skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: BUILDING 341 Seismic Evaluation


The Seismic Evaluation of Building 341 located at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, California has been completed. The subject building consists of a main building, Increment 1, and two smaller additions; Increments 2 and 3.

  1. Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (LLNL), Livermore, CA (United States)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (LLNL), Livermore, CA (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
OSTI Identifier:
Report Number(s):
DOE Contract Number:
Resource Type:
Technical Report
Country of Publication:
United States

Citation Formats

Halle, J. BUILDING 341 Seismic Evaluation. United States: N. p., 2015. Web. doi:10.2172/1251067.
Halle, J. BUILDING 341 Seismic Evaluation. United States. doi:10.2172/1251067.
Halle, J. Mon . "BUILDING 341 Seismic Evaluation". United States. doi:10.2172/1251067.
title = {BUILDING 341 Seismic Evaluation},
author = {Halle, J.},
abstractNote = {The Seismic Evaluation of Building 341 located at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, California has been completed. The subject building consists of a main building, Increment 1, and two smaller additions; Increments 2 and 3.},
doi = {10.2172/1251067},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {Mon Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2015},
month = {Mon Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2015}

Technical Report:

Save / Share:
  • Breathing zone samples were analyzed for the pesticides 2,4-D (94757), Banvel (1918009), Buctril (1689845), and Roundup (28641940) at field stations of the Bureau of Reclamation (Bureau) (SIC-9511), US Department of the Interior at Fresno, Tracy, and Red Bluff, California and Bismarck, North Dakota in August, 1983 and June, 1984. The survey was requested by the Bureau to evaluate its pesticide application program. Work practices were observed during mixing, spraying, and cleanup operations. Observation of work practices indicated that Bureau employees had a good understanding of the hazards associated with pesticides. Recommendations include employee education, using protective clothing during mixing, andmore » implementing programs of exposure recordkeeping.« less
  • The Operations Manager of Miller Brands Denver, Colorado, requested an evaluation of carbon monoxide (CO) exposures in the beer distributorship and storage facilities. Gasoline-powered beer trucks and fork lifts used inside large buildings generate the CO. The OSHA standard for CO is 50 parts per million (ppm) as a time-weighted average. CO measurements taken in the beer storage warehouse, in the beer-keg refrigerated storage room, and in the building where the filled trucks were within acceptable concentrations in all areas except the refrigerated keg storage room. Levels in the room reached 200ppm after the fork lift truck had been enteringmore » and exiting for about 20 minutes. The authors recommend that electric fork-lift trucks be used in the beer keg cool room to eliminate the CO hazard.« less
  • An evaluation of environmental conditions and possible health effects among workers exposed to coke dust was conducted. Personal breathing-zone (PBZ) concentrations of total airborne dust ranged from 0.1 to 12 milligrams/cubic meter (mg/m3) with a median of 1.6 mg/m3; mass median particle diameter was about 8 micrometers. Very high PBZ concentrations of coke dust occurred during a semimonthly cleanup of underground coke pits; levels ranged from 98 to 190mg/m3 with a mean of 140mg/m3. Oil mists were not detected. Exposures to polynuclear aromatic compounds were below the analytical limit of detection among workers for routine jobs. Abnormal pulmonary function testsmore » were found in 12% of those tested. Five cases of chronic bronchitis and seven of chronic cough, 10 and 13% respectively, were identified among those interviewed. The authors conclude that there were potentially hazardous exposures to high dust levels during semimonthly coke-pit cleaning jobs.« less
  • The expected performance of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) Plutonium Facility (Building 332) subjected to earthquake ground motion has been evaluated. Anticipated behavior of the building, glove boxes, ventilation system and other systems critical for containment of plutonium is described for three severe postulated earthquake excitations. Based upon this evaluation, some damage to the building, glove boxes and ventilation system would be expected but no collapse of any structure is anticipated as a result of the postulated earthquake ground motions.
  • This report summarizes the results of the seismic and tornado evaluation of Building 221-H and Penthouse Additions 221-SH, TH, and UH at the Savannah River Plant, Aiken, South Carolina. The main objective of this project was to determine whether Building 221-H and the two-story penthouse addition over Sections 2 through 6 meet the established acceptance criteria for the criterion seismic and tornado loadings. The analyses and evaluations of three related structures -- the exhaust stack 291-H, sand filters 294-H/294-lH, and the connecting air tunnel -- are presented in a separate report. During the progress of the project, both the scopemore » of work and the acceptance criteria for the seismic analyses of Building 221-H went through several revisions since the original criteria were established. As a result, linear elastic, quasi-nonlinear, and nonlinear dynamic analyses were performed to assess the building. The seismic criteria was based on the design response spectrum developed by Dr. George W. Housner with a Design Basis Earthquake ground acceleration of 0.2g and an Operating Basis Earthquake ground acceleration of 0.1g. Chapter 1 discusses the seismic analysis history of this project and the various analysis phases performed. The tornado analysis was performed for a Design Basis Tornado. The analyses considered the effects of wind velocity pressure, atmospheric pressure drop, and missile impact for structural response effects. The evaluation for wind velocity pressure and atmospheric pressure drop effects included consideration of both local and overall structural adequacy. The evaluation of missile impact effects included consideration of overall structural and individual panel response.« less