Ponds Closure Plan. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The 216-B-3 Expansion Ponds Closure Plan (Revision 1) consists of a Part A Dangerous Waste Permit Application and a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Closure Plan. An explanation of the Part A submitted with this document is provided at the beginning of the Part A Section. The closure plan consists of nine chapters and five appendices. The 216-B-3 Pond System consists of a series of four earthen, unlined, interconnected ponds and the 216-B-3-3 Ditch that receive waste water from various 200 East Area operating facilities. These four ponds, collectively. Waste water (primarily cooling water, steam condensate, and sanitary water) from various 200 East Area facilities is discharged to the 216-B-3-3 Ditch. Water discharged to the 216-8-3-3 Ditch flows directly into the 216-B-3 Pond. In the past, waste water discharges to B Pond and the 216-B-3-3 Ditch contained mixed waste (radioactive waste and dangerous waste). The radioactive portion of mixed waste has been interpreted by the US Department of Energy (DOE) to be regulated under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954; the nonradioactive dangerous portion of mixed waste is regulated under RCRA. Mixed waste also may be considered a hazardous substance under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) when considering remediation of waste sites.

Not Available

1993-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

92

Nevada National Security Site Environmental Remediation Progress Toward Closure of Contaminated Sites  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Environmental Restoration activities at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office assess the environmental impacts that resulted from atmospheric and underground nuclear tests conducted from 1951 to 1992 on the Nevada National Security Site and Nevada Test and Training Range (which includes the Tonopah Test Range). The goal is to protect public health and the environment through investigations and corrective actions. The Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO), established in 1996 between the State of Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP), DOE, and the U.S. Department of Defense, serves as the cleanup agreement for the Environmental Restoration activities and provides the framework for identifying, prioritizing, investigating, remediating, and monitoring contaminated sites. This agreement satisfies the corrective action requirements of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. To ensure efficiency in managing these corrective actions, the sites are grouped according to location, physical and geological characteristics, and/or contaminants. These groups, called corrective action units, are prioritized based on potential risk to workers and the public, available technology, future land use, agency and stakeholder concerns, and other criteria. Environmental Restoration activities include: Industrial Sites, Soils, and Underground Test Area. Nearly 15 years have passed since the FFACO was established, and during this time, more than 3,000 sites have been identified as requiring investigation or corrective actions. To date, approximately 1,945 sites have been investigated and closed through no further action, clean closure, or closure in place. Another 985 sites are currently being investigated or are in the remediation phase, leaving approximately 80 contaminated sites yet to be addressed.

Patrick Matthews (N-I) and Robert Boehlecke (NSO)

2011-03-03T23:59:59.000Z

93

Final Environmental Impact Statement Safe Interim Storage Of Hanford Tank Wastes  

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

1995/01eis0212_cl.html[6/27/2011 1:02:59 PM] 1995/01eis0212_cl.html[6/27/2011 1:02:59 PM] Final Environmental Impact Statement Safe Interim Storage Of Hanford Tank Wastes DOE/EIS-0212 VOLUME 1 OF 2 VOLUME 1 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SAFE INTERIM STORAGE OF HANFORD TANK WASTES Hanford Site Richland, Washington October, 1995 WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY NUCLEAR WASTE PROGRAM LACEY, WASHINGTON 98503 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY RICHLAND OPERATIONS OFFICE

94

DOE/EA-1149; Environmental Assessment: Closure of the Waste Calcining Facility, Idaho Nation Engineering Laboratory (and FONSI)  

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

9 9 July 1996 Environmental Assessment Closure of the Waste Calcining Facility (CPP-633), Idaho National Engineering Laboratory U. S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT FOR THE CLOSURE OF THE WASTE CALCINING FACILITY AT THE IDAHO NATIONAL ENGINEERING LABORATORY Agency: U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) Action: Finding of No Significant Impact SUMMARY: The DOE-Idaho Operations Office has prepared an environmental assessment (EA) to analyze the environmental impacts of closing the Waste Calcining Facility (WCF) at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL). The purpose of the action is to reduce the risk of radioactive exposure and release of radioactive and hazardous constituents and eliminate the need for extensive long-term surveillance and maintenance. DOE has determined that the closure is needed to reduce the risks to human

95

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

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

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

96

Tank Farm Area Cleanup Decision-Making  

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

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

97

Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Tank Waste Remediation System, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington  

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

for the Tank Waste Remediation System, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington for the Tank Waste Remediation System, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington file:///I|/Data%20Migration%20Task/EIS-0189-FEIS-Summary-1996.HTM[6/27/2011 11:21:59 AM] The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires Federal agencies to analyze the potential environmental impacts of their proposed actions to assist them in making informed decisions. A similar Washington State law, the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), requires State agencies, including the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology), to analyze environmental impacts before making decisions that could impact the environment. A major emphasis of both laws is to promote public awareness of these actions and provide opportunities for public involvement. Because NEPA and SEPA requirements are similar, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Ecology

98

Training Environmental Public Health Leaders From childhood lead poisoning in Philadelphia to tank barge  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Training Environmental Public Health Leaders 6/8/2010 From childhood lead poisoning in Philadelphia to tank barge emissions in Memphis, from food safety in Portland, Maine, to air quality in the San Joaquin in everyday life--in homes, in schools, in water supplies, at food markets, and in restaurants. Local EH

99

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2012-01-10T23:59:59.000Z

100

Environmental Assessment for the Construction, Operation, and Closure of the Burma Road II Borrow Pit at the Savannah River Site  

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

Construction, Operation, and Closure of the Construction, Operation, and Closure of the Burma Road II Borrow Pit at the Savannah River Site Agency: U.S. Department of Energy Action: Finding of No Significant Impact Summary: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has prepared an environmental assessment (EA) (DOE/EA-1501) to analyze the potential environmental impacts of a new borrow pit, and its alternatives, at the Savannah River Site (SRS), located near Aiken, South Carolina. Based on the analyses in the EA, DOE has determined that this action is not a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment within the meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). Therefore, the preparation of an environmental impact statement (EIS) is not

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


101

Underground Storage Tanks (West Virginia) | Department of Energy  

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

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

102

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

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

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

103

TANK DEIS TITLE PG.psd  

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

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

104

TANK DEIS SUMMARY TITLE PG.psd  

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

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

105

AX Tank Farm tank removal study  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

SKELLY, W.A.

1998-10-14T23:59:59.000Z

106

Environmental Assessment for Cleanup and Closure of the Energy Technology Engineering Center  

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

45 45 E E N N V V I I R R O O N N M M E E N N T T A A L L A A S S S S E E S S S S M M E E N N T T F F O O R R C C L L E E A A N N U U P P A A N N D D C C L L O O S S U U R R E E O O F F T T H H E E E E N N E E R R G G Y Y T T E E C C H H N N O O L L O O G G Y Y E E N N G G I I N N E E E E R R I I N N G G C C E E N N T T E E R R FINAL March 2003 U.S. Department of Energy NNSA Service Center Oakland, CA Environmental Assessment for Cleanup and Closure of the Energy Technology Engineering Center i TABLE OF CONTENTS Acronyms ..........................................................................................................................................v Glossary...........................................................................................................................................vi 1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................

107

Enhanced Tank Waste Strategy Update  

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

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

108

EIS-0303: Draft Environmental Impact Statement | Department of Energy  

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

Draft Environmental Impact Statement Draft Environmental Impact Statement EIS-0303: Draft Environmental Impact Statement High-Level Waste Tank Closure, Savannah River Operations Office, Aiken, SC This EIS evalutes the potential environmental impacts of a proposal to close the high-level waste tanks at the Savannah River Site in accordance with applicable laws and regulations, DOE Orders, and the Industrial Wastewater Closure Plan for F- and H-Area High-Level Waste Tank Systems (approved by the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control), which specifies the management of residuals as waste incidental to reprocessing. The proposed action would begin after bulk waste removal has been completed. This EIS evaluates three alternatives regarding the HLW tanks at the SRS. The three alternatives are the Clean and Stabilize Tanks

109

EIS-0303: Draft Environmental Impact Statement | Department of Energy  

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

03: Draft Environmental Impact Statement 03: Draft Environmental Impact Statement EIS-0303: Draft Environmental Impact Statement High-Level Waste Tank Closure, Savannah River Operations Office, Aiken, SC This EIS evalutes the potential environmental impacts of a proposal to close the high-level waste tanks at the Savannah River Site in accordance with applicable laws and regulations, DOE Orders, and the Industrial Wastewater Closure Plan for F- and H-Area High-Level Waste Tank Systems (approved by the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control), which specifies the management of residuals as waste incidental to reprocessing. The proposed action would begin after bulk waste removal has been completed. This EIS evaluates three alternatives regarding the HLW tanks at the SRS. The three alternatives are the Clean and Stabilize Tanks

110

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1997-10-02T23:59:59.000Z

111

EIS-0391: EPA Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental Impact  

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

a Final Environmental a Final Environmental Impact Statement EIS-0391: EPA Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental Impact Statement Hanford Tank Closure and Waste Management, Richland, WA EPA announces the availability of the Hanford Tank Closure and Waste Management FEIS. This FEIS evaluates the environmental impacts for the following three key areas: (1) retrieval, treatment, and disposal of waste from 149 single-shell tanks (SSTs) and 28 double-shell tanks and closure of the SST system, (2) decommissioning of the Fast Flux Test Facility, a nuclear test reactor, and (3) disposal of Hanford's waste and other DOE sites' low-level and mixed low-level radioactive waste. EIS-0391-FEIS-EPANOA-2012.pdf More Documents & Publications EIS-0413: EPA Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental Impact

112

EIS-0391: EPA Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental Impact  

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

391: EPA Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental 391: EPA Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental Impact Statement EIS-0391: EPA Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental Impact Statement Hanford Tank Closure and Waste Management, Richland, WA EPA announces the availability of the Hanford Tank Closure and Waste Management FEIS. This FEIS evaluates the environmental impacts for the following three key areas: (1) retrieval, treatment, and disposal of waste from 149 single-shell tanks (SSTs) and 28 double-shell tanks and closure of the SST system, (2) decommissioning of the Fast Flux Test Facility, a nuclear test reactor, and (3) disposal of Hanford's waste and other DOE sites' low-level and mixed low-level radioactive waste. EIS-0391-FEIS-EPANOA-2012.pdf More Documents & Publications EIS-0413: EPA Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental Impact

113

Final Environmental Assessment for Proposed Closure of the Airport Landfills Within Technical Area 73 at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico  

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

15 15 Final Environmental Assessment for Proposed Closure of the Airport Landfills Within Technical Area 73 at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico May 22, 2005 Department of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration Los Alamos Site Office Final EA for Proposed Closure of the Airport Landfills within TA-73 at LANL Page iii of viii Contents Acronyms and Terms .................................................................................................................. vi 1.0 Purpose and Need ................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Introduction.............................................................................................................

114

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Freeman-Pollard, J.R.

1994-03-02T23:59:59.000Z

115

Nondestructive assay (NDA) of fissile material solutions in tanks at Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Nondestructive assay of holdup in solution tanks at Rocky Flats has been performed to address criticality safety concerns since 1974. Destructive analysis techniques were used for quantification of the fissile material content of the tanks. With termination of operations in 1989, including sparging and sampling of tanks, a need arose for nondestructive assay of solutions in tanks to confirm previous inventory values. Gamma ray measurement methodologies were investigated and several techniques, including Poor Man`s Densitometry were implemented. These techniques have been applied to several different types of tanks including: annular, raschig ring filled, and pencil tanks. For the annular tanks ``Poor Man`s Densitometry`` is used, with the densities of the measured solutions normalized to the value of one ``accepted`` concentration tank. Measurement uncertainties for this technique has been better than was anticipated. Measurements are also performed at several levels to attempt to detect variations in density. For the current tank draining program, solution in tanks is assayed by the NDA gamma-ray technique before draining. Measurement results were obtained for plutonium, uranium, and mixtures of U/Pu solutions for concentrations ranging from less than 0.5 g/l to 150 g/l. Tanks with expected concentrations were used to establish a relationship between concentration and count rate. ``Bootstrapping`` calibration techniques were used in some cases to obtain quantitative results.

Fleissner, J.G.; Lamb, F.W.; Maul, M.R.

1995-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

116

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...

117

FINAL CLOSURE PLAN SURFACE IMPOUNDMENTS CLOSURE, SITE 300  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2004-09-29T23:59:59.000Z

118

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NSTec Environmental Restoration

2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

119

Tank Waste Committee Page 1  

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

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

120

Hanford Tank Waste Residuals  

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

Hanford Hanford Tank Waste Residuals DOE HLW Corporate Board November 6, 2008 Chris Kemp, DOE ORP Bill Hewitt, YAHSGS LLC Hanford Tanks & Tank Waste * Single-Shell Tanks (SSTs) - ~27 million gallons of waste* - 149 SSTs located in 12 SST Farms - Grouped into 7 Waste Management Areas (WMAs) for RCRA closure purposes: 200 West Area S/SX T TX/TY U 200 East Area A/AX B/BX/BY C * Double-Shell Tanks (DSTs) - ~26 million gallons of waste* - 28 DSTs located in 6 DST Farms (1 West/5 East) * 17 Misc Underground Storage Tanks (MUST) * 43 Inactive MUST (IMUST) 200 East Area A/AX B/BX/BY C * Volumes fluctuate as SST retrievals and 242-A Evaporator runs occur. Major Regulatory Drivers * Radioactive Tank Waste Materials - Atomic Energy Act - DOE M 435.1-1, Ch II, HLW - Other DOE Orders * Hazardous/Dangerous Tank Wastes - Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (TPA) - Retrieval/Closure under State's implementation

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


121

TFA Tank Focus Area - multiyear program plan FY98-FY00  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

122

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Fellinger, A.

2009-12-08T23:59:59.000Z

123

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2000-05-19T23:59:59.000Z

124

H-Tank Farm Waste Determination | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

(SRS) in South Carolina to complete cleanup and closure of the underground liquid waste tanks in the H Tank Farm as they are emptied and cleaned. The action marked a major...

125

Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact: Cleanup and Closure of the Energy Technology Engineering Center  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

DOE analyzed two cleanup and closure alternatives and the No Action Alternative, in accordance with the Council on Environmental Quality regulations implementing NEPA (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508) and DOE's NEPA implementing regulations (10 CFR Part 1021). Under Alternative 1, DOE is proposing to clean up the remaining ETEC facilities using the existing site specific cleanup standard of 15mrem/yr. (plus DOE's As Low As Reasonably Achievable--ALARA-principle) for decontamination of radiological facilities and surrounding soils (Alternative 1). An annual 15-millirem additional radiation dose to the maximally exposed individual (assumed to be an individual living in a residential setting on Area IV) from all exposure pathways (air, soil, groundwater) equates to an additional theoretical lifetime cancer risk of no more than 3 x 10{sup -4} (3 in 10,000). For perspective, it is estimated that the average individual in the United States receives a dose of about 300 millirem each year from natural sources of radiation. However, actual exposures generally will be much lower as a result of the application of the ''as low as reasonably achievable'' (ALARA) principle. Based on post-remediation verification sampling previous cleanups have generally resulted in a 2 x 10{sup -6} level of residual risk. DOE would decontaminate, decommission, and demolish the remaining radiological facilities. DOE would also decommission and demolish the one remaining sodium facility and all of the remaining uncontaminated support buildings for which it is responsible. The ongoing RCRA corrective action program, including groundwater treatment (interim measures), would continue. Other environmental impacts would include 2.5 x 10{sup -3} fatalities as a result of LLW shipments and 6.0 x 10{sup -3} fatalities as a result of emission exhaust from all shipments. DOE would also decommission and demolish the remaining sodium facility and decommission and demolish all of the remaining uncontaminated support buildings for which it is responsible. The SSFL RCRA corrective program (including the ongoing groundwater treatment) would continue. Alternative 1 is DOE's preferred alternative. Under Alternative 2, DOE would clean up the ETEC site using a 0.05-millirem standard. A 0.05 mrem exposure would result in an additional theoretical lifetime cancer risk of no more than 1 x 10{sup -6} to the maximally exposed individual over 40 years. Additional environmental impacts of this alternative include 1.4 traffic fatalities and increased release of particulates. As under Alternative 1, DOE would also decommission and demolish the remaining sodium facilities and all of the remaining uncontaminated support buildings for which it is responsible. Ongoing groundwater treatment (interim measures) and the SSFL site-wide RCRA corrective action would continue. The only difference between Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 is the volume of soil that would need to be excavated in order to meet the annual dose rate. As under the preferred alternative, DOE would also decommission and demolish the remaining sodium facility and decommission and demolish all of the remaining uncontaminated support buildings for which it is responsible. The SSFL RCRA corrective program, (including the ongoing groundwater treatment) would continue. Under the No Action Alternative, DOE would conduct no further cleanup of radiological facilities, soil, or the remaining sodium and other support facilities for which it is responsible. Rather, Rocketdyne, as the owner of the site, would prohibit or control access to contaminated facilities, soil, groundwater, or surface water and would continue groundwater treatment. This alternative is described fully in Section 3.4. DOE initially considered other alternatives that were screened out because they were not considered to be reasonable. These include (1) cleanup of the entire SSFL, (2) the disposal of all radiological facilities as radioactive waste regardless of contamination levels, (3) cleanup of the site to industrial levels, and (4) cleanup of the site to background

N /A

2003-04-02T23:59:59.000Z

126

EIS-0303: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement |  

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

03: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact 03: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement EIS-0303: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement Closure of High-Level Waste Tanks at the Savannah RIver Site, Aiken, South Carolina The Department of Energy (DOE) intends to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) on the proposed closing of high-level waste tanks at the Savannah River Site (SRS) near Aiken, South Carolina. DOE proposes to close the tanks to protect human health and the environment and to promote safety. DOE's preferred alternative is to remove the residual waste from the tanks to the extent technically and economically feasible, and then to fill them with a reducing grout to bind up residual waste and a structural material to prevent collapse of the tanks.

127

EIS-0303: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement |  

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

Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement EIS-0303: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement Closure of High-Level Waste Tanks at the Savannah RIver Site, Aiken, South Carolina The Department of Energy (DOE) intends to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) on the proposed closing of high-level waste tanks at the Savannah River Site (SRS) near Aiken, South Carolina. DOE proposes to close the tanks to protect human health and the environment and to promote safety. DOE's preferred alternative is to remove the residual waste from the tanks to the extent technically and economically feasible, and then to fill them with a reducing grout to bind up residual waste and a structural material to prevent collapse of the tanks.

128

Closure report for N Reactor  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

129

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NSTec Environmental Restoration

2007-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

130

Idaho High-Level Waste & Facilities Disposition, Final Environmental...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

from INTEC closure activities stored in the Tank Farm, solids in the bottom of the tanks, and trace contamination from first cycle reprocessing extraction waste. SBW contains...

131

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1995-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

132

E-Print Network 3.0 - alcohol tank installed Sample Search Results  

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

AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Summary: inspection. Risers should be installed on all new tanks and can even be retrofitted for existing tanks. All... that the septic tank needs...

133

Final Environmental Impact Statement (Supplement to ERDA-1537, September 1977) Waste Management Operations Double-Shell Tanks for Defense High-Level Radioactive Waste Storage Savannah River Plant  

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

Do Do E/EIS-0062 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT mATEIUIENT (Supplement to ERDA-1537, September 1977) Waste ~ Management Operations Savannah River Plant ! Aiken, South Carolina Double-Shell Tanks for Defense High-Level Radioactive Waste Storage April 1980 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY WASHINGTON. D.C.20545 1980 WL 94273 (F.R.) NOTICES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Office of Deputy Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Waste Management Double-Shell Tanks for Defense High-Level Radioactive Waste Storage, Savannah River Plant, Aiken, S.C. Wednesday, July 9, 1980 *46154 Record of Decision Decision. The decision has been made to complete the construction of the 14 double-shell tanks and use them to store defense high-level radioactive waste at the Savannah River Plant (SRP). Background. The SRP, located near Aiken, South Carolina, is a major installation of the

134

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NSTec Environmental Restoration

2007-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

135

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2013-11-11T23:59:59.000Z

136

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

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

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

137

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

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

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

138

TANK FARM RETRIEVAL LESSONS LEARNED AT THE HANFORD SITE  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

DODD RA

2008-01-22T23:59:59.000Z

139

Cementitious Grout for Closing SRS High Level Waste Tanks - 12315  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

In 1997, the first two United States Department of Energy (US DOE) high level waste tanks (Tanks 17-F and 20-F: Type IV, single shell tanks) were taken out of service (permanently closed) at the Savannah River Site (SRS). In 2012, the DOE plans to remove from service two additional Savannah River Site (SRS) Type IV high-level waste tanks, Tanks 18-F and 19-F. These tanks were constructed in the late 1950's and received low-heat waste and do not contain cooling coils. Operational closure of Tanks 18-F and 19-F is intended to be consistent with the applicable requirements of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and will be performed in accordance with South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC). The closure will physically stabilize two 4.92E+04 cubic meter (1.3 E+06 gallon) carbon steel tanks and isolate and stabilize any residual contaminants left in the tanks. Ancillary equipment abandoned in the tanks will also be filled to the extent practical. A Performance Assessment (PA) has been developed to assess the long-term fate and transport of residual contamination in the environment resulting from the operational closure of the F-Area Tank Farm (FTF) waste tanks. Next generation flowable, zero-bleed cementitious grouts were designed, tested, and specified for closing Tanks 18-F and 19-F and for filling the abandoned equipment. Fill requirements were developed for both the tank and equipment grouts. All grout formulations were required to be alkaline with a pH of 12.4 and to be chemically reducing with a reduction potential (Eh) of -200 to -400. Grouts with this chemistry stabilize potential contaminants of concern. This was achieved by including Portland cement and Grade 100 slag in the mixes, respectively. Ingredients and proportions of cementitious reagents were selected and adjusted to support the mass placement strategy developed by Savannah River Remediation (SRR) Closure Operations. Subsequent down selection was based on compressive strength and saturated hydraulic conductivity results. Fresh slurry property results were used as the first level of screening. A high range water reducing admixture and a viscosity modifying admixture were used to adjust slurry properties to achieve flowable grouts. Adiabatic calorimeter results were used as the second level screening. The third level of screening was used to design mixes that were consistent with the fill material parameters used in the F-Tank Farm Performance Assessment which was developed to assess the long-term fate and transport of residual contamination in the environment resulting from the operational closures. The cement and slag contents of a mix selected for filling Tanks 18-F and 19-F should be limited to no more than 125 and 210 lbs/cyd, respectively, to limit the heat generated as the result of hydration reaction during curing and thereby enable mass pour placement. Trial mixes with water to total cementitious materials ratios of 0.550 to 0.580 and 125 lbs/cyd of cement and 210 lbs/cyd of slag met the strength and permeability requirements. Mix LP no.8-16 was selected for closing SRS Tanks 18-F and 19-F because it meets or exceeds the design requirements with the least amount of Portland cement and blast furnace slag. This grout is expected to flow at least 45 feet. A single point of discharge should be sufficient for unrestricted flow conditions. However, additional entry points should be identified as back-up in case restrictions in the tank impede flow. The LP no.8 series of trial mixes had surprisingly high design compressive strengths (2000 to 4000/5000 psi) which were achieved at extended curing times (28 to 90 days, respectively) given the small amount of Portland cement in the mixes (100 to 185 lbs/cyd). The grouts were flowable structural fills containing 3/8 inch gravel and concrete sand aggregate. These grouts did not segregate and require no compaction. They have low permeabilities (? 10{sup -9} cm/s) and are consequen

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

2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

140

Closure Sites | Department of Energy  

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

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

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


141

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

DOVALLE, O.R.

1999-12-29T23:59:59.000Z

142

Underground Storage Tanks: New Fuels and Compatibility  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

143

Stabilization of in-tank residual wastes and external-tank soil contamination for the tank focus area, Hanford Tank Initiative: Applications to the AX tank farm  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Becker, D.L.

1997-11-03T23:59:59.000Z

144

EIS-0391: DOE Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental Impact  

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

DOE Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental DOE Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental Impact Statement EIS-0391: DOE Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental Impact Statement Hanford Tank Closure and Waste Management, Richland, WA DOE announces the availability of its Final Tank Closure and Waste Management EIS for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington (Final TC & WM EIS, DOE/EIS-0391), prepared pursuant NEPA. This Final EIS addresses all public comments on the Draft TC & WM EIS, which was issued in October 2009, and identifies DOE's preferred alternatives. EIS-0391-FEIS-DOENOA-2012.pdf More Documents & Publications Application to Export Electric Energy OE Docket No. EA-387 Energia Renovable S.C., LLC: Federal Register Notice, Volume 77, No. 241 - Dec. 14, 2012 EIS-0391: EPA Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental Impact

145

Regulated underground storage tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1992-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

146

Regulated underground storage tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1992-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

147

Environmental Assessment for the Construction, Operation, and Closure of the Burma Road II Borrow Pit at the Savannah River Site  

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

i This page is intentionally left blank ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Purpose and Need for Action 3 2.0 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES 3 2.1 Proposed Action 3 2.2 Alternatives to the Proposed Action 7 2.2.1 No Action, Continue to Use Existing SRS Borrow Pits 7 2.2.2 Build the Proposed Borrow Pit at Another Onsite Location 7 2.2.3 Use Offsite Commercial Sources of Structural Fill Material 8 3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 8 3.1 Land Use 8 3.2 Meteorology and Climatology 8 3.3 Geology and Seismology 8 3.4 Hydrology 9 3.5 Ecological and Cultural Resources 10 3.6 Radiation Environment 12 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES 12 4.1 Facility Construction 12

148

Environmental Impacts of Repository  

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

~~"'"""""""""'l.. _ _ 4 Environmental Impacts of Repository Construction, Operation and Monitoring, and Closure 4-iii Environmental Impacts of Repository Construction, Operations, Monitoring, and Closure TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 4. Environmental Impacts of Repository Construction, Operations, Monitoring, and Closure ..............4-1 4.1 Preclosure Environmental Impacts of Construction, Operations, Monitoring, and Closure of a Repository ...............................................................................................................................4-3 4.1.1 Impacts to Land Use and Ownership .......................................................................................4-4

149

EIS-0391: DOE Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental Impact  

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

EIS-0391: DOE Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental EIS-0391: DOE Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental Impact Statement EIS-0391: DOE Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental Impact Statement Hanford Tank Closure and Waste Management, Richland, WA DOE announces the availability of its Final Tank Closure and Waste Management EIS for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington (Final TC & WM EIS, DOE/EIS-0391), prepared pursuant NEPA. This Final EIS addresses all public comments on the Draft TC & WM EIS, which was issued in October 2009, and identifies DOE's preferred alternatives. EIS-0391-FEIS-DOENOA-2012.pdf More Documents & Publications Application to Export Electric Energy OE Docket No. EA-387 Energia Renovable S.C., LLC: Federal Register Notice, Volume 77, No. 241 - Dec. 14, 2012

150

Office of Environmental Management | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

(SRS) in South Carolina to complete cleanup and closure of the underground liquid waste tanks in the H Tank Farm as they are emptied and cleaned. The action marked a major...

151

Notice of Intent To Prepare the Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for the Hanford Site, Richland, WA (DOE/EIS-0391) (2/2/06)  

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

5 Federal Register 5 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 22 / Thursday, February 2, 2006 / Notices addressed as follows: Office of Electricity Delivery & Energy Reliability (Mail Code OE-20), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0350 (FAX 202-586-5860). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Russell (Program Office) 202-586- 9624 or Michael Skinker (Program Attorney) 202-586-2793. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Exports of electricity from the United States to a foreign country are regulated and require authorization under section 202(e) of the Federal Power Act (FPA) (16 U.S.C. 824a(e)). On December 14, 2005, the Department of Energy (DOE) received an application from MAG E.S. to transmit electric energy from the United States to Canada. MAG E.S. is a Canadian

152

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

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

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

153

Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) | Department of Energy  

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

May 1, 2002 May 1, 2002 EIS-0303: Final Environmental Impact Statement High-Level Waste Tank Closure March 1, 2002 EIS-0333: Draft Environmental Impact Statement Bonneville Power Administration, Benton County, Washington February 1, 2002 EIS-0332: Draft Environmental Impact Statement McNary-John Day Transmission Line Project February 1, 2002 EIS-0325: Draft Environmental Impact Statement Schultz-Hanford Area Transmission Line Project January 1, 2002 EIS-0333: Final Environmental Impact Statement Bonneville Power Administration, Maiden Wind Farm November 1, 2001 EIS-0309: Final Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant August 1, 2001 EIS-0319: Draft Environmental Impact Statement Proposed Relocation or Technical Area 18 Capabilities and Material at Los Alamos National Lab

154

Environmental Justice Strategy | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Calibration Facilities Environmental Justice Environmental Management System Applied Studies and Technology Post-Closure Benefits Property Records Management Stakeholder Relations...

155

Environmental Justice: Memorandum of Understanding | Department...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Calibration Facilities Environmental Justice Environmental Management System Applied Studies and Technology Post-Closure Benefits Property Records Management Stakeholder Relations...

156

Rulison Site Surface Closure Report  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

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

157

Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) | Department of Energy  

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

December 6, 2012 December 6, 2012 EIS-0391: Final Environmental Impact Statement Hanford Tank Closure and Waste Management, Hanford Site, Richland, WA October 5, 2012 EIS-0438: Draft Environmental Impact Statement Interconnection of the Proposed Hermosa West Wind Farm Project, Albany County, WY September 20, 2012 EIS-0473: Draft Environmental Impact Statement W.A. Parish Post-Combustion CO2 Capture and Sequestration Project, Fort Bend County, Texas July 25, 2012 EIS-0283-S2: Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Surplus Plutonium Disposition July 24, 2012 EIS-0403: Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Solar Energy Development in Six Southwestern States (AZ, CA, CO, NV, NM, and UT) May 31, 2012 EIS-0427: Final Environmental Impact Statement Interconnection of the Grapevine Canyon Wind Project, Coconino County,

158

High-Level Liquid Waste Tank Integrity Workshop - 2008  

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

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

159

E-Print Network 3.0 - actual tank 48h Sample Search Results  

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

septic... Purdue AgronomyPurdue Agronomy CROP, SOIL, AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Septic Tanks: The Primary... Introduction Septic tanks play an essential role in effectively...

160

EIS-0391: Draft Environmental Impact Statement | Department of Energy  

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

Draft Environmental Impact Statement Draft Environmental Impact Statement EIS-0391: Draft Environmental Impact Statement Tank Closure and Waste Management for the Hanford Site, Richland, WA Abstract: The Hanford Site (Hanford), located in southeastern Washington State and situated along the Columbia River, is approximately 1,518 square kilometers (586 square miles) in size. Hanford's mission from the early 1940s to approximately 1989 included defense-related nuclear research, development, and weapons production activities. These activities created a wide variety of chemical and radioactive wastes. Hanford's mission now is focused on the cleanup of those wastes and ultimate closure of Hanford. To this end, several types of radioactive waste are being managed at Hanford: (1) high-level radioactive waste (HLW) as defined in DOE Manual

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


161

Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Tank Integrity Workshop  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

M.C. Edelson; R. Bruce Thompson

2001-11-13T23:59:59.000Z

162

EIS-0391: Final Environmental Impact Statement | Department of...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

three key areas: (1) retrieval, treatment, and disposal of waste from 149 single-shell tanks (SSTs) and 28 double-shell tanks and closure of the SST system, (2) decommissioning of...

163

Tanks focus area multiyear program plan FY97-FY99  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1996-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

164

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

K. B. Campbell

2002-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

165

Underground Storage Tank Regulations | Department of Energy  

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

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

166

Dual Tank Fuel System  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

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

1999-11-16T23:59:59.000Z

167

Environmental Justice Five-Year Implementation Plan | Department...  

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

Management Team Environmental Justice Environmental Management System Applied Studies and Technology Post-Closure Benefits Property Records Management Stakeholder Relations...

168

Waste Characterization Data Manual for the inactive liquid low-level waste tank systems at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Environmental Restoration Program  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Waste Characterization Data Manual contains the results of an analysis of the contents of liquid low-level waste (LLLW) tanks that have been removed from service in accordance with the requirements of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Federal Facility Agreement (FFA), Section IX.G.1. Section IX.G.1 of the FFA requires waste characterizations be conducted and provided to EPA and TDEC for all LLLW tanks that are removed from service. These waste characterizations shall include the results of sampling and analysis of the tank contents, including wastes, liquids, and sludges. This manual was first issued as ORNL/ER-80 in June 1992. The waste characterization data were extracted from ORNL reports that described tank sampling and analysis conducted in 1988 for 32 out-of-service tanks. This revision of the manual contains waste characterization data for 54 tanks, including the 32 tanks from the 1988 sampling campaign (Sects. 2.1 through 2.32) and the 22 additional tanks from a subsequent sampling campaign in 1992 and 1993 (Sects. 2.33 through 2.54). Data are presented from analyses of volatile organic compounds, semivolatile organic compounds, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), pesticides, radiochemical compounds, and inorganic compounds. As additional data resulting from analyses of out-of-service tank samples become available, they will be added to this manual.

Not Available

1993-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

169

Storage Tanks (Arkansas) | Department of Energy  

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

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

170

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

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

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

171

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2002-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

172

18 - Tanks  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

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

2005-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

173

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

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

8 of 864 8 of 864 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Performance Assessment (PA) for the Savannah River Site (SRS) was prepared to support the eventual removal from service of the H-Area Tank Farm (HTF) underground radioactive waste tanks and ancillary equipment. This PA provides the technical basis and results to be used in subsequent documents to demonstrate compliance with the pertinent requirements identified below for removal from service and eventual final closure of the HTF.  U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 435.1 Change 1  Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 61 Subpart C as identified in "Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2005," Section 3116  South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC)

174

Hanford immobilized low-activity tank waste performance assessment  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Mann, F.M.

1998-03-26T23:59:59.000Z

175

Report: EM Tank Waste Subcommittee Full Report for Waste Treatment Plant  

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

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 1000 INDEPENDENCE AVENUE SW WASHINGTON DC 20585 September 30, 2010 Dr. Inés R. Triay Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management 1000 Independence Avenue SW Washington, DC 20585 Dear Dr. Triay: As discussed during our September 15th public meeting, enclosed please find the Environmental Management Advisory Board EM Tank Waste Subcommittee Report for Waste Treatment Plant; Report Number EMAB EM-TWS WTP-001, September 30, 2010, in accordance with the Work Plan directive dated May 10, 2010. This report covers the work plan observations and recommendations concerning the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant at Hanford (WTP). The charge is summarized below. Charge 1: Verification of closure of Waste Treatment and Immobilization

176

Environmental, Safety, and Health Plan for the remedial investigation of the liquid low-level waste tanks at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Environmental Restoration Program  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Environmental, Safety, and Health (ES&H) Plan presents the concepts and methodologies to be used during the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) RI/FS project to protect the health and safety of employees, the public, and the environment. The ES&H Plan acts as a management extension for ORNL and Energy Systems to direct and control implementation of the project ES&H program. This report describes the program philosophy, requirements, quality assurance measures, and methods for applying the ES&H program to individual task remedial investigations, project facilities, and other major tasks assigned to the project.

Not Available

1991-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

177

Feed tank transfer requirements  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Freeman-Pollard, J.R.

1998-09-16T23:59:59.000Z

178

M E Environmental Management Environmental Management  

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

safety  performance  cleanup  closure safety  performance  cleanup  closure M E Environmental Management Environmental Management M E Environmental Management Environmental Management Office of Site Restoration, EM-10 Office of D&D and Facility Engineering, EM-13 Facility Deactivation & Decommissioning (D&D) D&D Program Map Addendum: Impact of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) on EM's D&D Program 2013 Edition U.S. Department Of Energy safety  performance  cleanup  closure M E Environmental Management Environmental Management safety  performance  cleanup  closure M E Environmental Management Environmental Management M E Environmental Management Environmental Management 3/13/2013 The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009

179

Actions to Support Employees of Accelerated Closure Sites, 5/19/2000 |  

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

Actions to Support Employees of Accelerated Closure Sites, Actions to Support Employees of Accelerated Closure Sites, 5/19/2000 Actions to Support Employees of Accelerated Closure Sites, 5/19/2000 At present, there are approximately 400 employees assigned to accelerated closure sites. These sites are among our former nuclear production sites that are now being managed for clean up and closure on or before fiscal year 2006. As you may know, these sites have been identified in the Department's appropriations language for accelerated closure for the purpose of transitioning the real property to private commercial activities or environmentally friendly set-asides. Accelerated closure of these sites requires that employees with critical skills be retained, to the extent possible, to complete closure activities. Upon completion of closure activities requiring their specialized skills,

180

Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary  

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

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

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


181

E-Print Network 3.0 - annual post-closure inspection Sample Search...  

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

the repository has been backfilled and sealed (post-closure). The purpose ... Source: Yucca Mountain Project, US EPA Collection: Environmental Sciences and Ecology 2...

182

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

LUKE, S.N.

1999-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

183

Accelerating cleanup: Paths to closure  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Edwards, C.

1998-06-30T23:59:59.000Z

184

Small Site Closures  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

185

AREA 5 RWMS CLOSURE  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

186

Chemical composition of Hanford Tank SY-102  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1993-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

187

Environmentally safe fluid extractor  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

An environmentally safe fluid extraction device for use in mobile laboratory and industrial settings comprising a pump, compressor, valving system, waste recovery tank, fluid tank, and a exhaust filtering system.

Sungaila, Zenon F. (Orland Park, IL)

1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

188

Ohio Closure Projects Ceremony | Department of Energy  

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

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

189

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

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

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

190

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

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

F-Tank Farm Performance Assessment, Rev 1 F-Tank Farm Performance Assessment, Rev 1 F-Tank Farm Performance Assessment, Rev 1 Draft Basis for Section 3116 Determination for Closure of F-Tank Farm at the Savannah River Site. In accordance with NDAA Section 3116, certain waste from reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel is not high-level waste if the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the NRC, determines that the criteria in NDAA Section 3116(a) are met. This Draft FTF 3116 Basis Document shows that those criteria are satisfied, to support a potential determination by the Secretary pursuant Section 3116. This Draft FTF 3116 Basis Document concerns the stabilized residuals in waste tanks and ancillary structures, those waste tanks, and the ancillary structures (including integral equipment) at the SRS FTF at the time of closure.

191

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

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

F-Tank Farm Performance Assessment, Rev 1 F-Tank Farm Performance Assessment, Rev 1 F-Tank Farm Performance Assessment, Rev 1 Draft Basis for Section 3116 Determination for Closure of F-Tank Farm at the Savannah River Site. In accordance with NDAA Section 3116, certain waste from reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel is not high-level waste if the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the NRC, determines that the criteria in NDAA Section 3116(a) are met. This Draft FTF 3116 Basis Document shows that those criteria are satisfied, to support a potential determination by the Secretary pursuant Section 3116. This Draft FTF 3116 Basis Document concerns the stabilized residuals in waste tanks and ancillary structures, those waste tanks, and the ancillary structures (including integral equipment) at the SRS FTF at the time of closure.

192

Type I Tanks  

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

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

193

Chemical Stabilization of Hanford Tank Residual Waste  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2014-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

194

Rocky Flats Closure Unit Cost Data  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

195

Independent Oversight Special Review, Rocky Flats Closure Project Site -  

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

Oversight Special Review, Rocky Flats Closure Project Oversight Special Review, Rocky Flats Closure Project Site - April 2001 Independent Oversight Special Review, Rocky Flats Closure Project Site - April 2001 April 2001 Special Review of the Rocky Flats Closure Project Site The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Independent Environment, Safety, and Health Oversight (EH-2), within the Office of Environment, Safety and Health, conducted an independent oversight Special Review at the Rocky Flats Closure Project (RFCP). The Special Review was conducted at the request of the Rocky Flats Field Office (RFFO), which is the DOE organizational element with responsibility for the RFCP (formerly known as the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site). Kaiser-Hill Company, LLC (KH) is the prime contractor for the RFCP.

196

Independent Oversight Special Review, Rocky Flats Closure Project Site -  

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

Special Review, Rocky Flats Closure Project Special Review, Rocky Flats Closure Project Site - April 2001 Independent Oversight Special Review, Rocky Flats Closure Project Site - April 2001 April 2001 Special Review of the Rocky Flats Closure Project Site The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Independent Environment, Safety, and Health Oversight (EH-2), within the Office of Environment, Safety and Health, conducted an independent oversight Special Review at the Rocky Flats Closure Project (RFCP). The Special Review was conducted at the request of the Rocky Flats Field Office (RFFO), which is the DOE organizational element with responsibility for the RFCP (formerly known as the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site). Kaiser-Hill Company, LLC (KH) is the prime contractor for the RFCP. RFCP's project-oriented approach and aggressive scheduling have resulted

197

Tanks Focus Area annual report FY2000  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

None

2000-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

198

OXALATE MASS BALANCE DURING CHEMICAL CLEANING IN TANK 6F  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Poirier, M.; Fink, S.

2011-07-22T23:59:59.000Z

199

Final Meeting Summary Page 1  

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

... 4 Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement (TC & WM EIS) (joint with PIC) ......

200

Tank Waste Disposal Program redefinition  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1991-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


201

Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment and Disposition Framework |  

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

Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment and Disposition Framework Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment and Disposition Framework Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment and Disposition Framework Completing the Office of River Protection (ORP) mission of stabilizing 56 million gallons of chemical and radioactive waste stored in Hanford's 177 tanks is one of the Energy Department's highest priorities. This Framework document outlines a phased approach for beginning tank waste treatment while continuing to resolve technical issues with the Pretreatment and High-Level Waste Facilities. Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment and Disposition Framework More Documents & Publications EIS-0391: Draft Environmental Impact Statement Waste Treatment Plant and Tank Farm Program EIS-0356: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement

202

Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment and Disposition Framework |  

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

Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment and Disposition Framework Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment and Disposition Framework Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment and Disposition Framework Completing the Office of River Protection (ORP) mission of stabilizing 56 million gallons of chemical and radioactive waste stored in Hanford's 177 tanks is one of the Energy Department's highest priorities. This Framework document outlines a phased approach for beginning tank waste treatment while continuing to resolve technical issues with the Pretreatment and High-Level Waste Facilities. Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment and Disposition Framework More Documents & Publications EIS-0391: Draft Environmental Impact Statement Waste Treatment Plant and Tank Farm Program EIS-0356: Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement

203

Remedial Alternative Selection for the F Area Tank Farm,  

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

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

204

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Hobart, R.L.

1998-05-12T23:59:59.000Z

205

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Hobart, R.L.

1998-06-25T23:59:59.000Z

206

HANFORD TANK CLEANUP UPDATE  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

BERRIOCHOA MV

2011-04-07T23:59:59.000Z

207

Savannah River Tank Waste Residuals  

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

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

208

DOE/CBFO-11-3479 Panel Closure System Design  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

of Terms 40 CFR Part 191 Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for the Management and DisposalDOE/CBFO-11-3479 Panel Closure System Design Planned Change Request to the EPA 40 CFR Part 194.S. Department of Energy DRZ Disturbed Rock Zone EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency NMED New Mexico

209

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Jerry Bonn

1997-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

210

Tank characterization report: Tank 241-C-109  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

211

Draft Final Phase II Report: Review of Life Cycle and Technology Applications of the Office of Environmental Managements Tank  

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

A1-1 A1-1 APPENDIX 1 Charge Summary Issue Suggested Activities Expected Output/ Work Product Notes Charge 1 Modeling for Life-Cycle Analysis This task entails reviewing the modeling approaches for determining tank waste remediation life-cycle costs at both SRS and Hanford. This includes evaluating assumptions in system plans for completing tank waste missions at Hanford and SRS, as well as the rigor of the models for identifying activities and costs through the end of each site's program. Recommendation(s) At Hanford, LAW vitrification capital and operating costs are potentially substantially greater than competing technologies. A second LAW vitrification plant is currently part of the baseline in order to treat the balance of the

212

May 19, 2000 Memo, Actions to Support Employees of Accelerated Closure Sites  

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

," I'@ ." A:r " The Deputy Secretary of Energy Washington, DC 20585 May 19,2000 MEMOIVINDUM FOR HEADS OF DEPARTMENTAL ELEMENTS FROM: 9P T. J. GLAUTHIER SUBJECT: Actions to Support Employees of Accelerated Closure Sites At present, there are approximately 400 employees assigned to accelerated closure sites. These sites are among our former nuclear production sites that are now being managed for clean up and closure on or before fiscal year 2006. As you may know, these sites have been identified in the Department's appropriations language for accelerated closure for the purpose of transitioning the real property to private commercial activities or environmentally friendly set-asides. Accelerated closure of these sites requires that employees with critical skills be retained, to the extent possible, to complete closure activities. Upon completion of closure

213

Washington Closure Hanford, LLC  

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

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

214

Technical assistance to Ohio closure sites; Technologies to address leachate from the on-site disposal facility at Fernald Environmental Management Project, Ohio  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

On August 6-7, 2002, a Technical Assistance Team (''Team'') from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Subsurface Contaminants Focus Area (SCFA) met with Fernald Environmental Management Project (FEMP) personnel in Ohio to assess approaches to remediating uranium-contaminated leachate from the On-Site Disposal Facility (OSDF). The Team was composed of technical experts from national labs, technology centers, and industry and was assembled in response to a request from the FEMP Aquifer Restoration Project. Dave Brettschneider of Fluor Fernald, Inc., requested that a Team of experts be convened to review technologies for the removal of uranium in both brine ion exchange regeneration solution from the Advanced Wastewater Treatment facility and in the leachate from the OSDF. The Team was asked to identify one or more technologies for bench-scale testing as a cost effective alternative to remove uranium so that the brine regeneration solution from the Advanced Waste Water Treatment facility and the leachate from the OSDF can be discharged without further treatment. The Team was also requested to prepare a recommended development and demonstration plan for the alternative technologies. Finally, the Team was asked to make recommendations on the optimal technical solution for field implementation. The Site's expected outcomes for this effort are schedule acceleration, cost reduction, and better long-term stewardship implementation. To facilitate consideration of the most appropriate technologies, the Team was divided into two groups to consider the brine and the leachate separately, since they represent different sources with different constraints on solutions, e.g., short-term versus very long-term and concentrated versus dilute contaminant matrices. This report focuses on the technologies that are most appropriate for the leachate from the OSDF. Upon arriving at FEMP, project personnel asked the Team to concentrate its efforts on evaluating potential technologies and strategies to reduce uranium concentration in the leachate.

Hazen, Terry

2002-08-26T23:59:59.000Z

215

Oxalate Mass Balance During Chemical Cleaning in Tank 5F  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Poirier, M.; Fink, S.

2011-07-08T23:59:59.000Z

216

Onboard Storage Tank Workshop  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

217

Tank 241-TX-105 tank characterization plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Carpenter, B.C.

1995-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

218

Tank 241-T-111 tank characterization plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Homi, C.S.

1995-01-10T23:59:59.000Z

219

Summary - Tank 48 at the Savannah River Site  

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

Tank 48 Tank 48 ETR Report Date: August 2006 ETR-2 United States Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM) External Technical Review of Tank 48 at the Savannah River Site (SRS) Why DOE-EM Did This Review Tank 48 is a 1.3 million gallon tank with full secondary containment, located and interconnected within the SRS tank system that will play a very important role in removal and processing of high-level waste (HLW) in the years ahead. However, the tank is currently isolated from the system and unavailable for use, because its contents. It contains approximately 250,000 gallons of salt solution containing Cesium-137 and other radioisotopes which are contaminated with significant quantities of tetraphenylborate (TPB), a material which

220

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

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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


221

Feed tank transfer requirements  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Freeman-Pollard, J.R.

1998-09-16T23:59:59.000Z

222

Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary  

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

3622, Rev. 0 3622, Rev. 0 Summary Notes from 1 - 3 September 2009 Office of River Protection Waste Management Area C Tank Farm Performance Assessment Input Meeting MP Connelly Washington River Protection Solutions LLC Richland, WA 99352 U.S. Department of Energy Contract DE-AC27-08RV1 4800 EDT/ECN: DRF UC: Cost Center: Charge Code: B&R Code: Total Pages: 13 Key Words: Waste Management Area C, Performance Assessment, tank closure, waste inventory Abstract: Summary of meeting between DOE-ORP and Hanford Site regulators/stakeholders regarding Waste Management Area C performance assessment TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or

223

Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary  

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

1878, Rev. 0 1878, Rev. 0 Summary Notes from 5 - 7 May 2009 Office of River Protection Waste Management Area C Tank Farm Performance Assessment Input Meeting MP Connelly Washington River Protection Solutions LLC Richland, WA 99352 U.S. Department of Energy Contract DE-AC27-08RV14800 EDT/EON: DRF UC: Cost Center: Charge Code: B&R Code: Total Pages: 15 Key Words: Waste Management Area C, Performance Assessment, tank closure, waste inventory Abstract: Summary of meeting between DOE-ORP and Hanford Site regulators/stakeholders regarding Waste Management Area C performance assessment TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or

224

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Deutsch, William J.

2008-01-17T23:59:59.000Z

225

System for closure of a physical anomaly  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

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

2014-11-11T23:59:59.000Z

226

Vitrification technology for Hanford Site tank waste  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The US Department of Energy`s (DOE) Hanford Site has an inventory of 217,000 m{sup 3} of nuclear waste stored in 177 underground tanks. The DOE, the US Environmental Protection Agency, and the Washington State Department of Ecology have agreed that most of the Hanford Site tank waste will be immobilized by vitrification before final disposal. This will be accomplished by separating the tank waste into high- and low-level fractions. Capabilities for high-capacity vitrification are being assessed and developed for each waste fraction. This paper provides an overview of the program for selecting preferred high-level waste melter and feed processing technologies for use in Hanford Site tank waste processing.

Weber, E.T.; Calmus, R.B.; Wilson, C.N.

1995-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

227

Stress evaluation of the primary tank of a double-shell underground storage tank facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A facility called the Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility (MWTF) is being designed at the Department of Energy`s Hanford site. The MWTF is expected to be completed in 1998 and will consist of six underground double-shell waste storage tanks and associated systems. These tanks will provide safe and environmentally acceptable storage capacity to handle waste generated during single-shell and double-shell tank safety mitigation and remediation activities. This paper summarizes the analysis and qualification of the primary tank structure of the MWTF, as performed by ICF Kaiser Hanford during the latter phase of Title 1 (Preliminary) design. Both computer finite element analysis (FEA) and hand calculations methods based on the so-called Tank Seismic Experts Panel (TSEP) Guidelines were used to perform the analysis and evaluation. Based on the evaluations summarized in this paper, it is concluded that the primary tank structure of the MWTF satisfies the project design requirements. In addition, the hand calculations performed using the methodologies provided in the TSEP Guidelines demonstrate that, except for slosh height, the capacities exceed the demand. The design accounts for the adverse effect of the excessive slosh height demand, i.e., inadequate freeboard, by increasing the hydrodynamic wall and roof pressures appropriately, and designing the tank for such increased pressures.

Atalay, M.B. [ICF Kaiser Engineers, Inc., Oakland, CA (United States); Stine, M.D. [ICF Kaiser Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States); Farnworth, S.K. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

1994-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

228

EBR-II Primary Tank Wash-Water Alternatives Evaluation  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2008-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

229

EA-1345: Final Environmental Assessment | Department of Energy  

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

EA-1345: Final Environmental Assessment EA-1345: Final Environmental Assessment Cleanup and Closure of the Energy Technology Engineering Center, Oakland, California DOE will use...

230

EA-1707: Draft Environmental Assessment | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

EA-1707: Draft Environmental Assessment Closure of Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and Solid Waste Landfill, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington This environmental...

231

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

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

Closure Monitoring Plan for the Closure Monitoring Plan for the Northeast Site and 4.5 Acre Site August 2009 LMS/PIN/N01401 This page intentionally left blank LMS/PIN/N01401 Pinellas Environmental Restoration Project Closure Monitoring Plan for the Northeast Site and 4.5 Acre Site August 2009 This page intentionally left blank U.S. Department of Energy Closure Monitoring Plan for the Northeast Site and 4.5 Acre Site July 2009 Doc. No. N01401 Page i Contents 1.0 Introduction......................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Summary of Source Removal Activities............................................................................. 1 3.0 Delineation of Contaminant Plumes ...................................................................................

232

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) closure sumamry for the Uranium Treatment Unit  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This closure summary has been prepared for the Uranium Treatment Unit (UTU) located at the Y-12 Plant in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The actions required to achieve closure of the UTU area are outlined in the Closure Plan, submitted to and approved by the Tennessee Department of Environmental and Conservation staff, respectively. The UTU was used to store and treat waste materials that are regulated by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. This closure summary details all steps that were performed to close the UTU in accordance with the approved plan.

NONE

1996-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

233

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1992-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

234

EIS-0303: Final Environmental Impact Statement | Department of...  

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

in accordance with applicable laws and regulations, DOE Orders, and the Industrial Wastewater Closure Plan for F- and H-Area High-Level Waste Tank Systems (approved by the South...

235

Tank Waste System Integrated Project Team  

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

Decisional Draft Decisional Draft 1 This document is intended for planning and analysis purposes, assuming a continuing constrained budget environment. Every effort will be made to comply with all applicable environmental and legal obligations, while also assuring that essential functions necessary to protect human health, the environment and national security are maintained. Tank Waste System Tank Waste System Integrated Project Team Integrated Project Team Steve Schneider Office of Engineering and Technology Tank Waste Corporate Board July 29, 2009 2 This document is intended for planning and analysis purposes, assuming a continuing constrained budget environment. Every effort will be made to comply with all applicable environmental and legal obligations, while also assuring that essential functions necessary

236

Accelerating cleanup: Paths to closure  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1998-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

237

Georgia Underground Storage Tank Act (Georgia) | Department of Energy  

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

Underground Storage Tank Act (Georgia) Underground Storage Tank Act (Georgia) Georgia Underground Storage Tank Act (Georgia) < Back Eligibility Agricultural Commercial Construction Developer Fed. Government Fuel Distributor General Public/Consumer Industrial Installer/Contractor Institutional Investor-Owned Utility Local Government Low-Income Residential Multi-Family Residential Municipal/Public Utility Nonprofit Residential Retail Supplier Rural Electric Cooperative Schools State/Provincial Govt Systems Integrator Transportation Tribal Government Utility Program Info State Georgia Program Type Environmental Regulations Siting and Permitting Provider Georgia Department of Natural Resources The Georgia Underground Storage Act (GUST) provides a comprehensive program to prevent, detect, and correct releases from underground storage tanks

238

EA-0915: Waste Tank Safety Program Hanford Site, Richland, Washington  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This EA evaluates the environmental impacts of the proposal to resolve waste tank safety issues at the Hanford Site near the City of Richland, Washington, and to reduce the risks associated with...

239

Tank waste remediation system vadose zone program plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Fredenburg, E.A.

1998-07-27T23:59:59.000Z

240

Savannah River Site - Tank 48 SRS Review Report  

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

ETR-2 United States Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM) External Technical Review of Tank 48 at the Savannah River Site (SRS) Why DOE-EM Did This Review Tank 48 is a 1.3 million gallon tank with full secondary containment, located and interconnected within the SRS tank system that will play a very important role in removal and processing of high-level waste (HLW) in the years ahead. However, the tank is currently isolated from the system and unavailable for use, because its contents. It contains approximately 250,000 gallons of salt solution containing Cesium-137 and other radioisotopes which are contaminated with significant quantities of tetraphenylborate (TPB), a material which can release benzene vapor to the tank head space in

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


241

Alabama Underground Storage Tank And Wellhead Protection Act (Alabama) |  

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

Alabama Underground Storage Tank And Wellhead Protection Act Alabama Underground Storage Tank And Wellhead Protection Act (Alabama) Alabama Underground Storage Tank And Wellhead Protection Act (Alabama) < Back Eligibility Commercial Construction Industrial Municipal/Public Utility Savings Category Buying & Making Electricity Water Home Weatherization Program Info State Alabama Program Type Environmental Regulations The department, acting through the commission, is authorized to promulgate rules and regulations governing underground storage tanks and is authorized to seek the approval of the United States Environmental Protection Agency to operate the state underground storage tank program in lieu of the federal program. In addition to specific authorities provided by this chapter, the department is authorized, acting through the commission, to

242

Design demonstrations for category B tank systems at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document presents design demonstrations conducted of liquid low-level waste (LLLW) storage tank systems located at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). Demonstration of the design of these tank systems has been stipulated by the Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) between the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-Region IV; the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC); and the DOE. The FFA establishes four categories of tanks. These are: Category A -- New or replacement tank systems with secondary containment; Category B -- Existing tank systems with secondary containment; Category C -- Existing tank systems without secondary containment; Category D -- Existing tank systems without secondary containment that are removed from service. This document provides a design demonstration of the secondary containment and ancillary equipment of 11 tank systems listed in the FFA as Category B. The design demonstration for each tank is presented.

Not Available

1994-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

243

Appendix E: Underground Storage Annual Site Environmental Report  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Appendix E: Underground Storage Tank Data #12;Annual Site Environmental Report Appendix E identification service Contents Status ( ) date to Corrective action Tank Out-of- assessment number date regulatory Installation Capacity Preliminary date (gallons) investigation Environmental agency Petroleum USTs

Pennycook, Steve

244

GRR/Section 18-UT-a - Underground Storage Tank | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

GRR/Section 18-UT-a - Underground Storage Tank GRR/Section 18-UT-a - Underground Storage Tank < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-UT-a - Underground Storage Tank 18UTAUndergroundStorageTank (1).pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Utah Department of Environmental Quality Regulations & Policies Utah Underground Storage Tank Act Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 18UTAUndergroundStorageTank (1).pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative Utah Department of Environmental Quality Division of Environmental Response and Remediation oversees the underground storage tank (UST) program in

245

Supplemental design requirements document, Multifunction Waste Tank Facility, Project W-236A. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility (MWTF) consists of four, nominal 1 million gallon, underground double-shell tanks, located in the 200-East area, and two tanks of the same capacity in the 200-West area. MWTF will provide environmentally safe storage capacity for wastes generated during remediation/retrieval activities of existing waste storage tanks. This document delineates in detail the information to be used for effective implementation of the Functional Design Criteria requirements.

Groth, B.D.

1995-01-11T23:59:59.000Z

246

Compressed/Liquid Hydrogen Tanks  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

247

Tank Waste Committee Page 1  

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

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

248

COMPREHENSIVE CLOSURE PLAN FOR THE HANFORD CENTRAL PLATEAU  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This paper describes a comprehensive and strategic plan that has been recently developed for the environmental closure of the Central Plateau area of the Hanford Site, a former weapons-production complex managed by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). This approach was submitted to the DOE Richland Operations Office by Fluor Hanford to provide a framework and roadmap to integrate ongoing operations with closure of facilities that are no longer actively used--all with a view to closing the Central Plateau by 2035. The plan is currently under consideration by the DOE.

LACKEY, M.B.

2005-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

249

Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 342: Area 23 Mercury Fire Training Pit Nevada Test Site, Nevada  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of this Closure Report (CR) is to provide documentation of the completed corrective action and to provide data confirming the corrective action. The corrective action was performed following the approved Corrective Action Plan (CAP) (U.S. Department of Energy [DOE], 1999b) and consisted of closure-in-place with partial excavation, disposal, backfilling, administrative controls, and post-closure monitoring. Soil with petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations above the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) Action Level of 100 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) (Nevada Administrative Code, 1996) was removed to a depth of 1.5 meters (m) (5 feet [ft]). The excavations were backfilled with clean fill to restore the site and to prevent contact with deeper, closed-in-place soil that exceeded the NDEP Action Level. According to the Corrective Action Investigation Plan (CAIP) (DOE, 1998), the Mercury Fire Training Pit was used from approximately 1965 to the early 1990s to train fire-fighting and emergency response personnel at the NTS and encompasses an area approximately 85 by 115 m (280 by 380 ft). The location of the Mercury Fire Training Pit is shown in Figure 1 and a site plan is shown in Figure 2. The Mercury Fire Training Pit formerly included a bermed bum pit with four small bum tanks; four large above ground storage tanks (ASTS); an overturned bus, a telephone pole storage area; and several areas for burning sheds, pallets, and cables. During the active life of the Mercury Fire Training Pit, training events were conducted at least monthly and sometimes as often as weekly. Fuels burned during these events included off-specification or rust-contaminated gasoline, diesel, and aviation fuel (JP-4). Other items burned during these events included paint, tires, a pond liner, wood, paper, cloth, and copper cable. Approximately 570 liters (L) (150 gallons [gal]) of fuel were used for each training event resulting in an approximate total of 136,000 L (36,000 gal) of fuel used over the life of the Mercury Fire Training Pit. Unburned fuel was allowed to pool on the ground and was left to eventually volatilize or soak into the soil. In addition, fuels from the ASTS and fuels and fluids from the overturned bus leaked or spilled onto the ground. Approximately 19 L to 38 L (5 to 10 gal) of paint were also burned monthly until sometime in the 1970s.

C. M. Obi

2000-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

250

F-Area Type IV Tank Liner Life Estimation  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Wiersman, B. J.

2005-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

251

Hanford tank residual waste contaminant source terms and release models  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2011-08-23T23:59:59.000Z

252

Tank Waste Committee Page 1  

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

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

253

Reverberant Tank | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

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

254

Tank characterization reference guide  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1994-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

255

Slide 1  

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

Waste Processing Waste Processing Technical Exchange F - Tank Farm Closure Annulus Cleaning Rudy Jolly/Donald Thaxton Lead Project Engineer F- Tank Farm Closure Projects Washington Savannah River Company May 19, 2009 2 F-Tank Farm Closure Annulus Cleaning Introduction Tank Closure Driver Tank Closure Process Annulus Cleaning Process Annulus Cleaning Equipment Results 3 F-Tank Farm Closure Annulus Cleaning Tank Closure Driver In the Federal Facilities Agreement with the State of South Carolina and the Environmental Protection Agency, SRS has agreed to close non compliant waste tanks by specific dates. Two of the first tanks selected for closure are Tanks 5 and 6 in F-Tank Farm. 4 F-Tank Farm Closure Annulus Cleaning Tank 5 and 6 Closure Process Mechanical Sludge Removal

256

EA-1707: Closure of Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and Solid Waste  

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

07: Closure of Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and 07: Closure of Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and Solid Waste Landfill, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington EA-1707: Closure of Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and Solid Waste Landfill, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington Summary This EA evaluates the potential environmental impacts of closing the Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and the Solid Waste Landfill. The Washington State Department of Ecology is a cooperating agency in preparing this EA. Public Comment Opportunities None available at this time. Documents Available for Download August 26, 2011 EA-1707: Revised Draft Environmental Assessment Closure of Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and Solid Waste Landfill, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington May 13, 2010 EA-1707: Draft Environmental Assessment

257

The Office of Site Closure: Progress in the Face of Challenges  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Office of Site Closure (OSC) was formed in November 1999 when the Department of Energy's (DOE's) Office of Environmental Management (EM) reorganized to focus specifically on site cleanup and closure. OSC's objective is to achieve safe and cost-effective cleanups and closures that are protective of our workers, the public, and the environment, now and in the future. Since its inception, OSC has focused on implementing a culture of safe closure, with emphasis in three primary areas: complete our responsibility for the Closure Sites Rocky Flats, Mound, Fernald, Ashtabula, and Weldon Spring; complete our responsibility for cleanup at sites where the DOE mission has been completed (examples include Battelle King Avenue and Battelle West Jefferson in Columbus, and General Atomics) or where other Departmental organizations have an ongoing mission (examples include the Brookhaven, Livermore, or Los Alamos National Laboratories, and the Nevada Test Site); and create a framework a nd develop specific business closure tools that will help sites close, such as guidance for and decisions on post-contract benefit liabilities, records retention, and Federal employee incentives for site closure. This paper discusses OSC's 2001 progress in achieving site cleanups, moving towards site closure, and developing specific business closure tools to support site closure. It describes the tools used to achieve progress towards cleanup and closure, such as the application of new technologies, changes in contracting approaches, and the development of agreements between sites and with host states. The paper also identifies upcoming challenges and explores options for how Headquarters and the sites can work together to address these challenges. Finally, it articulates OSC's new focus on oversight of Field Offices to ensure they have the systems in place to oversee contractor activities resulting in site cleanups and closures.

Fiore, J. J.; Murphie, W. E.; Meador, S. W.

2002-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

258

Hanford Tank Waste Information Enclosure 1 Hanford Tank Waste Information  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

259

Environmental, Safety, and Health Plan for the remedial investigation of the liquid low-level waste tanks at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Environmental, Safety, and Health (ES H) Plan presents the concepts and methodologies to be used during the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) RI/FS project to protect the health and safety of employees, the public, and the environment. The ES H Plan acts as a management extension for ORNL and Energy Systems to direct and control implementation of the project ES H program. This report describes the program philosophy, requirements, quality assurance measures, and methods for applying the ES H program to individual task remedial investigations, project facilities, and other major tasks assigned to the project.

Not Available

1991-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

260

The integrated tank waste management plan at Oak Ridge National Laboratory  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

DOE`s Environmental Management Program at Oak Ridge has developed an integrated tank waste management plan that combines the accelerated deployment of innovative technologies with an aggressive waste transfer schedule. Oak Ridge is cleaning out waste from aging underground storage tanks in preparation of waste processing, packaging and final safe disposal. During remediation this plan will reduce the risk of environmental, worker, and civilian exposure, save millions of dollars, and cut years off of tank remediation schedules at Oak Ridge.

Billingsley, K. [STEP, Inc., Oak Ridge, TN (United States); Mims, C. [Dept. of Energy, Oak Ridge, TN (United States). Oak Ridge Operations Office; Robinson, S. [Oak Ridge National Lab., TN (United States)

1998-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


261

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

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

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

262

Hanford ETR Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant - Hanford Tank  

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

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

263

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

Energy Savers [EERE]

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

264

EA-1044: Final Environmental Assessment | Department of Energy  

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

Environmental Assessment EA-1044: Final Environmental Assessment Melton Valley Storage Tanks Capacity Increase Project- Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee This EA...

265

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1988-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

266

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1995-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

267

Estimating Residual Solids Volume In Underground Storage Tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Savannah River Site liquid waste system consists of multiple facilities to safely receive and store legacy radioactive waste, treat, and permanently dispose waste. The large underground storage tanks and associated equipment, known as the 'tank farms', include a complex interconnected transfer system which includes underground transfer pipelines and ancillary equipment to direct the flow of waste. The waste in the tanks is present in three forms: supernatant, sludge, and salt. The supernatant is a multi-component aqueous mixture, while sludge is a gel-like substance which consists of insoluble solids and entrapped supernatant. The waste from these tanks is retrieved and treated as sludge or salt. The high level (radioactive) fraction of the waste is vitrified into a glass waste form, while the low-level waste is immobilized in a cementitious grout waste form called saltstone. Once the waste is retrieved and processed, the tanks are closed via removing the bulk of the waste, chemical cleaning, heel removal, stabilizing remaining residuals with tailored grout formulations and severing/sealing external penetrations. The comprehensive liquid waste disposition system, currently managed by Savannah River Remediation, consists of 1) safe storage and retrieval of the waste as it is prepared for permanent disposition; (2) definition of the waste processing techniques utilized to separate the high-level waste fraction/low-level waste fraction; (3) disposition of LLW in saltstone; (4) disposition of the HLW in glass; and (5) closure state of the facilities, including tanks. This paper focuses on determining the effectiveness of waste removal campaigns through monitoring the volume of residual solids in the waste tanks. Volume estimates of the residual solids are performed by creating a map of the residual solids on the waste tank bottom using video and still digital images. The map is then used to calculate the volume of solids remaining in the waste tank. The ability to accurately determine a volume is a function of the quantity and quality of the waste tank images. Currently, mapping is performed remotely with closed circuit video cameras and still photograph cameras due to the hazardous environment. There are two methods that can be used to create a solids volume map. These methods are: liquid transfer mapping / post transfer mapping and final residual solids mapping. The task is performed during a transfer because the liquid level (which is a known value determined by a level measurement device) is used as a landmark to indicate solids accumulation heights. The post transfer method is primarily utilized after the majority of waste has been removed. This method relies on video and still digital images of the waste tank after the liquid transfer is complete to obtain the relative height of solids across a waste tank in relation to known and usable landmarks within the waste tank (cooling coils, column base plates, etc.). In order to accurately monitor solids over time across various cleaning campaigns, and provide a technical basis to support final waste tank closure, a consistent methodology for volume determination has been developed and implemented at SRS.

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

2014-01-08T23:59:59.000Z

268

ENVIRONMENTAL  

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

797 797 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY LOAN GUARANTEE FOR THE AGUA CALIENTE SOLAR PROJECT IN YUMA COUNTY, ARIZONA U.S. Department of Energy Loan Guarantee Program Office Washington, DC 20585 November 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Executive Summary .................................................................................................................ES-1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................ES-1 Purpose and Need ...............................................................................................................ES-1 Proposed Action and Alternatives........................................................................................ES-2

269

Implementation plan for Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 280 and 281; Final rules for underground storage tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report presents the schedules and methods required to comply with the newly promulgated Underground Storage Tank (UST) Regulations Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 280 and 281. These rules were promulgated by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on September 23, 1988, and became effective December 22, 1988. These regulations are required by Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976. Their purpose is to protect the groundwater supplies of the United States in the following ways: Closing old tanks; detecting and remediating tank leaks and spills; establishing stringent standards for new tanks; and upgrade of existing tanks to new-tank standards. 3 refs., 5 tabs.

Stupka, R.C.

1989-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

270

Underground Storage Tank Act (West Virginia) | Department of Energy  

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

Act (West Virginia) Act (West Virginia) Underground Storage Tank Act (West Virginia) < Back Eligibility Utility Fed. Government Commercial Agricultural Investor-Owned Utility State/Provincial Govt Industrial Construction Municipal/Public Utility Local Government Residential Installer/Contractor Rural Electric Cooperative Tribal Government Low-Income Residential Schools Retail Supplier Institutional Multi-Family Residential Systems Integrator Fuel Distributor Nonprofit General Public/Consumer Transportation Program Info State West Virginia Program Type Siting and Permitting Provider Department of Environmental Protection 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 therein, which may occur as

271

Program plan for the resolution of tank vapor issues  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Since 1987, workers at the Hanford Site waste tank farms in Richland, Washington, have reported strong odors emanating from the large, underground high-level radioactive waste storage tanks. Some of these workers have complained of symptoms (e.g., headaches, nausea) related to the odors. In 1992, the U.S. Department of Energy, which manages the Hanford Site, and Westinghouse Hanford Company determined that the vapor emissions coming from the tanks had not been adequately characterized and represented a potential health risk to workers in the immediate vicinity of the tanks. At that time, workers in certain areas of the tank farms were required to use full-face, supplied-breathing-air masks to reduce their exposure to the fugitive emissions. While use of supplied breathing air reduced the health risks associated with the fugitive emissions, it introduced other health and safety risks (e.g., reduced field of vision, air-line tripping hazards, and heat stress). In 1992, an aggressive program was established to assure proper worker protection while reducing the use of supplied breathing air. This program focuses on characterization of vapors inside the tanks and industrial hygiene monitoring in the tank farms. If chemical filtration systems for mitigation of fugitive emissions are deemed necessary, the program will also oversee their design and installation. This document presents the plans for and approach to resolving the Hanford Site high-level waste tank vapor concerns. It is sponsored by the Department of Energy Office of Environmental Restoration and Waste Management.

Osborne, J.W.; Huckaby, J.L.

1994-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

272

Investigation of the organic matter in inactive nuclear tank liquids  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) methodology for regulatory organics fails to account for the organic matter that is suggested by total organic carbon (TOC) analysis in the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) inactive nuclear waste-tank liquids and sludges. Identification and measurement of the total organics are needed to select appropriate waste treatment technologies. An initial investigation was made of the nature of the organics in several waste-tank liquids. This report details the analysis of ORNL wastes.

Schenley, R.L.; Griest, W.H.

1990-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

273

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

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

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

274

Characterization of Samples from Old Solvent Tanks S1 through S22  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Leyba, J.D.

1999-03-25T23:59:59.000Z

275

2011 River Corridor Closure Contractor Revegetation and Mitigation Monitoring Report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report documents the status of revegetation projects and natural resources mitigation efforts conducted for remediated waste sites and other activities associated with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 cleanup of National Priorities List waste sites at Hanford. This report contains the vegetation monitoring data that was collected in the spring and summer of 2011 from the River Corridor Closure Contractors revegetation and mitigation areas on the Hanford Site.

West, W. J.; Lucas, J. G.; Gano, K. A.

2011-11-14T23:59:59.000Z

276

IDENTIFICATION OF DOE'S POST-CLOSURE MONITORING NEEDS AND REQUIREMENTS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The 2006 plan sets an ambitious agenda for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Environmental Management (EM) and the remediation of sites contaminated by decades of nuclear weapons production activities. The plan's primary objective is to reduce overall clean up costs by first eliminating the environmental problems that are most expensive to control and safely maintain. In the context of the 2006 Plan, closure refers to the completion of area or facility specific cleanup projects. The cleanup levels are determined by the planned future use of the site or facility. Use restrictions are still undecided for most sites but are highly probable to exclude residential or agricultural activities. Most of the land will be remediated to ''industrial use'' levels with access restrictions and some areas will be closed-off through containment. Portions of the site will be reserved for waste disposal, either as a waste repository or the in-situ immobilization of contaminated soil and groundwater, and land use will be restricted to waste disposal only. The land used for waste disposal will require monitoring and maintenance activities after closure. Most of the land used for industrial use may also require such postclosure activities. The required postclosure monitoring and maintenance activities will be imposed by regulators and stakeholders. Regulators will not approve closure plans without clearly defined monitoring methods using approved technologies. Therefore, among all other more costly and labor-intensive closure-related activities, inadequate planning for monitoring and lack of appropriate monitoring technologies can prevent closure. The purpose of this project is to determine, document, and track the current and evolving postclosure monitoring requirements at DOE-EM sites. This information will aid CMST-CP in guiding its postclosure technology development and deployment efforts.

M.A. Ebadian, Ph.D.

1999-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

277

Ferrocyanide tank waste stability  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Fowler, K.D.

1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

278

Chapter 18 - Tanks  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

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

E.W. McAllister

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

279

Thermodynamic Model for Uranium Release from Hanford Site Tank Residual Waste  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2011-01-26T23:59:59.000Z

280

TANK SPACE OPTIONS REPORT  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

WILLIS WL; AHRENDT MR

2009-08-11T23:59:59.000Z

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


281

High-Pressure Hydrogen Tanks  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

282

SAVANNAH RIVER SITE TANK 18 AND TANK 19 WALL SAMPLER PERFORMANCE  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2009-12-19T23:59:59.000Z

283

Microsoft Word - HAB_FINAL_Feb07_Summ.doc  

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

... 6 Issue Manager Update on the Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement (TC&WM EIS) ......

284

Email Template  

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

... 1 Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement (TC&WM EIS) 1 River Protection System Plan, Rev. 4...

285

EM Tank Waste Subcommittee Report for SRS and Hanford Tank Waste Review  

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

One System Plan. ........................................................................................................ 88 v PREFACE This is the second report of the Environmental Management Tank Waste Subcommittee (EM- TWS) of the Environmental Management Advisory Board (EMAB). The first report was submitted and accepted by the Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management (EM-1) in September 2010. The EM-TWS responded to three charges from EM-1 regarding the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant at Hanford (WTP) under construction in Richland, Washington. EM's responses were timely, and efforts have been put in place to address the recommendations that EMAB made. This report addresses eight charges given to the EM-TWS earlier this fiscal year. The current

286

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

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

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

287

GRR/Section 18-TX-a - Underground Storage Tank Process | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

TX-a - Underground Storage Tank Process TX-a - Underground Storage Tank Process < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-TX-a - Underground Storage Tank Process 18TXAUndergroundStorageTanks (1).pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Regulations & Policies 30 Texas Administrative Code 334 - Underground and Aboveground Storage Tanks 30 Texas Administrative Code 37 - Financial Assurance for Petroleum Underground Storage Tanks Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 18TXAUndergroundStorageTanks (1).pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range.

288

GRR/Section 18-AK-a - Storage Tank Registration | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

GRR/Section 18-AK-a - Storage Tank Registration GRR/Section 18-AK-a - Storage Tank Registration < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-AK-a - Storage Tank Registration 18AKA - StorageTankRegistration (1).pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Regulations & Policies AS 46.03.380 As 46.03.385 18 AAC 78 Underground Storage Tanks Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 18AKA - StorageTankRegistration (1).pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative Any project that requires installation or operation of a storage tank must

289

GRR/Section 18-NV-a - Underground Storage Tank | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

a - Underground Storage Tank a - Underground Storage Tank < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-NV-a - Underground Storage Tank 18NVAUndergroundStorageTank.pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Nevada Division of Environmental Protection Regulations & Policies Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) Nevada Administrative Code (NAC) Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 18NVAUndergroundStorageTank.pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative The Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) administers the Underground Storage Tank (UST) Program for the State of Nevada.

290

GRR/Section 18-ID-a - Underground Storage Tank Systems | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

GRR/Section 18-ID-a - Underground Storage Tank Systems GRR/Section 18-ID-a - Underground Storage Tank Systems < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-ID-a - Underground Storage Tank Systems 18IDAUndergroundStorageTankSystems.pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Idaho Department of Environmental Quality Regulations & Policies IDAPA 58.01.07 Rules Regulating Underground Storage Tank Systems Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 18IDAUndergroundStorageTankSystems.pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative The Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) requires notification

291

CURRICULUM VITAE David W. Tank  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Tank, David

292

DOE Identifies its Preferred Alternative for Certain Hanford...  

Energy Savers [EERE]

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

293

Hanford low-level tank waste interim performance assessment  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Hanford Low-Level Tank Waste Interim Performance Assessment examines the long-term environmental and human health effects associated with the disposal of the low-level fraction of the Hanford single- and double-shell tank waste in the Hanford Site 200 East Area. This report was prepared as a good management practice to provide needed information about the relationship between the disposal system design and its performance as early as possible in the project cycle. The calculations in this performance assessment show that the disposal of the low-level fraction can meet environmental and health performance objectives.

Mann, F.M.

1996-09-16T23:59:59.000Z

294

Hanford low-level tank waste interim performance assessment  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Hanford Low-Level Tank Waste Interim Performance Assessment examines the long-term environmental and human health effects associated with the disposal of the low-level fraction of the Hanford single and double-shell tank waste in the Hanford Site 200 East Area. This report was prepared as a good management practice to provide needed information about the relationship between the disposal system design and performance early in the disposal system project cycle. The calculations in this performance assessment show that the disposal of the low-level fraction can meet environmental and health performance objectives.

Mann, F.M.

1997-09-12T23:59:59.000Z

295

Tank farm nuclear criticality review  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Bratzel, D.R., Westinghouse Hanford

1996-09-11T23:59:59.000Z

296

Houdini: Reconfigurable in-tank robot  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

RedZone Robotics, Inc. and Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) are developing a tethered mobile robot, Houdini, to work inside waste storage tanks in support of the Department of Energy`s Environmental Restoration and Waste Management (EM) Program. This project is funded by the DOE`s Environmental Management Office of Technology Development through the Morgantown Energy Technology Center (METC). Our goal is to develop technology that is useful for in-tank operations throughout the DOE`s EM program. The first application of the Houdini system is to support the waste retrieval action planned for the final remediation of the Fernald site`s waste silos. RedZone and CMU have discussed potential applications for the system with personnel from several other DOE sites, and have found that the system would be widely useful in the DOE complex for tasks both inside and outside of waste storage tanks. We are tailoring the first implementation of the Houdini system to the specific needs of the Fernald silo remediation. The Fernald application-specific design constraints are primarily interface issues and should not interfere with the utility of the system at other sites. In addition, DOE personnel at the Oak Ridge National Laboratories (ORNL) have expressed a strong interest in the Houdini system. They have a target application scheduled for mid-1996. This program represents a unique opportunity to develop a new technology that has immediate application in two CERCLA cleanup actions; the proposed applications at Fernald and ORNL support Federal Facility compliance agreements.

White, D.W.; Slifko, A.D.; Thompson, B.R.; Fisher, C.G.

1995-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

297

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...

298

Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility (WESF) Interim Status Closure Plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document describes the planned activities and performance standards for closing the Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility (WESF). WESF is located within the 225B Facility in the 200 East Area on the Hanford Facility. Although this document is prepared based on Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 265, Subpart G requirements, closure of the storage unit will comply with Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173-303-610 regulations pursuant to Section 5.3 of the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) Action Plan (Ecology et al. 1996). Because the intention is to clean close WESF, postclosure activities are not applicable to this interim status closure plan. To clean close the storage unit, it will be demonstrated that dangerous waste has not been left onsite at levels above the closure performance standard for removal and decontamination. If it is determined that clean closure is not possible or environmentally is impracticable, the interim status closure plan will be modified to address required postclosure activities. WESF stores cesium and strontium encapsulated salts. The encapsulated salts are stored in the pool cells or process cells located within 225B Facility. The dangerous waste is contained within a double containment system to preclude spills to the environment. In the unlikely event that a waste spill does occur outside the capsules, operating methods and administrative controls require that waste spills be cleaned up promptly and completely, and a notation made in the operating record. Because dangerous waste does not include source, special nuclear, and by-product material components of mixed waste, radionuclides are not within the scope of this documentation. The information on radionuclides is provided only for general knowledge.

SIMMONS, F.M.

2000-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

299

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2004-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

300

Think Tank: Delaware Department of Natural Resources  

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

Spring 2009 Number 58 Spring 2009 Number 58 UST Regulations Revision Update Jill Hall The Tank Management Branch (TMB) conducted 3 public workshops in October 2008 to roll out changes to the Delaware Regulations Governing Underground Storage Tanks (UST Regulations). The UST Regulations were completely re- vamped last year and became effective January 11, 2008. Changes were made last year for 2 reasons: (1) the UST Reg- ulations were woefully out of date with regards to technological changes, and (2) the Federal Energy Policy Act (EPACT) dictated that states make several chang- es to their UST programs. The changes required by EPACT have deadlines rang- ing from 2008 to August 2009. Delaware could not make all the required changes by January 11, 2008 because the United States Environmental Protection Agency

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


301

Tank characterization data report: Tank 241-C-112  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1993-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

302

Post-Closure Benefits | Department of Energy  

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

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

303

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1996-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

304

River Corridor Closure Project Partnering Performance Agreement...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

305

Remedial Action Work Plan Amchitka Island Mud Pit Closures  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

DOE/NV

2001-04-05T23:59:59.000Z

306

Clamshell closure for metal drum  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

Blanton, Paul S

2014-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

307

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

308

Tank characterization data report: Tank 241-C-112  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

309

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

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

310

EMAB Tank Waste Subcommittee Report Presentation  

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

EM EM Environmental Management Tank Waste Subcommittee (EM- -TWS) TWS) Report to the Report to the Environmental Management Advisory Board Environmental Management Advisory Board FY 2011 FY 2011 EM EM- -TWS Report TWS Report- - #003 #003 June 23, June 23, 2011 2011 1 1 Agenda Agenda Overview Overview * * Charges / Scope of Work Charges / Scope of Work * * Committee Members and Support Committee Members and Support * * Work Schedule Work Schedule * * Plan Focus Plan Focus System Plan Basis of Review System Plan Basis of Review 2 2 System Plan Basis of Review System Plan Basis of Review Phase II Report Findings and Observations Phase II Report Findings and Observations * * Charges 1 through 7 Charges 1 through 7 * * Status of Charge 8 Status of Charge 8 Vulnerabilities and Potential Mitigation

311

An Ultrasonic Instrument for Measuring Density and Viscosity of Tank Waste  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

An estimated 381,000 m3/1.1 x 109...Ci of radioactive waste are stored in high-level waste tanks at the Hanford, Savannah River, Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, and West Valley facilities...

S. H. Sheen; H. T. Chien; A. C. Raptis

1998-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

312

Tank Waste Committee Page 1  

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

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

313

Tank Waste Committee Page 1  

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

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

314

Tank Waste Committee Page 1  

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

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

315

GRR/Section 18-OR-a - State Underground Storage Tank | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

GRR/Section 18-OR-a - State Underground Storage Tank GRR/Section 18-OR-a - State Underground Storage Tank < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-OR-a - State Underground Storage Tank 18ORAStateUndergroundStorageTank (1).pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Regulations & Policies OAR 340-150: Underground Storage Tank Rules Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 18ORAStateUndergroundStorageTank (1).pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative _ 18-OR-a.1 - Application for General Permit Registration Certificate, EPA

316

EA-0881: Tank 241-c-103 Organic Vapor and Liquid Characterization and  

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

81: Tank 241-c-103 Organic Vapor and Liquid Characterization 81: Tank 241-c-103 Organic Vapor and Liquid Characterization and Supporting Activities, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington EA-0881: Tank 241-c-103 Organic Vapor and Liquid Characterization and Supporting Activities, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington SUMMARY This EA evaluates the environmental impacts of a proposal to sample the vapor space and liquid waste and perform other supporting activities in Tank 241-C-103 located in the 241-C Tank Farm on the Hanford Site in Richland, Washington. PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITIES None available at this time. DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD August 10, 1992 EA-0881: Finding of No Significant Impact Tank 241-c-103 Organic Vapor and Liquid Characterization and Supporting Activities, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington August 10, 1992

317

GRR/Section 18-MT-a - Underground Storage Tanks | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

MT-a - Underground Storage Tanks MT-a - Underground Storage Tanks < GRR Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap Help List of Sections Section 18-MT-a - Underground Storage Tanks 18MTAUndergroundStorageTanks (2).pdf Click to View Fullscreen Contact Agencies Montana Department of Environmental Quality Regulations & Policies Montana Code Annotated 75-11-501 Administrative Rules of Montana 17-56 Triggers None specified Click "Edit With Form" above to add content 18MTAUndergroundStorageTanks (2).pdf Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Error creating thumbnail: Page number not in range. Flowchart Narrative A developer must obtain an Underground Storage Tank Installation Permit

318

Applying Lean Concepts to Waste Site Closure - 13137  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Washington Closure Hanford (WCH) was selected by the U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office to manage the River Corridor Closure Project, a 10-year contract in which WCH will clean up 220 mi{sup 2} of contaminated land at the Hanford Site in Richland, Washington. In the summer of 2011, with Tri-Party (DOE-RL, Environmental Protection Agency and Washington State Department of Ecology) Agreement Milestones due at the end of the calendar year, standard work practices were challenged in regards to closure documentation development. The Lean process, a concept that maximizes customer value while minimizing waste, was introduced to WCH's Sample Design and Cleanup Verification organization with the intention of eliminating waste and maximizing efficiencies. The outcome of implementing Lean processes and concepts was impressive. It was determined that the number of non-value added steps far outnumbered the value added steps. Internal processing time, document size, and review times were all reduced significantly; relationships with the customer and the regulators were also improved; and collaborative working relationships with the Tri Parties have been strengthened by working together on Lean initiatives. (authors)

Proctor, M.L. [Washington Closure Hanford, 2620 Fermi, Richland, Washington 99354 (United States)] [Washington Closure Hanford, 2620 Fermi, Richland, Washington 99354 (United States)

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

319

Removing Phosphate from Hanford High-Phosphate Tank Wastes: FY 2010 Results  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is responsible for environmental remediation at the Hanford Site in Washington State, a former nuclear weapons production site. Retrieving, processing, immobilizing, and disposing of the 2.2 105 m3 of radioactive wastes stored in the Hanford underground storage tanks dominates the overall environmental remediation effort at Hanford. The cornerstone of the tank waste remediation effort is the Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP). As currently designed, the capability of the WTP to treat and immobilize the Hanford tank wastes in the expected lifetime of the plant is questionable. For this reason, DOE has been pursuing supplemental treatment options for selected wastes. If implemented, these supplemental treatments will route certain waste components to processing and disposition pathways outside of WTP and thus will accelerate the overall Hanford tank waste remediation mission.

Lumetta, Gregg J.; Braley, Jenifer C.; Edwards, Matthew K.; Qafoku, Odeta; Felmy, Andrew R.; Carter, Jennifer C.; MacFarlan, Paul J.

2010-09-22T23:59:59.000Z

320

Tank Waste Remediation System Tank Waste Analysis Plan. FY 1995  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This documents lays the groundwork for preparing the implementing the TWRS tank waste analysis planning and reporting for Fiscal Year 1995. This Tank Waste Characterization Plan meets the requirements specified in the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, better known as the Tri-Party Agreement.

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

1994-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


321

Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 366: Area 11 Plutonium Valley Dispersion Sites, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Closure Report (CR) presents information supporting closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 366, Area 11 Plutonium Valley Dispersion Sites, and provides documentation supporting the completed corrective actions and confirmation that closure objectives for CAU 366 were met. 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).

none,

2013-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

322

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

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

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

323

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...

324

Vendor Assessment for the Waste Package Closure System (Yucca Mountain Project)  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) has been tasked with developing, designing, constructing, and operating a full-scale prototype of the work package closure system. As a precursor to developing the conceptual design, all commercially available equipment was assessed to identify any existing technology gaps. This report presents the results of that assessment for all major equipment.

Shelton-Davis, C.V.

2003-09-26T23:59:59.000Z

325

Vendor Assessment for the Waste Package Closure System (Yucca Mtn. Project)  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) has been tasked with developing, designing, constructing, and operating a full-scale prototype of the work package closure system. As a precursor to developing the conceptual design, all commercially available equipment was assessed to identify any existing technology gaps. This report presents the results of that assessment for all major equipment.

Colleen Shelton-Davis

2003-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

326

Tank 241-Z-361 vapor sampling and analysis plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

BANNING, D.L.

1999-02-23T23:59:59.000Z

327

Organic liner for thermoset composite tank  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

Garvey, Raymond E. (Knoxville, TN)

1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

328

Estimating Waste Inventory and Waste Tank Characterization |...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

329

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

330

Utah Division of Environmental Response and Remediation Underground...  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Division of Environmental Response and Remediation Underground Storage Tank Branch Webpage Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Utah...

331

Tanks Focus Area site needs assessment FY 2000  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report documents the process used by the Tanks Focus Area (TFA) to analyze and develop responses to technology needs submitted by five major U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) sites with radioactive tank waste problems, and the initial results of the analysis. The sites are the Hanford Site, Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR), Savannah River Site (SRS), and West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP). During the past year, the TFA established a link with DOE's Fernald site to exchange, on a continuing basis, mutually beneficial technical information and assistance.

RW Allen

2000-04-11T23:59:59.000Z

332

Hanford Tanks Initiative fiscal year 1997 retrieval technology demonstrations  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Berglin, E.J.

1998-02-05T23:59:59.000Z

333

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1995-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

334

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

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

335

Cornell University's Online Aboveground Petroleum Tank Inspection Program  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Pawlowski, Wojtek

336

Tank Waste Corporate Board | Department of Energy  

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

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

337

DOE HydrogenDOE Hydrogen Composite Tank ProgramComposite Tank Program  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

338

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Wiersma, B; James Elder, J

2008-08-21T23:59:59.000Z

339

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Cementitious grout will be used to close Tanks 18-F and 19-F. The functions of the grout are to: (1) physically stabilize the final landfill by filling the empty volume in the tanks with a non compressible material; (2) provide a barrier for inadvertent intrusion into the tank; (3) reduce contaminant mobility by (a) limiting the hydraulic conductivity of the closed tank and (b) reducing contact between the residual waste and infiltrating water; and (4) providing an alkaline, chemically reducing environment in the closed tank to control speciation and solubility of selected radionuclides. The objective of this work was to identify a single (all-in-one) grout to stabilize and isolate the residual radionuclides in the tank, provide structural stability of the closed tank and serve as an inadvertent intruder barrier. This work was requested by V. A. Chander, High Level Waste (HLW) Tank Engineering, in HLW-TTR-2011-008. The complete task scope is provided in the Task Technical and QA Plan, SRNL-RP-2011-00587 Revision 0. The specific objectives of this task were to: (1) Identify new admixtures and dosages for formulating a zero bleed flowable tank fill material selected by HLW Tank Closure Project personnel based on earlier tank fill studies performed in 2007. The chemical admixtures used for adjusting the flow properties needed to be updated because the original admixture products are no longer available. Also, the sources of cement and fly ash have changed, and Portland cements currently available contain up to 5 wt. % limestone (calcium carbonate). (2) Prepare and evaluate the placement, compressive strength, and thermal properties of the selected formulation with new admixture dosages. (3) Identify opportunities for improving the mix selected by HLW Closure Project personnel and prepare and evaluate two potentially improved zero bleed flowable fill design concepts; one based on the reactor fill grout and the other based on a shrinkage compensating flowable fill mix design. (4) Prepare samples for hydraulic property measurements for comparison to the values in the F and H- Tank Farm Performance Assessments (PAs). (5) Identify a grout mix for the Tanks 18-F and 19-F Grout Procurement Specification [Forty, 2011 a, b, c]. Results for two flowable zero bleed structural fill concepts containing 3/8 inch gravel (70070 Series and LP-8 Series) and a sand only mix (SO Series) are provided in this report. Tank Farm Engineering and SRNL Project Management selected the 70070 mix as the base case for inclusion in Revision 0 of the Tanks 18-F and 19-F grout procurement specification [Forty 2011 a] and requested admixture recommendations and property confirmation for this formulation [Forty, 2011 b]. Lower cementitious paste mixes were formulated because the 70070 mix is over designed with respect to strength and generates more heat from hydration reactions than is desirable for mass pour application. Work was also initiated on a modification of the recommended mix which included shrinkage compensation to mitigate fast pathways caused by shrinkage cracking and poor physical bonding to the tank and ancillary equipment. Testing of this option was postponed to FY12.

Stefanko, D.; Langton, C.

2011-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

340

EXPEDITING THE PATH TO CLOSURE THE CHEMICAL WASTE LANDFILL, SANDIA NATIONAL LABORATORIES, NEW MEXICO  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Chemical Waste Landfill (CWL) at Sandia National Laboratories, New Mexico (SNL/NM) is undergoing closure subject to the requirements of Subtitle C of RCRA. This paper identifies regulatory mechanisms that have and continue to expedite and simplify the closure of the CWL. These include (1) the Environmental Restoration (ER) Programmatic effort to achieve progress quickly with respect to the standard regulatory processes, which resulted in the performance of voluntary corrective measures at the CWL years in advance of the standard process schedule, (2) the management and disposal of CWL remediation wastes and materials according to the risks posed, and (3) the combination of multiple regulatory requirements into a single submittal.

Young, S.G.; Schofield, D.P.; Davis, M.J.; Methvin, R.; Mitchell, M.

2003-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

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


341

FEMA Think Tank Call Meeting  

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

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

342

Response ¬タモ Tank Waste Subcommittee (1/24/11)  

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

1 1 MEMORANDUM FOR JAMES AJELLO CHAIRMAN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD FROM: INES R. TRIAY w sw ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR V ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT . SUBJECT: Office of Eilvironmental Management Response to the September 201 0 Report submitted by the Tank Waste Subcommittee of the Environmental Management Advisory Board on the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant On September 15,201 0, the Tank Waste Subcommittee (TWS) of the Office of Environmental Management Advisory Board (EMAB) briefed both the full EMAB as well as EM management on the results of its review of several technical aspects of the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP). The EMAB accepted the results of the review and on September 30,2010 you forwarded the full report, Environmental Management Advisory Board EM Tank Waste Subcommittee Report for

343

U.S. Department of Energy Miamisburg Closure Project  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

Miamisburg Closure Project 1075 Mound Road Miamisburg, Ohio 45342 Mr. Tim Fischer U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 77 W. Jackson Boulevard, SR-6J Chicago, JL 60604 MAY 5 2005 Mr. Brian Nickel Ohio Environmental Protection Agency 401 E. Fifth Street Dayton, OH 45402 Dear M r . Fischer & Mr..Nickel: r/ MCP-20 1-05 Enclosed please find the "Phase I Remedy (Monitored Natural Attenuation) Groundwater Monitoring Plan (Final, dated September 29,2004)." As you know, this monitoring plan was prepared in accordance with the Phase I Parcel Record of Decision (ROD), and was approved by the Mound 2000 Core Team on September 29,2004. The enclosed plan requires DOE to submit a draft annual report to the regulators, by March 3 1st of each year, that documents the progress of the M

344

April 29, 2004: Fernald Closure Site  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

345

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

346

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

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

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

347

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

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

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

348

Monthly Tank Inspection Log Name of Campus  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Rosen, Jay

349

Tips For Residential Heating Oil Tank Owners  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Maroncelli, Mark

350

Cornell University's Online Aboveground Petroleum Tank  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Pawlowski, Wojtek

351

Buffer Tank Design for Acceptable Control Performance  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Skogestad, Sigurd

352

DOE Vehicular Tank Workshop Sandia National Laboratories  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

353

Tanks Focus Area site needs assessment FY 1998  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report documents the process used by the Tanks Focus Area (TFA) to analyze and develop responses to technology needs submitted by four major US Department of Energy (DOE) sites with radioactive tank waste problems, and the initial results of the analysis. The sites are the Hanford Site, Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR), and Savannah River Site (SRS). This document describes the TFA`s process of collecting site needs, analyzing them, and creating technical responses to the sites. It also summarizes the information contained within the TFA needs database, portraying information provided by four major DOE sites with tank waste problems. The overall TFA program objective is to deliver a tank technology program that reduces the current cost, and the operational and safety risks of tank remediation. The TFA`s continues to enjoy close, cooperative relationships with each site. During the past year, the TFA has fostered exchanges of technical information between sites. These exchanges have proven to be healthy for all concerned. The TFA recognizes that site technology needs often change, and the TFA must be prepared not only to amend its program in response, but to help the sites arrive at the best technical approach to solve revised site needs.

NONE

1998-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

354

Tanks focus area site needs assessment FY 1997  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Tanks Focus Area`s (TFA`s) mission is to manage an integrated technology development program that results in the application of technology to safely and efficiently accomplish tank waste remediation across the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) complex. The TFA uses a systematic process for developing its annual program that draws from the tanks technology development needs expressed by four DOE tank waste sites - Hanford Site, Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR), and Savannah River Site (SRS). The process is iterative and involves six steps: (1) Site needs identification and documentation, (2) Site communication of priority needs, (3) Technical response development, (4) Review technical responses, (5) Develop program planning documents, and (6) Review planning documents. This document describes the outcomes of the first two steps: site needs identification and documentation, and site communication of priority needs. It also describes the initial phases of the third and fourth steps: technical response development and review technical responses. Each site`s Site Technology Coordination Group (STCG) was responsible for developing and delivering priority tank waste needs. This was accomplished using a standardized needs template developed by the National STCG. The standard template helped improve the needs submission process this year. The TFA received the site needs during December 1996 and January 1997.

NONE

1997-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

355

Radioactive Tank Waste Remediation Focus Area. Technology summary  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

In February 1991, DOE`s Office of Technology Development created the Underground Storage Tank Integrated Demonstration (UST-ID), to develop technologies for tank remediation. Tank remediation across the DOE Complex has been driven by Federal Facility Compliance Agreements with individual sites. In 1994, the DOE Office of Environmental Management created the High Level Waste Tank Remediation Focus Area (TFA; of which UST-ID is now a part) to better integrate and coordinate tank waste remediation technology development efforts. The mission of both organizations is the same: to focus the development, testing, and evaluation of remediation technologies within a system architecture to characterize, retrieve, treat, concentrate, and dispose of radioactive waste stored in USTs at DOE facilities. The ultimate goal is to provide safe and cost-effective solutions that are acceptable to both the public and regulators. The TFA has focused on four DOE locations: the Hanford Site in Richland, Washington, the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) near Idaho Falls, Idaho, the Oak Ridge Reservation in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and the Savannah River Site (SRS) in Aiken, South Carolina.

NONE

1995-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

356

The River Corridor Closure Contract How Washington Closure Hanford is Closing A Unique Department of Energy Project - 12425  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Cleanup of the Hanford River Corridor has been one of Hanford Site's top priorities since the early 1990's. This urgency is due to the proximity of hundreds of waste sites to the Columbia River and the groundwater that continues to threaten the Columbia River. In April 2005, the U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office (DOE-RL) awarded the Hanford River Corridor Closure Contract (RCCC), a cost-plus incentive-fee closure contract with a 2015 end date and first of its kind at Hanford Site, to Washington Closure Hanford (WCH), a limited-liability company owned by URS, Bechtel National, and CH2M HILL. WCH is a single-purpose company whose goal is to safely, compliantly, and efficiently accelerate cleanup in the Hanford River Corridor and reduce or eliminate future obligations to DOE-RL for maintaining long-term stewardship over the site. Accelerated performance of the work-scope while keeping a perspective on contract completion presents challenges that require proactive strategies to support the remaining work-scope through the end of the RCCC. This paper outlines the processes to address the challenges of completing work-scope while planning for contract termination. WCH is responsible for cleanup of the River Corridor 569.8 km{sup 2} (220 mi{sup 2}) of the 1,517.7 km{sup 2} (586 mi{sup 2}) Hanford Site's footprint reduction. At the end of calendar year 2011, WCH's closure implementation is well underway. Fieldwork is complete in three of the largest areas within the RCCC scope (Segments 1, 2, and 3), approximately 44.5% of the River Corridor (Figure 3). Working together, DOE-RL and WCH are in the process of completing the 'paper work' that will document the completion of the work-scope and allow DOE-RL to relieve WCH of contractual responsibilities and transition the completed areas to the Long-Term Stewardship Program, pending final action RODs. Within the next 4 years, WCH will continue to complete cleanup of the River Corridor following the completion goals. As field work-scope is completed, progressive reductions of business processes, physical facilities, and staff will occur. Organizations will collapse and flatten commensurate with workload. WCH employees will move on to new endeavors, proud of their accomplishments and the legacy they are leaving behind as being the first and largest environmental cleanup closure contract at Hanford. (authors)

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

2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

357

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."

358

High-Pressure Hydrogen Tanks  

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

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

359

Enhanced Integrity LNG Storage Tanks  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

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

W. S. Jacobs; S. E. Handman

1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

360

Tank Waste Committee Page 1  

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

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

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


361

Light Duty Vehicle CNG Tanks  

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

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

362

Tank Waste Committee Page 1  

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

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

363

DOE Vehicular Tank Workshop Agenda  

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

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

364

Investigating leaking underground storage tanks  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Upton, David Thompson

1989-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

365

Meeting Summaries for Development of the Hanford Site C Tank Farm  

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

Meeting Summaries for Development of the Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summaries for Development of the Hanford Site C Tank Farm Performance Assessment Meeting Summaries for Development of the Hanford Site C Tank Farm Performance Assessment The Meeting Summaries for Development of the Hanford Site C Tank Farm Performance Assessment cover informal discussions between representatives of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), and the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) and involvement with Tribal Nations, State of Oregon, and the Hanford Advisory Board to support DOE's preparation of a new performance assessment (PA) for the Hanford Site C Tank Farm (CTF). These discussions will include the underlying assumptions, input parameters, and modeling approaches to be taken in

366

Feasibility study on the solidification of liquid low-level radioactive mixed waste in the inactive tank system at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Environmental Restoration Program  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A literature survey was conducted to help determine the feasibility of solidifying a liquid low-level radioactive mixed waste in the inactive tank system at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). The goal of this report is to facilitate a decision on the disposition of these wastes by identifying any waste constituents that might (1) compromise the strength or stability of the waste form or (2) be highly leachable. Furthermore, its goal is to identify ways to circumvent interferences and to decrease the leachability of the waste constituents. This study has sought to provide an understanding of inhibition of cement set by identifying the fundamental chemical mechanisms by which this inhibition takes place. From this fundamental information, it is possible to draw some conclusions about the potential effects of waste constituents, even in the absence of particular studies on specific compounds.

Trussell, S. [Texas A and M Univ., College Station, TX (United States). Dept. of Civil Engineering; Spence, R.D. [Oak Ridge National Lab., TN (United States)

1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

367

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2007-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

368

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

369

ANNUAL RADIOACTIVE WASTE TANK INSPECTION PROGRAM 2009  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

West, B.; Waltz, R.

2010-06-21T23:59:59.000Z

370

ROBOTIC TANK INSPECTION END EFFECTOR  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Rachel Landry

1999-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

371

EA-1044: Melton Valley Storage Tanks Capacity Increase Project- Oak Ridge  

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

44: Melton Valley Storage Tanks Capacity Increase Project- Oak 44: Melton Valley Storage Tanks Capacity Increase Project- Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee EA-1044: Melton Valley Storage Tanks Capacity Increase Project- Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee SUMMARY This EA evaluates the environmental impacts of the proposal to construct and maintain additional storage capacity at the U.S. Department of Energy's Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, for liquid low-level radioactive waste. PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITIES None available at this time. DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD May 25, 1995 EA-1044: Finding of No Significant Impact Melton Valley Storage Tanks Capacity Increase Project- Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee May 25, 1995 EA-1044: Final Environmental Assessment

372

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

373

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

374

High-Pressure Hydrogen Tank Testing | Department of Energy  

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

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

375

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

376

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

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

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

377

Acoustic Method for Fish Counting and Fish Sizing in Tanks  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Kuperman, William A.; Roux, Philippe

2004-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

378

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Carrington-Crouch, Robert

1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

379

Acoustic Method for Fish Counting and Fish Sizing in Tanks  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

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

2005-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

380

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1996-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


381

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report provides the results of an extent of condition construction history review for tank 241-AY-101. The construction history of tank 241-AY-101 has been reviewed to identify issues similar to those experienced during tank AY-102 construction. Those issues and others impacting integrity are discussed based on information found in available construction records, using tank AY-102 as the comparison benchmark. In tank 241-AY-101, the second double-shell tank constructed, similar issues as those with tank 241-AY-102 construction reoccurred. The overall extent of similary and affect on tank 241-AY-101 integrity is described herein.

Barnes, Travis J.; Gunter, Jason R.

2013-08-26T23:59:59.000Z

382

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2014-04-04T23:59:59.000Z

383

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2014-03-17T23:59:59.000Z

384

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Mickalonis, J.

2011-08-29T23:59:59.000Z

385

Taking Closure to the Next Level - 13030  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

386

Project management plan for Project W-320, Tank 241-C-106 sluicing. Revision 2  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A major mission of the US Department of Energy (DOE) is the permanent disposal of Hanford Site defense wastes by utilizing safe, environmentally acceptable, and cost-effective disposal methods that meet applicable regulations. The Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Program was established at the Hanford Site to manage and control activities specific to the remediation of safety watch list tanks, including high-heat-producing tanks, and for the ultimate characterization, retrieval, pretreatment, and disposal of the low- and high-level fractions of the tank waste. Project W-320, Tank 241-C-106 Sluicing, provides the methodology, equipment, utilities, and facilities necessary for retrieving the high-heat waste from single-shell tank (SST) 24-C-106. Project W-320 is a fiscal year (FY) 1993 expense-funded major project, and has a design life of 2 years. Retrieval of the waste in tank 241-C-106 will be accomplished through mobilization of the sludge into a pumpable slurry using past-practice sluicing. The waste is then transferred directly to a double-shell tank for interim storage, subsequent pretreatment, and eventual disposal. A detailed description of the management organization and responsibilities of all participants is presented in this document.

Phillips, D.R.

1994-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

387

Summary of raman cone penetrometer probe waste tank radiation and chemical environment test  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report summarizes the results of testing Raman sapphire windows that were braze mounted into a mockup Raman probe head and stainless steel coupons in a simulated tank waste environment. The simulated environment was created by exposing sapphire window components, immersed in a tank simulant, in a gamma pit. This work was completed for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM-50) for Technical Task Proposal RL4-6-WT-21.

Reich, F.R.

1996-09-27T23:59:59.000Z

388

Appendix C: Underground Storage Annual Site Environmental Report  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Appendix C: Underground Storage Tank Data #12;#12;Annual Site Environmental Report Appendix C identification service Contents Status ( ) date to Corrective action Tank Out-of- assessment number date regulatory Installation Capacity Preliminary date (gallons) investigation Environmental agency Petroleum USTs

Pennycook, Steve

389

TANK48 CFD MODELING ANALYSIS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Lee, S.

2011-05-17T23:59:59.000Z

390

Soil Vapor Extraction System Optimization, Transition, and Closure Guidance  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Soil vapor extraction (SVE) is a prevalent remediation approach for volatile contaminants in the vadose zone. A diminishing rate of contaminant extraction over time is typically observed due to 1) diminishing contaminant mass, and/or 2) slow rates of removal for contamination in low-permeability zones. After a SVE system begins to show indications of diminishing contaminant removal rate, SVE performance needs to be evaluated to determine whether the system should be optimized, terminated, or transitioned to another technology to replace or augment SVE. This guidance specifically addresses the elements of this type of performance assessment. While not specifically presented, the approach and analyses in this guidance could also be applied at the onset of remediation selection for a site as a way to evaluate current or future impacts to groundwater from vadose zone contamination. The guidance presented here builds from existing guidance for SVE design, operation, optimization, and closure from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the Air Force Center for Engineering and the Environment. The purpose of the material herein is to clarify and focus on the specific actions and decisions related to SVE optimization, transition, and/or closure.

Truex, Michael J.; Becker, Dave; Simon, Michelle A.; Oostrom, Martinus; Rice, Amy K.; Johnson, Christian D.

2013-02-08T23:59:59.000Z

391

488-4D ASH LANDFILL CLOSURE CAP HELP MODELING  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

At the request of Area Completion Projects (ACP) in support of the 488-4D Landfill closure, the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) has performed Hydrologic Evaluation of Landfill Performance (HELP) modeling of the planned 488-4D Ash Landfill closure cap to ensure that the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) limit of no more than 12 inches of head on top of the barrier layer (saturated hydraulic conductivity of no more than 1.0E-05 cm/s) in association with a 25-year, 24-hour storm event is not projected to be exceeded. Based upon Weber 1998 a 25-year, 24-hour storm event at the Savannah River Site (SRS) is 6.1 inches. The results of the HELP modeling indicate that the greatest peak daily head on top of the barrier layer (i.e. geosynthetic clay liner (GCL) or high density polyethylene (HDPE) geomembrane) for any of the runs made was 0.079 inches associated with a peak daily precipitation of 6.16 inches. This is well below the SCDHEC limit of 12 inches.

Phifer, M.

2014-11-17T23:59:59.000Z

392

Sitewide risk perspectives for the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The US Department of Energy (DOE) has recently finalized a closure plan (originally called the Ten Year Plan) for closure and environmental cleanup of previous nuclear weapons facilities. The DOE Rocky Flats Field Office has established priorities for risk reduction work to Support closure activities, as well as addressing those hazards associated with storage and management of radioactive materials and hazardous chemicals. To provide information for future National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or other regulatory assessments of specific risk reduction projects identified in the Closure Plan, a risk assessment of normal operations and potential accidents was recently prepared to provide an updated baseline of the cumulative impacts to the worker, public and environment due to the Site`s operations, activities, and environmental conditions in light of the Site`s change in mission, and of future closure projects. This paper summarizes the risk assessment approach, results, and conclusions.

Olinger, S.J. [Dept. of Energy, Golden, CO (United States). Rocky Flats Field Office; Foppe, T.L. [M.H. Chew and Associates, Inc., Golden, CO (United States)

1998-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

393

In-tank recirculating arsenic treatment system  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

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

2009-04-07T23:59:59.000Z

394

Tank farm health and safety plan. Revision 2  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Tank Farm Health and Safety Plan (HASP) for the conduct of all operations and work activities at the Hanford Site 200 Area Tank Farms is provided in order to minimize health and safety risks to workers and other onsite personnel. The HASP accomplishes this objective by establishing requirements, providing general guidelines, and conveying farm and facility-specific hazard communication information. The HASP, in conjunction with the job-specific information required by the HASP, is provided also as a reference for use during the planning of work activities at the tank farms. This HASP applies to Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC), other prime contractors to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), and subcontractors to WHC who may be involved in tank farm work activities. This plan is intended to be both a requirements document and a useful reference to aid tank farm workers in understanding the safety and health issues that are encountered in routine and nonroutine work activities. The HASP defines the health and safety responsibilities of personnel working at the tank farms. It has been prepared in recognition of and is consistent with National Institute of Safety and Health (NIOSH), and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)/Unlimited State Coast Guard (USCG)/U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Occupational Safety and Health Guidance Manual for Hazardous Waste Site Activities (NIOSH 1985); WHC-CM-4-3, Industrial Safety Manual, Volume 4, {open_quotes}Health and Safety Programs for Hazardous Waste Operations;{close_quotes} 29 CFR 1910.120, Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response; WHC-CM-1-1, Management Policies; and WHC-CM-1-3, Management Requirements and Procedures. When differences in governing regulations or policies exist, the more stringent requirements shall apply until the discrepancy can be resolved.

Mickle, G.D.

1995-03-29T23:59:59.000Z

395

Standard guide for sampling radioactive tank waste  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

1.1 This guide addresses techniques used to obtain grab samples from tanks containing high-level radioactive waste created during the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuels. Guidance on selecting appropriate sampling devices for waste covered by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) is also provided by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (1). Vapor sampling of the head-space is not included in this guide because it does not significantly affect slurry retrieval, pipeline transport, plugging, or mixing. 1.2 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard. 1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

American Society for Testing and Materials. Philadelphia

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

396

Hanford Patrol Academy demolition sites closure plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1993-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

397

2401-W Waste storage building closure plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

LUKE, S.M.

1999-07-15T23:59:59.000Z

398

Experimental Breeder Reactor-II Primary Tank System Wash Water Workshop  

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

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

399

Post-Closure Inspection Report for Corrective Action Unit 426: Cactus Spring Waste Trenches Tonopah Test Range, Nevada Calendar Year 2000  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Post-closure monitoring requirements for the Cactus Spring Waste Trenches (Corrective Action Unit [CAW 426]) (Figure 1) are described in Closure Report for corrective Action Unit 426, Cactus Spring Waste Trenches. Tonopah Test Range, Nevada, report number DOE/NV--226. The Closure Report (CR) was submitted to the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) on August 14, 1998. Permeability results of soils adjacent to the engineered cover and a request for closure of CAU 404 were transmitted to the NDEP on April 29, 1999. The CR (containing the Post-Closure Monitoring Plan) was approved by the NDEP on May 13, 1999. Post-closure monitoring at CAU 426 consists of the following: (1) Site inspections done twice a year to evaluate the condition of the unit; (2) Verification that the site is secure; (3) Notice of any subsidence or deficiencies that may compromise the integrity of the unit; (4) Remedy of any deficiencies within 90 days of discovery; and (5) Preparation and submittal of an annual report. Site inspections were conducted on June 19, 2000, and November 21, 2000. All inspections were made after NDEP approval of the CR, and were conducted in accordance with the Post-Closure Monitoring Plan in the NDEP-approved CR. This report includes copies of the inspection checklists, photographs, recommendations, and conclusions. The Post-Closure Inspection Checklists are found in Attachment A, a copy of the field notes is found in Attachment B, and copies of the inspection photographs are found in Attachment C.

K. B. Campbell

2001-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

400

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document is a plan which serves as the contractual agreement between the Characterization Program, Sampling Operations and WHC 222-S Laboratory. The scope of this plan is to provide guidance for the sampling and analysis of samples for tank 241-BY-103.

Schreiber, R.D.

1995-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

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


401

Comparative safety analysis of LNG storage tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1982-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

402

High-Pressure Tube Trailers and Tanks  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

403

Disposal of Hanford Site Tank Wastes  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

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

M. J. Kupfer

1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

404

Technical requirements specification for tank waste retrieval  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Lamberd, D.L.

1996-09-26T23:59:59.000Z

405

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

406

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

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

407

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Feldman, Joel

408

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Disposal of Hanford Defense High-Level, Transuranic, and Tank Wastes, Hanford  

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

Disposal of Hanford Defense High-Level, Transuranic, and Tank Wastes, Hanford Disposal of Hanford Defense High-Level, Transuranic, and Tank Wastes, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington; Record of Decision (ROO). This Record of Decision has been prepared pursuant to the Council on Environme~tal Quality ~egulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Pol icy Act (NEPAl (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508) and the Department of Energy NEPA Guidelines (52 FR 47662, December 15, 1987). It is based on DOE's "Environmental Impact Statement for the Oi sposal of Hanford Defense High-Level, Transuranic, and Tank Wastes'' (OOE/EIS-0113) and consideration of ~11 public and agency comments received on the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). fJECISION The decision is to implement the ''Preferred Alternative'' as discussed in

409

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2003-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

410

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

411

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-05T23:59:59.000Z

412

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

413

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

414

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

415

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-05T23:59:59.000Z

416

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

417

300 Area Process Trenches Closure Plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Luke, S.N.

1994-08-15T23:59:59.000Z

418

Automatically closing swing gate closure assembly  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

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

1988-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

419

YUCCA MOUNTAIN WASTE PACKAGE CLOSURE SYSTEM  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2005-08-26T23:59:59.000Z

420

Hanford Communities Issue Briefing on Tank Farms  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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


421

Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems: Pump Tank  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Lesikar, Bruce J.

2008-10-23T23:59:59.000Z

422

Above Ground Storage Tank (AST) Inspection Form  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Pawlowski, Wojtek

423

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

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

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

424

Tanks Focus Area  

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

Partnership Partnership Project Number 08.1.3.1.7, DOE-EM 21 K. Brown (Presenter), Senior Research Scientist, CRESP/Vanderbilt U. D. Esh, M. Furman, J. Phillip, US NRC D. Kosson, S. Mahadevan, A. Garrabrants, CRESP/Vanderbilt U. H. van der Sloot, J.C.L. Meeussen, R. Comans, P. Seignette, ECN (NL) E. Garboczi, K. Snyder, J. Bullard, NIST (US) E. Samson, J. Marchand, SIMCO, Inc. (Canada) C. Langton, G. Flach, R. Seitz, G. Taylor, S. Marra, SRNL DOE Project Manager: Al Baione U.S. DOE Office of Waste Processing Technical Exchange 19-21 May 2009 2 Partnership Members Department of Energy - Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM) * Principal supporting agency * Primary end-user Nuclear Regulatory Commission (US NRC) * Oversight & Research Divisions * Primary end-user

425

Tank Farms and Waste Feed Delivery - 12507  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

426

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Hendrickson, D.W.

1996-04-30T23:59:59.000Z

427

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Healey, Christopher G.

428

Post-Closure Inspection Report for the Tonopah Test Range, Nevada, For Calendar Year 2007  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report provides the results of the semiannual post-closure inspections conducted at the closed Corrective Action Unit (CAU) sites located on the Tonopah Test Range (TTR), Nevada. This report covers calendar year 2007 and includes inspection and repair activities completed at the following nine CAUs: (1) CAU 400: Bomblet Pit and Five Points Landfill (TTR); (2) CAU 404: Roller Coaster Lagoons and Trench (TTR); (3) CAU 407: Roller Coaster RadSafe Area (TTR); (4) CAU 423: Area 3 Underground Discharge Point, Building 0360 (TTR); (5) CAU 424: Area 3 Landfill Complexes (TTR); (6) CAU 426: Cactus Spring Waste Trenches (TTR); (7) CAU 427: Area 3 Septic Waste Systems 2, 6 (TTR); (8) CAU 453: Area 9 UXO Landfill (TTR); and (9) CAU 487: Thunderwell Site (TTR). In a letter from the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) dated December 5, 2006, NDEP concurred with the request to reduce the frequency of post-closure inspections of CAUs at TTR to an annual frequency. This letter is included in Attachment B. Post-closure inspections were conducted on May 15-16, 2007. All inspections were conducted according to the post-closure plans in the approved Closure Reports. The post-closure inspection plan for each CAU is included in Attachment B, with the exception of CAU 400. CAU 400 does not require post-closure inspections, but inspections of the vegetation and fencing are conducted as a best management practice. The inspection checklists for each site inspection are included in Attachment C, the field notes are included in Attachment D, and the site photographs are included in Attachment E. Vegetation monitoring of CAU 400, CAU 404, CAU 407, and CAU 426 was performed in May 2007, and the vegetation monitoring report is included in Attachment F. Maintenance and/or repairs were performed at CAU 453. Animal burrows observed during the annual inspection at CAU 453 were backfilled on August 1, 2007. At this time, the TTR post-closure site inspections should continue as scheduled. Any potential problem areas previously identified (e.g., areas of erosion, subsidence) should be monitored closely, and periodic vegetation surveys of the vegetated covers should continue.

NSTec Environmental Restoration

2008-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

429

Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 562: Waste Systems, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Closure Report (CR) presents information supporting closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 562, Waste Systems, and provides documentation supporting the completed corrective actions and confirmation that closure objectives for CAU 562 were met. 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). CAU 562 consists of the following 13 Corrective Action Sites (CASs), located in Areas 2, 23, and 25 of the Nevada National Security Site: CAS 02-26-11, Lead Shot CAS 02-44-02, Paint Spills and French Drain CAS 02-59-01, Septic System CAS 02-60-01, Concrete Drain CAS 02-60-02, French Drain CAS 02-60-03, Steam Cleaning Drain CAS 02-60-04, French Drain CAS 02-60-05, French Drain CAS 02-60-06, French Drain CAS 02-60-07, French Drain CAS 23-60-01, Mud Trap Drain and Outfall CAS 23-99-06, Grease Trap CAS 25-60-04, Building 3123 Outfalls Closure activities began in October 2011 and were completed in April 2012. Activities were conducted according to the Corrective Action Plan for CAU 562 (U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office [NNSA/NSO], 2011). The corrective actions included No Further Action and Clean Closure. Closure activities generated sanitary waste and hazardous waste. Some wastes exceeded land disposal limits and required offsite treatment prior to disposal. Other wastes met land disposal restrictions and were disposed in appropriate onsite or offsite landfills. NNSA/NSO requests the following: A Notice of Completion from the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection to NNSA/NSO for closure of CAU 562 The transfer of CAU 562 from Appendix III to Appendix IV, Closed Corrective Action Units, of the FFACO

NSTec Environmental Restoration

2012-08-15T23:59:59.000Z

430

1985 environmental conference proceedings  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This book presents committee reports, an environmental index, and technical papers and abstracts from panel discussions covering the following topics: ground water monitoring and landfill considerations; flue gas desulfurization; wastewater treatment plant upgrade; anaerobic treatment; wastewater biomonitoring; asbestos/PCB concerns; activated sludge bulking control; solid waste handling and disposal; wood fired boiler emissions control; air regulatory issues; in-plant load reduction and corrosion aspects of mill closure; and monitoring.

Not Available

1985-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

431

Solar radiation effects on evaporative losses of floating roof storage tanks  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

There are 40 storage tanks in the Khark Island for storing crude oil. Considering the hot summers of the island, light hydrocarbons vaporise and vented to the atmosphere. This process causes environmental pollution and also affects the quality of the crude oil besides the economic detriment. Therefore, crude oil evaporation loss associated with the storage tank is an important issue which should be carefully investigated to identify the potential means of its reduction. The aim of the present work is to determine the evaporative losses from external floating storage tanks and to study the absorptivity effects of their exterior surface paint on the losses due to the solar irradiation. The API standards along with the thermal analysis of the tank have been employed to evaluate the tank temperature variations and the evaporative losses of a typical tank based on the actual ambient conditions of the Khark Island. The results show that the paints with low absorptivity can reduce the evaporative losses significantly. Furthermore, experimental data has been provided to validate the calculated tank temperature variations, and reasonable agreements have been found. [Received: April 10, 2010; Accepted: May 31, 2010

Mahmood Farzaneh-Gord; Amin Nabati; Hamid Niazmand

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

432

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT / REGULATORY IMPACT REVIEW / FINAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT / REGULATORY IMPACT REVIEW / FINAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS for Modifying existing Chinook and chum salmon savings areas AMENDMENT 84 to the Fishery Management Plan by the current regulatory closure regulations, as much higher salmon bycatch rates are reportedly encountered

433

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

434

Agreement on New Commitments for Hanford Tank Waste Cleanup Sent to Federal  

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

Agreement on New Commitments for Hanford Tank Waste Cleanup Sent to Agreement on New Commitments for Hanford Tank Waste Cleanup Sent to Federal Judge Agreement on New Commitments for Hanford Tank Waste Cleanup Sent to Federal Judge October 6, 2010 - 12:00am Addthis RICHLAND, Wash. - The U.S. Department of Energy and Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) jointly filed a motion today in U.S. District Court asking the court to approve and enter a judicial consent decree that imposes a new, enforceable, and achievable schedule for cleaning up waste from Hanford's underground tanks. The settlement also includes new milestones in the Tri-Party Agreement (TPA), an administrative order between DOE, Ecology, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which governs cleanup at DOE's Hanford Site. "Today's agreement represents an important milestone in the ongoing cleanup

435

Water Tanks Demolition and Deactivation (D&D) Project (4589), 5/29/2012  

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

Water Tanks Demolition and Deactivation (D&D) Projects (4589) Water Tanks Demolition and Deactivation (D&D) Projects (4589) Program or Field Office: Y-12 Site Office Location(s) (City/County/State): Oak Ridge, Anderson County, Tennessee Proposed Action Description: Submit by E-mail The proposed action is to demolish and deactivate three water tanks, an electrical services shed and related out of service diesel generator on the south ridge. The tanks have already been isolated from the Y-12 potable water system. Categorical Exclusion(s) Applied: B 1.23 - Demolition and disposal of buildings For the complete DOE National Environmental Policy Act regulations regarding categorical exclusions, including the full text of each categorical exclusion, see Subpart D of 10 CFR Part 1021. Regulatory Requirements in 10 CFR 1021.410(b): (See full text in regulation)

436

Spray-on foam insulations for launch vehicle cryogenic tanks  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Spray-on foam insulation (SOFI) has been developed for use on the cryogenic tanks of space launch vehicles beginning in the 1960s with the Apollo program. The use of SOFI was further developed for the Space Shuttle program. The External Tank (ET) of the Space Shuttle, consisting of a forward liquid oxygen tank in line with an aft liquid hydrogen tank, requires thermal insulation over its outer surface to prevent ice formation and avoid in-flight damage to the ceramic tile thermal protection system on the adjacent Orbiter. The insulation also provides system control and stability throughout the lengthy process of cooldown, loading, and replenishing the tank. There are two main types of SOFI used on the ET: acreage (with the rind) and closeout (machined surface). The thermal performance of the seemingly simple SOFI system is a complex array of many variables starting with the large temperature difference of 200260K through the typical 25-mm thickness. Environmental factors include air temperature and humidity, wind speed, solar exposure, and aging or weathering history. Additional factors include manufacturing details, launch processing operations, and number of cryogenic thermal cycles. The study of the cryogenic thermal performance of SOFI under large temperature differentials is the subject of this article. The amount of moisture taken into the foam during the cold soak phase, termed Cryogenic Moisture Uptake, must also be considered. The heat leakage rates through these foams were measured under representative conditions using laboratory standard liquid nitrogen boiloff apparatus. Test articles included baseline, aged, and weathered specimens. Testing was performed over the entire pressure range from high vacuum to ambient pressure. Values for apparent thermal conductivity and heat flux were calculated and compared with prior data. As the prior data of record was obtained for small temperature differentials on non-weathered foams, analysis of the different methods is provided. Recent advancements and applications of SOFI systems on future launch vehicles and spacecraft are also addressed.

J.E. Fesmire; B.E. Coffman; B.J. Meneghelli; K.W. Heckle

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

437

Tanks Focus Area (TFA) Site Needs Assessment FY 1999  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report documents the process used by the Tanks Focus Area (TFA) to analyze and develop responses to technology needs submitted by five major U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) sites with radioactive tank waste problems, and the initial results of the analysis. The sites are the Hanford Site, Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR), Savannah River Site (SRS), and West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP). This is the fifth edition of the TFA site needs assessment. As with previous editions, this edition serves to provide the basis for accurately defining the TFA program for the upcoming fiscal year (FY), and adds definition to the program for up to 4 additional outyears. Therefore, this version distinctly defines the FY 2000 progrti and adds further definition to the FY 2001- FY 2004 program. Each year, the TFA reviews and amends its program in response to site users' science and technology needs.

RW Allen

1999-05-03T23:59:59.000Z

438

Life Extension of Aging High-Level Waste Tanks  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2002-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

439

High Pressure Hydrogen Tank Manufacturing  

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

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

440

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2013-07-30T23:59:59.000Z

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


441

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1994-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

442

Stochastic particle acceleration and statistical closures  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1985-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

443

Site-Wide Integrated Water Monitoring - Defining and Implementing Sampling Objectives to Support Site Closure - 13060  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Underground Test Area (UGTA) activity is responsible for assessing and evaluating the effects of the underground nuclear weapons tests on groundwater at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS), formerly the Nevada Test Site (NTS), and implementing a corrective action closure strategy. The UGTA strategy is based on a combination of characterization, modeling studies, monitoring, and institutional controls (i.e., monitored natural attenuation). The closure strategy verifies through appropriate monitoring activities that contaminants of concern do not exceed the SDWA at the regulatory boundary and that adequate institutional controls are established and administered to ensure protection of the public. Other programs conducted at the NNSS supporting the environmental mission include the Routine Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (RREMP), Waste Management, and the Infrastructure Program. Given the current programmatic and operational demands for various water-monitoring activities at the same locations, and the ever-increasing resource challenges, cooperative and collaborative approaches to conducting the work are necessary. For this reason, an integrated sampling plan is being developed by the UGTA activity to define sampling and analysis objectives, reduce duplication, eliminate unnecessary activities, and minimize costs. The sampling plan will ensure the right data sets are developed to support closure and efficient transition to long-term monitoring. The plan will include an integrated reporting mechanism for communicating results and integrating process improvements within the UGTA activity as well as between other U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Programs. (authors)

Wilborn, Bill; Knapp, Kathryn [U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (United States)] [U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (United States); Farnham, Irene; Marutzky, Sam [Navarro-Intera (United States)] [Navarro-Intera (United States)

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

444

Site-Wide Integrated Water Monitoring -- Defining and Implementing Sampling Objectives to Support Site Closure  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Underground Test Area (UGTA) activity is responsible for assessing and evaluating the effects of the underground nuclear weapons tests on groundwater at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS), formerly the Nevada Test Site (NTS), and implementing a corrective action closure strategy. The UGTA strategy is based on a combination of characterization, modeling studies, monitoring, and institutional controls (i.e., monitored natural attenuation). The closure strategy verifies through appropriate monitoring activities that contaminants of concern do not exceed the SDWA at the regulatory boundary and that adequate institutional controls are established and administered to ensure protection of the public. Other programs conducted at the NNSS supporting the environmental mission include the Routine Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (RREMP), Waste Management, and the Infrastructure Program. Given the current programmatic and operational demands for various water-monitoring activities at the same locations, and the ever-increasing resource challenges, cooperative and collaborative approaches to conducting the work are necessary. For this reason, an integrated sampling plan is being developed by the UGTA activity to define sampling and analysis objectives, reduce duplication, eliminate unnecessary activities, and minimize costs. The sampling plan will ensure the right data sets are developed to support closure and efficient transition to long-term monitoring. The plan will include an integrated reporting mechanism for communicating results and integrating process improvements within the UGTA activity as well as between other U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Programs.

Wilborn, Bill [NNSA/NFO, Nevada Site Office (United States); Farnham, Irene [Navarro-Interra LLC, Las Vegas (United States); Marutzky, Sam [Navarro-Interra LLC, Las Vegas (United States); Knapp, Kathryn [NNSA/NFO, Nevada Site Office (United States)

2013-02-24T23:59:59.000Z

445