Powered by Deep Web Technologies
Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank farm facility" 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

Criticality Safety Evaluation of Hanford Tank Farms Facility  

SciTech Connect

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

WEISS, E.V.

2000-12-15T23:59:59.000Z

2

Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility The Secretary of Energy signed Section 3116 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 basis of determination for the disposal of grouted residual waste in the tank systems at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC) Tank Farm Facility (TFF) on November 19, 2006. Section 3116 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 authorizes the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, to reclassify certain waste from reprocessing spent nuclear fuel from high-level waste to low-level waste if it meets the criteria set

3

Hanford Site waste tank farm facilities design reconstitution program plan  

SciTech Connect

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

Vollert, F.R.

1994-09-06T23:59:59.000Z

4

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

5

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

NE-ID-11226 NE-ID-11226 Revision 0 Basis for Section 3116 Determination for the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility November 2006 DOE/NE-ID-11226 Revision 0 Basis for Section 3116 Determination for the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility November 2006 ii CONTENTS ACRONYMS.............................................................................................................................................. vii 1. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE.................................................................................................. 1 2. BACKGROUND................................................................................................................................ 5 2.1 Tank Farm Facility Description.............................................................................................

6

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

SciTech Connect

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

7

In-Tank Precipitation Facility (ITP) and H-Tank Farm (HTF) geotechnical report, WSRC-TR-95-0057, Revision 0, Volume 3  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

A geotechnical study has been completed in H-Area for the In-Tank Precipitation Facility (ITP) and the balance of the H-Area Tank Farm (HTF) at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina. The study consisted of subsurface field exploration, field and laboratory testing, and engineering analyses. The purpose of these investigations is to evaluate the overall stability of the H-Area tanks under static and dynamic conditions. The objectives of the study are to define the site-specific geological conditions at ITP and HTF, obtain engineering properties for the assessment of the stability of the native soils and embankment under static and dynamic loads (i.e., slope stability, liquefaction potential, and potential settlements), and derive properties for soil-structure interaction studies. This document contains the records of cone penetrometer and dilatometer soundings for the In-Tank Precipitation Facility (ITP) and H-Tank Farm (HTF) Geotechnical Report, Volume 3.

Fisk, B.E.; Timian, D.A.

1995-06-02T23:59:59.000Z

8

Possible explosive compounds in the Savannah River Site Tank Farm facilities. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect

Since 1970, many studies have been conducted concerning the potential for explosive compounds in tank farm operations including ammonium nitrate, metal oxalates, and silver and mercury compounds. The study currently in progress is the most comprehensive to date, encompassing all previous studies and extending the scope to include all compounds that could be formed from the known species in SRS wastes. In addition to waste storage, the study also considers waste removal and waste processing operations. The total number of possible explosive compounds is so large that it would not be useful to list them all here. Instead, only those compounds are listed that are known to be present or could conceivably be formed from material that is known to be present in the waste. The general approach to the problem is: identify all of the constituents that are known to be present in the waste together with those that might be present from possible chemical and radiolytic reactions, determine the compounds that could be formed from these constituents, compare these compounds with those listed in the literature, and assess the formation and stability of these compounds against the conditions existing in the tank farm facilities.

Hobbs, D.T.

1995-04-27T23:59:59.000Z

9

Possible explosive compounds in the Savannah River Site waste tank farm facilities  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Based on a comparison of the known constituents in high-level nuclear waste stored at the Savannah River Site (SRS) and explosive compounds reported in the literature, only two classes of explosive compounds (metal NO{sub x} compounds and organic compounds) were identified as requiring further work to determine if they exist in the waste, and if so, in what quantities. Of the fourteen classes of explosive compounds identified as conceivably being present in tank farm operations, nine classes (metal fulminates, metal azides, halogen compounds, metal-amine complexes, nitrate/oxalate mixtures, metal oxalates, metal oxohalogenates, metal cyanides/cyanates, and peroxides) are not a hazard because these classes of compounds cannot be formed or accumulated in sufficient quantity, or they are not reactive at the conditions which exist in the tank farm facilities. Three of the classes (flammable gases, metal nitrides, and ammonia compounds and derivatives) are known to have the potential to build up to concentrations at which an observable reaction might occur. Controls have been in place for some time to limit the formation or control the concentration of these classes of compounds. A comprehensive list of conceivable explosive compounds is provided in Appendix 3.

Hobbs, D.T.

1992-03-15T23:59:59.000Z

10

Possible explosive compounds in the Savannah River Site waste tank farm facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This report will be revised upon completion of current testing investigating the radiolytic stability of additional energetic materials and the analysis of tank farm samples for volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds.

Hobbs, D.T.

2000-04-13T23:59:59.000Z

11

Technical assessment of workplace air sampling requirements at tank farm facilities. Revision 1  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

WHC-CM-1-6 is the primary guidance for radiological control at Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC). It was written to implement DOE N 5480.6 ``US Department of Energy Radiological Control Manual`` as it applies to programs at Hanford which are now overseen by WHC. As such, it complies with Title 10, Part 835 of the Code of Federal Regulations. In addition to WHC-CM-1-6, there is HSRCM-1, the ``Hanford Site Radiological Control Manual`` and several Department of Energy (DOE) Orders, national consensus standards, and reports that provide criteria, standards, and requirements for workplace air sampling programs. This document provides a summary of these, as they apply to WHC facility workplace air sampling programs. This document also provides an evaluation of the compliance of Tank Farms` workplace air sampling program to the criteria, standards, and requirements and documents compliance with the requirements where appropriate. Where necessary, it also indicates changes needed to bring specific locations into compliance.

Olsen, P.A.

1994-09-21T23:59:59.000Z

12

Review of Nuclear Criticality Safety Requirements Implementation for Hanford Tank Farms Facility  

SciTech Connect

In November 1999, the Deputy Secretary of the Department of Energy directed a series of actions to strengthen the Department's ongoing nuclear criticality safety programs. A Review Plan describing lines of inquiry for assessing contractor programs was included. The Office of River Protection completed their assessment of the Tank Farm Contractor program in May 2000. This document supports that assessment by providing a compliance statement for each line of inquiry.

DEFIGH PRICE, C.

2000-08-09T23:59:59.000Z

13

AX Tank Farm tank removal study  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

SKELLY, W.A.

1999-02-24T23:59:59.000Z

14

AX Tank Farm tank removal study  

SciTech Connect

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

15

Tank farms essential drawing plan  

SciTech Connect

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

Domnoske-Rauch, L.A.

1998-08-04T23:59:59.000Z

16

Independent Oversight Review, Hanford Tank Farms - November 2011 |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Review, Hanford Tank Farms - November 2011 Review, Hanford Tank Farms - November 2011 Independent Oversight Review, Hanford Tank Farms - November 2011 November 2011 Review of Hanford Tank Farms Safety Basis Amendment for Double-Shell Tank Ventilation System Upgrades The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Enforcement and Oversight, within the Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS), conducted an independent oversight review of the draft amendment to the Hanford Tank Farms safety basis for upgrading the double-shell tank (DST) primary tank ventilation (PTV) systems to safety-significant designation. The Tank Farms are Hazard Category 2 DOE nuclear facilities. The review was performed during the period July 25 - August 12, 2011 by the HSS Office of Enforcement and Oversight's Office of Safety and Emergency Management

17

Evaluation of Alternative Control for Prevention and or Mitigation of HEPA Filter Failure Accidents at Tank Farm Facilities  

SciTech Connect

This study evaluates the adequacy and benefit of use of HEPA filter differential pressure limiting setpoints to initiate exhauster shut down as an alternative safety control for postulated accidents that might result in filtration failure and subsequent unfiltered release from Tank Farm primary tank ventilators.

GUSTAVSON, R.D.

2000-01-28T23:59:59.000Z

18

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

SciTech Connect

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

NONE

1998-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

19

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

May 2011 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 -...

20

ICPP tank farm closure study. Volume 1  

SciTech Connect

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

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

1998-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank farm facility" 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

Tank Farms at the Savannah River Site | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Tank Farms at the Savannah River Site Tank Farms at the Savannah River Site Tank Farms at the Savannah River Site Section 3116 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 authorizes the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, to reclassify certain waste from reprocessing spent nuclear fuel from high-level waste to low-level waste if it meets the criteria set forth in Section 3116. A Waste Determination Basis (WD Basis) provides the analysis to document the Secretary's determination to manage the residuals as low-level radioactive waste. The Savannah River Site has several facilities managed under Section 3116. The F-Area Tank Farm (FTF) WD Basis covers 20 tanks remaining to be closed in the FTF and the H-Area Tank Farm (HTF) WD Basis will cover all 29 HTF

22

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

23

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

24

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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...

25

EVALUATION OF THE IMPACT OF THE DEFENSE WASTE PROCESSING FACILITY (DWPF) LABORATORY GERMANIUM OXIDE USE ON RECYCLE TRANSFERS TO THE H-TANK FARM  

SciTech Connect

When processing High Level Waste (HLW) glass, the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) cannot wait until the melt or waste glass has been made to assess its acceptability, since by then no further changes to the glass composition and acceptability are possible. Therefore, the acceptability decision is made on the upstream feed stream, rather than on the downstream melt or glass product. This strategy is known as 'feed forward statistical process control.' The DWPF depends on chemical analysis of the feed streams from the Sludge Receipt and Adjustment Tank (SRAT) and the Slurry Mix Evaporator (SME) where the frit plus adjusted sludge from the SRAT are mixed. The SME is the last vessel in which any chemical adjustments or frit additions can be made. Once the analyses of the SME product are deemed acceptable, the SME product is transferred to the Melter Feed Tank (MFT) and onto the melter. The SRAT and SME analyses have been analyzed by the DWPF laboratory using a 'Cold Chemical' method but this dissolution did not adequately dissolve all the elemental components. A new dissolution method which fuses the SRAT or SME product with cesium nitrate (CsNO{sub 3}), germanium (IV) oxide (GeO{sub 2}) and cesium carbonate (Cs{sub 2}CO{sub 3}) into a cesium germanate glass at 1050 C in platinum crucibles has been developed. Once the germanium glass is formed in that fusion, it is readily dissolved by concentrated nitric acid (about 1M) to solubilize all the elements in the SRAT and/or SME product for elemental analysis. When the chemical analyses are completed the acidic cesium-germanate solution is transferred from the DWPF analytic laboratory to the Recycle Collection Tank (RCT) where the pH is increased to {approx}12 M to be released back to the tank farm and the 2H evaporator. Therefore, about 2.5 kg/yr of GeO{sub 2}/year will be diluted into 1.4 million gallons of recycle. This 2.5 kg/yr of GeO{sub 2} may increase to 4 kg/yr when improvements are implemented to attain an annual canister production goal of 400 canisters. Since no Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) exists for germanium in the Tank Farm, the Effluent Treatment Project, or the Saltstone Production Facility, DWPF has requested an evaluation of the fate of the germanium in the caustic environment of the RCT, the 2H evaporator, and the tank farm. This report evaluates the effect of the addition of germanium to the tank farm based on: (1) the large dilution of Ge in the RCT and tank farm; (2) the solubility of germanium in caustic solutions (pH 12-13); (3) the potential of germanium to precipitate as germanium sodalites in the 2H Evaporator; and (4) the potential of germanium compounds to precipitate in the evaporator feed tank. This study concludes that the impacts of transferring up to 4 kg/yr germanium to the RCT (and subsequently the 2H evaporator feed tank and the 2H evaporator) results in <2 ppm per year (1.834 mg/L) which is the maximum instantaneous concentration expected from DWPF. This concentration is insignificant as most sodium germanates are soluble at the high pH of the feed tank and evaporator solutions. Even if sodium aluminosilicates form in the 2H evaporator, the Ge will likely substitute for some small amount of the Si in these structures and will be insignificant. It is recommended that the DWPF continue with their strategy to add germanium as a laboratory chemical to Attachment 8.2 of the DWPF Waste Compliance Plan (WCP).

Jantzen, C.; Laurinat, J.

2011-08-15T23:59:59.000Z

26

Independent Oversight Review, Hanford Tank Farms - December 2012 |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

December 2012 December 2012 Independent Oversight Review, Hanford Tank Farms - December 2012 December 2012 Review of the Hanford Tank Farms Radiological Controls Activity-Level Implementation This report documents an independent review by the Office of Enforcement and Oversight (Independent Oversight) within the Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) of radiological protection program (RPP) activity-level implementation at the Hanford Tank Farms. The review was performed by the HSS Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations. The purpose of this Independent Oversight targeted review effort is to evaluate the flowdown of occupational radiation protection requirements, as expressed in facility RPPs, to work planning, control, and execution processes, such as

27

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

SciTech Connect

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

Girardot, Crystal L. [Washington River Protection Systems, Richland, WA (United States); Harlow, Donald G. [Washington River Protection Systems, Richland, WA (United States)

2013-07-11T23:59:59.000Z

28

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

29

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

30

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

31

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

32

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

33

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

34

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

35

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

36

ICPP Tank Farm planning through 2012  

SciTech Connect

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

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

1998-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

37

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

SciTech Connect

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

Girardot, Crystal L.; Harlow, Donald G.

2013-11-19T23:59:59.000Z

38

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

Girardot, Crystal L.; Harlow, Donald G.

2013-09-10T23:59:59.000Z

39

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

SciTech Connect

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

Girardot, Crystal L.; Harlow, Donald G.

2013-07-30T23:59:59.000Z

40

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

SciTech Connect

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

Girardot, Crystal L.; Harlow, Donald G.

2013-12-02T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank farm facility" 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

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

SciTech Connect

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

VENETZ TJ; WASHENFELDER D; JOHNSON J; GIRARDOT C

2012-01-25T23:59:59.000Z

42

Tank farm health and safety plan. Revision 2  

SciTech Connect

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

43

Independent Activity Report, Hanford Tank Farms - April 2013 | Department  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Tank Farms - April 2013 Tank Farms - April 2013 Independent Activity Report, Hanford Tank Farms - April 2013 April 2013 Operational Awareness at the Hanford Tank Farms [HIAR-HANFORD-2013-04-15] The Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations (HS-45) Site Lead conducted an operational awareness visit to the Office of River Protection (ORP) to 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, Hanford Tank Farms - April 2013 More Documents & Publications Independent Oversight Activity Report, Office of River Protection - May 2013 Independent Oversight Activity Report, Hanford Tank Farms - June 2013 Independent Activity Report, Office of River Protection Waste Treatment

44

Independent Oversight Review of Hanford Tank Farms Safety Basis...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Hanford Tank Farms Safety Basis Amendment for Double-Shell Tank Ventilation System Upgrades November 2011 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of...

45

Vadose zone characterization project at the Hanford Tank Farms: U Tank Farm Report  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The U.S. Department of Energy Grand Junction Office (DOE-GJO) was tasked by the DOE Richland Operations Office (DOE-RL) to perform a baseline characterization of the gamma-ray-emitting radionuclides that are distributed in the vadose zone sediments beneath and around the single-shell tanks (SSTs) at the Hanford Site. The intent of this characterization is to determine the nature and extent of the contamination, to identify contamination sources when possible, and to develop a baseline of the contamination distribution that will permit future data comparisons. This characterization work also allows an initial assessment of the impacts of the vadose zone contamination as required by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). This characterization project involves acquiring information regarding vadose zone contamination with borehole geophysical logging methods and documenting that information in a series of reports. This information is presently limited to detection of gamma-emitting radionuclides from both natural and man-made sources. Data from boreholes surrounding each tank are compiled into individual Tank Summary Data Reports. The data from each tank in a tank farm are then compiled and summarized in a Tank Farm Report. This document is the Tank Farm Report for the U Tank Farm. Logging operations used high-purity germanium detection systems to acquire laboratory-quality assays of the gamma-emitting radionuclides in the sediments around and below the tanks. These assays were acquired in 59 boreholes that surround the U Tank Farm tanks. Logging of all boreholes was completed in December 1995, and the last Tank Summary Data Report for the U Tank Farm was issued in September 1996.

NONE

1997-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

46

Evaluation of 241 AN tank farm flammable gas behavior  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

The 241 AN Tank Farm tanks 241-AN-103, -104, and 105 are Flammable Gas Watch List tanks. Characteristics exhibited by these tanks (i.e., surface level drops, pressure increases, and temperature profiles) are similar to those exhibited by tank 241-SY-101, which is also a Watch List tank. Although the characteristics exhibited by tank 241-SY-101 are also present in tanks 241-AN-103, -104, and 105, they are exhibited to a lesser degree in the AN Tank Farm tanks. The 241 AN Tank Farm tanks have only small surface level drops, and the pressure changes that occur are not sufficient to release an amount of gas that would cause the dome space to exceed the lower flammability limit (LFL) for hydrogen. Therefore, additional restrictions are probably unnecessary for working within the 241 AN Tank Farm, either within the dome space of the tanks or in the waste.

Reynolds, D.A.

1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

47

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

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

2013-11-19T23:59:59.000Z

48

Independent Oversight Activity Report, Hanford Tank Farms - June 2013 |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Oversight Activity Report, Hanford Tank Farms - June Oversight Activity Report, Hanford Tank Farms - June 2013 Independent Oversight Activity Report, Hanford Tank Farms - June 2013 June 2013 Office of River Protection Assessment of Contractor Quality Assurance, Operational Awareness at the Hanford Tank Farms [HIAR NNSS-2012-12-03] The Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS), Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations (Independent Oversight) Site Lead conducted an operational awareness visit to the ORP Hanford Tank Farms, observed a Tank Farms morning meeting, toured the C Tank Farm, and observed a heavy (34,000 pound) lift. Independent Oversight Activity Report, Hanford Tank Farms - June 2013 More Documents & Publications Independent Activity Report, Office of River Protection Waste Treatment

49

TANK FARM INTERIM SURFACE BARRIER MATERIALS AND RUNOFF ALTERNATIVES STUDY  

SciTech Connect

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

HOLM MJ

2009-06-25T23:59:59.000Z

50

Hanford Tank Farms Waste Certification Flow Loop Test Plan  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

A future requirement of Hanford Tank Farm operations will involve transfer of wastes from double shell tanks to the Waste Treatment Plant. As the U.S. Department of Energy contractor for Tank Farm Operations, Washington River Protection Solutions anticipates the need to certify that waste transfers comply with contractual requirements. This test plan describes the approach for evaluating several instruments that have potential to detect the onset of flow stratification and critical suspension velocity. The testing will be conducted in an existing pipe loop in Pacific Northwest National Laboratorys facility that is being modified to accommodate the testing of instruments over a range of simulated waste properties and flow conditions. The testing phases, test matrix and types of simulants needed and the range of testing conditions required to evaluate the instruments are described

Bamberger, Judith A.; Meyer, Perry A.; Scott, Paul A.; Adkins, Harold E.; Wells, Beric E.; Blanchard, Jeremy; Denslow, Kayte M.; Greenwood, Margaret S.; Morgen, Gerald P.; Burns, Carolyn A.; Bontha, Jagannadha R.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

51

Hanford Tank Farm interim storage phase probabilistic risk assessment outline  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1994-05-19T23:59:59.000Z

52

Analysis of ICPP tank farm infiltration  

SciTech Connect

This report addresses water seeping into underground vaults which contain high-level liquid waste (HLLW) storage tanks at the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant (ICPP). Each of the vaults contains from one to three sumps. The original purpose of the sumps was to serve as a backup leak detection system for release of HLLW from the storage tanks. However, water seeps into most of the vaults, filling the sumps, and defeating their purpose as a leak detection system. Leak detection for the HLLW storage tanks is based on measuring the level of liquid inside the tank. The source of water leaking into the vaults was raised as a concern by the State of Idaho INEL Oversight Group because this source could also be leaching contaminants released to soil in the vicinity of the tank farm and transporting contaminants to the aquifer. This report evaluates information concerning patterns of seepage into vault sumps, the chemistry of water in sumps, and water balances for the tank farm to determine the sources of water seeping into the vaults.

Richards, B.T.

1993-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

53

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

SciTech Connect

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

Kos, S.E.

1997-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

54

Tank Farm Operations Surveillance Automation Analysis  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Nuclear Operations Project Services identified the need to improve manual tank farm surveillance data collection, review, distribution and storage practices often referred to as Operator Rounds. This document provides the analysis in terms of feasibility to improve the manual data collection methods by using handheld computer units, barcode technology, a database for storage and acquisitions, associated software, and operational procedures to increase the efficiency of Operator Rounds associated with surveillance activities.

MARQUEZ, D.L.

2000-12-21T23:59:59.000Z

55

Hanford Tank Farms Vadose Zone, Addendum to the TX Tank Farm Report  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This addendum to the TX Tank Farm Report (GJO-97-13-TAR, GJO-HAN-11) published in September 1997 incorporates the results of high-rate and repeat logging activities along with shape factor analysis of the logging data. A high-rate logging system was developed and deployed in the TX Tank Farm to measure cesium-137 concentration levels in high gamma flux zones where the spectral gamma logging system was unable to collect usable data because of high dead times and detector saturation. This report presents additional data and revised visualizations of subsurface contaminant distribution in the TX Tank Farm at the DOE Hanford Site in the state of Washington.

Spatz, R.

2000-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

56

Tank Closure  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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...

57

ORP Tank Farms Unreviewed Safety Question Process Implementation...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Activity Report for the Selected Aspects of Tank Farms Unreviewed Safety Question Process Implementation Dates of Activity 02212011 - 04182011 Report Preparer Shivaji S....

58

PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES FOR TANK FARM CLOSURE PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

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

2005-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

59

Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

60

Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank farm facility" 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

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

SciTech Connect

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

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

2013-07-25T23:59:59.000Z

62

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

SciTech Connect

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

63

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SAMPLING OF TANK 19 IN F TANK FARM  

SciTech Connect

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

Harris, S.; Shine, G.

2009-12-14T23:59:59.000Z

64

High-level waste tank farm set point document  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

Anthony, J.A. III

1995-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

65

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

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (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.

66

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

SciTech Connect

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

Hommel, S.; Fountain, D.

2012-03-28T23:59:59.000Z

67

AN EVALUATION OF HANFORD SITE TANK FARM SUBSURFACE CONTAMINATION FY2007  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

MANN, F.M.

2007-07-10T23:59:59.000Z

68

Office of River Protection Assessment of Contractor Quality Assurance and Operational Awareness at Tank Farms, June 2013  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

HIAR-HANFORD-2013-06-17 HIAR-HANFORD-2013-06-17 Site: Hanford, Office of River Protection Subject: Office of Enforcement and Oversight's Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Activity Report for the Office of River Protection (ORP) Assessment of Contractor Quality Assurance, Operational Awareness at Hanford Tank Farms Dates of Activity : June 17-20, 2013 Report Preparer: Robert E. Farrell Activity Description/Purpose: The Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS), Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations (Independent Oversight) Site Lead conducted an operational awareness visit to the ORP Hanford Tank Farms, observed a Tank Farms morning meeting, toured the C Tank Farm, and observed a heavy (34,000 pound) lift. Result: Independent Oversight, together with the ORP Facility Representative, toured the C Tank Farm to observe workers setting

69

Remedial Alternative Selection for the F Area Tank Farm,  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (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

70

Tank farm surveillance and waste status summary report for October 1992  

SciTech Connect

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

Hanlon, B.M.

1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

71

Tank farm surveillance and waste status summary report for December 1992  

SciTech Connect

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

Hanlon, B.M.

1993-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

72

Tank farm surveillance and waste status summary report for January 1993  

SciTech Connect

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

Hanlon, B.M.

1993-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

73

Tank farm surveillance and waste status summary report for November 1993  

SciTech Connect

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

Hanlon, B.M.

1994-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

74

Tank farm surveillance and waste status summary report for November 1992  

SciTech Connect

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

Hanlon, B.M.

1993-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

75

Tank farm surveillance and waste status summary report for June 1993  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

Hanlon, B.M.

1993-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

76

Tank Farm surveillance and waste status summary report for September 1993  

SciTech Connect

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

Hanlon, B.M.

1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

77

Radiological Source Terms for Tank Farms Safety Analysis  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This document provides Unit Liter Dose factors, atmospheric dispersion coefficients, breathing rates and instructions for using and customizing these factors for use in calculating radiological doses for accident analyses in the Hanford Tank Farms.

COWLEY, W.L.

2000-06-27T23:59:59.000Z

78

SLUDGE BATCH 7B QUALIFICATION ACTIVITIES WITH SRS TANK FARM SLUDGE  

SciTech Connect

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

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

2011-11-16T23:59:59.000Z

79

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

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

1997-03-06T23:59:59.000Z

80

Supporting document for the SW Quadrant Historical Tank Content Estimate for U-Tank Farm  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This Supporting Document provides historical characterization information gathered on U-Tank Farm, such as historical waste transfer and level data, tank physical information, temperature data, sampling data, and drywell and liquid observation well data for Historical Tank Content Estimate of the SW Quadrant at the Hanford 200 West Area.

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

1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank farm facility" 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

Technical Baseline Summary Description for the Tank Farm Contractor  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

TEDESCHI, A.R.

2000-04-21T23:59:59.000Z

82

Operational Awarness at Hanford Tank Farms, April 2013  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

HSS Independent Activity Report - HSS Independent Activity Report - Rev. 0 Report Number: HIAR-HANFORD-2013-04-15 Site: Hanford - Office of River Protection Subject: Office of Enforcement and Oversight's Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Activity Report for Operational Awareness at the Hanford Tank Farms Dates of Activity : 04/15-26/2013 Report Preparer: Robert E. Farrell Activity Description/Purpose: The Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations (HS-45) Site Lead conducted an operational awareness visit to the Office of River Protection (ORP) to tour the Hanford Tank Farms, observe video inspection of single shell and double shell tanks, and observe Tank Farm project and staff meetings. Result:

83

Modifications to, and Vibration Analysis of Tank 7 Slurry Pumps, F Tank Farm  

SciTech Connect

Slurry pumps have demonstrated short life spans when operated in nuclear waste tanks. Their life approximates one thousand hours or approximately 42 days of continuous operation, evidenced by past performance in H-Area and F-Area at the Savannah River Site (SRS). Several investigations over the past six years have isolated the most significant reliability problems. These problems are seal and bearing failures caused by the vibrations of the long drive shafts in the pump, manufacturing tolerance accumulations, failures caused by material incompatibility between the waste and the lowest process bearing that is exposed to the waste, and vibrations which occur when the pump operates at critical speeds. Only vibration and material problems were corrected. Potential bearing and seal degradation still exists for those pumps with a critical speed near the operating speed. Bearing damage can be expected below 700 rpm. The pumps are used to mix or slurry nuclear waste products contained in waste storage tanks prior to transferring the tank contents for further processing. In particular, Lawrence Pumps, Inc. slurry pumps are installed on Tank 7 in F Tank Farm. Appendix A provides the initial recommendations, and further states that this follow up report would provide detailed descriptions of the pump components, failure mechanisms, and corrective actions which include tilt pad bearings, a Stellite process bearing, and modified split shaft retainers. By testing the pumps in a non-radioactive test facility, these corrections have been shown to significantly decrease the vibrations associated with bearing and seal failures, and consequently are expected to improve reliability.

Lieshear, R.A.

2002-05-10T23:59:59.000Z

84

Sunset Farms Biomass Facility | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Sunset Farms Biomass Facility Sunset Farms Biomass Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Sunset Farms Biomass Facility Facility Sunset Farms Sector Biomass Facility Type Landfill Gas Location Travis County, Texas Coordinates 30.2097015°, -97.6982272° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":30.2097015,"lon":-97.6982272,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

85

Worker Protection from Chemical Vapors: Hanford Tank Farms  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Chemical vapor emissions from underground hazardous waste storage tanks on the Hanford site in eastern Washington State are a potential concern because workers enter the tank farms on a regular basis for waste retrievals, equipment maintenance, and surveillance. Tank farm contractors are in the process of retrieving all remaining waste from aging single-shell tanks, some of which date to World War II, and transferring it to newer double-shell tanks. During the waste retrieval process, tank farm workers are potentially exposed to fugitive chemical vapors that can escape from tank head-spaces and other emission points. The tanks are known to hold more than 1,500 different species of chemicals, in addition to radionuclides. Exposure assessments have fully characterized the hazards from chemical vapors in half of the tank farms. Extensive sampling and analysis has been done to characterize the chemical properties of hazardous waste and to evaluate potential health hazards of vapors at the ground surface, where workers perform maintenance and waste transfer activities. Worker concerns, risk communication, and exposure assessment are discussed, including evaluation of the potential hazards of complex mixtures of chemical vapors. Concentrations of vapors above occupational exposure limits (OEL) were detected only at exhaust stacks and passive breather filter outlets. Beyond five feet from the sources, vapors disperse rapidly. No vapors have been measured above 50% of their OELs more than five feet from the source. Vapor controls are focused on limited hazard zones around sources. Further evaluations of vapors include analysis of routes of exposure and thorough analysis of nuisance odors. (authors)

Anderson, T.J. [CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc. / Environmental Health, Richland, WA (United States)

2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

86

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

Shafer, A.

2010-05-05T23:59:59.000Z

87

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

April 2013 April 2013 Independent Oversight Review, Hanford Tank Farms - April 2013 April 2013 Review of Management of Safety Systems at the Hanford Tank Farms The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Enforcement and Oversight (Independent Oversight), within the Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS), conducted an independent review of the management of safety class or safety significant structures, systems and components (hereinafter referred to as safety systems) at the Hanford Site Tank Farms. The review was performed by the HSS Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations. The purpose of this Independent Oversight targeted assessment effort is to evaluate processes for monitoring, maintaining, and operating safety systems to ensure their continued reliable capability to perform the

88

Nuclear Criticality Safety Requirements Implementation Matrix for Tank Farms  

SciTech Connect

This document provides a detailed matrix of specific Tank Farms nuclear criticality safety program elements indexed to primary requirements documents. These requirements are collected at a higher level in HNF-SO-MP-SRID-001, ''Tank Waste Remediation System Standards/Requirements Identification Document.'' The intended use of this document is to provide a roadmap for implementing procedures and assessments.

WEISS, E.V.

2000-05-17T23:59:59.000Z

89

AN ENHANCED HAZARD ANALYSIS PROCESS FOR THE HANFORD TANK FARMS  

SciTech Connect

CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc., has expanded the scope and increased the formality of process hazards analyses performed on new or modified Tank Farm facilities, designs, and processes. The CH2M HILL process hazard analysis emphasis has been altered to reflect its use as a fundamental part of the engineering and change control process instead of simply being a nuclear safety analysis tool. The scope has been expanded to include identification of accidents/events that impact the environment, or require emergency response, in addition to those with significant impact to the facility worker, the offsite, and the 100-meter receptor. Also, there is now an expectation that controls will be identified to address all types of consequences. To ensure that the process has an appropriate level of rigor and formality, a new engineering standard for process hazards analysis was created. This paper discusses the role of process hazards analysis as an information source for not only nuclear safety, but also for the worker-safety management programs, emergency management, environmental programs. This paper also discusses the role of process hazards analysis in the change control process, including identifying when and how it should be applied to changes in design or process.

SHULTZ MV

2008-05-15T23:59:59.000Z

90

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

SciTech Connect

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

Quigley, J.T.

1997-04-02T23:59:59.000Z

91

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

Garrison, R.C.

1995-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

92

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

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

1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

93

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

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

1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

94

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

SciTech Connect

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

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

1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

95

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

SciTech Connect

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

KRISTOFZSKI, J.G.

2007-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

96

Waste Treatment Plant and Tank Farm Program  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

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

97

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SAMPLING OF TANK 18 IN F TANK FARM  

SciTech Connect

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

Shine, G.

2009-12-14T23:59:59.000Z

98

Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

99

SY Tank Farm ventilation isolation option risk assessment report  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

The safety of the 241-SY Tank Farm ventilation system has been under extensive scrutiny due to safety concerns associated with tank 101-SY. Hydrogen and other gases are generated and trapped in the waste below the liquid surface. Periodically, these gases are released into the dome space and vented through the exhaust system. This attention to the ventilation system has resulted in the development of several alternative ventilation system designs. The ventilation system provides the primary means of mitigation of accidents associated with flammable gases. This report provides an assessment of various alternatives ventilation system designs.

Powers, T.B.; Morales, S.D.

1994-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

100

ORP Tank Farms Unreviewed Safety Question Process Implementation  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

0 Report Number: HIAR-HORP-2011-04-18 0 Report Number: HIAR-HORP-2011-04-18 Site: Office of River Protection Subject: Office of Independent Oversight's Office of Environment, Safety and Health Evaluations Activity Report for the Selected Aspects of Tank Farms Unreviewed Safety Question Process Implementation Dates of Activity 02/21/2011 - 04/18/2011 Report Preparer Shivaji S. Seth Activity Description/Purpose: The purpose of the activity, which was performed by the Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) as part of the Department of Energy (DOE) Office of River Protection's (ORP's) nuclear safety assessment and oversight, was to review and evaluate selected aspects of the Tank Farms Operating Contractor's (TOC's) implementation of the recently revised unreviewed safety question (USQ) procedure. A major aspect of the revised implemented process (Ref. 1) was to eliminate

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank farm facility" 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

PORFLOW Modeling Supporting The H-Tank Farm Performance Assessment  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

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

2012-08-31T23:59:59.000Z

102

Acceptance test procedure for SY Tank Farm replacement exhauster unit  

SciTech Connect

The proper functioning of a new 241-SY Tank Farm replacement exhauster will be acceptance tested, to establish operability and to provide an operational baseline for the equipment. During this test, a verification of all of the alarm and control circuits associated with the exhaust, which provide operating controls and/or signals to local and remote alarm/annunciator panels, shall be performed. Test signals for sensors that provide alarms, warnings, and/or interlocks will be applied to verify that alarm, warning, and interlock setpoints are correct. Alarm and warning lights, controls, and local and remote readouts for the exhauster will be verified to be adequate for proper operation of the exhauster. Testing per this procedure shall be conducted in two phases. The first phase of testing, to verify alarm, warning, and interlock setpoints primarily, will be performed in the MO-566 Fab Shop. The second phase of testing, to verify proper operation and acceptable interface with other tank farm systems, will be conducted after the exhauster and all associated support and monitoring equipment have been installed in the SY Tank Farm. The exhauster, which is mounted on a skid and which will eventually be located in the SY tank farm, receives input signals from a variety of sensors mounted on the skid and associated equipment. These sensors provide information such as: exhauster system inlet vacuum pressure; prefilter and HEPA filter differential pressures; exhaust stack sampler status; exhaust fan status; system status (running/shut down); and radiation monitoring systems status. The output of these sensors is transmitted to the exhauster annunciator panel where the signals are displayed and monitored for out-of-specification conditions.

Becken, G.W.

1994-12-16T23:59:59.000Z

103

Human Resources Staffing Plan for the Tank Farm Contractor  

SciTech Connect

The Human Resources Staffing Plan quantified the equivalent staffing needs required for the Tank Farm Contractor (TFC) and its subcontractors to execute the readiness to proceed baseline between FY 2000-2008. The TFC staffing needs were assessed along with the staffings needs of Fluor Hanford and the privatization contractor. The plan then addressed the staffing needs and recruitment strategies required to execute the baseline.

BOSLEY, J.W.

2000-04-22T23:59:59.000Z

104

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

First Draft Performance Assessment for the H-Area Tank Farm at the First Draft Performance Assessment for the H-Area Tank Farm at the Savannah River Site First Draft Performance Assessment for the H-Area Tank Farm at the Savannah River Site The PAs are used to assess the long-term fate and transport of residual contamination in the environment and provide the Department Of Energy with reasonable assurance that the removal from service of the Savannah River Site tank farm underground radioactive waste tanks and ancillary equipment will meet defined performance objectives for the protection of human health and the environment into the future. First Draft Performance Assessment for the H-Area Tank Farm at the Savannah River Site - Part 1 First Draft Performance Assessment for the H-Area Tank Farm at the Savannah River Site - Part 2

105

Configuration Management Plan for the Tank Farm Contractor  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

WEIR, W.R.

2000-04-21T23:59:59.000Z

106

Authorization basis status report (miscellaneous TWRS facilities, tanks and components)  

SciTech Connect

This report presents the results of a systematic evaluation conducted to identify miscellaneous TWRS facilities, tanks and components with potential needed authorization basis upgrades. It provides the Authorization Basis upgrade plan for those miscellaneous TWRS facilities, tanks and components identified.

Stickney, R.G.

1998-04-29T23:59:59.000Z

107

CHANGING THE SAFETY CULTURE IN HANFORD TANK FARMS  

SciTech Connect

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

BERRIOCHOA MV; ALCALA LJ

2009-01-06T23:59:59.000Z

108

CHANGING THE SAFETY CULTURE IN HANFORD TANK FARMS  

SciTech Connect

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

BERRIOCHOA MV; ALCALA LJ

2009-01-06T23:59:59.000Z

109

Supporting document for the North East Quandrant Historical Tank Content Estimate Report for BX-Tank Farm  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

Brevick, C.H.

1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

110

Environmental Program Description for the Tank Farm Contractor  

SciTech Connect

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

111

Development of Occupational Exposure Limits for the Hanford Tank Farms  

SciTech Connect

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

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

2010-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

112

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

LEHMAN LL

2008-01-23T23:59:59.000Z

113

Crude Oil Stocks at Tank Farms & Pipelines  

Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

Stocks at Tank Farms & Pipelines Stocks at Tank Farms & Pipelines (Thousand Barrels) Period: Monthly Annual Download Series History Download Series History Definitions, Sources & Notes Definitions, Sources & Notes Area Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 View History U.S. 263,633 264,749 252,781 242,174 232,837 248,898 1981-2013 East Coast (PADD 1) 2,000 1,635 1,585 1,793 1,507 2,033 1981-2013 Midwest (PADD 2) 100,842 101,525 99,186 89,116 84,420 84,878 1981-2013 Cushing, OK 49,237 50,172 48,671 40,459 34,809 33,017 2004-2013 Gulf Coast (PADD 3) 121,316 121,816 113,846 112,745 112,059 122,497 1981-2013 Rocky Mountain (PADD 4) 12,813 12,512 12,003 12,181 12,858 12,956 1981-2013 West Coast (PADD 5) 26,662 27,261 26,161 26,339 21,993 26,534 1981-2013

114

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

L. S. Cahn

2007-05-16T23:59:59.000Z

115

Review of the Hanford Tank Farms Radiological Controls Activity-Level Implementation, December 2012  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Tank Farms Tank Farms Radiological Controls Activity-Level Implementation May 2011 December 2012 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy Table of Contents 1.0 Purpose................................................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Background .......................................................................................................................................... 1 3.0 Scope.................................................................................................................................................... 2 4.0 Methodology ........................................................................................................................................

116

Review of the Hanford Tank Farms Radiological Controls Activity-Level Implementation, December 2012  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Tank Farms Tank Farms Radiological Controls Activity-Level Implementation May 2011 December 2012 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy Table of Contents 1.0 Purpose................................................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Background .......................................................................................................................................... 1 3.0 Scope.................................................................................................................................................... 2 4.0 Methodology ........................................................................................................................................

117

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

GRIGSBY KM

2011-04-07T23:59:59.000Z

118

Meeting Summaries for Development of the Hanford Site C Tank Farm  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

119

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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.

120

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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.

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank farm facility" 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

Independent Oversight Review of Hanford Tank Farms Safety Basis Amendment for Double-Shell Tank Ventilation System Upgrades, November 2011  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Hanford Tank Farms Safety Basis Amendment for Double-Shell Tank Ventilation System Upgrades November 2011 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy i Table of Contents 1.0 Purpose ................................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Background ............................................................................................................................................ 1 3.0 Scope and Approach .............................................................................................................................. 2

122

Configuration management plan for waste tank farms and the 242-A evaporator of tank waste remediation system  

SciTech Connect

The configuration management architecture presented in this Configuration Management Plan is based on the functional model established by DOE-STD-1073-93, ``Guide for Operational Configuration Management Program.`` The DOE Standard defines the configuration management program by the five basic program elements of ``program management,`` ``design requirements,`` ``document control,`` ``change control,`` and ``assessments,`` and the two adjunct recovery programs of ``design reconstitution,`` and ``material condition and aging management.`` The CM model of five elements and two adjunct programs strengthen the necessary technical and administrative control to establish and maintain a consistent technical relationship among the requirements, physical configuration, and documentation. Although the DOE Standard was originally developed for the operational phase of nuclear facilities, this plan has the flexibility to be adapted and applied to all life-cycle phases of both nuclear and non-nuclear facilities. The configuration management criteria presented in this plan endorses the DOE Standard and has been tailored specifically to address the technical relationship of requirements, physical configuration, and documentation during the full life cycle of the Waste Tank Farms and 242-A Evaporator of Tank Waste Remediation System.

Laney, T.

1994-08-30T23:59:59.000Z

123

Pore Water Extraction Test Near 241-SX Tank Farm at the Hanford Site, Washington, USA - 14168  

SciTech Connect

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

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

2013-11-11T23:59:59.000Z

124

Nuclear criticality project plan for the Hanford Site tank farms  

SciTech Connect

The mission of this project is to provide a defensible technical basis report in support of the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). This technical basis report will also be used to resolve technical issues associated with the nuclear criticality safety issue. The strategy presented in this project plan includes an integrated programmatic and organizational approach. The scope of this project plan includes the provision of a criticality technical basis supporting document (CTBSD) to support the FSAR as well as for resolution of the nuclear criticality safety issue. Specifically, the CTBSD provides the requisite technical analysis to support the FSAR hazard and accident analysis as well as for the determination of the required FSAR limits and controls. The scope of The CTBSD will provide a baseline for understanding waste partitioning and distribution phenomena and mechanistics for current operational activities inclusive of single-shell tanks, double-shell tanks, double-contained receiver tanks, and miscellaneous underground storage tanks.. Although the FSAR does not include future operational activities, the waste partitioning and distribution phenomena and mechanistics work scope identified in this project plan provide a sound technical basis as a point of departure to support independent safety analyses for future activities. The CTBSD also provides the technical basis for resolution of the technical issues associated with the nuclear criticality safety issue. In addition to the CTBSD, additional documentation will be required to fully resolve U.S. Department of Energy-Headquarters administrative and programmatic issues. The strategy and activities defined in this project plan provide a CTBSD for the FSAR and for accelerated resolution of the safety issue in FY 1996. On April 30, 1992, a plant review committee reviewed the Final Safety Analysis Reports for the single-shell, double-shell, and aging waste tanks in light of the conclusions of the inadequate waste characterization with respect to fissile material. The review indicated that the conclusion in the FSARS, that a criticality is not credible, cannot be supported for a full range of potential tank constituents. Therefore, a USQ was declared. Development of a credible scenario leading to a criticality proved to be extremely difficult, given the paucity of data on the quantity and distribution of fissile material in the tanks. The objective of this project plan is to develop a strategy and technical approach to provide a CTBSD for the FSAR and for resolution of the nuclear criticality safety issue pertaining to tank farm waste storage and transfer operations. The strategy and technical approach identified in this project plan include definition of administrative and technical tasks. Technical analyses will include mechanistic studies, historical data review, and additional limited neutronics analysis. Completion of these studies will be documented in a CTBSD to support the existing criticality technical basis. The CTBSD will be incorporated in the criticality portion of the FSAR.

Bratzel, D.R., Westinghouse Hanford

1996-08-06T23:59:59.000Z

125

Evaluation of 241-AZ tank farm supporting phase 1 privatization waste feed delivery  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This evaluation is one in a series of evaluations determining the process needs and assessing the adequacy of existing and planned equipment in meeting those needs at various double-shell tank farms in support of Phase 1 privatization. A number of tank-to-tank transfers and waste preparation activities are needed to process and feed waste to the private contractor in support of Phase 1 privatization. The scope of this evaluation is limited to process needs associated with 241-AZ tank farm during the Phase 1 privatization.

CARLSON, A.B.

1998-11-19T23:59:59.000Z

126

Independent Oversight Review of Hanford Tank Farms Safety Basis...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

to create tank vacuum exceeding their analyzed capabilities, which could result in structural failures. The vacuum relief valves and other tank vacuum 3 protection devices are...

127

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

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

128

BY tank farm waste inventory and transfer data ITS-2 operation during January To June 1972  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Daily record inventory of pumping activities and liquid level changes including occasional operations comments for the BY Tank Farm. Waste inventory and transfer data for ITS-2 operation during January to June 1972.

Reich, F.R., Westinghouse Hanford

1996-08-02T23:59:59.000Z

129

Evaluating capacity and expansion opportunities at tank farm: a decision support system using discrete event simulation  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This paper presents a discrete event simulation based Decision Support System to evaluate tank farm operations. The Decision Support System was developed in order to reduce capital expenditures and assist in decision making for assessing the impact of ...

Bikram Sharda; Adriana Vazquez

2009-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

130

Programmatic Baseline Summary for Phase 1 Privatization for the Tank Farm contractor  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The document describes the systematic integrated baseline planning process and provides a summary of the Tank Farm Contractor scope, schedule and cost analysis developed in support of the Phase 1 privatization mission.

DIEDIKER, J.A.

2000-04-22T23:59:59.000Z

131

Tank farm surveillance and waste status summary report for May 1993  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

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

Hanlon, B.M.

1993-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

132

Tank Farm surveillance and waste status summary report for April 1993  

SciTech Connect

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

Hanlon, B.M.

1993-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

133

High-level waste storage tank farms/242-A evaporator standards/requirements identification document (S/RID), Vol. 6  

SciTech Connect

The scope of the Environmental Restoration and Waste Management (EM) Functional Area includes the programmatic controls associated with the management and operation of the Hanford Tank Farm Facility. The driving management organization implementing the programmatic controls is the Tank Farms Waste Management (WM)organization whose responsibilities are to ensure that performance objectives are established; and that measurable criteria for attaining objectives are defined and reflected in programs, policies and procedures. Objectives for the WM Program include waste minimization, establishment of effective waste segregation methods, waste treatment technology development, radioactive (low-level, high-level) hazardous and mixed waste transfer, treatment, and storage, applicability of a corrective action program, and management and applicability of a decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) program in future years.

Not Available

1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

134

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

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (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

135

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

SciTech Connect

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

Not Available

1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

136

Aqua Farms International Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility |  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Farms International Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Farms International Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Aqua Farms International Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Facility Aqua Farms International Sector Geothermal energy Type Aquaculture Location Mecca, California Coordinates 33.571692°, -116.0772244° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[]}

137

Blue Aquarius Fish Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility |  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Aquarius Fish Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Aquarius Fish Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Blue Aquarius Fish Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Facility Blue Aquarius Fish Farms Sector Geothermal energy Type Aquaculture Location Mecca, California Coordinates 33.571692°, -116.0772244° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[]}

138

California Desert Fish Farm Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Fish Farm Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Fish Farm Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name California Desert Fish Farm Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Facility California Desert Fish Farm Sector Geothermal energy Type Aquaculture Location Niland, California Coordinates 33.2400366°, -115.5188756° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[]}

139

Valley Fish Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility | Open  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Fish Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Fish Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Valley Fish Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Facility Valley Fish Farms Sector Geothermal energy Type Aquaculture Location Imperial, California Coordinates 32.8475528°, -115.5694391° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[]}

140

Coachella Valley Fish Farm Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Coachella Valley Fish Farm Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Coachella Valley Fish Farm Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Coachella Valley Fish Farm Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Facility Coachella Valley Fish Farm Sector Geothermal energy Type Aquaculture Location Mecca, California Coordinates 33.571692°, -116.0772244° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[]}

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank farm facility" 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

Paso Robles Fish Farm Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility |  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Fish Farm Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Fish Farm Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Paso Robles Fish Farm Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Facility Paso Robles Fish Farm Sector Geothermal energy Type Aquaculture Location San Luis Obispo County, California Coordinates 35.3102296°, -120.4357631° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[]}

142

Opline Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Opline Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Opline Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Opline Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Facility Opline Farms Sector Geothermal energy Type Aquaculture Location Given Hot Springs, Idaho Coordinates Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[]}

143

Nichinghsiang Fish Farm Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility |  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Nichinghsiang Fish Farm Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Nichinghsiang Fish Farm Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Nichinghsiang Fish Farm Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Facility Nichinghsiang Fish Farm Sector Geothermal energy Type Aquaculture Location Mecca, California Coordinates 33.571692°, -116.0772244° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[]}

144

Sunnybrook Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility | Open  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Sunnybrook Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Sunnybrook Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Sunnybrook Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Facility Sunnybrook Farms Sector Geothermal energy Type Aquaculture Location Twin Falls, Idaho Coordinates 42.5629668°, -114.4608711° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[]}

145

Masson Radium Springs Farm Greenhouse Low Temperature Geothermal Facility |  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Masson Radium Springs Farm Greenhouse Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Masson Radium Springs Farm Greenhouse Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Masson Radium Springs Farm Greenhouse Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Facility Masson Radium Springs Farm Sector Geothermal energy Type Greenhouse Location Radium Springs, New Mexico Coordinates 32.501453°, -106.926575° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[]}

146

Blue Spruce Farm Ana Biomass Facility | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Spruce Farm Ana Biomass Facility Spruce Farm Ana Biomass Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Blue Spruce Farm Ana Biomass Facility Facility Blue Spruce Farm Ana Sector Biomass Location Vermont Coordinates 44.5588028°, -72.5778415° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":44.5588028,"lon":-72.5778415,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

147

Express Farms Greenhouse Low Temperature Geothermal Facility | Open Energy  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Express Farms Greenhouse Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Express Farms Greenhouse Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Express Farms Greenhouse Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Facility Express Farms Sector Geothermal energy Type Greenhouse Location Marsing, Idaho Coordinates 43.5454359°, -116.8131958° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[]}

148

Kerr Aqua Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility | Open  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Aqua Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Aqua Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Kerr Aqua Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Facility Kerr Aqua Farms Sector Geothermal energy Type Aquaculture Location Alamosa, Colorado Coordinates 37.4694491°, -105.8700214° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[]}

149

Silver Creek Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility | Open  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Creek Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Creek Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Silver Creek Farms Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Facility Silver Creek Farms Sector Geothermal energy Type Aquaculture Location Twin Falls, Idaho Coordinates 42.5629668°, -114.4608711° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[]}

150

First Ascent Fish Farm Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility |  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

First Ascent Fish Farm Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility First Ascent Fish Farm Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name First Ascent Fish Farm Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Facility First Ascent Fish Farm Sector Geothermal energy Type Aquaculture Location Buhl, Idaho Coordinates 42.5990714°, -114.7594946° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[]}

151

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

SciTech Connect

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

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

2010-09-27T23:59:59.000Z

152

Computer software configuration management plan for the 241-AY and 241-AZ tank farm MICON automation system  

SciTech Connect

Software configuration items pertaining to the process control systems, of the ventilation systems of the tank farms, are identified and configuration controls are defined.

Teats, M.C.

1995-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

153

Life Estimation of High Level Waste Tank Steel for H-Tank Farm ...  

the tanks is not considered in the analysis. Life Estimation of High Level Waste Tank ... conservative scenario in which the concrete vault has completely

154

Review of the Hanford Tank Farms Radiological Controls Activity...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

tank pump and slurry distributer, as well as excavation and installation of associated instrumentation. Independent Oversight also interviewed a selection of key personnel...

155

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

SciTech Connect

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

156

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

SciTech Connect

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

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

2013-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

157

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

SciTech Connect

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

158

Analysis of NaOH releases for Hanford tank farms  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

Ryan, G.W., Westinghouse Hanford

1996-09-12T23:59:59.000Z

159

Tank farm deflagration rates due to various ignition sources  

SciTech Connect

This supporting document evaluates potential ignition sources, documents calculated deflagration rates in flammable gas tanks from these ignition sources, and assesses the efficacy of controls to mitigate or prevent ignition.

Powers, T.B., Westinghouse Hanford

1996-08-29T23:59:59.000Z

160

REASSESSMENT OF NEAR SURFACE CONTAMINATION IN SINGLE SHELL TANK (SST) FARMS  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Reassessment of the documentation and information in valuing near-surface contamination and unplanned releases adjacent to the Tank Farms in the 200 Area of the Hanford Site. Information is contained in a Microsoft Access database. 63 new sources of contamination information were identified.

JONES, T.E.

2004-01-28T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank farm facility" 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

Review of Management of Safety Systems at the Hanford Tank Farms, April 2013  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Independent Oversight Review of Independent Oversight Review of Management of Safety Systems at the Hanford Tank Farms May 2011 February 2013 April 2013 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U. S. Department of Energy Table of Contents 1.0 Purpose.................................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Background ............................................................................................................................................. 1 3.0 Scope....................................................................................................................................................... 2

162

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

SciTech Connect

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

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

2011-06-17T23:59:59.000Z

163

Data Quality Objectives for Tank Farms Waste Compatibility Program  

SciTech Connect

There are 177 waste storage tanks containing over 210,000 m{sup 3} (55 million gal) of mixed waste at the Hanford Site. The River Protection Project (RPP) has adopted the data quality objective (DQO) process used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (EPA 1994a) and implemented by RPP internal procedure (Banning 1999a) to identify the information and data needed to address safety issues. This DQO document is based on several documents that provide the technical basis for inputs and decision/action levels used to develop the decision rules that evaluate the transfer of wastes. A number of these documents are presently in the process of being revised. This document will need to be revised if there are changes to the technical criteria in these supporting documents. This DQO process supports various documents, such as sampling and analysis plans and double-shell tank (DST) waste analysis plans. This document identifies the type, quality, and quantity of data needed to determine whether transfer of supernatant can be performed safely. The requirements in this document are designed to prevent the mixing of incompatible waste as defined in Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173-303-040. Waste transfers which meet the requirements contained in this document and the Double-Shell Tank Waste Analysis Plan (Mulkey 1998) are considered to be compatible, and prevent the mixing of incompatible waste.

BANNING, D.L.

1999-07-02T23:59:59.000Z

164

A STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY EVALUATION OF THE TANK FARM WASTE TRANSFER SYSTEM  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Radioactive supernate, salt, and/or sludge wastes (i.e., high level wastes) are confined in 49 underground storage tanks at the Savannah River Site (SRS). The waste is transported between tanks within and between the F and H area tank farms and other facilities on site via underground and a limited number of aboveground transfer lines. The Department of Energy - Savannah River Operations Office (DOE-SR) performed a comprehensive assessment of the structural integrity program for the Tank Farm waste transfer system at the SRS. This document addresses the following issues raised during the DOE assessment: (1) Inspections of failed or replaced transfer lines indicated that the wall thickness of some core and jacket piping is less than nominal; (2) No corrosion allowance is utilized in the transfer line structural qualification calculations. No basis for neglecting corrosion was provided in the calculations; (3) Wall loss due to erosion is not addressed in the transfer line structural qualification calculations; and (4) No basis is provided for neglecting intergranular stress corrosion cracking in the transfer line structural qualification calculations. The common theme in most of these issues is the need to assess the potential for occurrence of material degradation of the transfer line piping. The approach used to resolve these issues involved: (1) Review the design and specifications utilized to construct and fabricate the piping system; (2) Review degradation mechanisms for stainless steel and carbon steel and determine their relevance to the transfer line piping; (3) Review the transfer piping inspection data; (4) Life estimation calculations for the transfer lines; and (5) A Fitness-For-Service evaluation for one of the transfer line jackets. The evaluation concluded that the transfer line system piping has performed well for over fifty years. Although there have been instances of failures of the stainless steel core pipe during off-normal service, no significant degradation is anticipated during normal operations for the planned service life. General corrosion of stainless steel in high level waste environments was shown to be insignificant (i.e., little or no wall loss is expected for a time on the order of 180 years or more). Erosion is also not expected to limit the life of the pipes due to the low usage of the transfer lines and low fluid velocity during transfers. Quality controls on the material (e.g., corrosion evaluation testing) and procedures/specifications that limit contact with chloride bearing materials or liquids minimize the potential for the occurrence of stress corrosion cracking of the core pipe. General corrosion of the carbon steel jacket is not expected to be significant for a reasonable intended service life (e.g., on the order of 170 years). However, the carbon steel jackets are expected to continue to fail in local areas due to pitting corrosion. Life prediction estimates project that a significant increase in the number of jacket failures (i.e., through-wall penetrations) may occur after an additional 30 to 60 years of service life (i.e., between 2035 and 2065). A Fitness-For-Service evaluation was performed for a recently inspected jacket that showed evidence of pitting within a locally thinned area. The evaluation concluded that the line is still able to perform its intended function and can remain in service.

Wiersma, B.

2006-03-09T23:59:59.000Z

165

Tank Farm Mixing and Sampling to Support DWPF Operations  

Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) Requirements Waste ... The Sample Request Form defines the conditions and type of sample. 12 LWO-LWP-2009-00021 SRAT ...

166

Tank exhaust comparison with 40 CFR 61.93, Subpart H, and other referenced guidelines for Tank Farms National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutant (NESHAP) designated stacks  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) promulgated National Emission Standards other than Radon from US Department of Energy (DOE) Facilities (40 CFR 61, Subpart H) on December 15, 1989. The regulations specify procedures, equipment, and test methods that.are to be used to measure radionuclide emissions from exhaust stacks that are designated as National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutant (NESHAP) stacks. Designated NESHAP stacks are those that have the potential to cause any member of the public to receive an effective dose equivalent (EDE) greater than or equal to 0.1 mrem/year, assuming all emission controls were removed. Tank Farms currently has 33 exhaust stacks, 15 of which are designated NESHAP stacks. This document assesses the compliance status of the monitoring and sampling systems for the designated NESHAP stacks.

Bachand, D.D.; Crummel, G.M.

1994-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

167

Tank Closure  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

168

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

SciTech Connect

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

169

Tank Farm Contractor Phase 1 Feed Delivery and Storage and Disposal Mission Summary for 2006 Hot Start Extended Order  

SciTech Connect

This is the level one logic diagram for the River Protection Project (RPP), Tank Farm Contractor, Phase 1, Feed Delivery Storage and Disposal Mission Summary for 2006 Hot Start.

DAVIS, T.J.

2000-04-24T23:59:59.000Z

170

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

SciTech Connect

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

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

2009-09-24T23:59:59.000Z

171

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

SciTech Connect

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

172

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

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

2013-01-10T23:59:59.000Z

173

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

BAKER, D.M.

2004-08-03T23:59:59.000Z

174

Assessment of New Calculation Method for Toxicological Sums-of-Fractions for Hanford Tank Farm Wastes  

SciTech Connect

The toxicological source terms used for potential accident assessment in the Hanford Tank Farms DSA are based on toxicological sums-of-fractions (SOFs) that were calculated based on the Best Basis Inventory (BBI) from May 2002, using a method that depended on thermodynamic equilibrium calculations of the compositions of liquid and solid phases. The present report describes a simplified SOF-calculation method that is to be used in future toxicological updates and assessments and compares its results (for the 2002 BBI) to those of the old method.

Mahoney, Lenna A.

2006-10-18T23:59:59.000Z

175

Collaboration, Automation, and Information Management at Hanford High Level Radioactive Waste (HLW) Tank Farms - 14210  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

Aurah, Mirwaise Y.; Roberts, Mark A.

2013-12-12T23:59:59.000Z

176

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

177

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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 .........................................................................................................................................

178

Tank 42 sludge-only process development for the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF)  

SciTech Connect

Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) requested the development of a sludge-only process for Tank 42 sludge since at the current processing rate, the Tank 51 sludge has been projected to be depleted as early as August 1998. Testing was completed using a non-radioactive Tank 42 sludge simulant. The testing was completed under a range of operating conditions, including worst case conditions, to develop the processing conditions for radioactive Tank 42 sludge. The existing Tank 51 sludge-only process is adequate with the exception that 10 percent additional acid is recommended during sludge receipt and adjustment tank (SRAT) processing to ensure adequate destruction of nitrite during the SRAT cycle.

Lambert, D.P.

2000-03-22T23:59:59.000Z

179

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

SciTech Connect

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

180

Spectrum shape-analysis techniques applied to the Hanford Tank Farms spectral gamma logs  

SciTech Connect

Gamma-ray spectra acquired with high-energy resolution by the spectral gamma logging systems (SGLSs) at the U.S. Department of Energy Hanford Tank Farms, Richland, Washington, are being analyzed for spectral shape characteristics. These spectral shapes, together with a conventional peak-area analysis, enable an analyst not only to identify the gamma-emitting species but also to determine in many instances its spatial distribution around a borehole and to identify the presence of the bremsstrahlung-producing contaminant {sup 90}Sr. The analysis relies primarily on the results of computer simulations of gamma spectra from the predominant radionuclide {sup 137}Cs for various spatial distributions. This log analysis methodology has evolved through an examination of spectral features from spectral logs taken at the SX, BY, and U Tank Farms at the Hanford Site. Initial results determined with this technique show it is possible, in most cases, to distinguish between concentrations of {sup 137}Cs. Work is continuing by experimentally measuring shape factors, incorporating spectrum shape processing in routine log analysis, and extending the techniques to additional radionuclides.

Wilson, R.D.

1997-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank farm facility" 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

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

182

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

Reboul, S.

2012-08-29T23:59:59.000Z

183

Management plan -- Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect

This Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC) Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility (MWTF) Management Plan provides guidance for execution WHC MWTF Project activities related to design, procurement, construction, testing, and turnover. This Management Plan provides a discussion of organizational responsibilities, work planning, project management systems, quality assurance (QA), regulatory compliance, personnel qualifications and training, and testing and evaluations. Classified by the US Department of Energy (DOE) as a major systems acquisition (MSA), the MWTF mission is to provide a safe, cost-effective, and environmentally sound method for interim storage of Hanford Site high-level wastes. This Management Plan provides policy guidance and direction to the Project Office for execution of the project activities.

Fritz, R.L.

1995-01-11T23:59:59.000Z

184

High Level Waste Tank Farm Replacement Project for the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. Environmental Assessment  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Department of Energy (DOE) has prepared an environmental assessment (EA), DOE/EA-0831, for the construction and operation of the High-Level Waste Tank Farm Replacement (HLWTFR) Project for the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant located at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL). The HLWTFR Project as originally proposed by the DOE and as analyzed in this EA included: (1) replacement of five high-level liquid waste storage tanks with four new tanks and (2) the upgrading of existing tank relief piping and high-level liquid waste transfer systems. As a result of the April 1992 decision to discontinue the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel at INEL, DOE believes that it is unlikely that the tank replacement aspect of the project will be needed in the near term. Therefore, DOE is not proposing to proceed with the replacement of the tanks as described in this-EA. The DOE`s instant decision involves only the proposed upgrades aspect of the project described in this EA. The upgrades are needed to comply with Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the Idaho Hazardous Waste Management Act requirements, and the Department`s obligations pursuant to the Federal Facilities Compliance Agreement and Consent Order among the Environmental Protection Agency, DOE, and the State of Idaho. The environmental impacts of the proposed upgrades are adequately covered and are bounded by the analysis in this EA. If DOE later proposes to proceed with the tank replacement aspect of the project as described in the EA or as modified, it will undertake appropriate further review pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act.

Not Available

1993-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

185

High-level waste storage tank farms/242-A evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID)  

SciTech Connect

The High-Level Waste Storage Tank Farms/242-A Evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID) is contained in multiple volumes. This document (Volume 3) presents the standards and requirements for the following sections: Safeguards and Security, Engineering Design, and Maintenance.

Not Available

1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

186

High level waste storage tank farms/242-A evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID), Volume 6  

SciTech Connect

The High-Level Waste Storage Tank Farms/242-A Evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID) is contained in multiple volumes. This document (Volume 6) outlines the standards and requirements for the sections on: Environmental Restoration and Waste Management, Research and Development and Experimental Activities, and Nuclear Safety.

Not Available

1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

187

High-level waste storage tank farms/242-A evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID), Volume 2  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The High-Level Waste Storage Tank Farms/242-A Evaporator Standards/Requirements Document (S/RID) is contained in multiple volumes. This document (Volume 2) presents the standards and requirements for the following sections: Quality Assurance, Training and Qualification, Emergency Planning and Preparedness, and Construction.

Not Available

1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

188

Fiscal Year 2009 Annual Report for Operable Unit 3-14, Tank Farm Soil and INTEC Groundwater  

SciTech Connect

This annual report summarizes maintenance, monitoring, and inspection activities performed to implement the selected remedy for Waste Area Group 3, Operable Unit 3-14, Tank Farm soil and groundwater at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center located within the Idaho National Laboratory Site. Results from monitoring perched water and groundwater at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center are also presented.

Forsythe, Howard S.

2010-04-10T23:59:59.000Z

189

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

SciTech Connect

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

Not Available

1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

190

High-level waste storage tank farms/242-A evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID), Volume 5  

SciTech Connect

The High-Level Waste Storage Tank Farms/242-A Evaporator Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RID) is contained in multiple volumes. This document (Volume 5) outlines the standards and requirements for the Fire Protection and Packaging and Transportation sections.

1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

191

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

H-Area Tank Farm Performance Assessment Scoping Meeting April 20-22, 2010 230 Green Blvd. Aiken Design Center Building Village at Woodside Aiken, SC DRAFT MEETING NOTES Tuesday, April 20, 2010 (8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.) Welcome and introductions made by Tom Gutmann, DOE-SR and Ginger Dickert, SRR. The meeting proceeded with discussion of the topics as identified in the Agenda. Review of General Information Package Consider development of functional requirements/key assumptions tracking process. Evaluate use of Hanford tool for tracking assumptions. Evaluate TRS IAEA-364 for potential updates to some factors (recently published). NRC will provide to DOE and SRR. Consider Features Events Processes (FEPs) style analysis to provide additional

192

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

ANANTATMULA, R.P.

1999-10-20T23:59:59.000Z

193

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

SciTech Connect

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

Wells, Beric E.

2012-12-21T23:59:59.000Z

194

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

SciTech Connect

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

195

Oily-waste-disposal survey, South Tank Farm, Lajes Field, Azores. Final report, 12-17 Jun 90  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

A survey of the wet and dry sludge pits at the South Tank Farm, Lajes Field, Azores was performed by members of the AFOEHL. Samples of the waste water and sludge from the wet sludge pit (WSP) were taken as well as from the dry sludge pit. Bioremediation studies, incineration, and carbon adsorption studies were performed. The characterization of the waste water from the WSP revealed a one phase mixture of mostly soluble oils and grease with an average COD concentration of 1760 and a BOD of 407 mg/1. Oils and grease concentrations were in the 10 mg/1 range. The characterization of the sludge revealed 43% organics and concentrations of metals not high enough for consideration as hazardous waste. The sludge from the DSP also did not have levels of metals high enough for special disposal as hazardous waste. The WSP waste water was slow to degrade biologically through stimulation of indigenous organisms. Carbon was effective in removing COD. The WSP waste water has subsequently been released to the Praia Bay and the sludge recovered and drummed. Recommendations included the construction of a secondary sewage treatment plant to service the base, airport, and Praia, the construction of a sludge drying facility and testing of the dried sludge for ultimate disposal.

Binovi, R.D.

1991-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

196

Facility design philosophy: Tank Waste Remediation System Process support and infrastructure definition  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This report documents the current facility design philosophy for the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) process support and infrastructure definition. The Tank Waste Remediation System Facility Configuration Study (FCS) initially documented the identification and definition of support functions and infrastructure essential to the TWRS processing mission. Since the issuance of the FCS, the Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC) has proceeded to develop information and requirements essential for the technical definition of the TWRS treatment processing programs.

Leach, C.E.; Galbraith, J.D. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States); Grant, P.R.; Francuz, D.J.; Schroeder, P.J. [Fluor Daniel, Inc., Richland, WA (United States)

1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

197

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

SciTech Connect

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

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

2009-01-14T23:59:59.000Z

198

Plantwide Energy Assessment of a Sugarcane Farming and Processing Facility  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

A plantwide energy assessment was performed at Hawaiian Commercial & Sugar Co., an integrated sugarcane farming and processing facility on the island of Maui in the State of Hawaii. There were four main tasks performed for the plantwide energy assessment: 1) pump energy assessment in both field and factory operations, 2) steam generation assessment in the power production operations, 3) steam distribution assessment in the sugar manufacturing operation, and 4) electric power distribution assessment of the company system grid. The energy savings identified in each of these tasks were summarized in terms of fuel savings, electricity savings, or opportunity revenue that potentially exists mostly from increased electric power sales to the local electric utility. The results of this investigation revealed eight energy saving projects that can be implemented at HC&S. These eight projects were determined to have potential for $1.5 million in annual fuel savings or 22,337 MWh equivalent annual electricity savings. Most of the savings were derived from pump efficiency improvements and steam efficiency improvements both in generation and distribution. If all the energy saving projects were implemented and the energy savings were realized as less fuel consumed, there would be corresponding reductions in regulated air pollutants and carbon dioxide emissions from supplemental coal fuel. As HC&S is already a significant user of renewable biomass fuel for its operations, the projected reductions in air pollutants and emissions will not be as great compared to using only coal fuel for example. A classification of implementation priority into operations was performed for the identified energy saving projects based on payback period and ease of implementation.

Jakeway, L.A.; Turn, S.Q.; Keffer, V.I.; Kinoshita, C.M.

2006-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

199

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

SciTech Connect

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

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

2011-01-24T23:59:59.000Z

200

From the Lab to Your Gas Tank: 4 Bioenergy Testing Facilities That Are  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

From the Lab to Your Gas Tank: 4 Bioenergy Testing Facilities That From the Lab to Your Gas Tank: 4 Bioenergy Testing Facilities That Are Making a Difference From the Lab to Your Gas Tank: 4 Bioenergy Testing Facilities That Are Making a Difference December 16, 2013 - 2:46pm Addthis The Integrated Biorefinery Research Facility at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colorado enables partners to test conversion technologies on up to one ton of biomass material a day. | Photo by Dennis Schroeder, National Renewable Energy Laboratory The Integrated Biorefinery Research Facility at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colorado enables partners to test conversion technologies on up to one ton of biomass material a day. | Photo by Dennis Schroeder, National Renewable Energy Laboratory Leslie Pezzullo

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank farm facility" 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

From the Lab to Your Gas Tank: 4 Bioenergy Testing Facilities That Are  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

From the Lab to Your Gas Tank: 4 Bioenergy Testing Facilities That From the Lab to Your Gas Tank: 4 Bioenergy Testing Facilities That Are Making a Difference From the Lab to Your Gas Tank: 4 Bioenergy Testing Facilities That Are Making a Difference December 16, 2013 - 2:46pm Addthis The Integrated Biorefinery Research Facility at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colorado enables partners to test conversion technologies on up to one ton of biomass material a day. | Photo by Dennis Schroeder, National Renewable Energy Laboratory The Integrated Biorefinery Research Facility at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colorado enables partners to test conversion technologies on up to one ton of biomass material a day. | Photo by Dennis Schroeder, National Renewable Energy Laboratory Leslie Pezzullo

202

Operable Unit 3-14, Tank Farm Soil and INTEC Groundwater Remedial Design/Remedial Action Scope of Work  

SciTech Connect

This Remedial Design/Remedial Action (RD/RA) Scope of Work pertains to OU 3-14 Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center and the Idaho National Laboratory and identifies the remediation strategy, project scope, schedule, and budget that implement the tank farm soil and groundwater remediation, in accordance with the May 2007 Record of Decision. Specifically, this RD/RA Scope of Work identifies and defines the remedial action approach and the plan for preparing the remedial design documents.

D. E. Shanklin

2007-07-25T23:59:59.000Z

203

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

in a Type III Tank ... 146 Figure 3.2-42: Typical Conical (Umbrella) Type of Deployable Cooling Coil ... 146...

204

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

Bryant, Jeffrey Whealdon; Nenni, Joseph A; Timothy S. Yoder

2003-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

205

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

SciTech Connect

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

Bryant, J.W.; Nenni, J.A.; Yoder, T.S.

2003-04-22T23:59:59.000Z

206

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

SciTech Connect

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

MACKEY, T.C.

2006-03-17T23:59:59.000Z

207

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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)

208

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

SciTech Connect

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

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

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

209

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

Vail, T.S.

1997-05-29T23:59:59.000Z

210

Review of Management of Safety Systems at the Hanford Tank Farms...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Maintenance CRAD Criteria, Review and Approach Document CSE Cognizant System Engineer DOE U.S. Department of Energy DSA Documented Safety Analysis DST Double Shell Tank EIR...

211

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

at the seeplines of UTR and Fourmile Branch. The waste tank and ancillary equipment inventory of potentially airborne isotopes is used in conjunction with the methodology...

212

2004 Initial Assessments for the T and TX TY Tank Farm Field Investigation Report (FIR): Numerical Simulations  

SciTech Connect

In support of CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc.s (CHG) preparation of a Field Investigative Report (FIR) for the Hanford Site Single-Shell Tank Waste Management Area (WMA) T and TX-TY, a suite of numerical simulations of flow and solute transport was executed using the STOMP code to predict the performance of surface barriers for reducing long-term risks from potential groundwater contamination at the T and TX-TY WMA. The scope and parametric data for these simulations were defined by a modeling data package provided by CHG. This report documents the simulation involving 2-D cross sections through the T Tank and the TX-TY Tank Farm. Eight cases were carried out for the cross sections to simulate the effects of interim barrier, water line leak, inventory distribution, and surface recharge on water flow and the transport of long-lived radionuclides (i.e., technecium-99 and uranium) and chemicals (i.e., nitrate and chromium For simulations with barriers, it is assumed that an interim barrier is in place by the year 2010. It was also assumed that, for all simulations, as part of tank farm closure, a closure barrier was in place by the year 2040. The modeling considers the estimated inventories of contaminants within the vadose zone and calculates the associated risk. It assumes that no tanks will leak in the future. Initial conditions for contaminant concentration are provided as part of inventory estimates for uranium, technetium-99, nitrate, and chromium. For moisture flow modeling, Neumann boundary conditions are prescribed at the surface with the flux equal to the recharge rate estimate. For transport modeling, a zero flux boundary is prescribed at the surface for uranium, technetium-99, nitrate, and chromium. The western and eastern boundaries are assigned no-flux boundaries for both flow and transport. The water table boundary is prescribed by water table elevations and the unconfined aquifer hydraulic gradient. No-flux boundaries are used for the lower boundary. Numerical results were obtained for compliance at the WMA boundary, 200 Areas boundary, exclusion boundary beyond the 200 Areas, and the Columbia River (DOE-RL 2000). Streamtube/analytical models were used to route computed contaminant concentrations at the water table to the downstream compliance points. When the interim barrier was applied at 2010, the soil was desaturated gradually. The difference in saturation of the soil with and without the interim barrier was the largest at 2040, the time the closure barrier was applied. After this, the difference in saturation in the two cases became smaller with time. Generally, the solutes broke though faster if there was a water line leak. A relative small five-day leak (Case 4) had little effect on the peak concentration, while a large 20-yr leak (Case 3) increased the peak concentration significantly and reduced the solute travel in the vadose zone. The distribution of the inventory, either uniform or nonuniform, has little effect on peak arrival time; the peak concentrations of the conservative solutes varied by -6.9 to 0.2% for the T tank farm and by 11 to 49.4% for the TX tank farm. The reduction of the meteoric recharge before the barrier was applied led to less soil saturation, as expected, and thus longer solute travel time in the vadose zone and smaller peak fence line concentration. The effect on soil saturation lasted for about another 50 years after the barrier was applied at 2050. However, the reduced recharge rate affected the breakthough curve till the end of the simulation. The fence line concentrations at the year 3000 were always higher for cases with reduced natural recharge than for those of the base case, which indicates that the fundamental impact of the reduced natural recharge is a smoothing of the breakthrough concentrations at the compliance points.

Zhang, Z. F.; Freedman, Vicky L.; Waichler, Scott R.

2004-09-24T23:59:59.000Z

213

Largest Federally-Owned Wind Farm Breaks Ground at U.S. Weapons Facility |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Largest Federally-Owned Wind Farm Breaks Ground at U.S. Weapons Largest Federally-Owned Wind Farm Breaks Ground at U.S. Weapons Facility Largest Federally-Owned Wind Farm Breaks Ground at U.S. Weapons Facility August 13, 2013 - 10:54am Addthis News Media Contact (202) 586-4940 WASHINGTON - Building on President Obama's Climate Action Plan, which calls for steady, responsible steps to reduce carbon pollution, the Energy Department today broke ground on the nation's largest federally-owned wind project at the Pantex Plant in Amarillo, Texas. Once completed, this five-turbine 11.5 megawatt project will power more than 60 percent of the plant with clean, renewable wind energy and reduce carbon emissions by over 35,000 metric tons per year - equivalent to taking 7,200 cars off the road. The Pantex Plant is the primary site for the assembly, disassembly,

214

Largest Federally-Owned Wind Farm Breaks Ground at U.S. Weapons Facility |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Largest Federally-Owned Wind Farm Breaks Ground at U.S. Weapons Largest Federally-Owned Wind Farm Breaks Ground at U.S. Weapons Facility Largest Federally-Owned Wind Farm Breaks Ground at U.S. Weapons Facility August 13, 2013 - 10:54am Addthis News Media Contact (202) 586-4940 WASHINGTON - Building on President Obama's Climate Action Plan, which calls for steady, responsible steps to reduce carbon pollution, the Energy Department today broke ground on the nation's largest federally-owned wind project at the Pantex Plant in Amarillo, Texas. Once completed, this five-turbine 11.5 megawatt project will power more than 60 percent of the plant with clean, renewable wind energy and reduce carbon emissions by over 35,000 metric tons per year - equivalent to taking 7,200 cars off the road. The Pantex Plant is the primary site for the assembly, disassembly,

215

Hanford Tank Waste Residuals  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

216

Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility thermal hydraulic analysis for Title II design  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The purpose of this work was to provide the thermal hydraulic analysis for the Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility (MWTF) Title II design. Temperature distributions throughout the tank structure were calculated for subsequent use in the structural analysis and in the safety evaluation. Calculated temperatures of critical areas were compared to design allowables. Expected operating parameters were calculated for use in the ventilation system design and in the environmental impact documentation. The design requirements were obtained from the MWTF Functional Design Criteria (FDC). The most restrictive temperature limit given in the FDC is the 200 limit for the haunch and dome steel and concrete. The temperature limit for the rest of the primary and secondary tanks and concrete base mat and supporting pad is 250 F. Also, the waste should not be allowed to boil. The tank geometry was taken from ICF Kaiser Engineers Hanford drawing ES-W236A-Z1, Revision 1, included here in Appendix B. Heat removal rates by evaporation from the waste surface were obtained from experimental data. It is concluded that the MWTF tank cooling system will meet the design temperature limits for the design heat load of 700,000 Btu/h, even if cooling flow is lost to the annulus region, and temperatures change very slowly during transients due to the high heat capacity of the tank structure and the waste. Accordingly, transients will not be a significant operational problem from the viewpoint of meeting the specified temperature limits.

Cramer, E.R.

1994-11-10T23:59:59.000Z

217

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

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

2008-09-11T23:59:59.000Z

218

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

SciTech Connect

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

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

2008-09-11T23:59:59.000Z

219

Propane tank explosion (2 deaths, 7 injuries) at Herrig Brothers Feather Creek Farm, Albert City, Iowa, April 9, 1998. Investigation report  

SciTech Connect

This report explains the explosion/BLEVE that took place on April 9, 1998, at the Herrig Brothers Feather Creek Farm, located in Albert City, Iowa. Two volunteer fire fighters were killed and seven other emergency response personnel were injured. Safety issues covered in the report include protection of propane storage tanks and piping, state regulatory oversight of such installations, and fire fighter response to propane storage tank fires.

NONE

1999-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

220

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

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

1994-12-28T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank farm facility" 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

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

SciTech Connect

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

222

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

JENSEN, C.E.

1999-09-21T23:59:59.000Z

223

241-AY Double Shell Tanks (DST) Integrity Assessment Report  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

JENSEN, C.E.

1999-09-21T23:59:59.000Z

224

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

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

2008-09-11T23:59:59.000Z

225

Phase 1 RCRA Facility Investigation and Corrective Measures Study Work Plan for Single Shell Tank Waste Management Areas  

SciTech Connect

This document is the master work plan for the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) for single-shell tank (SST) farms at the Hanford Site. Evidence indicates that releases at four of the seven SST waste management areas have impacted.

ROGERS, P.M.

2000-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

226

RETRIEVAL & TREATMENT OF HANFORD TANK WASTE  

SciTech Connect

The Hanford Tank Farms contain 53 million gal of radioactive waste accumulated during over 50 years of operations. The waste is stored in 177 single-shell and double-shell tanks in the Hanford 200 Areas. The single-shell tanks were put into operation from the early 1940s through the 1960s with wastes received from several generations of processing facilities for the recovery of plutonium and uranium, and from laboratories and other ancillary facilities. The overall hanford Tank Farm system represents one of the largest nuclear legacies in the world driving towards completion of retrieval and treatment in 2028 and the associated closure activity completion by 2035. Remote operations, significant radiation/contamination levels, limited access, and old facilities are just some of the challenges faced by retrieval and treatment systems. These systems also need to be able to successfully remove 99% or more of the waste, and support waste treatment, and tank closure. The Tank Farm retrieval program has ramped up dramatically in the past three years with design, fabrication, installation, testing, and operations ongoing on over 20 of the 149 single-shell tanks. A variety of technologies are currently being pursued to retrieve different waste types, applications, and to help establish a baseline for recovery/operational efficiencies. The paper/presentation describes the current status of retrieval system design, fabrication, installation, testing, readiness, and operations, including: (1) Saltcake removal progress in Tanks S-102, S-109, and S-112 using saltcake dissolution, modified sluicing, and high pressure water lancing techniques; (2) Sludge vacuum retrieval experience from Tanks C-201, C-202, C-203, and C-204; (3) Modified sluicing experience in Tank C-103; (4) Progress on design and installation of the mobile retrieval system for sludge in potentially leaking single-shell tanks, particularly Tank C-101; and (5) Ongoing installation of various systems in the next generation of tanks to be retrieved.

EACKER, J.A.; SPEARS, J.A.; STURGES, M.H.; MAUSS, B.M.

2006-01-20T23:59:59.000Z

227

Computer code input for thermal hydraulic analysis of Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility Title II design  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The input files to the P/Thermal computer code are documented for the thermal hydraulic analysis of the Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility Title II design analysis.

Cramer, E.R.

1994-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

228

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

SciTech Connect

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

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

2007-12-21T23:59:59.000Z

229

A human factors engineering evaluation of the Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility. Final report  

SciTech Connect

This report documents the methods and results of a human factors engineering (HFE) review conducted on the Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility (MWTF), Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC) Project 236A, to be constructed at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facility at Hanford, Washington. This HFE analysis of the MWTF was initiated by WHC to assess how well the current facility and equipment design satisfies the needs of its operations and maintenance staff and other potential occupants, and to identify areas of the design that could benefit from improving the human interfaces at the facility. Safe and effective operations, including maintenance, is a primary goal for the MWTF. Realization of this goal requires that the MWTF facility, equipment, and operations be designed in a manner that is consistent with the abilities and limitations of its operating personnel. As a consequence, HFE principles should be applied to the MWTF design, construction, its operating procedures, and its training. The HFE review was focused on the 200-West Area facility as the design is further along than that of the 200-East Area. The review captured, to the greatest extent feasible at this stage of design, all aspects of the facility activities and included the major topics generally associated with HFE (e.g., communication, working environment). Lessons learned from the review of the 200 West facility will be extrapolated to the 200-East Area, as well as generalized to the Hanford Site.

Donohoo, D.T. [Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, WA (United States); Sarver, T.L. [ARES Corp., San Francisco, CA (United States)

1995-06-05T23:59:59.000Z

230

Review of the Technical Basis of the Hydrogen Control Limit for Operations in Hanford Tank Farms  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

The waste in Hanford tanks generates a mixture of flammable gases and releases it into the tank headspace. The potential hazard resulting from flammable gas generation requires that controls be established to prevent ignition and halt operations if gas concentrations reach levels of concern. In cases where only hydrogen is monitored, a control limit of 6,250 ppm hydrogen has been in use at Hanford for several years. The hydrogen-based control limit is intended to conservatively represent 25% of the lower flammability limit of a gas mixture, accounting for the presence of flammable gases other than hydrogen, with ammonia being the primary concern. This report reviews the technical basis of the current control limit based on observed and projected concentrations of hydrogen and ammonia representing a range of gas release scenarios. The conclusion supports the continued use of the current 6,250 ppm hydrogen control limit

Mahoney, Lenna A. (BATTELLE (PACIFIC NW LAB)); Stewart, Charles W. (BATTELLE (PACIFIC NW LAB))

2002-11-30T23:59:59.000Z

231

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

Science Conference Proceedings (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

232

January 7, 2013, Department letter accepting Board Recommendation 2012-2, Hanford Tank Farms Flammable Gas Safety Strategy  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

7, 2013 7, 2013 The Honorable PeterS. Winokur Chairman Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board 625 Indiana A venue, NW, Suite 700 Washington, DC 20004 Dear Mr. Chairman: The Department of Energy (DOE) acknowledges receipt of Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (Board) Recommendation 2012-2, Iianford Tank Fanns Flammable Gas Safety Strategy, issued on September 28, 2012, published in the Federal Register on October 12, 20 12, and accepts the Recommendation. The Board acknowledged in its Recommendation that some improvements had been made to the specific administrative controls used for flamn1able gas monitoring, but noted that more work was needed to make the ventilation systetn a credited safety control. DOE agrees. In developing an Implementation Plan (IP), DOE will take the

233

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

of performance for the closed HTF facilities over time based on the total remaining inventory. Section 4.1 provides an overview of the ICM comprised of three components: 1)...

234

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

SciTech Connect

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

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

2006-10-18T23:59:59.000Z

235

Implementation of an Integrated Information Management System for the US DOE Hanford Tank Farms Project - 14224  

SciTech Connect

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

Joyner, William Scott; Knight, Mark A.

2013-11-14T23:59:59.000Z

236

FINAL REPORT FOR THE EROSION AND CORROSION ANALYSIS OF WASTE TRANSFER PRIMARY PIPELINE SECTIONS FROM 241-SY TANK FARM  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

PAGE JS; WYRWAS RB; COOKE GA

2012-10-04T23:59:59.000Z

237

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

SciTech Connect

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

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

2012-10-04T23:59:59.000Z

238

Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility Quality Assurance Program Plan, Project W-236A. Revision 2  

SciTech Connect

This document describes the Quality Assurance (QA) program for the Multi-Function Waste Tank Facility (MWTF) Project. The purpose of this QA program is to control project activities in such a manner as to achieve the mission of the MWTF Project in a safe and reliable manner. The QA program for the MWTF Project is founded on DOE Order 5700.6C, Quality Assurance, and implemented through the use of ASME NQA-1, Quality Assurance Program Requirements for Nuclear Facilities (ASME 1989 with addenda la-1989, lb-1991 and lc-1992). This document describes the program and planned actions which the Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC) will implement to demonstrate and ensure that the project meets the requirements of DOE Order 5700.6C through the interpretive guidance of ASME NQA-1.

Hall, L.R.

1995-05-30T23:59:59.000Z

239

Old hydrofracture facility tanks contents removal action operations plan at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Volume 2: Checklists and work instructions  

SciTech Connect

This is volume two of the ORNL old hydrofracture facility tanks contents removal action operations plan. This volume contains checklists and work instructions.

1998-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

240

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank farm facility" 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

Data acquisition and control system for the High-Level Waste Tank Farm at Hanford, Washington  

SciTech Connect

The High-Level Nuclear Waste Storage Tank 241-SY-101 periodically releases flammable gasses. Mitigation experiments to release the gasses continuously to avoid a catastrophic build-up are planned for FY93 and beyond. Los Alamos has provided a data acquisition and control system (DACS) to monitor and control mitigation experiments on SY-101. The DACS consists of a data acquisition trailer to house the electronic components and computers in a friendly environment, a computer system running process control software for monitoring and controlling the tests, signal conditioners to convert the instrument signals to a usable form for the DACS, programmable logic controllers to process sensor signals and take action quickly, a fast data acquisition system for recording transient data, and a remote monitoring system to monitor the progress of the experiment. Equipment to monitor the release of the gasses was also provided. The first experiment involves a mixer pump to mix the waste and allow the gasses to be released at the surface of the liquid as the gas is being formed. The initial tests are scheduled for July 1993.

Hoida, H.W.; Hatcher, C.R.; Trujillo, L.T.; Holt, D.H. [Los Alamos National Lab., NM (United States); Vargo, G.F. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States); Martin, J.; Stastny, G.; Echave, R. [EG and G Energy Measurements, Inc., Las Vegas, NV (United States); Eldridge, K. [Eldridge Engineering, Spokane, WA (United States)

1993-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

242

Cold test plan for the Old Hydrofracture Facility tank contents removal project, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee  

SciTech Connect

This Old Hydrofracture Facility (OHF) Tanks Contents Removal Project Cold Test Plan describes the activities to be conducted during the cold test of the OHF sluicing and pumping system at the Tank Technology Cold Test Facility (TTCTF). The TTCTF is located at the Robotics and Process Systems Complex at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). The cold test will demonstrate performance of the pumping and sluicing system, fine-tune operating instructions, and train the personnel in the actual work to be performed. After completion of the cold test a Technical Memorandum will be prepared documenting completion of the cold test, and the equipment will be relocated to the OHF site.

1997-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

243

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

TC MACKEY; FG ABATT; MW RINKER

2009-01-14T23:59:59.000Z

244

Facility worker technical basis document  

SciTech Connect

This report documents the technical basis for facility worker safety to support the Tank Farms Documented Safety Analysis and described the criteria and methodology for allocating controls to hazardous conditions with significant facility worker consequences and presents the results of the allocation.

EVANS, C.B.

2003-03-21T23:59:59.000Z

245

Characterization of the Old Hydrofracture Facility (OHF) waste tanks located at ORNL  

SciTech Connect

The Old Hydrofracture Facility (OHF) is located in Melton Valley within Waste Area Grouping (WAG) 5 and includes five underground storage tanks (T1, T2, T3, T4, and T9) ranging from 13,000 to 25,000 gal. capacity. During the period of 1996--97 there was a major effort to re-sample and characterize the contents of these inactive waste tanks. The characterization data summarized in this report was needed to address waste processing options, examine concerns dealing with the performance assessment (PA) data for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), evaluate the waste characteristics with respect to the waste acceptance criteria (WAC) for WIPP and Nevada Test Site (NTS), address criticality concerns, and to provide the data needed to meet DOT requirements for transporting the waste. This report discusses the analytical characterization data collected on both the supernatant and sludge samples taken from three different locations in each of the OHF tanks. The isotopic data presented in this report supports the position that fissile isotopes of uranium ({sup 233}U and {sup 235}U) do not satisfy the denature ratios required by the administrative controls stated in the ORNL LLLW waste acceptance criteria (WAC). The fissile isotope of plutonium ({sup 239}Pu and {sup 241}Pu) are diluted with thorium far above the WAC requirements. In general, the OHF sludge was found to be hazardous (RCRA) based on total metal content and the transuranic alpha activity was well above the 100 nCi/g limit for TRU waste. The characteristics of the OHF sludge relative to the WIPP WAC limits for fissile gram equivalent, plutonium equivalent activity, and thermal power from decay heat were estimated from the data in this report and found to be far below the upper boundary for any of the remote-handled transuranic waste (RH-TRU) requirements for disposal of the waste in WIPP.

Keller, J.M.; Giaquinto, J.M.; Meeks, A.M.

1997-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

246

Sampling and analysis of water from Upper Three Runs and its wetlands near Tank 16 and the Mixed Waste Management Facility  

SciTech Connect

In April and September 1993, sampling was conducted to characterize the Upper Three Runs (UTR) wetland waters near the Mixed Waste Management Facility to determine if contaminants migrating from MWMF are outcropping into the floodplain wetlands. For the spring sampling event, 37 wetlands and five stream water samples were collected. Thirty-six wetland and six stream water samples were collected for the fall sampling event. Background seepline and stream water samples were also collected for both sampling events. All samples were analyzed for RCRA Appendix IX volatiles, inorganics appearing on the Target Analyte List, tritium, gamma-emitting radionuclides, and gross radiological activity. Most of the analytical data for both the spring and fall sampling events were reported as below method detection limits. The primary exceptions were the routine water quality indicators (e.g., turbidity, alkalinity, total suspended solids, etc.), iron, manganese, and tritium. During the spring, cadmium, gross alpha, nonvolatile beta, potassium-40, ruthenium-106, and trichloroethylene were also detected above the MCLs from at least one location. A secondary objective of this project was to identify any UTR wetland water quality impacts resulting from leaks from Tank 16 located at the H-Area Tank Farm.

Dixon, K.L.; Cummins, C.L.

1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

247

Project W-236A multi-function waste tank facility waste feed projections  

SciTech Connect

A review of Hanford Underground Waste Storage Tank Chemistry, coupled with planned remediation actions and retrieval sequences was conducted in order to predict the chemistry of the waste to be stored in the MWTF tanks. All projected waste solutions to be transferred to the MWTF tanks were found to be in compliance with current tank chemistry specifications; therefore, the waste and the tank materials of construction are expected to be compatible.

Larrick, A.P.

1994-12-22T23:59:59.000Z

248

Sludge treatment facility preliminary siting study for the sludge treatment project (A-13B)  

SciTech Connect

This study evaluates various sites in the 100 K area and 200 areas of Hanford for locating a treatment facility for sludge from the K Basins. Both existing facilities and a new standalone facility were evaluated. A standalone facility adjacent to the AW Tank Farm in the 200 East area of Hanford is recommended as the best location for a sludge treatment facility.

WESTRA, A.G.

1999-06-24T23:59:59.000Z

249

Tank 48 Treatment Process  

-Reduce elutriation of particulates containing coal System planning: Sludge batch planning/DWPF WAC-Evaluate Tank Farm and DWPF coal capability

250

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

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

2004-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

251

Phase 1 RCRA Facility Investigation & Corrective Measures Study Work Plan for Single Shell Tank (SST) Waste Management Areas  

SciTech Connect

This document is the master work plan for the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) Corrective Action Program (RCAP) for single-shell tank (SST) farms at the US. Department of Energy's (DOE'S) Hanford Site. The DOE Office of River Protection (ORP) initiated the RCAP to address the impacts of past and potential future tank waste releases to the environment. This work plan defines RCAP activities for the four SST waste management areas (WMAs) at which releases have contaminated groundwater. Recognizing the potential need for future RCAP activities beyond those specified in this master work plan, DOE has designated the currently planned activities as ''Phase 1.'' If a second phase of activities is needed for the WMAs addressed in Phase 1, or if releases are detected at other SST WMAs, this master work plan will be updated accordingly.

MCCARTHY, M.M.

1999-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

252

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

SciTech Connect

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

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

2013-06-28T23:59:59.000Z

253

Characterization of Vadose Zone Sediments Below the TX Tank Farm: Probe Holes C3830, C3831, C3832 and 299-W10-27  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory performed detailed analyses on vadose zone sediments from within Waste Management Area T-TX-TY. This report contains all the geologic, geochemical, and selected physical characterization data collected on vadose zone sediment recovered from three probe holes (C3830, C3831, and C3832) in the TX Tank Farm, and from borehole 299-W-10-27. Sediments from borehole 299-W-10-27 are considered to be uncontaminated sediments that can be compared with contaminated sediments. This report also presents our interpretation of the sediment lithologies, the vertical extent of contamination, the migration potential of the contaminants, and the likely source of the contamination in the vadose zone and groundwater below the TX Tank Farm. Sediment from the probe holes was analyzed for: moisture, radionuclide and carbon contents;, one-to-one water extracts (soil pH, electrical conductivity, cation, trace metal, and anion data), and 8 M nitric acid extracts. Overall, our analyses showed that common ion exchange is a key mechanism that influences the distribution of contaminants within that portion of the vadose zone affected by tank liquor. We did not observe significant indications of caustic alteration of the sediment mineralogy or porosity, or significant zones of slightly elevated pH values in the probe holes. The sediments do show that sodium-, nitrate-, and sulfate-dominated fluids are present. The fluids are more dilute than tank fluids observed below tanks at the SX and BX Tank Farms. Three primary stratigraphic units were encountered in each probe hole: (1) backfill material, (2) the Hanford formation, and (3) the Cold Creek unit. Each of the probe holes contain thin fine-grained layers in the Hanford H2 stratigraphic unit that may impact the flow of leaked fluids and effect irregular and horizontal flow. The probe holes could not penetrate below the enriched calcium carbonate strata of the Cold Creek lower subunit; therefore, we did not identify the maximum vertical penetration of the tank related plumes. However, the more elevated portions of the electrical conductivity (EC) profile at probe hole C3830 currently resides at the bottom of a fine-grained thin lens in the Hanford H2 unit at 87 ft bgs. At C3831, we lack good sample coverage to ascertain whether the salt plume has significantly descended into the Cold Creek Unit. There is strong indication at probe hole C3832 that the saline plume has descended into the Cold Creek Unit. The profiles do collectively suggest that the deepest penetration of tank related fluids is found in probe hole C3832. The water potential data from 299-W10-27?s H2 unit, the unit where most of the contaminants reside in the TX probe holes, are consistent with a draining profile. Despite the evidence that elevated EC values may be present in all three probe holes to their depth of refusal, the concentrations of long-term risk drivers are not large. The inventories of potential contaminants of concern, nitrate, technetium-99, uranium, and chromium, are provided. In addition, in situ desorption Kd values for these contaminants are provided. For conservative modeling purposes, we recommend using Kd values of 0 mL/g for nitrate and technetium-99, a value of 1 mL/g for uranium, and 10 mL/g for chromium to represent the entire vadose zone profile from the bottoms of the tanks to the water table. These conservative Kd values along with the provided inventories in the vadose zone sediments obtained from the three probe holes can be used in long-term risk projections that rely on estimates of water recharge and vadose zone and aquifer transport calculations.

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

2004-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

254

Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment and Disposition Framework |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

255

Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment and Disposition Framework |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

256

HANFORD DOUBLE SHELL TANK (DST) THERMAL & SEISMIC PROJECT SEISMIC ANALYSIS IN SUPPORT OF INCREASED LIQUID LEVEL IN 241-AP TANK FARMS  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

MACKEY TC; ABBOTT FG; CARPENTER BG; RINKER MW

2007-02-16T23:59:59.000Z

257

ANNUAL RADIOACTIVE WASTE TANK INSPECTION PROGRAM - 2011  

SciTech Connect

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

West, B.; Waltz, R.

2012-06-21T23:59:59.000Z

258

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

SciTech Connect

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

Bryant, J.W.; Nenni, J.A.; Yoder, T.S.

2003-04-22T23:59:59.000Z

259

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

SciTech Connect

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

Bryant, Jeffrey W.

2010-08-12T23:59:59.000Z

260

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

HAAS CC; KOVACH JL; KELLY SE; TURNER DA

2010-06-24T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank farm facility" 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

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

KELLY SE; HAASS CC; KOVACH JL; TURNER DA

2010-06-03T23:59:59.000Z

262

Progress in resolving Savannah River Site high-level waste tank safety issues  

SciTech Connect

At the Savannah River Site (SRS), near Aiken, South Carolina, approximately 35 million gallons of high-level radioactive waste are stored in 51 underground, carbon steel waste tanks. These tanks and associated facilities are distributed between the F and H areas, two processing areas at SRS, and are called the F- and H-area high-level waste tank farms. Within the last few years, issues have been raised about the safety of high-level waste tank farms throughout the DOE complex, including those at SRS. Plans for resolution of these issues were reported at the Waste Management 192 conference. This paper addresses progress made at SRS since 1992. Most of the efforts for resolving the six safety issues identified at SRS have concentrated on (1) preparing the tanks for waste removal and (2) completing construction, testing, and starting up three key facilities. These facilities will transform the waste into forms suitable for final disposal, specifically borosilicate glass and saltstone (grout). Removing the waste from the tanks and processing it is needed to resolve three of the safety issues. Two facilities -- In-Tank Precipitation and the Defense Waste Processing Facility -- are undergoing non-radioactive simulant testing (``cold runs``) at this time. The third facility -- Sludge Processing -- began testing with actual waste in October 1993. In Tank Precipitation is scheduled to be operating by the end of 1994.

d`Entremont, P.D.

1993-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

263

Ewington Wind Farm | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Login | Sign Up Search Page Edit with form History Facebook icon Twitter icon Ewington Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Ewington Wind Farm Facility Ewington Wind Farm...

264

Determination of ring correction factors for leaded gloves used in grab sampling activities at Hanford tank farms  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This study evaluates the effectiveness of lead lined gloves in reducing extremity dose from two sources specific to tank waste sampling activities: (1) sludge inside glass sample jars and (2) sludge as thin layer contamination on the exterior surface of sample jars. The response of past and present Hanford Extremity Dosimeters (ring) designs under these conditions is also evaluated.

RATHBONE, B.A.

1999-06-24T23:59:59.000Z

265

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

SciTech Connect

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

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

2007-09-28T23:59:59.000Z

266

Tjaden Farms Wind Farm | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Tjaden Farms Wind Farm Tjaden Farms Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Tjaden Farms Wind Farm Facility Tjaden Farms Sector Wind energy Facility Type Community Wind Facility Status In Service Owner Tjaden Farms Energy Purchaser Tjaden Farms Location Charles City IA Coordinates 43.170337°, -92.58944° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":43.170337,"lon":-92.58944,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

267

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

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

2012-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

268

SRTC criticality safety technical review: Nuclear criticality safety evaluation 94-02, uranium solidification facility pencil tank module spacing  

SciTech Connect

Review of NMP-NCS-94-0087, ``Nuclear Criticality Safety Evaluation 94-02: Uranium Solidification Facility Pencil Tank Module Spacing (U), April 18, 1994,`` was requested of the SRTC Applied Physics Group. The NCSE is a criticality assessment to show that the USF process module spacing, as given in Non-Conformance Report SHM-0045, remains safe for operation. The NCSE under review concludes that the module spacing as given in Non-Conformance Report SHM-0045 remains in a critically safe configuration for all normal and single credible abnormal conditions. After a thorough review of the NCSE, this reviewer agrees with that conclusion.

Rathbun, R. [Westinghouse Savannah River Co., Aiken, SC (United States)

1994-04-26T23:59:59.000Z

269

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

HAQ MA

2009-05-12T23:59:59.000Z

270

Characterization of Samples from Old Solvent Tanks S1 through S22  

Science Conference Proceedings (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

271

ANNUAL RADIOACTIVE WASTE TANK INSPECTION PROGRAM 2010  

SciTech Connect

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

West, B.; Waltz, R.

2011-06-23T23:59:59.000Z

272

FACILITY WORKER TECHNICAL BASIS DOCUMENT  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This technical basis document was developed to support RPP-13033, ''Tank Farms Documented Safety Analysis (DSA). It describes the criteria and methodology for allocating controls to hazardous conditions with significant facility worker (FW) consequence and presents the results of the allocation. The criteria and methodology for identifying controls that address FW safety are in accordance with DOE-STD-3009-94, ''Preparation Guide for US Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analyses''.

SHULTZ, M.V.

2005-03-31T23:59:59.000Z

273

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

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (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

274

Comprehensive monitoring report for underground storage tanks 1219-U, 1222-U, 2082-U, and 2068-U at the Rust Garage Facility, Buildings 9720-15 and 9754-1  

SciTech Connect

The purpose of this document is to provide hydrogeologic, geochemical, and vapor monitoring data required for comprehensive monitoring of underground storage tanks at the Rust Garage Facility.

Not Available

1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

275

DEMONSTRATION OF SIMULATED WASTE TRANSFERS FROM TANK AY-102 TO THE HANFORD WASTE TREATMENT FACILITY  

SciTech Connect

In support of Hanford's AY-102 Tank waste certification and delivery of the waste to the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP), Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) was tasked by the Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) to evaluate the effectiveness of mixing and transferring the waste in the Double Shell Tank (DST) to the WTP Receipt Tank. This work is a follow-on to the previous 'Demonstration of Internal Structures Impacts on Double Shell Tank Mixing Effectiveness' task conducted at SRNL 1. The objective of these transfers was to qualitatively demonstrate how well waste can be transferred out of a mixed DST tank and to provide insights into the consistency between the batches being transferred. Twelve (12) different transfer demonstrations were performed, varying one parameter at a time, in the Batch Transfer Demonstration System. The work focused on visual comparisons of the results from transferring six batches of slurry from a 1/22nd scale (geometric by diameter) Mixing Demonstration Tank (MDT) to six Receipt Tanks, where the consistency of solids in each batch could be compared. The simulant used in this demonstration was composed of simulated Hanford Tank AZ-101 supernate, gibbsite particles, and silicon carbide particles, the same simulant/solid particles used in the previous mixing demonstration. Changing a test parameter may have had a small impact on total solids transferred from the MDT on a given test, but the data indicates that there is essentially no impact on the consistency of solids transferred batch to batch. Of the multiple parameters varied during testing, it was found that changing the nozzle velocity of the Mixer Jet Pumps (MJPs) had the biggest impact on the amount of solids transferred. When the MJPs were operating at 8.0 gpm (22.4 ft/s nozzle velocity, U{sub o}D=0.504 ft{sup 2}/s), the solid particles were more effectively suspended, thus producing a higher volume of solids transferred. When the MJP flow rate was reduced to 5 gpm (14 ft/s nozzle velocity, U{sub o}D = 0.315 ft{sup 2}/s) to each pump, dead zones formed in the tank, resulting in fewer solids being transferred in each batch to the Receipt Tanks. The larger, denser particles were displaced (preferentially to the smaller particles) to one of the two dead zones and not re-suspended for the duration of the test. As the liquid level dropped in the MDT, re-suspending the particles became less effective (6th batch). The poor consistency of the solids transferred in the 6th batch was due to low liquid level in the MDT, thus poor mixing by the MJPs. Of the twelve tests conducted the best transfer of solids occurred during Test 6 and 8 where the MJP rotation was reduced to 1.0 rpm.

Adamson, D.; Poirier, M.; Steeper, T.

2009-12-03T23:59:59.000Z

276

RADIOACTIVE DEMONSTRATION OF MINERALIZED WASTE FORMS MADE FROM HANFORD LOW ACTIVITY WASTE (TANK FARM BLEND) BY FLUIDIZED BED STEAM REFORMATION (FBSR)  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The U.S. Department of Energys Office of River Protection (ORP) is responsible for the retrieval, treatment, immobilization, and disposal of Hanfords tank waste. A key aspect of the River Protection Project (RPP) cleanup mission is to construct and operate the Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP). The WTP will separate the tank waste into high-level and low-activity waste (LAW) fractions, both of which will subsequently be vitrified. The projected throughput capacity of the WTP LAW Vitrification Facility is insufficient to complete the RPP mission in the time frame required by the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, also known as the Tri-Party Agreement (TPA), i.e. December 31, 2047. Supplemental Treatment is likely to be required both to meet the TPA treatment requirements as well as to more cost effectively complete the tank waste treatment mission. The Supplemental Treatment chosen will immobilize that portion of the retrieved LAW that is not sent to the WTPs LAW Vitrification facility into a solidified waste form. The solidified waste will then be disposed on the Hanford site in the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF). Fluidized Bed Steam Reforming (FBSR) offers a moderate temperature (700-750C) continuous method by which LAW can be processed irrespective of whether the waste contain organics, nitrates, sulfates/sulfides, chlorides, fluorides, volatile radionuclides or other aqueous components. The FBSR technology can process these wastes into a crystalline ceramic (mineral) waste form. The mineral waste form that is produced by co-processing waste with kaolin clay in an FBSR process has been shown to be comparable to LAW glass, i.e. leaches Tc-99, Re and Na at 6 (the Hanford IDF criteria for Na) in the first few hours. The granular and monolithic waste forms also pass the EPA Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) for all Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) components at the Universal Treatment Standards (UTS). Two identical Benchscale Steam Reformers (BSR) were designed and constructed at SRNL, one to treat non-radioactive simulants and the other to treat actual radioactive wastes. The results from the non-radioactive BSR were used to determine the parameters needed to operate the radioactive BSR in order to confirm the findings of non-radioactive FBSR pilot scale and engineering scale tests and to qualify an FBSR LAW waste form for applications at Hanford. Radioactive testing commenced using SRS LAW from Tank 50 chemically trimmed to look like Hanfords blended LAW known as the Rassat simulant as this simulant composition had been tested in the non-radioactive BSR, the non-radioactive pilot scale FBSR at the Science Applications International Corporation-Science and Technology Applications Research (SAIC-STAR) facility in Idaho Falls, ID and in the TTT Engineering Scale Technology Demonstration (ESTD) at Hazen Research Inc. (HRI) in Denver, CO. This provided a tie back between radioactive BSR testing and non-radioactive BSR, pilot scale, and engineering scale testing. Approximately six hundred grams of non-radioactive and radioactive BSR product were made for extensive testing and comparison to the non-radioactive pilot scale tests performed in 2004 at SAIC-STAR and the engineering scale test performed in 2008 at HRI with the Rassat simulant. The same mineral phases and off-gas species were found in the radioactive and non-radioactive testing. The granular ESTD and BSR products (radioactive and non-radioactive) were analyzed for to

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

2013-08-21T23:59:59.000Z

277

Tank characterization report for single-shell tank 241-BY-104  

SciTech Connect

This characterization report summarizes the available information on the historical uses, current status, and the sampling and analysis results of waste contained in underground storage tank 241-BY-104. This report supports the requirements of the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, Milestone M-44-09. Tank 241-BY-104 is one of 12 single-shell tanks located in the BY-Tank Farm in the 200 East Area of the Hanford Site. Tank 241-BY-104 entered service in the first quarter of 1950 with a transfer of metal waste from an unknown source. Through cascading, the tank was full of metal waste by the second quarter of 1951. The waste was sluiced in the second quarter of 1954. Uranium recovery (tributyl phosphate) waste was sent from tank 241-BY-107 during the second quarter of 1955 and from tank 241-BY-110 during the third quarter of 1955. Most of this waste was sent to a crib during the fourth quarter of 1955. During the third and fourth quarters of 1956 and the second and third quarters of 1957, the tank received waste from the in-plant ferrocyanide scavenging process (PFeCN2) from tanks 241-BY-106, -107, -108, and -110. This waste type is predicted to compose the bottom layer of waste currently in the tank. The tank received PUREX cladding waste (CWP) periodically from 1961 to 1968. Ion-exchange waste from cesium recovery operations was received from tank 241-BX-104 during the second and third quarters of 1968. Tank 241-BY-104 received evaporator bottoms waste from the in-tank solidification process that was conducted in the BY-Tank Farm 0247from tanks 241 -BY- 109 and 241 -BY- 1 12 from 1970 to 1974. The upper portion of tank waste is predicted to be composed of BY saltcake. Tank 241-BY-104 was declared inactive in 1977. Waste was saltwell pumped from the tank during the third quarter of 1982 and the fourth quarter of 1985. Table ES-1 and Figure ES-1 describe tank 241-BY-104 and its status. The tank has an operating capacity of 2,869 kL and presently contains an estimated 1,234 kL of noncomplexed waste. Of this total volume, 568 kL are estimated to be sludge and 666 kL are estimated to be saltcake. The Hanlon values are not used because they are inconsistent with waste surface level measurements, and they will not be updated until the tank level stabilizes and the new surface photos are taken. This report summarizes the collection and analysis of two rotary-mode core samples obtained in October and November 1995 and reported in the Final Report for Tank 241-BY-104, Rotary Mode Cores 116 and 117. Cores 116 and 117 were obtained from risers 5 and IIA, respectively. The sampling event was performed to satisfy the requirements listed in the following documents: Tank Safety Screening Data Quality Objective , Data Requirements for the Ferrocyanide Safety Issue Developed through the Data Quality Objective Process, Data Quality Objective to Support Resolution of the Organic Fuel Rich Tank Safety Issue, Test Plan for Samples from Hanford Waste Tanks 241-BY-103, BY-104, BY-105, BY-106, BY-108, BY-110, YY-103, U-105, U-107, U-108, and U-109.

Benar, C.J.

1996-09-26T23:59:59.000Z

278

One System Integreated Project Team Progress in Coordinating Hanford Tank Farms and the Waste Treatment Plant - 14214  

SciTech Connect

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

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

2013-12-18T23:59:59.000Z

279

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

280

Salt Waste Processing Facility Fact Sheet | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Services » Waste Management » Tank Waste and Waste Processing » Services » Waste Management » Tank Waste and Waste Processing » Salt Waste Processing Facility Fact Sheet Salt Waste Processing Facility Fact Sheet Nuclear material production operations at SRS resulted in the generation of liquid radioactive waste that is being stored, on an interim basis, in 49 underground waste storage tanks in the F- and H-Area Tank Farms. SWPF Fact Sheet More Documents & Publications EIS-0082-S2: Amended Record of Decision Savannah River Site Salt Waste Processing Facility Technology Readiness Assessment Report EIS-0082-S2: Record of Decision Waste Management Nuclear Materials & Waste Tank Waste and Waste Processing Waste Disposition Packaging and Transportation Site & Facility Restoration Deactivation & Decommissioning (D&D)

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank farm facility" 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

Confirmation Run of the DWPF SRAT Cycle Using the Sludge-Only Flowsheet with Tank 40 Radioactive Sludge and Frit 200 in the Shielded Cells Facility  

SciTech Connect

Several basic data reports have been issued concerning the recent demonstration of the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) Sludge Receipt and Adjustment Tank (SRAT) Cycle and Slurry Mix Evaporator (SME) Cycle, conducted at the Savannah River Technology Center (SRTC). The SRTC demonstration was completed using the DWPF ''Sludge-Only'' flowsheet with washed Tank 40 sludge slurry (Sludge Batch 2 or Macrobatch 3) in the Shielded Cells facility. The DWPF ''Sludge-Only'' flowsheet calls for processing radioactive sludge slurry using nitric acid, concentrated formic acid, and frit 200.

Fellinger, T.L.

2002-08-29T23:59:59.000Z

282

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

SciTech Connect

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

DiCenso, A.T.; Amato, L.C.; Lambie, R.W.; Franklin, J.D.; Seymour, B.J.; Johnson, K.W.; Stevens, R.H. [Los Alamos Technical Associates, Inc., Kennewick, WA (United States); Remund, K.M. [Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, WA (United States); Sasaki, L.M.; Simpson, B.C. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

1995-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

283

Kas Farms Wind Farm | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Kas Farms Wind Farm Kas Farms Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Kas Farms Wind Farm Facility Kas Farms Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner Kas Brothers Developer Kas Brothers with Dan Juhl Energy Purchaser Xcel Energy Location Pipestone County MN Coordinates 43.9948°, -96.3175° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":43.9948,"lon":-96.3175,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

284

Project management plan for Waste Area Grouping 5 Old Hydrofracture Facility tanks contents removal at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee  

SciTech Connect

On January 1, 1992, the US Department of Energy (DOE), the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region IV, and the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) signed a Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) concerning the Oak Ridge Reservation. The FFA requires that inactive liquid low-level (radioactive) waste (LLLW) tanks at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) be remediated in accordance with requirements of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). This revision is to update the schedule and designation of responsibilities for the Old Hydrofracture Facility (OHF) tanks contents removal project. The scope of this project is to transfer inventory from the five inactive LLLW tanks at the OHF into the active LLLW system.

1998-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

285

Tank characterization report for single-shell Tank 241-T-105  

SciTech Connect

Single-Shell Tank 241-T-105, an underground storage tank containing radioactive waste, was most recently sampled in March and May of 1993. Sampling and characterization of the waste in Tank 241-T-105 contribute toward the fulfillment of Milestone M-44-05 of the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order. Tank 241-T-105, located in the 200 West Area T Tank Farm, was constructed in 1944 and went into service in July of 1946 by receiving second cycle decontamination waste from the T Plant. During the service life of the tank, other wastes were added including T Plant first cycle waste, PUREX Plant coating waste, laboratory waste, decontamination waste from T Plant, B Plant low level waste, and B Plant ion exchange waste. The tank currently contains 98,000 gal of non-complexed waste, existing primarily as sludge. Approximately 23,000 gal of drainable interstitial liquid remain. The waste is heterogeneous. Tank 241-T-105 is classified as a non-Watch List tank, with no Unreviewed Safety Questions associated with it at this time. The tank was Interim Stabilized in 1987 and Intrusion Prevention was completed in 1988. The waste in Tank 241-T-105 is comprised of precipitated salts, some of which contain traces of radioactive isotopes. The most prevalent analytes include aluminum, iron, silicon, manganese, sodium, uranium, nitrate, nitrite, and sulfate. The water digested sample results demonstrated that cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury, selenium, and silver concentrations were greater than their Toxicity Characteristic regulatory thresholds. The major radionuclide constituents are {sup 90}Sr and {sup 137}Cs. The waste is 74.1% solids by weight.

DiCenso, A.T.; Amato, L.C.; Franklin, J.D.; Nuttall, G.L.; Johnson, K.W. [Los Alamos Technical Associates, Kennewick, WA (United States); Simpson, B.C. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

1994-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

286

RADIOACTIVE DEMONSTRATION OF MINERALIZED WASTE FORMS MADE FROM HANFORD LOW ACTIVITY WASTE (TANK FARM BLEND) BY FLUIDIZED BED STEAM REFORMATION (FBSR)  

SciTech Connect

The U.S. Department of Energys Office of River Protection (ORP) is responsible for the retrieval, treatment, immobilization, and disposal of Hanfords tank waste. A key aspect of the River Protection Project (RPP) cleanup mission is to construct and operate the Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP). The WTP will separate the tank waste into high-level and low-activity waste (LAW) fractions, both of which will subsequently be vitrified. The projected throughput capacity of the WTP LAW Vitrification Facility is insufficient to complete the RPP mission in the time frame required by the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, also known as the Tri-Party Agreement (TPA), i.e. December 31, 2047. Supplemental Treatment is likely to be required both to meet the TPA treatment requirements as well as to more cost effectively complete the tank waste treatment mission. The Supplemental Treatment chosen will immobilize that portion of the retrieved LAW that is not sent to the WTPs LAW Vitrification facility into a solidified waste form. The solidified waste will then be disposed on the Hanford site in the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF). Fluidized Bed Steam Reforming (FBSR) offers a moderate temperature (700-750C) continuous method by which LAW can be processed irrespective of whether the waste contain organics, nitrates, sulfates/sulfides, chlorides, fluorides, volatile radionuclides or other aqueous components. The FBSR technology can process these wastes into a crystalline ceramic (mineral) waste form. The mineral waste form that is produced by co-processing waste with kaolin clay in an FBSR process has been shown to be comparable to LAW glass, i.e. leaches Tc-99, Re and Na at <2g/m2 during ASTM C1285 (Product Consistency) durability testing. Monolithing of the granular FBSR product was investigated to prevent dispersion during transport or burial/storage. Monolithing in an inorganic geopolymer binder, which is amorphous, macro-encapsulates the granules, and the monoliths pass ANSI/ANS 16.1 and ASTM C1308 durability testing with Re achieving a Leach Index (LI) of 9 (the Hanford Integrated Disposal Facility, IDF, criteria for Tc-99) after a few days and Na achieving an LI of >6 (the Hanford IDF criteria for Na) in the first few hours. The granular and monolithic waste forms also pass the EPA Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) for all Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) components at the Universal Treatment Standards (UTS). Two identical Benchscale Steam Reformers (BSR) were designed and constructed at SRNL, one to treat non-radioactive simulants and the other to treat actual radioactive wastes. The results from the non-radioactive BSR were used to determine the parameters needed to operate the radioactive BSR in order to confirm the findings of non-radioactive FBSR pilot scale and engineering scale tests and to qualify an FBSR LAW waste form for applications at Hanford. Radioactive testing commenced using SRS LAW from Tank 50 chemically trimmed to look like Hanfords blended LAW known as the Rassat simulant as this simulant composition had been tested in the non-radioactive BSR, the non-radioactive pilot scale FBSR at the Science Applications International Corporation-Science and Technology Applications Research (SAIC-STAR) facility in Idaho Falls, ID and in the TTT Engineering Scale Technology Demonstration (ESTD) at Hazen Research Inc. (HRI) in Denver, CO. This provided a tie back between radioactive BSR testing and non-radioactive BSR, pilot scale, and engineering scale testing. Approximately six hundred grams of non-radioactive and radioactive BSR product were made for extensive testing and comparison to the non-radioactive pilot scale tests performed in 2004 at SAIC-STAR and the engineering scale test performed in 2008 at HRI with the Rassat simulant. The same mineral phases and off-gas species were found in the radioactive and non-radioactive testing. The granular ESTD and BSR products (radioactive and non-radioactive) were analyzed for to

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

2013-08-21T23:59:59.000Z

287

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

66 of 864 66 of 864 3.0 DISPOSAL FACILITY CHARACTERISTICS Section 3.1 provides information regarding site characteristics including detailed information furnished for those characteristics that influence the contaminant transport modeling assumptions provided in Chapter 4.  Section 3.1.1 provides a general description and layout of the site and the HTF to orient the reader and includes the current (as of 2009) estimated population distribution of the surrounding area as well as future land use planning for information purposes.  Section 3.1.2 describes meteorological and climatological data collection at SRS. This data collection determines appropriate modeling assumptions related to rainfall and temperature to assess the performance of the HTF closure cap presented in SRNL-ESB-

288

Project management plan for Waste Area Grouping 5 Old Hydrofracture Facility tanks contents removal at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee  

SciTech Connect

This revision (Rev. 1) updates the schedule and designation of responsibilities for the Old Hydrofracture Facility (OHF) tanks contents removal project. Ongoing and planned future activities include: cold testing of the sluicing and pumping system; readiness assessment; equipment relocation and assembly; isotopic dilution of fissile radionuclides; sluicing and transfer of the tanks contents; and preparation of the Removal Action Completion Report. The most significant change is that the sluicing and pumping system has been configured by and will be operated by CDM Federal Programs Corporation. In addition, a new technical lead and a new project analyst have been designated within Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc. and Lockheed Martin Energy Research Corp. The schedule for tanks contents removal has been accelerated, with transfer of the final batch of tank slurry now scheduled for March 31, 1998 (instead of November 10, 1998). The OHF sluicing and pumping project is proceeding as a non-time-critical removal action under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. The purpose of the project is to remove the contents from five inactive underground storage tanks, designated T-1, T-2, T-3, T-4, and T-9. The tanks contain an estimated 52,700 gal of liquid and sludge, together comprising a radioactive inventory of approximately 30,000 Ci.

1998-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

289

Implementation Plan for Liquid Low-Level Radioactive Waste tank systems at Oak Ridge National Laboratory under the Federal Facility Agreement, Oak Ridge, Tennessee  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This document summarizes the progress that has been made to date in implementing the plans and schedules for meeting the Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) commitments for the Liquid Low-Level Waste (LLLW) System at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). These commitments were initially submitted in ES/ER-17&Dl, Federal Facility Agreement Plans and Schedules for Liquid Low-Level Radioactive Waste Tank Systems at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Information presented in this document provides a comprehensive summary to facilitate understanding of the FFA compliance program for LLLW tank systems and to present plans and schedules associated with remediation, through the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) process, of LLLW tank systems that have been removed from service. ORNL has a comprehensive program underway to upgrade the LLLW system as necessary to meet the FFA requirements. The tank systems that are removed from service are being investigated and remediated through the CERCLA process. Waste and risk characterizations have been submitted. Additional data will be prepared and submitted to EPA/TDEC as tanks are taken out of service and as required by the remedial investigation/feasibility study (RI/FS) process. The plans and schedules for implementing the FFA compliance program that were submitted in ES/ER-17&Dl, Federal Facility Agreement Plans and Schedules for Liquid Low-Level Radioactive Waste tanks Systems at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, are updated in this document. Chapter 1 provides general background information and philosophies that lead to the plans and schedules that appear in Chaps. 2 through 5.

Not Available

1994-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

290

Hazard Analysis for In Tank Spray Leaks  

SciTech Connect

The River Protection Project (RPP) Authorization Basis (AB) contains controls that address spray leaks in tanks. However, there are no hazardous conditions in the Hazards Database that specifically identify in-tank spray leak scenarios. The purpose of this Hazards Evaluation is to develop hazardous conditions related to in-tank spray leaks for the Hazards Database and to provide more complete coverage of Tank Farm facilities. Currently, the in-tank spray leak is part of the ''Spray Leak in Structures or From Waste Transfer Lines'' accidents in Section 3.4.2.9 of the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) (CHG, 2000a). The accident analysis for the ''Spray Leak in Structure or From Waste Transfer Lines'' states the following regarding the location of a possible spray leak: Inside ventilated waste storage tanks (DSTs, DCRTs, and some SSTs). Aerosols could be generated inside a storage tank during a transfer because of a leak from the portion of the transfer pipe inside the tank. The tank ventilation system could help disperse the aerosols to the atmosphere should the vent system HEPA filters fail. This Hazards Evaluation also evaluates the controls currently assigned to the spray leak in structure accident and determines the applicability of the controls to the new hazardous conditions. This comparison reviews both the analysis in the FSAR and the controls found in the Technical Safety Requirements (TSRs) (CHG, 2000h). If the new hazardous conditions do not match the analyzed accident conditions and controls, then additional analysis may be required. This document is not intended to authorize the activity or determine the adequacy of controls; it is only intended to provide information about the hazardous conditions associated with this activity. The Control decision process as defined in the AB will be used to determine the adequacy of controls and whether the proposed activity is within the AB. This hazard evaluation does not constitute an accident analysis.

GRAMS, W.H.

2000-06-13T23:59:59.000Z

291

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

SciTech Connect

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

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

2012-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

292

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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 .................................................................................................

293

Kodiak Island Wind Farm | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

| Sign Up Search Page Edit with form History Facebook icon Twitter icon Kodiak Island Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Kodiak Island Wind Farm Facility Kodiak Island...

294

Results for the DWPF Slurry Mix Evaporator Condensate Tank, Off Gas Condensate Tank, And Recycle Collection Tank Samples  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Defense Waste Processing Facility, DWPF, currently generates approximately 1.4 million gallons of recycle water per year during Sludge-Only operations. DWPF has minimized condensate generation to 1.4 million gallons by not operating the Steam Atomized Scrubbers, SASs, for the melter off gas system. By not operating the SASs, DWPF has reduced the total volume by approximately 800,000 gallons of condensate per year. Currently, the recycle stream is sent to back to the Tank Farm and processed through the 2H Evaporator system. To alleviate the load on the 2H Evaporator system, an acid evaporator design is being considered as an alternate processing and/or concentration method for the DWPF recycle stream. In order to support this alternate processing option, the DWPF has requested that the chemical and radionuclide compositions of the Off Gas Condensate Tank, OGCT, Slurry Mix Evaporator Condensate Tank, SMECT, Recycle Collection Tank, RCT, and the Decontamination Waste Treatment Tank, DWTT, be determined as a part of the process development work for the acid evaporator design. Samples have been retrieved from the OGCT, RCT, and SMECT and have been sent to the Savannah River National Laboratory, SRNL for this characterization. The DWTT samples have been recently shipped to SRNL. The results for the DWTT samples will be issued at later date.

TERRI, FELLINGER

2004-12-21T23:59:59.000Z

295

Evaluation of mitigation strategies in Facility Group 1 double-shell flammable-gas tanks at the Hanford Site  

SciTech Connect

Radioactive nuclear waste at the Hanford Site is stored in underground waste storage tanks at the site. The tanks fall into two main categories: single-shell tanks (SSTs) and double-shell tanks (DSTs). There are a total of 149 SSTs and 28 DSTs. The wastes stored in the tanks are chemically complex. They basically involve various sodium salts (mainly nitrite, nitrate, carbonates, aluminates, and hydroxides), organic compounds, heavy metals, and various radionuclides, including cesium, strontium, plutonium, and uranium. The waste is known to generate flammable gas (FG) [hydrogen, ammonia, nitrous oxide, hydrocarbons] by complex chemical reactions. The process of gas generation, retention, and release is transient. Some tanks reach a quasi-steady stage where gas generation is balanced by the release rate. Other tanks show continuous cycles of retention followed by episodic release. There currently are 25 tanks on the Flammable Gas Watch List (FGWL). The objective of this report is to evaluate possible mitigation strategies to eliminate the FG hazard. The evaluation is an engineering study of mitigation concepts for FG generation, retention, and release behavior in Tanks SY-101, AN-103, AN 104, An-105, and Aw-101. Where possible, limited quantification of the effects of mitigation strategies on the FG hazard also is considered. The results obtained from quantification efforts discussed in this report should be considered as best-estimate values. Results and conclusions of this work are intended to help in establishing methodologies in the contractor`s controls selection analysis to develop necessary safety controls for closing the FG unreviewed safety question. The general performance requirements of any mitigation scheme are discussed first.

Unal, C.; Sadasivan, P.; Kubic, W.L.; White, J.R.

1997-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

296

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

SciTech Connect

This data package discusses the geochemistry of vadose zone sediments beneath the single-shell tank (SST) farms at the U.S. Department of Energys (DOEs) Hanford Site. The purpose of the report is to provide a review of the most recent and relevant geochemical information available for the vadose zone beneath the SST farms and the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF).

Cantrell, Kirk J.; Brown, Christopher F.; Serne, R. Jeffrey; Krupka, Kenneth M.

2008-01-07T23:59:59.000Z

297

Hanford ETR Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant - Hanford Tank  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

298

Tank 241-B-112 tank characterization plan  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) has advised the US Department of Energy (DOE) to concentrate the near-term sampling and analysis activities on identification and resolution of safety issues. The data quality objective (DQO) process was chosen as a tool to be used to identify sampling and analytical needs for the resolution of safety issues. As a result, a revision in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement or TPA) milestone M-44-00 has been made, which states that ``A Tank Characterization Plan (TCP) will also be developed for each double-shell tank (DST) and single-shell tank (SST) using the DQO process... Development of TCPs by the DQO process is intended to allow users (e.g., Hanford Facility user groups, regulators) to ensure their needs will be met and that resources are devoted to gaining only necessary information.`` This document satisfies that requirement for tank 241-B-112 (B-112). Tank B-112 is currently a non-Watch List tank; therefore, the only applicable DQO as of January 1995 is the Tank Safety Screening Data Quality Objective, which is described below. Tank B-112 is expected to have three primary layers. A bottom layer of sludge consisting of second-cycle waste, followed by a layer of BY saltcake and a top layer of supernate.

Schreiber, R.D. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

1995-02-06T23:59:59.000Z

299

Tank characterization reference guide  

Science Conference Proceedings (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

300

Tank 241-S-107 tank characterization plan  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) has advised the Department of Energy (DOE) to concentrate the near-term sampling and analysis activities on identification and resolution of safety issues (Conway 1993). The data quality objective (DQO) process was chosen as a tool to be used to identify the sampling and analytical needs for the resolution of safety issues. As a result, a revision in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) milestone M-44 has been made, which states that ``A Tank Characterization Plan (TCP) will also be developed for each double-shell tank (DST) and single-shell tank (SST) using the DQO process``. This document satisfies that requirement for tank 241-S-107 (S-107) sampling activities. The report gives a summary of descriptive information available on Tank S-107. Included are the present status and physical description of the tank, its age, process history, and expected tank contents from previous sampling and analytical data. The different types of waste, by layer, for Tank S-107 will also be discussed. As of December 1994, Tank S-107 has been categorized as sound and was partially isolated in December 1982. It is a low-heat load tank and is awaiting stabilization. Tank S-107 is expected to contain two primary layers of waste. The bottom layer should contain a mixture of REDOX waste and REDOX cladding waste. The second layer contains S1 saltcake (waste generated from the 242-S evaporator/crystallizer from 1973 until 1976), and S2 salt slurry (waste generated from the 242-S evaporator-crystallizer from 1977 until 1980).

Jo, J.

1995-04-06T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank farm facility" 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

Site Familiarization and Introduction of New Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Site Lead for the Office of River Protection Waste Treatment Plant and Tank Farms, February 2013  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

HIAR-HANFORD-2013-02-25 HIAR-HANFORD-2013-02-25 Site: Hanford - Office of River Production Subject: Office of Enforcement and Oversight's Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Activity Report for Site Familiarization and Introduction of New Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Site Lead Dates of Activity : 02/25/13 - 03/07/13 and 03/18-28/13 Report Preparer: Robert E. Farrell Activity Description/Purpose: The Office of Health, Safety and Security's (HSS) Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations (HS-45) assigned a new Site Lead to provide continuous oversight of activities at the Office of River Protection (ORP) Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) and tank farms. To gain familiarity with the site programs and personnel, the new Site Lead made

302

Site Familiarization and Introduction of New Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Site Lead for the Office of River Protection Waste Treatment Plant and Tank Farms, February 2013  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

HIAR-HANFORD-2013-02-25 HIAR-HANFORD-2013-02-25 Site: Hanford - Office of River Production Subject: Office of Enforcement and Oversight's Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Activity Report for Site Familiarization and Introduction of New Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Site Lead Dates of Activity : 02/25/13 - 03/07/13 and 03/18-28/13 Report Preparer: Robert E. Farrell Activity Description/Purpose: The Office of Health, Safety and Security's (HSS) Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations (HS-45) assigned a new Site Lead to provide continuous oversight of activities at the Office of River Protection (ORP) Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) and tank farms. To gain familiarity with the site programs and personnel, the new Site Lead made

303

Tank 241-AZ-102 tank characterization plan  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board has advised the DOE to concentrate the near-term sampling and analysis activities on identification and resolution of safety issues. The Data Quality Objective (DQO) process was chosen as a tool to be used in the resolution of safety issues. As a result, a revision in the Federal Facilities Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) milestone M-44 has been made, which states that ``A Tank Characterization Plan (TCP) will also be developed for each double-shell tank (DST) and single-shell tank (SST) using the DQO process ... Development of TCPs by the DQO process is intended to allow users to ensure their needs will be met and that resources are devoted to gaining only necessary information``. This document satisfies that requirement for tank 241-AZ-102 (AZ-102) sampling activities. Tank AZ-102 is currently a non-Watch List tank, so the only DQOs applicable to this tank are the safety screening DQO and the compatibility DQO, as described below. The current contents of Tank AZ-102, as of October 31, 1994, consisted of 3,600 kL (950 kgal) of dilute non-complexed waste and aging waste from PUREX (NCAW, neutralized current acid waste). Tank AZ-102 is expected to have two primary layers. The bottom layer is composed of 360 kL of sludge, and the top layer is composed of 3,240 kL of supernatant, with a total tank waste depth of approximately 8.9 meters.

Schreiber, R.D.

1995-02-06T23:59:59.000Z

304

Tank 241-AZ-101 tank characterization plan  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board has advised the DOE to concentrate the near-term sampling and analysis activities on identification and resolution of safety issues. The Data Quality Objective (DQO) process was chosen as a tool to be used in the resolution of safety issues. As a result, A revision in the Federal Facilities Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) milestone M-44 has been made, which states that ``A Tank Characterization Plan (TCP) will also be developed for each double-shell tank (DST) and single-shell tank (SST) using the DQO process. Development of TCPs by the DQO process is intended to allow users to ensure their needs will be met and that resources are devoted to gaining only necessary information``. This document satisfies that requirement for Tank 241-AZ-101 (AZ-101) sampling activities. Tank AZ-101 is currently a non-Watch List tank, so the only DQOs applicable to this tank are the safety screening DQO and the compatibility DQO, as described below. The contents of Tank AZ-101, as of October 31, 1994, consisted of 3,630 kL (960 kgal) of dilute non-complexed waste and aging waste from PUREX (NCAW, neutralized current acid waste). Tank AZ-101 is expected to have two primary layers. The bottom layer is composed of 132 kL of sludge, and the top layer is composed of 3,500 kL of supernatant, with a total tank waste depth of approximately 8.87 meters.

Schreiber, R.D.

1995-02-06T23:59:59.000Z

305

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

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

2007-02-14T23:59:59.000Z

306

San Gorgonio Farms (repower) Wind Farm | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

repower) Wind Farm repower) Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name San Gorgonio Farms (repower) Wind Farm Facility San Gorgonio Farms (repower) Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner San Gorgonio Farms Developer San Gorgonio Farms Location San Gorgonio CA Coordinates 33.9095°, -116.734° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":33.9095,"lon":-116.734,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

307

Facilities  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Environment Feature Stories Public Reading Room: Environmental Documents, Reports LANL Home Phonebook Calendar Video About Operational Excellence Facilities Facilities...

308

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

DOE Green Energy (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

309

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

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Tank 241-S-102 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-S-102 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

310

California Desert Fish Farm Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal...  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

California Desert Fish Farm Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name California Desert Fish Farm Aquaculture Low Temperature Geothermal...

311

Tank SY-102 waste retrieval assessment: Rheological measurements and pump jet mixing simulations  

SciTech Connect

Wastes stored in Hanford Tank 241-SY-102 are planned to be retrieved from that tank and transferred to 200 East Area through the new pipeline Replacement Cross Site Transfer System (RCSTS). Because the planned transfer of this waste will use the RCSTS, the slurry that results from the mobilization and retrieval operations must meet the applicable waste acceptance criteria for this system. This report describes results of the second phase (the detailed assessment) of the SY-102 waste retrieval study, which is a part of the efforts to establish a technical basis for mobilization of the slurry, waste retrieval, and slurry transport. Hanford Tank 241-SY-102 is located in the SY Tank Farm in the Hanford Site`s 200 West Area. It was built in 1977 to serve as a feed tank for 242-S Evaporator/Crystallizer, receiving supernatant liquid from S, SX, T, and U tank farms. Since 1981, the primary sources of waste have been from 200 West Area facilities, e.g., T-Plant decontamination operations, Plutonium Finishing Plant operations, and the 222-S Laboratory. It is the only active-service double-shell tank (DST) in the 200 West Area and is used as the staging tank for cross-site transfers to 200 East Area DSTs. The tank currently stores approximately 470 kL (125 kgal) of sludge wastes from a variety of sources including the Plutonium Finishing Plant, T-Plant, and the 222-S Laboratory. In addition to the sludge, approximately twice this amount (about 930 kL) of dilute, noncomplexed waste forms a supernatant liquid layer above the sludge.

Onishi, Y.; Shekarriz, R.; Recknagle, K.P. [and others

1996-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

312

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

Science Conference Proceedings (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

313

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

SciTech Connect

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

Johnson, Michael E.; Field, Jim G.

2008-08-26T23:59:59.000Z

314

Office of River Protection (ORP) and Washingotn River Protection Solutions, LLC (WRPS) Partnering Agreement for the DOE-EM Tank Operations Project  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

The Mission of the Office of River Protection is to safely retrieve and treat Hanford's tank waste and close the Tank Farms to protect the Columbia River.

315

Implementation of Recommendations from the One System Comparative Evaluation of the Hanford Tank Farms and Waste Treatment Plant Safety Bases - 14137  

SciTech Connect

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

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

2013-11-07T23:59:59.000Z

316

WRPS MEETING THE CHALLENGE OF TANK WASTE  

SciTech Connect

Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) is the Hanford tank operations contractor, charged with managing one of the most challenging environmental cleanup projects in the nation. The U.S. Department of Energy hired WRPS to manage 56 million gallons of high-level radioactive waste stored in 177 underground tanks. The waste is the legacy of 45 years of plutonium production for the U. S. nuclear arsenal. WRPS mission is three-fold: safely manage the waste until it can be processed and immobilized; develop the tools and techniques to retrieve the waste from the tanks, and build the infrastructure needed to deliver the waste to the Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) when it begins operating. WTP will 'vitrify' the waste by mixing it with silica and other materials and heating it in an electric melter. Vitrification turns the waste into a sturdy glass that will isolate the radioactivity from the environment. It will take more than 20 years to process all the tank waste. The tank waste is a complex highly radioactive mixture of liquid, sludge and solids. The radioactivity, chemical composition of the waste and the limited access to the underground storage tanks makes retrieval a challenge. Waste is being retrieved from aging single-shell tanks and transferred to newer, safer double-shell tanks. WRPS is using a new technology known as enhanced-reach sluicing to remove waste. A high-pressure stream of liquid is sprayed at 100 gallons per minute through a telescoping arm onto a hard waste layer several inches thick covering the waste. The waste is broken up, moved to a central pump suction and removed from the tank. The innovative Mobile Arm Retrieval System (MARS) is also being used to retrieve waste. MARS is a remotely operated, telescoping arm installed on a mast in the center of the tank. It uses multiple technologies to scrape, scour and rake the waste toward a pump for removal. The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA) provided nearly $326 million over two-and-a-half years to modernize the infrastructure in Hanford's tank farms. WRPS issued 850 subcontracts totaling more than $152 million with nearly 76 percent of that total awarded to small businesses. WRPS used the funding to upgrade tank farm infrastructure, develop technologies to retrieve and consolidate tank waste and extend the life of two critical operating facilities needed to feed waste to the WTP. The 222-S Laboratory analyzes waste to support waste retrievals and transfers. The laboratory was upgraded to support future WTP operations with a new computer system, new analytical equipment, a new office building and a new climate-controlled warehouse. The 242-A Evaporator was upgraded with a control-room simulator for operator training and several upgrades to aging equipment. The facility is used to remove liquid from the tank waste, creating additional storage space, necessary for continued waste retrievals and WTP operation. The One System Integrated Project Team is ajoint effort ofWRPS and Bechtel National to identify and resolve common issues associated with commissioning, feeding and operating the Waste Treatment Plant. Two new facilities are being designed to support WTP hot commlsslomng. The Interim Hanford Storage project is planned to store canisters of immobilized high-level radioactive waste glass produced by the vitrification plant. The facility will use open racks to store the 15-foot long, two-foot diameter canisters of waste, which require remote handling. The Secondary Liquid Waste Treatment Project is a major upgrade to the existing Effluent Treatment Facility at Hanford so it can treat about 10 million gallons of liquid radioactive and hazardous effluent a year from the vitrification plant. The One System approach brings the staff of both companies together to identify and resolve WTP safety issues. A questioning attitude is encouraged and an open forum is maintained for employees to raise issues. WRPS is completing its mission safely with record-setting safety performance. Since WRPS took over the Hanford Tank Operations Contract in October 2

BRITTON JC

2012-02-21T23:59:59.000Z

317

Tank Waste Remediation System retrieval and disposal mission technical baseline summary description  

SciTech Connect

This document is prepared in order to support the US Department of Energy`s evaluation of readiness-to-proceed for the Waste Retrieval and Disposal Mission at the Hanford Site. The Waste Retrieval and Disposal Mission is one of three primary missions under the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Project. The other two include programs to characterize tank waste and to provide for safe storage of the waste while it awaits treatment and disposal. The Waste Retrieval and Disposal Mission includes the programs necessary to support tank waste retrieval, wastefeed, delivery, storage and disposal of immobilized waste, and closure of tank farms. This mission will enable the tank farms to be closed and turned over for final remediation. The Technical Baseline is defined as the set of science and engineering, equipment, facilities, materials, qualified staff, and enabling documentation needed to start up and complete the mission objectives. The primary purposes of this document are (1) to identify the important technical information and factors that should be used by contributors to the mission and (2) to serve as a basis for configuration management of the technical information and factors.

McLaughlin, T.J.

1998-01-06T23:59:59.000Z

318

Microsoft Word - Tank Waste Report 9-30-05.doc  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Accelerated Tank Waste Retrieval Accelerated Tank Waste Retrieval Activities at the Hanford Site DOE/IG-0706 October 2005 REPORT ON THE ACCELERATED TANK WASTE RETRIEVAL ACTIVITIES AT THE HANFORD SITE TABLE OF CONTENTS Tank Waste Retrieval Details of Finding 1 Recommendations and Comments 4 Appendices Objective, Scope, and Methodology 6 Prior Reports 7 Management Comments 8 Tank Waste Retrieval Page 1 Details of Finding Tank Waste The Department will not meet Tri-Party Agreement (Agreement) Retrieval Activities milestones for the retrieval of waste from the single-shell tanks located at the C-Tank Farm within schedule and cost. Based on the current C-Tank Farm retrieval schedule and the amount of waste retrieved to date, the Department will not accomplish its

319

Salt Waste Processing Facility Fact Sheet  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

Nuclear material production operations at SRS resulted in the generation of liquid radioactive waste that is being stored, on an interim basis, in 49 underground waste storage tanks in the F- and H-Area Tank Farms.

320

San Gorgonio Farms Wind Farm I | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

San Gorgonio Farms Wind Farm I San Gorgonio Farms Wind Farm I Facility San Gorgonio Farms Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Energy Purchaser Southern California Edison Co Location San Gorgonio CA Coordinates 33.9095°, -116.734° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":33.9095,"lon":-116.734,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank farm facility" 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

Fire protection considerations for the design and operation of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) storage facilities  

SciTech Connect

This standard addresses the design, operation, and maintenance of LPG storage facilities from the standpoint of prevention and control of releases, fire-protection design, and fire-control measures, as well as the history of LPG storage facility failure, facility design philosophy, operating and maintenance procedures, and various fire-protection and firefighting approaches and presentations. The storage facilities covered are LPG installations (storage vessels and associated loading/unloading/transfer systems) at marine and pipeline terminals, natural gas processing plants, refineries, petrochemical plants, and tank farms.

1989-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

322

Cooper Farms | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Cooper Farms Cooper Farms Jump to: navigation, search Name Cooper Farms Facility Cooper Farms Sector Wind energy Facility Type Community Wind Facility Status In Service Owner V.H. Cooper and Co Inc Developer One Energy LLC Energy Purchaser Cooper Farms Location Van Wert OH Coordinates 40.9061044°, -84.5719964° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":40.9061044,"lon":-84.5719964,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

323

Superior Farms | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Superior Farms Superior Farms Jump to: navigation, search Name Superior Farms Facility Superior Farms Sector Wind energy Facility Type Community Wind Facility Status In Service Owner Foundation Windpower Developer Foundation Windpower Energy Purchaser Superior Farms Location Dixon CA Coordinates 38.420103°, -121.817506° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":38.420103,"lon":-121.817506,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

324

Facilities  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Facilities Facilities Facilities LANL's mission is to develop and apply science and technology to ensure the safety, security, and reliability of the U.S. nuclear deterrent; reduce global threats; and solve other emerging national security and energy challenges. Contact Operator Los Alamos National Laboratory (505) 667-5061 Some LANL facilities are available to researchers at other laboratories, universities, and industry. Unique facilities foster experimental science, support LANL's security mission DARHT accelerator DARHT's electron accelerators use large, circular aluminum structures to create magnetic fields that focus and steer a stream of electrons down the length of the accelerator. Tremendous electrical energy is added along the way. When the stream of high-speed electrons exits the accelerator it is

325

Federal Facility Agreement plans and schedules for liquid low-level radioactive waste tank systems at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) requires a Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) for federal facilities placed on the National Priorities List. The Oak Ridge Reservation was placed on that list on December 21, 1989, and the agreement was signed in November 1991 by the Department of Energy Oak Ridge Field Office (DOE-OR), the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-Region IV, and the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC). The effective date of the FFA was January 1, 1992. Section 9 and Appendix F of the agreement impose design and operating requirements on the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) liquid low-level radioactive waste (LLLW) tank systems and identify several plans, schedules, and assessments that must be submitted to EPA/TDEC for review or approval. The initial issue of this document in March 1992 transmitted to EPA/TDEC those plans and schedules that were required within 60 to 90 days of the FFA effective date. The current revision of this document updates the plans, schedules, and strategy for achieving compliance with the FFA, and it summarizes the progress that has been made over the past year. Chapter 1 describes the history and operation of the ORNL LLLW System, the objectives of the FFA, the organization that has been established to bring the system into compliance, and the plans for achieving compliance. Chapters 2 through 7 of this report contain the updated plans and schedules for meeting FFA requirements. This document will continue to be periodically reassessed and refined to reflect newly developed information and progress.

Not Available

1993-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

326

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

Science Conference Proceedings (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

327

Comparative safety analysis of LNG storage tanks  

Science Conference Proceedings (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

328

Criticality Safety Evaluation of Hanford Site High Level Waste Storage Tanks  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This criticality safety evaluation covers operations for waste in underground storage tanks at the high-level waste tank farms on the Hanford site. This evaluation provides the bases for criticality safety limits and controls to govern receipt, transfer, and long-term storage of tank waste. Justification is provided that a nuclear criticality accident cannot occur for tank farms operations, based on current fissile material and operating conditions.

ROGERS, C.A.

2000-02-17T23:59:59.000Z

329

Tank characterization data report: Tank 241-C-112  

Science Conference Proceedings (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

330

Historical Tank Content Estimate for the Northwest Quandrant of the Hanford 200 East Area  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Historical Tank Content Estimate of the Northeast Quadrant provides historical evaluations on a tank by tank basis of the radioactive mixed wastes stored in the underground single-shell tanks of the Hanford 200 East area. This report summaries historical information such at waste history, temperature, 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, along with the components of the data management effort, such as waste status and Transaction Record Summary, Tank Layering Model, Defined Waste Types, and Inventory Estimates to generate these tank content estimates are also given in this report.

Brevick, C.H.; Gaddis, L.A.; Pickett, W.W.

1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

331

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

incorporating chemistry. Such tools would allow the facile evaluation of the impacts of treatment and waste form alternatives on the overall disposition path for Hanford tank...

332

SHEAR STRENGTH MEASURING EQUIPMENT EVALUATION AT THE COLD TEST FACILITY  

SciTech Connect

Retrievals under current criteria require that approximately 2,000,000 gallons of double-shell tank (DST) waste storage space not be used to prevent creating new tanks that might be susceptible to buoyant displacement gas release events (BDGRE). New criteria are being evaluated, based on actual sludge properties, to potentially show that sludge wastes do not exhibit the same BDGRE risk. Implementation of the new criteria requires measurement of in situ waste shear strength. Cone penetrometers were judged the best equipment for measuring in situ shear strength and an A.P. van den berg Hyson 100 kN Light Weight Cone Penetrometer (CPT) was selected for evaluation. The CPT was procured and then evaluated at the Hanford Site Cold Test Facility. Evaluation demonstrated that the equipment with minor modification was suitable for use in Tank Farms.

MEACHAM JE

2009-09-09T23:59:59.000Z

333

Frey Farm | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Frey Farm Frey Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Frey Farm Facility Frey Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Community Wind Facility Status In Service Owner PPL Renewable Energy Developer PPL Renewable Energy LLC / Lancaster County Solid Waste Management Authority Energy Purchaser Turkey Hill Dairy Location Conestoga PA Coordinates 39.95904681°, -76.45606756° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":39.95904681,"lon":-76.45606756,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

334

Roeder Farms | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Roeder Farms Roeder Farms Jump to: navigation, search Name Roeder Farms Facility Roeder Farms Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner 5045 Wind Partners Developer 5045 Wind Partners Energy Purchaser Alliant Energy Location Des Moines IA Coordinates 43.29729211°, -93.28315258° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":43.29729211,"lon":-93.28315258,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

335

Carsten Farms | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Carsten Farms Carsten Farms Jump to: navigation, search Name Carsten Farms Facility Carsten Farms Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Location Shelby IA Coordinates 41.4013022°, -94.60524023° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":41.4013022,"lon":-94.60524023,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

336

STATUS OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF IN-TANK/AT-TANK SEPARATIONS TECHNOLOGIES FOR FOR HIGH-LEVEL WASTE PROCESSING FOR THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY  

SciTech Connect

Within the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Technology Innovation and Development, the Office of Waste Processing manages a research and development program related to the treatment and disposition of radioactive waste. At the Savannah River (South Carolina) and Hanford (Washington) Sites, approximately 90 million gallons of waste are distributed among 226 storage tanks (grouped or collocated in 'tank farms'). This waste may be considered to contain mixed and stratified high activity and low activity constituent waste liquids, salts and sludges that are collectively managed as high level waste (HLW). A large majority of these wastes and associated facilities are unique to the DOE, meaning many of the programs to treat these materials are 'first-of-a-kind' and unprecedented in scope and complexity. As a result, the technologies required to disposition these wastes must be developed from basic principles, or require significant re-engineering to adapt to DOE's specific applications. Of particular interest recently, the development of In-tank or At-Tank separation processes have the potential to treat waste with high returns on financial investment. The primary objective associated with In-Tank or At-Tank separation processes is to accelerate waste processing. Insertion of the technologies will (1) maximize available tank space to efficiently support permanent waste disposition including vitrification; (2) treat problematic waste prior to transfer to the primary processing facilities at either site (i.e., Hanford's Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) or Savannah River's Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF)); and (3) create a parallel treatment process to shorten the overall treatment duration. This paper will review the status of several of the R&D projects being developed by the U.S. DOE including insertion of the ion exchange (IX) technologies, such as Small Column Ion Exchange (SCIX) at Savannah River. This has the potential to align the salt and sludge processing life cycle, thereby reducing the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) mission by 7 years. Additionally at the Hanford site, problematic waste streams, such as high boehmite and phosphate wastes, could be treated prior to receipt by WTP and thus dramatically improve the capacity of the facility to process HLW. Treatment of boehmite by continuous sludge leaching (CSL) before receipt by WTP will dramatically reduce the process cycle time for the WTP pretreatment facility, while treatment of phosphate will significantly reduce the number of HLW borosilicate glass canisters produced at the WTP. These and other promising technologies will be discussed.

Aaron, G.; Wilmarth, B.

2011-09-19T23:59:59.000Z

337

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

Narbutovskih, Susan M.

2006-09-29T23:59:59.000Z

338

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

SciTech Connect

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

Stefanko, D.; Langton, C.

2011-12-15T23:59:59.000Z

339

Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

K1) K1) Document Number: RPP-50002 Vdo(2) Revision Number: 0 (3) Effective Date: 06/20/2011 ()Document Type: E Digital Image E] Hard copy (a) Number of pages (including the DRIF) or 17 Z PDFVideonumber of digital images (5) Release Type Z New El Cancel Ifl Page Change E] Complete Revision (6) Document Title: Meeting Minutes Waste Management Area C Performance Assessment Ecological Risk Working Session held at Washington State Department of Ecology Offices 3100 Port of Benton Boulevard Richland, WA 99352 on May 17 through May 18, 2011 (7) Change/Release Initial release Description: (8) Change Justification: N/A (9) Associated Structure, (a) Structure Location: (c) Building Number: (a) Project Number: System, andN/NANA Component (SSC) and N/I/ / Building Number: (b) System Designator: (d) Equipment ID Number (EIN):

340

Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

4941 (2) Revision Number: 0 (3) Effective Date: 02/25/2010 4941 (2) Revision Number: 0 (3) Effective Date: 02/25/2010 (4) Document Type: ElDigital Image [] Hard copy (a) Number of pages (including the DIRF) or 20 SPDF Video number of digital images (5) Release Type New El Cancel I E Page Change El Complete Revision (6) Document Title: Meeting Minutes for the WMA C PA Working Session on Soils Inventory (7) Change/Release Summary of meeting between DOE-ORP and Hanford Site regulators/stakeholders regarding Description: Waste Management Area C performance assessment on soil inventory. (8) Change N/A Justification: (9) Associated (a) Structure Location: (c) Building Number: Structure, System, N/NA and Component N/NA (SSC) and Building (b) System Designator: (d) Equipment ID Number (EIN): Number: N/A N/A (10) Impacted (a) Document Type (b) Document Number (c) Document Revision

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank farm facility" 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

Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

RPP-48144, Rev. 0 RPP-48144, Rev. 0 Page 1 of 15 Meeting Minutes Waste Management Area C Performance Assessment Exposure Scenarios Working Session held at Washington State Department of Ecology Offices 3100 Port of Benton Boulevard Richland, WA 99352 on September 28 through September 30, 2010 LIST OF TERMS Abbreviations and Acronyms CA Composite Analysis CEES Columbia Energy and Environmental Services, Inc. CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (Public Law 111-88, 123 Stat. 2924, 42 USC 9607 et seq.) CHPRC CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company CRESP Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation CTUIR Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation DOE U.S. Department of Energy DOE-EM U.S. Department of Energy-Office of Environmental Management

342

Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

9066 (2) Revision Number: 0 (3) Effective Date: 03/01/201 9066 (2) Revision Number: 0 (3) Effective Date: 03/01/201 (4) Document Type: E] Digital Image E Hard copy (a) Number of pages (including the DRF) or 68 Z PDFVideonumber of digital images (5) Release Type ZNew E cancel Ifl Page Change Complete Revision (6) Document Title: Meeting Minutes for the WMA C PA Numerical Codes and Models Working Session (7) Change/Release Initial release Description: (8) Change Justification: N/A (9) Associated Structure, (a) Structure Location: (c) Building Number: (e) Project Number: System, andNIN/NA Component (SSC) and N/I/ / Building Number: (b) System Designator: (d) Equipment ID Number (EIN): N/A N/A (10) Impacted (a) Document Type (b) Document Number (c) Document Revision Documents: N/A N/A N/A (11) Approvals: (a) Author (Print/Sign):,1 Date:

343

Tank Farm Waste Transfer Compatibility Program  

SciTech Connect

The compatibility program described in this document formalizes the process for determining waste compatibility. The primary goal of the program is to ensure that sufficient controls are in place to prevent the formation of incompatible mixtures during future operations. The process described involves characterizing waste, comparing characteristics with criteria, resolving potential incompatibilities and documenting the process.

FOWLER, K.D.

2000-07-12T23:59:59.000Z

344

Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Systems Working Session (7) ChangeRelease Summary of meeting between DOE-ORP and Hanford Site regulatorsstakeholders regarding Description: Waste Management Area C...

345

Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOCUMENT RELEASE FORM DOCUMENT RELEASE FORM ! I (1) Document Number: RPP-47375 . NUMber· 0 I (3) Effective Date: 08/11/2010 i (4) Document Type: o Digital Image o Hard copy (a) Number of pages (including the DRF) or 21 I ~PDF o Video I number of digital images (5) Release Type ~ New o Cancel o Page Change o Complete Revision i (6) Document Title: Meeting Minutes for the WMA C PA Engineered Systems #2 Working Session - Steel Corrosion; i ConcretelGrout Degradation I(7) Change/Release ..- - . Summary of meeting between DOE-ORP and Hanford Site regulators/stakeholders regarding Description: Waste Management Area C performance assessment on Engineered Systems #2 - Steel Corrosion; Concrete/Grout Degradation I(8) Change N/A Justification: (9) Associated (a) Structure Location: (c) Building Number:

346

Hanford Site C Tank Farm Meeting Summary  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

51 35 51 35 (2) Revision Number: 0 (3) Effective Date: 03/03/2010 (4) Document Typo: [I Digital Image ElHard copy (a) Number of pages (including the DRF) or 18 JE PDF Vie number of digital Images (5) Release Type Z New 1: Cancel 1E: Page Change Complete Revision (6) Document Title: Meeting Minutes for the WMA C PA Engineering System #1 Working Session (7) ChangelReleese Summary of meeting between DOE-ORP and Hanford Site regulators/stakeholders regarding Description: Waste Management Area C performance assessment on Engineering System #1. (5) Change N/A Justification: (9) Associated (a) Structure Location: (c) Building Number: Structure, System, and Component N/NA (SSC) and Building (b) System Designator: (d) Equipment ID Number (EIN):. Number: (10) Impacted (a) Document Type (b) Document Number (c) Document Revision

347

PROBABILITY BASED CORROSION CONTROL FOR WASTE TANKS - PART II  

SciTech Connect

As part of an ongoing study to evaluate the discontinuity in the corrosion controls at the SRS tank farm, a study was conducted this year to assess the minimum concentrations below 1 molar nitrate, see Figure 1. Current controls on the tank farm solution chemistry are in place to prevent the initiation and propagation of pitting and stress corrosion cracking in the primary steel waste tanks. The controls are based upon a series of experiments performed with simulated solutions on materials used for construction of the tanks, namely ASTM A537 carbon steel (A537). During FY09, an experimental program was undertaken to investigate the risk associated with reducing the minimum molar nitrite concentration required to confidently inhibit pitting in dilute solutions (i.e., less than 1 molar nitrate). The experimental results and conclusions herein provide a statistical basis to quantify the probability of pitting for the tank wall exposed to various solutions with dilute concentrations of nitrate and nitrite. Understanding the probability for pitting will allow the facility to make tank-specific risk-based decisions for chemistry control. Based on previous electrochemical testing, a statistical test matrix was developed to refine and solidify the application of the statistical mixture/amount model to corrosion of A537 steel. A mixture/amount model was identified based on statistical analysis of recent and historically collected electrochemical data. This model provides a more complex relationship between the nitrate and nitrite concentrations and the probability of pitting than is represented by the model underlying the current chemistry control program, and its use may provide a technical basis for the utilization of less nitrite to inhibit pitting at concentrations below 1 molar nitrate. FY09 results fit within the mixture/amount model, and further refine the nitrate regime in which the model is applicable. The combination of visual observations and cyclic potentiodynamic polarization scans indicates a potential for significant inhibitor reductions at nitrate concentrations near 1.0 M without a significant increase in corrosion risk. The complete data sets from FY08 and FY09 testing have determined the statistical basis to confidently inhibit against pitting using nitrite inhibition with the current pH controls. Future testing will complete the spectrum of nitrate concentrations around 1 molar. These results will be combined to provide a complete spectrum for corrosion controls with a risk based component.

Hoffman, E.; Edwards, T.

2010-12-09T23:59:59.000Z

348

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

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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...

349

Burco Farm and Feed | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Burco Farm and Feed Burco Farm and Feed Jump to: navigation, search Name Burco Farm and Feed Facility Burco Farm and Feed Sector Wind energy Facility Type Small Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner Burco Farm and Feed Energy Purchaser Burco Farm and Feed Location Independence IA Coordinates 42.5638438°, -91.88753486° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":42.5638438,"lon":-91.88753486,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

350

JJN Wind Farm | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

JJN Wind Farm JJN Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name JJN Wind Farm Facility JJN Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner JJNWind Farm Developer JJNWind Farm Location Buffalo Ridge MN Coordinates 44.0039°, -96.0526° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":44.0039,"lon":-96.0526,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

351

SLUDGE BATCH 7 ACCEPTANCE EVALUATION: RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATIONS IN TANK 51 SB7 QUALIFICATION SAMPLE PREPARED AT SRNL  

SciTech Connect

Presented in this report are radionuclide concentrations required as part of the program of qualifying Sludge Batch Seven (SB7) for processing in the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF). The SB7 material is currently in Tank 51 being washed and prepared for transfer to Tank 40. The acceptance evaluation needs to be completed prior to the transfer of the material in Tank 51 to Tank 40. The sludge slurry in Tank 40 has already been qualified for DWPF and is currently being processed as SB6. The radionuclide concentrations were measured or estimated in the Tank 51 SB7 Qualification Sample prepared at Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL). This sample was prepared from the three liter qualification sample of Tank 51 sludge slurry (HTF-51-10-125) received on September 18, 2010. The sample was delivered to SRNL where it was initially characterized in the Shielded Cells. With consultation from the Liquid Waste Organization, the qualification sample was then modified by several washes and decants, which included addition of Pu from H Canyon and sodium nitrite per the Tank Farm corrosion control program. This final slurry now has a composition expected to be similar to that of the slurry in Tank 51 after final preparations have been made for transfer of that slurry to Tank 40. Determining the radionuclide concentrations in this Tank 51 SB7 Qualification Sample is part of the work requested in Technical Task Request (TTR) No. HLW-DWPF-TTR-2010-0031. The radionuclides included in this report are needed for the DWPF Radiological Program Evaluation, the DWPF Waste Acceptance Criteria (TSR/WAC) Evaluation, and the DWPF Solid Waste Characterization Program (TTR Task I.2). Radionuclides required to meet the Waste Acceptance Product Specifications (TTR Task III.2.) will be measured at a later date after the slurry from Tank 51 has been transferred to Tank 40. Then a sample of the as-processed SB7 will be taken and transferred to SRNL for measurement of these radionuclides. The results presented in this report are those necessary for DWPF to assess if the Tank 51 SB7 sample prepared at SRNL meets the requirements for the DWPF Radiological Program Evaluation, the DWPF Waste Acceptance Criteria evaluation, and the DWPF Solid Waste Characterization Program. Concentrations are given for thirty-four radionuclides along with total alpha and beta activity. Values for total gamma and total gamma plus beta activities are also calculated.

Pareizs, J.; Hay, M.

2011-02-22T23:59:59.000Z

352

Site-specific standard request for underground storage tanks 1219-U, 1222-U, 2082-U, and 2068-U at the rust garage facility buildings 9754-1 and 9720-15: Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Facility ID No. 0-010117  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This document represents a Site-specific Standard Request for underground storage tanks (USTs) 1219-U,1222-U and 2082-U previously located at former Building 9754-1, and tank 2086-U previously located at Building 9720-15, Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The tanks previously contained petroleum products. For the purposes of this report, the two building sites will be regarded as a single UST site and will be referred to as the Rust Garage Facility. The current land use associated with the Y-12 Plant is light industrial and the operational period of the plant is projected to be at least 30 years. Thus, potential future residential exposures are not expected to occur for at least 30 years. Based on the degradation coefficient for benzene (the only carcinogenic petroleum constituent detected in soils or groundwater at the Rust Garage Facility), it is expected that the benzene and other contaminants at the site will likely be reduced prior to expiration of the 30-year plant operational period. As the original sources of petroleum contamination have been removed, and the area of petroleum contamination is limited, a site-specific standard is therefore being requested for the Rust Garage Facility.

NONE

1994-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

353

Addendum to the corrective action plan for Underground Storage Tanks 1219-U, 1222-U, 2082-U, 2068-U at the Rust Garage Facility, Buildings 9720-15 and 9754-1: Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Facility ID {number_sign}0-010117  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This document represents an addendum to the Corrective Action Plan (CAP) for underground storage tanks 1219-U, 2082-U, and 2068-U located at Buildings 9720-15 and 9754-1, Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, TN. The site of the four underground storage tanks is commonly referred to as the Rust Garage Facility. The original CAP was submitted to the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) for review in May 1992. During the time period after submission of the original CAP for the Rust Garage Facility, Y-12 Plant Underground Storage Tank (UST) Program personnel continued to evaluate improvements that would optimize resources and expedite the activities schedule presented in the original CAP. Based on these determinations, several revisions to the original corrective action process options for remediation of contaminated soils are proposed. The revised approach will involve excavation of the soils from the impacted areas, on-site thermal desorption of soil contaminants, and final disposition of the treated soils by backfilling into the subject site excavations. Based on evaluation of the corrective actions with regard to groundwater, remediation of groundwater under the Y-12 Plant CERCLA Program is proposed for the facility.

Not Available

1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

354

Tank Waste Retrieval Lessons Learned at the Hanford Site  

SciTech Connect

One of the environmental remediation challenges facing the nation is the retrieval and permanent disposal of approximately 90 million gallons of radioactive waste stored in underground tanks at the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) facilities. The Hanford Site is located in southeastern Washington State and stores roughly 60 percent of this waste. An estimated 53 million gallons of high-level, transuranic, and low-level radioactive waste is stored underground in 149 single-shell tanks (SSTs) and 28 newer double-shell tanks (DSTs) at the Hanford Site. These SSTs range in size from 55,000 gallons to 1,000,000 gallon capacity. Approximately 30 million gallons of this waste is stored in SSTs. The SSTs were constructed between 1943 and 1964 and all have exceeded the nominal 20-year design life. Sixty-seven SSTs are known or suspected to have leaked an estimated 1,000,000 gallons of waste to the surrounding soil. The risk of additional SST leakage has been greatly reduced by removing more than 3 million gallons of interstitial liquids and supernatant and transferring this waste to the DST system. Retrieval of SST salt-cake and sludge waste is underway to further reduce risks and stage feed materials for the Hanford Site Waste Treatment Plant. Regulatory requirements for SST waste retrieval and tank farm closure are established in the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (HFFACO), better known as the Tri- Party Agreement, or TPA. The HFFACO was signed by the DOE, the State of Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology), and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and requires retrieval of as much waste as technically possible, with waste residues not to exceed 360 ft{sup 3} in 530,000 gallon or larger tanks; 30 ft{sup 3} in 55,000 gallon or smaller tanks; or the limit of waste retrieval technology, whichever is less. If residual waste volume requirements cannot be achieved, then HFFACO Appendix H provisions can be invoked to request Ecology and EPA approval of an exception to the waste retrieval criteria for a specific tank. Tank waste retrieval has been conducted at the Hanford Site over the last few decades using a method referred to as Past Practice Hydraulic Sluicing. Past Practice Hydraulic Sluicing employs large volumes of DST supernatant and water to dislodge, dissolve, mobilize, and retrieve tank waste. Concern over the leak integrity of SSTs resulted in the need for tank waste retrieval methods capable of using smaller volumes of liquid in a more controlled manner. Retrieval of SST waste in accordance with HFFACO requirements was initiated at the Hanford Site in April 2003. New and innovative tank waste retrieval methods that minimize and control the use of liquids are being implemented for the first time. These tank waste retrieval methods replace Past Practice Hydraulic Sluicing and employ modified sluicing, vacuum retrieval, and in-tank vehicle techniques. Waste retrieval has been completed in seven Hanford Site SSTs (C-106, C-103, C-201, C-202, C-203, C-204, and S-112) in accordance with HFFACO requirements. Three additional tanks are currently in the process of being retrieved (C-108, C-109 and S-102) Preparation for retrieval of two additional SSTs (C-104 and C-110) is ongoing with retrieval operations forecasted to start in calendar year 2008. Tank C-106 was retrieved to a residual waste volume of 470 ft{sup 3} using oxalic acid dissolution and modified sluicing. An Appendix H exception request for Tank C-106 is undergoing review. Tank C-103 was retrieved to a residual volume of 351 ft{sup 3} using a modified sluicing technology. This approach was successful at reaching the TPA limits for this tank of less than 360 ft{sup 3}and the limits of the technology. Tanks C-201, C-202, C-203, and C-204 are smaller (55,000 gallon) tanks and waste removal was completed in accordance with HFFACO requirements using a vacuum retrieval system. Residual waste volumes in each of these four tanks were less than 25 ft{sup 3}. Tank S-112 retrieval was completed February 28, 2007, meeting the TPA Limits of less than

Dodd, R.A. [CH2M HILL Hanford Group, Inc., Richland, Washington (United States)

2008-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

355

High-Level Liquid Waste Tank Integrity Workshop - 2008  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

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

356

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

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Tank 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. Tank BY-104 using the vapor sampling system (VSS) on June 24, 1994 by WHC Sampling and Mobile Laboratories. Air from the tank BY-104 headspace was withdrawn via a heated sampling probe mounted in riser 10A, and transferred via heated tubing to the VSS sampling manifold. Sampling media were prepared and analyzed by WHC, Oak Ridge National Laboratories, Pacific Northwest Laboratories, and Oregon Graduate Institute of Science and Technology through a contract with Sandia National Laboratories. The 46 tank air samples and 2 ambient air control samples collected are listed in Table X-1 by analytical laboratory. Table X-1 also lists the 10 trip blanks provided by the laboratories.

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-10T23:59:59.000Z

357

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

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

Fayer, Michael J.; Keller, Jason M.

2007-09-24T23:59:59.000Z

358

HANFORD DOUBLE SHELL TANK THERMAL AND SEISMIC PROJECT BUCKLING EVALUATION METHODS AND RESULTS FOR THE PRIMARY TANKS  

SciTech Connect

This report documents a detailed buckling evaluation of the primary tanks in the Hanford double-shell waste tanks (DSTs), which is part of a comprehensive structural review for the Double-Shell Tank Integrity Project. This work also provides information on tank integrity that specifically responds to concerns raised by the Office of Environment, Safety, and Health (ES&H) Oversight (EH-22) during a review of work performed on the double-shell tank farms and the operation of the aging waste facility (AWF) primary tank ventilation system. The current buckling review focuses on the following tasks: (1) Evaluate the potential for progressive anchor bolt failure and the appropriateness of the safety factors that were used for evaluating local and global buckling. The analysis will specifically answer the following questions: (a) Can the EH-22 scenario develop if the vacuum is limited to -6.6-inch water gage (w.g.) by a relief valve? (b) What is the appropriate factor of safety required to protect against buckling if the EH-22 scenario can develop? (c) What is the appropriate factor of safety required to protect against buckling if the EH-22 scenario cannot develop? (2) Develop influence functions to estimate the axial stresses in the primary tanks for all reasonable combinations of tank loads based on detailed finite element analysis. The analysis must account for the variation in design details and operating conditions between the different DSTs. The analysis must also address the imperfection sensitivity of the primary tank to buckling. (3) Perform a detailed buckling analysis to determine the maximum allowable differential pressure for each of the DST primary tanks at the current specified limits on waste temperature, height, and specific gravity. Based on the concrete anchor bolt loads analysis and the small deformations that are predicted at the unfactored limits on vacuum and axial loads, it is very unlikely that the EH-22 scenario (i.e., progressive anchor bolt failure leading to global buckling of the tank under increased vacuum) could occur. After releasing Revision 0 of this report, an independent review of the Double Shell Tanks (DST) Thermal and Operating Loads Analysis (TaLA) combined with the Seismic Analysis was conducted by Dr. Robert P. Kennedy of RPK Structural Mechanics Consulting and Dr. Anestis S. Veletsos of Rice University. Revision I was then issued to address their review comments (included in Appendix D). Additional concerns involving the evaluation of concrete anchor loads and allowables were found during a second review by Drs. Kennedy and Veletsos (see Appendix G). Extensive additional analysis was performed on the anchors, which is detailed by Deibler et al. (2008a, 2008b). The current report (Revision 2) references this recent work, and additional analysis is presented to show that anchor loads do not concentrate significantly in the presence of a local buckle.

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

2009-01-14T23:59:59.000Z

359

Wallys Wind Farm | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Wallys Wind Farm Wallys Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Wallys Wind Farm Facility Wallys Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner Wallys Wind Farm LLC Energy Purchaser Xcel Energy Location Lake Benton MN Coordinates 44.2847°, -96.4256° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":44.2847,"lon":-96.4256,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

360

Karen Avenue Wind Farm | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Farm Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Karen Avenue Wind Farm Facility Karen Avenue Windfarm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner San Gorgonio Farms Developer San Gorgonio Farms Energy Purchaser Southern California Edison Co Location San Gorgonio CA Coordinates 33.9095°, -116.734° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":33.9095,"lon":-116.734,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank farm facility" 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

Wing River Wind Farm | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

River Wind Farm River Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Wing River Wind Farm Facility Wing River Wind Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner Wing River Wind Farm Developer Wing River Wind Farm Location Hewitt MN Coordinates 46.3254°, -95.0864° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":46.3254,"lon":-95.0864,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

362

Uilk Wind Farm | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Uilk Wind Farm Uilk Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Uilk Wind Farm Facility Uilk Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Developer Uilk Wind Farm Energy Purchaser Xcel Energy Location West of Pipestone MN Coordinates 43.994704°, -96.365232° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":43.994704,"lon":-96.365232,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

363

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

364

Tank 241-C-112 vapor sampling and analysis tank characterization report  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Tank C-112 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. Tank C-112 is a single-shell tank which received first-cycle decontamination waste from B Plant and was later used as a settling tank. Samples were collected from Tank C-112 using the vapor sampling system (VSS) on August 11, 1994 by WHC Sampling and Mobile Laboratories. The tank headspace temperature was determined to be 28 C. Air from the Tank C-112 headspace was withdrawn via a 7.9 m-long heated sampling probe mounted in riser 4, and transferred via heated tubing to the VSS sampling manifold. All heated zones of the VSS were maintained at approximately 50 C. Sampling media were prepared and analyzed by WHC, Oak Ridge National Laboratories, Pacific Northwest Laboratories, and Oregon Graduate Institute of Science and Technology through a contract with Sandia National Laboratories. The 39 tank air samples and 2 ambient air control samples collected are listed in Table X-1 by analytical laboratory. Table X-1 also lists the 14 trip blanks and 2 field blanks provided by the laboratories.

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-10T23:59:59.000Z

365

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

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Tank C-111 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. Results presented here represent the best available data on the headspace constituents of Tank C-111. Almost all of the data in this report was obtained from samples collected on September 13, 1994.Data from 2 other sets of samples, collected on August 10, 1993 and June 20, 1994, are in generally good agreement with the more recent data. The tank headspace temperature was determined to be 27 C. Air from the Tank C-111 headspace was withdrawn via a 7.9 m-long heated sampling probe mounted in riser 6, and transferred via heated tubing to the VSS sampling manifold. All heated zones of the VSS were maintained at approximately 50 C. Sampling media were prepared and analyzed by WHC, Oak Ridge National Laboratories, Pacific Northwest Laboratories, and Oregon Graduate Institute of Science and Technology through a contract with Sandia National Laboratories. The 39 tank air samples and 2 ambient air control samples collected are listed in Table X-1 by analytical laboratory. Table X-1 also lists the 14 trip blanks provided by the laboratories. Tank C-111 is a single shell tank which received first-cycle decontamination waste from B Plant and was later used as a settling tank.

Huckaby, J.L.

1995-05-10T23:59:59.000Z

366

Final report of the TWRS Plant Implementation Team to review potential reactive component in tank 241-T-111 and methane in tank 241-SY-101 gas release event  

SciTech Connect

This is the final report of the results of a Tank Waste Remediation Systems Plant Implementation Team chartered by TWRS Operations, in response to a potential Unreviewed Safety Question (USQ) due to the discovery of a reactive component in waste tank 241-T-111 (T-111). Tank T-111, a non-Watch List single-shell tank, has no historical evidence of any potential safety problems. Core samples from tank T-111 were taken in 1991 and analyzed in 1992. The presence of uncharacterized exotherms was identified in the first three segments of two cores and reported to tank farm management in November 1993.

Engelman, D.B.

1994-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

367

PIBS 4709eMinistry of the Environment NOISE GUIDELINES FOR WIND FARMS Interpretation for Applying MOE NPC Publications to Wind Power Generation Facilities  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

This document establishes the sound level limits for land-based wind power generating facilities and describes the information required for noise assessments and submissions under the Environmental

Ministry Of The Environment

2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

368

Nuclear criticality safety evaluation -- DWPF Late Wash Facility, Salt Process Cell and Chemical Process Cell  

SciTech Connect

The Savannah River Site (SRS) High Level Nuclear Waste will be vitrified in the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) for long term storage and disposal. This is a nuclear criticality safety evaluation for the Late Wash Facility (LWF), the Salt Processing Cell (SPC) and the Chemical Processing Cell (CPC). of the DWPF. Waste salt solution is processed in the Tank Farm In-Tank Precipitation (ITP) process and is then further washed in the DWPF Late Wash Facility (LWF) before it is fed to the DWPF Salt Processing Cell. In the Salt Processing Cell the precipitate slurry is processed in the Precipitate Reactor (PR) and the resultant Precipitate Hydrolysis Aqueous (PHA) produce is combined with the sludge feed and frit in the DWPF Chemical Process Cell to produce a melter feed. The waste is finally immobilized in the Melt Cell. Material in the Tank Farm and the ITP and Extended Sludge processes have been shown to be safe against a nuclear criticality by others. The precipitate slurry feed from ITP and the first six batches of sludge feed are safe against a nuclear criticality and this evaluation demonstrates that the processes in the LWF, the SPC and the CPC do not alter the characteristics of the materials to compromise safety.

Williamson, T.G.

1994-10-17T23:59:59.000Z

369

Analysis of vehicle fuel release resulting in waste tank fire  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

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

STEPHENS, L.S.

2003-03-21T23:59:59.000Z

370

BLENDING STUDY FOR SRR SALT DISPOSITION INTEGRATION: TANK 50H SCALE-MODELING AND COMPUTER-MODELING FOR BLENDING PUMP DESIGN, PHASE 2  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

The Salt Disposition Integration (SDI) portfolio of projects provides the infrastructure within existing Liquid Waste facilities to support the startup and long term operation of the Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF). Within SDI, the Blend and Feed Project will equip existing waste tanks in the Tank Farms to serve as Blend Tanks where 300,000-800,000 gallons of salt solution will be blended in 1.3 million gallon tanks and qualified for use as feedstock for SWPF. Blending requires the miscible salt solutions from potentially multiple source tanks per batch to be well mixed without disturbing settled sludge solids that may be present in a Blend Tank. Disturbing solids may be problematic both from a feed quality perspective as well as from a process safety perspective where hydrogen release from the sludge is a potential flammability concern. To develop the necessary technical basis for the design and operation of blending equipment, Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) completed scaled blending and transfer pump tests and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modeling. A 94 inch diameter pilot-scale blending tank, including tank internals such as the blending pump, transfer pump, removable cooling coils, and center column, were used in this research. The test tank represents a 1/10.85 scaled version of an 85 foot diameter, Type IIIA, nuclear waste tank that may be typical of Blend Tanks used in SDI. Specifically, Tank 50 was selected as the tank to be modeled per the SRR, Project Engineering Manager. SRNL blending tests investigated various fixed position, non-rotating, dual nozzle pump designs, including a blending pump model provided by the blend pump vendor, Curtiss Wright (CW). Primary research goals were to assess blending times and to evaluate incipient sludge disturbance for waste tanks. Incipient sludge disturbance was defined by SRR and SRNL as minor blending of settled sludge from the tank bottom into suspension due to blending pump operation, where the sludge level was shown to remain constant. To experimentally model the sludge layer, a very thin, pourable, sludge simulant was conservatively used for all testing. To experimentally model the liquid, supernate layer above the sludge in waste tanks, two salt solution simulants were used, which provided a bounding range of supernate properties. One solution was water (H{sub 2}O + NaOH), and the other was an inhibited, more viscous salt solution. The research performed and data obtained significantly advances the understanding of fluid mechanics, mixing theory and CFD modeling for nuclear waste tanks by benchmarking CFD results to actual experimental data. This research significantly bridges the gap between previous CFD models and actual field experiences in real waste tanks. A finding of the 2009, DOE, Slurry Retrieval, Pipeline Transport and Plugging, and Mixing Workshop was that CFD models were inadequate to assess blending processes in nuclear waste tanks. One recommendation from that Workshop was that a validation, or bench marking program be performed for CFD modeling versus experiment. This research provided experimental data to validate and correct CFD models as they apply to mixing and blending in nuclear waste tanks. Extensive SDI research was a significant step toward bench marking and applying CFD modeling. This research showed that CFD models not only agreed with experiment, but demonstrated that the large variance in actual experimental data accounts for misunderstood discrepancies between CFD models and experiments. Having documented this finding, SRNL was able to provide correction factors to be used with CFD models to statistically bound full scale CFD results. Through the use of pilot scale tests performed for both types of pumps and available engineering literature, SRNL demonstrated how to effectively apply CFD results to salt batch mixing in full scale waste tanks. In other words, CFD models were in error prior to development of experimental correction factors determined during this research, which provided a technique to use CFD models fo

Leishear, R.; Poirier, M.; Fowley, M.

2011-05-26T23:59:59.000Z

371

Resolution of the nuclear criticality safety issue for the Hanford site high-level waste tanks  

SciTech Connect

This paper describes the approach used to resolve the Nuclear Criticality Safety Issue for the Hanford Site high-level waste tanks. Although operational controls have been in place at the Hanford Site throughout its operating life to minimize the amount of fissile material discarded as waste, estimates of the total amount of plutonium that entered the waste tanks range from 500 to 1,000 kg. Nuclear criticality safety concerns were heightened in 1991 based on a review of waste analysis results and a subsequent U.S. Department of Energy 1399 review of the nuclear criticality program. Although the DOE review team concluded that there was no imminent risk of a criticality at the Hanford Site tank farms, the team also stated its concern regarding the lack of definitive knowledge of the fissile material inventory and distribution within the waste tanks and the lack of sufficient management support for the overall criticality safety program. An in-depth technical review of the nuclear criticality safety of the waste tanks was conducted to develop a defensible technical basis to ensure that waste tanks are subcritical. The review covered all relevant aspects of nuclear criticality safety including neutronics and chemical and physical phenomena of the waste form under aging waste conditions as well as during routine waste management operations. This paper provides a review of the technical basis to support the conclusion that given current plutonium inventories and operating conditions, a nuclear criticality is incredible. The DOE has been requested to close the Nuclear Criticality Safety Issue. The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board is currently reviewing the technicalbasis.

Bratzel, D.R.

1997-01-07T23:59:59.000Z

372

Terology on marine wind farms  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Terology is a concept introduced to synthesize all the actions related to the managing of the life cycle of facilities and equipment as an enlarged maintenance perspective. Nowadays, the concept tries to give some contribution to integrate the environment ... Keywords: environmental impact, maintenance, marine wind farms, terology

Juan Jos Alonso Del Rosario; Jos Torres Farinha; Incio Fonseca; Fernando Maciel Barbosa

2010-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

373

Haynes Tow Tank | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Haynes Tow Tank Haynes Tow Tank Jump to: navigation, search Basic Specifications Facility Name Haynes Tow Tank Overseeing Organization Texas A&M (Haynes) Hydrodynamic Testing Facility Type Tow Tank Length(m) 45.7 Beam(m) 3.7 Depth(m) 3.0 Water Type Freshwater Cost(per day) $150/hour (excluding labor) Special Physical Features The tank includes a 7.6m by 3.7m by 1.5m deep sediment pit. Towing Capabilities Towing Capabilities Yes Maximum Velocity(m/s) 1.8 Length of Effective Tow(m) 24.4 Wavemaking Capabilities Wavemaking Capabilities None Channel/Tunnel/Flume Channel/Tunnel/Flume None Wind Capabilities Wind Capabilities None Control and Data Acquisition Description National Instruments LabView Number of channels 40 Cameras Yes Number of Color Cameras 6 Description of Camera Types 3 video; 3 digital

374

Stakeholder Engagement and Outreach: Wind Farms  

Wind Powering America (EERE)

Wind Farms Wind Farms When establishing wind farms, wind energy developers generally approach landowners where they want to build. Interest in wind farms is frequently spurred by external pressures such as tax and other financial incentives and legislative mandates. Since each situation is influenced by local policies and permitting, we can only provide general guidance to help you learn about the process of installing wind turbines. Publications Wind Project Development Process Permitting of Wind Energy Facilities: A Handbook. (August 2002). National Wind Coordinating Collaborative. Landowner Frequently Asked Questions and Answers. (August 2003). "State Wind Working Group Handbook." pp. 130-133. Software Wind Energy Finance Calculator Tool for financial analysis of

375

Farm Ponds  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Farm Ponds Farm Ponds Nature Bulletin No. 410-A March 13, 1971 Forest Preserve District of Cook County George W. Dunne, President Roland F. Eisenbeis, Supt. of Conservation FARM PONDS Since colonial times, farmers have been scooping out reservoirs or damming small watercourses to impound water for their livestock or satisfy a hankering for a private fishing hole. Such a pond was usually too shallow and was rarely fenced. In hot weather, cattle stood belly- deep in the water and hogs wallowed in the shallows. The shores were trampled bare of vegetation. It served as a swimming place for a flock of tame ducks and the youngsters of the family but, other than bullheads, a few fish could live in it. In most cases the dam was made of earth dug with a team and "slip scraper" to deepen the hole, without a proper spillway for the overflow during heavy rains. As a result, or because of holes tunneled through them by muskrats and crawfish, these dams eventually washed out. A number of them in our Palos preserves, built by early settlers, have been enlarged, provided with adequate spillways, and serve as harbors for fish and wildlife.

376

Projected integrated farm in Nepal  

SciTech Connect

A proposed integrated crop-livestock agro-processing complex to be based at Janakpur, Nepal is described. This project was proposed by the Agricultural Development Bank and is a small effort towards creating a self-sufficient rural community similar to one reported in China. The plan of the farm aims to achieve the integration of several agricultural, aquacultural, solar energy and biogas energy components with complete recycling of waste. These include biogas plants with associated slurry and storage tanks for operating a 3-kW generator, a 3.7-kW pump, providing domestic cooking, as well as energy to operate a fruit-processing plant. Energy for water heating, crop drying and refrigeration will be supplied by solar energy. Fish, livestock, fruits and vegetables will be produced by the farm.

Dhital, K.

1980-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

377

Inactive tanks remediation program strategy and plans for Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee  

SciTech Connect

This report presents plans and strategies for remediation of the liquid low-level waste (LLLW) tanks that have been removed from service (also known as inactive tanks) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. These plans and strategies will be carried out by the Environmental Restoration Program`s Inactive LLLW Tank Program at ORNL. These tanks are defined as Category D tanks because they are existing tank systems without secondary containment that are removed from service. The approach to remediation of each tank or tank farm must be adapted in response to the specific circumstances of individual tank sites. The approach will be tailored to accommodate feedback on lessons learned from previous tank remediation activities and will not be a rigid step-by-step approach that must be conducted identically for every tank system. However, the approach will follow a multistep decision process. The overall objective of the Inactive Tank Program is to remediate all LLLW tanks that have been removed from service to the extent practicable in accordance with the FFA requirements. The Inactive Tank Program will focus on the remediation of the tank residues (i.e., contents after tank has been emptied) and tank shell. This strategy is discussed in detail in this report.

1997-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

378

Demonstration of the TRUEX process for partitioning of actinides from actual ICPP tank waste using centrifugal contactors in a shielded cell facility  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

TRUEX is being evaluated at Idaho Chemical Processing Plant (ICPP) for separating actinides from acidic radioactive waste stored at ICPP; efforts have culminated in a recent demonstration with actual tank waste. A continuous countercurrent flowsheet test was successfully completed at ICPP using waste from tank WM-183. This demonstration was performed using 24 states of 2-cm dia centrifugal contactors in the shielded hot cell at the ICPP Remote Analytical Laboratory. The flowsheet had 8 extraction stages, 5 scrub stages, 6 strip stages, 3 solvent wash stages, and 2 acid rinse stages. A centrifugal contactor stage in the scrub section was not working during testing, and the scrub feed (aqueous) solution followed the solvent into the strip section, eliminating the scrub section in the flowsheet. An overall removal efficiency of 99.97% was obtained for the actinides, reducing the activity from 457 nCi/g in the feed to 0.12 nCi/g in the aqueous raffinate, well below the NRC Class A LLW requirement of 10 nCi/g for non-TRU waste.The 0.04 M HEDPA strip section back-extracted 99.9998% of the actinide from the TRUEX solvent. Removal efficiencies of >99. 90, 99.96, 99.98, >98.89, 93.3, and 89% were obtained for {sup 241}Am, {sup 238}Pu, {sup 239}Pu, {sup 235}U, {sup 238}U, and {sup 99}Tc. Fe was partially extracted by the TRUEX solvent, resulting in 23% of the Fe exiting in the strip product. Hg was also extracted by the TRUEX solvent (73%) and stripped from the solvent in the 0.25 M Na2CO3 wash section. Only 1.4% of the Hg exited with the high activity waste strip product.

Law, J.D.; Brewer, K.N.; Herbst, R.S.; Todd, T.A.

1996-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

379

B Plant facility description  

SciTech Connect

Buildings 225B, 272B, 282B, 282BA, and 294B were removed from the B Plant facility description. Minor corrections were made for tank sizes and hazardous and toxic inventories.

Chalk, S.E.

1996-10-04T23:59:59.000Z

380

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

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Farm II (San Gorgonio Farms) Farm II (San Gorgonio Farms) Jump to: navigation, search Name Karen Avenue Wind Farm II (San Gorgonio Farms) Facility Karen Avenue Windfarm II (San Gorgonio Farms) Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner San Gorgonio Farms Developer San Gorgonio Farms Energy Purchaser Southern California Edison Co Location San Gorgonio CA Coordinates 33.9095°, -116.734° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":33.9095,"lon":-116.734,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "tank farm facility" 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

East Ridge Wind Farm | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Ridge Wind Farm Ridge Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name East Ridge Wind Farm Facility East Ridge Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner Edison Mission Group owns majority Developer Edison Mission Group Energy Purchaser Xcel Energy Location Lincoln County MN Coordinates 44.4039°, -96.2646° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":44.4039,"lon":-96.2646,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

382

Trimont Area Wind Farm | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Trimont Area Wind Farm Trimont Area Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Trimont Area Wind Farm Facility Trimont Area Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner PPM Energy Inc Developer PPM Energy Inc Energy Purchaser Great River Energy Location Southwest MN MN Coordinates 43.779594°, -94.852874° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":43.779594,"lon":-94.852874,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

383

Rock River Wind Farm | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Wind Farm Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Rock River Wind Farm Facility Rock River Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner Shell Wind Energy Developer SeaWest Energy Purchaser PacifiCorp Location Arlington and Carbon Counties WY Coordinates 41.6996°, -107.003° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":41.6996,"lon":-107.003,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

384

Rail Splitter Wind Farm | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Rail Splitter Wind Farm Rail Splitter Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Rail Splitter Wind Farm Facility Rail Splitter Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner Horizon Developer Horizon Location Tazewell and Logan Counties IL Coordinates 40.309398°, -89.396195° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":40.309398,"lon":-89.396195,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

385

Waymart Wind Farm | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Waymart Wind Farm Waymart Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Waymart Wind Farm Facility Waymart Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner NextEra Energy Resources Developer Atlantic Renewable Energy Energy Purchaser Exelon Location Wayne County PA Coordinates 41.555385°, -75.451205° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":41.555385,"lon":-75.451205,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

386

Star Point Wind Farm | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Point Wind Farm Point Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Star Point Wind Farm Facility Star Point Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner Iberdrola Renewables Developer Iberdrola Renewables Energy Purchaser Modesto Irrigation District Location Near Moro OR Coordinates 45.474734°, -120.704412° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":45.474734,"lon":-120.704412,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

387

Hay Canyon Wind Farm | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Hay Canyon Wind Farm Hay Canyon Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Hay Canyon Wind Farm Facility Hay Canyon Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner Iberdrola Renewables Developer Iberdrola Renewables Energy Purchaser Snohomish Public Utility District Location Near Moro OR Coordinates 45.479548°, -120.741491° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":45.479548,"lon":-120.741491,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

388

Roscoe Wind Farm | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Roscoe Wind Farm Roscoe Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Roscoe Wind Farm Facility Roscoe Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner E.On Climate & Renewables Developer E.On Climate & Renewables Energy Purchaser Luminant Location Southeast of Roscoe TX Coordinates 32.237147°, -100.121427° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":32.237147,"lon":-100.121427,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

389

Ruthton Wind Farm | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Ruthton Wind Farm Ruthton Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Ruthton Wind Farm Facility Ruthton Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner NAE/Enel North America Developer Northern Alternative Energy Energy Purchaser Xcel Energy Location Lincoln County MN Coordinates 44.4039°, -96.2646° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":44.4039,"lon":-96.2646,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

390

Olsen Wind Farm | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Olsen Wind Farm Olsen Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Olsen Wind Farm Facility Olsen Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner Olsens Developer Olsens with Dan Juhl Energy Purchaser Xcel Energy Location Near Ihlen MN Coordinates 43.91065°, -96.369853° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":43.91065,"lon":-96.369853,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

391

Allegheny Ridge Wind Farm | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Ridge Wind Farm Ridge Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Allegheny Ridge Wind Farm Facility Allegheny Ridge wind farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner GE Energy Developer Gamesa Energy Purchaser First Energy Corp. Location Cambria and Blair Counties PA Coordinates 40.397243°, -78.546156° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":40.397243,"lon":-78.546156,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

392

Greensburg Wind Farm | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Greensburg Wind Farm Greensburg Wind Farm Jump to: navigation, search Name Greensburg Wind Farm Facility Greensburg Wind Farm Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner John Deere Wind Developer John Deere Wind Location Southwest of Greensburg KS Coordinates 37.576188°, -99.320898° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":37.576188,"lon":-99.320898,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

393

Nobles Wind Farm II | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Wind Farm II Wind Farm II Jump to: navigation, search Name Nobles Wind Farm II Facility Nobles Wind Farm II Sector Wind energy Facility Type Commercial Scale Wind Facility Status In Service Owner Xcel Energy Developer EnXco Energy Purchaser Xcel Energy Location Nobles County MN Coordinates 43.682956°, -95.728425° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":43.682956,"lon":-95.728425,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

394