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

Title: B241 Facility Screening Report (SCR)


No abstract prepared.

Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (LLNL), Livermore, CA (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
OSTI Identifier:
Report Number(s):
TRN: US200717%%438
DOE Contract Number:
Resource Type:
Technical Report
Country of Publication:
United States

Citation Formats

Johnson, M A. B241 Facility Screening Report (SCR). United States: N. p., 2007. Web. doi:10.2172/902237.
Johnson, M A. B241 Facility Screening Report (SCR). United States. doi:10.2172/902237.
Johnson, M A. Wed . "B241 Facility Screening Report (SCR)". United States. doi:10.2172/902237.
title = {B241 Facility Screening Report (SCR)},
author = {Johnson, M A},
abstractNote = {No abstract prepared.},
doi = {10.2172/902237},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {Wed Mar 14 00:00:00 EDT 2007},
month = {Wed Mar 14 00:00:00 EDT 2007}

Technical Report:

Save / Share:
  • B133 is located in the southwest quadrant inside the 1 square mile site of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The property is about 250 meters from the nearest boundary along Vasco Road. Building 133 is a 1 story steel framed building constructed in 1994 with stainless steel sidings. The facility covers 5,631 gross square feet of space. The building is used to house equipment to heat and cool buildings 132N and 132S. A 1380 volts electrical substation is located outside on the northeast corner, along with 2 diesel generators and a 1000 gallons diesel fuel tank. An evaporative cooling tower ismore » located to the south of B133 to dissipate heat from the chillers located in B133. The inside of the facility is divided into three main rooms housing the cooling system units, the boilers, and the electrical distribution panels. The facility has an automatic sprinkler system installed through out and a Freon alarm located in room 1000. Building 133 is used to supply electrical power, chilled water, and hot water to Bldgs 132 N & S. Primary activities include servicing and maintaining chillers, boilers, and electrical distribution equipment.« less
  • No abstract prepared.
  • This paper describes the status of the Innovative Clean Coal Technology project to demonstrate SCR technology for reduction of NOx emissions from flue gas of utility boilers burning U.S. high-sulfur coal. The project is sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy, managed and co- funded by Southern Company Services, Inc. on behalf of the Southern Company, and also co-funded by the Electric Power Research Institute and Ontario Hydro; and is located at Gulf Power Company`s Plant Crist Unit 5 (75 MW tangentially-fired boiler burning U.S. coals that have a sulfur content near 3.0%), near Pensacola, Florida. The test program ismore » being conducted for approximately two years to evaluate catalyst deactivation and other SCR operational effects. The SCR test facility has nine reactors: three 2.5 MW (5000 scfm), and six 0.2 MW(400 scfm). Eight reactors operate on high-dust flue gas, while the ninth reactor operates on low-dust flue gas using a slip stream at the exit of the host unit`s hot side precipitator. The reactors operate in parallel with commercially available SCR catalysts obtained from vendors throughout the world. Long-term performance testing began in July 1993. A general test facility description and the results from three parametric test sequences and long term test data through December 1994 are presented in this paper.« less
  • SCR technology has proven itself for nitrogen oxide reduction in fossil-fired power plants. Depending on spatial conditions, different types of SCR plants can be realized in a power plant. In some individual cases, detailed investigation is required to determine how the requirements of a specific NOx reduction rate can be fulfilled. This paper describes the primary differences in these various SCR plant types based on catalyst designs, such as achievable NOx removal rates and cost-effectiveness of catalyst use.
  • This task was a continuation of Task 86-29 initiated for Contract D. It provided in vivo screens for evaluating the efficacy of candidate pretreatment and treatment compounds submitted by the Drug Assessment Division of U.S. Army Medical Research of Chemical Defense against soman, tabun, and/or cyanide. A total of 578 compounds were received for testing and their maximum solubility in-vehicles comparable with in vivo testing in mice was determined. Range-finding and median lethal dose determinations following IM and/or oral administrations were conducted for 436 compounds submitted for nerve agent screening and range finding and median lethal dose determinations following IPmore » administration were conducted for up to 142 compounds submitted for cyanide screening. Of 332 compounds evaluated, 154 passed the GD treatment efficacy evaluation, and 90 of 156 compounds submitted passed the GA treatment efficacy evaluation. For pretreatment studies against a GD challenge, 224 of 379 compounds submitted passed the IM efficacy evaluation and 96 of 143 compounds submitted passed the oral efficacy evaluation. Only 12 of 133 compounds evaluated as cyanide pretreatment compounds passed the efficacy evaluations. The mission of Task 89-01 was combined under Task 91-20 for the duration of Contract DAMD17-89-C-9050.« less