National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for underground fuel tank

  1. Underground Storage Tanks: New Fuels and Compatibility

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  2. Underground Storage Tanks: New Fuels and Compatibility

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

    ... 1980 1984 1990 1995 1981 1985 1988 2005 Prior to Oct. 1980: No single or double wall tanks are warrantied for any alcohol or alcohol blended fuels. Oct. 1980 to Jun. 1984: ...

  3. Underground motor-fuel storage tanks: a national survey. Vol. 1. Technical report. Vol. 2. Appendices. Final report, February 1984-May 1986

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dietz, S.K.; Flora, J.D.; Strenio, J.F.; Vincent, C.J.

    1986-05-01

    A nationally representative sample of 2,812 establishments were interviewed to determine the presence of underground motor-fuel storage tanks. The sample represented establishments in fuel-related industries (1,612), large establishments in all other industries (600), and farms (600). A total of 890 of these establishments were found to have a total of 2445 underground motor fuel storage tanks. A subsample of 218 establishments was selected for tank tightness testing, using a modification of a commercially available test. The method over-filled the tank system into a standpipe, and thus detected leakage anywhere in the system of tank vessel, pipes, lines, joints, and fittings.

  4. Analysis of Underground Storage Tanks System Materials to Increased Leak Potential Associated with E15 Fuel

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kass, Michael D; Theiss, Timothy J; Janke, Christopher James; Pawel, Steven J

    2012-07-01

    The Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007 was enacted by Congress to move the nation toward increased energy independence by increasing the production of renewable fuels to meet its transportation energy needs. The law establishes a new renewable fuel standard (RFS) that requires the nation to use 36 billion gallons annually (2.3 million barrels per day) of renewable fuel in its vehicles by 2022. Ethanol is the most widely used renewable fuel in the US, and its production has grown dramatically over the past decade. According to EISA and RFS, ethanol (produced from corn as well as cellulosic feedstocks) will make up the vast majority of the new renewable fuel requirements. However, ethanol use limited to E10 and E85 (in the case of flex fuel vehicles or FFVs) will not meet this target. Even if all of the E0 gasoline dispensers in the country were converted to E10, such sales would represent only about 15 billion gallons per year. If 15% ethanol, rather than 10% were used, the potential would be up to 22 billion gallons. The vast majority of ethanol used in the United States is blended with gasoline to create E10, that is, gasoline with up to 10% ethanol. The remaining ethanol is sold in the form of E85, a gasoline blend with as much as 85% ethanol that can only be used in FFVs. Although DOE remains committed to expanding the E85 infrastructure, that market will not be able to absorb projected volumes of ethanol in the near term. Given this reality, DOE and others have begun assessing the viability of using intermediate ethanol blends as one way to transition to higher volumes of ethanol. In October of 2010, the EPA granted a partial waiver to the Clean Air Act allowing the use of fuel that contains up to 15% ethanol for the model year 2007 and newer light-duty motor vehicles. This waiver represents the first of a number of actions that are needed to move toward the commercialization of E15 gasoline blends. On January 2011, this waiver was expanded to include model year 2001 light-duty vehicles, but specifically prohibited use in motorcycles and off-road vehicles and equipment. UST stakeholders generally consider fueling infrastructure materials designed for use with E0 to be adequate for use with E10, and there are no known instances of major leaks or failures directly attributable to ethanol use. It is conceivable that many compatibility issues, including accelerated corrosion, do arise and are corrected onsite and, therefore do not lead to a release. However, there is some concern that higher ethanol concentrations, such as E15 or E20, may be incompatible with current materials used in standard gasoline fueling hardware. In the summer of 2008, DOE recognized the need to assess the impact of intermediate blends of ethanol on the fueling infrastructure, specifically located at the fueling station. This includes the dispenser and hanging hardware, the underground storage tank, and associated piping. The DOE program has been co-led and funded by the Office of the Biomass Program and Vehicle Technologies Program with technical expertise from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). The infrastructure material compatibility work has been supported through strong collaborations and testing at Underwriters Laboratories (UL). ORNL performed a compatibility study investigating the compatibility of fuel infrastructure materials to gasoline containing intermediate levels of ethanol. These results can be found in the ORNL report entitled Intermediate Ethanol Blends Infrastructure Materials Compatibility Study: Elastomers, Metals and Sealants (hereafter referred to as the ORNL intermediate blends material compatibility study). These materials included elastomers, plastics, metals and sealants typically found in fuel dispenser infrastructure. The test fuels evaluated in the ORNL study were SAE standard test fuel formulations used to assess material-fuel compatibility within a relatively short timeframe. Initially, these material studies included test fuels of Fuel C, CE10a, CE17a, and CE25a. The CE17a test fuel was selected to represent E15 since surveys have shown that the actual ethanol upper limit can be as high as 17%. Later, CE50a and CE85a test fuels were added to the investigation and these results are being compiled for a follow-on report to be published in 2012. Fuel C was used as the baseline reference and is a 50:50 blend of isooctane and toluene. This particular composition was used to represent premium-grade gasoline and was also used as the base fuel for the ethanol blends, where it is denoted by 'C' in the fuel name. The level of ethanol is represented by the number following the letter E. Therefore a 10% blend of ethanol in Fuel C is written as CE10a, where 'a' represents an aggressive formulation of the ethanol that contains water, NaCl, acetic and sulfuric acids per the SAE J1681 protocol.

  5. ERS 14.3 Underground and Above Ground Diesel Fuel Storage Tanks FPS 12.1, 1/9/01

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The objective of this surveillance is to verify underground and above ground diesel storage tanks are maintained, monitored, configured and marked as required.  These surveillance activities...

  6. ERS 14.3 Underground and Above Ground Diesel Fuel Storage Tanks FPS 12.1, 1/9/01

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

     The objective of this surveillance is to verify underground and above ground diesel storage tanks are maintained, monitored, configured and marked as required.  These surveillance activities...

  7. Dual Tank Fuel System

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Wagner, Richard William; Burkhard, James Frank; Dauer, Kenneth John

    1999-11-16

    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.

  8. Montana Underground Storage Tanks Webpage | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Underground Storage Tanks Webpage Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Montana Underground Storage Tanks Webpage Abstract Provides overview...

  9. Alaska Underground Storage Tanks Website | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Underground Storage Tanks Website Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Alaska Underground Storage Tanks Website Author Division of Spill...

  10. Hawaii Department of Health Underground Storage Tank Webpage...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Underground Storage Tank Webpage Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Hawaii Department of Health Underground Storage Tank Webpage Abstract...

  11. Nevada Underground Tank Program Webpage | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Underground Tank Program Webpage Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Nevada Underground Tank Program Webpage Abstract Provides overview of...

  12. Underground storage tank management plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1994-09-01

    The Underground Storage Tank (UST) Management Program at the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant was established to locate UST systems in operation at the facility, to ensure that all operating UST systems are free of leaks, and to establish a program for the removal of unnecessary UST systems and upgrade of UST systems that continue to be needed. The program implements an integrated approach to the management of UST systems, with each system evaluated against the same requirements and regulations. A common approach is employed, in accordance with Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) regulations and guidance, when corrective action is mandated. This Management Plan outlines the compliance issues that must be addressed by the UST Management Program, reviews the current UST inventory and compliance approach, and presents the status and planned activities associated with each UST system. The UST Management Plan provides guidance for implementing TDEC regulations and guidelines for petroleum UST systems. (There are no underground radioactive waste UST systems located at Y-12.) The plan is divided into four major sections: (1) regulatory requirements, (2) implementation requirements, (3) Y-12 Plant UST Program inventory sites, and (4) UST waste management practices. These sections describe in detail the applicable regulatory drivers, the UST sites addressed under the Management Program, and the procedures and guidance used for compliance with applicable regulations.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kerry L. Nisson

    2012-10-01

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

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

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

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

  15. Notification for Underground Storage Tanks (EPA Form 7530-1)...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Notification for Underground Storage Tanks (EPA Form 7530-1) Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Form: Notification for Underground Storage Tanks...

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

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

    Closure of Two Underground Waste Tanks at Savannah River Site Progress Continues Toward Closure of Two Underground Waste Tanks at Savannah River Site October 30, 2013 - 12:00pm ...

  17. NM Underground Storage Tank Registration | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Underground Storage Tank Registration Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- OtherOther: NM Underground Storage Tank RegistrationLegal...

  18. RCW - 90.76 Underground Storage Tanks | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    - 90.76 Underground Storage Tanks Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- RegulationRegulation: RCW - 90.76 Underground Storage...

  19. WAC - 173-360 Underground Storage Tank Regulations | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    60 Underground Storage Tank Regulations Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- RegulationRegulation: WAC - 173-360 Underground Storage...

  20. WSDE Underground Storage Tank Program webpage | Open Energy Informatio...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: WSDE Underground Storage Tank Program webpage Author Washington State Department of Ecology Published...

  1. 100-N Area underground storage tank closures

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rowley, C.A.

    1993-08-01

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

  2. Alternative Fuels Data Center: Filling CNG Fuel Tanks

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

    Filling CNG Fuel Tanks to someone by E-mail Share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Filling CNG Fuel Tanks on Facebook Tweet about Alternative Fuels Data Center: Filling CNG Fuel Tanks on Twitter Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Filling CNG Fuel Tanks on Google Bookmark Alternative Fuels Data Center: Filling CNG Fuel Tanks on Delicious Rank Alternative Fuels Data Center: Filling CNG Fuel Tanks on Digg Find More places to share Alternative Fuels Data Center: Filling CNG Fuel Tanks on

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

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Savannah River Site | Department of Energy Progress Continues Toward Closure of Two Underground Waste Tanks at Savannah River Site Progress Continues Toward Closure of Two Underground Waste Tanks at Savannah River Site October 30, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis Grouting of two Savannah River Site waste tanks began in August. Here, the first trucks with grout arrive at F Tank Farm. Grouting of two Savannah River Site waste tanks began in August. Here, the first trucks with grout arrive at F Tank

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bradley K. Griffith

    2011-12-01

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

  5. ARM 17-56 - Underground Storage Tanks Petroleum and Chemical...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    6 - Underground Storage Tanks Petroleum and Chemical Substance Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- RegulationRegulation: ARM 17-56 -...

  6. 30 TAC, part 1, chapter 334 Underground storage tanks general...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    34 Underground storage tanks general provisions Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- RegulationRegulation: 30 TAC, part 1, chapter 334...

  7. Decision analysis of Hanford underground storage tank waste retrieval systems

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Merkhofer, M.W.; Bitz, D.A.; Berry, D.L.; Jardine, L.J.

    1994-05-01

    A decision analysis approach has been proposed for planning the retrieval of hazardous, radioactive, and mixed wastes from underground storage tanks. This paper describes the proposed approach and illustrates its application to the single-shell storage tanks (SSTs) at Hanford, Washington.

  8. 200-Area plateau inactive miscellaneous underground storage tanks locations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H.

    1997-12-01

    Fluor Daniel Northwest (FDNW) has been tasked by Lockheed Martin Hanford Corporation (LMHC) to incorporate current location data for 64 of the 200-Area plateau inactive miscellaneous underground storage tanks (IMUST) into the centralized mapping computer database for the Hanford facilities. The IMUST coordinate locations and tank names for the tanks currently assigned to the Hanford Site contractors are listed in Appendix A. The IMUST are inactive tanks installed in underground vaults or buried directly in the ground within the 200-East and 200-West Areas of the Hanford Site. The tanks are categorized as tanks with a capacity of less than 190,000 liters (50,000 gal). Some of the IMUST have been stabilized, pumped dry, filled with grout, or may contain an inventory or radioactive and/or hazardous materials. The IMUST have been out of service for at least 12 years.

  9. Underground storage tank 291-D1U1: Closure plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mancieri, S.; Giuntoli, N.

    1993-09-01

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

  10. Underground storage tank 253-D1U1 Closure Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mancieri, S.; Giuntoli, N.

    1993-09-01

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

  11. Case Study in Corporate Memory Recovery: Hanford Tank Farms Miscellaneous Underground Waste Storage Tanks - 15344

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Washenfelder, D. J.; Johnson, J. M.; Turknett, J. C.; Barnes, T. J.; Duncan, K. G.

    2015-01-07

    In addition to managing the 177 underground waste storage tanks containing 212,000 m3 (56 million gal) of radioactive waste at the U. S. Department of Energy’s Hanford Site 200 Area Tank Farms, Washington River Protection Solutions LLC is responsible for managing numerous small catch tanks and special surveillance facilities. These are collectively known as “MUSTs” - Miscellaneous Underground Storage Tanks. The MUSTs typically collected drainage and flushes during waste transfer system piping changes; special surveillance facilities supported Tank Farm processes including post-World War II uranium recovery and later fission product recovery from tank wastes. Most were removed from service following deactivation of the single-shell tank system in 1980 and stabilized by pumping the remaining liquids from them. The MUSTs were isolated by blanking connecting transfer lines and adding weatherproofing to prevent rainwater entry. Over the next 30 years MUST operating records were dispersed into large electronic databases or transferred to the National Archives Regional Center in Seattle, Washington. During 2014 an effort to reacquire the historical bases for the MUSTs’ published waste volumes was undertaken. Corporate Memory Recovery from a variety of record sources allowed waste volumes to be initially determined for 21 MUSTs, and waste volumes to be adjusted for 37 others. Precursors and symptoms of Corporate Memory Loss were identified in the context of MUST records recovery.

  12. OAR 340-150 - DEQ Underground Storage Tank Rules | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    150 - DEQ Underground Storage Tank Rules Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- RegulationRegulation: OAR 340-150 - DEQ Underground...

  13. H.A.R. 11-281 - Underground Storage Tanks | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    81 - Underground Storage Tanks Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- RegulationRegulation: H.A.R. 11-281 - Underground Storage...

  14. Underground Storage Tank Integrated Demonstration (UST-ID). Technology summary

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-02-01

    The DOE complex currently has 332 underground storage tanks (USTs) that have been used to process and store radioactive and chemical mixed waste generated from weapon materials production. Very little of the over 100 million gallons of high-level and low-level radioactive liquid waste has been treated and disposed of in final form. Two waste storage tank design types are prevalent across the DOE complex: single-shell wall and double-shell wall designs. They are made of stainless steel, concrete, and concrete with carbon steel liners, and their capacities vary from 5000 gallons (19 m{sup 3}) to 10{sup 6} gallons (3785 m{sup 3}). The tanks have an overburden layer of soil ranging from a few feet to tens of feet. Responding to the need for remediation of tank waste, driven by Federal Facility Compliance Agreements (FFCAs) at all participating sites, the Underground Storage Tank Integrated Demonstration (UST-ID) Program was created by the US DOE Office of Technology Development in February 1991. Its mission is to focus the development, testing, and evaluation of remediation technologies within a system architecture to characterize, retrieve, treat to concentrate, and dispose of radioactive waste stored in USTs at DOE facilities. The ultimate goal is to provide safe and cost-effective solutions that are acceptable to the public and the regulators. The UST-ID has focused on five DOE locations: the Hanford Site, which is the host site, in Richland, Washington; the Fernald Site in Fernald, Ohio; the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory near Idaho Falls, Idaho; the Oak Ridge Reservation in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and the Savannah River Site in Savannah River, South Carolina.

  15. Estimating Residual Solids Volume In Underground Storage Tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2014-01-08

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

  16. Structural analysis of underground gunite storage tanks. Environmental Restoration Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-08-01

    This report documents the structural analysis of the 50-ft diameter underground gunite storage tanks constructed in 1943 and located in the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) South Tank Farm, known as Facility 3507 in the 3500-3999 area. The six gunite tanks (W-5 through W-10) are spaced in a 2 {times} 3 matrix at 60 ft on centers with 6 ft of soil cover. Each tank (Figures 1, 2, and 3) has an inside diameter of 50 ft, a 12-ft vertical sidewall having a thickness of 6 in. (there is an additional 1.5-in. inner liner for much of the height), and a spherical domed roof (nominal thickness is 10 in.) rising another 6 ft, 3 in. at the center of the tank. The thickness of both the sidewall and the domed roof increases to 30 in. near their juncture. The tank floor is nominally 3-in. thick, except at the juncture with the wall where the thickness increases to 9 in. The tanks are constructed of gunite (a mixture of Portland cement, sand, and water in the form of a mortar) sprayed from the nozzle of a cement gun against a form or a solid surface. The floor and the dome are reinforced with one layer of welded wire mesh and reinforcing rods placed in the radial direction. The sidewall is reinforced with three layers of welded wire mesh, vertical {1/2}-in. rods, and 21 horizontal rebar hoops (attached to the vertical rods) post-tensioned to 35,000 psi stress. The haunch at the sidewall/roof junction is reinforced with 17 horizontal rebar hoops post-tensioned with 35,000 to 40,000 psi stress. The yield strength of the post-tensioning steel rods is specified to be 60,000 psi, and all other steel is 40,000 psi steel. The specified 28-day design strength of the gunite is 5,000 psi.

  17. 7 C.C.R. 1101-14 - Underground Storage Tanks and Aboveground...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    C.C.R. 1101-14 - Underground Storage Tanks and Aboveground Storage tanks Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- RegulationRegulation: 7...

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

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

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

  19. Underground storage tank integrated demonstration: Evaluation of pretreatment options for Hanford tank wastes

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lumetta, G.J.; Wagner, M.J.; Colton, N.G.; Jones, E.O.

    1993-06-01

    Separation science plays a central role inn the pretreatment and disposal of nuclear wastes. The potential benefits of applying chemical separations in the pretreatment of the radioactive wastes stored at the various US Department of Energy sites cover both economic and environmental incentives. This is especially true at the Hanford Site, where the huge volume (>60 Mgal) of radioactive wastes stored in underground tanks could be partitioned into a very small volume of high-level waste (HLW) and a relatively large volume of low-level waste (LLW). The cost associated with vitrifying and disposing of just the HLW fraction in a geologic repository would be much less than those associated with vitrifying and disposing of all the wastes directly. Futhermore, the quality of the LLW form (e.g., grout) would be improved due to the lower inventory of radionuclides present in the LLW stream. In this report, we present the results of an evaluation of the pretreatment options for sludge taken from two different single-shell tanks at the Hanford Site-Tanks 241-B-110 and 241-U-110 (referred to as B-110 and U-110, respectively). The pretreatment options examined for these wastes included (1) leaching of transuranic (TRU) elements from the sludge, and (2) dissolution of the sludge followed by extraction of TRUs and {sup 90}Sr. In addition, the TRU leaching approach was examined for a third tank waste type, neutralized cladding removal waste.

  20. MCA 75-11-501 et seq. - Montana Underground Storage Tank Act...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    11-501 et seq. - Montana Underground Storage Tank Act Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- StatuteStatute: MCA 75-11-501 et seq. -...

  1. UC 19-6-401 et seq. - Utah Underground Storage Tank Act | Open...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    9-6-401 et seq. - Utah Underground Storage Tank Act Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- StatuteStatute: UC 19-6-401 et seq. - Utah...

  2. IDAPA 58.01.07 - Rules Regulating Underground Storage Tank Systems...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    7 - Rules Regulating Underground Storage Tank Systems Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- StatuteStatute: IDAPA 58.01.07 - Rules...

  3. Revitalized Board Lays Out New Path amid EM’s Recent Underground Tank Waste Successes

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    IDAHO FALLS, Idaho – A board charged with advancing the cleanup of underground waste storage tanks met this month to establish new working groups and draw lessons from recent successes at the Savannah River and Idaho sites.

  4. Light duty remote manipulator for underground storage tank inspection and characterization

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kruse, P.W.; Carteret, B.A.

    1994-12-31

    The Light Duty Utility Arm (LDUA) is a remote manipulator which is being designed and fabricated to perform surveillance and characterization activities in support of the remediation of underground storage tanks at the Hanford site as well as other DOE sites. The LDUA is a highly dexterous manipulator which utilizes an advanced control system to safely and reliably deploy a series of sensors to characterize underground storage tanks.

  5. Educational program on potential impacts of regulated underground storage tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Titus, E.W.

    1995-12-01

    This paper defines a brief (three to four hours) and effective method of educating future environmental professionals, concerned citizens of the community, or local government officials about the long term residual contamination potential posed by underground storage tank sites (UST`s). The format will be designed so that the student will have a clear understanding of the function and capabilities of UST systems, the required monitoring and maintenance, and the extensive commitments necessary to remediate a contaminated site. Subject material covered will include regulation overview, system design and installation, current remediation technologies and future trends. The curriculum will be presented in lecture/workshop format, and will feature color photographs, sites studies and relevant maps. Hypothetical statistical and chemical analytical results will be supplied for interpretation. The student will synthesize, in participatory work groups, the information using some of the various types of UST evaluation systems and formats currently in use by the individual states. This approach exposes the student to participatory group planning and decision making. This type of learning experience would be of significant value because UST`s have left an indelible mark on many street corners across the country. A variety of factors, such as population shifts from urban to suburban areas, governmental regulations, and overhead costs, caused many business owners to want to close their existing UST sites and sell the property. With these closed or abandoned sites comes the potential for soil and groundwater contamination due to petroleum product spillage, or leaking UST`s still under the surface of the site. The goal of this comprehensive approach is to enable the student to make informed judgements as to both the current and long term risks of UST systems. As an additional benefit these individuals will gain a better understanding about their local environment.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    D. H. Cox

    2001-06-01

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

  7. Status report for inactive miscellaneous underground storage tanks at Hanford Site 200 Areas

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Powers, T.B.

    1995-10-01

    The purpose of this status report is to summarize updated data and information from the FY 1994 strategy plan that is associated with inactive miscellaneous underground storage tanks (IMUSTs). Assumptions and processes to assess potential risks and operational concerns are documented in this report. Safety issue priorities are ranked based on a number of considerations. Sixty-three IMUSTs have been Identified and placed on the official IMUST list. All the tanks are associated with past Hanford Site operations. Of the 63 tanks., 19 are catch tanks, 20 are vault tanks, 3 are neutralization tanks, 8 are settling tanks, 2 are solvent makeup tanks used to store hexone, 2 are flush tanks, 3 are decontamination tanks, 1 is a diverter station, 1 is a receiver tank, 1 is an experimental tank, and 3 are waste handling tanks. It is important to proactively deal with the risks Imposed by these 63 tanks, and at the same time not jeopardize the existing commitments and schedules for mitigating and resolving identified safety issues related to the 177 SSTs and DSTS. Access controls and signs have been placed on all but the three official IMUSTs added most recently. An accelerated effort to identify authorization documents and perform unreviewed safety question (USQ) screening has been completed. According to a set of criteria consistent with the safety screening data quality objective (DQO) process, 6 IMUSTs are ranked high related to the hydrogen generation potential safety Issue, 1 is ranked high related to the ferrocyanide potential safety issue, 6 are ranked high related to the flammability potential safety issue, and 25 are ranked high related to the vapor emissions potential safety issue.

  8. RCRA corrective action for underground storage tanks -- Subtitle C for Subtitle I

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-08-01

    The purpose of this report is to provide guidance to DOE and DOE contractor personnel responsible for planning and implementation of corrective measures addressing cleanup of releases of hazardous materials or regulated substances from underground storage tanks regulated under RCRA Subtitle C or Subtitle I.

  9. Review of sensors for the in situ chemical characterization of the Hanford underground storage tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kyle, K.R.; Mayes, E.L.

    1994-07-29

    Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), in the Technical Task Plan (TTP) SF-2112-03 subtask 2, is responsible for the conceptual design of a Raman probe for inclusion in the in-tank cone penetrometer. As part of this task, LLNL is assigned the further responsibility of generating a report describing a review of sensor technologies other than Raman that can be incorporated in the in-tank cone penetrometer for the chemical analysis of the tank environment. These sensors would complement the capabilities of the Raman probe, and would give information on gaseous, liquid, and solid state species that are insensitive to Raman interrogation. This work is part of a joint effort involving several DOE laboratories for the design and development of in-tank cone penetrometer deployable systems for direct UST waste characterization at Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC) under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Underground Storage Tank Integrated Demonstration (UST-ID).

  10. Petroleum USTs: RCRA Subtitle 1, Underground Storage Tanks. RCRA Information Brief

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dailey, R.

    1994-01-01

    Underground tanks that contain petroleum or hazardous substances may be subject to the Federal Underground Storage Tank (UST) regulations. These regulations, issued by EPA under authority of Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery (RCRA) [Section 9003 of the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments Act of 1984 (HSWA)], establish standards for installation, operation, release detection, corrective action, repair, and closure. The Department of Energy (DOE) is required by Section 9007 of RCRA to implement these regulations at DOE facilities with USTs. DOE prepared a guidance document, Regulated Underground Storage Tanks (DOE/EH-231/0041/0191, June 1992), that describes the UST procedural requirements which regulate tanks and piping for both petroleum and hazardous substance USTs as well as USTs containing radioactive material regulated under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 USC 2011). This information Brief supplements the UST guidance by responding to critical questions concerning how the regulations apply to petroleum USTs. It is part of a series of information Briefs which address issues pertinent to specific categories of USTs.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stupka, R.C.

    1989-04-01

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

  12. Estimating heel retrieval costs for underground storage tank waste at Hanford. Draft

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    DeMuth, S.

    1996-08-26

    Approximately 100 million gallons ({approx}400,000 m{sup 3}) of existing U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) owned radioactive waste stored in underground tanks can not be disposed of as low-level waste (LLW). The current plan for disposal of UST waste which can not be disposed of as LLW is immobilization as glass and permanent storage in an underground repository. Disposal of LLW generally can be done sub-surface at the point of origin. Consequently, LLW is significantly less expensive to dispose of than that requiring an underground repository. Due to the lower cost for LLW disposal, it is advantageous to separate the 100 million gallons of waste into a small volume of high-level waste (HLW) and a large volume of LLW.

  13. Analysis of vehicle fuel release resulting in waste tank fire

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    STEPHENS, L.S.

    2003-03-21

    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.

  14. Cryograb: A Novel Approach to the Retrieval of Waste from Underground Storage Tanks - 13501

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    O'Brien, Luke; Baker, Stephen; Bowen, Bob; Mallick, Pramod; Smith, Gary; King, Bill; Judd, Laurie

    2013-07-01

    The UK's National Nuclear Laboratory (NNL) is investigating the use of cryogenic technology for the recovery of nuclear waste. Cryograb, freezing the waste on a 'cryo-head' and then retrieves it as a single mass which can then be treated or stabilized as necessary. The technology has a number of benefits over other retrieval approaches in that it minimizes sludge disturbance thereby reducing effluent arising and it can be used to de-water, and thereby reduce the volume of waste. The technology has been successfully deployed for a variety of nuclear and non-nuclear waste recovery operations. The application of Cryograb for the recovery of waste from US underground storage tanks is being explored through a US DOE International Technology Transfer and Demonstration programme. A sample deployment being considered involves the recovery of residual mounds of sludge material from waste storage tanks at Savannah River. Operational constraints and success criteria were agreed prior to the completion of a process down selection exercise which specified the preferred configuration of the cryo-head and supporting plant. Subsequent process modeling identified retrieval rates and temperature gradients through the waste and tank infrastructure. The work, which has been delivered in partnership with US DOE, SRNL, NuVision Engineering and Frigeo AB has demonstrated the technical feasibility of the approach (to TRL 2) and has resulted in the allocation of additional funding from DOE to take the programme to bench and cold pilot-scale trials. (authors)

  15. ADMINISTRATIVE AND ENGINEERING CONTROLS FOR THE OPERATION OF VENTILATION SYSTEMS FOR UNDERGROUND RADIOACTIVE WASTE STORAGE TANKS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wiersma, B.; Hansen, A.

    2013-11-13

    Liquid radioactive wastes from the Savannah River Site are stored in large underground carbon steel tanks. The majority of the waste is confined in double shell tanks, which have a primary shell, where the waste is stored, and a secondary shell, which creates an annular region between the two shells, that provides secondary containment and leak detection capabilities should leakage from the primary shell occur. Each of the DST is equipped with a purge ventilation system for the interior of the primary shell and annulus ventilation system for the secondary containment. Administrative flammability controls require continuous ventilation to remove hydrogen gas and other vapors from the waste tanks while preventing the release of radionuclides to the atmosphere. Should a leak from the primary to the annulus occur, the annulus ventilation would also serve this purpose. The functionality of the annulus ventilation is necessary to preserve the structural integrity of the primary shell and the secondary. An administrative corrosion control program is in place to ensure integrity of the tank. Given the critical functions of the purge and annulus ventilation systems, engineering controls are also necessary to ensure that the systems remain robust. The system consists of components that are constructed of metal (e.g., steel, stainless steel, aluminum, copper, etc.) and/or polymeric (polypropylene, polyethylene, silicone, polyurethane, etc.) materials. The performance of these materials in anticipated service environments (e.g., normal waste storage, waste removal, etc.) was evaluated. The most aggressive vapor space environment occurs during chemical cleaning of the residual heels by utilizing oxalic acid. The presence of NO{sub x} and mercury in the vapors generated from the process could potentially accelerate the degradation of aluminum, carbon steel, and copper. Once identified, the most susceptible materials were either replaced and/or plans for discontinuing operations are executed.

  16. The Performance of Underground Radioactive Waste Storage Tanks at the Savannah River Site: A 60-Year Historical Perspective

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wiersma, Bruce J.

    2014-02-08

    The Savannah River Site produced weapons-grade materials for nearly 35 years between 1953 and 1988. The legacy of this production is nearly 37 million gallons of radioactive waste. Since the 1950s, the liquid waste has been stored in large, underground carbon steel waste tanks. During the past 20 years, the site has begun to process the waste so that it may be stored in vitrified and grout forms, which are more suitable for long-term storage. Over the history of the site, some tanks have experienced leakage of the waste to the secondary containment. This article is a review of the instances of leakage and corrosion degradation that the tanks and associated equipment have experienced since the first tanks were built. Furthermore, the activities that the site has taken to mitigate the degradation and manage the service life of the tank for its anticipated lifetime are reviewed.

  17. The Performance of Underground Radioactive Waste Storage Tanks at the Savannah River Site: A 60-Year Historical Perspective

    DOE Public Access Gateway for Energy & Science Beta (PAGES Beta)

    Wiersma, Bruce J.

    2014-02-08

    The Savannah River Site produced weapons-grade materials for nearly 35 years between 1953 and 1988. The legacy of this production is nearly 37 million gallons of radioactive waste. Since the 1950s, the liquid waste has been stored in large, underground carbon steel waste tanks. During the past 20 years, the site has begun to process the waste so that it may be stored in vitrified and grout forms, which are more suitable for long-term storage. Over the history of the site, some tanks have experienced leakage of the waste to the secondary containment. This article is a review of themore » instances of leakage and corrosion degradation that the tanks and associated equipment have experienced since the first tanks were built. Furthermore, the activities that the site has taken to mitigate the degradation and manage the service life of the tank for its anticipated lifetime are reviewed.« less

  18. METHODOLOGY AND CALCULATIONS FOR THE ASSIGNMENT OF WASTE GROUPS FOR THE LARGE UNDERGROUND WASTE STORAGE TANKS AT THE HANFORD SITE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    WEBER RA

    2009-01-16

    The Hanford Site contains 177 large underground radioactive waste storage tanks (28 double-shell tanks and 149 single-shell tanks). These tanks are categorized into one of three waste groups (A, B, and C) based on their waste and tank characteristics. These waste group assignments reflect a tank's propensity to retain a significant volume of flammable gases and the potential of the waste to release retained gas by a buoyant displacement gas release event. Assignments of waste groups to the 177 double-shell tanks and single-shell tanks, as reported in this document, are based on a Monte Carlo analysis of three criteria. The first criterion is the headspace flammable gas concentration following release of retained gas. This criterion determines whether the tank contains sufficient retained gas such that the well-mixed headspace flammable gas concentration would reach 100% of the lower flammability limit if the entire tank's retained gas were released. If the volume of retained gas is not sufficient to reach 100% of the lower flammability limit, then flammable conditions cannot be reached and the tank is classified as a waste group C tank independent of the method the gas is released. The second criterion is the energy ratio and considers whether there is sufficient supernatant on top of the saturated solids such that gas-bearing solids have the potential energy required to break up the material and release gas. Tanks that are not waste group C tanks and that have an energy ratio < 3.0 do not have sufficient potential energy to break up material and release gas and are assigned to waste group B. These tanks are considered to represent a potential induced flammable gas release hazard, but no spontaneous buoyant displacement flammable gas release hazard. Tanks that are not waste group C tanks and have an energy ratio {ge} 3.0, but that pass the third criterion (buoyancy ratio < 1.0, see below) are also assigned to waste group B. Even though the designation as a waste group B (or A) tank identifies the potential for an induced flammable gas release hazard, the hazard only exists for specific operations that can release the retained gas in the tank at a rate and quantity that results in reaching 100% of the lower flammability limit in the tank headspace. The identification and evaluation of tank farm operations that could cause an induced flammable gas release hazard in a waste group B (or A) tank are included in other documents. The third criterion is the buoyancy ratio. This criterion addresses tanks that are not waste group C double-shell tanks and have an energy ratio {ge} 3.0. For these double-shell tanks, the buoyancy ratio considers whether the saturated solids can retain sufficient gas to exceed neutral buoyancy relative to the supernatant layer and therefore have buoyant displacement gas release events. If the buoyancy ratio is {ge} 1.0, that double-shell tank is assigned to waste group A. These tanks are considered to have a potential spontaneous buoyant displacement flammable gas release hazard in addition to a potential induced flammable gas release hazard. This document categorizes each of the large waste storage tanks into one of several categories based on each tank's waste characteristics. These waste group assignments reflect a tank's propensity to retain a significant volume of flammable gases and the potential of the waste to release retained gas by a buoyant displacement event. Revision 8 is the annual update of the calculations of the flammable gas Waste Groups for DSTs and SSTs.

  19. METHODOLOGY AND CALCULATIONS FOR THE ASSIGNMENT OF WASTE GROUPS FOR THE LARGE UNDERGROUND WASTE STORAGE TANKS AT THE HANFORD SITE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    FOWLER KD

    2007-12-27

    This document categorizes each of the large waste storage tanks into one of several categories based on each tank's waste characteristics. These waste group assignments reflect a tank's propensity to retain a significant volume of flammable gases and the potential of the waste to release retained gas by a buoyant displacement event. Revision 7 is the annual update of the calculations of the flammable gas Waste Groups for DSTs and SSTs. The Hanford Site contains 177 large underground radioactive waste storage tanks (28 double-shell tanks and 149 single-shell tanks). These tanks are categorized into one of three waste groups (A, B, and C) based on their waste and tank characteristics. These waste group assignments reflect a tank's propensity to retain a significant volume of flammable gases and the potential of the waste to release retained gas by a buoyant displacement gas release event. Assignments of waste groups to the 177 double-shell tanks and single-shell tanks, as reported in this document, are based on a Monte Carlo analysis of three criteria. The first criterion is the headspace flammable gas concentration following release of retained gas. This criterion determines whether the tank contains sufficient retained gas such that the well-mixed headspace flammable gas concentration would reach 100% of the lower flammability limit if the entire tank's retained gas were released. If the volume of retained gas is not sufficient to reach 100% of the lower flammability limit, then flammable conditions cannot be reached and the tank is classified as a waste group C tank independent of the method the gas is released. The second criterion is the energy ratio and considers whether there is sufficient supernatant on top of the saturated solids such that gas-bearing solids have the potential energy required to break up the material and release gas. Tanks that are not waste group C tanks and that have an energy ratio < 3.0 do not have sufficient potential energy to break up material and release gas and are assigned to waste group B. These tanks are considered to represent a potential induced flammable gas release hazard, but no spontaneous buoyant displacement flammable gas release hazard. Tanks that are not waste group C tanks and have an energy ratio {ge} 3.0, but that pass the third criterion (buoyancy ratio < 1.0, see below) are also assigned to waste group B. Even though the designation as a waste group B (or A) tank identifies the potential for an induced flammable gas release hazard, the hazard only exists for specific operations that can release the retained gas in the tank at a rate and quantity that results in reaching 100% of the lower flammability limit in the tank headspace. The identification and evaluation of tank farm operations that could cause an induced flammable gas release hazard in a waste group B (or A) tank are included in other documents. The third criterion is the buoyancy ratio. This criterion addresses tanks that are not waste group C double-shell tanks and have an energy ratio {ge} 3.0. For these double-shell tanks, the buoyancy ratio considers whether the saturated solids can retain sufficient gas to exceed neutral buoyancy relative to the supernatant layer and therefore have buoyant displacement gas release events. If the buoyancy ratio is {ge} 1.0, that double-shell tank is assigned to waste group A. These tanks are considered to have a potential spontaneous buoyant displacement flammable gas release hazard in addition to a potential induced flammable gas release hazard.

  20. Steam reforming as a method to treat Hanford underground storage tank (UST) wastes

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Miller, J.E.; Kuehne, P.B.

    1995-07-01

    This report summarizes a Sandia program that included partnerships with Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Synthetica Technologies, Inc. to design and test a steam reforming system for treating Hanford underground storage tank (UST) wastes. The benefits of steam reforming the wastes include the resolution of tank safety issues and improved radionuclide separations. Steam reforming destroys organic materials by first gasifying, then reacting them with high temperature steam. Tests indicate that up to 99% of the organics could be removed from the UST wastes by steam exposure. In addition, it was shown that nitrates in the wastes could be destroyed by steam exposure if they were first distributed as a thin layer on a surface. High purity alumina and nickel alloys were shown to be good candidates for materials to be used in the severe environment associated with steam reforming the highly alkaline, high nitrate content wastes. Work was performed on designing, building, and demonstrating components of a 0.5 gallon per minute (gpm) system suitable for radioactive waste treatment. Scale-up of the unit to 20 gpm was also considered and is feasible. Finally, process demonstrations conducted on non-radioactive waste surrogates were carried out, including a successful demonstration of the technology at the 0.1 gpm scale.

  1. Experimental and Modeling Study of the Flammability of Fuel Tank Headspace Vapors from High Ethanol Content Fuels

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gardiner, D.; Bardon, M.; Pucher, G.

    2008-10-01

    Study determined the flammability of fuel tank headspace vapors as a function of ambient temperature for seven E85 fuel blends, two types of gasoline, and denatured ethanol at a low tank fill level.

  2. Experimental and Modeling Study of the Flammability of Fuel Tank Headspace Vapors from Ethanol/Gasoline Fuels; Phase 3: Effects of Winter Gasoline Volatility and Ethanol Content on Blend Flammability; Flammability Limits of Denatured Ethanol

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gardiner, D. P.; Bardon, M. F.; Clark, W.

    2011-07-01

    This study assessed differences in headspace flammability for summertime gasolines and new high-ethanol content fuel blends. The results apply to vehicle fuel tanks and underground storage tanks. Ambient temperature and fuel formulation effects on headspace vapor flammability of ethanol/gasoline blends were evaluated. Depending on the degree of tank filling, fuel type, and ambient temperature, fuel vapors in a tank can be flammable or non-flammable. Pure gasoline vapors in tanks generally are too rich to be flammable unless ambient temperatures are extremely low. High percentages of ethanol blended with gasoline can be less volatile than pure gasoline and can produce flammable headspace vapors at common ambient temperatures. The study supports refinements of fuel ethanol volatility specifications and shows potential consequences of using noncompliant fuels. E85 is flammable at low temperatures; denatured ethanol is flammable at warmer temperatures. If both are stored at the same location, one or both of the tanks' headspace vapors will be flammable over a wide range of ambient temperatures. This is relevant to allowing consumers to splash -blend ethanol and gasoline at fueling stations. Fuels compliant with ASTM volatility specifications are relatively safe, but the E85 samples tested indicate that some ethanol fuels may produce flammable vapors.

  3. Underground storage tank management plan, Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1997-09-01

    The Underground Storage Tank (UST) Program at the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant was established to locate UST systems at the facility and to ensure that all operating UST systems are free of leaks. UST systems have been removed or upgraded in accordance with Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) regulations and guidance. With the closure of a significant portion of the USTs, the continuing mission of the UST Management Program is to manage the remaining active UST systems and continue corrective actions in a safe regulatory compliant manner. This Program outlines the compliance issues that must be addressed, reviews the current UST inventory and compliance approach, and presents the status and planned activities associated with each UST system. The UST Program provides guidance for implementing TDEC regulations and guidelines for petroleum UST systems. The plan is divided into three major sections: (1) regulatory requirements, (2) active UST sites, and (3) out-of-service UST sites. These sections describe in detail the applicable regulatory drivers, the UST sites addressed under the Program, and the procedures and guidance for compliance.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    O`Brien, J.E.; Siahpush, A.

    1998-02-01

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

  5. Advantages of co-located spent fuel reprocessing, repository and underground reactor facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mahar, James M.; Kunze, Jay F.; Wes Myers, Carl; Loveland, Ryan

    2007-07-01

    The purpose of this work is to extend the discussion of potential advantages of the underground nuclear park (UNP) concept by making specific concept design and cost estimate comparisons for both present Generation III types of reactors and for some of the modular Gen IV or the GNEP modular concept. For the present Gen III types, we propose co-locating reprocessing and (re)fabrication facilities along with disposal facilities in the underground park. The goal is to determine the site costs and facility construction costs of such a complex which incorporates the advantages of a closed fuel cycle, nuclear waste repository, and ultimate decommissioning activities all within the UNP. Modular power generation units are also well-suited for placement underground and have the added advantage of construction using current and future tunnel boring machine technology. (authors)

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Badden, Janet W.; Connelly, Michael P.; Seeley, Paul N.; Hendrickson, Michelle L.

    2013-01-10

    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.

  7. Calculation notes that support accident scenario and consequence of the in-tank fuel fire/deflageration

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Crowe, R.D., Westinghouse Hanford

    1996-09-09

    The purpose of this calculation note is to provide the basis for In-Tank Fuel fire/Deflageration consequence for the Tank Farm Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). Tank Fuel Fire/Deflageration scenario is developed and details and description of the analysis methods are provided.

  8. Calculation notes that support accident scenario and consequence of the in-tank fuel fire/deflagration

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Crowe, R.D.

    1996-09-27

    The purpose of this calculation note is to provide the basis for In-Tank Fuel Fire/Deflageration consequence for the Tank Farm Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). Tank Fuel Fire/Deflageration scenario is developed and details and description of the analysis methods are provided.

  9. A Combustion Model for the TWA 800 Center-Wing Fuel Tank Explosion

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Baer, M.R.; Gross, R.J.

    1998-10-02

    In support of the National Transportation Safety Board investigation of the TWA Flight 800 accident, a combined experimental/computational effort was conducted that focused on quarter-scale testing and simulation of the fuel-air explosion in the Boeing 747 center wing fuel tank. This report summarizes the modeling approach used at Sandia National Laboratories. In this approach approximations are introduced that capture the essential physics associated with turbulent flame propagation in multiple compartment fuel tanks. This model efficiently defines the pressure loading conditions during a jet-fuel air explosion in a fuel tank confinement. Modeling calculations compare favorably with a variety of experimental quarter-scale tests conducted in rigid confinement. The modeling describes well the overpressure history in several geometry configurations. Upon demonstrating a reasonable comparison to experimental observations, a parametric study of eight possible ignition sources is then discussed. Model calculations demonstrate that different loading conditions arise as the location of the ignition event is varied. By comparing the inferred damage and calculated impulses to that seen in the recovered tank, it maybe possible to reduce the number of likely sources. A possible extension of this work to better define tank damage includes coupling the combustion model as a pressure loading routine for structural failure analysis.

  10. METHODOLOGY & CALCULATIONS FOR THE ASSIGNMENT OF WASTE GROUPS FOR THE LARGE UNDERGROUND WASTE STORAGE TANKS AT THE HANFORD SITE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BARKER, S.A.

    2006-07-27

    Waste stored within tank farm double-shell tanks (DST) and single-shell tanks (SST) generates flammable gas (principally hydrogen) to varying degrees depending on the type, amount, geometry, and condition of the waste. The waste generates hydrogen through the radiolysis of water and organic compounds, thermolytic decomposition of organic compounds, and corrosion of a tank's carbon steel walls. Radiolysis and thermolytic decomposition also generates ammonia. Nonflammable gases, which act as dilutents (such as nitrous oxide), are also produced. Additional flammable gases (e.g., methane) are generated by chemical reactions between various degradation products of organic chemicals present in the tanks. Volatile and semi-volatile organic chemicals in tanks also produce organic vapors. The generated gases in tank waste are either released continuously to the tank headspace or are retained in the waste matrix. Retained gas may be released in a spontaneous or induced gas release event (GRE) that can significantly increase the flammable gas concentration in the tank headspace as described in RPP-7771. The document categorizes each of the large waste storage tanks into one of several categories based on each tank's waste characteristics. These waste group assignments reflect a tank's propensity to retain a significant volume of flammable gases and the potential of the waste to release retained gas by a buoyant displacement event. Revision 5 is the annual update of the methodology and calculations of the flammable gas Waste Groups for DSTs and SSTs.

  11. METHODOLOGY & CALCULATIONS FOR THE ASSIGNMENT OF WASTE FOR THE LARGE UNDERGROUND WASTE STORAGE TANKS AT THE HANFORD SITE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    TU, T.A.

    2007-01-04

    Waste stored within tank farm double-shell tanks (DST) and single-shell tanks (SST) generates flammable gas (principally hydrogen) to varying degrees depending on the type, amount, geometry, and condition of the waste. The waste generates hydrogen through the radiolysis of water and organic compounds, thermolytic decomposition of organic compounds, and corrosion of a tank's carbon steel walls. Radiolysis and thermolytic decomposition also generates ammonia. Nonflammable gases, which act as dilutents (such as nitrous oxide), are also produced. Additional flammable gases (e.g., methane) are generated by chemical reactions between various degradation products of organic chemicals present in the tanks. Volatile and semi-volatile organic chemicals in tanks also produce organic vapors. The generated gases in tank waste are either released continuously to the tank headspace or are retained in the waste matrix. Retained gas may be released in a spontaneous or induced gas release event (GRE) that can significantly increase the flammable gas concentration in the tank headspace as described in RPP-7771, Flammable Gas Safety Isme Resolution. Appendices A through I provide supporting information. The document categorizes each of the large waste storage tanks into one of several categories based on each tank's waste and characteristics. These waste group assignments reflect a tank's propensity to retain a significant volume of flammable gases and the potential of the waste to release retained gas by a buoyant displacement event. Revision 6 is the annual update of the flammable gas Waste Groups for DSTs and SSTs.

  12. Design of a reconfigurable liquid hydrogen fuel tank for use in the Genii unmanned aerial vehicle

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Adam, Patrick; Leachman, Jacob

    2014-01-29

    Long endurance flight, on the order of days, is a leading flight performance characteristic for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs). Liquid hydrogen (LH2) is well suited to providing multi-day flight times with a specific energy 2.8 times that of conventional kerosene based fuels. However, no such system of LH2 storage, delivery, and use is currently available for commercial UAVs. In this paper, we develop a light weight LH2 dewar for integration and testing in the proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell powered, student designed and constructed, Genii UAV. The fuel tank design is general for scaling to suit various UAV platforms. A cylindrical vacuum-jacketed design with removable end caps was chosen to incorporate various fuel level gauging, pressurizing, and slosh mitigation systems. Heat and mechanical loadings were modeled to compare with experimental results. Mass performance of the fuel tank is characterized by the fraction of liquid hydrogen to full tank mass, and the insulation performance was characterized by effective thermal conductivity and boil-off rate.

  13. Nevada test site underground storage tank number 12-13-1: Nevada division of emergency management case number H931130E corrective action unit 450. Closure report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1997-01-01

    The project site was identified as an abandoned Underground Storage Tank (UST) to be closed under the Department of Energy/Nevada Operations Office (DOE/NV) Environmental Restoration Division (ERD) Program during Fiscal Year 1993. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires that before permanent closure is completed an assessment of the site must take place. The Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) requires assessment and corrective actions for a petroleum substance in the soil which exceeds 100 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). Subsequent to the tank removal, a hydrocarbon release was identified at the site. The release was reported to the NDEP by DOE/NV on November 30, 1993. Nevada Division of Environmental Management (NDEM) Case Number H931130E was assigned. This final closure report documents the assessment and corrective actions taken for the hydrocarbon release identified at the site. The Notification of Closure, EPA Form 7530-1 dated March 22, 1994, is provided in Appendix A. A 45-day report documenting the notification for a hydrocarbon release was submitted to NDEP on April 6, 1994.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Badden, Janet W.; Connelly, Michael P.; Seeley, Paul N.; Hendrickson, Michelle L.

    2013-07-01

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

  15. Alternative Fuels Data Center

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

    Biofuel Compatibility Requirements for Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) Fueling station owners and operators must notify the appropriate state and local implementing agencies at least 30 days before switching USTs to store ethanol blends greater than 10%, biodiesel blends greater than 20%, or any other regulated fuel the agency has identified. This notification timeframe allows agencies to request information on UST compatibility before the owner or operator stores the fuel. Owners and operators

  16. Tank Farms and Waste Feed Delivery - 12507

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fletcher, Thomas; Charboneau, Stacy; Olds, Erik

    2012-07-01

    The mission of the Department of Energy's Office of River Protection (ORP) is to safely retrieve and treat the 56 million gallons of Hanford's tank waste and close the Tank Farms to protect the Columbia River. Our discussion of the Tank Farms and Waste Feed Delivery will cover progress made to date with Base and Recovery Act funding in reducing the risk posed by tank waste and in preparing for the initiation of waste treatment at Hanford. The millions of gallons of waste are a by-product of decades of plutonium production. After irradiated fuel rods were taken from the nuclear reactors to the processing facilities at Hanford they were exposed to a series of chemicals designed to dissolve away the rod, which enabled workers to retrieve the plutonium. Once those chemicals were exposed to the fuel rods they became radioactive and extremely hot. They also couldn't be used in this process more than once. Because the chemicals are caustic and extremely hazardous to humans and the environment, underground storage tanks were built to hold these chemicals until a more permanent solution could be found. The underground storage tanks range in capacity from 55,000 gallons to more than 1 million gallons. The tanks were constructed with carbon steel and reinforced concrete. There are eighteen groups of tanks, called 'tank farms', some having as few as two tanks and others up to sixteen tanks. Between 1943 and 1964, 149 single-shell tanks were built at Hanford in the 200 West and East Areas. Heat generated by the waste and the composition of the waste caused an estimated 67 of these single-shell tanks to leak into the ground. Washington River Protection Solutions is the prime contractor responsible for the safe management of this waste. WRPS' mission is to reduce the risk to the environment that is posed by the waste. All of the pumpable liquids have been removed from the single-shell tanks and transferred to the double-shell tanks. What remains in the single-shell tanks are solid and semi-solid wastes. Known as salt-cakes, they have the consistency of wet beach sand. Some of the waste resembles small broken ice, or whitish crystals. Because the original pumps inside the tanks were designed to remove only liquid waste, other methods have been developed to reach the remaining waste. Access to the tank waste is through long, typically skinny pipes, called risers, extending out of the tanks. It is through these pipes that crews are forced to send machines and devices into the tanks that are used to break up the waste or push it toward a pump. These pipes range in size from just a few inches to just over a foot in diameter because they were never intended to be used in this manner. As part of the agreement regulating Hanford cleanup, crews must remove at least 99% of the material in every tank on the site, or at least as much waste that can be removed based on available technology. To date, seven single-shell tanks have been emptied, and work is underway in another 10 tanks in preparation for additional retrieval activities. Two barriers have been installed over single-shell tanks to prevent the intrusion of surface water down to the tanks, with additional barriers planned for the future. Single and double-shell tank integrity analyses are ongoing. Because the volume of the waste generated through plutonium production exceeded the capacity of the single-shell tanks, between 1968 and 1986 Hanford engineers built 28 double-shell tanks. These tanks were studied and made with a second shell to surround the carbon steel and reinforced concrete. The double-shell tanks have not leaked any of their waste. (authors)

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Quigley, K.D.; Butterworth, St.W.; Lockie, K.A.

    2008-07-01

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

  18. Combined cooling and purification system for nuclear reactor spent fuel pit, refueling cavity, and refueling water storage tank

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Corletti, Michael M. (New Kensington, PA); Lau, Louis K. (Monroeville, PA); Schulz, Terry L. (Murrysville Boro, PA)

    1993-01-01

    The spent fuel pit of a pressured water reactor (PWR) nuclear power plant has sufficient coolant capacity that a safety rated cooling system is not required. A non-safety rated combined cooling and purification system with redundant branches selectively provides simultaneously cooling and purification for the spent fuel pit, the refueling cavity, and the refueling water storage tank, and transfers coolant from the refueling water storage tank to the refueling cavity without it passing through the reactor core. Skimmers on the suction piping of the combined cooling and purification system eliminate the need for separate skimmer circuits with dedicated pumps.

  19. Combined cooling and purification system for nuclear reactor spent fuel pit, refueling cavity, and refueling water storage tank

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Corletti, M.M.; Lau, L.K.; Schulz, T.L.

    1993-12-14

    The spent fuel pit of a pressured water reactor (PWR) nuclear power plant has sufficient coolant capacity that a safety rated cooling system is not required. A non-safety rated combined cooling and purification system with redundant branches selectively provides simultaneously cooling and purification for the spent fuel pit, the refueling cavity, and the refueling water storage tank, and transfers coolant from the refueling water storage tank to the refueling cavity without it passing through the reactor core. Skimmers on the suction piping of the combined cooling and purification system eliminate the need for separate skimmer circuits with dedicated pumps. 1 figures.

  20. Grouting at the Idaho National Laboratory Tank Farm Facility...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Small Tank Farm Facility * A system of 11 underground, 300,000-gallon stainless steel tanks - Tanks are fifty feet in diameter and twenty-five feet tall - Eight tanks have...

  1. A RAM (Reliability, Availability and Maintainability) analysis of the proposed Tinker AFB Jet Fuel Storage Tank Facility. [Reliability, Availability, and Maintainability

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wright, R.E.; Sattison, M.B.

    1987-08-01

    The purpose of this study is to determine the Reliability, Availability and Maintainability (RAM) at the 30% design phase of a Jet Fuel Storage Tank Facility that is to be installed at the Tinker Air Force Base, Tulsa, Oklahoma. The Jet Fuel Storage Tank Facility was divided into four subsystems: Fuel Storage and Pipeline Transfer Pumps; Truck Unloading and Loading; Fire Protection (foam and water supply systems); and Electric Power. The RAM analysis was performed on four functions of these subsystems: transferring fuel from the two new 55K barrel storage tanks to the existing fuel pipeline system; transferring fuel from the two 55K barrel storage tanks to the aircraft refueler trucks; transferring fuel from the road transport trucks to the aircraft refueler trucks; and fire protection. A fault tree analysis was performed on each functional system. The quantification was performed for several mission times.

  2. Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment, and Disposition Framework...

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

    nuclear waste legacyapproximately 56 million gallons of radioactive and chemical wastes stored in 177 underground tanks (tank farms) located on Hanford's Central Plateau. ...

  3. Hanford Technology Development (Tank Farms) - 12509

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fletcher, Thomas; Charboneau, Stacy; Olds, Erik

    2012-07-01

    The mission of the Department of Energy's Office of River Protection (ORP) is to safely retrieve and treat the 56 million gallons of Hanford's tank waste and close the Tank Farms to protect the Columbia River. The millions of gallons of tank waste are a byproduct of decades of plutonium production. After irradiated fuel rods were taken from the nuclear reactors to the processing facilities at Hanford they were exposed to a series of chemicals designed to dissolve away the rod, which enabled workers to retrieve the plutonium. Once those chemicals were exposed to the fuel rods they became radioactive and extremely hot. They also couldn't be used in this process more than once. Because the chemicals are caustic and extremely hazardous to humans and the environment, underground storage tanks were built to hold these chemicals until a more permanent solution could be found. One key part of the ongoing work at Hanford is retrieving waste from the single-shell tanks, some of which have leaked in the past, and transferring that waste to the double-shell tanks - none of which have ever leaked. The 56 million gallons of radioactive tank waste is stored in 177 underground tanks, 149 of which are single-shell tanks built between 1943 and 1964. The tanks sit approximately 250 feet above the water table. Hanford's single-shell tanks are decades past their 20-year design life. In the past, up to 67 of the single-shell tanks are known or suspected to have leaked as much as one million gallons of waste to the surrounding soil. Starting in the late 1950's, waste leaks from dozens of the single-shell tanks were detected or suspected. Most of the waste is in the soil around the tanks, but some of this waste is thought to have reached groundwater. The Vadose Zone Project was established to understand the radioactive and chemical contamination in the soil beneath the tanks as the result of leaks and discharges from past plutonium-production operations. The vadose zone is the area of soil between the ground surface and the water table 200-to-300 feet below. The project tracks and monitors contamination in the soil. Technologies are being developed and deployed to detect and monitor contaminants. Interim surface barriers, which are barriers put over the single-shell tanks, prevent rain and snow from soaking into the ground and spreading contamination. The impermeable barrier placed over T Farm, which was the site of the largest tank waste leak in Hanford's history, is 60,000 square feet and sloped to drain moisture outside the tank farm. The barrier over TY Farm is constructed of asphalt and drains moisture to a nearby evaporation basin. Our discussion of technology will address the incredible challenge of removing waste from Hanford's single-shell tanks. Under the terms of the Tri-Party Agreement, ORP is required to remove 99 percent of the tank waste, or until the limits of technology have been reached. All pumpable liquids have been removed from the single-shell tanks, and work now focuses on removing the non-pumpable liquids. Waste retrieval was completed from the first single-shell tank in late 2003. Since then, another six single-shell tanks have been retrieved to regulatory standards. (authors)

  4. Low-level tank waste simulant data base

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lokken, R.O.

    1996-04-01

    The majority of defense wastes generated from reprocessing spent N- Reactor fuel at Hanford are stored in underground Double-shell Tanks (DST) and in older Single-Shell Tanks (SST) in the form of liquids, slurries, sludges, and salt cakes. The tank waste remediation System (TWRS) Program has the responsibility of safely managing and immobilizing these tank wastes for disposal. This report discusses three principle topics: the need for and basis for selecting target or reference LLW simulants, tanks waste analyses and simulants that have been defined, developed, and used for the GDP and activities in support of preparing and characterizing simulants for the current LLW vitrification project. The procedures and the data that were generated to characterized the LLW vitrification simulants were reported and are presented in this report. The final section of this report addresses the applicability of the data to the current program and presents recommendations for additional data needs including characterization and simulant compositional variability studies.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Grant Evenson

    2009-05-01

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Grant Evenson

    2009-05-01

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

  7. Nuclear Dynamics Consequence Analysis (NDCA) for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel in an Underground Geologic Repository - Volume 3: Appendices

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Taylor, L.L.; Wilson, J.R.; Sanchez, L.C.; Aguilar, R.; Trellue, H.R.; Cochrane, K.; Rath, J.S.

    1998-10-01

    The United States Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management's (DOE/EM's) National Spent Nuclear Fuel Program (NSNFP), through a collaboration between Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) and Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), is conducting a systematic Nuclear Dynamics Consequence Analysis (NDCA) of the disposal of SNFs in an underground geologic repository sited in unsaturated tuff. This analysis is intended to provide interim guidance to the DOE for the management of the SNF while they prepare for final compliance evaluation. This report presents results from a Nuclear Dynamics Consequence Analysis (NDCA) that examined the potential consequences and risks of criticality during the long-term disposal of spent nuclear fuel owned by DOE-EM. This analysis investigated the potential of post-closure criticality, the consequences of a criticality excursion, and the probability frequency for post-closure criticality. The results of the NDCA are intended to provide the DOE-EM with a technical basis for measuring risk which can be used for screening arguments to eliminate post-closure criticality FEPs (features, events and processes) from consideration in the compliance assessment because of either low probability or low consequences. This report is composed of an executive summary (Volume 1), the methodology and results of the NDCA (Volume 2), and the applicable appendices (Volume 3).

  8. CONFIRMATORY SURVEY OF THE FUEL OIL TANK AREA HUMBOLDT BAY POWER PLANT EUREKA, CALIFORNIA

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    WADE C. ADAMS

    2012-04-09

    During the period of February 14 to 15, 2012, ORISE performed radiological confirmatory survey activities for the former Fuel Oil Tank Area (FOTA) and additional radiological surveys of portions of the Humboldt Bay Power Plant site in Eureka, California. The radiological survey results demonstrate that residual surface soil contamination was not present significantly above background levels within the FOTA. Therefore, it is ORISE’s opinion that the radiological conditions for the FOTA surveyed by ORISE are commensurate with the site release criteria for final status surveys as specified in PG&E’s Characterization Survey Planning Worksheet. In addition, the confirmatory results indicated that the ORISE FOTA survey unit Cs-137 mean concentrations results compared favorably with the PG&E FOTA Cs-137 mean concentration results, as determined by ORISE from the PG&E characterization data. The interlaboratory comparison analyses of the three soil samples analyzed by PG&E’s onsite laboratory and the ORISE laboratory indicated good agreement for the sample results and provided confidence in the PG&E analytical procedures and final status survey soil sample data reporting.

  9. AX Tank Farm tank removal study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    SKELLY, W.A.

    1998-10-14

    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.

  10. Tank waste remediation system integrated technology plan. Revision 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eaton, B.; Ignatov, A.; Johnson, S.; Mann, M.; Morasch, L.; Ortiz, S.; Novak, P.

    1995-02-28

    The Hanford Site, located in southeastern Washington State, is operated by the US Department of Energy (DOE) and its contractors. Starting in 1943, Hanford supported fabrication of reactor fuel elements, operation of production reactors, processing of irradiated fuel to separate and extract plutonium and uranium, and preparation of plutonium metal. Processes used to recover plutonium and uranium from irradiated fuel and to recover radionuclides from tank waste, plus miscellaneous sources resulted in the legacy of approximately 227,000 m{sup 3} (60 million gallons) of high-level radioactive waste, currently in storage. This waste is currently stored in 177 large underground storage tanks, 28 of which have two steel walls and are called double-shell tanks (DSTs) an 149 of which are called single-shell tanks (SSTs). Much of the high-heat-emitting nuclides (strontium-90 and cesium-137) has been extracted from the tank waste, converted to solid, and placed in capsules, most of which are stored onsite in water-filled basins. DOE established the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) program in 1991. The TWRS program mission is to store, treat, immobilize and dispose, or prepare for disposal, the Hanford tank waste in an environmentally sound, safe, and cost-effective manner. Technology will need to be developed or improved to meet the TWRS program mission. The Integrated Technology Plan (ITP) is the high-level consensus plan that documents all TWRS technology activities for the life of the program.

  11. Alternative Fuels Data Center

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

    Ethanol Infrastructure Grants The South Dakota Governor's Office of Economic Development administers the Ethanol Infrastructure Incentive Program, providing grants to offset the cost of installing ethanol blender pumps and underground storage tanks (UST) for ethanol at retail fueling stations throughout the state. Awardees may receive up to $29,054 per blender pump. Additionally, awardees may receive up to $40,000 per station for the installation of a UST that allows for the use of ethanol

  12. Utah Division of Environmental Response and Remediation Underground...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

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

  13. Gas Retention and Release from Hanford Site Sludge Waste Tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Meacham, Joseph E.; Follett, Jordan R.; Gauglitz, Phillip A.; Wells, Beric E.; Schonewill, Philip P.

    2015-02-18

    Radioactive wastes from nuclear fuel processing are stored in large underground storage tanks at the Hanford Site. Solid wastes can be divided into saltcake (mostly precipitated soluble sodium nitrate and nitrite salts with some interstitial liquid consisting of concentrated salt solutions) and sludge (mostly low solubility aluminum and iron compounds with relatively dilute interstitial liquid). Waste generates hydrogen through the radiolysis of water and organic compounds, radio-thermolytic decomposition of organic compounds, and corrosion of a tanks carbon steel walls. Nonflammable gases, such as nitrous oxide and nitrogen, are also produced. Additional flammable gases (e.g., ammonia and methane) are generated by chemical reactions between various degradation products of organic chemicals present in the tanks.

  14. High-Pressure Hydrogen Tank Testing

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Many types of compressed hydrogen tanks have been certified worldwide and demonstrated in several prototype fuel cell vehicles. The following information discusses high-pressure hydrogen tank...

  15. A strategy for resolving high-priority Hanford Site radioactive waste storage tank safety issues

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Babad, H.; DeFigh-Price, C.; Fulton, J.C.

    1993-02-01

    High-activity radioactive waste has been stored in large underground storage tanks at the US Department of Energy`s (DOE) Hanford Site in Eastern Washington State since 1944. Since then, more than 227,000 m{sup 3} (60 Mgal) of waste have been accumulated in 177 tanks. These caustic wastes consist of many different chemicals. The waste forms include liquids, slurries, salt cakes, and sludges. A number of safety issues have been raised about these wastes, and resolution of these issues is a top priority of DOE. A Waste Tank Safety Program has been established to resolve these high-priority safety issues. This paper will deal with three of these issues. The issues described are the release of flammable vapors from single- and double-shell tanks, the existence of organic chemicals, and/or ferrocyanide ion-containing fuel-rich mixtures of nitrate and nitrite salts in single-shell tanks.

  16. F tank draft basis determination press release 092910 _2_......

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

    place. The FTF is a 22-acre site, which consists of 22 underground radioactive waste storage tanks and supporting ancillary structures. The Secretary's decision only determines...

  17. Joint Tank Closure News Release Final.docx

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

    communities." Tanks 18 and 19 are two of the 51 underground carbon-steel waste storage tanks that make up the waste management facility at SRS, built at President Harry...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Alfred Wickline

    2007-04-01

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

  19. Multinational underground nuclear parks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Myers, C.W.; Giraud, K.M.

    2013-07-01

    Newcomer countries expected to develop new nuclear power programs by 2030 are being encouraged by the International Atomic Energy Agency to explore the use of shared facilities for spent fuel storage and geologic disposal. Multinational underground nuclear parks (M-UNPs) are an option for sharing such facilities. Newcomer countries with suitable bedrock conditions could volunteer to host M-UNPs. M-UNPs would include back-end fuel cycle facilities, in open or closed fuel cycle configurations, with sufficient capacity to enable M-UNP host countries to provide for-fee waste management services to partner countries, and to manage waste from the M-UNP power reactors. M-UNP potential advantages include: the option for decades of spent fuel storage; fuel-cycle policy flexibility; increased proliferation resistance; high margin of physical security against attack; and high margin of containment capability in the event of beyond-design-basis accidents, thereby reducing the risk of Fukushima-like radiological contamination of surface lands. A hypothetical M-UNP in crystalline rock with facilities for small modular reactors, spent fuel storage, reprocessing, and geologic disposal is described using a room-and-pillar reference-design cavern. Underground construction cost is judged tractable through use of modern excavation technology and careful site selection. (authors)

  20. Tank farm surveillance and waste status summary report for May 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hanlon, B.M.

    1993-08-01

    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.

  1. Title 18 Alaska Administrative Code Chapter 78 Underground Storage...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    8 Underground Storage Tanks Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- RegulationRegulation: Title 18 Alaska Administrative Code Chapter 78...

  2. Prediction of Peak Hydrogen Concentrations for Deep Sludge Retrieval in Tanks AN-101 and AN-106 from Historical Data of Spontaneous Gas Release Events

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wells, Beric E.; Cooley, Scott K.; Meacham, Joseph E.

    2013-10-21

    Radioactive and chemical wastes from nuclear fuel processing are stored in large underground storage tanks at the Hanford Site. The Tank Operations Contractor is continuing a program of moving solid wastes from single-shell tanks (SSTs) to double-shell tanks (DSTs) and preparing for waste feed delivery (WFD). A new mechanism for a large spontaneous gas release event (GRE) in deep sludge sediments has been postulated. The creation of this potential new GRE hazard, deep sludge gas release events (DSGREs), is the retrieval of sludge waste into a single DST that results in a sediment depth greater than operating experience has demonstrated is safe. The Tank Operations Contractor program of moving solid wastes from SSTs to DSTs and preparing for WFD is being negatively impacted by this sediment depth limit.

  3. Hanford tank waste pretreatment overview

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gasper, K.A.

    1994-12-31

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has established the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) to safely manage and dispose of the Hanford Site tank waste. Pretreatment is one of the major program elements of the TWRS. The scope of the TWRS Tank Waste Pretreatment Program is to treat tank waste to separate it into high- and low-level waste fractions and to provide additional treatment as required to feed low-level and high-level waste immobilization processes. The Pretreatment Program activities include technology development, design, fabrication, construction, and operation of facilities to support the pretreatment of radioactive mixed waste retrieved from 28 large underground double-shell tanks and 149 single-shell tanks.

  4. H-Tank Farm Waste Determination

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    On Dec. 19, 2014, the Energy Secretary signed a determination that allows the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina to complete cleanup and closure of the underground liquid waste tanks in the H Tank Farm as they are emptied and cleaned. The action marked a major milestone in efforts to clean up the Cold War legacy at SRS.

  5. Annual radioactive waste tank inspection program - 1999

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Moore, C.J.

    2000-04-14

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

  6. Annual radioactive waste tank inspection program - 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McNatt, F.G.

    1997-04-01

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

  7. Annual radioactive waste tank inspection program - 1992

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McNatt, F.G.

    1992-12-31

    Aqueous radioactive wastes from Savannah River Site (SRS) separations processes are contained in large underground carbon steel tanks. Inspections made during 1992 to evaluate these vessels and evaluations based on data accrued by inspections made since the tanks were constructed are the subject of this report.

  8. Annual Radioactive Waste Tank Inspection Program - 1997

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McNatt, F.G.

    1998-05-01

    Aqueous radioactive wastes from Savannah River Site (SRS) separations processes are contained in large underground carbon steel tanks. Inspections made during 1997 to evaluate these vessels, and evaluations based on data accrued by inspections performed since the tanks were constructed are the subject of this report.

  9. Annual Radioactive Waste Tank Inspection Program - 1998

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McNatt, F.G.

    1999-10-27

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

  10. Annual radioactive waste tank inspection program: 1995

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McNatt, F.G. Sr.

    1996-04-01

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

  11. Waste Tank Summary Report for Month ending March 31 2003

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HANLON, B.M.

    2003-05-05

    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 60 smaller miscellaneous underground storage 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 Order 435.1 (DOE-HQ, August 28, 2001, Radioactive Waste Management, US. Department of Energy-Washington, D.C.) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for the Hanford Site Tank Farm tanks.

  12. WASTE TANK SUMMARY REPORT FOR MONTH ENDING 01/2004

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HANLON, B.M.

    2004-03-02

    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 60 smaller miscellaneous underground storage tanks and special surveillance facilities, and supplemental information regarding tank surveillance anomalies and ongoing investigations. This report is intended to meet the requirement of U.S. Department of Energy Order 435.1 (DOE-HQ, August 28,2001, Radioactive Waste Management, U.S. Department of Energy-Washington, D.C.) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for the Hanford Site Tank Farm tanks.

  13. EM Takes Safe, Unique Approach to Underground Demolition at Hanford...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    largest of Hanford's experimental reactors used for developing and testing alternative fuels for the commercial nuclear power industry. Preparations to remove the underground...

  14. Report for Westinghouse Hanford Company: Makeup procedures and characterization data for modified DSSF and modified remaining inventory simulated tank waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lokken, R.O.

    1996-03-01

    The majority of defense wastes generated from reprocessing spent reactor fuel at Hanford are stored in underground Double-Shell Tanks (DST) and in older Single-Shell Tanks (SST). The Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Program has the responsibility of safely managing and immobilizing these tank wastes for disposal. A reference process flowsheet is being developed that includes waste retrieval, pretreatment, and vitrification. Melter technologies for vitrifying low-level tank wastes are being evaluated by Westinghouse Hanford Company. Chemical simulants are being used in the technology testing. For the first phase of low-level waste (LLW) vitrification simulant development, two waste stream compositions were investigated. The first waste simulant was based on the analyses of six tanks of double-shell slurry feed (DSSF) waste and on the projected composition of the wastes exiting the pretreatment operations. A simulant normalized to 6 M sodium was based on the anticipated chemical concentrations after ion exchange and initial separations. The same simulant concentrated to 10 M sodium would represent a waste that had been concentrated by evaporation to reduce the overall volume. The second LLW simulant, referred to as the remaining inventory (RI), included wastes not included in the DSSF tanks and the projected LLW fraction of single-shell tank wastes.

  15. Tank Closure

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    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...

  16. Hanford Single-Shell Tank Integrity Program

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    production reactors to irradiate fuel and produce plutonium. * Four large ... Type III 100 Series Tanks 241-BY, S, TX, and TY Farms, 48 Tanks 758,000 gallon capacity ...

  17. Independent Oversight Activity Report, Hanford Waste Tank Farms – October 28 – November 6, 2013

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Follow-up on Previously Identified Items Regarding Positive Ventilation of Hanford Underground Waste Tanks [HIAR-HANFORD-2013-10-28

  18. Onboard Storage Tank Workshop | Department of Energy

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

    Onboard Storage Tank Workshop Onboard Storage Tank Workshop The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Sandia National Laboratories co-hosted the Onboard Storage Tank Workshop on April 29th, 2010. Onboard storage tank experts gathered to share lessons learned about research and development (R&D) needs; regulations, codes and standards (RCS); and a path forward to enable the successful deployment of hydrogen storage tanks in early market fuel cell applications. The workshop also included initial

  19. Hanford Tank Farm Workers Begin Tank Waste Retrieval Ahead of Schedule

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    RICHLAND, Wash. – EM’s Office of River Protection (ORP) and tank farms contractor Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) began retrieving waste from underground double-shell tank AY-102 this month, ahead of schedule, meeting requirements of a settlement agreement with the State of Washington.

  20. ANNUAL RADIOACTIVE WASTE TANK INSPECTION PROGRAM 2009

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    West, B.; Waltz, R.

    2010-06-21

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

  1. Radioactive tank waste remediation focus area

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1996-08-01

    EM`s Office of Science and Technology has established the Tank Focus Area (TFA) to manage and carry out an integrated national program of technology development for tank waste remediation. The TFA is responsible for the development, testing, evaluation, and deployment of remediation technologies within a system architecture to characterize, retrieve, treat, concentrate, and dispose of radioactive waste stored in the underground stabilize and close the tanks. The goal is to provide safe and cost-effective solutions that are acceptable to both the public and regulators. Within the DOE complex, 335 underground storage tanks have been used to process and store radioactive and chemical mixed waste generated from weapon materials production and manufacturing. Collectively, thes tanks hold over 90 million gallons of high-level and low-level radioactive liquid waste in sludge, saltcake, and as supernate and vapor. Very little has been treated and/or disposed or in final form.

  2. Tank Waste and Waste Processing | Department of Energy

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

    waste stored in underground tanks and approximately 4,000 cubic meters of solid waste derived from the liquids stored in bins. The current DOE estimated cost for retrieval,...

  3. Workers Pour 1 Million Gallons of Grout into Massive Tanks

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    AIKEN, S.C. – Workers have poured more than 1 million gallons of a cement-like grout into two underground radioactive waste tanks, moving the Savannah River Site (SRS) nearer to closing the massive structures.

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  5. Experimental and Modeling Study of the Flammability of Fuel Tank Headspace Vapors from Ethanol/Gasoline Fuels, Phase 2: Evaluations of Field Samples and Laboratory Blends

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gardiner, D. P.; Bardon, M. F.; LaViolette, M.

    2010-04-01

    Study to measure the flammability of gasoline/ethanol fuel vapors at low ambient temperatures and develop a mathematical model to predict temperatures at which flammable vapors were likely to form.

  6. Deflagration studies on waste Tank 101-SY: Test plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cashdollar, K.L.; Zlochower, I.A.; Hertzberg, M.

    1991-07-01

    Waste slurries produced during the recovery of plutonium and uranium from irradiated fuel are stored in underground storage tanks. While a variety of waste types have been generated, of particular concern are the wastes stored in Tank 101-SY. A slurry growth-gas evolution cycle has been observed since 1981. The waste consists of a thick slurry, consisting of a solution high in NaOH, NaNO{sub 3}, NaAlO{sub 2}, dissolved organic complexants (EDTA, HEDTA, NTA, and degradation products), other salts (sulfates and phosphates), and radionuclides (primarily cesium and strontium). During a gas release the major gaseous species identified include: hydrogen and nitrous oxide (N{sub 2}O). Significant amounts of nitrogen may also be present. Traces of ammonia, carbon oxides, and other nitrogen oxides are also detected. Air and water vapor are also present in the tank vapor space. The purpose of the deflagration study is to determine risks of the hydrogen, nitrous oxide, nitrogen, and oxygen system. To be determined are pressure and temperature as a function of composition of reacting gases and the concentration of gases before and after the combustion event. Analyses of gases after the combustion event will be restricted to those tests that had an initial concentration of {le}8% hydrogen. This information will be used to evaluate safety issues related to periodic slurry growth and flammable gas releases from Tank 101-SY. the conditions to be evaluated will simulate gases in the vapor space above the salt cake as well as gases that potentially are trapped in pockets within/under the waste. The deflagration study will relate experimental laboratory results to conditions in the existing tanks.

  7. Think Tank: Delaware Department of Natural Resources

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

    Spring 2009 Number 58 UST Regulations Revision Update Jill Hall The Tank Management Branch (TMB) conducted 3 public workshops in October 2008 to roll out changes to the Delaware Regulations Governing Underground Storage Tanks (UST Regulations). The UST Regulations were completely re- vamped last year and became effective January 11, 2008. Changes were made last year for 2 reasons: (1) the UST Reg- ulations were woefully out of date with regards to technological changes, and (2) the Federal

  8. PROGRESS & CHALLENGES IN CLEANUP OF HANFORDS TANK WASTES

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HEWITT, W.M.; SCHEPENS, R.

    2006-01-23

    The River Protection Project (RPP), which is managed by the Department of Energy (DOE) Office of River Protection (ORP), is highly complex from technical, regulatory, legal, political, and logistical perspectives and is the largest ongoing environmental cleanup project in the world. Over the past three years, ORP has made significant advances in its planning and execution of the cleanup of the Hartford tank wastes. The 149 single-shell tanks (SSTs), 28 double-shell tanks (DSTs), and 60 miscellaneous underground storage tanks (MUSTs) at Hanford contain approximately 200,000 m{sup 3} (53 million gallons) of mixed radioactive wastes, some of which dates back to the first days of the Manhattan Project. The plan for treating and disposing of the waste stored in large underground tanks is to: (1) retrieve the waste, (2) treat the waste to separate it into high-level (sludge) and low-activity (supernatant) fractions, (3) remove key radionuclides (e.g., Cs-137, Sr-90, actinides) from the low-activity fraction to the maximum extent technically and economically practical, (4) immobilize both the high-level and low-activity waste fractions by vitrification, (5) interim store the high-level waste fraction for ultimate disposal off-site at the federal HLW repository, (6) dispose the low-activity fraction on-site in the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF), and (7) close the waste management areas consisting of tanks, ancillary equipment, soils, and facilities. Design and construction of the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP), the cornerstone of the RPP, has progressed substantially despite challenges arising from new seismic information for the WTP site. We have looked closely at the waste and aligned our treatment and disposal approaches with the waste characteristics. For example, approximately 11,000 m{sup 3} (2-3 million gallons) of metal sludges in twenty tanks were not created during spent nuclear fuel reprocessing and have low fission product concentrations. We plan to treat these wastes as transuranic waste (TRU) for disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), which will reduce the WTP system processing time by three years. We are also developing and testing bulk vitrification as a technology to supplement the WTP LAW vitrification facility for immobilizing the massive volume of LAW. We will conduct a full-scale demonstration of the Demonstration Bulk Vitrification System by immobilizing up to 1,100 m{sup 3} (300,000 gallons) of tank S-109 low-curie soluble waste from which Cs-137 had previously been removed. This past year has been marked by both progress and new challenges. The focus of our tank farm work has been retrieving waste from the old single-shell tanks (SSTs). We have completed waste retrieval from three SSTs and are conducting retrieval operations on an additional three SSTs. While most waste retrievals have gone about as expected, we have faced challenges with some recalcitrant tank heel wastes that required enhanced approaches. Those enhanced approaches ranged from oxalic acid additions to deploying a remote high-pressure water lance. As with all large, long-term projects that employ first of a kind technologies, we continue to be challenged to control costs and maintain schedule. However, it is most important to work safely and to provide facilities that will do the job they are intended to do.

  9. Testing of organic waste surrogate materials in support of the Hanford organic tank program. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Turner, D.A.; Miron, Y.

    1994-01-01

    To address safety issues regarding effective waste management efforts of underground organic waste storage tanks at the Hanford Site, the Bureau of Mines conducted a series of tests, at the request of the Westinghouse Hanford company. In this battery of tests, the thermal and explosive characteristics of surrogate materials, chosen by Hanford, were determined. The surrogate materials were mixtures of inorganic and organic sodium salts, representing fuels and oxidants. The oxidants were sodium nitrate and sodium nitrite. The fuels were sodium salts of oxalate, citrate and ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid (EDTA). Polyethylene powder was also used as a fuel with the oxidant(s). Sodium aluminate was used as a diluent. In addition, a sample of FeCN, supplied by Hanford was also investigated.

  10. Vitrified underground structures

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Murphy, Mark T. (Kennewick, WA); Buelt, James L. (Richland, WA); Stottlemyre, James A. (Richland, WA); Tixier, Jr., John S. (Richland, WA)

    1992-01-01

    A method of making vitrified underground structures in which 1) the vitrification process is started underground, and 2) a thickness dimension is controlled to produce substantially planar vertical and horizontal vitrified underground structures. Structures may be placed around a contaminated waste site to isolate the site or may be used as aquifer dikes.

  11. Annual radioactive waste tank inspection program - 1991. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McNatt, F.G.

    1992-10-01

    Aqueous radioactive wastes from Savannah River Site (SRS) separations processes are contained in large underground carbon steel tanks. Inspections made during 1991 to evaluate these vessels and evaluations based on data accrued by inspections made since the tanks were constructed are the subject of this report.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1994-06-01

    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.

  13. Waste tank summary report for month ending 06/30/2003

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HANLON, B.M.

    2003-08-18

    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 60 smaller miscellaneous underground storage 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 Order 435.1 (DOE-HQ, August 28, 2001, Radioactive Waste Management, US Department of Energy-Washington, D.C.) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for the Hanford Site Tank Farm tanks.

  14. WASTE TANK SUMMARY REPORT FOR MONTH ENDING 12/31/2003

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HANLON, B.M.

    2004-02-06

    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 60 smaller miscellaneous underground storage tanks and special surveillance facilities, and supplemental information regarding tank surveillance anomalies and ongoing investigations. This report is intended to meet the requirement of U.S. Department of Energy Order 435.1 (DOE-HQ, August 28, 2001, Radioactive Waste Management, U.S. Department of Energy-Washington, D.C.) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for the Hanford Site Tank Farm tanks.

  15. WASTE TANK SUMMARY REPORT FOR MONTH ENDING 11/30/2003

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HANLON, B.M.

    2004-01-14

    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 60 smaller miscellaneous underground storage tanks and special surveillance facilities, and supplemental information regarding tank surveillance anomalies and ongoing investigations. This report is intended to meet the requirement of U.S. Department of Energy Order 435.1 (DOE-HQ, August 28, 2001, Radioactive Waste Management, U.S. Department of Energy-Washington, D.C.) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for the Hanford Site Tank Farm tanks.

  16. Waste tank summary report for month ending 05/31/2003

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HANLON, B.M.

    2003-07-07

    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 60 smaller miscellaneous underground storage 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 Order 435.1 (DOE-HQ, August 28, 2001, Radioactive Waste Management, US Department of Energy-Washington, D.C.) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for the Hanford Site Tank Farm tanks.

  17. Waste tank summary report for month ending 04/30/2003

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HANLON, B.M.

    2003-06-10

    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 60 smaller miscellaneous underground storage 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 Order 435.1 (DOE-HQ, August 28, 2001, Radioactive Waste Management, US Department of Energy-Washington, D.C.) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for the Hanford Site Tank Farm tanks.

  18. WASTE TANK SUMMARY REPORT FOR MONTH ENDING 09/30/2003

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HANLON, B.M.

    2003-10-31

    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 60 smaller miscellaneous underground storage 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 Order 435.1 (DOE-HQ, August 28, 2001, Radioactive Waste Management, US. Department of Energy, Washington, D. C.) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for the Hanford Site Tank Farm tanks.

  19. Waste tank summary report for month ending 07/30/2003

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HANLON, B.M.

    2003-09-19

    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 60 smaller miscellaneous underground storage 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 Order 435.1 (DOE-HQ, August 28, 2001, Radioactive Waste Management, US Department of Energy-Washington, D.C.) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for the Hanford Site Tank Farm tanks.

  20. Waste Tank Summary Report for Month Ending 05/31/2002

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    HANLON, B M

    2002-07-25

    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 60 smaller miscellaneous underground storage 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 Order 435.I (WOE-HQ, August 28, 2001, Radioactive Waste Management, US Department of Energy-Washington, D.C.) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for the Hanford Site Tank Farm tanks.

  1. Going underground. [Review

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1980-10-01

    Underground space is increasingly used for energy-saving and secure storage that is often less expensive and more aesthetically pleasing than conventional facilities. Petroleum, pumped hydro, water, and sewage are among the large-scale needs that can be met by underground storage. Individual buildings can store chilled water underground for summer cooling. Windowless aboveground buildings are suitable and even more efficient if they are underground. The discovery of ancient underground cities indicates that the concept can be reapplied to relieve urban centers and save energy as is already done to a large extent in China and elsewhere. A national commitment to solar energy will benefit from increased use of underground space. Kansas City is among several cities which are developing the subsurface with success, businesses and schools having found the underground environment to have many benefits. More construction experience is needed, however, to help US lenders overcome their reluctance to finance earth-sheltered projects. (DCK)

  2. ANNUAL RADIOACTIVE WASTE TANK INSPECTION PROGRAM - 2011

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    West, B.; Waltz, R.

    2012-06-21

    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.

  3. Gas-phase propane fuel delivery system

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Clements, J.

    1991-04-30

    This patent describes a gas-phase fuel delivery system for delivering a vapor phase fuel independent of exterior temperatures. It comprises:a storage tank for storing a volume of fuel; a regulator in fluid communication with the tank for receiving fuel from the tank and for outputting the fuel in a vapor phase; a pressure sensor in fluid communication with the tank for monitoring pressure within the tank, the pressure sensor being operative to generate a pump enable signal when the pressure within the tank is less than a predetermined threshold; a pump in fluid communication with the tank.

  4. Annual Radioactive Waste Tank Inspection Program - 2000

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    West, W.R.

    2001-04-17

    Aqueous radioactive wastes from Savannah River Site (SRS) separations and vitrification processes are contained in large underground carbon steel tanks. Inspections made during 2000 to evaluate these vessels and other waste handling facilities along with evaluations based on data from previous inspections are the subject of this report.

  5. Flexible Fuel Vehicles: Providing a Renewable Fuel Choice, Vehicle...

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

    than one type of fuel. FFVs can be fueled with unleaded gasoline, E85, or any combination of the two. Like conventional gasoline vehicles, FFVs have a single fuel tank, fuel ...

  6. DOE Vehicular Tank Workshop Agenda | Department of Energy

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

    Vehicular Tank Workshop Agenda DOE Vehicular Tank Workshop Agenda This agenda was prepared for the Onboard Storage Tank Workshop on April 29, 2010. PDF icon agenda_ostw.pdf More Documents & Publications U.S. Department of Energy Onboard Storage Tank Workshop Notes Overview of DOE - DOT December 2009 CNG and Hydrogen Fuels Workshop Workshop Agenda: Compressed Natural Gas and Hydrogen Fuels, Lesssons Learned for the Safe Deployment of Vehicles

  7. Annual radioactive waste tank inspection program -- 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McNatt, F.G. Sr.

    1994-05-01

    Aqueous radioactive wastes from Savannah River Site (SRS) separations processes are contained in large underground carbon steel tanks. Inspections made during 1993 to evaluate these vessels, and evaluations based on data accrued by inspections made since the tanks were constructed, are the subject of this report. The 1993 inspection program revealed that the condition of the Savannah River Site waste tanks had not changed significantly from that reported in the previous annual report. No new leaksites were observed. No evidence of corrosion or materials degradation was observed in the waste tanks. However, degradation was observed on covers of the concrete encasements for the out-of-service transfer lines to Tanks 1 through 8.

  8. experimental tank tests

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

    experimental tank tests - Sandia Energy Energy Search Icon Sandia Home Locations Contact Us Employee Locator Energy & Climate Secure & Sustainable Energy Future Stationary Power Energy Conversion Efficiency Solar Energy Wind Energy Water Power Supercritical CO2 Geothermal Natural Gas Safety, Security & Resilience of the Energy Infrastructure Energy Storage Nuclear Power & Engineering Grid Modernization Battery Testing Nuclear Fuel Cycle Defense Waste Management Programs Advanced

  9. 2020 Vision for Tank Waste Cleanup (One System Integration) - 12506

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Harp, Benton; Charboneau, Stacy; Olds, Erik

    2012-07-01

    The mission of the Department of Energy's Office of River Protection (ORP) is to safely retrieve and treat the 56 million gallons of Hanford's tank waste and close the Tank Farms to protect the Columbia River. The millions of gallons of waste are a by-product of decades of plutonium production. After irradiated fuel rods were taken from the nuclear reactors to the processing facilities at Hanford they were exposed to a series of chemicals designed to dissolve away the rod, which enabled workers to retrieve the plutonium. Once those chemicals were exposed to the fuel rods they became radioactive and extremely hot. They also couldn't be used in this process more than once. Because the chemicals are caustic and extremely hazardous to humans and the environment, underground storage tanks were built to hold these chemicals until a more permanent solution could be found. The Cleanup of Hanford's 56 million gallons of radioactive and chemical waste stored in 177 large underground tanks represents the Department's largest and most complex environmental remediation project. Sixty percent by volume of the nation's high-level radioactive waste is stored in the underground tanks grouped into 18 'tank farms' on Hanford's central plateau. Hanford's mission to safely remove, treat and dispose of this waste includes the construction of a first-of-its-kind Waste Treatment Plant (WTP), ongoing retrieval of waste from single-shell tanks, and building or upgrading the waste feed delivery infrastructure that will deliver the waste to and support operations of the WTP beginning in 2019. Our discussion of the 2020 Vision for Hanford tank waste cleanup will address the significant progress made to date and ongoing activities to manage the operations of the tank farms and WTP as a single system capable of retrieving, delivering, treating and disposing Hanford's tank waste. The initiation of hot operations and subsequent full operations of the WTP are not only dependent upon the successful design and construction of the WTP, but also on appropriately preparing the tank farms and waste feed delivery infrastructure to reliably and consistently deliver waste feed to the WTP for many decades. The key components of the 2020 vision are: all WTP facilities are commissioned, turned-over and operational, achieving the earliest possible hot operations of completed WTP facilities, and supplying low-activity waste (LAW) feed directly to the LAW Facility using in-tank/near tank supplemental treatment technologies. A One System Integrated Project Team (IPT) was recently formed to focus on developing and executing the programs that will be critical to successful waste feed delivery and WTP startup. The team is comprised of members from Bechtel National, Inc. (BNI), Washington River Protection Solutions LLC (WRPS), and DOE-ORP and DOE-WTP. The IPT will combine WTP and WRPS capabilities in a mission-focused model that is clearly defined, empowered and cost efficient. The genesis for this new team and much of the 2020 vision is based on the work of an earlier team that was tasked with identifying the optimum approach to startup, commissioning, and turnover of WTP facilities for operations. This team worked backwards from 2020 - a date when the project will be completed and steady-state operations will be underway - and identified success criteria to achieving safe and efficient operations of the WTP. The team was not constrained by any existing contract work scope, labor, or funding parameters. Several essential strategies were identified to effectively realize the one-system model of integrated feed stream delivery, WTP operations, and product delivery, and to accomplish the team's vision of hot operations beginning in 2016: - Use a phased startup and turnover approach that will allow WTP facilities to be transitioned to an operational state on as short a timeline as credible. - Align Tank Farm (TF) and WTP objectives such that feed can be supplied to the WTP when it is required for hot operations. - Ensure immobilized waste and waste recycle streams can be recei

  10. Vehicle fuel system

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Risse, John T.; Taggart, James C.

    1976-01-01

    A vehicle fuel system comprising a plurality of tanks, each tank having a feed and a return conduit extending into a lower portion thereof, the several feed conduits joined to form one supply conduit feeding fuel to a supply pump and using means, unused fuel being returned via a return conduit which branches off to the several return conduits.

  11. ICPP tank farm closure study. Volume 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Spaulding, B.C.; Gavalya, R.A.; Dahlmeir, M.M.

    1998-02-01

    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.

  12. ANNUAL RADIOACTIVE WASTE TANK INSPECTION PROGRAM 2010

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    West, B.; Waltz, R.

    2011-06-23

    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.

  13. Advanced underground Vehicle Power and Control: The locomotive Research Platform

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Vehicle Projects LLC

    2003-01-28

    Develop a fuelcell mine locomotive with metal-hydride hydrogen storage. Test the locomotive for fundamental limitations preventing successful commercialization of hydride fuelcells in underground mining. During Phase 1 of the DOE-EERE sponsored project, FPI and its partner SNL, completed work on the development of a 14.4 kW fuelcell power plant and metal-hydride energy storage. An existing battery-electric locomotive with similar power requirements, minus the battery module, was used as the base vehicle. In March 2001, Atlas Copco Wagner of Portland, OR, installed the fuelcell power plant into the base vehicle and initiated integration of the system into the vehicle. The entire vehicle returned to Sandia in May 2001 for further development and integration. Initial system power-up took place in December 2001. A revision to the original contract, Phase 2, at the request of DOE Golden Field Office, established Vehicle Projects LLC as the new prime contractor,. Phase 2 allowed industry partners to conduct surface tests, incorporate enhancements to the original design by SNL, perform an extensive risk and safety analysis, and test the fuelcell locomotive underground under representative production mine conditions. During the surface tests one of the fuelcell stacks exhibited reduced power output resulting in having to replace both fuelcell stacks. The new stacks were manufactured with new and improved technology resulting in an increase of the gross power output from 14.4 kW to 17 kW. Further work by CANMET and Hatch Associates, an engineering consulting firm specializing in safety analysis for the mining industry, both under subcontract to Vehicle Projects LLC, established minimum requirements for underground testing. CANMET upgraded the Programmable Logic Control (PLC) software used to monitor and control the fuelcell power plant, taking into account locomotive operator's needs. Battery Electric, a South Africa manufacturer, designed and manufactured (at no cost to the project) a new motor controller capable of operating the higher rpm motor and different power characteristics of the fuelcells. In early August 2002, CANMET, with the technical assistance of Nuvera Fuel Cells and Battery Electric, installed the new PLC software, installed the new motor controller, and installed the new fuelcell stacks. After minor adjustments, the fuelcell locomotive pulled its first fully loaded ore cars on a surface track. The fuelcell-powered locomotive easily matched the battery powered equivalent in its ability to pull tonnage and equaled the battery-powered locomotive in acceleration. The final task of Phase 2, testing the locomotive underground in a production environment, occurred in early October 2002 in a gold mine. All regulatory requirements to allow the locomotive underground were completed and signed off by Hatch Associates prior to going underground. During the production tests, the locomotive performed flawlessly with no failures or downtime. The actual tests occurred during a 2-week period and involved moving both gold ore and waste rock over a 1,000 meter track. Refueling, or recharging, of the metal-hydride storage took place on the surface. After each shift, the metal-hydride storage module was removed from the locomotive, transported to surface, and filled with hydrogen from high-pressure tanks. The beginning of each shift started with taking the fully recharged metal-hydride storage module down into the mine and re-installing it onto the locomotive. Each 8 hour shift consumed approximately one half to two thirds of the onboard hydrogen. This indicates that the fuelcell-powered locomotive can work longer than a similar battery-powered locomotive, which operates about 6 hours, before needing a recharge.

  14. Working Gas in Underground Storage Figure

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Gas in Underground Storage Figure Working Gas in Underground Storage Compared with 5-Year Range Graph...

  15. Alternative Fuels Data Center: Biodiesel Equipment Options

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

    Steel tanks are listed under UL 58 for flammable fuels and do not test with specific fuels. Fiberglass tanks are listed under UL 1316, which does not offer a biodiesel test fluid. ...

  16. Hanford Tank Waste Residuals

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    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 ...

  17. Builders go underground

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McGrath, D.J.

    1982-01-01

    The appeal of earth-sheltered housing increased last year when 1000 new underground houses brought the national total to about 5000. Innovative construction and management techniques help, such as the Terra-Dome's moldset and equipment, which the company sells to builders under a license arrangement. Attention is given to aesthetic appeal as well as to energy savings. The Everstrong company builds all-wood underground houses to cut down on humidity and increase resistance to natural disasters. Tight mortgage money has been a serious problem for underground as well as conventional builders. (DCK)

  18. Vitrification technology for Hanford Site tank waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1995-04-01

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

  19. Tank farm surveillance and waste status summary report for May 1994

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hanlon, B.M.

    1994-08-01

    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.

  20. Tank Farm surveillance and waste status summary report for February 1994

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hanlon, B.M.

    1994-07-01

    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.

  1. Tank Farm surveillance and waste status summary report for July 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hanlon, B.M.

    1993-11-01

    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.

  2. Tank farm surveillance and waste status summary report for December 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hanlon, B.M.

    1994-05-01

    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 9 surveillance facilities, and supplemental information regarding tank surveillance anomalies and ongoing investigations. This report is intended to meet the requirement of U.S. Department of Energy-Richland Operations Office Order 5820.2A, Chapter I, Section 3.e. (3) (DOE-RL, 1990, Radioactive Waste Management, U.S. Department of Energy-Richland Operation Office, Richland, Washington) requiring the reporting of waste inventories and space utilization for Hanford Tank Farm Tanks.

  3. Tank farm surveillance and waste status summary report for January 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hanlon, B.M.

    1993-03-01

    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.

  4. Fueling Components Testing and Certification | Department of...

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

    Fueling Components Testing and Certification Fueling Components Testing and Certification These slides were presented at the Onboard Storage Tank Workshop on April 29, 2010. PDF ...

  5. fuel

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    4%2A en Cheaper catalyst may lower fuel costs for hydrogen-powered cars http:www.nnsa.energy.govblogcheaper-catalyst-may-lower-fuel-costs-hydrogen-powered-cars

  6. fuel

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    4%2A en Cheaper catalyst may lower fuel costs for hydrogen-powered cars http:nnsa.energy.govblogcheaper-catalyst-may-lower-fuel-costs-hydrogen-powered-cars

  7. Tank 241-U-204 tank characterization plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bell, K.E.

    1995-03-23

    This document is the tank characterization plan for Tank 241-U-204 located in the 200 Area Tank Farm on the Hanford Reservation in Richland, Washington. This plan describes Data Quality Objectives (DQO) and presents historical information and scheduled sampling events for tank 241-U-204.

  8. IWTU at Idaho Fact Sheet

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

    liquid waste stored in underground tanks at a former Cold War spent nuclear fuel ... 2014. Once the three underground storage tanks containing the waste have been emptied, ...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    DiCenso, A.T.; Amato, L.C.; Lambie, R.W.; Franklin, J.D.; Seymour, B.J.; Johnson, K.W.; Stevens, R.H.; Remund, K.M.; Sasaki, L.M.; Simpson, B.C.

    1995-02-01

    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.

  10. Feed tank transfer requirements

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Freeman-Pollard, J.R.

    1998-09-16

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

  11. LIFE ESTIMATION OF HIGH LEVEL WASTE TANK STEEL FOR F-TANK FARM CLOSURE PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT - 9310

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Subramanian, K; Bruce Wiersma, B; Stephen Harris, S

    2009-01-12

    High level radioactive waste (HLW) is stored in underground carbon steel storage tanks at the Savannah River Site. The underground tanks will be closed by removing the bulk of the waste, chemical cleaning, heel removal, stabilizing remaining residuals with tailored grout formulations, and severing/sealing external penetrations. The life of the carbon steel materials of construction in support of the performance assessment has been completed. The estimation considered general and localized corrosion mechanisms of the tank steel exposed to grouted conditions. A stochastic approach was followed to estimate the distributions of failures based upon mechanisms of corrosion accounting for variances in each of the independent variables. The methodology and results used for one-type of tank is presented.

  12. Ostwald Ripening and Its Effect on PuO2 Particle Size in Hanford Tank Waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Delegard, Calvin H.

    2011-09-29

    Between 1944 and 1989, the Hanford Site produced 60 percent (54.5 metric tons) of the United States weapons plutonium and produced an additional 12.9 metric tons of fuels-grade plutonium. High activity wastes, including plutonium lost from the separations processes used to isolate the plutonium, were discharged to underground storage tanks during these operations. Plutonium in the Hanford tank farms is estimated to be {approx}700 kg but may be up to {approx}1000 kg. Despite these apparent large quantities, the average plutonium concentration in the {approx}200 million liter tank waste volume is only about 0.003 grams per liter ({approx}0.0002 wt%). The plutonium is largely associated with low solubility metal hydroxide/oxide sludges where its low concentration and intimate mixture with neutron-absorbing elements (e.g., iron) are credited in nuclear criticality safety. However, concerns have been expressed that plutonium, in the form of plutonium hydrous oxide, PuO{sub 2} {center_dot} xH{sub 2}O, could undergo sufficient crystal growth through Ostwald ripening in the alkaline tank waste to potentially be separable from neutron absorbing constituents by settling or sedimentation. It was found that plutonium that entered the alkaline tank waste by precipitation through neutralization from acid solution is initially present as 2- to 3-nm (0.002- to 0.003-{mu}m) scale PuO{sub 2} {center_dot} xH{sub 2}O crystallite particles and grows from that point at exceedingly slow rates, posing no risk to physical segregation. These conclusions are reached by both general considerations of Ostwald ripening and specific observations of the behaviors of PuO{sub 2} and PuO{sub 2} {center_dot} xH{sub 2}O upon aging in alkaline solution.

  13. Hanford immobilized low-activity tank waste performance assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mann, F.M.

    1998-03-26

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

  14. Dynamic underground stripping to remediate a deep hydrocarbon spill

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Yow, J.L. Jr.; Aines, R.D.; Newmark, R.L.

    1995-09-01

    Dynamic Underground Stripping is a combination of in situ steam injection, electrical resistance heating, and fluid extraction for rapid removal and recovery of subsurface contaminants such as solvents or fuels. Underground imaging and other measurement techniques monitor the system in situ for process control. Field tests at a deep gasoline spill at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory recovered over 26,500 liters (7000 gallons) of gasoline during several months of field operations. Preliminary analysis of system cost and performance indicate that Dynamic Underground Stripping compares favorably with conventional pump-and-treat methods and vacuum extraction schemes for removing non-aqueous phase liquids (NAPLs) such as gasoline from deep subsurface plumes.

  15. Waste tank ventilation rates measured with a tracer gas method

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Huckaby, J.L.; Evans, J.C.; Sklarew, D.S.; Mitroshkov, A.V.

    1998-08-01

    Passive ventilation with the atmosphere is used to prevent accumulation of waste gases and vapors in the headspaces of 132 of the 177 high-level radioactive waste Tanks at the Hanford Site in Southeastern Washington State. Measurements of the passive ventilation rates are needed for the resolution of two key safety issues associated with the rates of flammable gas production and accumulation and the rates at which organic salt-nitrate salt mixtures dry out. Direct measurement of passive ventilation rates using mass flow meters is not feasible because ventilation occurs va multiple pathways to the atmosphere (i.e., via the filtered breather riser and unsealed tank risers and pits), as well as via underground connections to other tanks, junction boxes, and inactive ventilation systems. The tracer gas method discussed in this report provides a direct measurement of the rate at which gases are removed by ventilation and an indirect measurement of the ventilation rate. The tracer gas behaves as a surrogate of the waste-generated gases, but it is only diminished via ventilation, whereas the waste gases are continuously released by the waste and may be subject to depletion mechanisms other than ventilation. The fiscal year 1998 tracer studies provide new evidence that significant exchange of air occurs between tanks via the underground cascade pipes. Most of the single-shell waste tanks are connected via 7.6-cm diameter cascade pipes to one or two adjacent tanks. Tracer gas studies of the Tank U-102/U-103 system indicated that the ventilation occurring via the cascade line could be a significant fraction of the total ventilation. In this two-tank cascade, air evidently flowed from Tank U-103 to Tank U-102 for a time and then was observed to flow from Tank U-102 to Tank U-103.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brevick, C.H.

    1997-08-12

    The purpose of this historical characterization document is to present the synthesized summaries of the historical records concerning the physical characteristics, radiological, and chemical composition of mixed wastes stored in underground double-shell tanks and the physical condition of these tanks. The double-shell tanks are located on the United States Department of Energy`s Hanford Site, approximately 25 miles northwest or Richland, Washington. The document will be used to assist in characterizing the waste in the tanks in conjunction with the current program of sampling and analyzing the tank wastes. Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) developed computer models that used the historical data to attempt to characterize the wastes and to generate estimates of each tank`s inventory. A historical review of the tanks may reveal anomalies or unusual contents that could be critical to characterization and post characterization activities. This document was developed by reviewing the operating plant process histories, waste transfer data, and available physical and chemical data from numerous resources. These resources were generated by numerous contractors from 1945 to the present. Waste characterization, the process of describing the character or quality of a waste, is required by Federal law (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act [RCRA]) and state law (Washington Administrative Code [WAC] 173-303, Dangerous Waste Regulations). Characterizing the waste is necessary to determine methods to safely retrieve, transport, and/or treat the wastes.

  17. Midwest Underground Technology | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Underground Technology Jump to: navigation, search Name Midwest Underground Technology Facility Midwest Underground Technology Sector Wind energy Facility Type Small Scale Wind...

  18. Working Gas in Underground Storage Figure

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Working Gas in Underground Storage Figure Working Gas in Underground Storage Figure Working Gas in Underground Storage Compared with 5-Year Range Graph....

  19. Fuels

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

    Fueling the Next Generation of Vehicle Technology Fueling the Next Generation of Vehicle Technology February 6, 2013 - 11:20am Addthis Professor Jack Brouwer, Associate Director and Chief Technology Officer of the National Fuel Cell Research Center, points out the tri-generation facility that uses biogas from Orange County Sanitation District’s wastewater treatment plant to produce hydrogen, heat and power. | Photo courtesy of the Energy Department. Professor Jack Brouwer, Associate

  20. Dynamic Underground Stripping Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Aines, R.; Newmark, R.; McConachie, W.; Udell, K.; Rice, D.; Ramirez, A.; Siegel, W.; Buettner, M.; Daily, W.; Krauter, P.; Folsom, E.; Boegel, A.J.; Bishop, D.; Udell, K.

    1992-01-01

    LLNL is collaborating with the UC Berkeley College of Engineering to develop and demonstrate a system of thermal remediation and underground imaging techniques for use in rapid cleanup of localized underground spills. Called ``Dynamic Stripping`` to reflect the rapid and controllable nature of the process, it will combine steam injection, direct electrical heating, and tomographic geophysical imaging in a cleanup of the LLNL gasoline spill. In the first 8 months of the project, a Clean Site engineering test was conducted to prove the field application of the techniques before moving the contaminated site in FY 92.

  1. Microsoft Office Outlook - Memo Style

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    ... - underground - bldg 2211 4. Waste Oil Storage - 550 gal - used oil - underground - ... tank - bldg 2211 6. Facility Backup Power Generator - 550 gal - underground - Fuel ...

  2. Tank Farm surveillance and waste status summary report for March 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hanlon, B.M.

    1993-05-01

    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 flank 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.

  3. Static internal pressure capacity of Hanford Single-Shell Waste Tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Julyk, L.J.

    1994-07-19

    Underground single-shell waste storage tanks located at the Hanford Site in Richland, Washington, generate gaseous mixtures that could be ignited, challenging the structural integrity of the tanks. The structural capacity of the single-shell tanks to internal pressure is estimated through nonlinear finite-element structural analyses of the reinforced concrete tank. To determine their internal pressure capacity, designs for both the million-gallon and the half-million-gallon tank are evaluated on the basis of gross structural instability.

  4. The WIPP Underground Ventilation System

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

    , 2014 The WIPP Underground Ventilation System Since February, there has been considerable coverage about the WIPP Underground Ventilation System. On February 14, the ventilation system worked as designed, protecting human health and the environment. In normal exhaust mode, the ventilation system provides a continuous flow of fresh air to the underground tunnels and rooms that make up the disposal facility at WIPP. Air is supplied to the underground facility, located 2,150 feet below the

  5. RECENT PROGRESS IN DOE WASTE TANK CLOSURE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Langton, C

    2008-02-01

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

  6. Tank 19F Folding Crawler Final Evaluation, Rev. 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Nance, T.

    2000-10-25

    The Department of Energy (DOE) is committed to removing millions of gallons of high-level radioactive waste from 51 underground waste storage tanks at the Savannah River Site (SRS). The primary radioactive waste constituents are strontium, plutonium,and cesium. It is recognized that the continued storage of this waste is a risk to the public, workers, and the environment. SRS was the first site in the DOE complex to have emptied and operationally closed a high-level radioactive waste tank. The task of emptying and closing the rest of the tanks will be completed by FY28.

  7. Tank Farms - Hanford Site

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

    Farms Office of River Protection About ORP ORP Projects & Facilities Tank Farms Retrieval Activities PHOENIX - Tank Monitoring Waste Treatment & Immobilization Plant 242-A Evaporator 222-S Laboratory Newsroom Contracts & Procurements Contact ORP Tank Farms Email Email Page | Print Print Page |Text Increase Font Size Decrease Font Size Tank Farms What are Tank Farms? For more than 40 years, facilities at the Hanford Site produced plutonium Tanks by the Numbers critical to the nation's

  8. Alternative Fuels Data Center

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

    Diesel Fuel Blend Tax Exemption The biodiesel or ethanol portion of blended fuel containing taxable diesel is exempt from the diesel fuel tax. The biodiesel or ethanol fuel blend must be clearly identified on the retail pump, storage tank, and sales invoice in order to be eligible for the exemption. (Reference Texas Statutes, Tax Code 162.2

  9. Tank Waste Strategy Update

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Tank Waste Subcommittee www.em.doe.gov safety performance cleanup closure E M Environmental Management 1 Tank Waste Subcommittee Ken Picha Office of Environmental Management ...

  10. Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval,

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment, and Disposition Framework September 24, 2013 U.S. Department of Energy Washington, D.C. 20585 Hanford Tank Waste Retrieval, Treatment, and ...

  11. Commercial Submersible Mixing Pump For SRS Tank Waste Removal - 15223

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hubbard, Mike; Herbert, James E.; Scheele, Patrick W.

    2015-01-12

    The Savannah River Site Tank Farms have 45 active underground waste tanks used to store and process nuclear waste materials. There are 4 different tank types, ranging in capacity from 2839 m3 to 4921 m3 (750,000 to 1,300,000 gallons). Eighteen of the tanks are older style and do not meet all current federal standards for secondary containment. The older style tanks are the initial focus of waste removal efforts for tank closure and are referred to as closure tanks. Of the original 51 underground waste tanks, six of the original 24 older style tanks have completed waste removal and are filled with grout. The insoluble waste fraction that resides within most waste tanks at SRS requires vigorous agitation to suspend the solids within the waste liquid in order to transfer this material for eventual processing into glass filled canisters at the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF). SRS suspends the solid waste by use of recirculating mixing pumps. Older style tanks generally have limited riser openings which will not support larger mixing pumps, since the riser access is typically 58.4 cm (23 inches) in diameter. Agitation for these tanks has been provided by four long shafted standard slurry pumps (SLP) powered by an above tank 112KW (150 HP) electric motor. The pump shaft is lubricated and cooled in a pressurized water column that is sealed from the surrounding waste in the tank. Closure of four waste tanks has been accomplished utilizing long shafted pump technology combined with heel removal using multiple technologies. Newer style waste tanks at SRS have larger riser openings, allowing the processing of waste solids to be accomplished with four large diameter SLPs equipped with 224KW (300 HP) motors. These tanks are used to process the waste from closure tanks for DWPF. In addition to the SLPs, a 224KW (300 HP) submersible mixer pump (SMP) has also been developed and deployed within older style tanks. The SMPs are product cooled and product lubricated canned motor pumps designed to fit within available risers and have significant agitation capabilities to suspend waste solids. Waste removal and closure of two tanks has been accomplished with agitation provided by 3 SMPs installed within the tanks. In 2012, a team was assembled to investigate alternative solids removal technologies to support waste removal for closing tanks. The goal of the team was to find a more cost effective approach that could be used to replace the current mixing pump technology. This team was unable to identify an alternative technology outside of mixing pumps to support waste agitation and removal from SRS waste tanks. However, the team did identify a potentially lower cost mixing pump compared to the baseline SLPs and SMPs. Rather than using the traditional procurement using an engineering specification, the team proposed to seek commercially available submersible mixer pumps (CSMP) as alternatives to SLPs and SMPs. SLPs and SMPs have a high procurement cost and the actual cost of moving pumps between tanks has shown to be significantly higher than the original estimates that justified the reuse of SMPs and SLPs. The team recommended procurement of “off-the-shelf” industry pumps which may be available for significant savings, but at an increased risk of failure and reduced operating life in the waste tank. The goal of the CSMP program is to obtain mixing pumps that could mix from bulk waste removal through tank closure and then be abandoned in place as part of tank closure. This paper will present the development, progress and relative advantages of the CSMP.

  12. Apparatus and method for grounding compressed fuel fueling operator

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Cohen, Joseph Perry; Farese, David John; Xu, Jianguo

    2002-06-11

    A safety system for grounding an operator at a fueling station prior to removing a fuel fill nozzle from a fuel tank upon completion of a fuel filling operation is provided which includes a fuel tank port in communication with the fuel tank for receiving and retaining the nozzle during the fuel filling operation and a grounding device adjacent to the fuel tank port which includes a grounding switch having a contact member that receives physical contact by the operator and where physical contact of the contact member activates the grounding switch. A releasable interlock is included that provides a lock position wherein the nozzle is locked into the port upon insertion of the nozzle into the port and a release position wherein the nozzle is releasable from the port upon completion of the fuel filling operation and after physical contact of the contact member is accomplished.

  13. Economical wind protection - underground

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kiesling, E.W.

    1980-01-01

    Earth-sheltered buildings inherently posess near-absolute occupant protection from severe winds. They should sustain no structural damage and only minimal facial damage. Assuming that the lower-hazard risk attendant to this type of construction results in reduced insurance-premium rates, the owner accrues economic benefits from the time of construction. Improvements to aboveground buildings, in contrast, may not yield early economic benefits in spite of a favorable benefit-to-cost ratio. This, in addition to sensitivity to initial costs, traditionalism in residential construction, and lack of professional input to design, impede the widespread use of underground improvements and the subsequent economic losses from severe winds. Going underground could reverse the trend. 7 references.

  14. LUNA: Nuclear astrophysics underground

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Best, A.

    2015-02-24

    Underground nuclear astrophysics with LUNA at the Laboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso spans a history of 20 years. By using the rock overburden of the Gran Sasso mountain chain as a natural cosmic-ray shield very low signal rates compared to an experiment on the surface can be tolerated. The cross sectons of important astrophysical reactions directly in the stellar energy range have been successfully measured. In this proceeding we give an overview over the key accomplishments of the experiment and an outlook on its future with the expected addition of an additional accelerator to the underground facilities, enabling the coverage of a wider energy range and the measurement of previously inaccessible reactions.

  15. Underground waste barrier structure

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Saha, Anuj J.; Grant, David C.

    1988-01-01

    Disclosed is an underground waste barrier structure that consists of waste material, a first container formed of activated carbonaceous material enclosing the waste material, a second container formed of zeolite enclosing the first container, and clay covering the second container. The underground waste barrier structure is constructed by forming a recessed area within the earth, lining the recessed area with a layer of clay, lining the clay with a layer of zeolite, lining the zeolite with a layer of activated carbonaceous material, placing the waste material within the lined recessed area, forming a ceiling over the waste material of a layer of activated carbonaceous material, a layer of zeolite, and a layer of clay, the layers in the ceiling cojoining with the respective layers forming the walls of the structure, and finally, covering the ceiling with earth.

  16. On-farm anaerobic digester and fuel alcohol plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1985-01-01

    An anaerobic digestion system was constructed and set up on a southern Illinois farm. The anaerobic digestion system was designed to be coupled with a fuel alcohol plant constructed by the farm family as part of an integrated farm energy system. The digester heating can be done using waste hot water from the alcohol plant and biogas from the digester can be used as fuel for the alcohol production. The anaerobic digestion system is made up of the following components. A hog finishing house, which already had a slotted floor and manure pit beneath it, was fitted with a system to scrape the manure into a feed slurry pit constructed at one end of the hog house. A solids handling pump feeds the manure from the feed slurry pit into the digester, a 13,000 gallon tank car body which has been insulated with styrofoam and buried underground. Another pump transfers effluent (digested manure) from the digester to a 150,000 gallon storage tank. The digested manure is then applied to cropland at appropriate times of the year. The digester temperature is maintained at the required level by automated hot water circulation through an internal heat exchanger. The biogas produced in the digester is pumped into a 32,000 gallon gas storage tank.

  17. HANFORD TANK CLEANUP UPDATE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BERRIOCHOA MV

    2011-04-07

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2013-07-01

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

  19. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SAMPLING OF TANK 19 IN F TANK FARM

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Harris, S.; Shine, G.

    2009-12-14

    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

  20. Tank Waste | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Tank Waste Tank Waste May 16, 2016 EM Assistant Secretary Monica Regalbuto, directly left of the Tank Closure Monument, gathers with federal and contractor employees at SRS. Cheers ...

  1. Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage ... Underground Natural Gas in Storage - All Operators Minnesota Underground Natural Gas ...

  2. Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million...

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

    Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Natural Gas Underground ... Net Withdrawals of Natural Gas from Underground Storage - All Operators Texas Underground ...

  3. Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage ... Underground Natural Gas in Storage - All Operators Texas Underground Natural Gas Storage - ...

  4. Underground house book

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Campbell, S.

    1980-01-01

    Aesthetics, attitudes, and acceptance of earth-covered buildings are examined initially, followed by an examination of land, money, water, earth, design, heat, and interior factors. Contributions made by architect Frank Lloyd Wright are discussed and reviewed. Contemporary persons, mostly designers, who contribute from their experiences with underground structures are Andy Davis; Rob Roy; Malcolm Wells; John Barnard, Jr.; Jeff Sikora; and Don Metz. A case study to select the site, design, and prepare to construct Earthtech 6 is described. Information is given in appendices on earth-protected buildings and existing basements; financing earth-sheltered housing; heating-load calculations and life-cycle costing; and designer names and addresses. (MCW)

  5. Tank evaluation system shielded annular tank application

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Freier, D.A.

    1988-10-04

    TEST (Tank Evaluation SysTem) is a research project utilizing neutron interrogation techniques to analyze the content of nuclear poisons and moderators in tank shielding. TEST experiments were performed on an experimental SAT (Shielded Annular Tank) at the Rocky Flats Plant. The purpose of these experiments was threefold: (1) to assess TEST application to SATs, (2) to determine if Nuclear Safety inspection criteria could be met, and (3) to perform a preliminary calibration of TEST for SATs. Several experiments were performed, including measurements of 11 tank shielding configurations, source-simulated holdup experiments, analysis of three detector modes, resolution studies, and TEST scanner geometry experiments. 1 ref., 21 figs., 4 tabs.

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

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    River Site | Department of Energy 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

  7. Alternative Fuels Data Center: Biodiesel Codes, Standards, and...

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

    ... Depending on the standard, UL allows listing for B20 andor B100. Notably, test standards for fiberglass underground tanks and piping do not have the ability to list for biodiesel ...

  8. F-Tank Farm Performance Assessment, Rev 1

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    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...

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

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

    ... tank waste and provide for final disposition of the SSTs. ... 1968 to 1986 to support fuel reprocessing, isotope ... and have a total waste volume that is less than 1 ...

  10. DOE Hydrogen Delivery High-Pressure Tanks and Analysis Project...

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

    Overview of FreedomCAR & Fuels PartnershipDOE Delivery Program (PDF 9.19 MB), George Parks, ConocoPhilips High-Pressure Tube Trailers and Tanks (PDF 4.21 MB), Slavador Aceves, ...

  11. Alternative Fuels Data Center

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

    for a pilot program to operate Type II school buses that are retrofitted with an auxiliary fuel tank to enable the use of biodiesel, waste vegetable oil, or straight vegetable oil. ...

  12. Feed tank transfer requirements

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Freeman-Pollard, J.R.

    1998-09-16

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

  13. ,"Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals ...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Net ... 7:00:48 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Net ...

  14. ,"Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity ... 7:00:58 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity ...

  15. ,"Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage ... 7:00:37 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage ...

  16. ,"Minnesota Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:41 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Minnesota Natural Gas in ...

  17. ,"Michigan Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:40 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Michigan Natural Gas in ...

  18. ,"Louisiana Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:38 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Louisiana Natural Gas in ...

  19. ,"Oklahoma Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:50 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Oklahoma Natural Gas in ...

  20. ,"Tennessee Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:54 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Tennessee Natural Gas in ...

  1. ,"Alaska Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:26 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Alaska Natural Gas in ...

  2. ,"Missouri Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:43 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Missouri Natural Gas in ...

  3. ,"Arkansas Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:28 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Arkansas Natural Gas in ...

  4. ,"Maryland Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:40 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Maryland Natural Gas in ...

  5. ,"Kansas Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:36 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Kansas Natural Gas in ...

  6. ,"Ohio Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:49 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Ohio Natural Gas in ...

  7. ,"Illinois Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:34 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Illinois Natural Gas in ...

  8. ,"Nebraska Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:46 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Nebraska Natural Gas in ...

  9. ,"Wyoming Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:30:00 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Wyoming Natural Gas in ...

  10. ,"Utah Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:56 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Utah Natural Gas in ...

  11. ,"Kentucky Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:37 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Kentucky Natural Gas in ...

  12. ,"Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:57 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Virginia Natural Gas in ...

  13. ,"California Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:29 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","California Natural Gas in ...

  14. ,"Mississippi Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:44 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Mississippi Natural Gas in ...

  15. ,"Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity ... 11:44:46 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity ...

  16. ,"West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Data for" ,"Data 1","West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage ... AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage ...

  17. ,"Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Data for" ,"Data 1","Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage ... 11:44:05 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage ...

  18. Massachusetts Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Massachusetts Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million Cubic Feet) Decade Year-0 Year-1...

  19. Washington Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity ...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Washington Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  20. Mississippi Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Mississippi Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  1. Pennsylvania Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Pennsylvania Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May...

  2. Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Previous Articles Previous Articles Estimates of Peak Underground Working Gas Storage Capacity in the United States, 2009 Update (Released, 8312009) Estimates of Peak Underground...

  3. WPCF Underground Injection Control Disposal Permit Evaluation...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    WPCF Underground Injection Control Disposal Permit Evaluation and Fact Sheet Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Report: WPCF Underground Injection...

  4. California Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity ...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) California Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  5. Alternative Fuels Data Center

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

    Natural Gas Vehicle (NGV) Weight Exemption NGVs may exceed the federal maximum gross vehicle weight limit by an amount equal to the difference of the weight of the natural gas tank and fueling system and the weight of a comparable diesel tank and fueling system. The NGV must not exceed a maximum gross vehicle weight of 82,000 pounds. (Reference Public Law 114-94, 2015, and 23 U.S. Code 127(s)

  6. Alternative Fuels Data Center

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

    Natural Gas Vehicle (NGV) Inspection Requirements To pass the state vehicle inspection, an NGV owner must be able to provide proof that the fuel tank on the vehicle has met inspection requirements and falls within the manufacturer's recommended service life, as required by Title 49 of the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, section 571.304. Fleet operators must also be able to prove that a certified technician inspected the vehicle's fuel tank. (Reference Texas Statutes, Transportation Code

  7. SOLAR HEATING OF TANK BOTTOMS Application of Solar Heating to Asphaltic and Parrafinic Oils Reducing Fuel Costs and Greenhouse Gases Due to Use of Natural Gas and Propane

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eugene A. Fritzler

    2005-09-01

    The sale of crude oil requires that the crude meet product specifications for BS&W, temperature, pour point and API gravity. The physical characteristics of the crude such as pour point and viscosity effect the efficient loading, transport, and unloading of the crude oil. In many cases, the crude oil has either a very high paraffin content or asphalt content which will require either hot oiling or the addition of diluents to the crude oil to reduce the viscosity and the pour point of the oil allowing the crude oil to be readily loaded on to the transport. Marginal wells are significantly impacted by the cost of preheating the oil to an appropriate temperature to allow for ease of transport. Highly paraffinic and asphaltic oils exist throughout the D-J basin and generally require pretreatment during cold months prior to sales. The current study addresses the use of solar energy to heat tank bottoms and improves the overall efficiency and operational reliability of stripper wells.

  8. A Fluka study of underground cosmogenic neutron production

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Empl, A.; Hungerford, E.V.; Jasim, R.; Mosteiro, P. E-mail: evhunger@central.uh.edu E-mail: mosteiro@gmail.com

    2014-08-01

    Neutrons produced by cosmic muon interactions are important contributors to backgrounds in underground detectors when searching for rare events. Typically such neutrons can dominate the background, as they are particularly difficult to shield and detect. Since actual data is sparse and not well documented, simulation studies must be used to design shields and predict background rates. Thus validation of any simulation code is necessary to assure reliable results. This work compares in detail predictions of the FLUKA simulation code to existing data, and uses this code to report a simulation of cosmogenic backgrounds for typical detectors embedded in a water tank with liquid scintillator shielding.

  9. Refueling Infrastructure for Alternative Fuel Vehicles: Lessons...

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

    PDF icon fry.pdf More Documents & Publications HYDROGEN TO THE HIGHWAYS NREL Alt Fuel Lessons Learned: Hydrogen Infrastructure Safety Analysis of Type 4 Tanks in CNG Vehicles

  10. ,,,,"Reasons that Made Residual Fuel Oil Unswitchable"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ... storage of usable alternative fuels is not available due to the potential" "environmental impact of storage tanks." " NFNo applicable RSE rowcolumn factor." " * Estimate less ...

  11. ,,,,"Reasons that Made Distillate Fuel Oil Unswitchable"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ... storage of usable alternative fuels is not available due to the potential" "environmental impact of storage tanks." " NFNo applicable RSE rowcolumn factor." " * Estimate less ...

  12. CNG and Hydrogen Tank Safety, R&D, and Testing | Department of Energy

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

    CNG and Hydrogen Tank Safety, R&D, and Testing CNG and Hydrogen Tank Safety, R&D, and Testing Presentation given by Joe Wong of Powertech Labs Inc. at the CNG and Hydrogen Lessons Learned Workshop on December 10, 2009 PDF icon cng_h2_workshop_8_wong.pdf More Documents & Publications Hydrogen Tank Testing R&D Type 4 Tank Testing, Certification and Field Performance Data International Hydrogen Fuel and Pressure Vessel Forum 2010 Proceedings

  13. Light Duty Utility Arm System applications for tank waste remediation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Carteret, B.A.

    1994-10-01

    The Light Duty Utility Arm (LDUA) System is being developed by the US Department of Energy`s (DOE`s) Office of Technology Development (OTD, EM-50) to obtain information about the conditions and contents of the DOE`s underground storage tanks. Many of these tanks are deteriorating and contain hazardous, radioactive waste generated over the past 50 years as a result of defense materials production at a member of DOE sites. Stabilization and remediation of these waste tanks is a high priority for the DOE`s environmental restoration program. The LDUA System will provide the capability to obtain vital data needed to develop safe and cost-effective tank remediation plans, to respond to ongoing questions about tank integrity and leakage, and to quickly investigate tank events that raise safety concerns. In-tank demonstrations of the LDUA System are planned for three DOE sites in 1996 and 1997: Hanford, Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL), and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). This paper provides a general description of the system design and discusses a number of planned applications of this technology to support the DOE`s environmental restoration program, as well as potential applications in other areas. Supporting papers by other authors provide additional in-depth technical information on specific areas of the system design.

  14. A STUDY OF CORROSION AND STRESS CORROSION CRACKING OF CARBON STEEL NUCLEAR WASTE STORAGE TANKS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BOOMER, K.D.

    2007-08-21

    The Hanford reservation Tank Farms in Washington State has 177 underground storage tanks that contain approximately 50 million gallons of liquid legacy radioactive waste from cold war plutonium production. These tanks will continue to store waste until it is treated and disposed. These nuclear wastes were converted to highly alkaline pH wastes to protect the carbon steel storage tanks from corrosion. However, the carbon steel is still susceptible to localized corrosion and stress corrosion cracking. The waste chemistry varies from tank to tank, and contains various combinations of hydroxide, nitrate, nitrite, chloride, carbonate, aluminate and other species. The effect of each of these species and any synergistic effects on localized corrosion and stress corrosion cracking of carbon steel have been investigated with electrochemical polarization, slow strain rate, and crack growth rate testing. The effect of solution chemistry, pH, temperature and applied potential are all considered and their role in the corrosion behavior will be discussed.

  15. Hanford Tank Waste Remediation Systems (TWRS) Waste Pretreatment Program strategy and issues

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gasper, K.A.

    1994-02-01

    The US Department of Energy (DOE) has established the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) to safely manage an dispose of the Hanford Site tank waste. Pretreatment is one of the major program elements of the TWRS. The scope of the TWRS Tank Waste Pretreatment Program is to treat tank waste to separate it into high- and low-level waste fractions and to provide additional treatment as required to feed low-level waste fractions and to provide additional treatment as required to feed low-level and high-level waste immobilization processes. The Pretreatment Program activities include technology development, design, fabrication, construction, and operation of facilities to support the pretreatment of radioactive mixed waste retrieved from 28 large underground double-shell tanks and 149 single-shell tanks.

  16. FFTF vertical sodium storage tank preliminary thermal analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Irwin, J.J.

    1995-02-21

    In the FFTF Shutdown Program, sodium from the primary and secondary heat transport loops, Interim Decay Storage (IDS), and Fuel Storage Facility (FSF) will be transferred to four large storage tanks for temporary storage. Three of the storage tanks will be cylindrical vertical tanks having a diameter of 28 feet, height of 22 feet and fabricated from carbon steel. The fourth tank is a horizontal cylindrical tank but is not the subject of this report. The storage tanks will be located near the FFTF in the 400 Area and rest on a steel-lined concrete slab in an enclosed building. The purpose of this work is to document the thermal analyses that were performed to ensure that the vertical FFTF sodium storage tank design is feasible from a thermal standpoint. The key criterion for this analysis is the time to heat up the storage tank containing frozen sodium at ambient temperature to 400 F. Normal operating conditions include an ambient temperature range of 32 F to 120 F. A key parameter in the evaluation of the sodium storage tank is the type of insulation. The baseline case assumed six inches of calcium silicate insulation. An alternate case assumed refractory fiber (Cerablanket) insulation also with a thickness of six inches. Both cases assumed a total electrical trace heat load of 60 kW, with 24 kW evenly distributed on the bottom head and 36 kW evenly distributed on the tank side wall.

  17. Underground pumped hydroelectric storage

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Allen, R.D.; Doherty, T.J.; Kannberg, L.D.

    1984-07-01

    Underground pumped hydroelectric energy storage was conceived as a modification of surface pumped storage to eliminate dependence upon fortuitous topography, provide higher hydraulic heads, and reduce environmental concerns. A UPHS plant offers substantial savings in investment cost over coal-fired cycling plants and savings in system production costs over gas turbines. Potential location near load centers lowers transmission costs and line losses. Environmental impact is less than that for a coal-fired cycling plant. The inherent benefits include those of all pumped storage (i.e., rapid load response, emergency capacity, improvement in efficiency as pumps improve, and capacity for voltage regulation). A UPHS plant would be powered by either a coal-fired or nuclear baseload plant. The economic capacity of a UPHS plant would be in the range of 1000 to 3000 MW. This storage level is compatible with the load-leveling requirements of a greater metropolitan area with population of 1 million or more. The technical feasibility of UPHS depends upon excavation of a subterranean powerhouse cavern and reservoir caverns within a competent, impervious rock formation, and upon selection of reliable and efficient turbomachinery - pump-turbines and motor-generators - all remotely operable.

  18. ADMP Mixing of Tank 18F: History, Modeling, Testing, and Results

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    LEISHEAR, ROBERTA

    2004-03-29

    Residual radioactive waste was removed from Tank 18F in the F-Area Tank Farm at Savannah River Site (SRS), using the advanced design mixer pump (ADMP). Known as a slurry pump, the ADMP is a 55 foot long pump with an upper motor mounted to a steel super structure, which spans the top of the waste tank. The motor is connected by a long vertical drive shaft to a centrifugal pump, which is submerged in waste near the tank bottom. The pump mixes, or slurries, the waste within the tank so that it may be transferred out of the tank. Tank 18F is a 1.3 million gallon, 85 foot diameter underground waste storage tank, which has no internal components such as cooling coils or structural supports. The tank contained a residual 47,000 gallons of nuclear waste, consisting of a gelatinous radioactive waste known as sludge and particulate zeolite. The prediction of the ADMP success was based on nearly twenty five years of research and the application of that research to slurry pump technology. Many personnel at SRS and Pacific Northwest National Laboratories (PNNL) have significantly contributed to these efforts. This report summarizes that research which is pertinent to the ADMP performance in Tank 18F. In particular, a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model was applied to predict the performance of the ADMP in Tank 18F.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Becker, D.L.

    1998-09-02

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

  20. Miniature ceramic fuel cell

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Lessing, Paul A.; Zuppero, Anthony C.

    1997-06-24

    A miniature power source assembly capable of providing portable electricity is provided. A preferred embodiment of the power source assembly employing a fuel tank, fuel pump and control, air pump, heat management system, power chamber, power conditioning and power storage. The power chamber utilizes a ceramic fuel cell to produce the electricity. Incoming hydro carbon fuel is automatically reformed within the power chamber. Electrochemical combustion of hydrogen then produces electricity.

  1. WIPP Begins Underground Decontamination Activities

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

    Yellow brattice cloth is suspended from the ceiling in this disposal room. It is rolled down to prevent air flow to the room. Brattice cloth also will serve as a barrier to decontaminate floors. WIPP UPDATE: March 13, 2015 WIPP Begins Underground Decontamination Activities Activities are underway in WIPP's underground facility to address the radioactive contamination that remains as a result of the February 14, 2014 event. Employees are using a modified piece of agricultural spraying equipment

  2. Risk-based approach for bioremediation of fuel hydrocarbons at a major airport

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wiedemeier, T.H.; Guest, P.R.; Blicker, B.R.

    1994-12-31

    This paper describes a risk-based approach for bioremediation of fuel-hydrocarbon-contaminated soil and ground water at a major airport in Colorado. In situ bioremediation pilot testing, natural attenuation modeling, and full-scale remedial action planning and implementation for soil and ground water contamination has conducted at four airport fuel farms. The sources of fuel contamination were leaking underground storage tanks (USTs) or pipelines transporting Jet A fuel and aviation gasoline. Continuing sources of contamination were present in several small cells of free-phase product and in fuel residuals trapped within the capillary fringe at depths 15 to 20 feet below ground surface. Bioventing pilot tests were conducted to assess the feasibility of using this technology to remediate contaminated soils. The pilot tests included measurement of initial soil gas chemistry at the site, determination of subsurface permeability, and in situ respiration tests to determine fuel biodegradation rates. A product recovery test was also conducted. ES designed and installed four full-scale bioventing systems to remediate the long-term sources of continuing fuel contamination. Benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX) and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) were detected in ground water at concentrations slightly above regulatory guidelines.

  3. Underground Coal Gasification Program

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    1994-12-01

    CAVSIM is a three-dimensional, axisymmetric model for resource recovery and cavity growth during underground coal gasification (UCG). CAVSIM is capable of following the evolution of the cavity from near startup to exhaustion, and couples explicitly wall and roof surface growth to material and energy balances in the underlying rubble zones. Growth mechanisms are allowed to change smoothly as the system evolves from a small, relatively empty cavity low in the coal seam to a large,more » almost completely rubble-filled cavity extending high into the overburden rock. The model is applicable to nonswelling coals of arbitrary seam thickness and can handle a variety of gas injection flow schedules or compositions. Water influx from the coal aquifer is calculated by a gravity drainage-permeation submodel which is integrated into the general solution. The cavity is considered to consist of up to three distinct rubble zones and a void space at the top. Resistance to gas flow injected from a stationary source at the cavity floor is assumed to be concentrated in the ash pile, which builds up around the source, and also the overburden rubble which accumulates on top of this ash once overburden rock is exposed at the cavity top. Char rubble zones at the cavity side and edges are assumed to be highly permeable. Flow of injected gas through the ash to char rubble piles and the void space is coupled by material and energy balances to cavity growth at the rubble/coal, void/coal and void/rock interfaces. One preprocessor and two postprocessor programs are included - SPALL calculates one-dimensional mean spalling rates of coal or rock surfaces exposed to high temperatures and generates CAVSIM input: TAB reads CAVSIM binary output files and generates ASCII tables of selected data for display; and PLOT produces dot matrix printer or HP printer plots from TAB output.« less

  4. Economic comparison of passively conditioned underground houses. Master's thesis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Guy, H.L.

    1981-05-01

    The availability of cheap energy sources and the perfection of inexpensive, convenient heating and cooling systems has made the 'climate controlled' environment an integral and irreversible part of American life. However, the current shortage and high cost of fuel is threatening the quality and perhaps the availability of the climate-controlled environment. To prolong the life of the climate controlled environment, the national policy has been one of promoting conservation of the fuels that are available and promoting alternative energy systems that are often of high technology or of energy intensive materials. Fortunately, a grass roots response to the lack of energy has been an increase in the interest and construction of underground or earth-sheltered housing. The underground house, featuring a covering of earth on walls and roof, offers a high degree of energy conservation through low technology construction and the use of low energy intensive materials.

  5. Hanford tanks initiative plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McKinney, K.E.

    1997-07-01

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

  6. Greening up fossil fuels with carbon sequestration

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

    Greening up fossil fuels with carbon sequestration 1663 Los Alamos science and technology magazine Latest Issue:March 2016 past issues All Issues » submit Greening up fossil fuels with carbon sequestration Researchers make progress fighting climate change by capturing carbon dioxide from power plants and storing it deep underground in geological reservoirs March 25, 2013 Greening up fossil fuels with carbon sequestration Most of the world's existing energy supply is stored underground in

  7. Refinement of Modeling Techniques for the Structural Evaluation of Hanford Single-Shell Nuclear Waste Storage Tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Karri, Naveen K.; Rinker, Michael W.; Johnson, Kenneth I.; Bapanapalli, Satish K.

    2012-11-10

    ABSTRACT Several tanks at the Hanford Site (in Washington State, USA) belong to the first generation of underground nuclear waste storage tanks known as single shell tanks (SSTs). These tanks were constructed between 1943 and 1964 and are well beyond their design life. This article discusses the structural analysis approach and modeling challenges encountered during the ongoing analysis of record (AOR) for evaluating the structural integrity of the SSTs. There are several geometrical and material nonlinearities and uncertainties to be dealt with while performing the modern finite element analysis of these tanks. The analysis takes into account the temperature history of the tanks and allowable mechanical operating loads of these tanks for proper estimation of creep strains and thermal degradation of material properties. The loads prescribed in the AOR models also include anticipated loads that these tanks may see during waste retrieval and closure. Due to uncertainty in a number of inputs to the models, sensitivity studies were conducted to address questions related to the boundary conditions to realistically or conservatively represent the influence of surrounding tanks in a tank farm, the influence of backfill excavation slope, the extent of backfill and the total extent of undisturbed soil surrounding the backfill. Because of the limited availability of data on the thermal and operating history for many of the individual tanks, some of the data was assumed or interpolated. However, the models developed for the analysis of record represent the bounding scenarios and include the loading conditions that the tanks were subjected to or anticipated. The modeling refinement techniques followed in the AOR resulted in conservative estimates for force and moment demands at various sections in the concrete tanks. This article discusses the modeling aspects related to Type-II and Type-III SSTs. The modeling techniques, methodology and evaluation criteria developed for evaluating the structural integrity of SSTs at Hanford are in general applicable to any similar tanks or underground concrete storage structures.

  8. Compressed/Liquid Hydrogen Tanks

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  9. Dynamic Underground Stripping: In situ steam sweeping and electrical heating to remediate a deep hydrocarbon spill

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Yow, J.L. Jr.; Aines, R.D.; Newmark, R.L.; Udell, K.S.; Ziagos, J.P.

    1994-07-01

    Dynamic Underground Stripping is a combination of in situ steam injection, electrical resistance heating, and fluid extraction for rapid removal and recovery of subsurface contaminants such as solvents or fuels. Underground imaging and other measurement techniques monitor the system in situ for process control. Field tests at a deep gasoline spill at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory recovered over 7000 gallons of gasoline during several months of field operations. Preliminary analysis of system cost and performance indicate that Dynamic Underground Stripping compares favorably with conventional pump-and-treat and vacuum extraction schemes for removing non-aqueous phase liquids such as gasoline from deep subsurface plumes.

  10. Probabilistic safety assessment for Hanford high-level waste tank 241-SY-101

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MacFarlane, D.R.; Bott, T.F.; Brown, L.F.; Stack, D.W.; Kindinger, J.; Deremer, R.K.; Medhekar, S.R.; Mikschl, T.J.

    1994-05-01

    Los Alamos National Laboratory (Los Alamos) is performing a comprehensive probabilistic safety assessment (PSA), which will include consideration of external events for the 18 tank farms at the Hanford Site. This effort is sponsored by the Department of Energy (DOE/EM, EM-36). Even though the methodology described herein will be applied to the entire tank farm, this report focuses only on the risk from the weapons-production wastes stored in tank number 241-SY-101, commonly known as Tank 101-SY, as configured in December 1992. This tank, which periodically releases ({open_quotes}burps{close_quotes}) a gaseous mixture of hydrogen, nitrous oxide, ammonia, and nitrogen, was analyzed first because of public safety concerns associated with the potential for release of radioactive tank contents should this gas mixture be ignited during one of the burps. In an effort to mitigate the burping phenomenon, an experiment is being conducted in which a large pump has been inserted into the tank to determine if pump-induced circulation of the tank contents will promote a slow, controlled release of the gases. At the Hanford Site there are 177 underground tanks in 18 separate tank farms containing accumulated liquid/sludge/salt cake radioactive wastes from 50 yr of weapons materials production activities. The total waste volume is about 60 million gal., which contains approximately 120 million Ci of radioactivity.

  11. Utilization of the MPI Process for in-tank solidification of heel material in large-diameter cylindrical tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kauschinger, J.L.; Lewis, B.E.

    2000-01-01

    A major problem faced by the US Department of Energy is remediation of sludge and supernatant waste in underground storage tanks. Exhumation of the waste is currently the preferred remediation method. However, exhumation cannot completely remove all of the contaminated materials from the tanks. For large-diameter tanks, amounts of highly contaminated ``heel'' material approaching 20,000 gal can remain. Often sludge containing zeolite particles leaves ``sand bars'' of locally contaminated material across the floor of the tank. The best management practices for in-tank treatment (stabilization and immobilization) of wastes require an integrated approach to develop appropriate treatment agents that can be safely delivered and mixed uniformly with sludge. Ground Environmental Services has developed and demonstrated a remotely controlled, high-velocity jet delivery system termed, Multi-Point-Injection (MPI). This robust jet delivery system has been field-deployed to create homogeneous monoliths containing shallow buried miscellaneous waste in trenches [fiscal year (FY) 1995] and surrogate sludge in cylindrical (FY 1998) and long, horizontal tanks (FY 1999). During the FY 1998 demonstration, the MPI process successfully formed a 32-ton uniform monolith of grout and waste surrogates in about 8 min. Analytical data indicated that 10 tons of zeolite-type physical surrogate were uniformly mixed within a 40-in.-thick monolith without lifting the MPI jetting tools off the tank floor. Over 1,000 lb of cohesive surrogates, with consistencies similar to Gunite and Associated Tank (GAAT) TH-4 and Hanford tank sludges, were easily intermixed into the monolith without exceeding a core temperature of 100 F during curing.

  12. Corrosion Control Measures For Liquid Radioactive Waste Storage Tanks At The Savannah River Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wiersma, B. J.; Subramanian, K. H.

    2012-11-27

    The Savannah River Site has stored radioactive wastes in large, underground, carbon steel tanks for approximately 60 years. An assessment of potential degradation mechanisms determined that the tanks may be vulnerable to nitrate- induced pitting corrosion and stress corrosion cracking. Controls on the solution chemistry and temperature of the wastes are in place to mitigate these mechanisms. These controls are based upon a series of experiments performed using simulated solutions on materials used for construction of the tanks. The technical bases and evolution of these controls is presented in this paper.

  13. Structural Dimensions, Fabrication, Materials, and Operational History for Types I and II Waste Tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wiersma, B.J.

    2000-08-16

    Radioactive waste is confined in 48 underground storage tanks at the Savannah River Site. The waste will eventually be processed and transferred to other site facilities for stabilization. Based on waste removal and processing schedules, many of the tanks, including those with flaws and/or defects, will be required to be in service for another 15 to 20 years. Until the waste is removed from storage, transferred, and processed, the materials and structures of the tanks must maintain a confinement function by providing a leak-tight barrier to the environment and by maintaining acceptable structural stability during design basis event which include loading from both normal service and abnormal conditions.

  14. TANK FARM RETRIEVAL LESSONS LEARNED AT THE HANFORD SITE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    DODD RA

    2008-01-22

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

  15. Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million...

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

    Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Minnesota Natural Gas Underground ... Net Withdrawals of Natural Gas from Underground Storage - All Operators Minnesota ...

  16. Texas Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working Gas) (Million...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Working Gas) (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working Gas) ... Underground Working Natural Gas in Storage - All Operators Texas Underground Natural Gas ...

  17. A STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT OF UNDERGROUND PIPING ASSOCIATED WITH THE TRANSFER OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wiersma, B

    2006-04-25

    Radioactive wastes are confined in 49 underground storage tanks at the Savannah River Site. The waste is transported between tanks via underground transfer piping. An assessment of the structural integrity of the transfer piping was performed to ensure that the present condition of the piping was sound and to provide life expectancy estimates for the piping based on anticipated service. The assessment reviewed the original design of the piping, the potential and observed degradation mechanisms, the results from past inspections of the piping, and a Fitness-For-Service evaluation for a section of piping that experienced pitting in a locally thinned area. The assessment concluded that the piping was structurally sound. Assuming that service conditions remain the same, the piping will remain functional for its intended service life.

  18. Tank Waste Committee Page 1

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

    ... The permit will include a requirement for DOE to prepare a closure plan. Chris said DOE ... including evaluations of tank removal, pipeline closure, diversion boxes, and catch tanks. ...

  19. Reverberant Tank | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Reverberant Tank Jump to: navigation, search Retrieved from "http:en.openei.orgwindex.php?titleReverberantTank&oldid596388" Feedback Contact needs updating Image needs...

  20. Tow Tank | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Tow Tank Jump to: navigation, search Retrieved from "http:en.openei.orgwindex.php?titleTowTank&oldid596389" Feedback Contact needs updating Image needs updating Reference...

  1. H. R. 3710: A Bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow individuals a credit for expenditures to remove and replace underground home heating oil storage tanks in certain areas. Introduced in the House of Representatives, One Hundredth First Congress, First Session, November 17, 1989

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1989-01-01

    The bill would allow a tax credit in the amount equal to 25 percent of the removal and replacement expenditures made by the taxpayer during the taxable year, not to exceed 2000 dollars. The tank must be located at the principal residence of the taxpayer, be used to store heating oil for the residence, and be located in a critical aquifer protection area, as defined in the Public Health Service Act.

  2. Underground Coal Thermal Treatment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Smith, P.; Deo, M.; Eddings, E.; Sarofim, A.; Gueishen, K.; Hradisky, M.; Kelly, K.; Mandalaparty, P.; Zhang, H.

    2012-01-11

    The long-term objective of this work is to develop a transformational energy production technology by insitu thermal treatment of a coal seam for the production of substitute natural gas (SNG) while leaving much of the coal's carbon in the ground. This process converts coal to a high-efficiency, low-GHG emitting gas fuel. It holds the potential of providing environmentally acceptable access to previously unusable coal resources. This topical report discusses the development of experimental capabilities, the collection of available data, and the development of simulation tools to obtain process thermo-chemical and geo-thermal parameters in preparation for the eventual demonstration in a coal seam. It also includes experimental and modeling studies of CO2 sequestration.

  3. Logistics background study: underground mining

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hanslovan, J. J.; Visovsky, R. G.

    1982-02-01

    Logistical functions that are normally associated with US underground coal mining are investigated and analyzed. These functions imply all activities and services that support the producing sections of the mine. The report provides a better understanding of how these functions impact coal production in terms of time, cost, and safety. Major underground logistics activities are analyzed and include: transportation and personnel, supplies and equipment; transportation of coal and rock; electrical distribution and communications systems; water handling; hydraulics; and ventilation systems. Recommended areas for future research are identified and prioritized.

  4. Dynamic Underground Stripping Demonstration Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Aines, R.; Newmark, R.; McConachie, W.; Rice, D.; Ramirez, A.; Siegel, W.; Buettner, M.; Daily, W.; Krauter, P.; Folsom, E.; Boegel, A.J.; Bishop, D. ); udel, K. . Dept. of Mechanical Engineering)

    1992-03-01

    LLNL is collaborating with the UC Berkeley College of Engineering to develop and demonstrate a system of thermal remediation and underground imaging techniques for use in rapid cleanup of localized underground spills. Called Dynamic Stripping'' to reflect the rapid and controllable nature of the process, it will combine steam injection, direct electrical heating, and tomographic geophysical imaging in a cleanup of the LLNL gasoline spill. In the first 8 months of the project, a Clean Site engineering test was conducted to prove the field application of the techniques before moving to the contaminated site in FY 92.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2010-09-22

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

  6. Tank 241-BY-105 tank characterization plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Schreiber, R.D.

    1995-02-01

    This document is a plan which serves as the contractual agreement between the Characterization Program, Sampling Operations, PNL 325 Analytical Chemistry Laboratory, and WHC 222-S Laboratory. The scope of this plan is to provide guidance for the sampling and analysis of samples for tank 241-BY-105.

  7. ,"Texas Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...010TX2","N5020TX2","N5070TX2","N5050TX2","N5060TX2" "Date","Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)","Texas Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Texas ...

  8. Pressurizer tank upper support

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

    1994-01-11

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

  9. Pressurizer tank upper support

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

    1994-01-01

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

  10. 2009 underground/longwall mining buyer's guide

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2009-06-15

    The guide lists US companies supplying equipment and services to underground mining operations. An index by product category is included.

  11. High Temperature Superconducting Underground Cable

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Farrell, Roger, A.

    2010-02-28

    The purpose of this Project was to design, build, install and demonstrate the technical feasibility of an underground high temperature superconducting (HTS) power cable installed between two utility substations. In the first phase two HTS cables, 320 m and 30 m in length, were constructed using 1st generation BSCCO wire. The two 34.5 kV, 800 Arms, 48 MVA sections were connected together using a superconducting joint in an underground vault. In the second phase the 30 m BSCCO cable was replaced by one constructed with 2nd generation YBCO wire. 2nd generation wire is needed for commercialization because of inherent cost and performance benefits. Primary objectives of the Project were to build and operate an HTS cable system which demonstrates significant progress towards commercial progress and addresses real world utility concerns such as installation, maintenance, reliability and compatibility with the existing grid. Four key technical areas addressed were the HTS cable and terminations (where the cable connects to the grid), cryogenic refrigeration system, underground cable-to-cable joint (needed for replacement of cable sections) and cost-effective 2nd generation HTS wire. This was the worlds first installation and operation of an HTS cable underground, between two utility substations as well as the first to demonstrate a cable-to-cable joint, remote monitoring system and 2nd generation HTS.

  12. Organic Tanks Safety Program: Waste aging studies

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Camaioni, D.M.; Samuels, W.D.; Lenihan, B.D.; Clauss, S.A.; Wahl, K.L.; Campbell, J.A.

    1994-11-01

    The underground storage tanks at the Hanford Complex contain wastes generated from many years of plutonium production and recovery processes, and mixed wastes from radiological degradation processes. The chemical changes of the organic materials used in the extraction processes have a direct on several specific safety issues, including potential energy releases from these tanks. This report details the first year`s findings of a study charged with determining how thermal and radiological processes may change the composition of organic compounds disposed to the tank. Their approach relies on literature precedent, experiments with simulated waste, and studies of model reactions. During the past year, efforts have focused on the global reaction kinetics of a simulated waste exposed to {gamma} radiation, the reactions of organic radicals with nitrite ion, and the decomposition reactions of nitro compounds. In experiments with an organic tank non-radioactive simulant, the authors found that gas production is predominantly radiolytically induced. Concurrent with gas generation they observe the disappearance of EDTA, TBP, DBP and hexone. In the absence of radiolysis, the TBP readily saponifies in the basic medium, but decomposition of the other compounds required radiolysis. Key organic intermediates in the model are C-N bonded compounds such as oximes. As discussed in the report, oximes and nitro compounds decompose in strong base to yield aldehydes, ketones and carboxylic acids (from nitriles). Certain aldehydes can react in the absence of radiolysis to form H{sub 2}. Thus, if the pathways are correct, then organic compounds reacting via these pathways are oxidizing to lower energy content. 75 refs.

  13. WRPS MEETING THE CHALLENGE OF TANK WASTE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BRITTON JC

    2012-02-21

    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 2008, the recordable injury rate has decreased 43 percent, while the lost work-days rate decreased by 30 percent. The company recently surpassed three million hours worked without a lost workday accident.

  14. Challenge # 2 Logistics and Compatibility with Existing Infrastructure...

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

    Production location 2. Transporting feedstocks and fuel 3. Aging of oil 4. Oil storage 5. ... volume Storage & Use Above ground tanks Underground tanks Capital and O&M ...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2013-11-11

    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 above ground 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.

  16. Fuel cell system for transportation applications

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Kumar, R.; Ahmed, S.; Krumpelt, M.; Myles, K.M.

    1993-09-28

    A propulsion system is described for a vehicle having pairs of front and rear wheels and a fuel tank. An electrically driven motor having an output shaft operatively connected to at least one of said pair of wheels is connected to a fuel cell having a positive electrode and a negative electrode separated by an electrolyte for producing dc power to operate the motor. A partial oxidation reformer is connected both to the fuel tank and to the fuel cell and receives hydrogen-containing fuel from the fuel tank and uses water and air for partially oxidizing and reforming the fuel in the presence of an oxidizing catalyst and a reforming catalyst to produce a hydrogen-containing gas. The hydrogen-containing gas is sent from the partial oxidation reformer to the fuel cell negative electrode while air is transported to the fuel cell positive electrode to produce dc power for operating the electric motor. 3 figures.

  17. Fuel cell system for transportation applications

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Kumar, Romesh; Ahmed, Shabbir; Krumpelt, Michael; Myles, Kevin M.

    1993-01-01

    A propulsion system for a vehicle having pairs of front and rear wheels and a fuel tank. An electrically driven motor having an output shaft operatively connected to at least one of said pair of wheels is connected to a fuel cell having a positive electrode and a negative electrode separated by an electrolyte for producing dc power to operate the motor. A partial oxidation reformer is connected both to the fuel tank and to the fuel cell receives hydrogen-containing fuel from the fuel tank and water and air and for partially oxidizing and reforming the fuel with water and air in the presence of an oxidizing catalyst and a reforming catalyst to produce a hydrogen-containing gas. The hydrogen-containing gas is sent from the partial oxidation reformer to the fuel cell negative electrode while air is transported to the fuel cell positive electrode to produce dc power for operating the electric motor.

  18. Tank 48 - Chemical Destruction

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2013-01-09

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

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

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    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

  20. Radioactive Tank Waste Remediation Focus Area. Technology summary

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-06-01

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

  1. Underground coal gasification: a brief review of current status

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shafirovich, E.; Varma, A.

    2009-09-15

    Coal gasification is a promising option for the future use of coal. Similarly to gasification in industrial reactors, underground coal gasification (UCG) produces syngas, which can be used for power generation or for the production of liquid hydrocarbon fuels and other valuable chemical products. As compared with conventional mining and surface gasification, UCG promises lower capital/operating costs and also has other advantages, such as no human labor underground. In addition, UCG has the potential to be linked with carbon capture and sequestration. The increasing demand for energy, depletion of oil and gas resources, and threat of global climate change lead to growing interest in UCG throughout the world. In this article, we review the current status of this technology, focusing on recent developments in various countries.

  2. CHANGING THE SAFETY CULTURE IN HANFORD TANK FARMS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BERRIOCHOA MV; ALCALA LJ

    2009-01-06

    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.

  3. Dynamic simulation of the Hanford tank waste remediation system

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Harmsen, R.W., Westinghouse Hanford

    1996-05-03

    Cleaning up and disposing of approximately 50 years of nuclear waste is the main mission at the U.S. Department of Energy`s Hanford Nuclear Reservation, located in the southeastern part of the state of Washington. A major element of the total cleanup effort involves retrieving, processing, and disposing of radioactive and hazardous waste stored in 177 underground storage tanks. This effort, referred to as the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS), is expected to cost billions of dollars and take approximately 25 years to complete. Several computer simulations of this project are being created, focusing on both programmatic and detailed engineering issues. This paper describes one such simulation activity, using the ithink(TM)computer simulation software. The ithink(TM) simulation includes a representation of the complete TWRS cleanup system, from retrieval of waste through intermediate processing and final vitrification of waste for disposal. Major issues addressed to date by the simulation effort include the need for new underground storage tanks to support TWRS activities, and the estimated design capacities for various processing facilities that are required to support legally mandated program commitment dates. This paper discusses how the simulation was used to investigate these questions.

  4. Tank Waste System Integrated Project Team

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Tank Waste System Tank Waste System Integrated Project Team Integrated Project Team Steve Schneider Office of Engineering and Technology Tank Waste Corporate Board July 29, 2009 2 ...

  5. Chemical and physical processes in Tank 241-SY-101: A preliminary report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1991-02-01

    Since 1942, chemical and radioactive waste have been stored in underground tanks at the Hanford Site. In March 1981 one of the double shell tanks, 241-SY-101 (called 101-SY), began venting large quantities of gas, primarily hydrogen and nitrous oxide. Because of the potential for explosion Westinghouse Hanford Company and the US Department of Energy realized the need for knowledge about the processes occurring in this tank that lead to generation of the gases. In June 1990, the Pacific Northwest Laboratory began assembling a Tank Waste Science Panel to develop a better understanding of the processes occurring the Tank 101-SY. This knowledge is necessary to provide a technically defensible basis for the safety analyses, which will allow the tank contents to be sampled, as well as for the future remediation of the tank and its contents. The Panel concluded that the data available on Tank 101-SY are insufficient to allow the critical chemical and physical processes giving rise to gas formation and release to be unambiguously identified. To provide the needed information the Panel recommends that Tank 101-SY by physically and chemically characterized as fully as possible and as expeditiously as safety considerations allow, and laboratory studies and modeling efforts be undertaken the chemical and physical processes involved in gas generation and release. Finally, the Panel recommends that no remediation steps be taken until there is a better understanding of the chemical and physical phenomena occurring in Tank 101-SY. Premature remediation steps may only serve to compound the problem. Furthermore, such steps may change the chemical and physical characteristics of the tank and prevent a true understanding of the phenomena involved. As a consequence, similar problems in other tanks on the site may not be adequately addressed. 17 refs., 3 figs., 1 tab.

  6. Nebraska Company Expands to Meet Demand for Hydrogen Fuel | Department of

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

    Energy Nebraska Company Expands to Meet Demand for Hydrogen Fuel Nebraska Company Expands to Meet Demand for Hydrogen Fuel February 4, 2014 - 12:06pm Addthis Hexagon Lincoln develops carbon fiber composite fuel tanks that help deliver hydrogen to fleets throughout the country. The company has more than doubled its workforce to accommodate growing demand for the tanks. | Photo courtesy of Hexagon Lincoln Hexagon Lincoln develops carbon fiber composite fuel tanks that help deliver hydrogen to

  7. Hanford tank residual waste contaminant source terms and release models

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2011-08-23

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

  8. SAVANNAH RIVER SITE TANK 18 AND TANK 19 WALL SAMPLER PERFORMANCE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2009-12-19

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

  9. Tank Waste Committee

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

    3/15 Tank Waste Committee Priorities for advice on FY17 budget Not in priority order, numbering refers to last year's related advice points, per DOE response  (#1) The Board strongly urges DOE-Headquarters (HQ) to request full funding from Congress to meet all legal requirements of the ongoing cleanup work in FY 2016 and 2017 in addition to the following specific requests.  (#2) The Board advises DOE-ORP continue to request funding to proceed to empty leaking tanks (particularly AY-102 and

  10. TANK SPACE OPTIONS REPORT

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    WILLIS WL; AHRENDT MR

    2009-08-11

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

  11. Tank depletion flow controller

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Georgeson, Melvin A.

    1976-10-26

    A flow control system includes two bubbler tubes installed at different levels within a tank containing such as radioactive liquid. As the tank is depleted, a differential pressure transmitter monitors pressure differences imparted by the two bubbler tubes at a remote, shielded location during uniform time intervals. At the end of each uniform interval, balance pots containing a dense liquid are valved together to equalize the pressures. The resulting sawtooth-shaped signal generated by the differential pressure transmitter is compared with a second sawtooth signal representing the desired flow rate during each time interval. Variations in the two signals are employed by a control instrument to regulate flow rate.

  12. Tank Waste Committee Page 1

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

    8, 2013 FINAL MEETING SUMMARY HANFORD ADVISORY BOARD TANK WASTE COMMITTEE May 8, 2013 Topics in this Meeting Summary Opening ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Advice Development Regarding Double-Shell Tank AY-102 (Joint with PIC) ........................................... 1 Meeting participants

  13. High-Pressure Hydrogen Tanks

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  14. Developmental test report, assessment of XT-70E percussion drill rig operation in tank farms

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dougherty, L.F., Westinghouse Hanford

    1996-09-10

    The following report documents the testing of the XT-70E percussion drill rig for use in the 241-SX Tank Farm. The test is necessary to support evaluation of the safety and authorization level of the proposed activity of installing up to three new drywells in the 241- SX Tank Farm. The proposed activity plans to install drywells by percussion drilling 7 inch O.D./6 inch I.D. pipe in close proximity of underground storage tanks and associated equipment. The load transmitted from the drill rig`s percussion hammer through the ground to the tank structure and equipment is not known and therefore testing is required to ensure the activity is safe and authorized.

  15. No loss fueling station for liquid natural gas vehicles

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cieslukowski, R.E.

    1992-06-16

    This patent describes a no loss fueling station for delivery of liquid natural gas (LNG) to a use device such as a motor vehicle. It comprises: a pressure building tank holding a quantity of LNG and gas head; means for delivering LNG to the pressure building tank; means for selectively building the pressure in the pressure building tank; means for selectively reducing the pressure in the pressure building tank; means for controlling the pressure building and pressure reducing means to maintain a desired pressure in the pressure building tank without venting natural gas to the atmosphere; and means for delivering the LNG from the pressure building tank to the use device.

  16. DOE Identifies its Preferred Alternative for Certain Hanford Tank Wastes

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is announcing its preferred alternative for wastes contained in underground radioactive waste storage tanks evaluated in the Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington (Final TC & WM EIS, DOE/EIS-0391, December 2012). With regard to those wastes that, in the future, may be properly and legally classified as mixed transuranic waste (mixed TRU waste). DOE's preferred alternative is to retrieve, treat, package, and characterize and certify the wastes for disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in Carlsbad, New Mexico, a geologic repository for the disposal of mixed TRU waste generated by atomic energy defense activities.

  17. NREL Driving Research on Hydrogen Fuel Cells - News Feature ...

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

    NREL Driving Research on Hydrogen Fuel Cells March 24, 2014 In this photo, the hose of a ... side of a car, with the device plugged into what looks like a standard gasoline fuel tank. ...

  18. Westinghouse Again Recognized For Safe Underground Operations...

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

    and operating contractor for DOE at WIPP. The company's underground operations include mining, hoisting, maintenance, engineering and other related activities. The Certificate of...

  19. ,"Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  20. ,"California Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  1. ,"Kentucky Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  2. ,"Maryland Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  3. ,"Nebraska Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  4. ,"Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  5. ,"Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals ...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  6. ,"Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  7. ,"Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  8. ,"Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  9. ,"Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  10. ,"Colorado Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  11. ,"Alabama Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  12. ,"Missouri Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  13. ,"Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  14. ,"Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  15. ,"Louisiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  16. ,"Montana Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  17. ,"Kansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  18. ,"Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  19. ,"Indiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  20. ,"Mississippi Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  1. ,"Alaska Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  2. ,"Utah Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  3. ,"Michigan Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data...

  4. ,"Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030mn2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

  5. ,"Missouri Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030mo2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

  6. ,"Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030ok2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

  7. ,"Utah Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030ut2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

  8. ,"Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030va2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

  9. ,"Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030tn2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

  10. ,"Maryland Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030md2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

  11. ,"Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030wa2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

  12. ,"Montana Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030mt2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

  13. ,"Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030pa2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

  14. ,"Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030or2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

  15. ,"Nebraska Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030ne2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

  16. ,"Michigan Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030mi2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

  17. ,"Mississippi Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030ms2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

  18. ,"Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030oh2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

  19. ,"Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030tx2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

  20. ,"Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ...dnavnghistn5030wy2m.htm" ,"Source:","Energy Information Administration" ,"For Help, ...

  1. Weekly Working Gas in Underground Storage

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

    company data. Notes: This table tracks U.S. natural gas inventories held in underground storage facilities. The weekly stocks generally are the volumes of working gas as...

  2. ,"Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release...

  3. ,"Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release...

  4. Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Capacity Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity Released: September 3, 2010 for data as of April 2010 Next Release: August 2011 References Methodology Definitions...

  5. Cryogenic slurry for extinguishing underground fires

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Chaiken, Robert F. (Pittsburgh, PA); Kim, Ann G. (Pittsburgh, PA); Kociban, Andrew M. (Wheeling, WV); Slivon, Jr., Joseph P. (Tarentum, PA)

    1994-01-01

    A cryogenic slurry comprising a mixture of solid carbon dioxide particles suspended in liquid nitrogen is provided which is useful in extinguishing underground fires.

  6. Oregon Underground Injection Control Registration Geothermal...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Form: Oregon Underground Injection Control Registration Geothermal Heating Systems (DEQ Form UICGEO-1004(f)) Abstract Required...

  7. Oregon Underground Injection Control Registration Application...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Form: Oregon Underground Injection Control Registration Application Fees (DEQ Form UIC 1003-GIC) Abstract Required fees and form...

  8. Washington Environmental Permit Handbook - Underground Injection...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Underground Injection Control Registration webpage Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Washington Environmental Permit Handbook -...

  9. Oregon Underground Injection Control Program Authorized Injection...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Oregon Underground Injection Control Program Authorized Injection Systems Webpage Author Oregon Department of...

  10. Hawaii Underground Injection Control Permitting Webpage | Open...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Permitting Webpage Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Hawaii Underground Injection Control Permitting Webpage Author State of Hawaii...

  11. ,"Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for" ,"Data 1","Texas Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)",1,"Annual",2014 ,"Release Date:","9...

  12. Twenty Years of Underground Research at Canada's URL

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chandler, N. A.

    2003-02-27

    Construction of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited's (AECL's) Underground Research Laboratory (URL) began in 1982. The URL was designed to address the needs of the Canadian nuclear fuel waste management program. Over the years, a comprehensive program of geologic characterization and underground hydrogeologic, geotechnical and geomechanical projects have been performed, many of which are ongoing. The scientific work at the URL has evolved through a number of different phases to meet the changing needs of Canada's waste management program. The various phases of the URL have included siting, site evaluation, construction and operation. Collaboration with international organizations is encouraged at the URL, with the facility being a centre of excellence in an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) network of underground facilities. One of AECL's major achievements of the past 20 year program has been the preparation and public defense of a ten-volume Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for a conceptual deep geologic repository. Completion of this dissertation on the characterization, construction and performance modeling of a conceptual repository in the granite rock of the Canadian Shield was largely based on work conducted at the URL. Work conducted over the seven years since public defense of the EIS has been directed towards developing those engineering and performance assessment tools that would be required for implementation of a deep geologic repository. The URL continues to be a very active facility with ongoing experiments and demonstrations performed for a variety of Canadian and international radioactive waste management organizations.

  13. Stratification in hot water tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Balcomb, J.D.

    1982-04-01

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

  14. Tank Waste Committee Page 1

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

    10, 2013 FINAL MEETING SUMMARY HANFORD ADVISORY BOARD TANK WASTE COMMITTEE April 10, 2013 Richland, WA Topics in this Meeting Summary Opening ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Integrated Project Team Update on Double-Shell Tank AY-102 ................................................................. 2 Update on Single-Shell Tank (SST) T-111 and SSTs with Decreasing Levels

  15. Tank Waste Committee Page 1

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

    9, 2014 FINAL MEETING SUMMARY HANFORD ADVISORY BOARD TANK WASTE COMMITTEE April 9, 2014 Richland, WA Topics in this Meeting Summary Opening ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Update on Double-Shell Tank Construction-Extent of Conditions Report ................................................ 2 Review of Responses to HAB Advice #271 Leaking Tanks and HAB Advice #273 Openness

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Alfred Wickline

    2009-03-01

    This Closure Report (CR) presents information supporting the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 130: Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada. This CR complies with the requirements of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order that was agreed to by the State of Nevada; U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Environmental Management; U.S. Department of Defense; and DOE, Legacy Management. The corrective action sites (CASs) within CAU 130 are located within Areas 1, 7, 10, 20, 22, and 23 of the Nevada Test Site. Corrective Action Unit 130 is comprised of the following CASs: 01-02-01, Underground Storage Tank 07-02-01, Underground Storage Tanks 10-02-01, Underground Storage Tank 20-02-03, Underground Storage Tank 20-99-05, Tar Residue 22-02-02, Buried UST Piping 23-02-07, Underground Storage Tank This CR provides documentation supporting the completed corrective action investigations and provides data confirming that the closure objectives for CASs within CAU 130 were met. To achieve this, the following actions were performed: Reviewed the current site conditions, including the concentration and extent of contamination. Implemented any corrective actions necessary to protect human health and the environment. Properly disposed of corrective action and investigation-derived wastes. From August 4 through September 30, 2008, closure activities were performed as set forth in the Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Plan for CAU 130, Storage Tanks, Nevada Test Site, Nevada. The purposes of the activities as defined during the data quality objectives process were: Determine whether contaminants of concern (COCs) are present. If COCs are present, determine their nature and extent, implement appropriate corrective actions, confirm that no residual contamination is present, and properly dispose of wastes. Constituents detected during the closure activities were evaluated against final action levels to identify COCs for CAU 130. Assessment of the data generated from closure activities indicates that no further action is necessary because no COCs were identified at any CAU 130 CAS. Debris removal from these CASs was considered a best management practice because no contamination was detected. The DOE, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office provides the following recommendations: No further corrective action is required at all CAU 130 CASs. A Notice of Completion to DOE, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office, is requested from the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection for closure of CAU 130. Corrective Action Unit 130 should be moved from Appendix III to Appendix IV of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order.

  17. Idaho Site D&D Crew Uses Specialized Tools to Cut Apart Massive Tank in

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Demolition Project | Department of Energy D&D Crew Uses Specialized Tools to Cut Apart Massive Tank in Demolition Project Idaho Site D&D Crew Uses Specialized Tools to Cut Apart Massive Tank in Demolition Project November 25, 2015 - 12:05pm Addthis A worker employs a thermal lance to cut apart a massive tank so it can be removed from a building slated for demolition at the Idaho Site's Materials and Fuels Complex. A worker employs a thermal lance to cut apart a massive tank so it can

  18. Tank Waste Retrieval Lessons Learned at the Hanford Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dodd, R.A.

    2008-07-01

    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

  19. Plating Tank Control Software

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    1998-03-01

    The Plating Tank Control Software is a graphical user interface that controls and records plating process conditions for plating in high aspect ratio channels that require use of low current and long times. The software is written for a Pentium II PC with an 8 channel data acquisition card, and the necessary shunt resistors for measuring currents in the millampere range.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    FIELD, J.G.

    1999-02-02

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

  1. Development of Occupational Exposure Limits for the Hanford Tank Farms

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2010-04-01

    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.

  2. Los Alamos improves biomass-to-fuel process

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

    Biomass-to-fuel Process Improved Los Alamos improves biomass-to-fuel process Los Alamos scientists and collaborators published an article in the scientific journal Nature Chemistry this week that could offer a big step on the path to renewable energy. April 26, 2013 Los Alamos research better converts energy from fields into fuel tanks. Los Alamos research better converts energy from fields into fuel tanks. Contact Nancy Ambrosiano Communications Office (505) 667-0471 Email This work describes a

  3. Tank Waste Remediation System decisions and risk assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Johnson, M.E.

    1994-09-01

    The Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) mission is to store, treat, and immobilize the highly radioactive Hanford Site tank wastes and encapsulated cesium and strontium materials in an environmentally sound, safe, and cost effective manner. Additionally, the TWRS conducts, as part of this mission, resolution of safety issues associated with the wastes within the 177 underground radioactive waste tanks. Systems engineering principles are being applied to determine the functions and establish requirements necessary for accomplishing the TWRS mission (DOE 1994 draft). This systematic evaluation of the TWRS program has identified key decisions that must be executed to establish mission scope, determine requirements, or select a technical solution for accomplishing identified functions and requirements. Key decisions identified through the systematic evaluation of the TWRS mission are presented in this document. Potential alternative solutions to each decision are discussed. After-discussion and evaluation of each decision with effected stakeholder groups, the US Department of Energy (DOE) will select a solution from the identified alternatives for implementation. In order to proceed with the development and execution of the tank waste remediation program, the DOE has adopted a planning basis for several of these decisions, until a formal basis is established. The planning bases adopted by the DOE is continuing to be discussed with stakeholder groups to establish consensus for proceeding with proposed actions. Technical and programmatic risks associated with the planning basis adopted by the DOE are discussed.

  4. Tank characterization technical sampling basis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brown, T.M.

    1998-04-28

    Tank Characterization Technical Sampling Basis (this document) is the first step of an in place working process to plan characterization activities in an optimal manner. This document will be used to develop the revision of the Waste Information Requirements Document (WIRD) (Winkelman et al. 1997) and ultimately, to create sampling schedules. The revised WIRD will define all Characterization Project activities over the course of subsequent fiscal years 1999 through 2002. This document establishes priorities for sampling and characterization activities conducted under the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Tank Waste Characterization Project. The Tank Waste Characterization Project is designed to provide all TWRS programs with information describing the physical, chemical, and radiological properties of the contents of waste storage tanks at the Hanford Site. These tanks contain radioactive waste generated from the production of nuclear weapons materials at the Hanford Site. The waste composition varies from tank to tank because of the large number of chemical processes that were used when producing nuclear weapons materials over the years and because the wastes were mixed during efforts to better use tank storage space. The Tank Waste Characterization Project mission is to provide information and waste sample material necessary for TWRS to define and maintain safe interim storage and to process waste fractions into stable forms for ultimate disposal. This document integrates the information needed to address safety issues, regulatory requirements, and retrieval, treatment, and immobilization requirements. Characterization sampling to support tank farm operational needs is also discussed.

  5. Transition from Consultation to Monitoring-NRC's Increasingly Focused Review of Factors Important to F-Area Tank Farm Facility Performance - 13153

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barr, Cynthia; Grossman, Christopher; Alexander, George; Parks, Leah; Fuhrmann, Mark; Shaffner, James; McKenney, Christepher; Pabalan, Roberto; Pickett, David; Dinwiddie, Cynthia

    2013-07-01

    In consultation with the NRC, DOE issued a waste determination for the F-Area Tank Farm (FTF) facility in March 2012. The FTF consists of 22 underground tanks, each 2.8 to 4.9 million liters in capacity, used to store liquid high-level waste generated as a result of spent fuel reprocessing. The waste determination concluded stabilized waste residuals and associated tanks and auxiliary components at the time of closure are not high-level and can be disposed of as LLW. Prior to issuance of the final waste determination, during the consultation phase, NRC staff reviewed and provided comments on DOE's revision 0 and revision 1 FTF PAs that supported the waste determination and produced a technical evaluation report documenting the results of its multi-year review in October 2011. Following issuance of the waste determination, NRC began to monitor DOE disposal actions to assess compliance with the performance objectives in 10 CFR Part 61, Subpart C. To facilitate its monitoring responsibilities, NRC developed a plan to monitor DOE disposal actions. NRC staff was challenged in developing a focused monitoring plan to ensure limited resources are spent in the most cost-effective manner practical. To address this challenge, NRC prioritized monitoring areas and factors in terms of risk significance and timing. This prioritization was informed by NRC staff's review of DOE's PA documentation, independent probabilistic modeling conducted by NRC staff, and NRC-sponsored research conducted by the Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analyses in San Antonio, TX. (authors)

  6. ,"Underground Natural Gas Storage by Storage Type"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Sourcekey","N5030US2","N5010US2","N5020US2","N5070US2","N5050US2","N5060US2" "Date","U.S. Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)","U.S. Total Natural Gas in Underground...

  7. The Gunite and Associated Tanks Remediation Project Tank Waste Retrieval Performance and Lessons Learned, vol. 1 [of 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lewis, BE

    2003-10-07

    The Gunite and Associated Tanks (GAAT) Remediation Project was the first of its kind performed in the United States. Robotics and remotely operated equipment were used to successfully transfer almost 94,000 gal of remote-handled transuranic sludge containing over 81,000 Ci of radioactive contamination from nine large underground storage tanks at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). The sludge was transferred with over 439,000 gal of radioactive waste supernatant and {approx}420,500 gal of fresh water that was used in sluicing operations. The GAATs are located in a high-traffic area of ORNL near a main thoroughfare. A phased and integrated approach to waste retrieval operations was used for the GAAT Remediation Project. The project promoted safety by obtaining experience from low-risk operations in the North Tank Farm before moving to higher-risk operations in the South Tank Farm. This approach allowed project personnel to become familiar with the tanks and waste, as well as the equipment, processes, procedures, and operations required to perform successful waste retrieval. By using an integrated approach to tank waste retrieval and tank waste management, the project was completed years ahead of the original baseline schedule, which resulted in avoiding millions of dollars in associated costs. This report is organized in two volumes. Volume 1 provides information on the various phases of the GAAT Remediation Project. It also describes the different types of equipment and how they were used. The emphasis of Volume 1 is on the description of the tank waste retrieval performance and the lessons learned during the GAAT Remediation Project. Volume 2 provides the appendixes for the report, which include the following information: (A) Background Information for the Gunite and Associated Tanks Operable Unit; (B) Annotated Bibliography; (C) Comprehensive Listing of the Sample Analysis Data from the GAAT Remediation Project; (D) GAAT Equipment Matrix; and (E) Vendor List for the GAAT Remediation Project. The remediation of the GAATs was completed {approx}5.5 years ahead of schedule and {approx}$120,435,000 below the cost estimated in the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study for the project. These schedule and cost savings were a direct result of the selection and use of state-of-the-art technologies and the dedication and drive of the engineers, technicians, managers, craft workers, and support personnel that made up the GAAT Remediation Project Team.

  8. EXPLORING ENGINEERING CONTROL THROUGH PROCESS MANIPULATION OF RADIOACTIVE LIQUID WASTE TANK CHEMICAL CLEANING

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brown, A.

    2014-04-27

    One method of remediating legacy liquid radioactive waste produced during the cold war, is aggressive in-tank chemical cleaning. Chemical cleaning has successfully reduced the curie content of residual waste heels in large underground storage tanks; however this process generates significant chemical hazards. Mercury is often the bounding hazard due to its extensive use in the separations process that produced the waste. This paper explores how variations in controllable process factors, tank level and temperature, may be manipulated to reduce the hazard potential related to mercury vapor generation. When compared using a multivariate regression analysis, findings indicated that there was a significant relationship between both tank level (p value of 1.65x10{sup -23}) and temperature (p value of 6.39x10{sup -6}) to the mercury vapor concentration in the tank ventilation system. Tank temperature showed the most promise as a controllable parameter for future tank cleaning endeavors. Despite statistically significant relationships, there may not be confidence in the ability to control accident scenarios to below mercury’s IDLH or PAC-III levels for future cleaning initiatives.

  9. Hanford tank clean up: A guide to understanding the technical issues

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gephart, R.E.; Lundgren, R.E.

    1995-12-31

    One of the most difficult technical challenges in cleaning up the US Department of Energy`s (DOE) Hanford Site in southeast Washington State will be to process the radioactive and chemically complex waste found in the Site`s 177 underground storage tanks. Solid, liquid, and sludge-like wastes are contained in 149 single- and 28 double-shelled steel tanks. These wastes contain about one half of the curies of radioactivity and mass of hazardous chemicals found on the Hanford Site. Therefore, Hanford cleanup means tank cleanup. Safely removing the waste from the tanks, separating radioactive elements from inert chemicals, and creating a final waste form for disposal will require the use of our nation`s best available technology coupled with scientific advances, and an extraordinary commitment by all involved. The purpose of this guide is to inform the reader about critical issues facing tank cleanup. It is written as an information resource for the general reader as well as the technically trained person wanting to gain a basic understanding about the waste in Hanford`s tanks -- how the waste was created, what is in the waste, how it is stored, and what are the key technical issues facing tank cleanup. Access to information is key to better understanding the issues and more knowledgeably participating in cleanup decisions. This guide provides such information without promoting a given cleanup approach or technology use.

  10. Tank waste remediation system fiscal year 1997 multi-year workplan WBS 1.1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wilson, C.E.

    1996-09-23

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) established the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Program to manage and immobilize for disposal the waste contained in underground storage tanks at the Hanford Site. The TWRS program was established as a DOE major system acquisition under an approved Justification of Mission Need (JMN) dated January 19, 1993. The JMN states that the purpose of the TWRS Program is to: Resolve the tank waste safety issues; Integrate the waste disposal mission with the ongoing waste management mission; Assess the technical bases for tank waste management and disposal; Determine the technology available and develop any needed technologies; and Establish a dedicated organization and provide the resources to meet the technical challenge. The principal objectives of management of existing and future tank wastes is to cost-effectively minimize the environmental, safety, and health risks associated with stored wastes, with reduction of safety risks given the highest priority. The potentials must be minimized for release of tank wastes to the air and to the ground (and subsequently to the groundwater) and for exposure of the operating personnel to tank wastes.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thaxton, D; Timothy Baughman, T

    2008-01-16

    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.

  12. he Hanford Story Tank Waste Cleanup | Department of Energy

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

    he Hanford Story Tank Waste Cleanup he Hanford Story Tank Waste Cleanup Addthis Description The Hanford Story Tank Waste Cleanup

  13. New Mexico Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity ...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) New Mexico Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  14. DOE - Office of Legacy Management -- Hoe Creek Underground Coal...

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Hoe Creek Underground Coal Gasification Site - 045 FUSRAP Considered Sites Site: Hoe Creek Underground Coal Gasification Site (045) Designated Name: Alternate Name: Location: ...

  15. Nevada National Security Site Underground Test Area (UGTA) Flow...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Nevada National Security Site Underground Test Area (UGTA) Flow and Transport Modeling - ... Video Presentation PDF icon Nevada National Security Site Underground Test Area (UGTA) ...

  16. ,"West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Data for" ,"Data 1","West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity ... AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity ...

  17. NAC - 534 Underground Water and Wells | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    - 534 Underground Water and Wells Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- RegulationRegulation: NAC - 534 Underground Water and...

  18. Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million...

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

    Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct...

  19. New York Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) New York Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  20. Pore Models Track Reactions in Underground Carbon Capture

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

    extract from saline aquifers deep underground. The goal is to learn what will happen when fluids pass through the material should power plants inject carbon dioxide underground. ...

  1. AGA Eastern Consuming Region Natural Gas Underground Storage...

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

    Eastern Consuming Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) AGA Eastern Consuming Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Year...

  2. Indiana Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Indiana Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul...

  3. Oregon Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Oregon Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul...

  4. Arkansas Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Arkansas Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  5. Alaska Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Alaska Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul...

  6. Oklahoma Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Oklahoma Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  7. Nebraska Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Nebraska Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  8. Michigan Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Michigan Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  9. Minnesota Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Minnesota Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  10. Utah Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Utah Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul...

  11. Missouri Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Missouri Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  12. Virginia Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Virginia Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  13. Maryland Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Maryland Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  14. Wyoming Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Wyoming Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul...

  15. Ohio Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Ohio Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul...

  16. Illinois Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Illinois Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  17. Iowa Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Iowa Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul...

  18. Kentucky Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Kentucky Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  19. Texas Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Texas Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul...

  20. Louisiana Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Louisiana Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun...

  1. Alabama Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Alabama Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul...

  2. AGA Producing Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals...

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

    AGA Producing Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet) AGA Producing Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic...

  3. New model more accurately tracks gases for underground nuclear...

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

    underground nuclear explosion detection Scientists have developed a new, more thorough method for detecting underground nuclear explosions by coupling two fundamental...

  4. West Virginia Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) West Virginia Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May...

  5. EPA - Underground Injection Control Classes of Wells webpage...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Underground Injection Control Classes of Wells webpage Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: EPA - Underground Injection Control Classes of...

  6. Idaho Underground Injection Control Program Webpage | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Underground Injection Control Program Webpage Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Idaho Underground Injection Control Program Webpage...

  7. Vermont Underground Injection Control Rule | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Underground Injection Control Rule Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- RegulationRegulation: Vermont Underground Injection Control...

  8. Montana Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul...

  9. Kansas Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million...

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Kansas Working Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul...

  10. Long-Baseline Neutrino Facility / Deep Underground Neutrino Project...

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

    Long-Baseline Neutrino Facility Deep Underground Neutrino Project (LBNF-DUNE) Long-Baseline Neutrino Facility Deep Underground Neutrino Project (LBNF-DUNE) Long-Baseline ...

  11. Technical evaluation and assessment of CNG/LPG bi-fuel and flex-fuel vehicle viability

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sinor, J E

    1994-05-01

    This report compares vehicles using compressed natural gas (CNG), liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), and combinations of the two in bi-fuel or flex-fuel configurations. Evidence shows that environmental and energy advantages can be gained by replacing two-fuel CNG/gasoline vehicles with two-fuel or flex-fuel systems to be economically competitive, it is necessary to develop a universal CNG/LPG pressure-regulator-injector and engine control module to switch from one tank to the other. For flex-fuel CNG/LPG designs, appropriate composition sensors, refueling pumps, fuel tanks, and vaporizers are necessary.

  12. NREL: Energy Systems Integration Facility - Fuel Distribution...

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

    "day tank" for diesel fuel and supply lines throughout the lab space. Photo of a man standing next to a rooftop hydrogen distribution bus. Hydrogen is supplied to the labs in the...

  13. Tank Waste Remediation System Tank Waste Analysis Plan. FY 1995

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1994-11-01

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

  14. The Basics of Underground Natural Gas Storage

    Annual Energy Outlook [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    Two of the most important characteristics of an underground storage reservoir are its capacity to hold natural gas for future use and the rate at which gas inventory can be...

  15. ,"Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"1012015 11:00:57 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5070WA2"...

  16. ,"California Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"01292016 2:35:44 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: California Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5070CA2"...

  17. Dynamic underground stripping demonstration project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Newmark, R.L.

    1992-04-01

    LLNL is collaborating with the UC Berkeley College of Engineering to develop and demonstrate a system of thermal remediation techniques for rapid cleanup of localized underground spills. Called dynamic stripping to reflect the rapid and controllable nature of the process, it will combine steam injection, direct electrical heating, and tomographic geophysical imaging in a cleanup of the LLNL gasoline spill. In the first eight months of the project, a Clean Site engineering test was conducted to prove the field application of the techniques. Tests then began on the contaminated site in FY 1992. This report describes the work at the Clean Site, including design and performance criteria, test results, interpretations, and conclusions. We fielded 'a wide range of new designs and techniques, some successful and some not. In this document, we focus on results and performance, lessons learned, and design and operational changes recommended for work at the contaminated site. Each section focuses on a different aspect of the work and can be considered a self-contained contribution.

  18. Seismic design and evaluation guidelines for the Department of Energy High-Level Waste Storage Tanks and Appurtenances

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bandyopadhyay, K.; Cornell, A.; Costantino, C.; Kennedy, R.; Miller, C.; Veletsos, A.

    1995-10-01

    This document provides seismic design and evaluation guidelines for underground high-level waste storage tanks. The guidelines reflect the knowledge acquired in the last two decades in defining seismic ground motion and calculating hydrodynamic loads, dynamic soil pressures and other loads for underground tank structures, piping and equipment. The application of the guidelines is illustrated with examples. The guidelines are developed for a specific design of underground storage tanks, namely double-shell structures. However, the methodology discussed is applicable for other types of tank structures as well. The application of these and of suitably adjusted versions of these concepts to other structural types will be addressed in a future version of this document. The original version of this document was published in January 1993. Since then, additional studies have been performed in several areas and the results are included in this revision. Comments received from the users are also addressed. Fundamental concepts supporting the basic seismic criteria contained in the original version have since then been incorporated and published in DOE-STD-1020-94 and its technical basis documents. This information has been deleted in the current revision.

  19. Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Citygate Price Residential Price Commercial Price Industrial Price Electric Power Price Gross Withdrawals Gross Withdrawals From Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Oil Wells Gross Withdrawals From Shale Gas Wells Gross Withdrawals From Coalbed Wells Repressuring Nonhydrocarbon Gases Removed Vented and Flared Marketed Production NGPL Production, Gaseous Equivalent Dry Production Imports By Pipeline LNG Imports Exports Exports By Pipeline LNG Exports Underground Storage Capacity Gas in Underground

  20. Underground infrastructure damage for a Chicago scenario

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dey, Thomas N; Bos, Rabdall J

    2011-01-25

    Estimating effects due to an urban IND (improvised nuclear device) on underground structures and underground utilities is a challenging task. Nuclear effects tests performed at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) during the era of nuclear weapons testing provides much information on how underground military structures respond. Transferring this knowledge to answer questions about the urban civilian environment is needed to help plan responses to IND scenarios. Explosions just above the ground surface can only couple a small fraction of the blast energy into an underground shock. The various forms of nuclear radiation have limited penetration into the ground. While the shock transmitted into the ground carries only a small fraction of the blast energy, peak stresses are generally higher and peak ground displacement is lower than in the air blast. While underground military structures are often designed to resist stresses substantially higher than due to the overlying rocks and soils (overburden), civilian structures such as subways and tunnels would generally only need to resist overburden conditions with a suitable safety factor. Just as we expect the buildings themselves to channel and shield air blast above ground, basements and other underground openings as well as changes of geology will channel and shield the underground shock wave. While a weaker shock is expected in an urban environment, small displacements on very close-by faults, and more likely, soils being displaced past building foundations where utility lines enter could readily damaged or disable these services. Immediately near an explosion, the blast can 'liquefy' a saturated soil creating a quicksand-like condition for a period of time. We extrapolate the nuclear effects experience to a Chicago-based scenario. We consider the TARP (Tunnel and Reservoir Project) and subway system and the underground lifeline (electric, gas, water, etc) system and provide guidance for planning this scenario.

  1. System for remote control of underground device

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Brumleve, T.D.; Hicks, M.G.; Jones, M.O.

    1975-10-21

    A system is described for remote control of an underground device, particularly a nuclear explosive. The system includes means at the surface of the ground for transmitting a seismic signal sequence through the earth having controlled and predetermined signal characteristics for initiating a selected action in the device. Additional apparatus, located with or adjacent to the underground device, produces electrical signals in response to the seismic signals received and compares these electrical signals with the predetermined signal characteristics.

  2. Evaluation of Flygt Propeller Xixers for Double Shell Tank (DST) High Level Waste Auxiliary Solids Mobilization

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    PACQUET, E.A.

    2000-07-20

    The River Protection Project (RPP) is planning to retrieve radioactive waste from the single-shell tanks (SST) and double-shell tanks (DST) underground at the Hanford Site. This waste will then be transferred to a waste treatment plant to be immobilized (vitrified) in a stable glass form. Over the years, the waste solids in many of the tanks have settled to form a layer of sludge at the bottom. The thickness of the sludge layer varies from tank to tank, from no sludge or a few inches of sludge to about 15 ft of sludge. The purpose of this technology and engineering case study is to evaluate the Flygt{trademark} submersible propeller mixer as a potential technology for auxiliary mobilization of DST HLW solids. Considering the usage and development to date by other sites in the development of this technology, this study also has the objective of expanding the knowledge base of the Flygt{trademark} mixer concept with the broader perspective of Hanford Site tank waste retrieval. More specifically, the objectives of this study delineated from the work plan are described.

  3. Fuel flexible fuel injector

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Tuthill, Richard S; Davis, Dustin W; Dai, Zhongtao

    2015-02-03

    A disclosed fuel injector provides mixing of fuel with airflow by surrounding a swirled fuel flow with first and second swirled airflows that ensures mixing prior to or upon entering the combustion chamber. Fuel tubes produce a central fuel flow along with a central airflow through a plurality of openings to generate the high velocity fuel/air mixture along the axis of the fuel injector in addition to the swirled fuel/air mixture.

  4. Tank Waste Committee Page 1

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

    April 17, 2012 FINAL MEETING SUMMARY HANFORD ADVISORY BOARD TANK WASTE COMMITTEE MEETING April 17, 2012 Richland, WA Topics in this Meeting Summary Welcome & Introductions ............................................................................................................................. 1 Discussion of Tank-Related Permit Units ..................................................................................................... 1 Discussion of IDF and Risk Budget Tool

  5. Tank Closure & Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement...

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

    RODs: Tanks with leaks removed to get at leak contamination. Tank gear, pipes, valves, etc to be removed. RTD contaminated soils where necessary. Watch for...

  6. Tank Farm Area Cleanup Decision-Making

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

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

  7. Organic liner for thermoset composite tank

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Garvey, Raymond E.

    1991-01-01

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

  8. Independent Oversight Review, Hanford Tank Farms- November 2011

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Review of Hanford Tank Farms Safety Basis Amendment for Double-Shell Tank Ventilation System Upgrades

  9. SLUDGE RETRIEVAL FROM HANFORD K WEST BASIN SETTLER TANKS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    ERPENBECK EG; LESHIKAR GA

    2011-01-13

    In 2010, an innovative, remotely operated retrieval system was deployed to successfully retrieve over 99.7% of the radioactive sludge from ten submerged tanks in Hanford's K-West Basin. As part of K-West Basin cleanup, the accumulated sludge needed to be removed from the 0.5 meter diameter by 5 meter long settler tanks and transferred approximately 45 meters to an underwater container for sampling and waste treatment. The abrasive, dense, non-homogeneous sludge was the product of the washing process of corroded nuclear fuel. It consists of small (less than 600 micron) particles of uranium metal, uranium oxide, and various other constituents, potentially agglomerated or cohesive after 10 years of storage. The Settler Tank Retrieval System (STRS) was developed to access, mobilize and pump out the sludge from each tank using a standardized process of retrieval head insertion, periodic high pressure water spray, retraction, and continuous pumping of the sludge. Blind operations were guided by monitoring flow rate, radiation levels in the sludge stream, and solids concentration. The technology developed and employed in the STRS can potentially be adapted to similar problematic waste tanks or pipes that must be remotely accessed to achieve mobilization and retrieval of the sludge within.

  10. Refinement of Modeling Techniques for the Structural Evaluation of Hanford Single-Shell Nuclear Waste Storage Tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Karri, Naveen K.; Rinker, Michael W.; Johnson, Kenneth I.; Bapanapalli, Satish K.

    2012-03-01

    Abstract: A total of 149 tanks out of 177 at the Hanford Site (in Washington State, USA) belong to the first generation of underground nuclear waste storage tanks known as single shell tanks (SSTs). These tanks were constructed between 1943 and 1964 and are well beyond their design life. All the SSTs had been removed from active service by November 1980 and have been later interim stabilized by removing the pumpable liquids. The remaining waste in the tanks is in the form of salt cake and sludge awaiting r permanent disposal.. The evaluation of the structural integrity of these tanks is of utmost importance not only for the continued safe storage of the waste until waste retrieval and closure, but also to assure safe retrieval and closure operations. This article discusses the structural analysis approach, modeling challenges and issues encountered during the ongoing analysis of record (AOR) for evaluating the structural integrity of the SSTs. There are several geometrical and material nonlinearities and uncertainties to be dealt with while performing the modern finite element analysis of these tanks. Several studies were conducted to refine the models in order to minimize modeling artifacts introduced by soil arching, boundary effects, concrete cracking, and concrete-soil interface behavior. The analysis takes into account the temperature history of the tanks and allowable mechanical operating loads of these tanks for proper estimation of creep strains and thermal degradation of material properties. The loads imposed in the AOR models also include anticipated loads that these tanks may see during waste retrieval and closure. Due to uncertainty in a number of inputs to the models, sensitivity studies were conducted to address questions related to the boundary conditions to realistically or conservatively represent the influence of surrounding tanks in a tank farm, the influence of backfill excavation slope, the extent of backfill and the total extent of undisturbed soil surrounding the backfill. The article also discusses the criteria and design standards used for evaluating the structural integrity of these underground concrete tanks. Because of the non-availability of complete data on the thermal and operating history for many of the individual tanks, some of the data was assumed or interpolated. However, the models developed for the analysis of record represent the bounding scenarios and include the worst and extreme loading cases that the tanks were subjected to or anticipated. The modeling refinement techniques followed in the AOR resulted in conservative estimates for force and moment demands at various sections in the concrete tanks. The SSTs are classified into 4 types as per their configuration and capacity. This article discusses the modeling aspects related to two types of SSTs that have been analyzed until now. The TOLA results combined with seismic demands from seismic analysis for the analysis of record indicate that the tanks analyzed are structurally stable as per the evaluation criteria established. These results are presented in a separate article. The modeling techniques, methodology and evaluation criteria developed for evaluating the structural integrity of SSTs at Hanford are in general applicable to any similar tanks or underground concrete storage structures.

  11. Geologic Carbon Sequestration: Mitigating Climate Change by Injecting CO2 Underground (LBNL Summer Lecture Series)

    ScienceCinema (OSTI)

    Oldenburg, Curtis M [LBNL Earth Sciences Division

    2011-04-28

    Summer Lecture Series 2009: Climate change provides strong motivation to reduce CO2 emissions from the burning of fossil fuels. Carbon dioxide capture and storage involves the capture, compression, and transport of CO2 to geologically favorable areas, where its injected into porous rock more than one kilometer underground for permanent storage. Oldenburg, who heads Berkeley Labs Geologic Carbon Sequestration Program, will focus on the challenges, opportunities, and research needs of this innovative technology.

  12. Geologic Carbon Sequestration: Mitigating Climate Change by Injecting CO2 Underground (LBNL Summer Lecture Series)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Oldenburg, Curtis M

    2009-07-21

    Summer Lecture Series 2009: Climate change provides strong motivation to reduce CO2 emissions from the burning of fossil fuels. Carbon dioxide capture and storage involves the capture, compression, and transport of CO2 to geologically favorable areas, where its injected into porous rock more than one kilometer underground for permanent storage. Oldenburg, who heads Berkeley Labs Geologic Carbon Sequestration Program, will focus on the challenges, opportunities, and research needs of this innovative technology.

  13. Tank farms hazards assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Broz, R.E.

    1994-09-30

    Hanford contractors are writing new facility specific emergency procedures in response to new and revised US Department of Energy (DOE) Orders on emergency preparedness. Emergency procedures are required for each Hanford facility that has the potential to exceed the criteria for the lowest level emergency, an Alert. The set includes: (1) a facility specific procedure on Recognition and Classification of Emergencies, (2) area procedures on Initial Emergency Response and, (3) an area procedure on Protective Action Guidance. The first steps in developing these procedures are to identify the hazards at each facility, identify the conditions that could release the hazardous material, and calculate the consequences of the releases. These steps are called a Hazards Assessment. The final product is a document that is similar in some respects to a Safety Analysis Report (SAR). The document could br produced in a month for a simple facility but could take much longer for a complex facility. Hanford has both types of facilities. A strategy has been adopted to permit completion of the first version of the new emergency procedures before all the facility hazards Assessments are complete. The procedures will initially be based on input from a task group for each facility. This strategy will but improved emergency procedures in place sooner and therefore enhance Hanford emergency preparedness. The purpose of this document is to summarize the applicable information contained within the Waste Tank Facility ``Interim Safety Basis Document, WHC-SD-WM-ISB-001`` as a resource, since the SARs covering Waste Tank Operations are not current in all cases. This hazards assessment serves to collect, organize, document and present the information utilized during the determination process.

  14. Hydrogen Storage "Think Tank" Report | Department of Energy

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

    "Think Tank" Report Hydrogen Storage "Think Tank" Report This report is a compilation of information exchanged at a forum on March 14, 2003, in Washington, D.C. The forum was assembled for innovative and non-conventional brainstorming on this issue of hydrogen storage technologies. PDF icon Hydrogen Storage "Think Tank" Report More Documents & Publications Hydrogen Program Goal-Setting Methodologies Report to Congress FY 2003 Progress Report for Hydrogen, Fuel

  15. Houdini{trademark}: Reconfigurable in-tank mobile robot. Final report, June 1995--January 1997

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thompson, B.; Slifko, A.

    1998-12-31

    This report details the development of a reconfigurable in-tank robotic cleanup system called Houdini{trademark}. Driven by the general need to develop equipment for the removal of radioactive waste from hundreds of DOE waste storage tanks and the specific needs of DOE sites such as Oak Ridge National Laboratory and Fernald, Houdini{trademark} represents one of the possible tools that can be used to mobilize and retrieve this waste material for complete remediation. Houdini{trademark} is a hydraulically powered, track driven, mobile work vehicle with a collapsible frame designed to enter underground or above ground waste tanks through existing 24 inch riser openings. After the vehicle has entered the waste tank, it unfolds and lands on the waste surface or tank floor to become a remotely operated mini-bulldozer. Houdini{trademark} utilizes a vehicle mounted plow blade and 6-DOF manipulator to mobilize waste and carry other tooling such as sluicing pumps, excavation buckets, and hydraulic shears. The complete Houdini{trademark} system consists of the tracked vehicle and other support equipment (e.g., control console, deployment system, hydraulic power supply, and controller) necessary to deploy and remotely operate this system at any DOE site. Inside the storage tanks, the system is capable of performing heel removal, waste mobilization, waste size reduction, and other tank waste retrieval and decommissioning tasks. The first Houdini{trademark} system was delivered on September 24, 1996 to Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). The system acceptance test was successfully performed at a cold test facility at ORNL. After completion of the cold test program and the training of site personnel, ORNL will deploy the system for clean-up and remediation of the Gunite storage tanks.

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

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

    Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington (Final TC & WM EIS) (DOE/EIS-0391) Frequently Asked Questions What are the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) proposed actions in the Final TC & WM EIS? The Final TC & WM EIS (DOE/EIS-0391) evaluates three sets of proposed actions, as follows: Retrieve and treat the waste remaining in 177 underground storage tanks; store the high-level radioactive waste (HLW); dispose of

  17. Light Duty Vehicle CNG Tanks

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Duty Vehicle CNG Tanks Dane A. Boysen, PhD Program Director Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy, US DOE dane.boysen@doe.gov Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composite Manufacturing Workshop Advanced Manufacturing Office, EERE, US DOE Arlington VA, January 13, 2014 Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy Can I put my luggage in the trunk? Uh, sorry no Commercial CNG Tanks Tank Type I Type IV Material steel carbon fiber Capacity 12 gallon 12 gallon Weight 490 lb 190 lb Cost $1,700 $4,300 50% less

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Balsley, S.D.; Krumhansl, J.L.; Borns, D.J.; McKeen, R.G.

    1998-07-01

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

  19. Multiple fuel supply system for an internal combustion engine

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Crothers, William T.

    1977-01-01

    A multiple fuel supply or an internal combustion engine wherein phase separation of components is deliberately induced. The resulting separation permits the use of a single fuel tank to supply components of either or both phases to the engine. Specifically, phase separation of a gasoline/methanol blend is induced by the addition of a minor amount of water sufficient to guarantee separation into an upper gasoline phase and a lower methanol/water phase. A single fuel tank holds the two-phase liquid with separate fuel pickups and separate level indicators for each phase. Either gasoline or methanol, or both, can be supplied to the engine as required by predetermined parameters. A fuel supply system for a phase-separated multiple fuel supply contained in a single fuel tank is described.

  20. Method for making generally cylindrical underground openings

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Routh, J.W.

    1983-05-26

    A rapid, economical and safe method for making a generally cylindrical underground opening such as a shaft or a tunnel is described. A borehole is formed along the approximate center line of where it is desired to make the underground opening. The borehole is loaded with an explodable material and the explodable material is detonated. An enlarged cavity is formed by the explosive action of the detonated explodable material forcing outward and compacting the original walls of the borehole. The enlarged cavity may be increased in size by loading it with a second explodable material, and detonating the second explodable material. The process may be repeated as required until the desired underground opening is made. The explodable material used in the method may be free-flowing, and it may be contained in a pipe.

  1. Underground pipe inspection device and method

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Germata, Daniel Thomas (Wadsworth, IL)

    2009-02-24

    A method and apparatus for inspecting the walls of an underground pipe from inside the pipe in which an inspection apparatus having a circular planar platform having a plurality of lever arms having one end pivotably attached to one side of the platform, having a pipe inspection device connected to an opposite end, and having a system for pivoting the lever arms is inserted into the underground pipe, with the inspection apparatus oriented with the planar platform disposed perpendicular to the pipe axis. The plurality of lever arms are pivoted toward the inside wall of the pipe, contacting the inside wall with each inspection device as the apparatus is conveyed along a length of the underground pipe.

  2. The Gunite and Associated Tanks Remediation Project Tank Waste Retrieval Performance and Lessons Learned, vol. 2 [of 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lewis, BE

    2003-10-07

    The Gunite and Associated Tanks (GAAT) Remediation Project was the first of its kind performed in the United States. Robotics and remotely operated equipment were used to successfully transfer almost 94,000 gal of remote-handled transuranic sludge containing over 81,000 Ci of radioactive contamination from nine large underground storage tanks at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). The sludge was transferred with over 439,000 gal of radioactive waste supernatant and {approx}420,500 gal of fresh water that was used in sluicing operations. The GAATs are located in a high-traffic area of ORNL near a main thoroughfare. Volume 1 provides information on the various phases of the project and describes the types of equipment used. Volume 1 also discusses the tank waste retrieval performance and the lessons learned during the remediation effort. Volume 2 consists of the following appendixes, which are referenced in Vol. 1: A--Background Information for the Gunite and Associated Tanks Operable Unit; B--Annotated Bibliography; C--GAAT Equipment Matrix; D--Comprehensive Listing of the Sample Analysis Data from the GAAT Remediation Project; and E--Vendor List for the GAAT Remediation Project. The remediation of the GAATs was completed {approx}5.5 years ahead of schedule and {approx}$120,435K below the cost estimated in the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study for the project. These schedule and cost savings were a direct result of the selection and use of state-of-the-art technologies and the dedication and drive of the engineers, technicians, managers, craft workers, and support personnel that made up the GAAT Remediation Project Team.

  3. STEADY STATE FLAMMABLE GAS RELEASE RATE CALCULATION AND LOWER FLAMMABILITY LEVEL EVALUATION FOR HANFORD TANK WASTE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MEACHAM JE

    2009-10-26

    This report assesses the steady state flammability level under off normal ventilation conditions in the tank headspace for 28 double-shell tanks (DST) and 149 single shell-tanks (SST) at the Hanford Site. Flammability was calculated using estimated gas release rates, Le Chatelier's rule, and lower flammability limits of fuels in an air mixture. This revision updates the hydrogen generation rate input data for all 177 tanks using waste composition information from the Best Basis Inventory Detail Report (data effective as of August 4,2008). Assuming only barometric breathing, the shortest time to reach 25% of the lower flammability limit is 11 days for DSTs (i.e., tank 241-AZ-10l) and 36 days for SSTs (i.e., tank 241-B-203). Assuming zero ventilation, the shortest time to reach 25% of the lower flammability limit is 10 days for DSTs (i.e., tank 241-AZ-101) and 34 days for SSTs (i.e., tank 241-B-203).

  4. STEADY STATE FLAMMABLE GAS RELEASE RATE CALCULATION AND LOWER FLAMMABILITY LEVEL EVALUATION FOR HANFORD TANK WASTE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MEACHAM JE

    2008-11-17

    This report assesses the steady state flammability level under off normal ventilation conditions in the tank headspace for 28 double-shell tanks (DST) and 149 single shell-tanks (SST) at the Hanford Site. Flammability was calculated using estimated gas release rates, Le Chatelier's rule, and lower flammability limits of fuels in an air mixture. This revision updates the hydrogen generation rate input data for al1 177 tanks using waste composition information from the Best Basis Inventory Detail Report (data effective as of August 4,2008). Assuming only barometric breathing, the shortest time to reach 25% of the lower flammability limit is 13 days for DSTs (i.e., tank 241-AZ-102) and 36 days for SSTs (i.e., tank 241-B-203). Assuming zero ventilation, the shortest time to reach 25% of the lower flammability limit is 12 days for DSTs (i.e., tank 241-AZ-102) and 34 days for SSTs (i.e., tank 241-B-203).

  5. Tank Waste Committee Page 1

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

    ... close in C Farm, and there is 6.3 miles of contaminated pipeline to go with those tanks. ... (OU) decision, and are identified in the SST closure permit and the current Part B permit. ...

  6. Retooling Michigan: Tanks to Turbines

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  7. Light Duty Vehicle CNG Tanks

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

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

  8. Tank Waste Committee Page 1

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

    ... Because of the stress on the tank due to it being bowed up in the middle (or "oil ... There would be no time for annulus pumping. The waste would almost instantly fill the leak ...

  9. Tank Waste Committee Page 1

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

    June 9, 2011 FINAL MEETING SUMMARY HANFORD ADVISORY BOARD TANK WASTE COMMITTEE MEETING June 9, 2011 Richland, WA Topics in this Meeting Summary Welcome and Introductions .......................................................................................................................... 1 Waste Management Area C Performance Assessment ................................................................................. 1 Closure Schedule for WMA C

  10. Cost and code study of underground buildings

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sterling, R.L.

    1981-01-01

    Various regulatory and financial implications for earth-sheltered houses and buildings are discussed. Earth-sheltered houses are covered in the most detail including discussions of building-code restrictions, HUD Minimum Property Standards, legal aspects, zoning restrictions, taxation, insurance, and home financing. Examples of the initial-cost elements in earth-sheltered houses together with projected life-cycle costs are given and compared to more-conventional energy-conserving houses. For larger-scale underground buildings, further information is given on building code, fire protection, and insurance provisions. Initial-cost information for five large underground buildings is presented together with energy-use information where available.

  11. Potential underground risks associated with CAES.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kirk, Matthew F.; Webb, Stephen Walter; Broome, Scott Thomas; Pfeifle, Thomas W.; Grubelich, Mark Charles; Bauer, Stephen J.

    2010-10-01

    CAES in geologic media has been proposed to help 'firm' renewable energy sources (wind and solar) by providing a means to store energy when excess energy was available, and to provide an energy source during non-productive renewable energy time periods. Such a storage media may experience hourly (perhaps small) pressure swings. Salt caverns represent the only proven underground storage used for CAES, but not in a mode where renewable energy sources are supported. Reservoirs, both depleted natural gas and aquifers represent other potential underground storage vessels for CAES, however, neither has yet to be demonstrated as a functional/operational storage media for CAES.

  12. REACTOR FUEL ELEMENTS TESTING CONTAINER

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Whitham, G.K.; Smith, R.R.

    1963-01-15

    This patent shows a method for detecting leaks in jacketed fuel elements. The element is placed in a sealed tank within a nuclear reactor, and, while the reactor operates, the element is sparged with gas. The gas is then led outside the reactor and monitored for radioactive Xe or Kr. (AEC)

  13. Refinement of Modeling Techniques for the Structural Evaluation of Hanford Single-Shell Nuclear Waste Storage Tanks - 12288

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Karri, Naveen K.; Rinker, Michael W.; Johnson, Kenneth I.; Bapanapalli, Satish K.

    2012-07-01

    The single-shell tanks at the Hanford Site (in Washington State, USA) were constructed between 1943 and 1964 and are well beyond their estimated 25 year design life. This article discusses the structural analysis approach and modeling challenges encountered during the ongoing analysis of record for evaluating the structural integrity of the single-shell tanks. There are several geometrical and material nonlinearities and uncertainties to be dealt with while performing the modern finite element analysis of these tanks. The analysis takes into account the temperature history of the tanks and allowable mechanical operating loads for proper estimation of creep strains and thermal degradation of material properties. The loads prescribed in the analysis of record models also include anticipated loads that may occur during waste retrieval and closure. Due to uncertainty in a number of modeling details, sensitivity studies were conducted to address questions related to boundary conditions that realistically or conservatively represent the influence of surrounding tanks in a tank farm, the influence of backfill excavation slope, the extent of backfill and the total extent of undisturbed soil surrounding the backfill. Because of the limited availability of data on the thermal and operating history for many of the individual tanks, some of the data was assumed or interpolated. However, the models developed for the analysis of record represent the bounding scenarios and include the loading conditions that the tanks were subjected to or anticipated. The modeling refinement techniques followed in the analysis of record resulted in conservative estimates for force and moment demands at various sections in the concrete tanks. This article discusses the modeling aspects related to Type-II and Type-III single-shell tanks. The modeling techniques, methodology and evaluation criteria developed for evaluating the structural integrity of single-shell tanks at Hanford are in general applicable to other similar tanks or underground concrete storage structures. This article presented the details of the finite element models and analysis approach followed during the ongoing effort to establish structural integrity of single shell tanks at the Hanford site. The details of the material constitutive models applicable to the underground Hanford concrete tanks that capture the thermal and creep induce degradation are also presented. The thermal profiles were developed based on the available tank temperature data for the Type II and Type III single-shell tanks, and they were chosen to yield conservative demands under the thermal and operating loads analysis of these tanks. Sensitivity studies were conducted to address two issues regarding the soils modeled around the single-shell tanks. The results indicate that excluding the boundary separating the backfill soil from the undisturbed soil will result in conservative demands (plots 14b and 14c green lines for circumferential Demand/Capacity ratios). The radial extent study indicated that the soil model extending to 240 ft gave more conservative results than the model with 62 ft of soil (plots 17a and 17c magenta lines for hoop Demand/Capacity ratios). Based on these results, a 240 ft far-field soil boundary with backfill throughout the lateral extent was recommended and used for the finite element models used in the Type-II and Type-III analyses of record. The modeling effort and sensitivity studies discussed in this article helped in developing bounding models for the structural integrity evaluation of single shell tanks at the Hanford site. (authors)

  14. Test procedure for use of the shear vane in tanks 103-SY, 103-AN, and 103-AW

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    LeClair, M.D.; Waters, E.

    1995-01-01

    This is a record copy of a test procedure for application of the full-scale shear vane to underground waste tanks at Hanford. The introduction of the report provides background information on the development and proof-testing of the shear vane, as well as information about its current location. The document was originally prepared in 1988, and the work as shelved temporarily for lack of funds. Activities to utilize the shear vane will be expedited by use of this information.

  15. LABORATORY TESTING TO SIMULATE VAPOR SPACE CORROSION IN RADIOACTIVE WASTE STORAGE TANKS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wiersma, B.; Garcia-Diaz, B.; Gray, J.

    2013-08-30

    Radioactive liquid waste has been stored in underground carbon steel tanks for nearly 70 years at the Hanford nuclear facility. Vapor space corrosion of the tank walls has emerged as an ongoing challenge to overcome in maintaining the structural integrity of these tanks. The interaction between corrosive and inhibitor species in condensates/supernates on the tank wall above the liquid level, and their interaction with vapor phase constituents as the liquid evaporates from the tank wall influences the formation of corrosion products and the corrosion of the carbon steel. An effort is underway to gain an understanding of the mechanism of vapor space corrosion. Localized corrosion, in the form of pitting, is of particular interest in the vapor space. CPP testing was utilized to determine the susceptibility of the steel in a simulated vapor space environment. The tests also investigated the impact of ammonia gas in the vapor space area on the corrosion of the steel. Vapor space coupon tests were also performed to investigate the evolution of the corrosion products during longer term exposures. These tests were also conducted at vapor space ammonia levels of 50 and 550 ppm NH{sub 3} (0.005, and 0.055 vol.%) in air. Ammonia was shown to mitigate vapor space corrosion.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    KRISTOFZSKI, J.G.

    2007-01-15

    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.

  17. Remote systems for waste retrieval from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory gunite tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Falter, D.D.; Babcock, S.M.; Burks, B.L.; Lloyd, P.D.; Randolph, J.D.; Rutenber, J.E.; Van Hoesen, S.D.

    1995-12-31

    As part of a Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act Treatability Study funded by the Department of Energy, the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is preparing to demonstrate and evaluate two approaches for the remote retrieval of wastes in underground storage tanks. This work is being performed to identify the most cost-effective and efficient method of waste removal before full-scale remediation efforts begin in 1998. System requirements are based on the need to dislodge and remove sludge wastes ranging in consistency from broth to compacted clay from Gunite (Shotcrete) tanks that are approaching fifty years in age. Systems to be deployed must enter and exit through the existing 0.6 m (23.5 in.) risers and conduct retrieval operations without damaging the layered concrete walls of the tanks. Goals of this project include evaluation of confined sluicing techniques and successful demonstration of a telerobotic arm-based system for deployment of the sluicing system. As part of a sister project formed on the Old Hydrofracture Facility tanks at ORNL, vehicle-based tank remediation will also be evaluated.

  18. Nested Fixed Depth Fluidic Sampler and At Tank Analysis System Deployment Strategy and Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    REICH, F.R.

    2000-02-01

    Under the Hanford Site River Protection Project (RPP) privatization strategy, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of River Protection (ORP) requires the CH2M Hill Hanford Group, Inc. (CHG) to supply tank waste to the privatization contractor, BNFL Inc. (BNFL), for separation and/or treatment and immobilization (vitrification). Three low-activity waste (LAW) specification envelopes represent the range of liquid waste types in the large, Hanford Site underground waste storage tanks. The CHG also is expected to supply high-level waste (HLW) separation and/or treatment and disposal. The HLW envelope is an aqueous slurry of insoluble suspended solids (sludge). The Phase 1 demonstration will extend over 24 years (1996 through 2019) and will be used to resolve technical uncertainties. About one-tenth of the total Hanford Site tank waste, by mass, will be processed during this period. This document provides a strategy and top-level implementation plan for demonstrating and deploying an alternative sampling technology. The alternative technology is an improvement to the current grab sampling and core sampling approaches that are planned to be used to support the RPP privatization contract. This work also includes adding the capability for some at-tank analysis to enhance the potential of this new technology to meet CHG needs. The first application is to LAW and HLW feed staging for privatization; the next is to support cross-site waste transfer from 200 West Area tanks.

  19. Savannah River Site - Tank 48 Briefing on SRS Tank 48 Independent...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    SRS Tank 48 Independent Technical Review August 2006 2 SRS Tank 48 ITR SRS Tank 48 ITR Key ITR Observation Two distinct problems: Removing tetraphenylborate (TPB) waste and then ...

  20. ,"Midwest Region Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:21 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Midwest Region Natural Gas ...

  1. ,"AGA Eastern Consuming Region Underground Natural Gas Storage...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:24 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","AGA Eastern Consuming Region ...

  2. ,"West Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:59 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","West Virginia Natural Gas in ...

  3. ,"New York Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:48 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... York Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","New York Natural Gas in ...

  4. ,"Mountain Region Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:22 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Mountain Region Natural Gas ...

  5. ,"Pacific Region Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:26 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","Pacific Region Natural Gas ...

  6. ,"AGA Western Consuming Region Underground Natural Gas Storage...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:25 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","AGA Western Consuming Region ...

  7. ,"East Region Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:19 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","East Region Natural Gas in ...

  8. ,"AGA Producing Region Underground Natural Gas Storage - All...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:23 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","AGA Producing Region Natural ...

  9. ,"South Central Region Underground Natural Gas Storage - All...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...282016 11:29:20 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Total Underground Storage" ... Region Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) (MMcf)","South Central Region Natural ...

  10. ,"Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5070VA2" "Date","Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net ...

  11. ,"West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    "Back to Contents","Data 1: West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5070WV2" "Date","West Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage ...

  12. ,"New Mexico Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    ...,"N5020NM2","N5070NM2","N5050NM2","N5060NM2" "Date","New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)","New Mexico Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Base Gas) ...

  13. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5070NM2" "Date","New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Net ...

  14. Lower 48 States Natural Gas Working Underground Storage (Billion...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Underground Storage (Billion Cubic Feet) Lower 48 States Natural Gas Working Underground Storage (Billion Cubic Feet) Year-Month Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 End Date Value...

  15. Montana Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working Gas) (Million...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    in Underground Storage (Working Gas) (Million Cubic Feet) Montana Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Working Gas) (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct ...

  16. NRS Chapter 534 - Underground Water and Wells | Open Energy Informatio...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    - Underground Water and Wells Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Legal Document- StatuteStatute: NRS Chapter 534 - Underground Water and WellsLegal...

  17. Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1997 0 0...

  18. Visit to the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2009-03-31

    U.S. Department of Energy scientists and administrators join members of the National Science Foundation and South Dakotas Sanford Underground Laboratory for the deepest journey yet to the proposed site of the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory (DUSEL).

  19. Visit to the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2009-01-01

    U.S. Department of Energy scientists and administrators join members of the National Science Foundation and South Dakotas Sanford Underground Laboratory for the deepest journey yet to the proposed site of the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory (DUSEL).

  20. ,"Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5070OK2" "Date","Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Net ...