Sample records for underground storage sites

  1. Appendix E: Underground Storage Annual Site Environmental Report

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Pennycook, Steve

    Appendix E: Underground Storage Tank Data #12;Annual Site Environmental Report Appendix E: Underground Storage Tank Data E-3 Table E.1. Underground storage tanks (USTs) at the Y-12 Plant Location/95) NA Closure approval 3/95 (6/96) 9714 2334-U 1987 In use 6,000 Gasoline Full Site check NA NA

  2. Appendix C: Underground Storage Annual Site Environmental Report

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Pennycook, Steve

    Appendix C: Underground Storage Tank Data #12;#12;Annual Site Environmental Report Appendix C: Underground Storage Tank Data C-3 Table C.1. Underground storage tanks (USTs) at the Y-12 Plant Location/95) NA Closure approval 3/95 (6/96) 9714 2334-U 1987 In use 6,000 Gasoline Full Site check NA Case closed

  3. Appendix C: Underground Storage Annual Site Environmental Report

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Pennycook, Steve

    Appendix C: Underground Storage Tank Data #12;#12;Annual Site Environmental Report Appendix C: Underground Storage Tank Data C-3 Table C.1. Underground storage tanks (USTs) at the Y-12 Complex Location/95) NA Closure approval 3/95 (6/96) 9714 2334-U 1987 In use 6,000 Gasoline Full Site check NA Case closed

  4. Underground Storage Tank Regulations

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    D. H. Cox

    2001-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office

    1999-12-23T23:59:59.000Z

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

  7. Underground Storage Tanks (West Virginia)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  8. Underground Storage Tanks (New Jersey)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  9. Underground Storage Tank Program (Vermont)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    These rules are intended to protect public health and the environment by establishing standards for the design, installation, operation, maintenance, monitoring, and closure of underground storage...

  10. Underground pumped hydroelectric storage

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1984-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  11. Underground Storage Tank Act (West Virginia)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  12. Georgia Underground Storage Tank Act (Georgia)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  13. Underground caverns for hydrocarbon storage

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barron, T.F. [Exeter Energy Services, Houston, TX (United States)

    1998-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    Large, international gas processing projects and growing LPG imports in developing countries are driving the need to store large quantities of hydrocarbon liquids. Even though underground storage is common in the US, many people outside the domestic industry are not familiar with the technology and the benefits underground storage can offer. The latter include lower construction and operating costs than surface storage, added safety, security and greater environmental acceptance.

  14. 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.

    2014-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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

  15. Underground storage tank management plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1994-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  16. Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 135: Area 25 Underground Storage Tanks Nevada Test Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office

    1999-05-05T23:59:59.000Z

    This Corrective Action Investigation Plan (CAIP) has been developed in accordance with the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) that was agreed to by the US Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office (DOE/NV); the State of Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP); and the US Department of Defense (FFACO, 1996). The CAIP is a document that provides or references all of the specific information for investigation activities associated with Corrective Action Units (CAUs) or Corrective Action Sites (CASs). According to the FFACO, CASs are sites potentially requiring corrective action(s) and may include solid waste management units or individual disposal or release sites (FFACO, 1996). Corrective Action Units consist of one or more CASs grouped together based on geography, technical similarity, or agency responsibility for the purpose of determining corrective actions. This CAIP contains the environmental sample collection objectives and the criteria for conducting site investigation activities at CAU 135, Area 25 Underground Storage Tanks (USTs), which is located on the Nevada Test Site (NTS). The NTS is approximately 105 kilometers (km) (65 miles [mi]) northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada.

  17. 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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bradley K. Griffith

    2011-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  19. Underground storage of oil and gas

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bergman, S.M.

    1984-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The environmental and security advantages of underground storage of oil and gas are well documented. In many cases, underground storage methods such as storage in salt domes, abandoned mines, and mined rock caverns have proven to be cost effective when compared to storage in steel tanks constructed for that purpose on the surface. In good rock conditions, underground storage of large quantities of hydrocarbon products is normally less costly--up to 50-70% of the surface alternative. Under fair or weak rock conditions, economic comparisons between surface tanks and underground caverns must be evaluated on a case to case basis. The key to successful underground storage is enactment of a realistic geotechnical approach. In addition to construction cost, storage of petroleum products underground has operational advantages over similar storage above ground. These advantages include lower maintenance costs, less fire hazards, less land requirements, and a more even storage temperature.

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

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

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  8. Pipelines and Underground Gas Storage (Iowa)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    These rules apply to intrastate transport of natural gas and other substances via pipeline, as well as underground gas storage facilities. The construction and operation of such infrastructure...

  9. Prince George's County Underground Storage Act (Maryland)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    A gas storage company may invoke eminent domain to acquire property in Prince George's County for underground gas storage purposes. The area acquired must lie not less than 800 feet below the...

  10. Carbon Allocation in Underground Storage Organs

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Carbon Allocation in Underground Storage Organs Studies on Accumulation of Starch, Sugars and Oil Cover: Starch granules in cells of fresh potato tuber visualised by iodine staining. #12;Carbon By increasing knowledge of carbon allocation in underground storage organs and using the knowledge to improve

  11. Preliminary design study of underground pumped hydro and compressed-air energy storage in hard rock. Volume 5: site selection. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1981-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This volume documents a six-step site selection process undertaken to identify and subsequently rank potential sites suitable for either an underground pumped hydroelectric (UPH) facility, or a water-compensated hard-rock cavern compressed air energy storage (CAES) facility. The region of study was confined to the service area of the Potomac Electric Power Company (PEPCO) and contiguous areas. Overriding considerations related to geology, environmental impact and transmission-line routing were studies within the context of minimizing plant costs. The selection process led to the identification of several sites suitable for the development of either a CAES or an UPH facility. Design development and site exploration at the selected site are described in other volumes of the final report.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Grant Evenson

    2009-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Grant Evenson

    2009-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  14. 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

    2009-01-16T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  15. 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

    2007-12-27T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  16. Underground Storage Tank Regulations for the Certification of Persons Who Install, Alter, and Remove Underground Storage Tanks (Mississippi)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Underground Storage Tank Regulations for the Certification of Persons who Install, Alter, and Remove Underground Storage Tanks applies to any project that will install, alter or remove...

  17. Legislation pertaining to underground storage tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1994-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  18. Underground Storage of Natural Gas (Kansas)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Any natural gas public utility may appropriate for its use for the underground storage of natural gas any subsurface stratum or formation in any land which the commission shall have found to be...

  19. ADVANCED UNDERGROUND GAS STORAGE CONCEPTS REFRIGERATED-MINED CAVERN STORAGE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1998-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Limited demand and high cost has prevented the construction of hard rock caverns in this country for a number of years. The storage of natural gas in mined caverns may prove technically feasible if the geology of the targeted market area is suitable; and economically feasible if the cost and convenience of service is competitive with alternative available storage methods for peak supply requirements. It is believed that mined cavern storage can provide the advantages of high delivery rates and multiple fill-withdrawal cycles in areas where salt cavern storage is not possible. In this research project, PB-KBB merged advanced mining technologies and gas refrigeration techniques to develop conceptual designs and cost estimates to demonstrate the commercialization potential of the storage of refrigerated natural gas in hard rock caverns. Five regions of the U.S.A. were studied for underground storage development and PB-KBB reviewed the literature to determine if the geology of these regions was suitable for siting hard rock storage caverns. Area gas market conditions in these regions were also studied to determine the need for such storage. Based on an analysis of many factors, a possible site was determined to be in Howard and Montgomery Counties, Maryland. The area has compatible geology and a gas industry infrastructure for the nearby market populous of Baltimore and Washington D.C.. As Gas temperature is lowered, the compressibility of the gas reaches an optimum value. The compressibility of the gas, and the resultant gas density, is a function of temperature and pressure. This relationship can be used to commercial advantage by reducing the size of a storage cavern for a given working volume of natural gas. This study looks at this relationship and and the potential for commercialization of the process in a storage application. A conceptual process design, and cavern design were developed for various operating conditions. Potential site locations were considered and a typical plant layout was developed. In addition a geomechanical review of the proposed cavern design was performed, evaluating the stability of the mine rooms and shafts, and the effects of the refrigerated gas temperatures on the stability of the cavern. Capital and operating cost estimates were also developed for the various temperature cases considered. The cost estimates developed were used to perform a comparative market analysis of this type of gas storage system to other systems that are commercially used in the region of the study.

  20. Underground storage tank 511-D1U1 closure plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mancieri, S.; Giuntoli, N.

    1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  2. Underground Natural Gas Storage Wells in Bedded Salt (Kansas)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    These regulations apply to natural gas underground storage and associated brine ponds, and includes the permit application for each new underground storage tank near surface water bodies and springs.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kerry L. Nisson

    2012-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  4. Investigating leaking underground storage tanks

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Upton, David Thompson

    1989-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    and characterizing sites at which releases have been reported. The proposed requirements very nearly parallel those prepared by the E. P. A. , contained in 40 CFR parts 280 and 281. By their nature, these requirements necessitate that a thorough site investigation... be performed before the Texas Water Commission's concerns can be adequately addressed in the final site characterization and assessment report. However, the contents of these regulations do not indicate appropriate procedures for conducting such site...

  5. Underground storage of hydrocarbons in Ontario

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Carter, T.R.; Manocha, J. [Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Ontario (Canada)

    1995-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The underground storage of natural gas and liquified petroleum products in geological formations is a provincially significant industry in Ontario with economic, environmental, and safety benefits for the companies and residents of Ontario. There are 21 active natural gas storage pools in Ontario, with a total working storage capacity of approximately 203 bcf (5.76 billion cubic metres). Most of these pools utilize former natural gas-producing Guelph Formation pinnacle reefs. In addition there are seventy-one solution-mined salt caverns utilized for storage capacity of 24 million barrels (3.9 million cubic metres). These caverns are constructed within salt strata of the Salina A-2 Unit and the B Unit. The steadily increasing demand for natural gas in Ontario creates a continuing need for additional storage capacity. Most of the known gas-producing pinnacle reefs in Ontario have already been converted to storage. The potential value of storage rights is a major incentive for continued exploration for undiscovered reefs in this mature play. There are numerous depleted or nearly depleted natural gas reservoirs of other types with potential for use as storage pools. There is also potential for use of solution-mined caverns for natural gas storage in Ontario.

  6. Viewing Systems for Large Underground Storage Tanks.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Heckendorn, F.M., Robinson, C.W., Anderson, E.K. [Westinghouse Savannah River Co., Aiken, SC (United States)], Pardini, A.F. [Westinghouse Hanford Co., Richland, WA (United States)

    1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    Specialized remote video systems have been successfully developed and deployed in a number of large radiological Underground Storage Tanks (USTs)that tolerate the hostile tank interior, while providing high resolution video to a remotely located operator. The deployment is through 100 mm (4 in) tank openings, while incorporating full video functions of the camera, lights, and zoom lens. The usage of remote video minimizes the potential for personnel exposure to radiological and hazardous conditions, and maximizes the quality of the visual data used to assess the interior conditions of both tank and contents. The robustness of this type of remote system has a direct effect on the potential for radiological exposure that personnel may encounter. The USTs typical of the Savannah River and Hanford Department Of Energy - (DOE) sites are typically 4.5 million liter (1.2 million gal) units under earth. or concrete overburden with limited openings to the surface. The interior is both highly contaminated and radioactive with a wide variety of nuclear processing waste material. Some of the tanks are -flammable rated -to Class 1, Division 1,and personnel presence at or near the openings should be minimized. The interior of these USTs must be assessed periodically as part of the ongoing management of the tanks and as a step towards tank remediation. The systems are unique in their deployment technology, which virtually eliminates the potential for entrapment in a tank, and their ability to withstand flammable environments. A multiplicity of components used within a common packaging allow for cost effective and appropriate levels of technology, with radiation hardened components on some units and lesser requirements on other units. All units are completely self contained for video, zoom lens, lighting, deployment,as well as being self purging, and modular in construction.

  7. 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.

    2006-07-27T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    TU, T.A.

    2007-01-04T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  9. Underground-Energy-Storage Program, 1982 annual report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kannberg, L.D.

    1983-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Two principal underground energy storage technologies are discussed--Seasonal Thermal Energy Storage (STES) and Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES). The Underground Energy Storage Program objectives, approach, structure, and milestones are described, and technical activities and progress in the STES and CAES areas are summarized. STES activities include aquifer thermal energy storage technology studies and STES technology assessment and development. CAES activities include reservoir stability studies and second-generation concepts studies. (LEW)

  10. Alabama Underground Storage Tank And Wellhead Protection Act...

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

    commission, is authorized to promulgate rules and regulations governing underground storage tanks and is authorized to seek the approval of the United States Environmental...

  11. ,"Lower 48 States Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators...

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  12. ,"AGA Producing Region Underground Natural Gas Storage - All...

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  13. ,"AGA Western Consuming Region Underground Natural Gas Storage...

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  14. ,"West Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators...

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  15. ,"AGA Eastern Consuming Region Underground Natural Gas Storage...

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  16. ,"New York Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  17. ,"New Mexico Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators...

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

    Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators" ,"Click worksheet name or tab at bottom for data" ,"Worksheet Name","Description"," Of Series","Frequency","Latest Data for"...

  18. 100-N Area underground storage tank closures

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rowley, C.A.

    1993-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  19. Advanced Underground Gas Storage Concepts: Refrigerated-Mined Cavern Storage, Final Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none

    1998-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

    Over the past 40 years, cavern storage of LPG's, petrochemicals, such as ethylene and propylene, and other petroleum products has increased dramatically. In 1991, the Gas Processors Association (GPA) lists the total U.S. underground storage capacity for LPG's and related products of approximately 519 million barrels (82.5 million cubic meters) in 1,122 separate caverns. Of this total, 70 are hard rock caverns and the remaining 1,052 are caverns in salt deposits. However, along the eastern seaboard of the U.S. and the Pacific northwest, salt deposits are not available and therefore, storage in hard rocks is required. Limited demand and high cost has prevented the construction of hard rock caverns in this country for a number of years. The storage of natural gas in mined caverns may prove technically feasible if the geology of the targeted market area is suitable; and economically feasible if the cost and convenience of service is competitive with alternative available storage methods for peak supply requirements. Competing methods include LNG facilities and remote underground storage combined with pipeline transportation to the area. It is believed that mined cavern storage can provide the advantages of high delivery rates and multiple fill withdrawal cycles in areas where salt cavern storage is not possible. In this research project, PB-KBB merged advanced mining technologies and gas refrigeration techniques to develop conceptual designs and cost estimates to demonstrate the commercialization potential of the storage of refrigerated natural gas in hard rock caverns. DOE has identified five regions, that have not had favorable geological conditions for underground storage development: New England, Mid-Atlantic (NY/NJ), South Atlantic (DL/MD/VA), South Atlantic (NC/SC/GA), and the Pacific Northwest (WA/OR). PB-KBB reviewed published literature and in-house databases of the geology of these regions to determine suitability of hard rock formations for siting storage caverns, and gas market area storage needs of these regions.

  20. ,"New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals...

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

    ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"3292015 10:08:54 PM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5070NM2"...

  1. ,"New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)"

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

    ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"2262015 9:17:17 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5290NY2"...

  2. ,"New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

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

    ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"2262015 9:16:28 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5060NY2"...

  3. ,"New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf...

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

    ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"2262015 9:16:55 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5070NY2"...

  4. ,"New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf...

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

    ,,"(202) 586-8800",,,"2262015 9:16:27 AM" "Back to Contents","Data 1: New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (MMcf)" "Sourcekey","N5060NY2"...

  5. Underground Storage of Natural Gas and Liquefied Petroleum Gas (Nebraska)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This statute declares underground storage of natural gas and liquefied petroleum gas to be in the public interest if it promotes the conservation of natural gas and permits the accumulation of...

  6. Georgia Underground Gas Storage Act of 1972 (Georgia)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Georgia Underground Gas Storage Act, which permits the building of reserves for withdrawal in periods of peak demand, was created to promote the economic development of the State of Georgia and...

  7. Underground pumped storage scheme in the Bukit Timah granite of Singapore

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wong, I.H. [Nanyang Technological Univ. (Singapore)] [Nanyang Technological Univ. (Singapore)

    1996-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Pumped storage is an energy storage method that involves the pumping of water from a lower reservoir to an upper reservoir during off-peak period using low cost power and releasing of the water from the upper reservoir to produce electricity during peak load period. Because of the very small and relatively flat land area of Singapore, a conventional surface pumped storage plant is not feasible. A pumped storage plant can be constructed here by siting the upper reservoir in one of the many abandoned granite quarries and by placing the lower reservoir and the powerhouse underground in the Bukit Timah granite, which is sound, massive and impervious. The capital costs for a pumped storage plant could be the same as those of an oil-fired plant of a comparable size. When the very high cost of land in Singapore is taken into account, an underground pumped storage scheme for peaking purposes becomes attractive. 7 refs., 4 figs., 3 tabs.

  8. Underground Gas Storage Reservoirs (West Virginia)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Lays out guidelines for the conditions under which coal mining operations must notify state authorities of intentions to mine where underground gas is stored as well as map and data requirements,...

  9. Underground gas storage in New York State: A historical perspective

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Friedman, G.M.; Sarwar, G.; Bass, J.P. [Brooklyn College of the City Univ., Troy, NY (United States)] [and others

    1995-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    New York State has a long history of underground gas storage activity that began with conversion of the Zoar gas field into a storage reservoir in 1916, the first in the United States. By 1961 another fourteen storage fields were developed and seven more were added between 1970 and 1991. All twenty-two operating storage reservoirs of New York were converted from depleted gas fields and are of low-deliverability, base-load type. Nineteen of these are in sandstone reservoirs of the Lower Silurian Medina Group and the Lower Devonian Oriskany Formation and three in limestone reservoirs are located in the gas producing areas of southwestern New York and are linked to the major interstate transmission lines. Recent developments in underground gas storage in New York involve mainly carbonate-reef and bedded salt-cavern storage facilities, one in Stuben County and the other in Cayuga County, are expected to begin operation by the 1996-1997 heating season.

  10. Numerical Simulations of Leakage from Underground LPG Storage Caverns

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Yamamoto, Hajime; Pruess, Karsten

    2004-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    To secure a stable supply of petroleum gas, underground storage caverns for liquified petroleum gas (LPG) are commonly used in many countries worldwide. Storing LPG in underground caverns requires that the surrounding rock mass remain saturated with groundwater and that the water pressure be higher than the liquid pressure inside the cavern. In previous studies, gas containment criteria for underground gas storage based on hydraulic gradient and pressure have been discussed, but these studies do not consider the physicochemical characteristics and behavior of LPG such as vaporization and dissolution in groundwater. Therefore, while these studies are very useful for designing storage caverns, they do not provide better understanding of the either the environmental effects of gas contamination or the behavior of vaporized LPG. In this study, we have performed three-phase fluid flow simulations of gas leakage from underground LPG storage caverns, using the multiphase multicomponent nonisothermal simulator TMVOC (Pruess and Battistelli, 2002), which is capable of solving the three-phase nonisothermal flow of water, gas, and a multicomponent mixture of volatile organic chemicals (VOCs) in multidimensional heterogeneous porous media. A two-dimensional cross-sectional model resembling an actual underground LPG facility in Japan was developed, and gas leakage phenomena were simulated for three different permeability models: (1) a homogeneous model, (2) a single-fault model, and (3) a heterogeneous model. In addition, the behavior of stored LPG was studied for the special case of a water curtain suddenly losing its function because of operational problems, or because of long-term effects such as clogging of boreholes. The results of the study indicate the following: (1) The water curtain system is a very powerful means for preventing gas leakage from underground storage facilities. By operating with appropriate pressure and layout, gas containment can be ensured. (2) However , in highly heterogeneous media such as fractured rock and fault zones, local flow paths within which the gas containment criterion is not satisfied could be formed. To eliminate such zones, treatments such as pre/post grouting or an additional installment of water-curtain boreholes are essential. (3) Along highly conductive features such as faults, even partially saturated zones possess certain effects that can retard or prevent gas leakage, while a fully unsaturated fault connected to the storage cavern can quickly cause a gas blowout. This possibility strongly suggests that ensuring water saturation of the rock surrounding the cavern is a very important requirement. (4) Even if an accident should suddenly impair the water curtain, the gas plume does not quickly penetrate the ground surface. In these simulations, the plume takes several months to reach the ground surface.

  11. Nevada National Security Site Underground Test Area (UGTA) Flow...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    December 12, 2014 To view all the P&RA CoP 2014 Technical Exchange Meeting videos click here. Video Presentation Nevada National Security Site Underground Test Area...

  12. Relevance of underground natural gas storage to geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Lippmann, Marcelo J.; Benson, Sally M.

    2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Underground Storage of Natural Gas in the United States andEnergy Information Agency (2002). U.S. Natural Gas Storage.www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/natural_gas/info_glance/storage.html

  13. Underground storage of natural gas, liquid hydrocarbons, and carbon dioxide (Louisiana)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality regulates the underground storage of natural gas or liquid hydrocarbons and carbon dioxide. Prior to the use of any underground reservoir for the...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1994-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1992-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  16. Estimating Residual Solids Volume In Underground Storage Tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2014-01-08T23:59:59.000Z

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

  17. Rules and Regulations for Underground Storage Facilities Used for Petroleum Products and Hazardous Materials (Rhode Island)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    These regulations apply to underground storage facilities for petroleum and hazardous waste, and seek to protect water resources from contamination. The regulations establish procedures for the...

  18. Illinois Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40Coal Stocks at1,066,688ElectricityLess thanThousandUnderground Storage Volume

  19. Delaware Natural Gas Underground Storage Injections All Operators (Million

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,128 2,469Decade Year-0Cubic Feet) Underground Storage

  20. Arkansas Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40Coal Stocks at CommercialDecade Year-0 Year-1Year%Underground Storage Volume

  1. Maryland Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade EnergyTennesseeYearUnderground Storage1Feet)Year Jan

  2. Washington Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are nowTotal" (Percent) Type: Sulfur Content4,367,470 4,364,790 4,363,909 4,363,143 4,363,967 4,363,549 1973-2015 Alaska 14,197 14,197Cubic Feet) Gas,Underground Storage

  3. Wyoming Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade1(MillionExtensionsThousandUnderground Storage Volume (Million Cubic

  4. Maryland Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade EnergyTennesseeYearUnderground Storage1Feet)Year Jan Feb

  5. Montana Underground Storage Tanks Webpage | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere I Geothermal Pwer Plant JumpMarysville,Missoula, Montana:Northeast AsiaAir|Underground Storage Tanks Webpage

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1994-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  7. New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghurajiConventionalMississippi"site. IfProved Reservesthroughwww.eia.govNThousand CubicUnderground

  8. 382-1 underground gasoline storage tank soil-gas survey

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jacques, I.D.

    1993-08-27T23:59:59.000Z

    A soil-gas survey was conducted near the 382 Pump House in the 300 Area of the Hanford Site. The objective of the soil-gas survey was to characterize the extent of petroleum product contamination in the soil beneath the 382-1 underground gasoline storage tank excavation. The tank was discovered to have leaked when it was removed in September 1992. The results of this soil-gas survey indicate petroleum products released from the 382-1 tank are probably contained in a localized region of soil directly beneath the tank excavation site. The soil-gas data combined with earlier tests of groundwater from a nearby downgradient monitoring well suggest the spilled petroleum hydrocarbons have not penetrated the soil profile to the water table.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  10. Regulation for Underground Storage of CO2 Passed by U.S. States

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Regulation for Underground Storage of CO2 Passed by U.S. States Holly Javedan Massachusetts Institute of Technology 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02139 #12;p. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT capture, transportation, injection and storage of CO2. To date nine states have passed regulation

  11. AQUIFER STORAGE SITE EVALUATION AND MONITORING

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Edwards, Mike

    CO2 AQUIFER STORAGE SITE EVALUATION AND MONITORING Edited and compiled by Martin Smith, David Campbell, Eric Mackay and Debbie Polson Understanding the challenges of CO2 storage: results of the CASSEM Project Im agecopyrightofNERC #12;#12;CO2 Aquifer storage site evaluation and monitoring EDITED

  12. Numerical Simulations of Leakage from Underground LPG Storage Caverns

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Yamamoto, Hajime; Pruess, Karsten

    2004-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    model contains three propane storage caverns, 10 m wide and3.2.9. The loss of propane from storage is not significant,liquefied propane) was placed in the storage caverns, and

  13. 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...

  14. 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...

  15. Underground Energy Storage Program: 1981 annual report. Volume I. Progress summary

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kannberg, L.D.

    1982-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This is the 1981 annual report for the Underground Energy Storage Program administered by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory for the US Department of Energy. The two-volume document describes all of the major research funded under this program during the period March 1981 to March 1982. Volume I summarizes the activities and notable progress toward program objectives in both Seasonal Thermal Energy Storage (STES) and Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES). Major changes in program emphasis and structure are also documented.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  17. EA-1219: Hoe Creek Underground Coal Gasification Test Site Remediation, Campbell County, Wyoming

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This EA evaluates the environmental impacts for the proposed Hoe Creek Underground Coal Gasification Test Site Remediation that would be performed at the Hoe Creek site in Campbell County, Wyoming.

  18. Revision Policy for EIA Weekly Underground Natural Gas Storage...

    Weekly Natural Gas Storage Report (EIA)

    April 26, 2005 This report consists of the following sections: General EIA Weekly Natural Gas Storage Report Revisions Policy - a description of how revisions to the Weekly Natural...

  19. Borehole Miner - Extendible Nozzle Development for Radioactive Waste Dislodging and Retrieval from Underground Storage Tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    CW Enderlin; DG Alberts; JA Bamberger; M White

    1998-09-25T23:59:59.000Z

    This report summarizes development of borehole-miner extendible-nozzle water-jetting technology for dislodging and retrieving salt cake, sludge} and supernate to remediate underground storage tanks full of radioactive waste. The extendible-nozzle development was based on commercial borehole-miner technology.

  20. Rawlins UCG (underground coal gasification) Demonstration Project site characterization report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1989-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The United States Department of Energy and Energy International, Inc. have entered into a Cooperative Agreement to conduct a cost-shared UCG field test demonstrating the operation of commercial scale Underground Coal Gasification (UCG) on steeply dipping bed modules to provide synthesis gas for a small scale commercial ammonia plant. The field test and the commercial ammonia plant will be located at the North Knobs site near Rawlins, Wyoming. During this demonstration test, two or more UCG modules will be operated simultaneously until one module is completely consumed and an additional module is brought on line. During this period, the average coal gasification rate will be between 500 and 1200 tons per day. A portion of the raw UCG product gas will be cleaned and converted into a synthesis gas, which will be used as feedstock to a 400--500 ton per day ammonia plant. The UCG facility will continue to operate subsequent to the test demonstration to provide feedstock for the commercial plant. The objective of the hydrologic site characterization program is to provide an accurate representation of the hydrologic environment within the area to be gasified. This information will aid in the placement and operation of the process wells in relation to the ground water source. 21 refs., 14 figs., 6 tabs.

  1. Rawlins UCG (underground coal gasification) Demonstration Project site characterization report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1989-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The US Department of Energy and Energy International, Inc. have entered into a Cooperative Agreement to conduct a cost-shared UCG field test demonstrating the operation of commercial scale underground coal gasification (UCG) on steeply dipping bed modules to provide synthesis gas for a small scale commercial ammonia plant. The field test and the commercial ammonia plant will be located at the North Knobs site near Rawlins, Wyoming. During this demonstration test, two or more UCG modules will be operated simultaneously until one module is completely consumed and an additional module is brought on line. During this period, the average coal gasification rate will be between 500 and 1200 tons per day. A portion of the raw UCG product gas will be cleaned and converted into a synthesis gas, which will be used as feedstock to a 400--500 ton per day ammonia plant. The UCG facility will continue to operate subsequent to the test demonstration to provide feedstock for the commercial plant. The objective of the geologic site characterization program is to provide a descriptive model that accurately represents the geologic environment of the coal resource that is to be gasified. This model is to be used as an aid in understanding the hydrology of the coal bearing sequence, as a framework for installation of the process wells and the subsequent exploitation of the coal resources. 3 figs., 3 tabs.

  2. Colorado Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40Coal Stocks at CommercialDecadeReservesYear21 3.96 1967-2010 PipelineUnderground

  3. Indiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40Coal Stocks at1,066,688ElectricityLessApril 2015Year Jan Feb MarDecadeUnderground

  4. Delaware Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals All Operators

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,128 2,469Decade Year-0Cubic Feet) Underground

  5. Delaware Natural Gas Underground Storage Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,128 2,469Decade Year-0Cubic Feet) UndergroundWithdrawals

  6. AGA Producing Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40Coal Stocks at Commercial andSeptember 25,9,1996 N Y625(95)Feet) Underground

  7. Michigan Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade EnergyTennesseeYearUndergroundCubicDecade

  8. Michigan Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade EnergyTennesseeYearUndergroundCubicDecadeFeet) Year Jan Feb Mar

  9. Michigan Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade EnergyTennesseeYearUndergroundCubicDecadeFeet) Year Jan Feb

  10. Minnesota Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade1 Source: Office of Fossil Energy, U.S.Year Jan Feb Mar AprUnderground

  11. Montana Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade1 Source: Office of FossilFoot) Year Jan Feb(MillionYearUnderground

  12. Virginia Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are nowTotal" (Percent) Type: Sulfur Content4,367,470 4,364,790 4,363,909 4,363,143 4,363,967 4,363,549 1973-2015 Alaska 14,197 14,197 14,197(BillionYearThousandUnderground

  13. Louisiana Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade EnergyTennesseeYear Jan Next MECSInput SupplementalYear JanUnderground

  14. 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...

  15. Site Visit Report, Hanford Waste Encapsulation Storage Facility...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Site Visit Report, Hanford Waste Encapsulation Storage Facility - January 2011 Site Visit Report, Hanford Waste Encapsulation Storage Facility - January 2011 January 2011 Hanford...

  16. WSDE Underground Storage Tank Program webpage | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghuraji Agro IndustriesTown ofNationwide Permit webpage Jump to: navigation, searchInformationStorage

  17. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Underground Natural Gas Storage

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade Year-0E (2001)gasoline353/06)Pipeline UtilizationProcess andStorage

  18. CLOSURE REPORT FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION UNIT 204: STORAGE BUNKERS, NEVADA TEST SITE, NEVADA

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    2006-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 330 consists of four Corrective Action Sites (CASs) located in Areas 6, 22, and 23 of the Nevada Test Site (NTS). The unit is listed in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO, 1996) as CAU 330: Areas 6, 22, and 23 Tanks and Spill Sites. CAU 330 consists of the following CASs: CAS 06-02-04, Underground Storage Tank (UST) and Piping CAS 22-99-06, Fuel Spill CAS 23-01-02, Large Aboveground Storage Tank (AST) Farm CAS 23-25-05, Asphalt Oil Spill/Tar Release

  19. ,"AGA Producing Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments; Unit:1996..........Region Natural Gas Underground Storage

  20. New Mexico Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghurajiConventionalMississippi"site. IfProved Reservesthroughwww.eia.govNThousand Cubic

  1. New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghurajiConventionalMississippi"site. IfProved(Million Barrels)21 4.65 1967-2010 Imports 4.67

  2. New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghurajiConventionalMississippi"site. IfProved(Million Barrels)21 4.65 1967-2010 Imports

  3. Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghurajiConventionalMississippi"site. IfProved(Million Barrels)21 4.65per9 0 1 2YearYear Jan

  4. Ohio Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghurajiConventionalMississippi"site. IfProved(Million Barrels)21 4.65per9 0 1 2YearYear

  5. Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghurajiConventionalMississippi"site. IfProved(Million Barrels)21 4.65per9Year JanYear Jan

  6. Oklahoma Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghurajiConventionalMississippi"site. IfProved(Million Barrels)21 4.65per9Year JanYear

  7. Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghurajiConventionalMississippi"site. IfProved(Million Barrels)21Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayYear Jan

  8. Oregon Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghurajiConventionalMississippi"site. IfProved(Million Barrels)21Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayYear

  9. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (Million Cubic

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghurajiConventionalMississippi"site. IfProved(Million Barrels)21Year JanCubicper ThousandNA

  10. Pennsylvania Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghurajiConventionalMississippi"site. IfProved(Million Barrels)21Year JanCubicper

  11. Underground Natural Gas Working Storage Capacity - Energy Information

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghuraji Agro IndustriesTownDells,1Stocks Nov-14TotalThe Outlook269,023Year69,023USWNC MO SiteWSC

  12. Hawaii Department of Health Underground Storage Tank Webpage | Open Energy

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov You are8COaBulkTransmissionSitingProcess.pdfGetec AG| OpenInformationHartsville,NewOpenInformation

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Alfred Wickline

    2009-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wiersma, B.; Hansen, A.

    2013-11-13T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  15. Relevance of underground natural gas storage to geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lippmann, Marcelo J.; Benson, Sally M.

    2002-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The practice of underground natural gas storage (UNGS), which started in the USA in 1916, provides useful insight into the geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide--the dominant anthropogenic greenhouse gas released into the atmosphere. In many ways, UNGS is directly relevant to geologic CO{sub 2} storage because, like CO{sub 2}, natural gas (essentially methane) is less dense than water. Consequently, it will tend to rise to the top of any subsurface storage structure located below the groundwater table. By the end of 2001 in the USA, about 142 million metric tons of natural gas were stored underground in depleted oil and gas reservoirs and brine aquifers. Based on their performance, UNGS projects have shown that there is a safe and effective way of storing large volumes of gases in the subsurface. In the small number of cases where failures did occur (i.e., leakage of the stored gas into neighboring permeable layers), they were mainly related to improper well design, construction, maintenance, and/or incorrect project operation. In spite of differences in the chemical and physical properties of the gases, the risk-assessment, risk-management, and risk-mitigation issues relevant to UNGS projects are also pertinent to geologic CO{sub 2} sequestration.

  16. U.S. Natural Gas Salt - Underground Storage - Base Gas (Million Cubic Feet)

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What'sis Taking Over OurThe Iron Spin Transition in2,EHSSCoalWithdrawalsPoint of- Underground Storage -

  17. ,"U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators"

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy SourcesRefinery, Bulk Terminal, and Natural GasU.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage

  18. Lower 48 States Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade EnergyTennesseeYearUnderground Storage Volume (Million Cubic Feet)

  19. International Symposium on Site Characterization for CO2 Geological Storage

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Tsang, Chin-Fu

    2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    WITH SITE SCREENING AND SELECTION FOR CO 2 STORAGE D. A.77 ASSESSING AND EXPANDING CO 2 STORAGE CAPACITY IN DEPLETEDFOR CO 2 GEOLOGICAL STORAGE IN CENTRAL COAL BASIN (NORTHERN

  20. Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 262: Area 25 Septic Systems and Underground Discharge Point, Nevada Test Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    D. S. Tobiason

    2003-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Closure Report (CR) documents the activities undertaken to close Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 262: Area 25 Septic Systems and Underground Discharge Point, in accordance with the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) of 1996. Site closure was performed in accordance with the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP)-approved Corrective Action Plan (CAP) for CAU 262 (U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Operations Office [NNSA/NV, 2002a]). CAU 262 is located at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) approximately 105 kilometers (65 miles) northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. CAU 262 consists of the following nine Corrective Action Sites (CASs) located in Area 25 of the NTS: CAS 25-02-06, Underground Storage tank CAS 25-04-06, Septic Systems A and B CAS 25-04-07, Septic System CAS 25-05-03, Leachfield CAS 25-05-05, Leachfield CAS 25-05-06, Leachfield CAS 25-05-08, Radioactive Leachfield CAS 25-05-12, Leachfield CAS 25-51-01, Dry Well.

  1. US Department of Energy DOE Nevada Operations Office, Nevada Test Site: Underground safety and health standards

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Nevada Test Site Underground Safety and Health Standards Working Group was formed at the direction of John D. Stewart, Director, Nevada Test Site Office in April, 1990. The objective of the Working Group was to compile a safety and health standard from the California Tunnel Safety Orders and OSHA for the underground operations at the NTS, (excluding Yucca Mountain). These standards are called the NTS U/G Safety and Health Standards. The Working Group submits these standards as a RECOMMENDATION to the Director, NTSO. Although the Working Group considers these standards to be the most integrated and comprehensive standards that could be developed for NTS Underground Operations, the intent is not to supersede or replace any relevant DOE orders. Rather the intent is to collate the multiple safety and health references contained in DOE Order 5480.4 that have applicability to NTS Underground Operations into a single safety and heath standard to be used in the underground operations at the NTS. Each portion of the standard was included only after careful consideration by the Working Group and is judged to be both effective and appropriate. The specific methods and rationale used by the Working Group are outlined as follows: The letter from DOE/HQ, dated September 28, 1990 cited OSHA and the CTSO as the safety and health codes applicable to underground operations at the NTS. These mandated codes were each originally developed to be comprehensive, i.e., all underground operations of a particular type (e.g., tunnels in the case of the CTSO) were intended to be adequately regulated by the appropriate code. However, this is not true; the Working Group found extensive and confusing overlap in the codes in numerous areas. Other subjects and activities were addressed by the various codes in cursory fashion or not at all.

  2. Registration of Hanford Site Class V underground injection wells. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Plan and Schedule for Disposition and Regulatory Compliance for Miscellaneous Streams (DOE 1994) requires that all existing Class V injection wells be registered under WAC 173--218. (Washington Underground Injection Control Program). The purpose of this document is to fulfill this requirement by registering all active Class V underground injection control wells, on the Hanford Site, under WAC 173--218. This registration will revise the registration previously submitted in 1988 (DOE 1988). In support of this registration, an extensive effort has been made to identify all injection wells on the Hanford Site. New injection wells will not be constructed on the Hanford Site except to receive uncontaminated stormwater or groundwater heatpump return flow. All changes to Miscellaneous Streams will be tracked through the Hanford Site Miscellaneous Streams Inventory Database. Table 5--2 of this injection well registration may be updated annually at the same time as the Miscellaneous Streams Inventory, if necessary.

  3. Compressed Air Energy Storage Act (Kansas)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This act lays out regulations for the local authorities related to site selection, design, operation and monitoring for underground storage of compressed air.

  4. Assessment of concentration mechanisms for organic wastes in underground storage tanks at Hanford

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gerber, M.A.; Burger, L.L.; Nelson, D.A.; Ryan, J.L. [Pacific Northwest Lab., Richland, WA (United States); Zollars, R.L. [Washington State Univ., Pullman, WA (United States)

    1992-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) has conducted an initial conservative evaluation of physical and chemical processes that could lead to significant localized concentrations of organic waste constituents in the Hanford underground storage tanks (USTs). This evaluation was part of ongoing studies at Hanford to assess potential safety risks associated with USTs containing organics. Organics in the tanks could pose a potential problem if localized concentrations are high enough to propagate combustion and are in sufficient quantity to produce a large heat and/or gas release if in contact with a suitable oxidant. The major sources of oxidants are oxygen in the overhead gas space of the tanks and sodium nitrate and nitrite either as salt cake solids or dissolved in the supernatant and interstitial liquids.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1994-07-29T23:59:59.000Z

    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).

  6. ,"Underground Natural Gas Storage - Salt Cavern Storage Fields"

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghuraji Agro IndustriesTownDells,1 U.S. Department of Energygasoline4 Space2.9PetroleumSalt Cavern Storage

  7. Preliminary studies of tunnel interface response modeling using test data from underground storage facilities.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sobolik, Steven Ronald; Bartel, Lewis Clark

    2010-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In attempting to detect and map out underground facilities, whether they be large-scale hardened deeply-buried targets (HDBT's) or small-scale tunnels for clandestine border or perimeter crossing, seismic imaging using reflections from the tunnel interface has been seen as one of the better ways to both detect and delineate tunnels from the surface. The large seismic impedance contrast at the tunnel/rock boundary should provide a strong, distinguishable seismic response, but in practice, such strong indicators are often lacking. One explanation for the lack of a good seismic reflection at such a strong contrast boundary is that the damage caused by the tunneling itself creates a zone of altered seismic properties that significantly changes the nature of this boundary. This report examines existing geomechanical data that define the extent of an excavation damage zone around underground tunnels, and the potential impact on rock properties such as P-wave and S-wave velocities. The data presented from this report are associated with sites used for the development of underground repositories for the disposal of radioactive waste; these sites have been excavated in volcanic tuff (Yucca Mountain) and granite (HRL in Sweden, URL in Canada). Using the data from Yucca Mountain, a numerical simulation effort was undertaken to evaluate the effects of the damage zone on seismic responses. Calculations were performed using the parallelized version of the time-domain finitedifference seismic wave propagation code developed in the Geophysics Department at Sandia National Laboratories. From these numerical simulations, the damage zone does not have a significant effect upon the tunnel response, either for a purely elastic case or an anelastic case. However, what was discovered is that the largest responses are not true reflections, but rather reradiated Stoneley waves generated as the air/earth interface of the tunnel. Because of this, data processed in the usual way may not correctly image the tunnel. This report represents a preliminary step in the development of a methodology to convert numerical predictions of rock properties to an estimation of the extent of rock damage around an underground facility and its corresponding seismic velocity, and the corresponding application to design a testing methodology for tunnel detection.

  8. Underground Test Area Quality Assurance Project Plan Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Irene Farnham

    2011-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) provides the overall quality assurance (QA) program requirements and general quality practices to be applied to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) Underground Test Area (UGTA) Sub-Project (hereafter the Sub-Project) activities. The requirements in this QAPP are consistent with DOE Order 414.1C, Quality Assurance (DOE, 2005); U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Guidance for Quality Assurance Project Plans for Modeling (EPA, 2002); and EPA Guidance on the Development, Evaluation, and Application of Environmental Models (EPA, 2009). The QAPP Revision 0 supersedes DOE--341, Underground Test Area Quality Assurance Project Plan, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, Revision 4.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    O'Brien, Luke; Baker, Stephen; Bowen, Bob [UK National Nuclear Laboratory, Chadwick House, Warrington (United Kingdom)] [UK National Nuclear Laboratory, Chadwick House, Warrington (United Kingdom); Mallick, Pramod; Smith, Gary [US Department of Energy (United States)] [US Department of Energy (United States); King, Bill [Savannah River National Laboratory (United States)] [Savannah River National Laboratory (United States); Judd, Laurie [NuVision Engineering (United States)] [NuVision Engineering (United States)

    2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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)

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  11. A study of the feasibility of construction of underground storage structures in soft soil

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Rosner, Stephen Anthony

    1984-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Underground construction is a means of providing efficient use of land space. In recent times, the most extensive use of underground construction has been in Sweden. However, possible uses of underground space were recognized... widespread and efficient use of underground space has been in Sweden. This is facilitated in part by the competent rock that is found there. The stratigraphy in Sweden is dominated by Pre-Cambrian and Paleozoic rock with a thin covering of moraine sediment...

  12. Evaluation and Optimization of Underground Thermal Energy Storage Systems of Energy Efficient Buildings (WKSP)- A Project within the new German R&D- Framework EnBop

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Bockelmann, F.; Kipry, H.; Plesser, S.; Fisch, M. N.

    of these research projects and presents detailed results of project WKSP. The performance of buildings with systems for underground thermal energy storage is analysed in this project. As the analyses show several systems work worse than expected. Within the project...

  13. Environmental assessment for the Hoe Creek underground, Coal Gasification Test Site Remediation, Campbell County, Wyoming

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has prepared this EA to assess environmental and human health Issues and to determine potential impacts associated with the proposed Hoe Creek Underground Coal Gasification Test Site Remediation that would be performed at the Hoe Creek site in Campbell County, Wyoming. The Hoe Creek site is located south-southwest of the town of Gillette, Wyoming, and encompasses 71 acres of public land under the stewardship of the Bureau of Land Management. The proposed action identified in the EA is for the DOE to perform air sparging with bioremediation at the Hoe Creek site to remove contaminants resulting from underground coal gasification (UCG) experiments performed there by the DOE in the late 1970s. The proposed action would involve drilling additional wells at two of the UCG test sites to apply oxygen or hydrogen peroxide to the subsurface to volatilize benzene dissolved in the groundwater and enhance bioremediation of non-aqueous phase liquids present in the subsurface. Other alternatives considered are site excavation to remove contaminants, continuation of the annual pump and treat actions that have been used at the site over the last ten years to limit contaminant migration, and the no action alternative. Issues examined in detail in the EA are air quality, geology, human health and safety, noise, soils, solid and hazardous waste, threatened and endangered species, vegetation, water resources, and wildlife. Details of mitigative measures that could be used to limit any detrimental effects resulting from the proposed action or any of the alternatives are discussed, and information on anticipated effects identified by other government agencies is provided.

  14. Changes in major organic contaminants in the groundwater at the Hoe Creek underground coal gasification site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wang, F.; Mead, W.

    1985-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The results of groundwater analysis at the Hoe Creek underground coal gasification (UCG) site have indicated that, after gasification, the phenolic compounds and neutral aromatic hydrocarbons decrease more slowly than expected on the basis of our laboratory studies. The field data also fail to confirm the expected inverse relationship between a contaminant's water solubility and the extent to which it is sorbed by surrounding coal. The authors described a mechanism for the deposition of coal pyrolysis products that may help to elucidate the observed behavior of these organic contaminants. 7 refs., 7 figs.

  15. Environmental evaluation and restoration plan of the Hoe Creek Underground Coal Gasification Site, Wyoming: Topical report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barteaux, W.L.; Berdan, G.L.; Lawrence, J.

    1986-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Three underground coal gasification (UCG) experiments were conducted by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) at the Hoe Creek Site, Wyoming; the Hoe Creek I experiment was conducted in 1976, the Hoe Creek II experiment in 1977, and the Hoe Creek III experiment in 1979. These experiments have had an impact on the land and groundwater quality at the site, and the Department of Energy (DOE) has requested that Western Research Institute (WRI) develop and implement a site restoration plan. The purpose of the plan is to restore the site to conditions being negotiated with the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality (WDEQ). To prepare for developing a plan, WRI compiled background information on the site. The geologic and hydrologic characteristics of the site were determined, and the water quality data were analyzed. Modelling the site was considered and possible restoration methods were examined. Samples were collected and laboratory tests were conducted. WRI then developed and began implementing a field-scale restoration test. 41 refs, 46 figs., 13 tabs.

  16. Geological evaluation of the proposed Rocky Mountain 1 underground coal gasification test site, Hanna, Wyoming

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Oliver, R.L.

    1987-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    To characterize the proposed Rocky Mountain 1 underground coal gasification test site near Hanna, Wyoming, 30 drill and/or core holes were completed and downhole geophysically logged during the summer of 1986. Core testing was conducted to identify coal quality and predict behavior during gasification. Data were then interpreted to provide information on process parameters and restoration to be used by process and environmental engineers. The coal seam at the Rocky Mountain 1 site dips to the northeast at 7/sup 0/ and shows only minor folding of strata. A fault with 30 feet of stratigraphic displacement is located approximately 300 feet northeast of the northern boundary of the proposed burn area. From core and outcrop observations, tectonic fracturing is predicted to be minor, although local areas of fracturing may exist. Overburden stratigraphy consists of interbedded sandstone, siltstone, and shale with minor coal. The Hanna No. 1 coal (target of the experiments) is approximately 30 feet thick. It contains an upper bench approximately 3 to 4 feet thick of lower quality (higher ash, lower Btu), a central bench about 20 feet thick of higher quality (lower ash, higher Btu), and a lower bench approximately 3 to 4 feet thick also of lower quality. The benches are separated by shaley zones approximately 1 to 2 feet thick, which are correlative across the site. Another shaley zone exists near the base of the central bench. The coal varies vertically and somewhat laterally across the site but averages at a high volatile C bituminous rank. Average-as-received proximate analysis values for the coal are 8.8 wt % moisture, 27.3 wt % ash, 32.0 wt % volatile matter, 31.9 wt % fixed carbon, and approximately 8600 Btu/lb heating value. Average-as-received sulfur content is 0.7 wt %. Site characteristics are very amenable to underground coal gasification, and no hindrances to the test due to geologic conditions are expected. 9 refs., 21 figs., 6 tabs.

  17. International Symposium on Site Characterization for CO2Geological Storage

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tsang, Chin-Fu

    2006-02-23T23:59:59.000Z

    Several technological options have been proposed to stabilize atmospheric concentrations of CO{sub 2}. One proposed remedy is to separate and capture CO{sub 2} from fossil-fuel power plants and other stationary industrial sources and to inject the CO{sub 2} into deep subsurface formations for long-term storage and sequestration. Characterization of geologic formations for sequestration of large quantities of CO{sub 2} needs to be carefully considered to ensure that sites are suitable for long-term storage and that there will be no adverse impacts to human health or the environment. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage (Final Draft, October 2005) states that ''Site characterization, selection and performance prediction are crucial for successful geological storage. Before selecting a site, the geological setting must be characterized to determine if the overlying cap rock will provide an effective seal, if there is a sufficiently voluminous and permeable storage formation, and whether any abandoned or active wells will compromise the integrity of the seal. Moreover, the availability of good site characterization data is critical for the reliability of models''. This International Symposium on Site Characterization for CO{sub 2} Geological Storage (CO2SC) addresses the particular issue of site characterization and site selection related to the geologic storage of carbon dioxide. Presentations and discussions cover the various aspects associated with characterization and selection of potential CO{sub 2} storage sites, with emphasis on advances in process understanding, development of measurement methods, identification of key site features and parameters, site characterization strategies, and case studies.

  18. The Hanna and Hoe Creek underground coal gasification test sites: Status report, (June 1986-June 1987)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Berdan, G.L.; Nolan, B.T.; Barteaux, W.L.; Barrash, W.

    1987-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    To comply with a cooperative agreement with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the Western Research Institute (WRI) is required to submit an annual report summarizing the status of environmentally related work performed by WRI at the Hanna and Hoe Creek underground coal gasification (UCG) sites. The following is a summary of work performed at these two sites from June 1986 to June 1987. Several tasks for restoring the water quailty at Hoe Creek were: (1) groundwater treatment demonstration (1986); (2) bench-scale carbon adsorption experiments (1987); (3) design of the scaled-up treatment system (1987); (4) well-pumping test (1987). A summary of the results of each task is presented. 6 refs., 8 figs., 4 tabs.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Alfred Wickline

    2007-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  20. Combined Air Sparge and Bioremediation of an Underground Coal Gasification Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Covell, J.R.; Thomas, M.H.

    1996-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    EG&G Technical Services of West Virginia (TSWV) Inc. is successfully remediating a former underground coal gasification (UCG) test site in northeastern Wyoming. EG&G is demonstrating the effectiveness of combined air sparge and biostimulation technology. This project is being conducted for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE ) - Morgantown Energy Technology Center (METC), the lease holder of the site. UCG testing from 1976 through 1979 contaminated three water-bearing units at the site with benzene. Previous pump and treat operations at the site showed the presence of a persistent non-dissolved benzene source material. The Felix I coal seam is the most contaminated unit at the site and was the target unit for the initial demonstration. Air sparging was selected to strip dissolved benzene, volatilize the non- dissolved benzene source material, and to provide oxygen for increasing aerobic bacteria populations. Indigenous bacteria populations were stimulated with ammonium phosphate addition. EG&G designed the remediation system to take advantage of the hydrogeologic environment to produce a cost-effective approach to the groundwater remediation. Groundwater pumping was used to manipulate subsurface air flow, nutrient transport, and biomass management. Demonstration operations began on September 29, 1995, and were suspended on April 30, 1996 to begin demonstration expansion. Initial results of the demonstration show substantial reduction in benzene concentrations across the demonstration area. Benzene concentration reductions greater than 80% were observed two months after demonstration operations were suspended.

  1. Results of the groundwater restoration project, Hanna Underground Coal Gasification Test Site, Wyoming: Topical report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Oliver, R.L.

    1988-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Underground coal gasification (UCG) experiments conducted during the 1970s at the Department of Energy (DOE) site near Hanna, Wyoming, formed six underground cavities in the Hanna No. 1 coal seam, an aquifer of low permeability. When the first Hanna UCG experiment began in March 1973, researchers had little information about what effects the geologic or hydrologic characteristics of the area might have on the UCG process; likewise, the effects of UCG on the environment were unknown. Since the UCG experiments were completed, dilute concentrations of pyrolysis products and leachates have been detected in groundwater monitoring wells in and near some of the six cavities. Three primary UCG indicator constituents have been measured at elevated concentrations: phenols, TDS, and sulfate. The Hanna III cavity water exceeded the DOE target level for TDS and sulfate, and the Hanna I cavity water exceeded the DOE target level for phenols. The indicated phenols contamination, however, was in groundwater sampled from a well which was previously used as a production well during the experiment. Water pumped during the restoration project and a new well located approximately 10 ft from the old production well was sampled and no elevated phenols concentration was detected. Therefore, the restoration performed on the Hanna I cavity water was not necessary. The restoration was performed, however, because these indications were not available until during the restoration. Locally, various other constituents exceed DOE target levels, but concentrations are very near target levels and are well within livestock use limits. 2 refs., 7 figs., 5 tabs.

  2. Groundwater restoration field test at the Hoe Creek underground coal gasification site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Nordin, J.S.; Barrash, W.; Nolan, B.T.

    1988-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Three underground coal gasification burns were conducted at the Hoe Creek Site in the Powder River Basin. Some contaminants were released in the groundwater. The Department of Energy (DOE) analyzed the water from a network of wells. Two million gallons of groundwater were pumped from wells adjacent to the Hoe Creek II underground coal gasification cavity, passed through filters and carbon adsorbers, and reinjected into the cavity. Phenol was the target compound of the water treatment system. The phenol concentration pumped from well WS-10 decreased from 974 parts per billion (ppB) when treatment began on July 2, 1987, to about 200 ppB when treatment ceased on August 29, 1987. Phenol concentrations pumped from well WS-22 fluctuated during the tests, but they decreased to the 150 to 200 ppB range by the time treatment was terminated. The phenol concentration of treated water reinjected into the Hoe Creek II cavity was below detectable limits (less than 20 ppB). Pumping rates were about 18 gallons per minute (gpm) from well WS-10 and 6 to 8 gpm from well WS-22. Hoe Creek is located approximately 20 miles southwest of Gillette, Wyoming. 12 refs., 5 figs., 8 tabs.

  3. THERMAL ENERGY STORAGE IN AQUIFERS WORKSHOP

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Authors, Various

    2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    1975. Underground Storage of Treated Water: A Field Test.1975. "Underground Storage of Treated Water: A Field Test,"

  4. Organic contaminants in groundwater mar an underground coal gasification site in northeastern Wyoming

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stuermer, D.H.

    1982-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Three groundwater samples collected near two underground coal gasification (UCG) sites 15 months after the end of gasification were analysed for dissolved organic contaminants. The contaminants consisted of phenols, aromatic carboxylic acids, aromatic hydrocarbons, ketones, aldehydes, pyridines, quinolines, isoquinolines, and aromatic amines. Concentrations ranged up to about 50 ppm with large variations both in the relative concentrations of acidic, neutral, and basic constituents and in the concentrations of individual compounds. Naphthalene o-xylene, 2-methylpyridine, and o-cresol were consistently present in high concentrations and were identified as UCG contaminant-indicator compounds that appear to be particularly useful for monitoring purposes. A simplified method of analysis for these compounds was developed.

  5. Organic contaminants in groundwater near an underground coal gasification site in northeastern Wyoming

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stuermer, D.H.; Ng, D.J.; Morris, C.J.

    1982-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Three groundwater samples collected near two underground coal gasification (UCG) sites 15 months after the end of gasification were analyzed for dissolved organic contaminants. The contaminants consisted of phenols, aromatic carboxylic acids, aromatic hydrocarbons, ketones, aldehydes, pyridines, quinolines, isoquinolines, and aromatic amines. Concentrations ranged up to about 50 ppm with large variations both in the relative concentrations of acidic, neutral, and basic constituents and in the concentrations of individual compounds. Naphthalene, o-xylene, 2-methylpyridine, and o-cresol were consistently present in high concentrations and were identified as UCG contaminant-indicator compounds that appear to be particularly useful for monitoring purposes. A simplified method of analysis for these compounds was developed.

  6. Using the Choquet integral for screening geological CO2 storage sites

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Zhang, Y.

    2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    reservoirs, deep saline aquifers, and in salt caverns. 1 Before a detailed storage site characterization

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Alfred Wickline

    2008-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  8. Preliminary design study of underground pumped hydro and compressed-air energy storage in hard rock. Volume 1. Executive summary. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1981-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Potomac Electric Power Company (PEPCO) and Acres American Incorporated (AAI) have carried out a preliminary design study of water-compensated Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES) and Underground Pumped Hydroelectric (UPH) plants for siting in geological conditions suitable for hard rock excavations. The work was carried out over a period of three years and was sponsored by the US Department of Energy (DOE), the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and PEPCO. The study was divided into five primary tasks as follows: establishment of design criteria and analysis of impact on power system; selection of site and establishment of site characteristics; formulation of design approaches; assessment of environmental and safety aspects; and preparation of preliminary design of plant. The salient aspects considered and the conclusions reached during the consideration of the five primary tasks for both CAES and UPH are presented in this Executive Summary, which forms Volume 1 of the series of reports prepared during the study. The investigations and analyses carried out, together with the results and conclusions reached, are described in detail in Volumes 2 through 13 and ten appendices.

  9. Analysis, comparison, and modeling of radar interferometry, date of surface deformation signals associated with underground explosions, mine collapses and earthquakes. Phase I: underground explosions, Nevada Test Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Foxall, W; Vincent, P; Walter, W

    1999-07-23T23:59:59.000Z

    We have previously presented simple elastic deformation modeling results for three classes of seismic events of concern in monitoring the CTBT--underground explosions, mine collapses and earthquakes. Those results explored the theoretical detectability of each event type using synthetic aperture radar interferometry (InSAR) based on commercially available satellite data. In those studies we identified and compared the characteristics of synthetic interferograms that distinguish each event type, as well the ability of the interferograms to constrain source parameters. These idealized modeling results, together with preliminary analysis of InSAR data for the 1995 mb 5.2 Solvay mine collapse in southwestern Wyoming, suggested that InSAR data used in conjunction with regional seismic monitoring holds great potential for CTBT discrimination and seismic source analysis, as well as providing accurate ground truth parameters for regional calibration events. In this paper we further examine the detectability and ''discriminating'' power of InSAR by presenting results from InSAR data processing, analysis and modeling of the surface deformation signals associated with underground explosions. Specifically, we present results of a detailed study of coseismic and postseismic surface deformation signals associated with underground nuclear and chemical explosion tests at the Nevada Test Site (NTS). Several interferograms were formed from raw ERS-1/2 radar data covering different time spans and epochs beginning just prior to the last U.S. nuclear tests in 1992 and ending in 1996. These interferograms have yielded information about the nature and duration of the source processes that produced the surface deformations associated with these events. A critical result of this study is that significant post-event surface deformation associated with underground nuclear explosions detonated at depths in excess of 600 meters can be detected using differential radar interferometry. An immediate implication of this finding is that underground nuclear explosions may not need to be captured coseismically by radar images acquired before and after an event in order to be detectable. This has obvious advantages in CTBT monitoring since suspect seismic events--which usually can be located within a 100 km by 100 km area of an ERS-1/2 satellite frame by established seismic methods-can be imaged after the event has been identified and located by existing regional seismic networks. Key Words: InSAR, SLC images, interferogram, synthetic interferogram, ERS-1/2 frame, phase unwrapping, DEM, coseismic, postseismic, source parameters.

  10. Geology of the Hanna Formation, Hanna Underground Coal Gasification Site, Hanna, Wyoming

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Oliver, R.L.; Youngberg, A.D.

    1984-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Hanna Underground Coal Gasification (UCG) study area consists of the SW1/4 of Section 29 and the E1/2SE1/4 of Section 30 in Township 22 North, Range 81 West, Wyoming. Regionally, this is located in the coal-bearing Hanna Syncline of the Hanna Basin in southeast Wyoming. The structure of the site is characterized by beds dipping gently to the northeast. An east-west fault graben complex interrupts this basic trend in the center of the area. The target coal bed of the UCG experiments was the Hanna No. 1 coal in the Hanna Formation. Sedimentary rocks comprising the Hanna Formation consist of a sequence of nonmarine shales, sandstones, coals and conglomerates. The overburden of the Hanna No. 1 coal bed at the Hanna UCG site was divided into four broad local stratigraphic units. Analytical studies were made on overburden and coal samples taken from cores to determine their mineralogical composition. Textural and mineralogical characteristics of sandstones from local stratigraphic units A, B, and C were analyzed and compared. Petrographic analyses were done on the coal including oxides, forms of sulfur, pyrite types, maceral composition, and coal rank. Semi-quantitative spectrographic and analytic geochemical analyses were done on the overburden and coal and relative element concentrations were compared. Trends within each stratigraphic unit were also presented and related to depositional environments. The spectrographic analysis was also done by lithotype. 34 references, 60 figures, 18 tables.

  11. The value of underground storage in today`s natural gas industry

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The report consists of three chapters and four appendices. Chapter 1 provides basic information on the role of storage in today`s marketplace where natural gas is treated as a commodity. Chapter 2 provides statistical analyses of the relationship between storage and spot prices on both a monthly and daily basis. For the daily analysis, temperature data were used a proxy for storage withdrawals, providing a new means of examining the short-term relationship between storage and spot prices. Chapter 3 analyzes recent trends in storage management and use, as well as plans for additions to storage capacity. It also reviews the status of the new uses of storage resulting from Order 636, that is, market-based rates and capacity release. Appendix A serves as a stand-along primer on storage operations, and Appendix B provides further data on plans for the expansion of storage capacity. Appendix C explains recent revisions made to working gas and base gas capacity on the part of several storage operators in 1991 through 1993. The revisions were significant, and this appendix provides a consistent historical data series that reflects these changes. Finally, Appendix D presents more information on the regression analysis presented in Chapter 2. 19 refs., 21 figs., 5 tabs.

  12. ,"U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy SourcesRefinery, Bulk Terminal, and Natural GasU.S. Underground Natural Gas

  13. ,"U.S. Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity"

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy SourcesRefinery, Bulk Terminal, and Natural GasU.S. Underground Natural

  14. ,"AGA Producing Regions Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments; Unit:1996..........Region Natural Gas Underground

  15. ,"AGA Western Consuming Region Natural Gas Underground Storage Volume (MMcf)"

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments; Unit:1996..........Region Natural Gas UndergroundWestern

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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,

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Freeman-Pollard, J.R.

    1994-03-02T23:59:59.000Z

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

  18. Preburn versus postburn mineralogical and geochemical characteristics of overburden and coal at the Hanna, Wyoming underground coal gasification site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Oliver, R.L.; Youngberg, A.D.

    1983-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Hundreds of mineralogic and geochemical tests were done under US Department of Energy contracts on core samples taken from the Hanna underground coal gasification site. These tests included x-ray diffraction studies of minerals in coal ash, overburden rocks, and heat-altered rocks; x-ray fluorescence analyses of oxides in coal ash and heat-altered rocks; semi-quantitative spectrographic analyses of elements in coal, overburden, and heat-altered rocks; chemical analyses of elements and compounds in coal, overburden, and heat-altered rocks and ASTM proximate and ultimate analyses of coal and heat-altered coal. These data sets were grouped, averaged, and analyzed to provide preburn and postburn mineralogic and geochemical characteristics of rock units at the site. Where possible, the changes in characteristics from the preburn to the postburn state are related to underground coal gasification processes. 11 references, 13 figures, 8 tables.

  19. Underground natural gas storage reservoir management: Phase 2. Final report, June 1, 1995--March 30, 1996

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ortiz, I.; Anthony, R.V.

    1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    Gas storage operators are facing increased and more complex responsibilities for managing storage operations under Order 636 which requires unbundling of storage from other pipeline services. Low cost methods that improve the accuracy of inventory verification are needed to optimally manage this stored natural gas. Migration of injected gas out of the storage reservoir has not been well documented by industry. The first portion of this study addressed the scope of unaccounted for gas which may have been due to migration. The volume range was estimated from available databases and reported on an aggregate basis. Information on working gas, base gas, operating capacity, injection and withdrawal volumes, current and non-current revenues, gas losses, storage field demographics and reservoir types is contained among the FERC Form 2, EIA Form 191, AGA and FERC Jurisdictional databases. The key elements of this study show that gas migration can result if reservoir limits have not been properly identified, gas migration can occur in formation with extremely low permeability (0.001 md), horizontal wellbores can reduce gas migration losses and over-pressuring (unintentionally) storage reservoirs by reinjecting working gas over a shorter time period may increase gas migration effects.

  20. 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:...

  1. PEGASUS, a European research project on the effects of gas in underground storage facilities for radioactive waste

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Haijtink, B.; McMenamin, T. [Commission of the European Communities, Brussels (Belgium)

    1993-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    Whereas the subject of gas generation and possible gas release from radioactive waste repositories has gained in interest on the international scene, the Commission of the European Communities has increased its research efforts on this issue. In particular in the 4th five year R and D program on Management and Storage of Radioactive Waste (1990--1994), a framework has been set up in which research efforts on the subject of gas generation and migration, supported by the CEC, are brought together and coordinated. In this project, called PEGASUS, Project on the Effects of GAS in Underground Storage facilities for radioactive waste, about 20 organizations and research institutes from 7 European countries are involved. The project covers both experimental and theoretical studies of the processes of gas formation and possible gas release from the different waste types, LLW, ILW and HLW, under typical repository conditions in suitable geological formations as clay, salt and granite. In this paper an overview is given of the various studies undertaken in the project as well as some first results presented.

  2. AQUIFER THERMAL ENERGY STORAGE-A SURVEY

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Tsang, Chin Fu

    2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    High temperature underground thermal energy storage, inProceedings, Thermal Energy Storage in Aquifers Workshop:underground thermal energy storage, in ATES newsletter:

  3. AQUIFER THERMAL ENERGY STORAGE-A SURVEY

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Tsang, Chin Fu

    2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    1978, High temperature underground thermal energy storage,in Proceedings, Thermal Energy Storage in Aquifers Workshop:High temperature underground thermal energy storage, in ATES

  4. Multinational underground nuclear parks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Myers, C.W. [Nuclear Engineering and Nonproliferation Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, MS F650, Los Alamos, NM 87544 (United States); Giraud, K.M. [Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation, 1550 Oxen Lane NE, P.O. Box 411, Burlington, KS 66839-0411 (United States)

    2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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)

  5. ,"Tennessee Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources andPlant Liquids,+ LeasePrice Sold to ElectricLNG Storage

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

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments;NetPriceNonassociated NaturalCoalbedLNG StoragePrice

  7. Modeling of coupled thermodynamic and geomechanical performance of underground compressed air energy storage (CAES) in lined rock caverns

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Rutqvist, J.

    2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    associated with natural gas storage in Sweden, includingassociated with natural gas storage in Sweden. The main

  8. Modeling of coupled thermodynamic and geomechanical performance of underground compressed air energy storage (CAES) in lined rock caverns

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Rutqvist, J.

    2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    compressed air energy storage technology by the hydraulicscale electric energy storage technologies. Compressed air

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

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources andPlant Liquids,+ LeasePrice Sold to ElectricLNG StorageVolume

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

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources and Shipments;NetPriceNonassociated NaturalCoalbedLNG StoragePrice SoldNet

  11. ,"New York Natural Gas Underground Storage Net Withdrawals (MMcf)"

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources andPlant Liquids, ExpectedLNG Storage NetPrice Sold toNet Withdrawals

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

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS Codes; Column: Energy Sources andPlant Liquids, ExpectedLNG Storage NetPrice Sold toNet WithdrawalsVolume

  13. Modeling of coupled thermodynamic and geomechanical performance of underground compressed air energy storage (CAES) in lined rock caverns

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rutqvist, J.; Kim, H. -M.; Ryu, D. -W.; Synn, J. -H.; Song, W. -K.

    2012-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    We applied coupled nonisothermal, multiphase fluid flow and geomechanical numerical modeling to study the coupled thermodynamic and geomechanical performance of underground compressed air energy storage (CAES) in concrete-lined rock caverns. The paper focuses on CAES in lined caverns at relatively shallow depth (e.g., 100 m depth) in which a typical CAES operational pressure of 5 to 8 MPa is significantly higher than both ambient fluid pressure and in situ stress. We simulated a storage operation that included cyclic compression and decompression of air in the cavern, and investigated how pressure, temperature and stress evolve over several months of operation. We analyzed two different lining options, both with a 50 cm thick low permeability concrete lining, but in one case with an internal synthetic seal such as steel or rubber. For our simulated CAES system, the thermodynamic analysis showed that 96.7% of the energy injected during compression could be recovered during subsequent decompression, while 3.3% of the energy was lost by heat conduction to the surrounding media. Our geomechanical analysis showed that tensile effective stresses as high as 8 MPa could develop in the lining as a result of the air pressure exerted on the inner surface of the lining, whereas thermal stresses were relatively smaller and compressive. With the option of an internal synthetic seal, the maximum effective tensile stress was reduced from 8 to 5 MPa, but was still in substantial tension. We performed one simulation in which the tensile tangential stresses resulted in radial cracks and air leakage though the lining. This air leakage, however, was minor (about 0.16% of the air mass loss from one daily compression) in terms of CAES operational efficiency, and did not significantly impact the overall energy balance of the system. However, despite being minor in terms of energy balance, the air leakage resulted in a distinct pressure increase in the surrounding rock that could be quickly detected using pressure monitoring outside the concrete lining.

  14. Evaluation and Optimization of Underground Thermal Energy Storage Systems of Energy Efficient Buildings (WKSP)- A Project within the new German R&D- Framework EnBop 

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Bockelmann, F.; Kipry, H.; Plesser, S.; Fisch, M. N.

    2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Evaluation and optimization of underground thermal energy storage systems of Energy Efficient Buildings (WKSP) - A project within the new German R&D-framework EnBop Dipl.-Ing. Franziska Bockelmann IGS ? Institute of Building Services... and Energydesign, Technical University of Braunschweig, Germany Dipl.-Ing. Herdis Kipry IGS ? Institute of Building Services and Energydesign, Technical University of Braunschweig, Germany Dipl.-Ing. Stefan Plesser Head of Energy Efficient Non...

  15. Modeling of coupled thermodynamic and geomechanical performance of underground compressed air energy storage (CAES) in lined rock caverns

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Rutqvist, J.

    2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Williams, Compressed air energy storage: Theory, resources,for the compressed air energy storage technology by thefor compressed air energy storage power generation, Japan

  16. Oregon Underground Injection Control Program Authorized Injection...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Oregon Underground Injection Control Program Authorized Injection Systems Webpage Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: Oregon Underground...

  17. Pipeline transportation and underground storage are vital and complementary components of the U

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghurajiConventionalMississippi"site. IfProved(MillionPrice8.PDF Table 28. PADTABLE8.PDF TablePipeline

  18. Pipeline transportation and underground storage are vital and complementary components of the U

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghurajiConventionalMississippi"site. IfProved(MillionPrice8.PDF Table 28. PADTABLE8.PDF

  19. Pipeline transportation and underground storage are vital and complementary components of the U

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghurajiConventionalMississippi"site. IfProved(MillionPrice8.PDF Table 28. PADTABLE8.PDFAdditions to

  20. IDAPA 58.01.07 - Rules Regulating Underground Storage Tank Systems | Open

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov You are8COaBulkTransmissionSitingProcess.pdfGetecGtel JumpCounty, Texas: EnergyHy9Moat ofEnergy52Information Rules

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

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov You are8COaBulkTransmissionSitingProcess.pdfGetec AG| Open EnergyGuntersville ElectricControl Jump to:

  2. Notification for Underground Storage Tanks (EPA Form 7530-1) | Open Energy

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere I Geothermal Pwer PlantMunhall,Missouri: EnergyExcellence Seed LLCShores,Activity on Low Risk Sites |Notice

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

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghuraji Agro IndustriesTown of Ladoga, IndianaTurtle Airships JumpType B:7-15:Web Site:07 - AirEnergy

  4. Identifying suitable "piercement" salt domes for nuclear waste storage sites

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kehle, R.

    1980-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Piercement salt domes of the northern interior salt basins of the Gulf of Mexico are being considered as permanent storage sites for both nuclear and chemically toxic wastes. The suitable domes are stable and inactive, having reached their final evolutionary configuration at least 30 million years ago. They are buried to depths far below the level to which erosion will penetrate during the prescribed storage period and are not subject to possible future reactivation. The salt cores of these domes are themselves impermeable, permitting neither the entry nor exit of ground water or other unwanted materials. In part, a stable dome may be recognized by its present geometric configuration, but conclusive proof depends on establishing its evolutionary state. The evolutionary state of a dome is obtained by reconstructing the growth history of the dome as revealed by the configuration of sedimentary strata in a large area (commonly 3,000 square miles or more) surrounding the dome. A high quality, multifold CDP reflection seismic profile across a candidate dome will provide much of the necessary information when integrated with available subsurface control. Additional seismic profiles may be required to confirm an apparent configuration of the surrounding strata and an interpreted evolutionary history. High frequency seismic data collected in the near vicinity of a dome are also needed as a supplement to the CDP data to permit accurate depiction of the configuration of shallow strata. Such data must be tied to shallow drill hole control to confirm the geologic age at which dome growth ceased. If it is determined that a dome reached a terminal configuration many millions of years ago, such a dome is incapable of reactivation and thus constitutes a stable storage site for nuclear wastes.

  5. Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration Plan for Corrective Action Unit 121: Storage Tanks and Miscellaneous Sites, Nevada Test Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2007-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) Plan identifies the activities required for the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 121, Storage Tanks and Miscellaneous Sites. CAU 121 is currently listed in Appendix III of the ''Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order'' (FFACO, 1996) and consists of three Corrective Action Sites (CASs) located in Area 12 of the Nevada Test Site (NTS): CAS 12-01-01, Aboveground Storage Tank; CAS 12-01-02, Aboveground Storage Tank; and CAS 12-22-26, Drums; 2 AST's. CASs 12-01-01 and 12-01-02 are located to the west of the Area 12 Camp, and CAS 12-22-26 is located near the U-12g Tunnel, also known as G-tunnel, in Area 12 (Figure 1). The aboveground storage tanks (ASTs) present at CASs 12-01-01 and 12-01-02 will be removed and disposed of at an appropriate facility. Soil below the ASTs will be sampled to identify whether it has been impacted with chemicals or radioactivity above action levels. If impacted soil above action levels is present, the soil will be excavated and disposed of at an appropriate facility. The CAS 12-22-26 site is composed of two overlapping areas, one where drums had formerly been stored, and the other where an AST was used to dispense diesel for locomotives used at G-tunnel. This area is located above an underground radioactive materials area (URMA), and within an area that may have elevated background radioactivity because of containment breaches during nuclear tests and associated tunnel reentry operations. CAS 12-22-26 does not include the URMA or the elevated background radioactivity. An AST that had previously been used to store liquid magnesium chloride (MgCl) was properly disposed of several years ago, and releases from this tank are not an environmental concern. The diesel AST will be removed and disposed of at an appropriate facility. Soil at the former drum area and the diesel AST area will be sampled to identify whether it has been impacted by releases, from the drums or the AST, with chemicals or radioactivity above action levels. CAS 12-22-26 has different potential closure pathways that are dependent upon the concentrations and chemicals detected. If only petroleum hydrocarbons are detected above action levels, then the area will be use-restricted. It will not be excavated because of the more significant hazard of excavating within a URMA. Similarly, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) will only be excavated for concentrations of 50 parts per million (ppm) or greater, if there are no other factors that require excavation. For PCBs at concentrations above 1 ppm, the area will be use-restricted as required by Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 761 for PCBs (CFR, 2006), in the ''Toxic Substances Control Act'' (TSCA). Other chemicals at concentrations above the final action levels (FALs) will be excavated. If radioactivity is above action levels, then the soil will be excavated only to a depth of 1 foot (ft) below ground surface (bgs) and replaced with clean fill. This action is intended to remove the ''hot spot'' on the surface caused by leakage from a drum, and not to remediate the URMA.

  6. Linear Scarifying End-Effector Developed For Wall Cleaning In Underground Storage Tanks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fitzgerald, C.L.F.

    2001-02-04T23:59:59.000Z

    This paper describes the development and performance of a Linear Scarifying End-Effector (LSEE) designed and fabricated for deployment by a remotely operated vehicle. The end-effector was designed to blast or scarify in-grained residual contamination from gunite tank walls using high-pressure water jets after the bulk sludge had been removed from the tanks using an integrated suite of remotely operated tools. Two generations of the LSEE were fabricated, tested, and deployed in the gunite tanks at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, with varying levels of success. Because the LSEE was designed near the end of a four-year project to clean up the gunite tanks at Oak Ridge, a number of design constraints existed. The end-effector had to utilize pneumatic, hydraulic and electrical interfaces already available at the site; and to be deployable through one of the containment structures already in place for the other remote systems. Another primary design consideration was that the tool had to effectively extend the reach of an existing remotely operated vehicle from six ft. to at least ten ft. to allow cleaning the tank walls from floor to ceiling. In addition, the combined weight and thrust of the LSEE had to be manageable by the manipulator mounted on the vehicle. Finally, the end-effector had to follow an autonomous scarifying path such that the vehicle was only required to reposition the unit at the end of each pass after the mist had cleared from the tank. The prototypes successfully met each of these challenges, but did encounter other difficulties during actual tank operations.

  7. Niagara Falls Storage Site annual environmental report for calendar year 1991, Lewiston, New York. [Niagara Falls Storage Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1992-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document describes the environmental monitoring program at the Niagara Falls Storage Site (NFSS) and surrounding area, implementation of the program, and monitoring results for 1991. Environmental monitoring at NFSS began in 1981. The site is owned by the US Department of Energy (DOE) and is assigned to the DOE Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP). FUSRAP is a program to decontaminate or otherwise control sites where residual radioactive materials remain from the early years of the nation's atomic energy program or from commercial operations causing conditions that Congress has authorized DOE to remedy. The environmental monitoring program at NFSS includes sampling networks for radon concentrations in air; external gamma radiation exposure; and total uranium and radium-226 concentrations in surface water, sediments, and groundwater. Additionally, several nonradiological parameters including seven metals are routinely measured in groundwater. Monitoring results are compared with applicable Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards, DOE derived concentration guides (DCGs), dose limits, and other requirements in DOE orders. Environmental standards are established to protect public health and the environment.

  8. Excavation of the Partial Seam CRIP underground coal gasification test site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cena, R.J.; Britten, J.A.; Thorsness, C.B.

    1987-08-14T23:59:59.000Z

    In the fall of 1983, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory conducted the Partial Seam CRIP (PSC) underground coal gasification (UCG) field experiment at the Washington Irrigation and Development Company mine near Centralia, Washington. The test, in the subbituminous Big Dirty coal seam, lasted 30 days during which time 1400 cubic meters of coal were consumed from two injection/production well combinations. In the spring of 1986, normal mining activity in the vicinity of the PSC test allowed the opportunity to carefully excavate the experiment and examine the post-burn cavities. The mining operation dug out the front and back half of the test area and most of the overburden above the UCG cavities, leaving approximately 23,000 cubic meters of earth containing the main portion of the test area undisturbed. Under direction of the Wyoming Research Institute (WRI), this remaining earth was carefully excavated, in slices perpendicular to the original injection/production line, using small earthmoving equipment to uncover and sample the final burn cavities. Preliminary results of the excavation were presented by WRI at the 12th Underground Coal Conversion Symposium. We present additional results and conclusions based on all of the information obtained. Topics covered include: comparison to material balance and thermal instrumentation data, analysis and composition of samples taken from the cavity and general cavity shape and characteristics in comparison with mechanistic models of cavity growth. 10 refs., 10 figs., 1 tab.

  9. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Salt Cavern Storage Reservoir...

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

    Salt Cavern Underground Natural Gas Storage Reservoir Configuration Salt Cavern Underground Natural Gas Storage Reservoir Configuration Source: PB Energy Storage Services Inc....

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jerry Bonn

    1997-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  11. Underground Test Area Fiscal Year 2012 Annual Quality Assurance Report Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Farnham, Irene; Marutzky, Sam

    2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report is mandated by the Underground Test Area (UGTA) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) and identifies the UGTA quality assurance (QA) activities for fiscal year (FY) 2012. All UGTA organizations—U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO); Desert Research Institute (DRI); Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL); Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL); Navarro-Intera, LLC (N-I); National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec); and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)—conducted QA activities in FY 2012. The activities included conducting assessments, identifying findings and completing corrective actions, evaluating laboratory performance, revising the QAPP, and publishing documents. In addition, processes and procedures were developed to address deficiencies identified in the FY 2011 QAPP gap analysis.

  12. Laboratory studies on evaluation of in situ biodegradation at the Hoe Creek UCG (underground coal gasification) site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Nolan, B.T.; Suthersan, S.

    1987-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Laboratory experiments were conducted to evaluate the potential for in situ biodegradation in the contaminated groundwater aquifer at the Hoe Creek underground coal gasification site. Experiments were performed in electrolytic respirometric cells under simulated environmental conditions. An orthogonal, fractional factorial design was used to evaluate the effects of the following factors on phenol degradation: nutrient dose, amount of bacterial inoculum, temperature, light conditions, and substrate concentration. Microorganisms native to the environment were used as the inoculum, and phosphorus was used as the nutrient. The amount of inoculum introduced and the nutrient dose were found to have a positive effect on phenol degradation. Temperature changes from 15{degree}C (59{degree}F) to 25{degree}C (77{degree}F) had no significant effect. The light conditions (fluorescent or dark) also had no significant effect on phenol degradation. Higher concentrations of substrate required increased amounts of oxygen for biodegradation. 24 refs., 1 fig., 4 tabs.

  13. Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 262: Area 25 Septic Systems and Underground Discharge Point, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, Revision No. 1 (9/2001)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NNSA /NV

    2000-07-20T23:59:59.000Z

    This corrective action investigation plan contains the U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office's approach to collect data necessary to evaluate corrective action alternatives appropriate for the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 262 under the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order. Corrective Action Unit 262 consists of nine Corrective Action Sites (CASs): Underground Storage Tank (25-02-06), Septic Systems A and B (25-04-06), Septic System (25-04-07), Leachfield (25-05-03), Leachfield (25-05-05), Leachfield (25-05-06), Radioactive Leachfield (25-05-08), Leachfield (25-05-12), and Dry Well (25-51-01). Situated in Area 25 at the Nevada Test Site (NTS), sites addressed by CAU 262 are located at the Reactor-Maintenance, Assembly, and Disassembly (R-MAD); Test Cell C; and Engine-Maintenance, Assembly, and Disassembly (E-MAD) facilities. The R-MAD, Test Cell C, and E-MAD facilities supported nuclear rocket reactor and engine testing as part of the Nuclear Rocket Development Station. The activities associated with the testing program were conducted between 1958 and 1973. Based on site history collected to support the Data Quality Objectives process, contaminants of potential concern (COPCs) for the site include oil/diesel-range total petroleum hydrocarbons, volatile organic compounds, semivolatile organic compounds, polychlorinated biphenyls, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act metals, and gamma-emitting radionuclides, isotopic uranium, isotopic plutonium, strontium-90, and tritium. The scope of the corrective action field investigation at the CAU will include the inspection of portions of the collection systems, sampling the contents of collection system features in situ of leachfield logging materials, surface soil sampling, collection of samples of soil underlying the base of inlet and outfall ends of septic tanks and outfall ends of diversion structures and distribution boxes, collection of soil samples from biased or a combination of biased and random locations within the boundaries of the leachfields, collection of soil samples at stepout locations (where needed) to further define lateral and vertical extent of contamination, conduction of discrete field screening, and logging of soil borings and collection of geotechnical samples to assess soil characteristics. Historical information indicates that significant quantities of radioactive material were produced during the rocket engine testing program, some of which was disposed of in radioactive waste disposal systems (posted leachfields) at each of these locations. Process and sanitary effluents were generated and disposed of in other leachfields. The results of this field investigation will be used to develop and evaluate corrective action alternatives for these CASs.

  14. Overburden characterization and post-burn study of the Hoe Creek, Wyoming underground coal gasification site and comparison with the Hanna, Wyoming site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ethridge, F.C.; Burns, L.K.; Alexander, W.G.; Craig, G.N. II; Youngberg, A.D.

    1983-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In 1978 the third test (Hoe Creek III) in a series of underground coal gasification (UCG) experiments was completed at a site south of Gillette, Wyoming. The post-burn study of the geology of the overburden and interlayered rock of the two coal seams affected by the experiment is based on the study of fifteen cores. The primary purpose of the study was to characterize the geology of the overburden and interlayered rock and to determine and evaluate the mineralogical and textural changes that were imposed by the experiment. Within the burn cavity the various sedimentary units have been brecciated and thermally altered to form several pyrometamorphic rock types of paralava rock, paralava breccia, buchite, buchite breccia and hornfels. High temperature minerals of mullite, cordierite, oligo-clase-andesine, tridymite, cristobalite, clinopyroxenes, and magnetite are common in the pyrometamorphic rocks. The habit of these minerals indicates that they crystallized from a melt. These minerals and textures suggest that the rocks were formed at temperatures between 1200/sup 0/ and 1400/sup 0/C. A comparison of geologic and geological-technological factors between the Hoe Creek III site, which experienced substantial roof collapse, and the Hanna II site, which had only moderate roof collapse, indicates that overburden thickness relative to coal seam thickness, degree of induration of overburden rock, injection-production well spacing, and ultimate cavity size are important controls of roof collapse in the structural setting of the two sites.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2008-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  16. Modeling of coupled thermodynamic and geomechanical performance of underground compressed air energy storage (CAES) in lined rock caverns

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Rutqvist, J.

    2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    reservoir storage project in Sesta, Italy [1]; as well as two pilot tests in rock caverns associated with abandoned

  17. Challenges in defining a radiologic and hydrologic source term for underground nuclear test centers, Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Smith, D.K.

    1995-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The compilation of a radionuclide inventory for long-lived radioactive contaminants residual from nuclear testing provides a partial measure of the radiologic source term at the Nevada Test Site. The radiologic source term also includes potentially mobile short-lived radionuclides excluded from the inventory. The radiologic source term for tritium is known with accuracy and is equivalent to the hydrologic source term within the saturated zone. Definition of the total hydrologic source term for fission and activation products that have high activities for decades following underground testing involves knowledge and assumptions which are presently unavailable. Systematic investigation of the behavior of fission products, activation products and actinides under saturated or Partially saturated conditions is imperative to define a representative total hydrologic source term. This is particularly important given the heterogeneous distribution of radionuclides within testing centers. Data quality objectives which emphasize a combination of measurements and credible estimates of the hydrologic source term are a priority for near-field investigations at the Nevada Test Site.

  18. BUSINESS PLAN LBNL Main Site

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Eisen, Michael

    Materials Does your facility have on site (for any purpose) at any one me, hazardous materials at or above substance speci ed in 40 CFR Part 355, Appendix A or B; or handle radiological materials in quan es Storage (UST) Does your facility own or operate underground storage tanks? Yes Hazardous Waste Is your

  19. Regional groundwater flow and tritium transport modeling and risk assessment of the underground test area, Nevada Test Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    None

    1997-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The groundwater flow system of the Nevada Test Site and surrounding region was evaluated to estimate the highest potential current and near-term risk to the public and the environment from groundwater contamination downgradient of the underground nuclear testing areas. The highest, or greatest, potential risk is estimated by assuming that several unusually rapid transport pathways as well as public and environmental exposures all occur simultaneously. These conservative assumptions may cause risks to be significantly overestimated. However, such a deliberate, conservative approach ensures that public health and environmental risks are not underestimated and allows prioritization of future work to minimize potential risks. Historical underground nuclear testing activities, particularly detonations near or below the water table, have contaminated groundwater near testing locations with radioactive and nonradioactive constituents. Tritium was selected as the contaminant of primary concern for this phase of the project because it is abundant, highly mobile, and represents the most significant contributor to the potential radiation dose to humans for the short term. It was also assumed that the predicted risk to human health and the environment from tritium exposure would reasonably represent the risk from other, less mobile radionuclides within the same time frame. Other contaminants will be investigated at a later date. Existing and newly collected hydrogeologic data were compiled for a large area of southern Nevada and California, encompassing the Nevada Test Site regional groundwater flow system. These data were used to develop numerical groundwater flow and tritium transport models for use in the prediction of tritium concentrations at hypothetical human and ecological receptor locations for a 200-year time frame. A numerical, steady-state regional groundwater flow model was developed to serve as the basis for the prediction of the movement of tritium from the underground testing areas on a regional scale. The groundwater flow model was used in conjunction with a particle-tracking code to define the pathlines followed by groundwater particles originating from 415 points associated with 253 nuclear test locations. Three of the most rapid pathlines were selected for transport simulations. These pathlines are associated with three nuclear test locations, each representing one of the three largest testing areas. These testing locations are: BOURBON on Yucca Flat, HOUSTON on Central Pahute Mesa, and TYBO on Western Pahute Mesa. One-dimensional stochastic tritium transport simulations were performed for the three pathlines using the Monte Carlo method with Latin hypercube sampling. For the BOURBON and TYBO pathlines, sources of tritium from other tests located along the same pathline were included in the simulations. Sensitivity analyses were also performed on the transport model to evaluate the uncertainties associated with the geologic model, the rates of groundwater flow, the tritium source, and the transport parameters. Tritium concentration predictions were found to be mostly sensitive to the regional geology in controlling the horizontal and vertical position of transport pathways. The simulated concentrations are also sensitive to matrix diffusion, an important mechanism governing the migration of tritium in fractured carbonate and volcanic rocks. Source term concentration uncertainty is most important near the test locations and decreases in importance as the travel distance increases. The uncertainty on groundwater flow rates is as important as that on matrix diffusion at downgradient locations. The risk assessment was performed to provide conservative and bounding estimates of the potential risks to human health and the environment from tritium in groundwater. Risk models were designed by coupling scenario-specific tritium intake with tritium dose models and cancer and genetic risk estimates using the Monte Carlo method. Estimated radiation doses received by individuals from chronic exposure to tritium, and the corre

  20. Techniques and equipment used in contaminant detection at Hoe Creek underground coal gasification experimental site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Davidson, S.C.

    1984-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Data obtained from existing monitoring wells at an experimental coal gasification site indicated that local groundwater supplies were under risk from organic contaminants, particularly phenols. A more extensive monitoring system was installed. A drilling and open-hole sampling programme was devised to locate the edge of the contaminated area and indicate where additional monitoring wells were required. Geophysical logging was employed to determine the optimal position of gas-driven groundwater samplers/piezometers. The system successfully delineated the extent of the contaminant plume on 3 sides, but further work is required on the fourth side.

  1. Wells, Borings, and Underground Uses (Minnesota)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This section regulates wells, borings, and underground storage with regards to protecting groundwater resources. The Commissioner of the Department of Health has jurisdiction, and can grant permits...

  2. Examination of the 1970 National Bureau of Standards Underground Corrosion Test Welded Stainless STeel Coupons from Site D

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    L. R. Zirker; M. K. Adler Flitton; T. S. Yoder; T. L. Trowbridge

    2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A 1970 study initiated by the National Bureau of Standards (NBS), now known as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), buried over 6000 corrosion coupons or specimens of stainless steel Types 201, 202, 301, 304, 316, 409, 410, 430, and 434. The coupons were configured as sheet metal plates, coated plates, cross-welded plates, U-bend samples, sandwiched materials, and welded tubes. All coupons were of various heat-treatments and cold worked conditions and were buried at six distinctive soil-type sites throughout the United States. The NBS scientists dug five sets of two trenches at each of the six sites. In each pair of trenches, they buried duplicate sets of stainless steel coupons. The NBS study was designed to retrieve coupons after one year, two years, four years, eight years, and x years in the soil. During the first eight years of the study, four of five planned removals were completed. After the fourth retrieval, the NBS study was abandoned, and the fifth and final set of specimens remained undisturbed for over 33 years. In 2003, an interdisciplinary research team of industrial, university, and national laboratory investigators were funded under the United States Department of Energy’s Environmental Management Science Program (EMSP; Project Number 86803) to extract part of the remaining set of coupons at one of the test sites, characterize the stainless steel underground corrosion rates, and examine the fate and transport of metal ions into the soil. Extraction of one trench at one of the test sites occurred in April 2004. This report details only the characterization of corrosion found on the 14 welded coupons–two cross welded plates, six U-bends, and six welded tubes–that were retrieved from Site D, located near Wildwood, NJ. The welded coupons included Type 301, 304, 316, and 409 stainless steels. After 33 years in the soil, corrosion on the coupons varied according to alloy. This report discusses the stress corrosion cracking and crevice corrosion cracking of the U-bend coupons; the minimal corrosion found on the cross-bead plates; and the general, pitting, and crevice corrosion found on the welded tubes. In general, the austenitic Type 301, 304 and 316 samples showed little if any corrosion after 33+-years in the soil, whereas the ferritic alloys-Type 409 and 434– showed a spectrum of corrosion.

  3. Neptunium Transport Behavior in the Vicinity of Underground Nuclear Tests at the Nevada Test Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zhao, P; Tinnacher, R M; Zavarin, M; Williams, R W; Kersting, A B

    2010-12-03T23:59:59.000Z

    We used short lived {sup 239}Np as a yield tracer and state of the art magnetic sector ICP-MS to measure ultra low levels of {sup 237}Np in a number of 'hot wells' at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS), formerly known as the Nevada Test Site (NTS). The results indicate that {sup 237}Np concentrations at the Almendro, Cambric, Dalhart, Cheshire and Chancellor sites, are in the range of 3 x 10{sup -5} to 7 x 10{sup -2} pCi/L and well below the MCL for alpha emitting radionuclides (15 pCi/L) (EPA, 2009). Thus, while Np transport is believed to occur at the NNSS, activities are expected to be well below the regulatory limits for alpha-emitting radionuclides. We also compared {sup 237}Np concentration data to other radionuclides, including tritium, {sup 14}C, {sup 36}Cl, {sup 99}Tc, {sup 129}I, and plutonium, to evaluate the relative {sup 237}Np transport behavior. Based on isotope ratios relative to published unclassified Radiologic Source Terms (Bowen et al., 1999) and taking into consideration radionuclide distribution between melt glass, rubble and groundwater (IAEA, 1998), {sup 237}Np appears to be substantially less mobile than tritium and other non-sorbing radionuclides, as expected. However, this analysis also suggests that {sup 237}Np mobility is surprisingly similar to that of plutonium. The similar transport behavior of Np and Pu can be explained by one of two possibilities: (1) Np(IV) and Pu(IV) oxidation states dominate under mildly reducing NNSS groundwater conditions resulting in similar transport behavior or (2) apparent Np transport is the result of transport of its parent {sup 241}Pu and {sup 241}Am isotopes and subsequent decay to {sup 237}Np. Finally, measured {sup 237}Np concentrations were compared to recent Hydrologic Source Term (HST) models. The 237Np data collected from three wells in Frenchman Flat (RNM-1, RNM-2S, and UE-5n) are in good agreement with recent HST transport model predictions (Carle et al., 2005). The agreement provides confidence in the results of the predictive model. The comparison to Cheshire HST model predictions (Pawloski et al, 2001) is somewhat ambiguous due to the low concentration resolution of the particle transport model.

  4. Results of Phase 1 postburn drilling and coring, Rocky Mountain 1 Underground Coal Gasification Site, Hanna Basin, Wyoming

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lindblom, S.R.; Covell, J.R.; Oliver, R.L.

    1990-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Rocky Mountain 1 (RM1) Underground Coal Gasification (UCG) test consisted of two different module configurations: the controlled retracting injection point (CRIP) and elongated linked well (ELW) configurations. The postburn coring of the RM1 UCG site was designed in two phases to fulfill seven objectives outlined in the Western Research Institute's (WRI) annual project plan for 1988--1989. The seven objectives were to (1) delineate the areal extent of the cavities, (2) identify the extent of roof collapse, (3) obtain samples of all major cavity rock types, (4) characterize outflow channels and cavity stratigraphy, (5) characterize the area near CRIP points and ignition points, (6) further define the structural geology of the site, and (7) identify the vertical positioning of the horizontal process wells within the coal seam. Phase 1 of the coring was completed in the summer of 1989 and served to partially accomplish all seven objectives. In relation to the seven objectives, WRI determined that (1) the ELW cavity extends farther to the west and the CRIP cavity was located 5--10 feet farther to the south than anticipated; (2) roof collapse was contained within unit A in both modules; (3) samples of all major rock types were recovered; (4) insufficient data were obtained to characterize the outflow channels, but cavity stratigraphy was well defined; (5) bore holes near the CRIP points and ignition point did not exhibit characteristics significantly different from other bore holes in the cavities; (6) a fault zone was detected between VIW=1 and VIW-2 that stepped down to the east; and (7) PW-1 was only 7--12 feet below the top of the coal seam in the eastern part of the ELW module area; and CIW-1 was located 18--20 feet below the top of the coal seam in the CRIP module area. 7 refs., 7 figs., 1 tab.

  5. On-site storage of low and intermediate level radwaste at INER, R.O.C.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pen, B.L. [Inst. of Nuclear Energy Research, Lung-Tan (Taiwan, Province of China). Chemical Engineering Div.

    1993-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    The radwaste on-site storage at INER has operated since 1977. In this paper the storage facilities including liquid ILW tanks, solid ILW vaults, silos and LLW warehouses were reported. For the sake of complying with the new radiation protection regulations, a facility upgrading plan which contains three programs is on schedule. The main upgrading program is storage buildings construction. This paper also briefly describes the contents of the plan.

  6. EA-1211: Relocation and Storage of Isotopic Heat Sources, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This EA evaluates the environmental impacts for the proposal for relocation and storage of the isotopic heat sources at the U.S. Department of Energy Hanford Site in Richland, Washington.

  7. Geochemical information for sites contaminated with low-level radioactive wastes. III. Weldon Spring Storage Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Seeley, F.G.; Kelmers, A.D.

    1985-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Weldon Spring Storage Site (WSSS), which includes both the chemical site and the quarry, became radioactively contaminated as the result of wastes that were being stored from operations to recover uranium from pitchblende ores in the 1940s and 1950s. The US Department of Energy (DOE) is considering various remedial action options for the WSSS. This report describes the results of geochemical investigations carried out at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) to support these activities and to help quantify various remedial action options. Soil and groundwater samples were characterized, and uranium and radium sorption ratios were measured in site soil/groundwater systems by batch contact methodology. Soil samples from various locations around the raffinate pits were found to contain major amounts of silica, along with illite as the primary clay constituent. Particle sizes of the five soil samples were variable (50% distribution point ranging from 12 to 81 ..mu..m); the surface areas varied from 13 to 62 m/sup 2//g. Elemental analysis of the samples showed them to be typical of sandy clay and silty clay soils. Groundwater samples included solution from Pit 3 and well water from Well D. Anion analyses showed significant concentrations of sulfate and nitrate (>350 and >7000 mg/L, respectively) in the solution from Pit 3. These anions were also present in the well water, but in lower concentrations. Uranium sorption ratios for four of the soil samples contacted with the solution from Pit 3 were moderate to high (approx. 300 to approx. 1000 mL/g). The fifth sample had a ratio of only 12 mL/g. Radium sorption ratios for the five samples were moderate to high (approx. 600 to approx. 1000 mL/g). These values indicate that soil at the WSSS may show favorable retardation of uranium and radium in the groundwater. 13 references, 13 figures, 10 tables.

  8. Natural phenomena evaluations of the K-25 site UF{sub 6} cylinder storage yards

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fricke, K.E.

    1996-09-15T23:59:59.000Z

    The K-25 Site UF{sub 6} cylinder storage yards are used for the temporary storage of UF{sub 6} normal assay cylinders and long-term storage of other UF{sub 6} cylinders. The K-25 Site UF{sub 6} cylinder storage yards consist of six on-site areas: K-1066-B, K-1066-E, K-1066-F, K-1066-J, K-1066-K and K-1066-L. There are no permanent structures erected on the cylinder yards, except for five portable buildings. The operating contractor for the K-25 Site is preparing a Safety Analysis Report (SAR) to examine the safety related aspects of the K-25 Site UF{sub 6} cylinder storage yards. The SAR preparation encompasses many tasks terminating in consequence analysis for the release of gaseous and liquid UF{sub 6}, one of which is the evaluation of natural phenomena threats, such as earthquakes, floods, and winds. In support of the SAR, the six active cylinder storage yards were evaluated for vulnerabilities to natural phenomena, earthquakes, high winds and tornados, tornado-generated missiles, floods (local and regional), and lightning. This report summarizes those studies. 30 refs.

  9. Savannah River Site Robotics

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    None

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Meet Sandmantis and Frankie, two advanced robotic devices that are key to cleanup at Savannah River Site. Sandmantis cleans hard, residual waste off huge underground storage tanks. Frankie is equipped with unique satellite capabilities and sensing abilties that can determine what chemicals still reside in the tanks in a cost effective manner.

  10. Savannah River Site Robotics

    ScienceCinema (OSTI)

    None

    2012-06-14T23:59:59.000Z

    Meet Sandmantis and Frankie, two advanced robotic devices that are key to cleanup at Savannah River Site. Sandmantis cleans hard, residual waste off huge underground storage tanks. Frankie is equipped with unique satellite capabilities and sensing abilties that can determine what chemicals still reside in the tanks in a cost effective manner.

  11. Preliminary design study of underground pumped hydro and compressed-air energy storage in hard rock. Volume 4. System planning studies. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1981-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Potomac Electric Power Company and Acres American Incorporated have been performing a three year DOE/EPRI/PEPCO sponsored program for preliminary design of water compensated Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES) and Underground Pumped Hydroelectric (UPH) power plants. This report presents both the costs of the CAES and UPH plant designs which were developed, and the results of economic evaluations performed for the PEPCO system. The PEPCO system planning analysis was performed in parallel stages with plant design development. Analyses performed early in the project indicated a requirement for 1000 MW/10,000 MWH of energy storage on a daily operating schedule, with economic installation in two segments of 500 MW in 1990 and 1997. The analysis was updated eighteen months later near the end of the project to reflect the impact of new growth projections and revised plant costs. The revised results indicated economic installations for either UPH or CAES of approximately 675 MW/6750 MWH on a daily cycle, installed in blocks of approximately 225 MW in 1990, 1993 and 1995. Significant savings in revenue requirements and oil fuel over the combustion turbine alternative were identified for both CAES and UPH.

  12. Hanford Site existing irradiated fuel storage facilities description

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Willis, W.L.

    1995-01-11T23:59:59.000Z

    This document describes facilities at the Hanford Site which are currently storing spent nuclear fuels. The descriptions provide a basis for the no-action alternatives of ongoing and planned National Environmental Protection Act reviews.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2013-01-10T23:59:59.000Z

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

  14. Environmental Assessment: Relocation and storage of TRIGA{reg_sign} reactor fuel, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In order to allow the shutdown of the Hanford 308 Building in the 300 Area, it is proposed to relocate fuel assemblies (101 irradiated, three unirradiated) from the Mark I TRIGA Reactor storage pool. The irradiated fuel assemblies would be stored in casks in the Interim Storage Area in the Hanford 400 Area; the three unirradiated ones would be transferred to another TRIGA reactor. The relocation is not expected to change the offsite exposure from all Hanford Site 300 and 400 Area operations.

  15. Distributed Energy Resources On-Site Optimization for Commercial Buildings with Electric and Thermal Storage Technologies

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lacommare, Kristina S H; Stadler, Michael; Aki, Hirohisa; Firestone, Ryan; Lai, Judy; Marnay, Chris; Siddiqui, Afzal

    2008-05-15T23:59:59.000Z

    The addition of storage technologies such as flow batteries, conventional batteries, and heat storage can improve the economic as well as environmental attractiveness of on-site generation (e.g., PV, fuel cells, reciprocating engines or microturbines operating with or without CHP) and contribute to enhanced demand response. In order to examine the impact of storage technologies on demand response and carbon emissions, a microgrid's distributed energy resources (DER) adoption problem is formulated as a mixed-integer linear program that has the minimization of annual energy costs as its objective function. By implementing this approach in the General Algebraic Modeling System (GAMS), the problem is solved for a given test year at representative customer sites, such as schools and nursing homes, to obtain not only the level of technology investment, but also the optimal hourly operating schedules. This paper focuses on analysis of storage technologies in DER optimization on a building level, with example applications for commercial buildings. Preliminary analysis indicates that storage technologies respond effectively to time-varying electricity prices, i.e., by charging batteries during periods of low electricity prices and discharging them during peak hours. The results also indicate that storage technologies significantly alter the residual load profile, which can contribute to lower carbon emissions depending on the test site, its load profile, and its adopted DER technologies.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2012-11-27T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  17. Hanford Site River Protection Project (RPP) High Level Waste Storage

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    KRISTOFZSKI, J.G.

    2000-01-31T23:59:59.000Z

    The CH2M HILL Hanford Group (CHG) conducts business to achieve the goals of the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of River Protection at the Hanford Site. The CHG is organized to manage and perform work to safely store, retrieve, etc.

  18. Addendum to the Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 262: Area 25 Septic Systems and Underground Discharge Point, Nevada Test Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lynn Kidman

    2008-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document constitutes an addendum to the July 2003, Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 262: Area 25 Septic Systems and Underground Discharge Point as described in the document Recommendations and Justifications for Modifications for Use Restrictions Established under the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (UR Modification document) dated February 2008. The UR Modification document was approved by NDEP on February 26, 2008. The approval of the UR Modification document constituted approval of each of the recommended UR modifications.

  19. Rigorous Screening Technology for Identifying Suitable CO2 Storage Sites II

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    George J. Koperna Jr.; Vello A. Kuuskraa; David E. Riestenberg; Aiysha Sultana; Tyler Van Leeuwen

    2009-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report serves as the final technical report and users manual for the 'Rigorous Screening Technology for Identifying Suitable CO2 Storage Sites II SBIR project. Advanced Resources International has developed a screening tool by which users can technically screen, assess the storage capacity and quantify the costs of CO2 storage in four types of CO2 storage reservoirs. These include CO2-enhanced oil recovery reservoirs, depleted oil and gas fields (non-enhanced oil recovery candidates), deep coal seems that are amenable to CO2-enhanced methane recovery, and saline reservoirs. The screening function assessed whether the reservoir could likely serve as a safe, long-term CO2 storage reservoir. The storage capacity assessment uses rigorous reservoir simulation models to determine the timing, ultimate storage capacity, and potential for enhanced hydrocarbon recovery. Finally, the economic assessment function determines both the field-level and pipeline (transportation) costs for CO2 sequestration in a given reservoir. The screening tool has been peer reviewed at an Electrical Power Research Institute (EPRI) technical meeting in March 2009. A number of useful observations and recommendations emerged from the Workshop on the costs of CO2 transport and storage that could be readily incorporated into a commercial version of the Screening Tool in a Phase III SBIR.

  20. Evaluation of advanced turbomachinery for underground pumped hydroelectric storage. Part 3. Multistage unregulated pump/turbines for operating heads of 1000 to 1500 m

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Frigo, A.A.; Pistner, C.

    1980-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This is the final report in a series of three on studies of advanced hydraulic turbomachinery for underground pumped hydroelectric storage. All three reports address Francis-type, reversible pump/turbines. The first report covered single-stage regulated units; the second report covered two-stage regulated units; the present report covers multistage unregulated units. Multistage unregulated pump/turbines offer an economically attractive option for heads of 1000 to 1500 m. The feasibility of developing such machines for capacities up to 500 MW and operating heads up to 1500 m has been evaluated. Preliminary designs have been generated for six multistage pump/turbines. The designs are for nominal capacities of 350 and 500 MW and for operating heads of 1000, 1250, and 1500 m. Mechanical, hydraulic, and economic analyses indicate that these machines will behave according to the criteria used to design them and that they can be built at a reasonable cost with no unsolvable problems. Efficiencies of 85.8% and 88.5% in the generating and pumping modes, respectively, can be expected for the 500-MW, 1500-m unit. Performances of the other five machines are at least comparable, and usually better. Over a 1000 to 1500-m head range, specific $/kW costs of the pump/turbines in mid-1978 US dollars vary from 19.0 to 23.1 for the 500-MW machines, and from 21.0 to 24.1 for the 350-MW machines.

  1. On-Site and Bulk Hydrogen Storage | Department of Energy

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYouTube YouTube Note: Since the.pdfBreaking ofOilNEWResponse toOctober 2014Funds for Clean Cities Programto REMSOn-Site

  2. Revised technical action plan at former Commodity Credit Corporation grain storage sites in Nebraska and Kansas

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document has been prepared for the Commodity Credit Corporation of the US Department of Agriculture (USDA/CCC) to provide an outline for a multiyear plan for technical investigations at sites in Kansas and Nebraska that have been identified as having groundwater contamination. Carbon tetrachloride is the primary contaminant of concern at sites in Nebraska and Kansas where former USDA/CCC grain storage facilities were located.

  3. Interim Safe Storage of Plutonium Production Reactors at the US DOE Hanford Site - 13438

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Schilperoort, Daryl L.; Faulk, Darrin [Washington Closure Hanford, 2620 Fermi Avenue, Richland, Washington 99352 (United States)] [Washington Closure Hanford, 2620 Fermi Avenue, Richland, Washington 99352 (United States)

    2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Nine plutonium production reactors located on DOE's Hanford Site are being placed into an Interim Safe Storage (ISS) period that extends to 2068. The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for ISS [1] was completed in 1993 and proposed a 75-year storage period that began when the EIS was finalized. Remote electronic monitoring of the temperature and water level alarms inside the safe storage enclosure (SSE) with visual inspection inside the SSE every 5 years are the only planned operational activities during this ISS period. At the end of the ISS period, the reactor cores will be removed intact and buried in a landfill on the Hanford Site. The ISS period allows for radioactive decay of isotopes, primarily Co-60 and Cs-137, to reduce the dose exposure during disposal of the reactor cores. Six of the nine reactors have been placed into ISS by having an SSE constructed around the reactor core. (authors)

  4. Hanford Site waste treatment/storage/disposal integration

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MCDONALD, K.M.

    1999-02-24T23:59:59.000Z

    In 1998 Waste Management Federal Services of Hanford, Inc. began the integration of all low-level waste, mixed waste, and TRU waste-generating activities across the Hanford site. With seven contractors, dozens of generating units, and hundreds of waste streams, integration was necessary to provide acute waste forecasting and planning for future treatment activities. This integration effort provides disposition maps that account for waste from generation, through processing, treatment and final waste disposal. The integration effort covers generating facilities from the present through the life-cycle, including transition and deactivation. The effort is patterned after the very successful DOE Complex EM Integration effort. Although still in the preliminary stages, the comprehensive onsite integration effort has already reaped benefits. These include identifying significant waste streams that had not been forecast, identifying opportunities for consolidating activities and services to accelerate schedule or save money; and identifying waste streams which currently have no path forward in the planning baseline. Consolidation/integration of planned activities may also provide opportunities for pollution prevention and/or avoidance of secondary waste generation. A workshop was held to review the waste disposition maps, and to identify opportunities with potential cost or schedule savings. Another workshop may be held to follow up on some of the long-term integration opportunities. A change to the Hanford waste forecast data call would help to align the Solid Waste Forecast with the new disposition maps.

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

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

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

  6. Ground-water hydrologic effects resulting from underground coal gasification experiments at the Hoe Creek Site near Gillette, Wyoming. Interim report, October 1979-March 1980

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Raber, E.; Stone, R.

    1980-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This technical note summarizes our activities, to date, on the research project: Ground-Water Hydrologic Effects Resulting from Underground Coal Gasification Experiments (EPA-IAG-79-D-X0795). The gasified coal seam (Felix No. 2 coal) and two overlying aquifers (Felix No. 1 coal and overlying sand) appear to have become interconnected as a result of roof collapse and subsidence at both Hoe Creek Sites II and III near Gillette, Wyoming. To evaluate changes in the ground-water flow regime at the two sites, completion of supplementary wells was necessary to define the distance versus head drawdown relationships in each of the three aquifers. Hydraulic head potentials have been measured at Site III since gasification ended on October 10, 1979. These data are presented in graphic format. Although hydraulic head measurements at Site II seemed to be approaching a steady-state condition 1.5 years after gasification, the subsequent gasification at Site III temporarily altered the ground-water flow patterns. These changes will have a definite effect on contaminant dispersal and will need to be taken into consideration.

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  8. Identification and Characterization of Hydrogeologic Units at the Nevada Test Site Using Geophysical Logs: Examples from the Underground Test Area Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lance Prothro, Sigmund Drellack, Margaret Townsend

    2009-03-25T23:59:59.000Z

    The diverse and complex geology of the Nevada Test Site region makes for a challenging environment for identifying and characterizing hydrogeologic units penetrated by wells drilled for the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration, Underground Test Area (UGTA) Environmental Restoration Sub-Project. Fortunately, UGTA geoscientists have access to large and robust sets of subsurface geologic data, as well as a large historical knowledge base of subsurface geological analyses acquired mainly during the underground nuclear weapons testing program. Of particular importance to the accurate identification and characterization of hydrogeologic units in UGTA boreholes are the data and interpretation principles associated with geophysical well logs. Although most UGTA participants and stakeholders are probably familiar with drill hole data such as drill core and cuttings, they may be less familiar with the use of geophysical logs; this document is meant to serve as a primer on the use of geophysical logs in the UGTA project. Standard geophysical logging tools used in the UGTA project to identify and characterize hydrogeologic units are described, and basic interpretation principles and techniques are explained. Numerous examples of geophysical log data from a variety of hydrogeologic units encountered in UGTA wells are presented to highlight the use and value of geophysical logs in the accurate hydrogeologic characterization of UGTA wells.

  9. Niagara Falls Storage Site, Annual site environmental report, Lewiston, New York, Calendar year 1986: Surplus Facilities Management Program (SFMP)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1987-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    During 1986, the environmental monitoring program was continued at the Niagara Falls Storage Site (NFSS), a US Department of Energy (DOE) surplus facility located in Niagara County, New York, presently used for the interim storage of radioactive residues and contaminated soils and rubble. The monitoring program is being conducted by Bechtel National, Inc. The monitoring program at the NFSS measures radon gas concentrations in air; external gamma radiation levels; and uranium and radium concentrations in surface water, groundwater, and sediment. To verify that the site is in compliance with the DOE radiation protection standard and to assess its potential effect on public health, the radiation dose was calculated for the maximally exposed individual. Based on the conservative scenario described in the report, this individual would receive an annual external exposure approximately equivalent to 6% of the DOE radiation protection standard of 100 mrem/yr. By comparison, the incremental dose received from living in a brick house versus a wooden house is 10 mrem/yr above background. The cumulative dose to the population within an 80-km (50-mi) radius of the NFSS that would result from radioactive materials present at the site would be indistinguishable from the dose that the same population would receive from naturally occurring radioactive sources. Results of the 1986 monitoring show that the NFSS is in compliance with the DOE radiation protection standard. 14 refs., 11 figs., 14 tabs.

  10. Site-specific investigations of aquifer thermal energy storage for space and process cooling

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brown, D R; Hattrup, M P; Watts, R L

    1991-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) has completed three preliminary site-specific feasibility studies that investigated using aquifer thermal energy storage (ATES) to reduce space and process cooling costs. Chilled water stored in an ATES system could be used to meet all or part of the process and/or space cooling loads at the three facilities investigated. The work was sponsored by the US Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Energy Management. The ultimate goal of DOE's Thermal Energy Storage Program is to successfully transfer ATES technology to industrial and commercial sectors. The primary objective of this study was to identify prospective sites and determine the technical and economic feasibility of implementing chill ATES technology. A secondary objective was to identify site-specific factors promoting or inhibiting the application of chill ATES technology so that other potentially attractive sites could be more easily identified and evaluated. A preliminary investigation of the feasibility of commercializing chill ATES in automotive assembly facilities was completed. The results suggested that automotive assembly facilities was completed. The results suggested that automotive assembly facilities represent a good entry market for chill ATES, if the system is cost-effective. As a result, this study was undertaken to identify and evaluate prospective chill ATES applications in the automotive industry. The balance of the report contains two main sections. Section 2.0 describes the site identification process. Site feasibility is addressed in Section 3.0. Overall study conclusions and recommendations are than presented in Section 4.0.

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

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

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

  12. Underground Test Area Fiscal Year 2013 Annual Quality Assurance Report Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Krenzien, Susan; Marutzky, Sam

    2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report is required by the Underground Test Area (UGTA) Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) and identifies the UGTA quality assurance (QA) activities for fiscal year (FY) 2013. All UGTA organizations—U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO); Desert Research Institute (DRI); Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL); Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL); Navarro-Intera, LLC (N-I); National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec); and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)—conducted QA activities in FY 2013. The activities included conducting assessments, identifying findings and completing corrective actions, evaluating laboratory performance, and publishing documents. In addition, integrated UGTA required reading and corrective action tracking was instituted.

  13. Finding of no significant impact. Consolidation and interim storage of special nuclear material at Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Department of Energy (DOE) has prepared an environmental assessment (EA), DOE/EA -- 1060, for the consolidation, processing, and interim storage of Category I and II special nuclear material (SNM) in Building 371 at the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site (hereinafter referred to as Rocky Flats or Site), Golden, Colorado. The scope of the EA included alternatives for interim storage including the no action alternative, the construction of a new facility for interim storage at Rocky Flats, and shipment to other DOE facilities for interim storage.

  14. Testing in support of on-site storage of residues in the Pipe Overpack Container

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ammerman, D.J.; Bobbe, J.G.; Arviso, M.

    1997-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The disposition of the large back-log of plutonium residues at the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site (Rocky Flats) will require interim storage and subsequent shipment to a waste repository. Current plans call for disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) and the transportation to WIPP in the TRUPACT-II. The transportation phase will require the residues to be packaged in a container that is more robust than a standard 55-gallon waste drum. Rocky Flats has designed the Pipe Overpack Container to meet this need. It is desirable to use this same waste packaging for interim on-site storage in non-hardened buildings. To meet the safety concerns for this storage the Pipe Overpack Container has been subjected to a series of tests at Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, New Mexico. In addition to the tests required to qualify the Pipe Overpack Container as a waste container for shipment in the TRUPACT-II several tests were performed solely for the purpose of qualifying the container for interim storage. This report will describe these tests and the packages response to the tests. 12 figs., 3 tabs.

  15. Weldon Spring storage site environmental-monitoring report for 1979 and 1980

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Weidner, R B; Boback, M W

    1982-04-19T23:59:59.000Z

    The US Department of Energy (DOE) Weldon Spring Site consists of two separate radioactive waste storage properties: a 52-acre site which is a remnant of the Weldon Spring Feed Materials Plant; and a 9-acre abandoned rock quarry. The larger property has four pits which contain settled sludge from uranium and thorium processing operations. At the quarry, part of the excavation contains contaminated building rubble, scrap, and various residues. During 1979 and 1980 these storage locations were managed by NLO, Inc., contract operator of the DOE Feed Materials Production Center. Air and water samples were collected to provide information about the transfer of radionuclides in the offsite environment. Monitoring results show that uranium and radium concentrations in offsite surface and well water were within DOE Guide values for uncontrolled areas. At offsite locations, radon-222 concentrations in air were well within the Guide value.

  16. An economic analysis of a monitored retrievable storage site for Tennessee. Final report and appendices

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fox, W.F.; Mayo, J.W.; Hansen, L.T.; Quindry, K.E.

    1985-12-17T23:59:59.000Z

    The United States Department of Energy is charged with the task of identifying potential sites for a Monitored Retrievable Storage (MRS) Facility and reporting the results of its analysis to Congress by January 1986. DOE chose three finalist sites from 11 sites DOE analysts evaluated earlier. All three are in Tennessee, including two in Oak Ridge and one in Trousdale/Smith Counties. This paper is a summary of research undertaken on the economic effects of establishing the MRS facility in Tennessee. All three locations were considered in the analysis, but on some occasions attention is focused on the site preferred by DOE. The research was undertaken by the Center for Business and Economic Research (CBER), College of Business Administration, the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, under contract with the Tennessee Department of Economic and Community Development.

  17. An economic analysis of a monitored retrievable storage site for Tennessee

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fox, W.F.; Mayo, J.W.; Hansen, L.T.; Quindry, K.E.

    1985-12-17T23:59:59.000Z

    The United States Department of Energy is charged with the task of identifying potential sites for a Monitored Retrievable Storage (MRS) Facility and reporting the results of its analysis to Congress by January 1986. DOE chose three finalist sites from 11 sites DOE analysts evaluated earlier. All three are in Tennessee, including two in Oak Ridge and one in Trousdale/Smith Counties. This paper is a summary of research undertaken on the economic effects of establishing the MRS facility in Tennessee. All three locations were considered in the analysis, but on some occasions attention is focused on the site preferred by DOE. The research was undertaken by the Center for Business and Economic Research (CBER), College of Business Administration, the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, under contract with the Tennessee Department of Economic and Community Development.

  18. ENERGY STORAGE IN AQUIFERS - - A SURVEY OF RECENT THEORETICAL STUDIES

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Tsang, Chin Fu

    2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    temperature underground thermal energy storage. In Proc. Th~al modeling of thermal energy storage in aquifers. In ~~-Mathematical modeling; thermal energy storage; aquifers;

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2009-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  20. EIS-0109: Long-Term Management of the Existing Radioactive Wastes and Residues at the Niagara Falls Storage Site

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The U.S. Department of Energy developed this statement to evaluate the environmental impacts of several alternatives for management and control of the radioactive wastes and residues at the Niagara Falls Storage Site, including a no action alternative, an alternative to manage wastes on-site, and two off-site management alternatives.

  1. Underground Exploration

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Underground Exploration and Testing A Report to Congress and the Secretary of Energy Nuclear Waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Use rail to support tunnel boring machine operation . . . . . . . . . 14 Excavate smaller diameter tunnels outside the portal-to-portal loop . 15 Use a tunnel boring machine to excavate the core test area

  2. First Dark Matter Search Results from a 4-kg CF$_3$I Bubble Chamber Operated in a Deep Underground Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Behnke, E.; /Indiana U., South Bend; Behnke, J.; /Indiana U., South Bend; Brice, S.J.; /Fermilab; Broemmelsiek, D.; /Fermilab; Collar, J.I.; /Chicago U., EFI; Conner, A.; /Indiana U., South Bend; Cooper, P.S.; /Fermilab; Crisler, M.; /Fermilab; Dahl, C.E.; /Chicago U., EFI; Fustin, D.; /Chicago U., EFI; Grace, E.; /Indiana U., South Bend /Fermilab

    2012-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    New data are reported from the operation of a 4.0 kg CF{sub 3}I bubble chamber in the 6800 foot deep SNOLAB underground laboratory. The effectiveness of ultrasound analysis in discriminating alpha decay background events from single nuclear recoils has been confirmed, with a lower bound of >99.3% rejection of alpha decay events. Twenty single nuclear recoil event candidates and three multiple bubble events were observed during a total exposure of 553 kg-days distributed over three different bubble nucleation thresholds. The effective exposure for single bubble recoil-like events was 437.4 kg-days. A neutron background internal to the apparatus, of known origin, is estimated to account for five single nuclear recoil events and is consistent with the observed rate of multiple bubble events. This observation provides world best direct detection constraints on WIMP-proton spin-dependent scattering for WIMP masses >20 GeV/c{sup 2} and demonstrates significant sensitivity for spin-independent interactions.

  3. Transferability of Data Related to the Underground Test Area Project, Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada: Revision 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stoller-Navarro Joint Venture

    2004-06-24T23:59:59.000Z

    This document is the collaborative effort of the members of an ad hoc subcommittee of the Underground Test Area (UGTA) Technical Working Group (TWG). The UGTA Project relies on data from a variety of sources; therefore, a process is needed to identify relevant factors for determining whether material-property data collected from other areas can be used to support groundwater flow, radionuclide transport, and other models within a Corrective Action Unit (CAU), and for documenting the data transfer decision and process. This document describes the overall data transfer process. Separate Parameter Descriptions will be prepared that provide information for selected specific parameters as determined by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) UGTA Project Manager. This document and its accompanying appendices do not provide the specific criteria to be used for transfer of data for specific uses. Rather, the criteria will be established by separate parameter-specific and model-specific Data Transfer Protocols. The CAU Data Documentation Packages and data analysis reports will apply the protocols and provide or reference a document with the data transfer evaluations and decisions.

  4. 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.

    2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  5. EA-1900: Radiological Work and Storage Building at the Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory Kesselring Site, West Milton, New York

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program (NNPP) intent to prepare an Environmental Assessment for a radiological work and storage building at the Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory (Kesselring Site in West Milton, New York. A new facility is needed to streamline radioactive material handling and storage operations, permit demolition of aging facilities, and accommodate efficient maintenance of existing nuclear reactors.

  6. EA-1120: Solid Residues Treatment, Repackaging and Storage at the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site, Golden, Colorado

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This EA evaluates the environmental impacts of the proposal to stabilize, if necessary, and/or repackage the residues for safe interim storage at the Site while awaiting the completion and opening...

  7. Underground Natural Gas Storage by Storage Type

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto17 34 44Year Jan Feb MarDecadeFour-Dimensional2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

  8. Underground Natural Gas Storage by Storage Type

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade Year-0E (2001)gasoline prices4 Oil demand expected to risesummerNov-14

  9. An Assessment of Technologies to Provide Extended Sludge Retrieval from Underground Storage Tanks at the Hanford Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    JA Bamberger

    2000-08-02T23:59:59.000Z

    The purpose of this study was to identify sludge mobilization technologies that can be readily installed in double-shell tanks along with mixer pumps to augment mixer pump operation when mixer pumps do not adequately mobilize waste. The supplementary technologies will mobilize sludge that may accumulate in tank locations out-of-reach of the mixer-pump jet and move the sludge into the mixer-pump range of operation. The identified technologies will be evaluated to determine if their performances and configurations are adequate to meet requirements developed for enhanced sludge removal systems. The study proceeded in three parallel paths to identify technologies that: (1) have been previously deployed or demonstrated in radioactive waste tanks, (2) have been specifically evaluated for their ability to mobilize or dislodge waste simulants with physical and theological properties similar to those anticipated during waste retrieval, and (3) have been used in similar industrial conditions, bu t not specifically evaluated for radioactive waste retrieval.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    DOE/NV

    1999-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This CAIP presents a plan to investigate the nature and extent of the contaminants of potential concern (COPCs) at CAU 135. The purpose of the corrective action investigation described in this CAIP is to: (1) Identify the presence and nature of COPCs; (2) Determine the location of radiological contamination within the vault and determine the extent of COPCs in the sump area and on the floor; and (3) Provide sufficient information and data to develop and evaluate appropriate corrective actions for CAS 25-02-01. This CAIP was developed using the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Data Quality Objectives (DQOs) (EPA, 1994) process to clearly define the goals for collecting environmental data, to determine data uses, and to design a data collection program that will satisfy these uses. A DQO scoping meeting was held prior to preparation of this plan; a brief summary of the DQOs is presented in Section 3.4. A more detailed summary of the DQO process and results is included in Appendix A.

  11. DOE Issues Final Mercury Storage Environmental Impact Statement: Texas Site Is Preferred for Long-Term Mercury Storage

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    WASHINGTON – The Department of Energy has prepared a Final Long-Term Management and Storage of Elemental Mercury Environmental Impact Statement to analyze the potential environmental, human health, and socioeconomic impacts of elemental mercury storage at seven locations

  12. Analysis of dissolved benzene plumes and methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) plumes in ground water at leaking underground fuel tank (LUFT) sites

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Happel, A.M.; Rice, D. [Lawrence Livermore National Lab., CA (United States); Beckenbach, E. [California Univ., Berkeley, CA (United States); Savalin, L.; Temko, H.; Rempel, R. [California State Water Resources Control Board, Sacramento, CA (United States); Dooher, B. [California Univ., Los Angeles, CA (United States)

    1996-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments mandate the addition of oxygenates to gasoline products to abate air pollution. Currently, many areas of the country utilize oxygenated or reformulated fuel containing 15- percent and I I-percent MTBE by volume, respectively. This increased use of MTBE in gasoline products has resulted in accidental point source releases of MTBE containing gasoline products to ground water. Recent studies have shown MTBE to be frequently detected in samples of shallow ground water from urban areas throughout the United States (Squillace et al., 1995). Knowledge of the subsurface fate and transport of MTBE in ground water at leaking underground fuel tank (LUFT) sites and the spatial extent of MTBE plumes is needed to address these releases. The goal of this research is to utilize data from a large number of LUFT sites to gain insights into the fate, transport, and spatial extent of MTBE plumes. Specific goals include defining the spatial configuration of dissolved MTBE plumes, evaluating plume stability or degradation over time, evaluating the impact of point source releases of MTBE to ground water, and attempting to identify the controlling factors influencing the magnitude and extent of the MTBE plumes. We are examining the relationships between dissolved TPH, BTEX, and MTBE plumes at LUFT sites using parallel approaches of best professional judgment and a computer-aided plume model fitting procedure to determine plume parameters. Here we present our initial results comparing dissolved benzene and MTBE plumes lengths, the statistical significance of these results, and configuration of benzene and MTBE plumes at individual LUFT sites.

  13. Niagara falls storage site: Annual site environmental report, Lewiston, New York, Calendar Year 1988: Surplus Facilities Management Program (SFMP)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1989-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The monitoring program at the Niagara Falls Storage Site (NFSS) measures radon concentrations in air; external gamma radiation levels; and uranium and radium concentrations in surface water, groundwater, and sediment. To verify that the site is in compliance with the DOE radiation protection standard and to assess its potential effect on public health, the radiation dose was calculated for a hypothetical maximally exposed individual. Based on the conservative scenario described in this report, this hypothetical individual receives an annual external exposure approximately equivalent to 6 percent of the DOE radiation protection standard of 100 mrem/yr. This exposure is less than a person receives during two round-trip flights from New York to Los Angeles (because of the greater amounts of cosmic radiation at higher altitudes). The cumulative dose to the population within an 80-km (50-mi) radius of the NFSS that results from radioactive materials present at the site is indistinguishable from the dose that the same population receives from naturally occurring radioactive sources. Results of the 1988 monitoring show that the NFSS is in compliance with applicable DOE radiation protection standards. 17 refs., 31 figs., 20 tabs.

  14. Environmental audit of the Maywood Site: Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program, Maywood Interim Storage Site vicinity properties

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1990-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report presents the results of the Environmental Audit of the Maywood Site managed by the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP). The Audit was carried out from November 7 through 16, 1990. The Audit Team found overall technical competence and knowledge of management and staff to be excellent. This applies to DOE as well as to Bechtel National, Incorporated (BNI). In particular, there was excellent knowledge of federal, state, and local environmental regulations, as well as analysis for applicability of these regulations to FUSRAP. Project management of the Maywood Site is also excellent. BNI and DOE project staff have made frequent contact with members of the community, and all removal actions and remedial investigation activities have been planned, scheduled, and accomplished with competence and attention to total quality principles. To date, all actions taken for the Maywood Site cleanup have been completed ahead of schedule and on or under budget. Weakness noted include self-assessment efforts by DOE, failure to fully implement DOE Order requirements throughout the program, and some discrepancies in formally documenting and reviewing procedures. 7 figs., 10 tabs.

  15. Hazelwood Interim Storage Site environmental surveillance report for calendar year 1993

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report summarizes the results of environmental surveillance activities conducted at the Hazelwood Interim Storage Site (HISS) during calendar year 1993. It includes an overview of site operations, the basis for monitoring for radioactive and non-radioactive parameters, summaries of environmental program at HISS, a summary of the results, and the calculated hypothetical radiation dose to the offsite population. Environmental surveillance activities were conducted in accordance with the site environmental monitoring plan, which describes the rationale and design criteria for the surveillance program, the frequency of sampling and analysis, specific sampling and analysis procedures, and quality assurance requirements. The US Department of Energy (DOE) began environmental monitoring of HISS in 1984, when the site was assigned to DOE by Congress through the energy and Water Development Appropriations Act and subsequent to DOE`s Formerly Utilized Sites Remediation Action Program (FUSRAP). Contamination at HISS originated from uranium processing work conducted at Mallinckrodt Chemical Works at the St. Louis Downtown Site (SLDS) from 1942 through 1957.

  16. Using the Choquet integral for screening geological CO2 storage sites

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zhang, Y.

    2011-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    For geological CO{sub 2} storage site selection, it is desirable to reduce the number of candidate sites through a screening process before detailed site characterization is performed. Screening generally involves defining a number of criteria which then need to be evaluated for each site. The importance of each criterion to the final evaluation will generally be different. Weights reflecting the relative importance of these criteria can be provided by experts. To evaluate a site, each criterion must be evaluated and scored, and then aggregated, taking into account the importance of the criteria. We propose the use of the Choquet integral for aggregating the scores. The Choquet integral considers the interactions among criteria, i.e. whether they are independent, complementary to each other, or partially repetitive. We also evaluate the Shapley index, which demonstrates how the importance of a given piece of information may change if it is considered by itself or together with other available information. An illustrative example demonstrates how the Choquet integral properly accounts for the presence of redundancy in two site-evaluation criteria, making the screening process more defensible than the standard weighted-average approach.

  17. Underground coal gasification: environmental update

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dockter, L.; Mcternan, E.M.

    1985-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    To evaluate the potential for ground water contamination by underground coal gasification, extensive postburn groundwater monitoring programs are being continued at two test sites in Wyoming. An overview of the environmental concerns related to UCG and some results to date on the two field sites are presented in this report.

  18. Health, Safety, and Environmental Screening and Ranking Frameworkfor Geologic CO2 Storage Site Selection

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Oldenburg, Curtis M.

    2006-03-15T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes a screening and ranking framework(SRF) developed to evaluate potential geologic carbon dioxide (CO2)storage sites on the basis of health, safety, and environmental (HSE)risk arising from possible CO2 leakage. The approach is based on theassumption that HSE risk due to CO2 leakage is dependent on three basiccharacteristics of a geologic CO2 storage site: (1) the potential forprimary containment by the target formation, (2) the potential forsecondary containment if the primary formation leaks, and (3) thepotential for attenuation and dispersion of leaking CO2 if the primaryformation leaks and secondary containment fails. The framework isimplemented in a spreadsheet in which users enter numerical scoresrepresenting expert opinions or general information available frompublished materials along with estimates of uncertainty to evaluate thethree basic characteristics in order to screen and rank candidate sites.Application of the framework to the Rio Vista Gas Field, Ventura OilField, and Mammoth Mountain demonstrates the approach. Refinements andextensions are possible through the use of more detailed data or modelresults in place of property proxies. Revisions and extensions to improvethe approach are anticipated in the near future as it is used and testedby colleagues and collaborators.

  19. Niagara Falls Storage Site environmental report for calendar year 1989, Lewiston, New York

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1990-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The environmental monitoring program, which began in 1981, was continued during 1989 at the Niagara Falls Storage Site (NFSS), a United States Department of Energy (DOE) surplus facility located in Niagara County, New York, that is currently used for interim storage of radioactive residues, contaminated soils, and rubble. The monitoring program is being conducted by Bechtel National, Inc. The monitoring program at NFSS measures radon concentrations in air; external gamma radiation levels; and uranium and radium concentrations in surface water, groundwater, and sediment. Additionally, several nonradiological parameters are measured in groundwater. To verify that the site is in compliance with the DOE radiation protection standard and to assess its potential effect on public health, the radiation dose was calculated for a hypothetical maximally exposed individual. Based on the conservative scenario described in this report, this hypothetical individual receives an annual external exposure equivalent to approximately 2 percent of the DOE radiation protection standard of 100 mrem/yr. This exposure is less than a person receives during a one-way flight from New York to Los Angeles (because of the greater amounts of cosmic radiation at higher altitudes). The cumulative dose to the population within an 80-km (50-mi) radius of NFSS that results from radioactive materials present at the site is indistinguishable from the dose that the same population receives from naturally occurring radioactive sources. Results of the 1989 monitoring show that NFSS is in compliance with applicable DOE radiation protection standards. 18 refs., 26 figs., 18 tabs.

  20. Health, Safety, and Environmental Screening and Ranking Frameworkfor Geologic CO2 Storage Site Selection

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Oldenburg, Curtis M.

    2005-09-19T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes a screening and ranking framework(SRF) developed to evaluate potential geologic carbon dioxide (CO2) storage sites on the basis of health, safety, and environmental (HSE) risk arising from possible CO2 leakage. The approach is based on the assumption that HSE risk due to CO2 leakage is dependent on three basic characteristics of a geologic CO2 storage site: (1) the potential for primary containment by the target formation; (2) the potential for secondary containment if the primary formation leaks; and (3) the potential for attenuation and dispersion of leaking CO2 if the primary formation leaks and secondary containment fails. The framework is implemented in a spreadsheet in which users enter numerical scores representing expert opinions or general information available from published materials along with estimates of uncertainty to evaluate the three basic characteristics in order to screen and rank candidate sites. Application of the framework to the Rio Visa Gas Field, Ventura Oil Field, and Mammoth Mountain demonstrates the approach. Refinements and extensions are possible through the use of more detailed data or model results in place of property proxies. Revisions and extensions to improve the approach are anticipated in the near future as it is used and tested by colleagues and collaborators.

  1. Visit to the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory

    ScienceCinema (OSTI)

    None

    2010-01-08T23:59:59.000Z

    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).

  2. Geochemical information for sites contaminated with low-level radioactive wastes: II. St. Louis Airport Storage Site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Seeley, F.G.; Kelmers, A.D.

    1985-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The St. Louis Airport Storage Site (SLASS) became radioactively contaminated as a result of wastes that were being stored from operations to recover uranium from pitchblende ores in the 1940s and 1950s. The US Department of Energy is considering various remedial action options for the SLASS under the Formerly Utilized Site Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP). This report describes the results of geochemical investigations, carried out to support the FUSRAP activities and to aid in quantifying various remedial action options. Soil and groundwater samples from the site were characterized, and sorption ratios for uranium and radium and apparent concentration limit values for uranium were measured in soil/groundwater systems by batch contact methodology. The uranium and radium concentrations in soil samples were significantly above background near the old contaminated surface horizon (now at the 0.3/sup -/ to 0.9/sup -/m depth); the maximum values were 1566 ..mu..g/g and 101 pCi/g, respectively. Below about the 6/sup -/m depth, the concentrations appeared to be typical of those naturally present in soils of this area (3.8 +- 1.2 ..mu..g/g and 3.1 +- 0.6 pCi/g). Uranium sorption ratios showed stratigraphic trends but were generally moderate to high (100 to 1000 L/kg). The sorption isotherm suggested an apparent uranium concentration limit of about 200 mg/L. This relatively high solubility can probably be correlated with the carbonate content of the soil/groundwater systems. The lower sorption ratio values obtained from the sorption isotherm may have resulted from changes in the experimental procedure or the groundwater used. The SLASS appears to exhibit generally favorable behavior for the retardation of uranium solubilized from waste in the site. Parametric tests were conducted to estimate the sensitivity of uranium sorption and solubility to the pH and carbonate content of the system.

  3. Corrective Action Plan for Corrective Action Unit 166: Storage Yards and Contaminated Materials, Nevada Test Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Restoration

    2007-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 166, Storage Yards and Contaminated Materials, is listed in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) of 1996 (FFACO, 1996). CAU 166 consists of seven Corrective Action Sites (CASs) located in Areas 2, 3, 5, and 18 of the Nevada Test Site (NTS), which is located approximately 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada (Figure 1). CAU 166 consists of the following CASs: (1) CAS 02-42-01, Cond. Release Storage Yd - North; (2) CAS 02-42-02, Cond. Release Storage Yd - South; (3) CAS 02-99-10, D-38 Storage Area; (4) CAS 03-42-01, Conditional Release Storage Yard; (5) CAS 05-19-02, Contaminated Soil and Drum; (6) CAS 18-01-01, Aboveground Storage Tank; and (7) CAS 18-99-03, Wax Piles/Oil Stain. Details of the site history and site characterization results for CAU 166 are provided in the approved Corrective Action Investigation Plan (CAIP) (U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office [NNSA/NSO], 2006) and in the approved Corrective Action Decision Document (CADD) (NNSA/NSO, 2007).

  4. Laboratory characterization of the spalling properties of the rock cores from the UCG (Underground Coal Gasification) test site near Porto Alegre in Brazil

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tantekin, S.B.; Sperry, D.P.; Krantz, W.B.; Britten, J.A.

    1988-02-22T23:59:59.000Z

    One of the principal problems encountered in most of the Underground Coal Gasification (UCG) field tests conducted thus far has been excessive water influx. Spalling-enhanced-drying of coal and overburdens rock has been identified as the principal mechanism of water influx observed in the Hanna UCG field tests in Wyoming Spalling is defined as the chipping, fracturing and breaking off of small rock fragments from the cavity roof due to the combined action of mechanical loading and thermally induced stresses. Spalling is also responsibble for vertical cavity growth and a portion of the heat losses during UCG. A laboratory core characterization method has been developed to determine the spalling properties of overburden rock which are essential to make influx and cavity geometry predictions for a prospective field test. In this study, the spalling properties of the representative rock cores from the UCG test site near Porto Alegre in Brazil have been determined using the laboratory core characterization test which utilizes the temperature-gradient-induced spalling hypothesis.

  5. Hazelwood Interim Storage Site environmental report for calendar year 1992, 9200 Latty Avenue, Hazelwood, Missouri

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the environmental surveillance program at the Hazelwood Interim storage Site (HISS) and surrounding area, provides the results for 1992, and discusses applicable environmental standards and requirements with which the results were compared. HISS is located in eastern Missouri in the City of Hazelwood (St. Louis County) and occupies approximately 2.2 ha (5.5 acres). Environmental monitoring of HISS began in 1984 when the site was assigned to the US Department of Energy (DOE) as part of the decontamination research and development project authorized by Congress under the 1984 Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act. DOE placed responsibility for HISS under the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP), which was established to identify and decontaminate or otherwise control sites where residual radioactive materials remain from the early years of the nation`s atomic energy program or from commercial operations causing conditions that Congress has authorized DOE to remedy. In 1992 there were no environmental occurrences or unplanned contaminant releases as defined in DOE requirements and in the Superfund Amendment and Reauthorization Act (SARA) Title III of CERCLA.

  6. Prediction of Pseudo relative velocity response spectra at Yucca Mountain for underground nuclear explosions conducted in the Pahute Mesa testing area at the Nevada testing site; Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Phillips, J.S.

    1991-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Project (YMP), managed by the Office of Geologic Disposal of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management of the US Department of Energy, is examining the feasibility of siting a repository for commercial, high-level nuclear wastes at Yucca Mountain on and adjacent to the Nevada Test Site (NTS). This work, intended to extend our understanding of the ground motion at Yucca Mountain resulting from testing of nuclear weapons on the NTS, was funded by the Yucca Mountain project and the Military Applications Weapons Test Program. This report summarizes one aspect of the weapons test seismic investigations conducted in FY88. Pseudo relative velocity response spectra (PSRV) have been calculated for a large body of surface ground motions generated by underground nuclear explosions. These spectra have been analyzed and fit using multiple linear regression techniques to develop a credible prediction technique for surface PSRVs. In addition, a technique for estimating downhole PSRVs at specific stations is included. A data summary, data analysis, prediction development, prediction evaluation, software summary and FORTRAN listing of the prediction technique are included in this report.

  7. Sandia National Laboratories: Carbon Storage

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

    from improved climate models to performance models for underground waste storage to 3D printing and digital rock physics. Marianne Walck (Director ... Joint SandiaUniversity of...

  8. Sandia National Laboratories: Energy Storage

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

    from improved climate models to performance models for underground waste storage to 3D printing and digital rock physics. Marianne Walck (Director ... Recent Sandia Secure,...

  9. Distributed Energy Resources On-Site Optimization for Commercial Buildings with Electric and Thermal Storage Technologies

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Stadler, Michael

    2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    could be acquired, e.g. battery storage, the costs for whichlead/acid battery, and thermal storage, capabilities, withis limited by battery size - Heat storage is limited by

  10. Hydro-mechanical modelling of geological CO2 storage and the study of possible caprock fracture mechanisms

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    element modelling of a hypothetical underground carbon dioxide (CO2) storage operation. The hydro-mechanical properties of the materials modelled are chosen to be representative of a potential injection site. For high on the injection process, and on site and rock properties. Rutqvist et al. (2008) showed through a coupled

  11. Engineering evaluation of alternatives for the disposition of Niagara Falls Storage Site, its residues and wastes

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1984-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The final disposition scenarios selected by DOE for assessment in this document are consistent with those stated in the Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Niagara Falls Storage Site (NFSS) (DOE, 1983d) and the modifications to the alternatives resulting from the public scoping process. The scenarios are: take no action beyond interim remedial measures other than maintenance and surveillance of the NFSS; retain and manage the NFSS as a long-term waste management facility for the wastes and residues on the site; decontaminate, certify, and release the NFSS for other use, with long-term management of the wastes and residues at other DOE sites; and partially decontaminate the NFSS by removal and transport off site of only the more radioactive residues, and upgrade containment of the remaining wastes and residues on site. The objective of this document is to present to DOE the conceptual engineering, occupational radiation exposure, construction schedule, maintenance and surveillance requirements, and cost information relevant to design and implementation of each of the four scenarios. The specific alternatives within each scenario used as the basis for discussion in this document were evaluated on the bases of engineering considerations, technical feasibility, and regulatory requirements. Selected alternatives determined to be acceptable for each of the four final disposition scenarios for the NFSS were approved by DOE to be assessed and costed in this document. These alternatives are also the subject of the EIS for the NFSS currently being prepared by Argonne National Laboratory (ANL). 40 figures, 38 tables.

  12. Niagara Falls Storage Site, Lewiston, New York: Annual site environmental report, Calendar year 1987: Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1988-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The monitoring program at the Niagara Falls Storage Site (NFSS) measures radon gas concentrations in air; external gamma radiation levels; and uranium and radium concentrations in surface water, groundwater, and sediment. To verify that the site is in compliance with the DOE radiation protection standard and to assess its potential effect on public health, the radiation dose was calculated for the maximally exposed individual. Based on the conservative scenario described in the report, this individual would receive an annual external exposure approximately equivalent to 6 percent of the DOE radiation protection standard of 100 mrem/yr. By comparison, the incremental dose received from living in a brick house versus a wooden house is 10 mrem/yr above background. The cumulative dose to the population within an 80-km (50-mi) radius of the NFSS that would result from radioactive materials present at the site would be indistinguishable from the dose that the same population would receive from naturally occurring radioactive sources. Results of the 1987 monitoring show that the NFSS is in compliance with the DOE radiation protection standard. 13 refs., 10 figs., 20 tabs.

  13. Flood Assessment at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site and the Proposed Hazardous Waste Storage Unit, DOE/Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Schmeltzer, J. S., Millier, J. J., Gustafson, D. L.

    1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A flood assessment at the Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) and the proposed Hazardous Waste Storage Unit (HWSU) in Area 5 of the Nevada Test Site (NTS) was performed to determine the 100-year flood hazard at these facilities. The study was conducted to determine whether the RWMS and HWSU are located within a 100-year flood hazard as defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and to provide discharges for the design of flood protection.

  14. Site-specific EIS ordered but injunctive relief deined in nuclear waste storage case

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Barnhart y Chavez, S.

    1980-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA) received appropriations in 1976-77 to construct 22 tanks for storage of high level radioactive wastes generated by its nuclear weapons materials production program. The tanks were to replace older, leaking tanks at the Hanford Reservation in Richland, Washington and the Savannah River Plant in Aiken, South Carolina. The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) had unsuccessfully requested that ERDA obtain a construction permit from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). NRDC also petitioned NRC to exercise its licensing authority over the tanks under Section 202(4) of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974. In response to the NRDC request, ERDA claimed the tanks were only for short-term storage and therefore a license was unnecessary. NRC claimed it lacked jurisdiction over the tanks. NRDC filed suit in United States District Court for the District of Columbia, alleging that ERDA had violated Section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act, and that both ERDA and NRC had violated Section 202(4) of the Energy Reorganization Act. NRDC requested an injunction against further construction of the tanks. Although ERDA did not have to obtain an NRC construction permit for the nuclear waste storage tanks at Hanford Reservation and Savannah River Plant, the programmatic Environmental Impact Statement submitted was insufficient and site-specific statements must be prepared. Injunctive relief pending the statements was denied for the social and economic costs of delaying the tanks project. NRC decisions even remotely connected to its licensing power should be contested in federal courts of appeals, not district courts. The court gave NRDC a hollow victory by ordering a more specific EIS, but denying an injunction.

  15. Overburden characterization and post-burn study of the Hanna IV, underground coal gasification site, Wyoming, and comparison to other Wyoming UCG sites

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Marcouiller, B.A.; Burns, L.K.; Ethridge, F.G.

    1984-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Analysis of 21 post-burn cores taken from the Hanna IV UCG site allows 96 m (315 ft) of overburden to be subdivided into four local stratigraphic units. The 7.6 m (25 ft) thick Hanna No. 1 coal seam is overlain by a laterally discontinuous, 3.3 m (11 ft) thick shaley mudstone (Unit A') in part of the Hanna IV site. A more widespread, 30 m (90 ft) thick well-indurated sandstone (Unit A) overlies the A' unit. Unit A is the roof rock for both of the Hanna IV cavities. Overlying Unit A is a 33 m (108 ft) thick sequence of mudstone and claystone (Unit B), and the uppermost unit at the Hanna IV site (Unit C) is a coarse-grained sandstone that ranges in thickness from 40 to 67 m (131 to 220 ft). Two elliptical cavities were formed during the two phases of the Hanna IV experiment. The larger cavity, Hanna IVa, is 45 x 15 m in plan and has a maximum height of 18 m (59 ft) from the base of the coal seam to the top of the cavity; the Hanna IVb cavity is 40 x 15 m in plan and has a maximum height of 11 m (36 ft) from the base of the coal seam to the top of the cavity. Geotechnical tests indicated that the Hanna IV overburden rocks were moderately strong to strong, based on the empirical classification of Broch and Franklin (1972), and a positive, linear correlation exists between rock strength and volume percent calcite cement. There is an inverse linear correlation between rock strength and porosity for the Hanna IV overburden rocks. 28 refs., 34 figs., 13 tabs..

  16. Preliminary Analysis of Grande Ronde Basalt Formation Flow Top Transmissivity as it Relates to Assessment and Site Selection Applications for Fluid/Energy Storage and Sequestration Projects

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Spane, Frank A.

    2013-04-29T23:59:59.000Z

    Preliminary Analysis of Grande Ronde Basalt Formation Flow Top Transmissivity as it Relates to Assessment and Site Selection Applications for Fluid/Energy Storage and Sequestration Projects

  17. CPP-603 Underwater Fuel Storage Facility Site Integrated Stabilization Management Plan (SISMP), Volume I

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Denney, R.D.

    1995-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The CPP-603 Underwater Fuel Storage Facility (UFSF) Site Integrated Stabilization Management Plan (SISMP) has been constructed to describe the activities required for the relocation of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) from the CPP-603 facility. These activities are the only Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) actions identified in the Implementation Plan developed to meet the requirements of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Recommendation 94-1 to the Secretary of Energy regarding an improved schedule for remediation in the Defense Nuclear Facilities Complex. As described in the DNFSB Recommendation 94-1 Implementation Plan, issued February 28, 1995, an INEL Spent Nuclear Fuel Management Plan is currently under development to direct the placement of SNF currently in existing INEL facilities into interim storage, and to address the coordination of intrasite SNF movements with new receipts and intersite transfers that were identified in the DOE SNF Programmatic and INEL Environmental Restoration and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement Record, of Decision. This SISMP will be a subset of the INEL Spent Nuclear Fuel Management Plan and the activities described are being coordinated with other INEL SNF management activities. The CPP-603 relocation activities have been assigned a high priority so that established milestones will be meet, but there will be some cases where other activities will take precedence in utilization of available resources. The Draft INEL Site Integrated Stabilization Management Plan (SISMP), INEL-94/0279, Draft Rev. 2, dated March 10, 1995, is being superseded by the INEL Spent Nuclear Fuel Management Plan and this CPP-603 specific SISMP.

  18. Abstract--An all-day tour to observe arid land reclamation on the Nevada Test Site was conducted in conjunction with the

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    of Energy must study and characterize Yucca Mountain, Nevada, as a potential site for long-term underground storage of high- level nuclear waste. Site characterization activities include a variety of geo- logical Reclamation On the Nevada Test Site--A Field Tour Von K. Winkel W. Kent Ostler In: Roundy, Bruce A.; Mc

  19. Natural gas storage in bedded salt formations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Macha, G.

    1996-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In 1990 Western Resources Inc. (WRI) identified the need for additional natural gas storage capacity for its intrastate natural gas system operated in the state of Kansas. Western Resources primary need was identified as peak day deliverability with annual storage balancing a secondary objective. Consequently, an underground bedded salt storage facility, Yaggy Storage Field, was developed and placed in operation in November 1993. The current working capacity of the new field is 2.1 BCF. Seventy individual caverns are in service on the 300 acre site. The caverns vary in size from 310,000 CF to 2,600,000 CF. Additional capacity can be added on the existing acreage by increasing the size of some of the smaller existing caverns by further solution mining and by development of an additional 30 potential well sites on the property.

  20. EPA - Ground Water Discharges (EPA's Underground Injection Control...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Discharges (EPA's Underground Injection Control Program) webpage Jump to: navigation, search OpenEI Reference LibraryAdd to library Web Site: EPA - Ground Water Discharges (EPA's...

  1. Niagara Falls storage site annual environmental report for calendar year 1990, Lewiston, New York

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1991-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Environmental monitoring of the US DOE Niagara Falls Storage Site (NFSS) and surrounding area began in 1981. NFSS is part of a DOE program to decontaminate or otherwise control sites where residual radioactive materials remain from the early years of the nation's atomic energy program or from commercial, operations causing conditions the Congress has authorized DOE to remedy. Environmental monitoring systems at NFSS include sampling networks for radon concentrations in air; external gamma radiation exposure; and total uranium and radium-226 concentrations in surface water sediments, and groundwater. Additionally, several nonradiological parameters are routinely measured in groundwater. During 1990, the average ambient air radon concentration (including background) at NFSS ranged from 0.3 to 0.7 pCi/L (0.01 to 0.03 Bq/L); the maximum at any location for any quarter was 1.6 pCi/L (0.06 Bq/L). The average on-site external gamma radiation exposure level was 69 mR/yr; the average at the property line was 68 mR/yr (including background). The average background radiation level in the area was 66 mR/yr. Average annual concentrations of radium-226 and total uranium in surface water ranged from 0.4E-9 to 0.9E-9 {mu}Ci/m1 (0.02 to 0.03 Bq/L) and from 5E-9 to 9E-9 {mu}Ci/m1 (0.2 to 0.3 Bq/L), respectively. Routine analyses of groundwater samples from NFSS included the indicator parameters total organic carbon, total organic halides, pH, and specific conductivity.

  2. "Goodbye Doesn’t Mean Forever:" Selection Strategies for the Transfer of Slavic to Off-Site Remote Storage

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Giullian, Jon C.

    2007-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    to the storage crisis, several of the nation’s top research libraries have constructed off-site, high-density shelving facilities. This paper first summarizes the discussion about the nature and function of these facilities. The paper goes on to document a case...

  3. EIS-0063: Waste Management Operations, Double-Shell Tanks for Defense High Level Radioactive Waste Storage, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The U.S. Department of Energy developed this statement to evaluate the existing tank design and consider additional specific design and safety feature alternatives for the thirteen tanks being constructed for storage of defense high-level radioactive liquid waste at the Hanford Site in Richland, Washington. This statement supplements ERDA-1538, "Final Environmental Statement on Waste Management Operation."

  4. Evaluating the Suitability for CO2 Storage at the FutureGen 2.0 Site, Morgan County, Illinois, USA

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bonneville, Alain; Gilmore, Tyler J.; Sullivan, E. C.; Vermeul, Vincent R.; Kelley, Mark E.; White, Signe K.; Appriou, Delphine; Bjornstad, Bruce N.; Gerst, Jacqueline L.; Gupta, Neeraj; Horner, Jacob A.; McNeil, Caitlin; Moody, Mark A.; Rike, William M.; Spane, Frank A.; Thorne, Paul D.; Zeller, Evan R.; Zhang, Z. F.; Hoffman, Jeffrey; Humphreys, Kenneth K.

    2013-08-05T23:59:59.000Z

    FutureGen 2.0 site will be the first near-zero emission power plant with fully integrated long-term storage in a deep, non-potable saline aquifer in the United States. The proposed FutureGen 2.0 CO2 storage site is located in northeast Morgan County, Illinois, U.S.A., forty-eight kilometres from the Meredosia Energy Center where a large-scale oxy-combustion demonstration will be conducted. The demonstration will involve > 90% carbon capture, which will produce more than one million metric tons (MMT) of CO2 per year. The CO2 will be compressed at the power plant and transported via pipeline to the storage site. To examine CO2 storage potential of the site, a 1,467m characterization well (FGA#1) was completed in December 2011. The target reservoir for CO2 storage is the Mt. Simon Sandstone and Elmhurst Sandstone Member of the lower Eau Claire Formation for a combined thickness of 176 m. Confining beds of the overlying Lombard and Proviso Members (upper Eau Claire Formation) reach a thickness of 126 m. Characterization of the target injection zone and the overlying confining zone was based on wellbore data, cores, and geophysical logs, along with surface geophysical (2-D seismic profiles, magnetic and gravity), and structural data collected during the initial stage of the project . Based on this geological model, 3D simulations of CO2 injection and redistribution were conducted using STOMP-CO2, a multiphase flow and transport simulator. After this characterization stage, it appears that the injection site is a suitable geologic system for CO2 sequestration and that the injection zone is sufficient to receive up to 33 MMT of CO2 at a rate of 1.1 MMT/yr. GHGT-11 conference

  5. Groundwater Chemistry Changes as a Result of CO2 Injection at the ZERT Field Site in Bozeman, Montana

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Apps, J.A.

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    field program to evaluate phenomena associated with the atmospheric leakage of CO 2 from underground storage

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Alfred Wickline

    2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  8. Search for underground openings for in situ test facilities in crystalline rock

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wollenberg, H.A.; Strisower, B.; Corrigan, D.J.; Graf, A.N.; O'Brien, M.T.; Pratt, H.; Board, M.; Hustrulid, W.

    1980-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    With a few exceptions, crystalline rocks in this study were limited to plutonic rocks and medium to high-grade metamorphic rocks. Nearly 1700 underground mines, possibly occurring in crystalline rock, were initially identified. Application of criteria resulted in the identification of 60 potential sites. Within this number, 26 mines and 4 civil works were identified as having potential in that they fulfilled the criteria. Thirty other mines may have similar potential. Most of the mines identified are near the contact between a pluton and older sedimentary, volcanic and metamorphic rocks. However, some mines and the civil works are well within plutonic or metamorphic rock masses. Civil works, notably underground galleries associated with pumped storage hydroelectric facilities, are generally located in tectonically stable regions, in relatively homogeneous crystalline rock bodies. A program is recommended which would identify one or more sites where a concordance exists between geologic setting, company amenability, accessibility and facilities to conduct in situ tests in crystalline rock.

  9. Environmental surveillance results for 1994 for the Hazelwood Interim Storage Site. FUSRAP technical memorandum Number 140-95-011

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Szojka, S.

    1995-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report presents analytical results and an interpretation of the results for samples collected as part of the 1994 environmental surveillance program for the Hazelwood Interim Storage Site (HISS) for the interim storage of radiologically contaminated soils. The discussion provides a comparative analysis of local background conditions and applicable regulatory criteria to results reported for external gamma radiation and for samples from the media investigated (air, surface water, sediment, groundwater, and stormwater). Results from the 1994 environmental surveillance program at HISS indicate that Department of Energy (DOE) guidelines were not exceeded for the calculated airborne particulate dose or for the monitored constituents.

  10. CHARACTERIZING DOE HANFORD SITE WASTE ENCAPSULATION STORAGE FACILITY CELLS USING RADBALL

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Farfan, E.; Coleman, R.

    2011-03-31T23:59:59.000Z

    RadBall{trademark} is a novel technology that can locate and quantify unknown radioactive hazards within contaminated areas, hot cells, and gloveboxes. The device consists of a colander-like outer tungsten collimator that houses a radiation-sensitive polymer semi-sphere. The collimator has a number of small holes with tungsten inserts; as a result, specific areas of the polymer are exposed to radiation becoming increasingly more opaque in proportion to the absorbed dose. The polymer semi-sphere is imaged in an optical computed tomography scanner that produces a high resolution 3D map of optical attenuation coefficients. A subsequent analysis of the optical attenuation data using a reverse ray tracing or backprojection technique provides information on the spatial distribution of gamma-ray sources in a given area forming a 3D characterization of the area of interest. RadBall{trademark} was originally designed for dry deployments and several tests, completed at Savannah River National Laboratory and Oak Ridge National Laboratory, substantiate its modeled capabilities. This study involves the investigation of the RadBall{trademark} technology during four submerged deployments in two water filled cells at the DOE Hanford Site's Waste Encapsulation Storage Facility.

  11. Compressed air energy storage: preliminary design and site development program in an aquifer. Final draft, Task 2: Volume 2 of 3. Characterize and explore potential sites and prepare research and development plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    None

    1980-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The characteristics of sites in Indiana and Illinois which are being investigated as potential sites for compressed air energy storage power plants are documented. These characteristics include geological considerations, economic factors, and environmental considerations. Extensive data are presented for 14 specific sites and a relative rating on the desirability of each site is derived. (LCL)

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NNSA /NV

    2002-08-27T23:59:59.000Z

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

  13. West Hackberry Strategic Petroleum Reserve site brine-disposal monitoring, Year I report. Volume III. Biological oceanography. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    DeRouen, L.R.; Hann, R.W.; Casserly, D.M.; Giammona, C.; Lascara, V.J. (eds.)

    1983-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Department of Energy's Strategic Petroleum Reserve Program began discharging brine into the Gulf of Mexico from its West Hackberry site near Cameron, Louisiana in May 1981. The brine originates from underground salt domes being leached with water from the Intracoastal Waterway, making available vast underground storage caverns for crude oil. The effects of brine discharge on aquatic organisms are presented in this volume. The topics covered are: benthos; nekton; phytoplankton; zooplankton; and data management.

  14. Feasibility study: Assess the feasibility of siting a monitored retrievable storage facility. Phase 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    King, J.W.

    1993-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The purpose of phase one of this study are: To understand the waste management system and a monitored retrievable storage facility; and to determine whether the applicant has real interest in pursuing the feasibility assessment process. Contents of this report are: Generating electric power; facts about exposure to radiation; handling storage, and transportation techniques; description of a proposed monitored retrievable storage facility; and benefits to be received by host jurisdiction.

  15. Characterization and reclamation assessment for the Central Shops Diesel Storage Facility, Savannah River Site, Aiken, South Carolina

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fliermans, C.B.; Hazen, T.C.; Bledsoe, H.

    1993-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The contamination of subsurface terrestrial environments by organic contaminants is a global phenomenon. The remediation of such environments requires innovative assessment techniques and strategies for successful clean-ups. Central Shops Diesel Storage Facility at Savannah River Site was characterized to determine the extent of subsurface diesel fuel contamination using innovative approaches and effective bioremediation techniques for clean-up of the contaminant plume have been established.

  16. Sandia National Laboratories: hydrogen storage options

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

    storage options Storing Hydrogen Underground Could Boost Transportation, Energy Security On February 26, 2015, in Capabilities, Center for Infrastructure Research and Innovation...

  17. Sandia National Laboratories: Carbon Capture & Storage

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

    from improved climate models to performance models for underground waste storage to 3D printing and digital rock physics. Marianne Walck (Director ... Federal Laboratory...

  18. Technical action plan at former Commodity Credit Corporation grain storage sites in Nebraska, Kansas, Iowa, and Missouri. Revision 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document has been prepared for the Commodity Credit Corporation of the US Department of Agriculture (CCC/USDA), to provide an outline for a multiyear plan for technical investigations at sites in Kansas and Nebraska that have been identified as having groundwater contamination. Carbon tetrachloride is the primary contaminant of concern at sites in Nebraska and Kansas where former CCC/USDA grain storage facilities were located. At this time, no former CCC/USDA grain bin sites in Iowa and Missouri have been determined to have contamination at or above the maximum concentration level (MCL). This document represents a second revision to an original plan proposed by the CCC/USDA in January 1992 (Technical Action Plan at Former Commodity Credit Corporation Grain Storage Sites in Nebraska and Kansas). The CCC/USDA recognizes the need to address the reported groundwater contamination problems in a timely manner. Doing so will protect public drinking water supplies, public health, and the environment. To address these groundwater contamination problems, the CCC/USDA has committed and continues to commit resources and funding to investigate the contaminated sites further.

  19. Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 145: Wells and Storage Holes, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, Rev. No.: 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    David A. Strand

    2004-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Corrective Action Investigation Plan (CAIP) contains project-specific information for conducting site investigation activities at Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 145: Wells and Storage Holes. Information presented in this CAIP includes facility descriptions, environmental sample collection objectives, and criteria for the selection and evaluation of environmental samples. Corrective Action Unit 145 is located in Area 3 of the Nevada Test Site, which is 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. Corrective Action Unit 145 is comprised of the six Corrective Action Sites (CASs) listed below: (1) 03-20-01, Core Storage Holes; (2) 03-20-02, Decon Pad and Sump; (3) 03-20-04, Injection Wells; (4) 03-20-08, Injection Well; (5) 03-25-01, Oil Spills; and (6) 03-99-13, Drain and Injection Well. These sites are being investigated because existing information on the nature and extent of potential contamination is insufficient to evaluate and recommend corrective action alternatives. Additional information will be obtained by conducting a corrective action investigation (CAI) prior to evaluating corrective action alternatives and selecting the appropriate corrective action for each CAS. The results of the field investigation will support a defensible evaluation of viable corrective action alternatives that will be presented in the Corrective Action Decision Document. One conceptual site model with three release scenario components was developed for the six CASs to address all releases associated with the site. The sites will be investigated based on data quality objectives (DQOs) developed on June 24, 2004, by representatives of the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection; U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office; Stoller-Navarro Joint Venture; and Bechtel Nevada. The DQOs process was used to identify and define the type, amount, and quality of data needed to develop and evaluate appropriate corrective actions for CAU 145.

  20. VM-based infrastructure for simulating different cluster and storage solutions used on ATLAS tier3 sites

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    KUTOUSKI, M; The ATLAS collaboration; PETROSYAN, A; KADOCHNIKOV, I; BELOV, S; KORENKOV, V

    2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    ATLAS is a particle physics experiment on Large Hadron Collider at CERN. The experiment produces petabytes of data every year. The ATLAS Computing model embraces the Grid paradigm and originally included three levels of computing centres to be able to operate such large volume of data. With the formation of small computing centres, usually based at universities, the model was expanded to include them as Tier3 sites. The experiment supplies all necessary software to operate typical Grid-site, but Tier3 sites do not support Grid services of the experiment or support them partially. Tier3 centres comprise a range of architectures and many do not possess Grid middleware, thus, monitoring of storage and analysis software used on Tier2 sites becomes unavailable for Tier3 site system administrator and, also, Tier3 sites activity becomes unavailable for virtual organization of the experiment. In this paper we present ATLAS off-Grid sites monitoring software suite, which enables monitoring on sites, which are not unde...

  1. SWEDISH-AMERICAN COOPERATIVE PROGRAM ON RADIOACTIVE WASTE STORAGE IN MINED CAVERNS. PROGRAM SUMMARY

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Witherspoon, P.A.

    2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    field investigations on the general problem of underground waste storage.field work will be carried out aimed at the general nroblen of underground radioacti\\'e waste storage.

  2. Origin, diagnostics, and mitigation of a salt dissolution sinkhole at the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve storage site, Weeks Island, Louisiana

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Neal, J.T. [Sandia National Labs., Albuquerque, NM (United States); Myers, R.E. [USDOE, New Orleans, LA (United States)

    1995-01-27T23:59:59.000Z

    A sinkhole was first observed in May 1992 over the edge of the two-level former salt mine that was converted for oil storage by the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR). Diagnostic studies that included geophysical, geochemical, drilling, and hydrological methods suggest a direct connection exists between the surface collapse area and the underground mine as shown by correlative measurements of sediment slump rates and brine influx into the mine. The dissolution of salt below the sinkhole that initiated the leak into the mine was likely caused by several confluent geologic processes, and exacerbated by mining-induced stresses that created fractures which served as hydrologic flowpaths. Modeling studies of mine stresses show that years may be required before tensional cracking begins to occur, but once begun can continue to develop, and relieve the stress in that specific regime. The crack regime creates the avenue for incursion of groundwater, very slowly initially, but gradually enlarging as undersaturated groundwater dissolves salt on the sides of the crack. Mitigation measures include increasing the mine pressurization, slowing the dissolution by injecting brine into the sinkhole throat, and freeze grouting to restrict hydrologic flowpaths.

  3. NOONER Page 1 A Baseline Gravity Survey over the Sleipner CO2 Sequestration Site

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Nooner, Scott

    field in the North Sea, is a collaborative research effort between US scientists and members of the SACS (Saline Aquifer CO2 Storage) consortium. At this site, about 1 Mton of excess CO2 is extracted from underground for sequestration before, it is important to monitor what happens as time passes. As this gas

  4. Assessing health impacts of CO2 leakage from a geological storage site into buildings: role of attenuation in the unsaturated zone and building foundation

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Paris-Sud XI, Université de

    a) Title Assessing health impacts of CO2 leakage from a geological storage site into buildings of the greenhouse gas CO2 has the potential to be a widespread and effective option to mitigate climate change. As any industrial activity, CO2 storage may lead to adverse impact on human health and the environment

  5. SAVANNAH RIVER SITE INCIPIENT SLUDGE MIXING IN RADIOACTIVE LIQUID WASTE STORAGE TANKS DURING SALT SOLUTION BLENDING

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Leishear, R.; Poirier, M.; Lee, S.; Steeper, T.; Fowley, M.; Parkinson, K.

    2011-01-12T23:59:59.000Z

    This paper is the second in a series of four publications to document ongoing pilot scale testing and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modeling of mixing processes in 85 foot diameter, 1.3 million gallon, radioactive liquid waste, storage tanks at Savannah River Site (SRS). Homogeneous blending of salt solutions is required in waste tanks. Settled solids (i.e., sludge) are required to remain undisturbed on the bottom of waste tanks during blending. Suspension of sludge during blending may potentially release radiolytically generated hydrogen trapped in the sludge, which is a safety concern. The first paper (Leishear, et. al. [1]) presented pilot scale blending experiments of miscible fluids to provide initial design requirements for a full scale blending pump. Scaling techniques for an 8 foot diameter pilot scale tank were also justified in that work. This second paper describes the overall reasons to perform tests, and documents pilot scale experiments performed to investigate disturbance of sludge, using non-radioactive sludge simulants. A third paper will document pilot scale CFD modeling for comparison to experimental pilot scale test results for both blending tests and sludge disturbance tests. That paper will also describe full scale CFD results. The final paper will document additional blending test results for stratified layers in salt solutions, scale up techniques, final full scale pump design recommendations, and operational recommendations. Specifically, this paper documents a series of pilot scale tests, where sludge simulant disturbance due to a blending pump or transfer pump are investigated. A principle design requirement for a blending pump is UoD, where Uo is the pump discharge nozzle velocity, and D is the nozzle diameter. Pilot scale test results showed that sludge was undisturbed below UoD = 0.47 ft{sup 2}/s, and that below UoD = 0.58 ft{sup 2}/s minimal sludge disturbance was observed. If sludge is minimally disturbed, hydrogen will not be released. Installation requirements were also determined for a transfer pump which will remove tank contents, and which is also required to not disturb sludge. Testing techniques and test results for both types of pumps are presented.

  6. Record of Technical Change for Corrective Action Plan for Corrective Action Unit 140: Waste Dumps, burn Pits, and Storage Area, Nevada Test Site, Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration, Nevada Site Office; Bechtel Nevada

    2005-01-05T23:59:59.000Z

    Record of Technical Change for Corrective Action Plan for Corrective Action Unit 140: Waste Dumps, Burn Pits, and Storage Area, Nevada Test Site, Nevada (DOE/NV--963-Rev 2, dated November 2004).

  7. Determining Long-Term Performance of Cool Storage Systems from Short-Term Tests; Literature Review and Site Selection, Nov. 1997 (Revised Feb. 1998)

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Haberl, J. S.; Claridge, D. E.; Reddy, T. A.; Elleson, J.

    1997-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This is the preliminary report contains the literature review and site selection recommendations for ASHRAE Research Project RP 1004 — "Determining Long-term Performance of Cool Storage Systems From Short-term Tests"....

  8. Overview of geologic storage of natural gas with an emphasis on assessing the feasibility of storing hydrogen.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lord, Anna Snider

    2009-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In many regions across the nation geologic formations are currently being used to store natural gas underground. Storage options are dictated by the regional geology and the operational need. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has an interest in understanding theses various geologic storage options, the advantages and disadvantages, in the hopes of developing an underground facility for the storage of hydrogen as a low cost storage option, as part of the hydrogen delivery infrastructure. Currently, depleted gas/oil reservoirs, aquifers, and salt caverns are the three main types of underground natural gas storage in use today. The other storage options available currently and in the near future, such as abandoned coal mines, lined hard rock caverns, and refrigerated mined caverns, will become more popular as the demand for natural gas storage grows, especially in regions were depleted reservoirs, aquifers, and salt deposits are not available. The storage of hydrogen within the same type of facilities, currently used for natural gas, may add new operational challenges to the existing cavern storage industry, such as the loss of hydrogen through chemical reactions and the occurrence of hydrogen embrittlement. Currently there are only three locations worldwide, two of which are in the United States, which store hydrogen. All three sites store hydrogen within salt caverns.

  9. Evaluation of Final Radiological Conditions at Areas of the Niagara Falls Storage Site Remediated under the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program -12184

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Clayton, Christopher [U.S Department of Energy Office of Legacy Management, Washington, DC; Kothari, Vijendra [U.S Department of Energy Office of Legacy Management, Morgantown, West Virginia; Starr, Ken [U.S Department of Energy Office of Legacy Management, Westminster, Colorado; Widdop, Michael; Gillespie, Joey [SM Stoller Corporation, Grand Junction, Colorado

    2012-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

    The U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) methods and protocols allow evaluation of remediation and final site conditions to determine if remediated sites remain protective. Two case studies are presented that involve the Niagara Falls Storage Site (NFSS) and associated vicinity properties (VPs), which are being remediated under the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP). These properties are a part of the former Lake Ontario Ordnance Works (LOOW). In response to stakeholders concerns about whether certain remediated NFSS VPs were putting them at risk, DOE met with stakeholders and agreed to evaluate protectiveness. Documentation in the DOE records collection adequately described assessed and final radiological conditions at the completed VPs. All FUSRAP wastes at the completed sites were cleaned up to meet DOE guidelines for unrestricted use. DOE compiled the results of the investigation in a report that was released for public comment. In conducting the review of site conditions, DOE found that stakeholders were also concerned about waste from the Separations Process Research Unit (SPRU) at the Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory (KAPL) that was handled at LOOW. DOE agreed to determine if SPRU waste remained at that needed to be remediated. DOE reviewed records of waste characterization, historical handling locations and methods, and assessment and remediation data. DOE concluded that the SPRU waste was remediated on the LOOW to levels that pose no unacceptable risk and allow unrestricted use and unlimited exposure. This work confirms the following points as tenets of an effective long-term surveillance and maintenance (LTS&M) program: ? Stakeholder interaction must be open and transparent, and DOE must respond promptly to stakeholder concerns. ? DOE, as the long-term custodian, must collect and preserve site records in order to demonstrate that remediated sites pose no unacceptable risk. ? DOE must continue to maintain constructive relationships with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and state and federal regulators.

  10. Preliminary design study of underground pumped hydro and compressed-air energy storage in hard rock. Volume 12. Plant design: CAES. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1981-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    During Task 5C of the PEPCO/CAES study detailed designs were developed for the major components and systems of the CAES plant. These designs were based upon the preliminary economic and technical evaluations and alternative designs developed in Task 3C. Volume 12, Plant Design - CAES, presents the detailed project design drawings for the major plant systems and structures. In addition, Volume 12 presents the site development report, updated cost estimate, cost/schedule risk study, reliability/availability analysis, and recommendations for additional research and development.

  11. Colonie Interim Storage Site environmental report for calendar year 1992, 1130 Central Avenue, Colonie, New York. Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the environmental surveillance program at the Colonie Interim Storage Site (CISS) and provides the results for 1992. The site is located in eastern New York State, approximately 6.4 km (4.0 mi) northwest of downtown Albany. From 1958 to 1984, National Lead (NL) Industries used the facility to manufacture various components from depleted and enriched uranium natural thorium. Environmental monitoring of CISS began in 1984 when Congress added, the site to the US Department of Energy`s (DOE) Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP). FUSRAP is a program established to identify and decontaminate or otherwise control sites where residual radioactive materials remain from the early years of the nation`s atomic energy program or from commercial operations causing conditions that Congress has authorized DOE to remedy. The environmental surveillance program at CISS includes sampling networks for external gamma radiation exposure and for thorium-232 and total uranium concentrations in surface water, sediment, and groundwater. Several chemical parameters are also measured in groundwater, including total metals, volatile organics, and water quality parameters. This surveillance program assists in fulfilling the DOE policy of measuring and monitoring effluents from DOE activities and calculating hypothetical doses. Results are compared with applicable Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) standards, DOE derived concentration guides (DCGs), dose limits, and other DOE requirements.

  12. Maywood Interim Storage Site environmental report for calendar year 1992, 100 West Hunter Avenue, Maywood, New Jersey. Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the environmental surveillance program at the Maywood Interim Storage Site (MISS) and provides the results for 1992. Environmental monitoring of MISS began in 1984, when the site was assigned to DOE by Congress through the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act and was placed under DOE`s Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP). FUSRAP was established to identify and decontaminate or otherwise control sites where residual radioactive materials remain from the early years of the nation`s atomic energy program or from commercial operations causing conditions that Congress has authorized DOE to remedy. MISS is part of a National Priorities List (NPL) site. The environmental surveillance program at MISS includes sampling networks for radon and thoron in air; external gamma radiation exposure; and radium-226, radium-228, thorium-232, and total uranium in surface water, sediment, and groundwater. Additionally, chemical analysis includes metals and organic compounds in surface water and groundwater and metals in sediments. This program assists in fulfilling the DOE objective of measuring and monitoring effluents from DOE activities and calculating hypothetical doses to members of the general public. Monitoring results are compared with applicable Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and state standards, DOE derived concentration guides (DCGs), dose limits, and other DOE requirements. Environmental standards are established to protect public health and the environment. The radiological data for all media sampled support the conclusion that doses to the public are not distinguishable from natural background radiation.

  13. Niagara Falls Storage Site environmental report for calendar year 1992, 1397 Pletcher Road, Lewiston, New York. Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the environmental surveillance program at the Niagara Falls Storage Site (NFSS) and provides the results for 1992. From 1944 to the present, the primary use of NFSS has been storage of radioactive residues produced as a by-product of uranium production. All onsite areas of residual radioactivity above guidelines have been remediated. Materials generated during remediation are stored onsite in the 4-ha (10-acre) waste containment structure (WCS). The WCS is a clay-lined, clay-capped, and grass-covered storage pile. The environmental surveillance program at NFSS includes sampling networks for radon concentrations in air; external gamma radiation exposure; and total uranium and radium-226 concentrations in surface water, sediments, and groundwater. Several chemical parameters, including seven metals, are also routinely measured in groundwater. This surveillance program assists in fulfilling the DOE policy of measuring and monitoring effluents from DOE activities and calculating hypothetical doses. Monitoring results are compared with applicable Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) standards, DOE derived concentration guides (DCGs), dose limits, and other DOE requirements. Results of environmental monitoring during 1992 indicate that levels of the parameters measured were in compliance with all but one requirement: Concentrations of iron and manganese in groundwater were above NYSDEC groundwater quality standards. However, these elements occur naturally in the soils and groundwater associated with this region. In 1992 there were no environmental occurrences or reportable quantity releases.

  14. Underground Injection Control (Louisiana)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Injection and Mining Division (IMD) has the responsibility of implementing two major federal environmental programs which were statutorily charged to the Office of Conservation: the Underground...

  15. ENERGY STORAGE IN AQUIFERS - - A SURVEY OF RECENT THEORETICAL STUDIES

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Tsang, Chin Fu

    2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    underground thermal energy storage. In Proc. Th~rmal1980), 'I'hermal energy storage? in a confined aquifer·--al modeling of thermal energy storage in aquifers. In ~~-

  16. Wayne Interim Storage Site environmental report for calendar year 1992, 868 Black Oak Ridge Road, Wayne, New Jersey. Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the environmental surveillance program at the Wayne Interim Storage Site (WISS) and provides the results for 1992. The fenced, site, 32 km (20 mi) northwest of Newark, New Jersey, was used between 1948 and 1971 for commercial processing of monazite sand to separate natural radioisotopes - predominantly thorium. Environmental surveillance of WISS began in 1984 in accordance with Department of Energy (DOE) Order 5400.1 when Congress added the site to DOE`s Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP). The environmental surveillance program at WISS includes sampling networks for radon and thoron in air; external gamma radiation exposure; radium-226, radium-228, thorium-230, thorium-232, total uranium, and several chemicals in surface water and sediment; and total uranium, radium-226, radium-228, thorium-230, thorium-232, and organic and inorganic chemicals in groundwater. Monitoring results are compared with applicable Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and state standards, DOE derived concentration guides (DCGs), dose limits, and other DOE requirements. This monitoring program assists in fulfilling the DOE policy of measuring and monitoring effluents from DOE activities and calculating hypothetical doses. Results for environmental surveillance in 1992 show that the concentrations of all radioactive and most chemical contaminants were below applicable standards.

  17. Decommissioning and Dismantling of Liquid Waste Storage and Liquid Waste Treatment Facility from Paldiski Nuclear Site, Estonia

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Varvas, M. [AS ALARA, Leetse tee 21, Paldiski, 76806 (Estonia); Putnik, H. [Delegation of the European Commission to Russia, Kadashevskaja nab. 14/1 119017 Moscow (Russian Federation); Nirvin, B.; Pettersson, S. [SKB, Box 5864, Stockholm, SE-102 40 (Sweden); Johnsson, B. [Studsvik RadWaste, Nykoping, SE-611 82 (Sweden)

    2006-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Paldiski Nuclear Facility in Estonia, with two nuclear reactors was owned by the Soviet Navy and was used for training the navy personnel to operate submarine nuclear reactors. After collapse of Soviet Union the Facility was shut down and handed over to the Estonian government in 1995. In co-operation with the Paldiski International Expert Reference Group (PIERG) decommission strategy was worked out and started to implement. Conditioning of solid and liquid operational waste and dismantling of contaminated installations and buildings were among the key issues of the Strategy. Most of the liquid waste volume, remained at the Facility, was processed in the frames of an Estonian-Finnish co-operation project using a mobile wastewater purification unit NURES (IVO International OY) and water was discharged prior to the site take-over. In 1999-2002 ca 120 m{sup 3} of semi-liquid tank sediments (a mixture of ion exchange resins, sand filters, evaporator and flocculation slurry), remained after treatment of liquid waste were solidified in steel containers and stored into interim storage. The project was carried out under the Swedish - Estonian co-operation program on radiation protection and nuclear safety. Contaminated installations in buildings, used for treatment and storage of liquid waste (Liquid Waste Treatment Facility and Liquid Waste Storage) were then dismantled and the buildings demolished in 2001-2004. (authors)

  18. Site characterization plan: Conceptual design report: Volume 4, Appendices F-O: Nevada Nuclear Waste Storage Investigations Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MacDougall, H R; Scully, L W; Tillerson, J R [comps.] [comps.

    1987-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The site for the prospective repository is located at Yucca Mountain in southwestern Nevada, and the waste emplacement area will be constructed in the underlying volcanic tuffs. The target horizon for waste emplacement is a sloping bed of densely welded tuff more than 650 ft below the surface and typically more than 600 ft above the water table. The conceptual design described in this report is unique among repository designs in that it uses ramps in addition to shafts to gain access to the underground facility, the emplacement horizon is located above the water table, and it is possible that 300- to 400-ft-long horizontal waste emplacement boreholes will be used. This report summarizes the design bases, design and performance criteria, and the design analyses performed. The current status of meeting the preclosure performance objectives for licensing and of resolving the repository design and preclosure issues is presented. The repository design presented in this report will be expanded and refined during the advanced conceptual design, the license application design, and the final procurement and construction design phases. Volume 4 contains Appendices F to O.

  19. GRI highlights underground gasification effort

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1987-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A consortium headed by the Gas Research Institute is supporting major underground coal gasification tests to take place over the next two years at a site near Hanna, Wyoming. About 200 tons of coal will be gasified per day. Directional drilling will be used to form the horizontal gasification pathways linking the injection and production wells. The objectives of the program include a further evaluation of the controlled-retracting-injection-point technology. The technology involves the use of a device that is capable of igniting successive coal zones as it is retracted through a borehole in the coal seam. Comparable data will also be obtained during the test in sections where a linked-vertical-well concept will be used instead of the retracting-injection method. The linked-vertical-well concept, which has been used in most coal gasification tests, involves drilling a series of vertical wells into the coal seam gasification pathway for the ignition of successive coal zones. A parallel program will be conducted to evaluate environmental control technology applicable to underground coal gasification and to define the process requirements that must be satisfied to meet environmental quality standards. The results of these combined programs will provide the process and environmental data bases necessary to assess the economic potential of underground coal gasification from various US locations for a variety of end-product applications.

  20. Geothermal-energy files in computer storage: sites, cities, and industries

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    O'Dea, P.L.

    1981-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The site, city, and industrial files are described. The data presented are from the hydrothermal site file containing about three thousand records which describe some of the principal physical features of hydrothermal resources in the United States. Data elements include: latitude, longitude, township, range, section, surface temperature, subsurface temperature, the field potential, and well depth for commercialization. (MHR)

  1. Underground infrastructure damage for a Chicago scenario

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dey, Thomas N [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Bos, Rabdall J [Los Alamos National Laboratory

    2011-01-25T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  2. EA-1146: Radioactive Waste Storage at Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site, Golden, Colorado

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This EA evaluates the environmental impacts of the proposal to convert buildings at the U.S. Department of Energy Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site from their former uses to interim waste...

  3. Hanford Site River Protection Project High-Level Waste Safe Storage and Retrieval

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Aromi, E. S.; Raymond, R. E.; Allen, D. I.; Payne, M. A.; DeFigh-Price, C.; Kristofzski, J. G.; Wiegman, S. A.

    2002-02-25T23:59:59.000Z

    This paper provides an update from last year and describes project successes and issues associated with the management and work required to safely store, enhance readiness for waste feed delivery, and prepare for treated waste receipts for the approximately 53 million gallons of mixed and high-level waste currently in aging tanks at the Hanford Site. The Hanford Site is a 560 square-mile area in southeastern Washington State near Richland, Washington.

  4. Underground nuclear energy complexes - technical and economic advantages

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Myers, Carl W [Los Alamos National Laboratory; Kunze, Jay F [IDAHO STATE UNIV; Giraud, Kellen M [BABECOCK AND WILCOX; Mahar, James M [IDAHO STATE UNIV

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Underground nuclear power plant parks have been projected to be economically feasible compared to above ground instalIations. This paper includes a thorough cost analysis of the savings, compared to above ground facilities, resulting from in-place entombment (decommissioning) of facilities at the end of their life. reduced costs of security for the lifetime of the various facilities in the underground park. reduced transportation costs. and reduced costs in the operation of the waste storage complex (also underground). compared to the fair share of the costs of operating a national waste repository.

  5. DOE - Office of Legacy Management -- Niagara Falls Storage Site NY - NY 17

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

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

  7. Base Natural Gas in Underground Storage (Summary)

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

    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...

  8. Underground Storage Tank Management (District of Columbia)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The  installation, upgrade and operation of any petroleum UST (>110 gallons) or hazardous substance UST System, including heating oil tanks over 1,100 gallons capacity in the District requires a...

  9. Indiana Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0 0.0Decade4Year

  10. Indiana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0 0.0Decade4Year114,937 114,274 111,271

  11. Iowa Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0Decade Year-0Base7 3 2 1 0 0

  12. Iowa Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0Decade Year-0Base7 3 2 1 0 0284,747

  13. Kansas Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0DecadeYearDecade Year-0Thousand

  14. Kansas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building FloorspaceThousandWithdrawals0.0DecadeYearDecade Year-0Thousand82,221

  15. Kentucky Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 0 0 1 1996-2013 Lease20 55 10 41

  16. Kentucky Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 0 0 1 1996-2013 Lease20 55 10 4120,359

  17. Louisiana Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 0 0579,766 568,661 511,096 438,064

  18. Louisiana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 0 0 0579,766 568,661 511,096

  19. Maryland Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 00.0 0.0

  20. Maryland Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3 00.0 0.04,000 64,000 64,000 64,000

  1. Michigan Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3Exportsper Thousand Cubic9 6 0

  2. Michigan Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet) 3Exportsper Thousand Cubic9 6 01,062,339

  3. Minnesota Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet)Commercialper Thousand Cubic9 2.8 2.66,992

  4. Minnesota Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million Cubic Feet)Commercialper Thousand Cubic9 2.8

  5. Mississippi Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic Feet)Same Month443,025(Million

  6. Mississippi Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic Feet)Same Month443,025(Million187,251

  7. Missouri Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic

  8. Missouri Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto China (Million CubicCubic32,876 10,889 11,502 13,845 13,845 13,845

  9. Tennessee Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial ConsumersThousandCubic Feet)4.Synthetic 1980-2003 Propane-Air340 340

  10. Tennessee Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial ConsumersThousandCubic Feet)4.Synthetic 1980-2003 Propane-Air340

  11. Alabama Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS8) Distribution Category UC-950 Cost and Quality of Fuels forA 6 J 9 U B u oDecadeSame52,051per0 1 2

  12. Alaska Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National and Regional Data; Row: NAICS8) Distribution Category UC-950 Cost and Quality of Fuels forA 6 J 9 U B uYearDecadeYearThousand From

  13. Alaska Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion CubicPotentialNov-14 Dec-14 Jan-1538,469 39,194 39,008 38,823

  14. Arkansas Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion CubicPotentialNov-14SalesSame Month Previous1 0 11 102008

  15. Arkansas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion CubicPotentialNov-14SalesSame Month Previous1 0 11 1020082,000

  16. California Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,128 2,469 2,321 2,590FuelDecadeCalifornia23 46 47 62 53

  17. California Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,128 2,469 2,321 2,590FuelDecadeCalifornia23 46 47 62 53498,705

  18. Colorado Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,128 2,469 2,321Spain,606,602 1,622,434 1,634,58723

  19. Colorado Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,128 2,469 2,321Spain,606,602 1,622,434 1,634,5872395,068

  20. Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade1 Source: Office(BillionYear JanYearYear Jan8,859 8,560 8,662)

  1. Weekly Working Gas in Underground Storage

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40Coal Stocks at Commercial andSeptember 25, 2012 MEMORANDUM FOR:0,0, 1997Working

  2. Washington Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial602 1,397 125 Q 69 (Million Cubic58 810Year Jan Feb

  3. Washington Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial602 1,397 125 Q 69 (Million Cubic58 810Year Jan Feb39,287 39,210 41,309

  4. West Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial602 1,397 125 Q 69 (Million Cubic58(MillionYear Jan Feb(Dollars528,442

  5. Wyoming Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial602 1,397 125 Q 69 (MillionAdjustments (MillionYearYear Jan Feb162

  6. Wyoming Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial602 1,397 125 Q 69 (MillionAdjustments (MillionYearYear Jan Feb162111,167

  7. Texas Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto17 34 44Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul2011 20123.9684,094 673,410

  8. Texas Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto17 34 44Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul2011 20123.9684,094

  9. The Basics of Underground Natural Gas Storage

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto17 34 44Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul2011Dry ProductionThe Basics

  10. Utah Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto17 34 44Year Jan FebIncreases (BillionThousand Cubic Feet)403

  11. Utah Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto17 34 44Year Jan FebIncreases (BillionThousand Cubic

  12. Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto17 34 44Year JanDecade Year-0 Year-11,113,016 1,124,7170 0 0

  13. Virginia Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto17 34 44Year JanDecade Year-0 Year-11,113,016 1,124,7170 0 06,200

  14. Underground Natural Gas in Storage - All Operators

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are now leaving Energy.gov You are now leaving Energy.gov YouKizildere IRaghuraji Agro IndustriesTownDells,1Stocks Nov-14TotalThe Outlook269,023Year69,023USWNC MO

  15. Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade1 Source: Office of(Millionthrough 1996)200971 andEIA projects9,233,469

  16. Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade1 Source: Office of(Millionthrough 1996)200971 andEIA

  17. The Basics of Underground Natural Gas Storage

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYou are nowTotal" (Percent) Type: Sulfur Content API GravityDakota" "Fuel, quality", 2013,Iowa"Dakota"YearProductionShale ProvedA(MillionGrossNatural Gas

  18. Illinois Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,12803 TableTotal Consumptionper Thousand Cubic4 15 0 0

  19. Illinois Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,12803 TableTotal Consumptionper Thousand Cubic4 15 0 0977,989

  20. Montana Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,12803andYear Jan Feb Mar AprYear Jan FebThousand198,539

  1. Montana Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,12803andYear Jan Feb Mar AprYear Jan FebThousand198,53974,201

  2. Natural Gas In Underground Storage (Summary)

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,12803andYear Janthrough2,869,960 3,958,315 5,817,1223,751,360

  3. Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,12803andYear Janthrough2,869,9601. Natural5,1958 2009 2010

  4. Nebraska Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,12803andYearWithdrawals (MillionYear Jan FebThousand9

  5. Nebraska Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion2,12803andYearWithdrawals (MillionYear Jan FebThousand94,850

  6. Working Gas in Underground Storage Figure

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade1(MillionExtensionsThousand Cubic%perYear Jan Feb Marper3Working Gas in

  7. Working Gas in Underground Storage Figure

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for On-Highway4,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,9,1,50022,3,,,,6,1,Decade1(MillionExtensionsThousand Cubic%perYear Jan Feb Marper3Working Gas

  8. Alabama Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Building Floorspace (Square Feet)SalesYear Jan Feb Mar Aprper Thousand0 16,900

  9. Underground CO2 Storage | GE Global Research

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOE Office of ScienceandMesa del SolStrengthening aTurbulence mayUndergraduate Program Undergraduate

  10. Pennsylvania Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5 Tables July 1996 Energy Information Administration Office ofthroughYear Jan Feb Mar AprYear Jan Feb Mar Apr MayPeachThree 0 0 0 0

  11. Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto17 3400,Information55,035 283,879 317,647 348,809 322,670 Salt Caverns

  12. New Mexico Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto ChinaThousand Cubic Feet)Feet)Feet)556,905136 14980,000

  13. New York Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto ChinaThousand CubicSeparation 29 0Year Jan0 0 0 0 0 08.1228,613

  14. Ohio Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto ChinaThousandDecade Year-0Separation3,262,7160 0 0

  15. Oklahoma Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40 Buildingto ChinaThousandDecadeSales (Billion CubicDecadeSameThousand1.4

  16. Natural Gas Underground Storage Capacity (Summary)

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5 Tables July 1996 Energy Information Administration Office ofthrough 1996) in Delaware (Million3,751,360 3,740,757 Annual55,035 283,879

  17. Ohio Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5 Tables July 1996 Energy Information Administration Office ofthroughYear Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul9Thousand Cubic Feet)7 5 1 1

  18. Oklahoma Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5 Tables July 1996 Energy Information Administration Office ofthroughYear Jan Feb Mar Apr MayYear Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul

  19. Oregon Underground Natural Gas Storage - All Operators

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5 Tables July 1996 Energy Information Administration Office ofthroughYear Jan Feb Mar Apr MayYear Jan FebYear Jan FebYearYear27,713

  20. Underground Natural Gas Working Storage Capacity - Methodology

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122 40CoalLease(Billion Cubic Feet)Year Jan FebFeet) Gas WellsNatural Gas Glossary

  1. Oregon Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial Consumers (NumberThousand Cubic Feet) DecadeYear JanYear0.9 0.929,415

  2. Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial Consumers (NumberThousand Cubic Feet) 0PADPrevious Articles Previous

  3. Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial Consumers (NumberThousand Cubic Feet) 0PADPrevious Articles

  4. Peak Underground Working Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial Consumers (NumberThousand Cubic Feet) 0PADPrevious

  5. Pennsylvania Underground Natural Gas Storage Capacity

    Annual Energy Outlook 2013 [U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial Consumers (NumberThousand CubicFuelDecade Year-0(Dollars per 0 0

  6. Storage for the Fast Flux Test Facility unirradiated fuel in the Plutonium Finishing Plant Complex, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Environmental Assessment evaluates the proposed action to relocate and store unirradiated Fast Flux Test Facility fuel in the Plutonium Finishing Plant Complex on the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington. The US Department of Energy has decided to cease fuel fabrication activities in the 308 Building in the 300 Area. This decision was based on a safety concern over the ability of the fuel fabrication portion of the 308 Building to withstand a seismic event. The proposed action to relocate and store the fuel is based on the savings that could be realized by consolidating security costs associated with storage of the fuel. While the 308 Building belowgrade fuel storage areas are not at jeopardy by a seismic event, the US Department of Energy is proposing to cease storage operations along with the related fabrication operations. The US Department of Energy proposes to remove the unirradiated fuel pins and fuel assemblies from the 308 Building and store them in Room 192A, within the 234-5Z Building, a part of the Plutonium Finishing Plant Complex, located in the 200 West Area. Minor modifications to Room 192A would be required to accommodate placement of the fuel. The US Department of Energy estimates that removing all of the fuel from the 308 Building would save $6.5 million annually in security expenditures for the Fast Flux Test Facility. Environmental impacts of construction, relocation, and operation of the proposed action and alternatives were evaluated. This evaluation concluded that the proposed action would have no significant impacts on the human environment.

  7. On Leakage andSeepage of CO2 from Geologic Storage Sites intoSurface Water

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Oldenburg, C.M.; Lewicki, J.L.

    2005-10-14T23:59:59.000Z

    Geologic carbon sequestration is the capture ofanthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) and its storage in deep geologicformations. The processes of CO2 seepage into surface water aftermigration through water-saturated sediments are reviewed. Natural CO2 andCH4 fluxes are pervasive in surface-water environments and are goodanalogues to potential leakage and seepage of CO2. Buoyancy-driven bubblerise in surface water reaches a maximum velocity of approximately 30 cms-1. CO2 rise in saturated porous media tends to occur as channel flowrather than bubble flow. A comparison of ebullition versus dispersive gastransport for CO2 and CH4 shows that bubble flow will dominate overdispersion in surface water. Gaseous CO2 solubility in variable-salinitywaters decreases as pressure decreases leading to greater likelihood ofebullition and bubble flow in surface water as CO2 migratesupward.

  8. Sandia National Laboratories: cost-effective hydrogen storage

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

    cost-effective hydrogen storage Storing Hydrogen Underground Could Boost Transportation, Energy Security On February 26, 2015, in Capabilities, Center for Infrastructure Research...

  9. EIA - Natural Gas Pipeline Network - Aquifer Storage Reservoir...

    Gasoline and Diesel Fuel Update (EIA)

    Configuration About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines - Transporting Natural Gas based on data through 20072008 with selected updates Aquifer Underground Natural Gas Storage...

  10. Status and use of the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site Pipe Overpack Container for TRU waste storage and shipments

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thorp, D.T.; Geinitz, R.R. [Safe Sites of Colorado, L.L.C., Golden, CO (United States); Rivera, M.A. [Los Alamos Technical Associates (United States)

    1998-03-03T23:59:59.000Z

    The Pipe Overpack Container was designed to optimize shipments of high plutonium content transuranic waste from Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site (RFETS) to Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). The container was approved for use in the TRUPACT-II shipping container by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in February 1997. The container optimizes shipments to WIPP by increasing the TRUPACT-II criticality limit from 325 fissile grams equivalent (FGE) to 2,800 FGE and provides additional shielding for handling wastes with high americium-241 (Am-241) content. The container was subsequently evaluated and approved for storage of highly dispersible TRU wastes and residues at RFETS. Thermal evaluation of the container shows that the container will mitigate the impact of a worst case thermal event from reactive or potentially pyrophoric materials. These materials contain hazards postulated by the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board for interim storage. Packaging these reactive or potentially pyrophoric residues in the container without stabilizing the materials is under consideration at RFETS. The design, testing, and evaluations used in the approvals, and the current status of the container usage, will be discussed.

  11. Final environmental assessment for the U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge Operations receipt and storage of uranium materials from the Fernald Environmental Management Project site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1999-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Through a series of material transfers and sales agreements over the past 6 to 8 years, the Fernald Environmental Management Project (FEMP) has reduced its nuclear material inventory from 14,500 to approximately 6,800 metric tons of uranium (MTU). This effort is part of the US Department of energy`s (DOE`s) decision to change the mission of the FEMP site; it is currently shut down and the site is being remediated. This EA focuses on the receipt and storage of uranium materials at various DOE-ORO sites. The packaging and transportation of FEMP uranium material has been evaluated in previous NEPA and other environmental evaluations. A summary of these evaluation efforts is included as Appendix A. The material would be packaged in US Department of Transportation-approved shipping containers and removed from the FEMP site and transported to another site for storage. The Ohio Field Office will assume responsibility for environmental analyses and documentation for packaging and transport of the material as part of the remediation of the site, and ORO is preparing this EA for receipt and storage at one or more sites.

  12. Nick Balthaser! LBNL/NERSC Storage Systems Group LBNL/NERSC Site

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

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What's Possible for Renewable Energy:Nanowire Solar541,9337,2April 2013 ESH&SNextNexusLBNL/NERSC Site

  13. Underground reactor containments: An option for the future?

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Forsberg, C.W. [Oak Ridge National Lab., TN (United States). Chemical Technology Div.; Kress, T.

    1997-02-18T23:59:59.000Z

    Changing world conditions and changing technologies suggest that serious consideration should be given to siting of nuclear power plants underground. Underground siting is not a new concept. Multiple research reactors, several weapons production reactors, and one power reactor have been built underground. What is new are the technologies and incentives that may now make underground siting a preferred option. The conditions and technologies, along with their implications, are discussed herein. Underground containments can be constructed in mined cavities or pits that are then backfilled with thick layers of rock and soil. Conventional above-ground containments resist assaults and accidents because of the strength of their construction materials and the effectiveness of their safety features that are engineered to reduce loads. However, underground containments can provide even more resistance to assaults and accidents because of the inertia of the mass of materials over the reactor. High-technology weapons or some internal accidents can cause existing strong-material containments to fail, but only very-high energy releases can move large inertial masses associated with underground containments. New methods of isolation may provide a higher confidence in isolation that is independent of operator action.

  14. CO2 leakage up from a geological storage site to shallow fresh groundwater: CO2-water-rock interaction assessment and

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Paris-Sud XI, Université de

    CO2 leakage up from a geological storage site to shallow fresh groundwater: CO2-water repository requires the investigation of the potential CO2 leakage back into fresh groundwater, particularly sensitive monitoring techniques in order to detect potential CO2 leaks and their magnitude as well

  15. Natural gas storage - end user interaction. Task 2. Topical report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    New opportunities have been created for underground gas storage as a result of recent regulatory developments in the energy industry. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Order 636 directly changed the economics of gas storage nationwide. This paper discusses the storage of natural gas, storage facilities, and factors affecting the current, and future situation for natural gas storage.

  16. Underground Injection Control (West Virginia)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This rule set forth criteria and standards for the requirements which apply to the State Underground Injection Control Program (U.I.C.). The UIC permit program regulates underground injections by...

  17. Cutting-Edge Savannah River Site Project Avoids Millions in Costs, Removes Chemical Solvents from Underground: Project avoided costs totaling more than $15 million, removed tons of chemical solvents from beneath the Savannah River Site

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    AIKEN, S.C. – Workers recently completed a multiyear project that removed more than 33,000 gallons of non-radioactive chemical solvents from beneath a portion of the Savannah River Site (SRS), preventing those pollutants from entering the local water table and helping the site avoid costs of more than $15 million.

  18. Dynamic underground stripping. Innovative technology summary report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Dynamic Underground Stripping (DUS) is a combination of technologies targeted to remediate soil and ground water contaminated with organic compounds. DUS is effective both above and below the water table and is especially well suited for sites with interbedded sand and clay layers. The main technologies comprising DUS are steam injection at the periphery of a contaminated area to heat permeable subsurface areas, vaporize volatile compounds bound to the soil, and drive contaminants to centrally located vacuum extraction wells; electrical heating of less permeable sediments to vaporize contaminants and drive them into the steam zone; and underground imaging such as Electrical Resistance Tomography to delineate heated areas to ensure total cleanup and process control. A full-scale demonstration was conducted on a gasoline spill site at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, California from November 1992 through December 1993.

  19. Underground waste barrier structure

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Saha, Anuj J. (Hamburg, NY); Grant, David C. (Gibsonia, PA)

    1988-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  20. Underground Test Area Project Waste Management Plan (Rev. No. 2, April 2002)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    IT Corporation, Las Vegas

    2002-04-24T23:59:59.000Z

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Operations Office (NNSA/NV) initiated the UGTA Project to characterize the risk posed to human health and the environment as a result of underground nuclear testing activities at the Nevada Test Site (NTS). The UGTA Project investigation sites have been grouped into Corrective Action Units (CAUs) in accordance with the most recent version of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order. The primary UGTA objective is to gather data to characterize the groundwater aquifers beneath the NTS and adjacent lands. The investigations proposed under the UGTA program may involve the drilling and sampling of new wells; recompletion, monitoring, and sampling of existing wells; well development and hydrologic/ aquifer testing; geophysical surveys; and subsidence crater recharge evaluation. Those wastes generated as a result of these activities will be managed in accordance with existing federal and state regulations, DOE Orders, and NNSA/NV waste minimization and pollution prevention objectives. This Waste Management Plan provides a general framework for all Underground Test Area (UGTA) Project participants to follow for the characterization, storage/accumulation, treatment, and disposal of wastes generated by UGTA Project activities. The objective of this waste management plan is to provide guidelines to minimize waste generation and to properly manage wastes that are produced. Attachment 1 to this plan is the Fluid Management Plan and details specific strategies for management of fluids produced under UGTA operations.

  1. Rainwater Harvesting: Soil Storage and Infiltration System

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Mechell, Justin; Lesikar, Bruce J.

    2008-08-11T23:59:59.000Z

    A soil storage and infiltration system collects rainfall runoff from the roofs of buildings and directs it underground where it infiltrates the soil. Such a system conserves water and protects it from surface pollution. This publication describes...

  2. Underground and under scrutiny

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Lee, Leslie

    2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    2 txH2O Summer 2014 Story by Leslie Lee The Frio River, located in the Texas Hill Country, is spring-fed and therefore affected by groundwater pumping. Photo from istock.com. Underground and under scrutiny A changing state increasingly... their geological features is more multifaceted. Consider that each aquifer in Texas has different geological and hydrological character- istics, and therefore varying recharge rates, water quality and regional needs, and the complexity heightens. From a legal...

  3. NIAGARA FALLS STORAGE SITE

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA groupTuba City, Arizona, DisposalFourthN V O 1 8 7 + PROJECTpi/L +3(YJ 4:i"

  4. A life cycle cost analysis framework for geologic storage of hydrogen : a user's tool.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kobos, Peter Holmes; Lord, Anna Snider; Borns, David James; Klise, Geoffrey T.

    2011-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has an interest in large scale hydrogen geostorage, which could offer substantial buffer capacity to meet possible disruptions in supply or changing seasonal demands. The geostorage site options being considered are salt caverns, depleted oil/gas reservoirs, aquifers and hard rock caverns. The DOE has an interest in assessing the geological, geomechanical and economic viability for these types of geologic hydrogen storage options. This study has developed an economic analysis methodology and subsequent spreadsheet analysis to address costs entailed in developing and operating an underground geologic storage facility. This year the tool was updated specifically to (1) incorporate more site-specific model input assumptions for the wells and storage site modules, (2) develop a version that matches the general format of the HDSAM model developed and maintained by Argonne National Laboratory, and (3) incorporate specific demand scenarios illustrating the model's capability. Four general types of underground storage were analyzed: salt caverns, depleted oil/gas reservoirs, aquifers, and hard rock caverns/other custom sites. Due to the substantial lessons learned from the geological storage of natural gas already employed, these options present a potentially sizable storage option. Understanding and including these various geologic storage types in the analysis physical and economic framework will help identify what geologic option would be best suited for the storage of hydrogen. It is important to note, however, that existing natural gas options may not translate to a hydrogen system where substantial engineering obstacles may be encountered. There are only three locations worldwide that currently store hydrogen underground and they are all in salt caverns. Two locations are in the U.S. (Texas), and are managed by ConocoPhillips and Praxair (Leighty, 2007). The third is in Teeside, U.K., managed by Sabic Petrochemicals (Crotogino et al., 2008; Panfilov et al., 2006). These existing H{sub 2} facilities are quite small by natural gas storage standards. The second stage of the analysis involved providing ANL with estimated geostorage costs of hydrogen within salt caverns for various market penetrations for four representative cities (Houston, Detroit, Pittsburgh and Los Angeles). Using these demand levels, the scale and cost of hydrogen storage necessary to meet 10%, 25% and 100% of vehicle summer demands was calculated.

  5. Sample storage/disposal study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Valenzuela, B.D.

    1994-09-29T23:59:59.000Z

    Radioactive waste from defense operations has accumulated at the Hanford Site`s underground waste tanks since the late 1940`s. Each tank must be analyzed to determine whether it presents any harm to the workers at the Hanford Site, the public or the environment. Analyses of the waste aids in the decision making process in preparation of future tank waste stabilization procedures. Characterization of the 177 waste tanks on the Hanford Site will produce a large amount of archived material. This also brings up concerns as to how the excess waste tank sample material from 325 and 222-S Analytical Laboratories will be handled. Methods to archive and/or dispose of the waste have been implemented into the 222-S and 325 Laboratory procedures. As the amount of waste characterized from laboratory analysis grows, an examination of whether the waste disposal system will be able to compensate for this increase in the amount of waste needs to be examined. Therefore, the need to find the safest, most economically sound method of waste storage/disposal is important.

  6. Underground barrier construction apparatus with soil-retaining shield

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Gardner, Bradley M. (Idaho Falls, ID); Smith, Ann Marie (Pocatello, ID); Hanson, Richard W. (Spokane, WA); Hodges, Richard T. (Deer Park, WA)

    1998-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    An apparatus for building a horizontal underground barrier by cutting through soil and depositing a slurry, preferably one which cures into a hardened material. The apparatus includes a digging means for cutting and removing soil to create a void under the surface of the ground, a shield means for maintaining the void, and injection means for inserting barrier-forming material into the void. In one embodiment, the digging means is a continuous cutting chain. Mounted on the continuous cutting chain are cutter teeth for cutting through soil and discharge paddles for removing the loosened soil. This invention includes a barrier placement machine, a method for building an underground horizontal containment barrier using the barrier placement machine, and the underground containment system. Preferably the underground containment barrier goes underneath and around the site to be contained in a bathtub-type containment.

  7. Underground barrier construction apparatus with soil-retaining shield

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Gardner, B.M.; Smith, A.M.; Hanson, R.W.; Hodges, R.T.

    1998-08-04T23:59:59.000Z

    An apparatus is described for building a horizontal underground barrier by cutting through soil and depositing a slurry, preferably one which cures into a hardened material. The apparatus includes a digging means for cutting and removing soil to create a void under the surface of the ground, a shield means for maintaining the void, and injection means for inserting barrier-forming material into the void. In one embodiment, the digging means is a continuous cutting chain. Mounted on the continuous cutting chain are cutter teeth for cutting through soil and discharge paddles for removing the loosened soil. This invention includes a barrier placement machine, a method for building an underground horizontal containment barrier using the barrier placement machine, and the underground containment system. Preferably the underground containment barrier goes underneath and around the site to be contained in a bathtub-type containment. 17 figs.

  8. Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 166: Storage Yards and Contaminated Materials, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, Rev. No.: 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    David Strand

    2006-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Corrective Action Unit 166 is located in Areas 2, 3, 5, and 18 of the Nevada Test Site, which is 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 166 is comprised of the seven Corrective Action Sites (CASs) listed below: (1) 02-42-01, Cond. Release Storage Yd - North; (2) 02-42-02, Cond. Release Storage Yd - South; (3) 02-99-10, D-38 Storage Area; (4) 03-42-01, Conditional Release Storage Yard; (5) 05-19-02, Contaminated Soil and Drum; (6) 18-01-01, Aboveground Storage Tank; and (7) 18-99-03, Wax Piles/Oil Stain. These sites are being investigated because existing information on the nature and extent of potential contamination is insufficient to evaluate and recommend corrective action alternatives. Additional information will be obtained by conducting a corrective action investigation (CAI) before evaluating corrective action alternatives and selecting the appropriate corrective action for each CAS. The results of the field investigation will support a defensible evaluation of viable corrective action alternatives that will be presented in the Corrective Action Decision Document. The sites will be investigated based on the data quality objectives (DQOs) developed on February 28, 2006, by representatives of the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection; U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office; Stoller-Navarro Joint Venture; and Bechtel Nevada. The DQO process was used to identify and define the type, amount, and quality of data needed to develop and evaluate appropriate corrective actions for CAU 166. Appendix A provides a detailed discussion of the DQO methodology and the DQOs specific to each CAS. The scope of the CAI for CAU 166 includes the following activities: (1) Move surface debris and/or materials, as needed, to facilitate sampling. (2) Conduct radiological surveys. (3) Perform field screening. (4) Collect and submit environmental samples for laboratory analysis to determine if contaminants of concern are present. (5) If contaminants of concern are present, collect additional step-out samples to define the extent of the contamination. (6) Collect samples of investigation-derived waste, as needed, for waste management and minimization purposes. This Corrective Action Investigation Plan has been developed in accordance with the ''Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order'' that was agreed to by the State of Nevada, the U.S. Department of Energy, and the U.S. Department of Defense. Under the ''Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order'', this Corrective Action Investigation Plan will be submitted to the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, and field work will commence following approval.

  9. Underground Injection Control Regulations (Kansas)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This article prohibits injection of hazardous or radioactive wastes into or above an underground source of drinking water, establishes permit conditions and states regulations for design,...

  10. Underground Injection Control Rule (Vermont)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This rule regulates injection wells, including wells used by generators of hazardous or radioactive wastes, disposal wells within an underground source of drinking water, recovery of geothermal...

  11. Saving an Underground Reservoir 

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Wythe, Kathy

    2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    significant part of the region?s agricultural economy. Though the area has few rivers and lakes, underneath it lies a supply of water that has provided groundwater for developing this economy. This underground water, the Ogallala Aquifer, is a finite... resource. The amount of water seeping back into the aquifer is much less than the water taken out, especially in the southern half of the aquifer, which spreads out from western Kansas to the High Plains of Texas. ?Water levels are declining 2 to 4...

  12. Underground coal gasification. Presentations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The 8 presentations are: underground coal gasification (UCG) and the possibilities for carbon management (J. Friedmann); comparing the economics of UCG with surface gasification technologies (E. Redman); Eskom develops UCG technology project (C. Gross); development and future of UCG in the Asian region (L. Walker); economically developing vast deep Powder River Basin coals with UCG (S. Morzenti); effectively managing UCG environmental issues (E. Burton); demonstrating modelling complexity of environmental risk management; and UCG research at the University of Queensland, Australia (A.Y. Klimenko).

  13. Compressed air energy storage: preliminary design and site development program in an aquifer. Final draft, Task 1: establish facility design criteria and utility benefits

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    None

    1980-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Compressed air energy storage (CAES) has been identified as one of the principal new energy storage technologies worthy of further research and development. The CAES system stores mechanical energy in the form of compressed air during off-peak hours, using power supplied by a large, high-efficiency baseload power plant. At times of high electrical demand, the compressed air is drawn from storage and is heated in a combustor by the burning of fuel oil, after which the air is expanded in a turbine. In this manner, essentially all of the turbine output can be applied to the generation of electricity, unlike a conventional gas turbine which expends approximately two-thirds of the turbine shaft power in driving the air compressor. The separation of the compression and generation modes in the CAES system results in increased net generation and greater premium fuel economy. The use of CAES systems to meet the utilities' high electrical demand requirements is particularly attractive in view of the reduced availability of premium fuels such as oil and natural gas. This volume documents the Task 1 work performed in establishing facility design criteria for a CAES system with aquifer storage. Information is included on: determination of initial design bases; preliminary analysis of the CAES system; development of data for site-specific analysis of the CAES system; detailed analysis of the CAES system for three selected heat cycles; CAES power plant design; and an economic analysis of CAES.

  14. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH STORAGE, TREATMENT, AND DISPOSAL OF SOLID RADIOACTIVE AND CHEMICALLY HAZARDOUS WASTE AT THE HANFORD SITE, RICHLAND, WASHINGTON

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Johnson, Wayne L.; Nelson, Iral C.; Payson, David R.; Rhoads, Kathleen

    2004-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Hanford Site Solid (Radioactive and Hazardous) Waste Program Environmental Impact Statement (HSW EIS) provides environmental and technical information concerning U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) proposed waste management practices for certain solid radioactive wastes at the Hanford Site through the year 2046. The HSW EIS covers four primary aspects of waste management at Hanford – storage, treatment, transportation, and disposal. It also addresses four types of solid waste – low-level waste, mixed low-level waste that contains both radioactive and chemically hazardous constituents, immobilized low-activity waste from processing Hanford tank waste, and transuranic waste. The HSW EIS was prepared to assist DOE in determining which specific Hanford Site facilities will continue to be used, will be modified, or need to be constructed, to safely treat, store, and dispose of these wastes.

  15. 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...

  16. Preliminary Notice of Violation, Pacific Underground Construction...

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

    Pacific Underground Construction, Inc. - WEA-2009-02 Preliminary Notice of Violation, Pacific Underground Construction, Inc. - WEA-2009-02 April 7, 2009 Issued to Pacific...

  17. International Workshop on ecological aspects on underground mining of usable minerals deposits,

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Paris-Sud XI, Université de

    International Workshop on ecological aspects on underground mining of usable minerals deposits, GIG Ecological aspects of underground mining of usable minerals deposits, Szczyrk : Poland (1993)" #12;2/12 I and exemplary programme for the reclamation of opencast mining sites at the Herault Operations Unit

  18. Program for large-scale underground-coal-gasification tests

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hammesfahr, F.W.; Winter, P.L.

    1982-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The continuing development of underground coal gasification technology requires extended multi-module field programs in which the output gas is linked to surface usage. This effort was to appraise whether existing surface facilities in the utility, petroleum refinery, or natural gas industries could be used to reduce the cost of such an extended multi-module test and whether regional demand in areas having underground coal gasification coal resources could support the manufacture of transportation fuels from underground coal gasification gases. To limit the effort to a reasonable level but yet to permit a fair test of the concept, effort was focused on five states, Illinois, New Mexico, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming, which have good underground coal gasification reserves. Studies of plant distribution located 25 potential sites within 3 miles of the underground coal gasification amenable reserves in the five states. Distribution was 44% to utilities, 44% to refineries, and 12% to gas processing facilities. The concept that existing surface facilities, currently or potentially gas-capable, might contribute to the development of underground coal gasification technology by providing a low cost industrial application for the gas produced in a multi-module test appears valid. To further test the concept, three industries were reviewed in depth. These were the electric utility, natural gas, and petroleum industries. When looking at a fuel substitution of the type proposed, each industry had its special perspective. These are discussed in detail in the report.

  19. A life cycle cost analysis framework for geologic storage of hydrogen : a scenario analysis.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kobos, Peter Holmes; Lord, Anna Snider; Borns, David James

    2010-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The U.S. Department of Energy has an interest in large scale hydrogen geostorage, which would offer substantial buffer capacity to meet possible disruptions in supply. Geostorage options being considered are salt caverns, depleted oil/gas reservoirs, aquifers and potentially hard rock cavrns. DOE has an interest in assessing the geological, geomechanical and economic viability for these types of hydrogen storage options. This study has developed an ecocomic analysis methodology to address costs entailed in developing and operating an underground geologic storage facility. This year the tool was updated specifically to (1) a version that is fully arrayed such that all four types of geologic storage options can be assessed at the same time, (2) incorporate specific scenarios illustrating the model's capability, and (3) incorporate more accurate model input assumptions for the wells and storage site modules. Drawing from the knowledge gained in the underground large scale geostorage options for natural gas and petroleum in the U.S. and from the potential to store relatively large volumes of CO{sub 2} in geological formations, the hydrogen storage assessment modeling will continue to build on these strengths while maintaining modeling transparency such that other modeling efforts may draw from this project.

  20. CO2 Storage and Enhanced Oil Recovery: Bald Unit Test Site, Mumford Hills Oil Field, Posey County, Indiana

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Frailey, Scott M.; Krapac, Ivan G.; Damico, James R.; Okwen, Roland T.; McKaskle, Ray W.

    2012-03-30T23:59:59.000Z

    The Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium (MGSC) carried out a small-scale carbon dioxide (CO2) injection test in a sandstone within the Clore Formation (Mississippian System, Chesterian Series) in order to gauge the large-scale CO2 storage that might be realized from enhanced oil recovery (EOR) of mature Illinois Basin oil fields via miscible liquid CO2 flooding. As part of the MGSC�������¢����������������s Validation Phase (Phase II) studies, the small injection pilot test was conducted at the Bald Unit site within the Mumford Hills Field in Posey County, southwestern Indiana, which was chosen for the project on the basis of site infrastructure and reservoir conditions. Geologic data on the target formation were extensive. Core analyses, porosity and permeability data, and geophysical logs from 40 wells were used to construct cross sections and structure contour and isopach maps in order to characterize and define the reservoir architecture of the target formation. A geocellular model of the reservoir was constructed to improve understanding of CO2 behavior in the subsurface. At the time of site selection, the Field was under secondary recovery through edge-water injection, but the wells selected for the pilot in the Bald Unit had been temporarily shut-in for several years. The most recently shut-in production well, which was surrounded by four nearby shut-in production wells in a five-spot pattern, was converted to CO2 injection for this pilot. Two additional wells outside the immediate five-spot pattern, one of which was an active producer, were instrumented to measure surface temperature and pressure. The CO2 injection period lasted from September 3, 2009, through December 14, 2010, with one three-month interruption caused by cessation of CO2 deliveries due to winter weather. Water was injected into the CO2 injection well during this period. A total of 6,300 tonnes (6,950 tons) of CO2 were injected into the reservoir at rates that generally ranged from 18 to 32 tonnes (20 to 35 tons) per day. The CO2 injection bottomhole pressure generally remained at 8.3 to 9.0 MPag (1,200 to 1,300 psig). The CO2 injection was followed by continued monitoring for nine months during post-CO2 water injection. A monitoring, verification, and accounting (MVA) program was designed to determine the fate of injected CO2. Extensive periodic sampling and analysis of brine, groundwater, and produced gases began before CO2 injection and continued through the monitored waterflood periods. Samples were gathered from production wells and three newly installed groundwater monitoring wells. Samples underwent geochemical and isotopic analyses to reveal any CO2-related changes. Groundwater and kinetic modeling and mineralogical analysis were also employed to better understand the long-term dynamics of CO2 in the reservoir. No CO2 leakage into groundwater was detected, and analysis of brine and gas chemistry made it possible to track the path of plume migration and infer geochemical reactions and trapping of CO2. Cased-hole logging did not detect any CO2 in the near-wellbore region. An increase in CO2 concentration was first detected in February 2010 from the gas present in the carboy during brine sampling; however, there was no appreciable gas volume associated with the detection of CO2. The first indication of elevated gas rates from the commingled gas of the pilot�������¢����������������s production wells occurred in July 2010 and reached a maximum of 0.36 tonnes/day (0.41 tons/day) in September 2010. An estimated 27 tonnes (30 tons) of CO2 were produced at the surface from the gas separator at the tank battery from September 3, 2009, through September 11, 2011, representing 0.5% of the injected CO2. Consequently, 99.5%

  1. Geosphere in underground coal gasification

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Daly, D.J.; Groenewold, G.H.; Schmit, C.R.; Evans, J.M.

    1988-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The feasibility of underground coal gasification (UCG), the in-situ conversion of coal to natural gas, has been demonstrated through 28 tests in the US alone, mainly in low-rank coals, since the early 1970s. Further, UCG is currently entering the commercial phase in the US with a planned facility in Wyoming for the production of ammonia-urea from UCG-generated natural gas. Although the UCG process both affects and is affected by the natural setting, the majority of the test efforts have historically been focused on characterizing those aspects of the natural setting with the potential to affect the burn. With the advent of environmental legislation, this focus broadened to include the potential impacts of the process on the environment (e.g., subsidence, degradation of ground water quality). Experience to date has resulted in the growing recognition that consideration of the geosphere is fundamental to the design of efficient, economical, and environmentally acceptable UCG facilities. The ongoing RM-1 test program near Hanna, Wyoming, sponsored by the US Department of Energy and an industry consortium led by the Gas Research Institute, reflects this growing awareness through a multidisciplinary research effort, involving geoscientists and engineers, which includes (1) detailed geological site characterization, (2) geotechnical, hydrogeological, and geochemical characterization and predictive modeling, and (3) a strategy for ground water protection. Continued progress toward commercialization of the UCG process requires the integration of geological and process-test information in order to identify and address the potentially adverse environmental ramifications of the process, while identifying and using site characteristics that have the potential to benefit the process and minimize adverse impacts.

  2. Flow characteristics in underground coal gasification

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chang, H.L.; Himmelblau, D.M.; Edgar, T.F.

    1982-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    During the underground coal gasification field test at the Hoe Creek site No. 2, Wyoming, helium pulses were introduced to develop information to characterize the flow field, and to estimate the coefficients in dispersion models of the flow. Quantitative analysis of the tracer response curves shows an increasing departure from a plug flow regime with time because of the combined effects of the free and forced convection in addition to the complex non-uniformity of the flow field. The Peclet number was a function of temperature, pressure, gas recovery and characteristic velocity, as well as the split of the gas between the parallel streams in the model. 17 refs.

  3. Natural Gas Storage in Basalt Aquifers of the Columbia Basin, Pacific Northwest USA: A Guide to Site Characterization

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Reidel, Steve P.; Spane, Frank A.; Johnson, Vernon G.

    2002-08-08T23:59:59.000Z

    This report provides the technical background and a guide to characterizing a site for storing natural gas in the Columbia River Basalt

  4. On CO2 Behavior in the Subsurface, Following Leakage from a Geologic Storage Reservoir

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Pruess, Karsten

    2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    1 - 16, 1987. Skinner, L. CO2 Blowouts: An Emerging Problem,Assessment for Underground CO2 Storage, paper 234, presentedReservoir Performance Risk in CO2 Storage Projects, paper

  5. The lifetime of carbon capture and storage as a climate-change mitigation technology

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Szulczewski, Michael Lawrence

    In carbon capture and storage (CCS), CO[subscript 2] is captured at power plants and then injected underground into reservoirs like deep saline aquifers for long-term storage. While CCS may be critical for the continued ...

  6. Remaining Sites Verification Package for the 600-243 Petroleum-Contaminated Soil Bioremediation Pad, Waste Site Reclassification Form 2007-033

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    J. M. Capron

    2008-11-07T23:59:59.000Z

    The 600-243 waste site consisted of a bioremediation pad for petroleum-contaminated soils resulting from the 1100 Area Underground Storage Tank (UST) upgrades in 1994. In accordance with this evaluation, the verification sampling results support a reclassification of this site to Interim Closed Out. The results of verification sampling show that residual contaminant concentrations do not preclude any future uses and allow for unrestricted use of shallow zone soils. The results also demonstrate that residual contaminant concentrations are protective of groundwater and the Columbia River.

  7. EIS-0062: Double-Shell Tanks for Defense High Level Waste Storage, Savannah River Site, Aiken, SC

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This EIS analyzes the impacts of the various design alternatives for the construction of fourteen 1.3 million gallon high-activity radioactive waste tanks. The EIS further evaluates the effects of these alternative designs on tank durability, on the ease of waste retrieval from such tanks, and the choice of technology and timing for long-term storage or disposal of the wastes.

  8. Water intrusion in underground structures

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Nazarchuk, Alex

    2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This thesis presents a study of the permissible groundwater infiltration rates in underground structures, the consequences of this leakage and the effectiveness of mitigation measures. Design guides and codes do not restrict, ...

  9. Remaining Sites Verification Package for the 100-D-9 Boiler Fuel Oil Tank Site, Waste Site Reclassification Form 2006-030

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    L. M. Dittmer

    2006-08-10T23:59:59.000Z

    The 100-D-9 site is the former location of an underground storage tank used for holding fuel for the 184-DA Boiler House. Results of soil-gas samples taken from six soil-gas probes in a rectangle around the site the tank had been removed from concluded that there were no volatile organic compounds at detectable levels in the area. The 100-D-9 Boiler Fuel Oil Tank Site meets the remedial action objectives specified in the Remaining Sites ROD. The results demonstrated that residual contaminant concentrations do not preclude any future uses and allow for unrestricted use of shallow zone soils. The results also demonstrate that residual contaminant concentrations are protective of groundwater and the Columbia River.

  10. Conversion of the Bryan Mound geological site characterization reports to a three-dimensional model.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stein, Joshua S.; Rautman, Christopher Arthur

    2005-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Bryan Mound salt dome, located near Freeport, Texas, is home to one of four underground crude oil-storage facilities managed by the U. S. Department of Energy Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) Program. Sandia National Laboratories, as the geotechnical advisor to the SPR, conducts site-characterization investigations and other longer-term geotechnical and engineering studies in support of the program. This report describes the conversion of two-dimensional geologic interpretations of the Bryan Mound site into three-dimensional geologic models. The new models include the geometry of the salt dome, the surrounding sedimentary units, mapped faults, and the 20 oil-storage caverns at the site. This work provides an internally consistent geologic model of the Bryan Mound site that can be used in support of future work.

  11. Conversion of the Big Hill geological site characterization report to a three-dimensional model.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stein, Joshua S.; Rautman, Christopher Arthur

    2003-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Big Hill salt dome, located in southeastern Texas, is home to one of four underground oil-storage facilities managed by the U. S. Department of Energy Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) Program. Sandia National Laboratories, as the geotechnical advisor to the SPR, conducts site-characterization investigations and other longer-term geotechnical and engineering studies in support of the program. This report describes the conversion of two-dimensional geologic interpretations of the Big Hill site into three-dimensional geologic models. The new models include the geometry of the salt dome, the surrounding sedimentary units, mapped faults, and the 14 oil storage caverns at the site. This work provides a realistic and internally consistent geologic model of the Big Hill site that can be used in support of future work.

  12. Conversion of the West Hackberry geological site characterization report to a three-dimensional model.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stein, Joshua S.; Rautman, Christopher Arthur; Snider, Anna C.

    2004-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The West Hackberry salt dome, in southwestern Louisiana, is one of four underground oil-storage facilities managed by the U. S. Department of Energy Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) Program. Sandia National Laboratories, as the geotechnical advisor to the SPR, conducts site-characterization investigations and other longer-term geotechnical and engineering studies in support of the program. This report describes the conversion of two-dimensional geologic interpretations of the West Hackberry site into three-dimensional geologic models. The new models include the geometry of the salt dome, the surrounding sedimentary layers, mapped faults, and a portion of the oil storage caverns at the site. This work provides a realistic and internally consistent geologic model of the West Hackberry site that can be used in support of future work.

  13. Opportunities in underground coal gasification

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bloomstran, M.A.; Davis, B.E.

    1984-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A review is presented of the results obtained on DOE-sponsored field tests of underground coal gasification in steeply-dipping beds at Rawlins, Wyoming. The coal gas composition, process parameters, and process economics are described. Steeply-dipping coal resources, which are not economically mineable using conventional coal mining methods, are identified and potential markets for underground coal gasification products are discussed. It is concluded that in-situ gasification in steeply-dipping deposits should be considered for commercialization.

  14. Corrective Action Decision Document for Corrective Action Unit 140: Waste Dumps, Burn Pits, and Storage Area, Nevada Test Site, Nevada: Revision No. 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office

    2003-10-17T23:59:59.000Z

    This Corrective Action Decision Document identifies and rationalizes the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office's selection of a recommended corrective action alternative appropriate to facilitate the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 140: Waste Dumps, Burn Pits, and Storage Area, Nevada Test Site (NTS), Nevada, under the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order. Located in Areas 5, 22, and 23 of the NTS, CAU 140 consists of nine corrective action sites (CASs). Investigation activities were performed from November 13 through December 11, 2002, with additional sampling to delineate the extent of contaminants of concern (COCs) conducted on February 4 and March 18 and 19, 2003. Results obtained from the investigation activities and sampling indicated that only 3 of the 9 CASs at CAU 140 had COCs identified. Following a review of existing data, future land use, and current operations at the NTS, the following preferred alternatives were developed for consideration: (1) No Further Action - six CASs (05-08-02, 05-17-01, 05-19-01, 05-35-01, 05-99-04, and 22-99-04); (2) Clean Closure - one CAS (05-08-01), and (3) Closure-in-Place - two CASs (05-23-01 and 23-17-01). These alternatives were judged to meet all requirements for the technical components evaluated. Additionally, the alternatives meet all applicable state and federal regulations for closure of the site and will eliminate potential future exposure pathways to the contaminated media at CAU 140.

  15. Muon-Induced Background Study for Underground Laboratories

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    D. -M. Mei; A. Hime

    2005-12-06T23:59:59.000Z

    We provide a comprehensive study of the cosmic-ray muon flux and induced activity as a function of overburden along with a convenient parameterization of the salient fluxes and differential distributions for a suite of underground laboratories ranging in depth from $\\sim$1 to 8 km.w.e.. Particular attention is given to the muon-induced fast neutron activity for the underground sites and we develop a Depth-Sensitivity-Relation to characterize the effect of such background in experiments searching for WIMP dark matter and neutrinoless double beta decay.

  16. Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Unit 140: Waste Dumps, Burn Pits, and Storage Area, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, July 2002, Rev. No. 0

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NNSA /NV

    2002-07-18T23:59:59.000Z

    This Corrective Action Investigation Plan contains the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Operations Office's approach to collect the data necessary to evaluate corrective action alternatives appropriate for the closure of Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 140 under the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order. Corrective Action Unit 140 consists of nine Corrective Action Sites (CASs): 05-08-01, Detonation Pits; 05-08-02, Debris Pits; 05-17-01, Hazardous Waste Accumulation Site (Buried); 05-19-01, Waste Disposal Site; 05-23-01, Gravel Gertie; 05-35-01, Burn Pit; 05-99-04, Burn Pit; 22-99-04, Radioactive Waste Dump; 23-17-01, Hazardous Waste Storage Area. All nine of these CASs are located within Areas 5, 22, and 23 of the Nevada Test Site (NTS) in Nevada, approximately 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas. This CAU is being investigated because disposed waste may be present without appropriate controls (i.e., use restrictions, adequate cover) and hazardous and/or radioactive constituents may be present or migrating at concentrations and locations that could potentially pose a threat to human health and the environment. The NTS has been used for various research and development projects including nuclear weapons testing. The CASs in CAU 140 were used for testing, material storage, waste storage, and waste disposal. A two-phase approach has been selected to collect information and generate data to satisfy needed resolution criteria and resolve the decision statements. Phase I will determine if contaminants of potential concern (COPCs) are present in concentrations exceeding preliminary action levels. This data will be evaluated at all CASs. Phase II will determine the extent of the contaminant(s) of concern (COCs). This data will only be evaluated for CASs with a COC identified during Phase I. Based on process knowledge, the COPCs for CAU 140 include volatile organics, semivolatile organics, petroleum hydrocarbons, explosive residues, herbicides, pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls, metals, and radionuclides. The results of this field investigation will support a defensible evaluation of corrective action alternatives in the corrective action decision document.

  17. Hanna, Wyoming underground coal gasification data base. Volume 1. General information and executive summary

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bartke, T.C.; Fischer, D.D.; King, S.B.; Boyd, R.M.; Humphrey, A.E.

    1985-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report is part of a seven-volume series on the Hanna, Wyoming, underground coal gasification field tests. Volume 1 is a summary of the project and each of Volumes 2 through 6 describes a particular test. Volume 7 is a compilation. This report covers: (1) history of underground coal gasification leading to the Hanna tests; (2) area characteristics (basic meteorological and socioeconomic data); (3) site selection history; (4) site characteristics; (5) permitting; and (6) executive summary. 5 figs., 15 tabs.

  18. Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 3 Site Environmental Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    None

    2000-06-14T23:59:59.000Z

    The CY1999 Site Environmental Report and Compliance Summary discusses environmental compliance activities for NPR-3 (Teapot Dome). All hazardous wastes that were stored in the hazardous waste accumulation at NPR-3 were removed in CY1999. NPR-3 maintains its status as a conditionally exempt small quantity generator. Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) flares have not operated at NPR-3 since 1996; monitoring of H2S indicates readings well below limits. All underground storage tanks were removed in 1998. Wastewater samples were in compliance with applicable standards.

  19. RCRA Part A Permit Application for Waste Management Activities at the Nevada Test Site, Part B Permit Application Hazardous Waste Storage Unit, Nevada Test Site, and Part B Permit Application - Explosives Ordnance Disposal Unit (EODU)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NSTec Environmental Programs

    2010-06-17T23:59:59.000Z

    The Area 5 Hazardous Waste Storage Unit (HWSU) was established to support testing, research, and remediation activities at the Nevada Test Site (NTS), a large-quantity generator of hazardous waste. The HWSU, located adjacent to the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS), is a prefabricated, rigid steel-framed, roofed shelter used to store hazardous nonradioactive waste generated on the NTS. No offsite generated wastes are managed at the HWSU. Waste managed at the HWSU includes the following categories: Flammables/Combustibles; Acid Corrosives; Alkali Corrosives; Oxidizers/Reactives; Toxics/Poisons; and Other Regulated Materials (ORMs). A list of the regulated waste codes accepted for storage at the HWSU is provided in Section B.2. Hazardous wastes stored at the HWSU are stored in U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) compliant containers, compatible with the stored waste. Waste transfer (between containers) is not allowed at the HWSU and containers remain closed at all times. Containers are stored on secondary containment pallets and the unit is inspected monthly. Table 1 provides the metric conversion factors used in this application. Table 2 provides a list of existing permits. Table 3 lists operational Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) units at the NTS and their respective regulatory status.

  20. Study of the VOC emissions from a municipal solid waste storage pilot-scale cell: Comparison with biogases from municipal waste landfill site

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chiriac, R., E-mail: rodica.chiriac@univ-lyon1.fr [Universite de Lyon, Universite Lyon 1, CNRS, UMR 5615, Laboratoire des Multimateriaux et Interfaces, 43 boulevard du 11 Novembre 1918, F-69622 Villeurbanne (France); De Araujos Morais, J. [Universite Federal de Paraiba, Campus I Departamento de Engenharia Civil e Ambiental, Joao Pessoa, Paraiba (Brazil); Carre, J. [Universite de Lyon, Universite Lyon 1, CNRS, UMR 5256, Institut de Recherche sur la Catalyse et l'Environnement, 43 boulevard du 11 Novembre 1918, F-69622 Villeurbanne (France); Bayard, R. [Universite de Lyon, INSA de Lyon, Laboratoire de Genie Civil et d'Ingenierie environnementale (LGCIE), F-69622 Villeurbanne (France); Chovelon, J.M. [Universite de Lyon, Universite Lyon 1, CNRS, UMR 5256, Institut de Recherche sur la Catalyse et l'Environnement, 43 boulevard du 11 Novembre 1918, F-69622 Villeurbanne (France); Gourdon, R. [Universite de Lyon, INSA de Lyon, Laboratoire de Genie Civil et d'Ingenierie environnementale (LGCIE), F-69622 Villeurbanne (France)

    2011-11-15T23:59:59.000Z

    Highlights: > Follow-up of the emission of VOCs in a municipal waste pilot-scale cell during the acidogenesis and acetogenesis phases. > Study from the very start of waste storage leading to a better understanding of the decomposition/degradation of waste. > Comparison of the results obtained on the pilot-scale cell with those from 3 biogases coming from the same landfill site. > A methodology of characterization for the progression of the stabilization/maturation of waste is finally proposed. - Abstract: The emission of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from municipal solid waste stored in a pilot-scale cell containing 6.4 tonnes of waste (storage facility which is left open during the first period (40 days) and then closed with recirculation of leachates during a second period (100 days)) was followed by dynamic sampling on activated carbon and analysed by GC-MS after solvent extraction. This was done in order to know the VOC emissions before the installation of a methanogenesis process for the entire waste mass. The results, expressed in reference to toluene, were exploited during the whole study on all the analyzable VOCs: alcohols, ketones and esters, alkanes, benzenic and cyclic compounds, chlorinated compounds, terpene, and organic sulphides. The results of this study on the pilot-scale cell are then compared with those concerning three biogases from a municipal waste landfill: biogas (1) coming from waste cells being filled or recently closed, biogas (2) from all the waste storage cells on site, and biogas (3) which is a residual gas from old storage cells without aspiration of the gas. The analysis of the results obtained revealed: (i) a high emission of VOCs, principally alcohols, ketones and esters during the acidogenesis; (ii) a decrease in the alkane content and an increase in the terpene content were observed in the VOCs emitted during the production of methane; (iii) the production of heavier alkanes and an increase in the average number of carbon atoms per molecule of alkane with the progression of the stabilisation/maturation process were also observed. Previous studies have concentrated almost on the analysis of biogases from landfills. Our research aimed at gaining a more complete understanding of the decomposition/degradation of municipal solid waste by measuring the VOCs emitted from the very start of the landfill process i.e. during the acidogenesis and acetogenesis phases.