available for public and state review and comment and Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) consultation review. The public comments on the Draft WIR Evaluation were submitted to...
To whom it may concern, Attached please find comments from the North Dakota Ethanol Council regarding infrastructure constraints in preparation for the OER Public Meeting, which will be held in Bismarck, N.D., on August 8. Sincerely, Deana Wies
1/05/13 Page 1 of 2 TANK WASTE COMMITTEE - 3 MONTH WORK PLAN (SUBJECT TO REVISION) February Committee meeting placeholder: Wednesday, February 13 Committee call placeholder: Tuesday, February 19 @ 3:00 p.m. * Waste Incidental to Reprocessing (WIR) facility (timely?) * Performance Assessment integration, Waste Management Area C (joint w/ RAP, TWC lead?) * SST Integrity Milestones * Site-Wide Waste Transfer Systems (joint w/HSEP, TWC lead) * WESF - viability of concrete, dose (joint w/
WEST VALLEY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT WEST VALLEY, NEW YORK NEWS MEDIA CONTACT: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Bryan Bower: 716-942-4368 June 28, 2012 Bill Taylor: 803-952-8564 West Valley Draft Waste Evaluation West Valley, New York - The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today released to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), the public and the states of Nevada and Texas, for review and comment, a Draft Waste Incidental to Reprocessing (WIR) Evaluation (Draft Evaluation) for the concentrator feed makeup
Department of Energy Responses to Public Comments on Draft Vitrification Melter Evaluation Responses to Public Comments on Draft Vitrification Melter Evaluation To provide greater transparency to the Department of Energy's (DOE) cleanup of nuclear legacy waste, DOE made the "West Valley Demonstration Project Draft Waste Incidental to Reprocessing Evaluation for the Vitrification Melter" (Draft WIR Evaluation) available for public and state review and comment and Nuclear Regulatory
Responses to Public Comments on the Draft Waste- Incidental-to-Reprocessing Evaluation for the West Valley Demonstration Project Concentrator Feed Makeup Tank and Melter Feed Hold Tank 1 Introduction The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is providing responses to the comments received from the public and from state and county agencies on the West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) Draft Waste-Incidental-to-Reprocessing (WIR) Evaluation for the Concentrator Feed Makeup Tank (CFMT) and the Melter
Wir schaffen Wissen - heute für morgen SHE Symposium, College Station, Texas USA ; March 30-April 1 2015 SHE Symposium, College Station, Texas USA ; March 30-April 1 2015 Paul S cherrer I ns.tute, V illigen, Switzerland University of B ern, B ern, S witzerland Gas p hase c hemistry w ith S HE - E xperiments Robert E ichler R. Eichler @ SHE Symposium, College Station, Texas USA ; March 30-April 1 2015 Theory: --- a sk t he r ight q ues=ons Adequate t echnique f or single atoms: --- m ulitstep p
Department of Energy Melter Draft Waste Evaluation Released for Public Comment West Valley Melter Draft Waste Evaluation Released for Public Comment March 11, 2011 - 12:00pm Addthis Media Contact Bill Taylor (513) 246-0539 firstname.lastname@example.org West Valley, New York - The U.S. Department of Energy today released a Draft Waste Incidental to Reprocessing (WIR) Evaluation of a vitrification melter at the West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) for review and comment by the public,
Wilmarth, B; Sheryl Bush, S
The objective of this report is to describe the pretreatment solutions that allow treatment to be tailored to specific wastes, processing ahead of the completion schedules for the main treatment facilities, and reduction of technical risks associated with future processing schedules. Wastes stored at Hanford and Savannah River offer challenging scientific and engineering tasks. At both sites, space limitations confound the ability to effectively retrieve and treat the wastes. Additionally, the radiation dose to the worker operating and maintaining the radiochemical plants has a large role in establishing the desired radioactivity removal. However, the regulatory requirements to treat supernatant and saltcake tank wastes differ at the two sites. Hanford must treat and remove radioactivity from the tanks based on the TriParty Agreement and Waste Incidental to Reprocessing (WIR) documentation. These authorizing documents do not specify treatment technologies; rather, they specify endstate conditions. Dissimilarly, Waste Determinations prepared at SRS in accordance with Section 3116 of the 2005 National Defense Authorization Act along with state operating permits establish the methodology and amounts of radioactivity that must be removed and may be disposed of in South Carolina. After removal of entrained solids and site-specific radionuclides, supernatant and saltcake wastes are considered to be low activity waste (LAW) and are immobilized in glass and disposed of at the Hanford Site Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF) or formulated into a grout for disposal at the Savannah River Site Saltstone Disposal Facility. Wastes stored at the Hanford Site or SRS comprise saltcake, supernate, and sludges. The supernatant and saltcake waste fractions contain primarily sodium salts, metals (e.g., Al, Cr), cesium-137 (Cs-137), technetium-99 (Tc-99) and entrained solids containing radionuclides such as strontium-90 (Sr-90) and transuranic elements. The sludges contain many of the transition metal hydroxides that precipitate when the spent acidic process solutions are rendered alkaline with sodium hydroxide. The sludges contain Sr-90 and transuranic elements. The wastes stored at each site have been generated and stored for over fifty years. Although the majority of the wastes were generated to support nuclear weapons production and reprocessing, the wastes differ substantially between the sites. Table 5 shows the volumes and total radioactivity (including decay daughters) of the waste phases stored in tanks at each site. At Hanford, there are 177 tanks that contain 56.5 Mgal of waste. SRS has 51 larger tanks, of which 2 are closed, that contain 36.5 Mgal. Mainly due to recovery operations, the waste stored at Hanford has less total curies than that stored at Savannah River. The total radioactivity of the Hanford wastes contains approximately 190 MCi, and the total radioactivity of the Savannah River wastes contains 400 MCi.