Science.gov

Sample records for act cercla disposal

  1. Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility Complex Compliance Demonstration for DOE Order 435.1

    SciTech Connect

    Simonds, J.

    2007-11-06

    This compliance demonstration document provides an analysis of the Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility (ICDF) Complex compliance with DOE Order 435.1. The ICDF Complex includes the disposal facility (landfill), evaporation pond, administration facility, weigh scale, and various staging/storage areas. These facilities were designed and constructed to be compliant with DOE Order 435.1, Resource Conservation and Recovery act Subtitle C, and Toxic Substances Control Act polychlorinated biphenyl design and construction standards. The ICDF Complex is designated as the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) facility for the receipt, staging/storage, treatment, and disposal of INL Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) waste streams.

  2. Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility Complex Waste Acceptance Criteria

    SciTech Connect

    W. Mahlon Heileson

    2006-10-01

    The Idaho Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Disposal Facility (ICDF) has been designed to accept CERCLA waste generated within the Idaho National Laboratory. Hazardous, mixed, low-level, and Toxic Substance Control Act waste will be accepted for disposal at the ICDF. The purpose of this document is to provide criteria for the quantities of radioactive and/or hazardous constituents allowable in waste streams designated for disposal at ICDF. This ICDF Complex Waste Acceptance Criteria is divided into four section: (1) ICDF Complex; (2) Landfill; (3) Evaporation Pond: and (4) Staging, Storage, Sizing, and Treatment Facility (SSSTF). The ICDF Complex section contains the compliance details, which are the same for all areas of the ICDF. Corresponding sections contain details specific to the landfill, evaporation pond, and the SSSTF. This document specifies chemical and radiological constituent acceptance criteria for waste that will be disposed of at ICDF. Compliance with the requirements of this document ensures protection of human health and the environment, including the Snake River Plain Aquifer. Waste placed in the ICDF landfill and evaporation pond must not cause groundwater in the Snake River Plain Aquifer to exceed maximum contaminant levels, a hazard index of 1, or 10-4 cumulative risk levels. The defined waste acceptance criteria concentrations are compared to the design inventory concentrations. The purpose of this comparison is to show that there is an acceptable uncertainty margin based on the actual constituent concentrations anticipated for disposal at the ICDF. Implementation of this Waste Acceptance Criteria document will ensure compliance with the Final Report of Decision for the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center, Operable Unit 3-13. For waste to be received, it must meet the waste acceptance criteria for the specific disposal/treatment unit (on-Site or off-Site) for which it is destined.

  3. Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility Complex Compliance Demonstration for DOE Order 435.1

    SciTech Connect

    J. Simonds

    2006-09-01

    This compliance demonstration document provides an analysis of the Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility (ICDF) Complex compliance with DOE Order 435.1. The ICDF Complex includes the disposal facility (landfill), evaporation pond, admin facility, weigh scale, decon building, treatment systems, and various staging/storage areas. These facilities were designed and are being constructed to be compliant with DOE Order 435.1, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Subtitle C, and Toxic Substances Control Act polychlorinated biphenyl design and construction standards. The ICDF Complex is designated as the central Idaho National Laboratory (INL) facilityyy for the receipt, staging/storage, treatment, and disposal of INL Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) waste streams. This compliance demonstration document discusses the conceptual site model for the ICDF Complex area. Within this conceptual site model, the selection of the area for the ICDF Complex is discussed. Also, the subsurface stratigraphy in the ICDF Complex area is discussed along with the existing contamination beneath the ICDF Complex area. The designs for the various ICDF Complex facilities are also included in this compliance demonstration document. These design discussions are a summary of the design as presented in the Remedial Design/Construction Work Plans for the ICDF landfill and evaporation pond and the Staging, Storage, Sizing, and Treatment Facility. Each of the major facilities or systems is described including the design criteria.

  4. 48 CFR 1426.7103 - The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Superfund...

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Superfund Minority Contractors Utilization... SOCIOECONOMIC PROGRAMS OTHER SOCIOECONOMIC PROGRAMS Minority Business Reports 1426.7103 The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Superfund Minority Contractors...

  5. 48 CFR 1426.7103 - The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Superfund...

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Superfund Minority Contractors Utilization... SOCIOECONOMIC PROGRAMS OTHER SOCIOECONOMIC PROGRAMS Minority Business Reports 1426.7103 The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Superfund Minority Contractors...

  6. 48 CFR 1426.7103 - The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Superfund...

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Superfund Minority Contractors Utilization... SOCIOECONOMIC PROGRAMS OTHER SOCIOECONOMIC PROGRAMS Minority Business Reports 1426.7103 The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Superfund Minority Contractors...

  7. 48 CFR 1426.7103 - The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Superfund...

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Superfund Minority Contractors Utilization... SOCIOECONOMIC PROGRAMS OTHER SOCIOECONOMIC PROGRAMS Minority Business Reports 1426.7103 The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Superfund Minority Contractors...

  8. 48 CFR 1426.7103 - The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Superfund...

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Superfund Minority Contractors Utilization... SOCIOECONOMIC PROGRAMS OTHER SOCIOECONOMIC PROGRAMS Minority Business Reports 1426.7103 The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Superfund Minority Contractors...

  9. Savannah River Site Public and Regulatory Involvement in the Cercla Low-Level Waste (LLW) Program and Their Effect on Decisions to Dispose of LLW Generated by Cercla

    SciTech Connect

    Belencan, H.

    2008-07-01

    The key to successful public involvement at the Savannah River Site (SRS) has been and continues to be vigorous, up-front involvement of the public, federal and state regulators with technical experts. The SRS Waste Management Program includes all forms of radioactive waste. All of the decisions associated with the management of these wastes are of interest to the public and successful program implementation would be impossible without including the public up-front in the program formulation. Serious problems can result if program decisions are made without public involvement, and if the public is informed after key decisions are made. This paper will describe the regulatory and public involvement program and their effects on the decisions concerning the disposal at the Savannah River Site (SRS) of LLW generated from CERCLA Removal and Remedial Actions. At SRS the Deactivation and Decommissioning (D and D) project has generated large amounts of LLW from the removal of buildings and processing facilities. The D and D project is expected to generate even larger amounts of LLW in the future. The most cost effective disposal alternated is to use the onsite LLW disposal facility in E-Area. The E-Area LLW Facility is owned and operated by the Department of Energy (DOE) under its authority granted by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. Since the disposal of CERCLA generated waste is also governed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) CERCLA regulations, it is important that EPA, DOE, and the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) work together to resolve any conflicts in implementation of the D and D project so that all regulations are followed and the project can be continued successfully. An issue of particular significance will be described in this paper that, were it not resolved successfully, would have jeopardized the completion of one project and resulted in higher overall project costs. The EPA determined in review of

  10. INEEL Subsurface Disposal Area CERCLA-based Decision Analysis for Technology Screening and Remedial Alternative Evaluation

    SciTech Connect

    Parnell, G. S.; Kloeber, Jr. J.; Westphal, D; Fung, V.; Richardson, John Grant

    2000-03-01

    A CERCLA-based decision analysis methodology for alternative evaluation and technology screening has been developed for application at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory WAG 7 OU13/14 Subsurface Disposal Area (SDA). Quantitative value functions derived from CERCLA balancing criteria in cooperation with State and Federal regulators are presented. A weighted criteria hierarchy is also summarized that relates individual value function numerical values to an overall score for a specific technology alternative.

  11. 76 FR 32360 - Casmalia Disposal Site; Notice of Proposed CERCLA Administrative De Minimis Settlement

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2011-06-06

    ...) 972-3951. CORRECTION: In the Federal Register of April 4, 2011, in FR Doc. 2011- 7904, 76 FR 18549... AGENCY Casmalia Disposal Site; Notice of Proposed CERCLA Administrative De Minimis Settlement AGENCY... of a proposed administrative de minimis settlement concerning the Casmalia Disposal Site in...

  12. Annual Groundwater Detection Monitoring Report for the Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility (2008)

    SciTech Connect

    Lorie Cahn

    2009-07-31

    This report presents the data collected for groundwater detection monitoring at the Idaho Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) Disposal Facility (ICDF) during calendar year 2008. The detection-monitoring program developed for the ICDF groundwater-monitoring wells is applicable to six wells completed in the uppermost portion of the Snake River Plain Aquifer. Five wells downgradient of the ICDF and one well upgradient. The ICDF detection-monitoring program was established to meet the substantive requirements of Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 264.97 and 264.98, which are applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements under CERCLA. Semiannal groundwater samples were collected and analyzed for indicator parameters in March and September. The indicator parameters focus on constituents that are found in higher concentrations in ICDF leachate than in groundwater (bicarbonate alkalinity, sulfate, U-233, and U-238). The only detection monitoring limits that were exceeded were for bicarbonate alkalinity. Bicarbonate alkalinity is naturally occuring in groundwater. Bicarbonate alkalinity found in ICDF detection monitoring wells is not a result of waste migration from the ICDF landfill or the evaporation pond. The U.S. Department of Energy will continue with detection monitoring for the ICDF, which is semiannual sampling for indicator parameters.

  13. Annual Groundwater Detection Monitoring Report for the Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility (2008)

    SciTech Connect

    Cahn, Lorie

    2009-07-31

    This report presents the data collected for groundwater detection monitoring at the Idaho Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) Disposal Facility (ICDF) during calendar year 2008. The detection-monitoring program developed for the ICDF groundwater-monitoring wells is applicable to six wells completed in the uppermost portion of the Snake River Plain Aquifer - five wells downgradient of the ICDF and one well upgradient. The ICDF detection-monitoring program was established to meet the substantive requirements of Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 264.97 and 264.98, which are applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements under CERCLA. Semiannual groundwater samples were collected and analyzed for indicator parameters in March and September. The indicator parameters focus on constituents that are found in higher concentrations in ICDF leachate than in groundwater (bicarbonate alkalinity, sulfate, U-233, U-234, and U-238). The only detection monitoring limits that were exceeded were for bicarbonate alkalinity. Bicarbonate alkalinity is naturally occurring in groundwater. Bicarbonate alkalinity found in ICDF detection monitoring wells is not a result of waste migration from the ICDF landfill or the evaporation pond. The U.S. Department of Energy will continue with detection monitoring for the ICDF, which is semiannual sampling for indicator parameters.

  14. Implementing Systems Engineering on a CERCLA Project

    SciTech Connect

    G. A. Beitel

    1999-06-01

    The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), enacted in 1980, provides a regulatory and legal mechanism to reduce risks from prior disposal of hazardous and toxic chemicals. Regulations, Standards, and Guidelines have been published to further define the CERCLA Process. The OU 7-10 Staged Interim Action Project at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) is a CERCLA project working to remediate the pre-1970 disposal pit in which transuranic materials have been disposed. This paper analyzes the CERCLA process from a systems engineering perspective and describes how systems engineering is implemented on this project.

  15. Overview of the regulation of hazardous chemicals: SDWA (Safe Drinking Water Act), RCRA (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act), and CERCLA (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act)

    SciTech Connect

    Baes, C.F. III

    1989-01-01

    The regulation of nonradioactive hazardous chemicals is carried out under a number of federal environmental laws that regulate either hazardous products, substances, or wastes. Because each law is intended to provide protection from different classes of substances (e.g., wastes vs products) or protect different media (e.g., air, water, land), the standards and levels of protection for different hazardous chemicals may be different. Nevertheless, one agency -- the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) -- has primary responsibility for both promulgating regulations mandated by Congress under the various statutes and enforcement of the regulations. One overriding principal underlies the maze of complex regulations that govern the transport, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous substances: protect human health and the environment. It is beyond the scope of this talk to comprehensively examine all of the regulations and standards that govern the management of hazardous chemicals. Instead this discussion will focus on three statutes, the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), that together provide a basis for a basic understanding of the approach that the EPA takes to regulating hazardous chemicals.

  16. Integrating NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) and CERCLA (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) requirements during remedial responses at DOE facilities

    SciTech Connect

    Levine, M.B.; Smith, E.D.; Sharples, F.E.; Eddlemon, G.K.

    1990-07-01

    US Department of Energy (DOE) Order 5400.4, issued October 6, 1989, calls for integrating the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) with those of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) for DOE remedial actions under CERCLA. CERCLA requires that decisions on site remediation be made through a formal process called a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS). According to the DOE order, integration is to be accomplished by conducting the NEPA and CERCLA environmental planning and review procedures concurrently. The primary instrument for integrating the processes is to be the RI/FS process, which will be supplemented as needed to meet the procedural and documentational requirements of NEPA. The final product of the integrated process will be a single, integrated set of documents; namely, an RI report and an FS-EIS that satisfy the requirements of both NEPA and CERCLA. The contents of the report include (1) an overview and comparison of the requirements of the two processes; (2) descriptions of the major tasks included in the integrated RI/FS-EIS process; (3) recommended contents for integrated RI/FS-EIS documents; and (4)a discussion of some potential problems in integrating NEPA and CERCLA that fall outisde the scope of the RI/FS-EIS process, with suggestions for resolving some of these problems. 15 refs.

  17. NEPA/CERCLA/RCRA (National Environmental Policy Act/Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act) integration

    SciTech Connect

    Sharples, F.E.; Smith, E.D.

    1989-01-01

    The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) requires that decisions concerning remedial actions at Superfund sites be made through a formal decisionmaking process known as Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS). Many of the elements of this process are similar to the steps in the process required to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Both processes, for example, involve the identification and analysis of alternative courses of action, provide for public disclosure and participation in the processes, and are documented by Records of Decision. This document discusses the applicability of NEPA to federal facility remedial actions and the advisability of integrating the NEPA process with the CERCLA and RCRA processes. Included are points addressed by panelists and recent developments. 3 refs.

  18. Application of Clean Water (CWA) Section 404 compensatory wetland mitigation under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA)

    SciTech Connect

    Abbott, D.J.; Straub, C.A.

    1994-06-01

    Pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), activities resulting in the discharge of dredge or fill material into waters of the US, including wetlands, require permit authorization from the US Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). As part of the Section 404 permitting process, compensatory wetland mitigation in the form of wetland enhancement, restoration, or construction may be required to off-set impacts sustained under a Section 404 permit. Under normal circumstances, compensatory mitigation is a relatively straight forward process; however, issues associated with mitigation become more complex at sites undergoing remediation under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), because on-site response/remedial actions involving dredged and fill material are not subject to the formal Section 404 permitting process. These actions are conducted in accordance with the substantive permitting requirements of the ACOE`s Nationwide and individual permitting programs. Wetland mitigatory requirements are determined through application of the US Environmental Protection Agency`s (USEPA`s) 040(b) (1) Guidelines promulgated in 40 CFR Part 230 and are implemented through compliance with substantive permitting requirements during the conduct of response/remedial actions. A programmatic approach for implementing wetland mitigatory requirements is being developed at a former US Department of Energy (DOE) uranium refinery undergoing CERCLA remediation in southwestern Ohio. The approach is designed to define the regulatory mechanism that will be used to integrate CWA driven wetland mitigatory requirements into the CERCLA process.

  19. 40 CFR 35.6340 - Disposal of CERCLA-funded property.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-07-01

    ... ASSISTANCE STATE AND LOCAL ASSISTANCE Cooperative Agreements and Superfund State Contracts for Superfund... in another manner: (A) If the equipment has a residual fair market value of $5,000 or more, the... equipment disposal options. (B) If the equipment has a residual fair market value of less than $5,000,...

  20. 76 FR 18549 - Casmalia Disposal Site; Notice of Proposed CERCLA Administrative De Minimis Settlement

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2011-04-04

    ... sent 13,311,191 lbs. of waste to the Casmalia Disposal Site, which represents 0.002 (0.2%) of the total Site waste of 5.6 billion pounds. This settlement requires these parties to pay over $1.2 million to... Information and Electronic Systems Integration Inc.; Cenveo; ConAgra Foods, Inc.; Continental Chemical...

  1. 40 CFR 35.6340 - Disposal of CERCLA-funded property.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-07-01

    ... in another manner: (A) If the equipment has a residual fair market value of $5,000 or more, the... equipment disposal options. (B) If the equipment has a residual fair market value of less than $5,000, the... remaining residual value at the time of final disposition, the recipient must reimburse the...

  2. 40 CFR 35.6340 - Disposal of CERCLA-funded property.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-07-01

    ... in another manner: (A) If the equipment has a residual fair market value of $5,000 or more, the... equipment disposal options. (B) If the equipment has a residual fair market value of less than $5,000, the... remaining residual value at the time of final disposition, the recipient must reimburse the...

  3. 40 CFR 35.6340 - Disposal of CERCLA-funded property.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-07-01

    ... in another manner: (A) If the equipment has a residual fair market value of $5,000 or more, the... equipment disposal options. (B) If the equipment has a residual fair market value of less than $5,000, the... remaining residual value at the time of final disposition, the recipient must reimburse the...

  4. 40 CFR 35.6340 - Disposal of CERCLA-funded property.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-07-01

    ... in another manner: (A) If the equipment has a residual fair market value of $5,000 or more, the... equipment disposal options. (B) If the equipment has a residual fair market value of less than $5,000, the... remaining residual value at the time of final disposition, the recipient must reimburse the...

  5. 75 FR 69992 - Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) or Superfund...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-11-16

    ... Notice at 67 FR 67181, Nov. 4, 2002, are also eligible for funding under CERCLA 128(a). \\3\\ The Agency... tribes may include Section 128(a) cooperative agreements in their PPG 69 FR 51,756 (2004). Section 128(a... use (example uses) Establish or Enhance the four elements:........ $XX,XXX $XX,XXX 1. Timely...

  6. 77 FR 69827 - Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) or Superfund...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-11-21

    ... Sustainable Development, Strategic Plan Objective 3.1: Promote Sustainable and Livable Communities, and Work... Notice at 67 FR 67181, Nov. 4, 2002, are also eligible for funding under CERCLA section 128(a). \\3... to EPA regional office approval, states or tribes may include development and operation of...

  7. Successful Opening and Disposal to-Date of Mixed CERCLA Waste at the ORR-EMWMF

    SciTech Connect

    Corpstein, P.; Hopper, P.; McNutt, R.

    2003-02-25

    On May 28, 2002, the Environmental Management Waste Management Facility (EMWMF) opened for operations on the Department of Energy's Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR). The EMWMF is the centerpiece in the DOE's strategy for ORR environmental cleanup. The 8+ year planned project is an on-site engineered landfill, which is accepting for disposal radioactive, hazardous, toxic and mixed wastes generated by remedial action subcontractors. The opening of the EMWMF on May 28, 2002 marked the culmination of a long development process that began in mid-1980. In late 1999 the Record of Decision was signed and a full year of design for the initial 400, 000-yd3 disposal cell began. In early 2000 Duratek Federal Services, Inc. (Federal Services) began construction. Since then, Federal Services and Bechtel Jacobs Company, LLC (BJC) have worked cooperatively to complete a required DOE readiness evaluation, develop all the Safety Authorization Basis Documentation (ASA's, SER, and UCD's) and prepare procedures and work controlling documents required to safely accept waste. This paper explains the intricacies and economics of designing and constructing the facility.

  8. Superfund guide: Clean Air Act hazardous air pollutants added to the list of CERCLA hazardous substances. Fact sheet

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1993-09-01

    The fact sheet identifies the 52 CAA hazardous air pollutants that have been added to the list of CERCLA hazardous substances and that are now subject to CERCLA requirements; describes the reporting requirements and exemptions under CERCLA; and examines reporting exemptions in relation to releases of ethylene glycol.

  9. The National Historic Preservation Act is Not Your Problem, But How You are Addressing it for Your CERCLA Project May Be - 12344

    SciTech Connect

    Cusick, Lesley T.

    2012-07-01

    The 1995 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) joint 'Policy on Decommissioning of Department of Energy Facilities Under CERCLA was developed so that decommissioning could occur in a manner that ensures protection of worker and public health and the environment, that is consistent with Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), that provides for stakeholder involvement, and that achieves risk reduction without unnecessary delay'. The source of the 'unnecessary delays' the joint policy intended to avert could be attributed to numerous factors such as obtaining permits, conducting administrative activities, or implementing regulatory processes that could yield, among other things, differing preferred alternatives. Why, you might ask, more than fifteen years later, does DOE continue to struggle through CERCLA projects with unnecessary delays? From problem identification, to determination of nature and extent, to alternative analysis and ultimately remedy selection and implementation, reaching a compliant and effective clean-up end-point can be a process that seems to mimic geologic timescales. The source of these delays is often the failure to use all of the tools the CERCLA process offers. As one example, renewed commitment to follow the CERCLA process to address the regulatory reviews pursuant to the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) is called for. Project managers implementing CERCLA actions in any agency, not only DOE, do not need to be apprehensive about using the CERCLA process for NHPA review but should welcome it. It is critical that methods are used that address substantive NHPA requirements clearly and consistently, and that they are shared and communicated as frequently as needed to interested and questioning stakeholders. (author)

  10. Determinations of TSD facility acceptability under the CERCLA Off-Site Rule

    SciTech Connect

    1997-06-01

    On September 22, 1993, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published the ``Off-Site Rule`` to implement section 121(d)(3) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA). CERCLA {section}121(d)(3) requires that wastes generated as a result of remediation activities taken under CERCLA authority and transferred off-site be managed only at facilities that comply with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. In 1994, the DOE`s Office of Environmental Policy and Assistance (OEPA), RCRA/CERCLA Division (EH-413) published a CERCLA Information Brief titled ``The Off-Site Rule`` which describes the content of the Off-Site Rule and clarifies some of its implications for DOE remedial actions under CERCLA. Additionally, EH-413 published the Guide on Selecting Compliant Off-Site Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facilities which provides a regulatory roadmap for accomplishing off-site transfers of environmental restoration and process hazardous waste at DOE facilities in a manner compliant with the Off-Site Rule and other relevant Federal regulations. Those guidance documents concentrate primarily on DOE`s perspective as a hazardous waste generator. The purpose of this Information Brief is to address the implications of the Off-Site Rule for DOE-owned hazardous waste treatment, storage or disposal facilities that accept CERCLA remediation wastes from off-site locations.

  11. Hazard Ranking System evaluation of CERCLA (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) inactive waste sites at Hanford: Volume 1, Evaluation methods and results

    SciTech Connect

    Stenner, R.D.; Cramer, K.H.; Higley, K.A.; Jette, S.J.; Lamar, D.A.; McLaughlin, T.J.; Sherwood, D.R.; Van Houten, N.C.

    1988-10-01

    The purpose of this report is to formally document the individual site Hazard Ranking System (HRS) evaluations conducted as part of the preliminary assessment/site inspection (PA/SI) activities at the US Department of Energy (DOE) Hanford Site. These activities were carried out pursuant to the DOE orders that describe the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Program addressing the cleanup of inactive waste sites. These orders incorporate the US Environmental Protection Agency methodology, which is based on the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA). The methodology includes six parts: PA/SI, remedial investigation/feasibility study, record of decision, design and implementation of remedial action, operation and monitoring, and verification monitoring. Volume 1 of this report discusses the CERCLA inactive waste-site evaluation process, assumptions, and results of the HRS methodology employed. Volume 2 presents the data on the individual CERCLA engineered-facility sites at Hanford, as contained in the Hanford Inactive Site Surveillance (HISS) Data Base. Volume 3 presents the data on the individual CERCLA unplanned-release sites at Hanford, as contained in the HISS Data Base. 34 refs., 43 figs., 47 tabs.

  12. THE INTEGRATION OF THE 241-Z BUILDING DECONTAMINATION & DECOMMISSIONING (D&D) UNDER COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE COMPENSATION & LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA) WITH RESOURCE CONSERVATION & RECOVERY ACT (RCRA) CLOSURE AT THE PLUTONIUM FINISHING PLANT (PFP)

    SciTech Connect

    HOPKINS, A.M.

    2007-02-20

    The 241-Z treatment and storage tanks, a hazardous waste Treatment, Storage and Disposal (TSD) unit permitted pursuant to the ''Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976'' (RCRA) and Washington State ''Hazardous Waste Management Act, RCW 70.105'', have been deactivated and are being actively decommissioned. The 241-Z TSD unit managed non-listed radioactive contaminated waste water, containing trace RCRA characteristic constituents. The 241-Z TSD unit consists of below grade tanks (D-4, D-5, D-7, D-8, and an overflow tank) located in a concrete containment vault, sample glovebox GB-2-241-ZA, and associated ancillary piping and equipment. The tank system is located beneath the 241-Z building. The 241-Z building is not a portion of the TSD unit. The sample glovebox is housed in the above-grade building. Waste managed at the TSD unit was received via underground mining from Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) sources. Tank D-6, located in the D-6 vault cell, is a past-practice tank that was taken out of service in 1972 and has never operated as a portion of the RCRA TSD unit. CERCLA actions address Tank D-6, its containment vault cell, and soil beneath the cell that was potentially contaminated during past-practice operations and any other potential past-practice contamination identified during 241-Z closure, while outside the scope of the ''Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Closure Plant, 241-Z Treatment and Storage Tanks''.

  13. CERCLA's innocent landowner defense -- Consultants beware

    SciTech Connect

    Nijman, J.T. )

    1994-05-01

    Consultant liability is an area of the innocent landowner defense under CERCLA that is not often discussed. The only reasonable way to protect consultants hired by innocent purchasers'' is for Congress or state legislatures to establish standardized, regulated audit guidelines. However, even standardized guidelines do not protect consultants completely, because standards cannot specify all activity necessary to perform a particular task. Each project has unique circumstances, and standards arguably can become per se determinants of liability. CERCLA provides three defenses to its basic strict, joint and several liability provisions -- an act of God, an act of war, and an act or omission of a third party not in a contractual relationship with the current owner. Congress amended the third-party not in a contractual relationship with the current owner. Congress amended the third-party defense in SARA by redefining contractual relationship'' to exclude from liability owners who acquired the real property following disposal or placement of hazardous material, and established satisfactorily that the owner at the time of purchase neither knew nor had reason to know hazardous substances were disposed on the property -- the innocent landowner defense.

  14. CERCLA Compliance with Other Laws Manual: CERCLA compliance with the CWA and SDWA. Fact sheet (Final)

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1990-02-01

    The fact sheet provides a guide to Chapters 3 and 4 of Part I of the CERCLA Compliance with Other Laws Manual. The sixth in a series, the fact sheet focuses on CERCLA compliance with the Clean Water Act (Chapter 3), and Safe Drinking Water Act (Chapter 4), and discusses other statutes with provisions relevant to surface water or drinking water.

  15. 33 CFR 1.01-70 - CERCLA delegations.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-07-01

    ... 33 Navigation and Navigable Waters 1 2012-07-01 2012-07-01 false CERCLA delegations. 1.01-70... GENERAL PROVISIONS Delegation of Authority § 1.01-70 CERCLA delegations. (a) For the purpose of this... 1986 (Pub. L. 99-499), apply. The Act, as amended, is referred to in this section as CERCLA. (b)...

  16. 33 CFR 1.01-70 - CERCLA delegations.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-07-01

    ... 33 Navigation and Navigable Waters 1 2011-07-01 2011-07-01 false CERCLA delegations. 1.01-70... GENERAL PROVISIONS Delegation of Authority § 1.01-70 CERCLA delegations. (a) For the purpose of this... 1986 (Pub. L. 99-499), apply. The Act, as amended, is referred to in this section as CERCLA. (b)...

  17. 33 CFR 1.01-70 - CERCLA delegations.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-07-01

    ... 33 Navigation and Navigable Waters 1 2014-07-01 2014-07-01 false CERCLA delegations. 1.01-70... GENERAL PROVISIONS Delegation of Authority § 1.01-70 CERCLA delegations. (a) For the purpose of this... 1986 (Pub. L. 99-499), apply. The Act, as amended, is referred to in this section as CERCLA. (b)...

  18. 33 CFR 1.01-70 - CERCLA delegations.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-07-01

    ... 33 Navigation and Navigable Waters 1 2013-07-01 2013-07-01 false CERCLA delegations. 1.01-70... GENERAL PROVISIONS Delegation of Authority § 1.01-70 CERCLA delegations. (a) For the purpose of this... 1986 (Pub. L. 99-499), apply. The Act, as amended, is referred to in this section as CERCLA. (b)...

  19. CERCLA reauthorization 1994: Insuring the cleanup of hazardous substance pollution

    SciTech Connect

    Eubank, K.T.

    1993-12-31

    Authorizing legislation for the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 ({open_quotes}CERCLA{close_quotes} or, more popularly, {open_quotes}Superfund{close_quotes}) will expire September 30, 1994. Enacted more than a decade ago, the CERCLA program is ripe for scrutiny prior to reauthorization. The following questions deserve consideration: has the CERCLA program accomplished its goals, do the benefits of the CERCLA program justify the costs involved, and what administrative or legislative changes will maximize the benefits of the CERCLA program as compared to its costs. Definitive answers to these questions may be impossible to ascertain, but by focusing on basic risk management principles and the issue of insurance coverage for CERCLA cleanups, this article illustrates that inefficiencies and unnecessary costs will plague the cleanup program until CERCLA`s site-specific, strict, retroactive, and joint and several liability scheme is discarded. 78 refs.

  20. CERCLA reporting requirements, DOE occurrence reporting, and the DOE Emergency Management System. CERCLA Information Brief

    SciTech Connect

    Dailey, R.

    1993-10-01

    The Emergency Management System (EMS) provides a structure for reporting and processing operations information related to DOE owned/operated facilities. Hazardous Substance (HS) releases are subject to reporting requirements under the EMS as well as under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). CERCLA requires reporting of HS releases into the environment in amounts greater than or equal to Reportable Quantities (RQs). This Information Brief elaborates on earlier CERCLA reporting and response process information Briefs by providing a general explanation of these CERCLA or EMS requirements, procedures, and events as they pertain to releases of HS`s at DOE facilities.

  1. Catalog of CERCLA applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs) - fact sheets

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1990-07-01

    Section 121(d) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), requires attainment of federal and state applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs). Subpart E, Section 300.400(g) {open_quotes}Identification of applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements{close_quotes} of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP)(55 FR 8666, March 8, 1990) describes the process for attaining ARARs. The purpose of this catalog is to provide DOE Program Offices and Field Organizations with all of the {open_quotes}Quick Reference Fact Sheets{close_quotes} on attaining ARARS. These fact sheets provide overviews of ARARs for CERCLA cleanup actions pertinent to DOE environmental restoration activities. All of the fact sheets in this catalog were prepared by the Environmental Protection Agency`s Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. Fact sheets 1-7 discuss land disposal restrictions (LDRs) and their applicability. LDRs may pertain to a number of CERCLA response actions at DOE facilities. Fact Sheets 8-13 are based on the CERCLA Compliance with Other Laws Manual: Parts I and II and provide an overview of many other CERCLA ARARs. Overview of ARARs-Focus on ARAR Waivers (fact sheet 11), provides a good introduction to ARARS. The last two fact sheets, 14 and 15, are periodic reports that describe additional fact sheets and clarify issues.

  2. The Pueblo Superfund program -- a Native American perspective on cultural impacts and environmental equity under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA)

    SciTech Connect

    Sanchez, C.M.; Garcia, T.L.; Chavez, E.F.; Tso, K.; Francisco, C.L.; Allison, A.; Tso, D.

    1996-12-31

    The All Indian Pueblo Council (AIPC) through the Pueblo Office of Environmental Protection (POEP) implements and provides a variety of environmental programs and services to the 19 Indian Pueblos of New Mexico. Specifically, the POEP Superfund Program investigates and evaluates potential hazardous waste sites within Pueblo lands. The POEP Superfund Program began in September 1991 when the 19 Pueblo Governors signed a Superfund Memorandum of Agreement with the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 6. The goal of the POEP Superfund Program is to determine those sites that are eligible for Superfund-financed remedial action by placing those sites on the National Priorities List (NPL), while including the Pueblo perspective. Because the 19 Pueblos are each unique, sovereign nations, several differences and gaps associated with the current Superfund law and EPA methodologies exist. Currently, the Superfund Hazard Ranking System (HRS) model does not account for Indian religious and ceremonial impacts from these sites. Due to their importance in Pueblo life, culturally significant plants, animals, ceremonial surface water use, and sacred areas should be considered as critical impacts when evaluating the various pathways of exposure of the HRS. Tribal environmental equality is an aspect that will be included into all environmental laws. AIPC and POEP are working to address this issue under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA).

  3. 40 CFR 22.37 - Supplemental rules governing administrative proceedings under the Solid Waste Disposal Act.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-07-01

    ... administrative proceedings under the Solid Waste Disposal Act. 22.37 Section 22.37 Protection of Environment... Supplemental rules governing administrative proceedings under the Solid Waste Disposal Act. (a) Scope. This... sections 3005(d) and (e), 3008, 9003 and 9006 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6925(d) and...

  4. 40 CFR 22.37 - Supplemental rules governing administrative proceedings under the Solid Waste Disposal Act.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-07-01

    ... administrative proceedings under the Solid Waste Disposal Act. 22.37 Section 22.37 Protection of Environment... Supplemental rules governing administrative proceedings under the Solid Waste Disposal Act. (a) Scope. This... sections 3005(d) and (e), 3008, 9003 and 9006 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6925(d) and...

  5. 40 CFR 22.37 - Supplemental rules governing administrative proceedings under the Solid Waste Disposal Act.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-07-01

    ... administrative proceedings under the Solid Waste Disposal Act. 22.37 Section 22.37 Protection of Environment... Supplemental rules governing administrative proceedings under the Solid Waste Disposal Act. (a) Scope. This... sections 3005(d) and (e), 3008, 9003 and 9006 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6925(d) and...

  6. 40 CFR 22.37 - Supplemental rules governing administrative proceedings under the Solid Waste Disposal Act.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-07-01

    ... administrative proceedings under the Solid Waste Disposal Act. 22.37 Section 22.37 Protection of Environment... Supplemental rules governing administrative proceedings under the Solid Waste Disposal Act. (a) Scope. This... sections 3005(d) and (e), 3008, 9003 and 9006 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6925(d) and...

  7. 40 CFR 22.37 - Supplemental rules governing administrative proceedings under the Solid Waste Disposal Act.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-07-01

    ... administrative proceedings under the Solid Waste Disposal Act. 22.37 Section 22.37 Protection of Environment... Supplemental rules governing administrative proceedings under the Solid Waste Disposal Act. (a) Scope. This... sections 3005(d) and (e), 3008, 9003 and 9006 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6925(d) and...

  8. NEPA/CERCLA/RCRA integration: Policy vs. practice

    SciTech Connect

    Hansen, R.P. ); Wolff, T.A. )

    1993-01-01

    Overwhelmed with environmental protection documentation requirements, a number of Federal agencies are grappling with the complexities of attempting to integrate'' the documentation requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). While there is some overlap between the general environmental policy objectives of NEPA, and the much more specific waste cleanup objectives of CERCLA and RCRA, there are also major differences and outright conflicts. This paper identifies both problems and opportunities associated with implementing emerging and evolving Federal agency policy regarding integration of the procedural and documentation requirements of NEPA, CERCLA, and RCRA. The emphasis is on NEPA/CERCLA/RCRA integration policy and practice at US Department of Energy (DOE) facilities. The paper provides a comparative analysis of NEPA, CERCLA, and RCRA processes and discusses special integration issues including scoping, development and analysis of alternatives, risk assessment, tiering, scheduling, and the controversy surrounding applicability of NEPA to CERCLA or RCRA cleanup activities. Several NEPA/CERCLA/RCRA integration strategy options are evaluated and an annotated outline of an integrated NEPA/CERCLA document is included.

  9. 40 CFR Appendix A to Part 307 - Application for Preauthorization of a CERCLA Response Action

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-07-01

    ... CERCLA Response Action A Appendix A to Part 307 Protection of Environment ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY... RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA) CLAIMS PROCEDURES Pt. 307, App. A Appendix A to Part 307—Application for Preauthorization of a CERCLA Response Action EC02AU92.021 EC02AU92.022 EC02AU92.023...

  10. 40 CFR Appendix A to Part 307 - Application for Preauthorization of a CERCLA Response Action

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-07-01

    ... CERCLA Response Action A Appendix A to Part 307 Protection of Environment ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY... RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA) CLAIMS PROCEDURES Pt. 307, App. A Appendix A to Part 307—Application for Preauthorization of a CERCLA Response Action EC02AU92.021 EC02AU92.022 EC02AU92.023...

  11. 40 CFR Appendix A to Part 307 - Application for Preauthorization of a CERCLA Response Action

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-07-01

    ... CERCLA Response Action A Appendix A to Part 307 Protection of Environment ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY... RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA) CLAIMS PROCEDURES Pt. 307, App. A Appendix A to Part 307—Application for Preauthorization of a CERCLA Response Action EC02AU92.021 EC02AU92.022 EC02AU92.023...

  12. Guidance for performing site inspections under CERCLA

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1992-09-01

    This guidance presents EPA`s site inspection (SI) strategy. The strategy discusses procedural guidelines to investigate potential Superfund (CERCLA) sites for evaluation pursuant to the Hazard Ranking System (HRS), revised in accordance with the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986. The HRS is the primary means by which EPA evaluates sites for superfund`s National Priorities List (NPL).

  13. 75 FR 39041 - Notice of Lodging of Proposed Consent Decree Under the Solid Waste Disposal Act

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-07-07

    ... From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Notice of Lodging of Proposed Consent Decree Under the Solid Waste Disposal Act Notice is hereby given that... Environmental Protection Agency (``EPA'') for violations of Section 7003 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act...

  14. 40 CFR 2.305 - Special rules governing certain information obtained under the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-07-01

    ... information obtained under the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended. 2.305 Section 2.305 Protection of... § 2.305 Special rules governing certain information obtained under the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended. (a) Definitions. For purposes of this section: (1) Act means the Solid Waste Disposal Act,...

  15. 40 CFR 2.305 - Special rules governing certain information obtained under the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-07-01

    ... information obtained under the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended. 2.305 Section 2.305 Protection of... § 2.305 Special rules governing certain information obtained under the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended. (a) Definitions. For purposes of this section: (1) Act means the Solid Waste Disposal Act,...

  16. 40 CFR 2.305 - Special rules governing certain information obtained under the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-07-01

    ... information obtained under the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended. 2.305 Section 2.305 Protection of... § 2.305 Special rules governing certain information obtained under the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended. (a) Definitions. For purposes of this section: (1) Act means the Solid Waste Disposal Act,...

  17. 40 CFR 2.305 - Special rules governing certain information obtained under the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-07-01

    ... information obtained under the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended. 2.305 Section 2.305 Protection of... § 2.305 Special rules governing certain information obtained under the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended. (a) Definitions. For purposes of this section: (1) Act means the Solid Waste Disposal Act,...

  18. 40 CFR 2.305 - Special rules governing certain information obtained under the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-07-01

    ... information obtained under the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended. 2.305 Section 2.305 Protection of... § 2.305 Special rules governing certain information obtained under the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended. (a) Definitions. For purposes of this section: (1) Act means the Solid Waste Disposal Act,...

  19. The cleanup of releases of radioactive materials from commercial low-level radioactive waste disposal sites: Whose jurisdiction?

    SciTech Connect

    Hartnett, C.

    1994-12-31

    There exists an overlap between the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Recovery Act ({open_quotes}CERCLA{close_quotes}) and the Atomic Energy Act ({open_quotes}AEA{close_quotes}) regarding the cleanup of releases of radioactive materials from commercial low-level radioactive waste sites. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission ({open_quotes}NRC{close_quotes}) and Agreement States have jurisdiction under the AEA, and the Environmental Protection Agency ({open_quotes}EPA{close_quotes}) has jurisdiction pursuant to CERCLA. This overlapping jurisdiction has the effect of imposing CERCLA liability on parties who have complied with AEA regulations. However, CERCLA was not intended to preempt existing legislation. This is evidenced by the federally permitted release exemption, which explicitly exempts releases from CERCLA liability pursuant to an AEA license. With little guidance as to the applicability of this exemption, it is uncertain whether CERCLA`s liability is broad enough to supersede the Atomic Energy Act. It is the purpose of this paper to discuss the overlapping jurisdiction for the cleanup of releases of radioactive materials from commercial low-level radioactive waste disposal sites with particular emphasis on the cleanup at the Maxey Flats, West Valley and Sheffield sites.

  20. CERCLA Site discharges to POTWs CERCLA site sampling program: Detailed data report

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1990-08-01

    The document contains wastewater data obtained from sampling at seventeen CERCLA sites during a study of wastewater discharges from CERCLA sites to publicly owned treatment works (POTWs). The document serves as an appendix to the report summarizing the findings of the CERCLA site sampling program in Section 3 (CERCLA Site Data Report) in the USEPA CERCLA Site Discharges to POTWs Treatability Manual.

  1. Consolidated List of chemicals Subject to Reporting Under the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act: SARA Section 302 Extremely Hazardous Substances, CERCLA Hazardous Substances and SARA Section 313 Toxic Chemicals (Title III, list of lists), EZ-Base (trade name) version (for microcomputers). Data file

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1992-05-01

    This is the diskette based version of the Office of Toxic Substances Consolidated List of Chemicals Subject to Reporting Under Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) and SARA Section 302 Extremely Hazardous Substances, as well as CERCLA Hazardous Substances. Title III is also known as the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act. The diskette is designed to generate either a printout or a dBase III file from any IBM or IBM compatible system.

  2. Consolidated list of chemical subject to reporting under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act: SARA Section 302 extremely hazardous substances, CERCLA hazardous substances and SARA Section 313 toxic chemicals (Title III, list of lists) (for microcomputers). Data file

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1991-01-01

    This is the disk based version of the Office of Toxic Substances Consolidated list of chemicals subject to reporting under Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) and SARA Section 302 Extremely Hazardous Substances, as well as CERCLA Hazardous Substances. Title III is also known as the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act. The disks are designed to generate either a printout or a dBase III file from any IBM or IBM compatible system.

  3. 40 CFR Appendix A to Part 307 - Application for Preauthorization of a CERCLA Response Action

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-07-01

    ... 40 Protection of Environment 28 2014-07-01 2014-07-01 false Application for Preauthorization of a CERCLA Response Action A Appendix A to Part 307 Protection of Environment ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY... RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA) CLAIMS PROCEDURES Pt. 307, App. A Appendix A to Part...

  4. 40 CFR Appendix A to Part 307 - Application for Preauthorization of a CERCLA Response Action

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-07-01

    ... 40 Protection of Environment 27 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Application for Preauthorization of a CERCLA Response Action A Appendix A to Part 307 Protection of Environment ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY... RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA) CLAIMS PROCEDURES Pt. 307, App. A Appendix A to Part...

  5. 40 CFR Appendix B to Part 307 - Claim for CERCLA Response Action

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-07-01

    ... 40 Protection of Environment 27 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Claim for CERCLA Response Action B Appendix B to Part 307 Protection of Environment ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (CONTINUED) SUPERFUND..., AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA) CLAIMS PROCEDURES Pt. 307, App. B Appendix B to Part 307—Claim for...

  6. 40 CFR Appendix B to Part 307 - Claim for CERCLA Response Action

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-07-01

    ... 40 Protection of Environment 28 2014-07-01 2014-07-01 false Claim for CERCLA Response Action B Appendix B to Part 307 Protection of Environment ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (CONTINUED) SUPERFUND..., AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA) CLAIMS PROCEDURES Pt. 307, App. B Appendix B to Part 307—Claim for...

  7. 40 CFR Appendix B to Part 307 - Claim for CERCLA Response Action

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-07-01

    ... 40 Protection of Environment 28 2011-07-01 2011-07-01 false Claim for CERCLA Response Action B Appendix B to Part 307 Protection of Environment ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (CONTINUED) SUPERFUND..., AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA) CLAIMS PROCEDURES Pt. 307, App. B Appendix B to Part 307—Claim for...

  8. 75 FR 28819 - Notice of Lodging of a Consent Decree Under CERCLA

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-05-24

    ... From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Notice of Lodging of a Consent Decree Under CERCLA Notice is hereby given that on May 4, 2010, a proposed..., Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (``CERCLA''), 42 U.S.C. 9606, 9607 and 9613(g)(2),...

  9. 40 CFR Appendix B to Part 307 - Claim for CERCLA Response Action

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-07-01

    ... 40 Protection of Environment 29 2012-07-01 2012-07-01 false Claim for CERCLA Response Action B Appendix B to Part 307 Protection of Environment ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (CONTINUED) SUPERFUND..., AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA) CLAIMS PROCEDURES Pt. 307, App. B Appendix B to Part 307—Claim for...

  10. 40 CFR Appendix B to Part 307 - Claim for CERCLA Response Action

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-07-01

    ... 40 Protection of Environment 29 2013-07-01 2013-07-01 false Claim for CERCLA Response Action B Appendix B to Part 307 Protection of Environment ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (CONTINUED) SUPERFUND..., AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA) CLAIMS PROCEDURES Pt. 307, App. B Appendix B to Part 307—Claim for...

  11. Application of NEPA requirements to CERCLA remedial actions. Master's thesis

    SciTech Connect

    Strobbe, C.L.

    1994-06-01

    This study investigated the application of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements to Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) actions. Similarities in the documentation and public participation requirements of NEPA and CERCLA include identification and evaluation of alternatives and public participation. Differences include document contents and timing of public participation. This study presented four options for ensuring NEPA compliance at CERCLA sites. Option one included a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) with subsequent combined FS/EIS report for each subunit. Option two eliminated the PEIS, but retained a stand-alone NEPA document for each CERCLA subunit. Option three included a PEIS with a subsequent combined FS/EIS report for each subunit. Option four eliminated the PEIS but retained a combined FS/EIS report for each subunit. The model presented in this study can be used at any installation to determine the optimal approach for the site. The model's goal is to comply with NEPA and CERCLA while maintaining a balance between cost, schedule, and public acceptance.

  12. RCRA, Superfund and EPCRA hotline training module. Introduction to: CERCLA and EPCRA release reporting requirements (CERCLA section 103 and EPCRA section 304)

    SciTech Connect

    1998-06-01

    The release reporting requirements set out in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) enable federal, state, and local authorities to effectively prepare for and respond to chemical accidents. This module reviews the regulations found at 40 CFR Part 302 promulgated pursuant to CERCLA section 103, and the regulations found at 40 CFR section 355.40 promulgated pursuant to EPCRA section 304. The goal of this module is to explain the notification requirements triggered by releases of CERCLA hazardous substances and EPCRA-designated extremely hazardous substances (EHSs).

  13. 40 CFR 307.42 - Fund's obligation in the event of failure of remedial actions taken pursuant to CERCLA section 122.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-07-01

    ... failure of remedial actions taken pursuant to CERCLA section 122. 307.42 Section 307.42 Protection of...-KNOW PROGRAMS COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA) CLAIMS... taken pursuant to CERCLA section 122. (a) In the case of the failure of a completed remedial...

  14. 40 CFR 307.42 - Fund's obligation in the event of failure of remedial actions taken pursuant to CERCLA section 122.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-07-01

    ... failure of remedial actions taken pursuant to CERCLA section 122. 307.42 Section 307.42 Protection of...-KNOW PROGRAMS COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA) CLAIMS... taken pursuant to CERCLA section 122. (a) In the case of the failure of a completed remedial...

  15. 40 CFR 307.42 - Fund's obligation in the event of failure of remedial actions taken pursuant to CERCLA section 122.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-07-01

    ... failure of remedial actions taken pursuant to CERCLA section 122. 307.42 Section 307.42 Protection of...-KNOW PROGRAMS COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA) CLAIMS... taken pursuant to CERCLA section 122. (a) In the case of the failure of a completed remedial...

  16. 40 CFR 307.42 - Fund's obligation in the event of failure of remedial actions taken pursuant to CERCLA section 122.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-07-01

    ... failure of remedial actions taken pursuant to CERCLA section 122. 307.42 Section 307.42 Protection of...-KNOW PROGRAMS COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA) CLAIMS... taken pursuant to CERCLA section 122. (a) In the case of the failure of a completed remedial...

  17. 40 CFR 307.42 - Fund's obligation in the event of failure of remedial actions taken pursuant to CERCLA section 122.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-07-01

    ... failure of remedial actions taken pursuant to CERCLA section 122. 307.42 Section 307.42 Protection of...-KNOW PROGRAMS COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT (CERCLA) CLAIMS... taken pursuant to CERCLA section 122. (a) In the case of the failure of a completed remedial...

  18. Reading, 'Riting and Response: Holding Colleges Liable under CERCLA.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Naples, Mary Jo C.

    1994-01-01

    A discussion of college and university responsibility to comply with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compliance, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) focuses on recent court litigation and suggests practical procedures for colleges to anticipate and control environmental problems. Colleges and universities are cautioned to be prepared for…

  19. Overview, Analysis and Research Results of a CERCLA Site: A Model Study? and the NAFT Experience

    NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

    Hunt, Clinton, Jr.

    2004-01-01

    THe paper discusses the following: What do we want to accomplish? How do we want to accomplish it? When do we expect to complete each task? CERCLA stands for: Comprehensive, Environmental, Response, Compensation, Liability, and Act.

  20. Performing Trade Studies in the CERCLA Environment

    SciTech Connect

    Borland, Mark Wilson; Rice, Philip Matthew; Jamison, Ronald Kirt

    2002-07-01

    During almost any project, situations will arise that require project management and/or engineering personnel to make choices regarding project direction or product development. Often these choices are simply a part of the normal engineering development cycle (e.g., refinement or optimization of the product design). Frequently, on Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and other similar projects, trade studies are initiated to address concerns or issues raised by stakeholders (e.g., EPA, local and state governments, local tribes, public). Where CERCLA projects, by definition, deal with releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances that may endanger public health or the environment, these trade studies must balance safety, risk and health issues, as well as cost and engineering viability. How these trade studies are carried out and documented/presented to the stakeholders involved can often be the difference between continued project progress and a "stalemate" leaving the project in limbo. This document describes a basic trade study process, which has proved successful in addressing stakeholder concerns while at the same time balancing the desires of the various parties involved.

  1. Calendar Year 2002 RCRA & CERCLA Groundwater Monitoring Well summary report

    SciTech Connect

    MARTINEZ, C.R.

    2003-01-01

    This report describes the calendar year 2002 field activities associated with installing four new groundwater monitoring wells in the 200 West Area of the Hanford Site. Two groundwater monitoring wells are located around waste management area (WMA) TX-TY to support the ''Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976'' (RCRA) and two groundwater monitoring wells are located in the 200-UP-1 and 200-ZP-1 operable units (OU) to support the ''Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980'' (CERCLA).

  2. CERCLA compliance with other laws manual. Part 1. Interim final. Draft report

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1988-08-08

    The manual is developed to provide guidance to Remedial Project Managers (RPMs), State personnel at State-lead Superfund sites, On-Scene Coordinators (OSCs), and other persons responsible for planning response actions under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). The guidance is intended to assist in the selection of on-site remedial actions that meet the applicable, or relevant and appropriate requirements (ARARs) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Clean Water Act (CWA), Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), Clean Air Act (CAA), and other Federal and State environmental laws as required by CERCLA.

  3. CERCLA enforcement-policy compendium update

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1992-09-01

    The compendium is a compilation of documents originated by the Office of Waste Programs Enforcement, CERCLA Enforcement Division. Documents contained in the 1992 compendium were issued after August 14, 1990 and are related to CERCLA Enforcement. The compendium also consists of documents originated by the Office of Enforcement and Office of Emergency and Remedial Response.

  4. Guidance for federal facilities on release notification requirements under CERCLA and SARA Title 3

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1990-11-01

    The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA or Superfund''), as amended, creates a framework for Federal involvement in response to and cleanup of hazardous substance releases. Although many of its provisions deal with cleanup, liability, and compensation associated with inactive or abandoned hazardous waste sites, equally important parts of CERCLA address the reporting of and response to releases of hazardous substances as they occur. The statute establishes a list of hazardous substances,'' of which there are currently 727. The CERCLA list contains hazardous substances identified under other statutes, including the Clean Water Act (CWS), the Clean Air Act (CAA), and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). CERCLA also contains a provision authorizing the Administrator of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to add substances to the list that when released into the environment may present substantial danger to the public health or welfare or the environment...'' EPA is providing this guidance document so that Federal facilities may better understand the CERCLA and SARA Title 3 release notification requirements. The information is presented in a variety of formats, including questions and answers, fact sheets, scenarios, and a flowchart. A glossary of key terms also has been included in this document. 5 figs.

  5. Proposed plan for the United Nuclear Corporation Disposal Site at the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1991-03-01

    The US Department of Energy (DOE) in compliance with Section 117(a) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986, is releasing the proposed plan for remedial action at the United Nuclear Corporation (UNC) Disposal Site located at the DOE Oak Ridge Operations (ORO) Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The purpose of this document is to present and solicit for comment to the public and all interested parties the preferred plan'' to remediate the UNC Disposal Site. However, comments on all alternatives are invited.

  6. A Plutonium Finishing Plant Model for the Cercla Removal Action and Decommissioning Construction Final Report

    SciTech Connect

    Hopkins, A.

    2008-07-01

    The joint policy between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for decommissioning buildings at DOE facilities documents an agreement between the agencies to perform decommissioning activities including demolition under the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA). The use of removal actions for decommissioning integrates EPA oversight authority, DOE lead agency responsibility, and state authority for decommissioning activities. Once removal actions have been performed under CERCLA, a construction completion report is required to document the completion of the required action. Additionally, a decommissioning report is required under DOE guidance. No direct guidance was found for documenting completion of decommissioning activities and preparing a final report that satisfies the CERCLA requirements and the DOE requirements for decommissioning. Additional guidance was needed for the documentation of construction completion under CERCLA for D and D projects undertaken under the joint policy that addresses the requirements of both agencies. A model for the construction completion report was developed to document construction completion for CERCLA D and D activities performed under the joint EPA/DOE policy at the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP). The model documentation report developed at PFP integrates the DOE requirements for establishing decommissioning end-points, documenting end-point completion and preparing a final decommissioning report with the CERCLA requirements to document completion of the action identified in the Action Memorandum (AM). The model includes the required information on health and safety, data management, cost and schedule and end-points completion. (authors)

  7. Radioactive waste disposal implications of extending Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act to cover radioactively contaminated land.

    PubMed

    Nancarrow, D J; White, M M

    2004-03-01

    A short study has been carried out of the potential radioactive waste disposal issues associated with the proposed extension of Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 to include radioactively contaminated land, where there is no other suitable existing legislation. It was found that there is likely to be an availability problem with respect to disposal at landfills of the radioactive wastes arising from remediation. This is expected to be principally wastes of high volume and low activity (categorised as low level waste (LLW) and very low level waste (VLLW)). The availability problem results from a lack of applications by landfill operators for authorisation to accept LLW wastes for disposal. This is apparently due to perceived adverse publicity associated with the consultation process for authorisation coupled with uncertainty over future liabilities. Disposal of waste as VLLW is limited both by questions over volumes that may be acceptable and, more fundamentally, by the likely alpha activity of wastes (originating from radium and thorium operations). Authorised on-site disposal has had little attention in policy and guidance in recent years, but may have a part to play, especially if considered commercially attractive. Disposal at BNFL's near surface disposal facility for LLW at Drigg is limited to wastes for which there are no practical alternative disposal options (and preference has been given to operational type wastes). Therefore, wastes from the radioactively contaminated land (RCL) regime are not obviously attractive for disposal to Drigg. Illustrative calculations have been performed based on possible volumes and activities of RCL arisings (and assuming Drigg's future volumetric disposal capacity is 950,000 m3). These suggest that wastes arising from implementing the RCL regime, if all disposed to Drigg, would not represent a significant fraction of the volumetric capacity of Drigg, but could have a significant impact on the radiological

  8. The Integration of the 241-Z Building Decontamination and Decommissioning Under Cercla with RCRA Closure at the Plutonium Finishing Plant

    SciTech Connect

    Mattlin, E.; Charboneau, S.; Johnston, G.; Hopkins, A.; Bloom, R.; Skeels, B.; Klos, D.B.

    2007-07-01

    The 241-Z treatment and storage tanks, a hazardous waste Treatment, Storage and Disposal (TSD) unit permitted pursuant to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) and Washington State Hazardous Waste Management Act, RCW 70.105, , have been deactivated and are being actively decommissioned under the provisions of the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (HFFACO), RCRA and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq. The 241-Z TSD unit managed non-listed radioactive contaminated waste water, containing trace RCRA characteristic constituents. The 241-Z TSD unit consists of below grade tanks (D-4, D-5, D-7, D-8, and an overflow tank) located in a concrete containment vault, sample glovebox GB-2-241-ZA, and associated ancillary piping and equipment. The tank system is located beneath the 241-Z building. The 241-Z building is not a portion of the TSD unit. The sample glovebox is housed in the above-grade building. Waste managed at the TSD unit was received via underground piping from Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) sources. Tank D-6, located in the D-6 vault cell, is a past-practice tank that was taken out of service in 1972 and has never operated as a portion of the RCRA TSD unit. CERCLA actions will address Tank D-6, its containment vault cell, and soil beneath the cell that was potentially contaminated during past-practice operations and any other potential past-practice contamination identified during 241-Z closure, while outside the scope of the Hanford Facility Dangerous Waste Closure Plan, 241-Z Treatment and Storage Tanks. Under the RCRA closure plan, the 241-Z TSD unit is anticipated to undergo clean closure to the performance standards of the State of Washington with respect to dangerous waste contamination from RCRA operations. The TSD unit will be clean closed if physical closure activities identified in the plan achieve clean closure standards for all 241-Z

  9. 15 CFR 990.20 - Relationship to the CERCLA natural resource damage assessment regulations.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-01-01

    ... 43 CFR part 11. The CERCLA regulations originally applied to natural resource damages resulting from... commenced a natural resource damage assessment for an oil discharge under 43 CFR part 11 prior to February 5..., DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE OIL POLLUTION ACT REGULATIONS NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE ASSESSMENTS Authorities §...

  10. 15 CFR 990.20 - Relationship to the CERCLA natural resource damage assessment regulations.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-01-01

    ... 43 CFR part 11. The CERCLA regulations originally applied to natural resource damages resulting from... commenced a natural resource damage assessment for an oil discharge under 43 CFR part 11 prior to February 5..., DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE OIL POLLUTION ACT REGULATIONS NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE ASSESSMENTS Authorities §...

  11. 15 CFR 990.20 - Relationship to the CERCLA natural resource damage assessment regulations.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-01-01

    ... 43 CFR part 11. The CERCLA regulations originally applied to natural resource damages resulting from... commenced a natural resource damage assessment for an oil discharge under 43 CFR part 11 prior to February 5..., DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE OIL POLLUTION ACT REGULATIONS NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE ASSESSMENTS Authorities §...

  12. 15 CFR 990.20 - Relationship to the CERCLA natural resource damage assessment regulations.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-01-01

    ... 43 CFR part 11. The CERCLA regulations originally applied to natural resource damages resulting from... commenced a natural resource damage assessment for an oil discharge under 43 CFR part 11 prior to February 5..., DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE OIL POLLUTION ACT REGULATIONS NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE ASSESSMENTS Authorities §...

  13. 15 CFR 990.20 - Relationship to the CERCLA natural resource damage assessment regulations.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-01-01

    ... 43 CFR part 11. The CERCLA regulations originally applied to natural resource damages resulting from... commenced a natural resource damage assessment for an oil discharge under 43 CFR part 11 prior to February 5..., DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE OIL POLLUTION ACT REGULATIONS NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE ASSESSMENTS Authorities §...

  14. 33 CFR 153.109 - CERCLA delegations.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-07-01

    ... 33 Navigation and Navigable Waters 2 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false CERCLA delegations. 153.109 Section 153.109 Navigation and Navigable Waters COAST GUARD, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (CONTINUED) POLLUTION CONTROL OF POLLUTION BY OIL AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES, DISCHARGE REMOVAL General § 153.109...

  15. 33 CFR 153.109 - CERCLA delegations.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-07-01

    ... 33 Navigation and Navigable Waters 2 2013-07-01 2013-07-01 false CERCLA delegations. 153.109 Section 153.109 Navigation and Navigable Waters COAST GUARD, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (CONTINUED) POLLUTION CONTROL OF POLLUTION BY OIL AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES, DISCHARGE REMOVAL General § 153.109...

  16. 33 CFR 153.109 - CERCLA delegations.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-07-01

    ... 33 Navigation and Navigable Waters 2 2011-07-01 2011-07-01 false CERCLA delegations. 153.109 Section 153.109 Navigation and Navigable Waters COAST GUARD, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (CONTINUED) POLLUTION CONTROL OF POLLUTION BY OIL AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES, DISCHARGE REMOVAL General § 153.109...

  17. 33 CFR 153.109 - CERCLA delegations.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-07-01

    ... 33 Navigation and Navigable Waters 2 2014-07-01 2014-07-01 false CERCLA delegations. 153.109 Section 153.109 Navigation and Navigable Waters COAST GUARD, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (CONTINUED) POLLUTION CONTROL OF POLLUTION BY OIL AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES, DISCHARGE REMOVAL General § 153.109...

  18. 33 CFR 153.109 - CERCLA delegations.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-07-01

    ... 33 Navigation and Navigable Waters 2 2012-07-01 2012-07-01 false CERCLA delegations. 153.109 Section 153.109 Navigation and Navigable Waters COAST GUARD, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (CONTINUED) POLLUTION CONTROL OF POLLUTION BY OIL AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES, DISCHARGE REMOVAL General § 153.109...

  19. 2013 Annual Site Inspection and Monitoring Report for Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act Title II Disposal Sites

    SciTech Connect

    2013-11-01

    This report, in fulfillment of a license requirement, presents the results of long-term surveillance and maintenance activities conducted by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Legacy Management in 2013 at six uranium mill tailings disposal sites reclaimed under Title II of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) of 1978. These activities verified that the UMTRCA Title II disposal sites remain in compliance with license requirements. DOE manages six UMTRCA Title II disposal sites under a general license granted by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) established at Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 40.28. Reclamation and site transition activities continue at other sites, and DOE ultimately expects to manage approximately 27 Title II disposal sites. Long-term surveillance and maintenance activities and services for these disposal sites include inspecting and maintaining the sites; monitoring environmental media and institutional controls; conducting any necessary corrective action; and performing administrative, records, stakeholder services, and other regulatory functions. Annual site inspections and monitoring are conducted in accordance with site-specific long-term surveillance plans (LTSPs) and procedures established by DOE to comply with license requirements. Each site inspection is performed to verify the integrity of visible features at the site; to identify changes or new conditions that may affect the long-term performance of the site; and to determine the need, if any, for maintenance, follow-up inspections, or corrective action. LTSPs and site compliance reports are available online at http://www.lm.doe.gov

  20. Approach for addressing dioxin in soils at CERCLA and RCRA sites. Directive

    SciTech Connect

    1997-04-13

    The purpose of this Directive is to recommend preliminary remediation goals (PRGs) or starting points for setting cleanup levels for dioxin in soil at Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) corrective action sites. These recommended levels are to be used pending the release of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) comprehensive dioxin reassessment report and cross-program assessment of the impacts of the report.

  1. 2013 Annual Site Inspection and Monitoring Report for Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act Title I Disposal Sites

    SciTech Connect

    None, None

    2014-03-01

    This report, in fulfillment of a license requirement, presents the results of long-term surveillance and maintenance activities conducted by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Legacy Management (LM) in 2013 at 19 uranium mill tailings disposal sites established under Title I of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) of 1978.1 These activities verified that the UMTRCA Title I disposal sites remain in compliance with license requirements. DOE operates 18 UMTRCA Title I sites under a general license granted by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in accordance with Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 40.27 (10 CFR 40.27). As required under the general license, a long-term surveillance plan (LTSP) for each site was prepared by DOE and accepted by NRC. The Grand Junction, Colorado, Disposal Site, one of the 19 Title I sites, will not be included under the general license until the open, operating portion of the cell is closed. The open portion will be closed either when it is filled or in 2023. This site is inspected in accordance with an interim LTSP. Long-term surveillance and maintenance services for these disposal sites include inspecting and maintaining the sites; monitoring environmental media and institutional controls; conducting any necessary corrective actions; and performing administrative, records, stakeholder relations, and other regulatory stewardship functions. Annual site inspections and monitoring are conducted in accordance with site-specific LTSPs and procedures established by DOE to comply with license requirements. Each site inspection is performed to verify the integrity of visible features at the site; to identify changes or new conditions that may affect the long-term performance of the site; and to determine the need, if any, for maintenance, follow-up or contingency inspections, or corrective action in accordance with the LTSP. LTSPs and site compliance reports are available on the Internet at http://www.lm.doe.gov/.

  2. 100 Areas CERCLA ecological investigations

    SciTech Connect

    Landeen, D.S.; Sackschewsky, M.R.; Weiss, S.

    1993-09-01

    This document reports the results of the field terrestrial ecological investigations conducted by Westinghouse Hanford Company during fiscal years 1991 and 1992 at operable units 100-FR-3, 100-HR-3, 100-NR-2, 100-KR-4, and 100-BC-5. The tasks reported here are part of the Remedial Investigations conducted in support of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 studies for the 100 Areas. These ecological investigations provide (1) a description of the flora and fauna associated with the 100 Areas operable units, emphasizing potential pathways for contaminants and species that have been given special status under existing state and/or federal laws, and (2) an evaluation of existing concentrations of heavy metals and radionuclides in biota associated with the 100 Areas operable units.

  3. 40 CFR 35.6325 - Title and EPA interest in CERCLA-funded property.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-07-01

    ... 40 Protection of Environment 1 2013-07-01 2013-07-01 false Title and EPA interest in CERCLA-funded... Title and EPA interest in CERCLA-funded property. (a) EPA's interest in CERCLA-funded property. EPA has... purchased with CERCLA funds. (b) Title in CERCLA-funded property. Title in both equipment and...

  4. 40 CFR 35.6325 - Title and EPA interest in CERCLA-funded property.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-07-01

    ... 40 Protection of Environment 1 2014-07-01 2014-07-01 false Title and EPA interest in CERCLA-funded... Title and EPA interest in CERCLA-funded property. (a) EPA's interest in CERCLA-funded property. EPA has... purchased with CERCLA funds. (b) Title in CERCLA-funded property. Title in both equipment and...

  5. 40 CFR 35.6325 - Title and EPA interest in CERCLA-funded property.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-07-01

    ... 40 Protection of Environment 1 2012-07-01 2012-07-01 false Title and EPA interest in CERCLA-funded... Title and EPA interest in CERCLA-funded property. (a) EPA's interest in CERCLA-funded property. EPA has... purchased with CERCLA funds. (b) Title in CERCLA-funded property. Title in both equipment and...

  6. Superfund TIO videos. Set A. Regulatory overview - CERCLA's relationship to other programs: RCRA, Title III, UST, CWA, SDWA. Part 1. Audio-Visual

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1990-01-01

    The videotape is divided into five sections. Section 1 provides definitions and historical information on both the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). The four types of RCRA regulatory programs - Subtitles C, D, I, and J - are described. Treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD) and recycling facilities are also discussed. Section 2 discusses the history behind the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (Title III). The four major provisions of Title III, which are emergency planning, emergency release notification, community right-to-know reporting, and the toxic chemical release inventory are covered. Section 3 outlines the UST program covering notification, record keeping, and the UST Trust Fund. Section 4 outlines the six major provisions of the Clean Water Act (CWA): water quality, pretreatment, prevention of oil and hazardous substance discharges, responses to oil and hazardous substance discharges, discharges of hazardous substances into the ocean, and dredge and fill. Section 5 explains the purpose, regulations, and standards of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). Specific issues such as underground injection, sole source aquifers, and lead contamination are discussed.

  7. Evaluation of Groundwater Impacts to Support the National Environmental Policy Act Environmental Assessment for the INL Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project

    SciTech Connect

    Annette Schafer; Arthur S. Rood; A. Jeffrey Sondrup

    2011-12-01

    The groundwater impacts have been analyzed for the proposed RH-LLW disposal facility. A four-step analysis approach was documented and applied. This assessment compared the predicted groundwater ingestion dose to the more restrictive of either the 25 mrem/yr all pathway dose performance objective, or the maximum contaminant limit performance objective. The results of this analysis indicate that the groundwater impacts for either proposed facility location are expected to be less than the performance objectives. The analysis was prepared to support the NEPA-EA for the top two ranking of the proposed RH-LLW sites. As such, site-specific conditions were incorporated for each set of results generated. These site-specific conditions were included to account for the transport of radionuclides through the vadose zone and through the aquifer at each site. Site-specific parameters included the thickness of vadose zone sediments and basalts, moisture characteristics of the sediments, and aquifer velocity. Sorption parameters (Kd) were assumed to be very conservative values used in Track II analysis of CERCLA sites at INL. Infiltration was also conservatively assumed to represent higher rates corresponding to disturbed soil conditions. The results of this analysis indicate that the groundwater impacts for either proposed facility location are expected to be less than the performance objectives.

  8. Evaluation of Groundwater Impacts to Support the National Environmental Policy Act Environmental Assessment for the INL Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project

    SciTech Connect

    Annette Schafer; Arthur S. Rood; A. Jeffrey Sondrup

    2011-08-01

    The groundwater impacts have been analyzed for the proposed RH-LLW disposal facility. A four-step analysis approach was documented and applied. This assessment compared the predicted groundwater ingestion dose to the more restrictive of either the 25 mrem/yr all pathway dose performance objective, or the maximum contaminant limit performance objective. The results of this analysis indicate that the groundwater impacts for either proposed facility location are expected to be less than the performance objectives. The analysis was prepared to support the NEPA-EA for the top two ranking of the proposed RH-LLW sites. As such, site-specific conditions were incorporated for each set of results generated. These site-specific conditions were included to account for the transport of radionuclides through the vadose zone and through the aquifer at each site. Site-specific parameters included the thickness of vadose zone sediments and basalts, moisture characteristics of the sediments, and aquifer velocity. Sorption parameters (Kd) were assumed to be very conservative values used in Track II analysis of CERCLA sites at INL. Infiltration was also conservatively assumed to represent higher rates corresponding to disturbed soil conditions. The results of this analysis indicate that the groundwater impacts for either proposed facility location are expected to be less than the performance objectives.

  9. Evaluation of Groundwater Impacts to Support the National Environmental Policy Act Environmental Assessment for the INL Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project

    SciTech Connect

    Annette Schafer; Arthur S. Rood; A. Jeffrey Sondrup

    2010-08-01

    The groundwater impacts have been analyzed for the proposed RH-LLW disposal facility. A four-step analysis approach was documented and applied. This assessment compared the predicted groundwater ingestion dose to the more restrictive of either the 25 mrem/yr all pathway dose performance objective, or the maximum contaminant limit performance objective. The results of this analysis indicate that the groundwater impacts for either proposed facility location are expected to be less than the performance objectives. The analysis was prepared to support the NEPA-EA for the top two ranking of the proposed RH-LLW sites. As such, site-specific conditions were incorporated for each set of results generated. These site-specific conditions were included to account for the transport of radionuclides through the vadose zone and through the aquifer at each site. Site-specific parameters included the thickness of vadose zone sediments and basalts, moisture characteristics of the sediments, and aquifer velocity. Sorption parameters (Kd) were assumed to be very conservative values used in Track II analysis of CERCLA sites at INL. Infiltration was also conservatively assumed to represent higher rates corresponding to disturbed soil conditions. The results of this analysis indicate that the groundwater impacts for either proposed facility location are expected to be less than the performance objectives.

  10. The innocent landowner defense under CERCLA should be transferable to subsequent purchasers

    SciTech Connect

    Spertus, J.W.

    1993-12-31

    Under CERCLA, landowners are held strictly liable for cleaning up hazardous substances on their property. Purchasers who acquire title to contaminated property become liable for cleanup costs by virtue of their status as the current owner. Although liability under the Act is strict, joint, and several, a few limited defenses enable some landowners to avoid liability altogether. One such defense, known as the innocent landowner defense, is the subject of this article.

  11. Glossary of CERCLA, RCRA and TSCA related terms and acronyms. Environmental Guidance

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1993-10-01

    This glossary contains CERCLA, RCRA and TSCA related terms that are most often encountered in the US Department of Energy (DOE) Environmental Restoration and Emergency Preparedness activities. Detailed definitions are included for key terms. The CERCLA definitions included in this glossary are taken from the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended and related federal rulemakings. The RCRA definitions included in this glossary are taken from the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and related federal rulemakings. The TSCA definitions included in this glossary are taken from the Toxic Substances and Control Act (TSCA) and related federal rulemakings. Definitions related to TSCA are limited to those sections in the statute and regulations concerning PCBs and asbestos.Other sources for definitions include additional federal rulemakings, assorted guidance documents prepared by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), guidance and informational documents prepared by the US Department of Energy (DOE), and DOE Orders. The source of each term is noted beside the term. Terms presented in this document reflect revised and new definitions published before July 1, 1993.

  12. Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act (CERFA) report, Pueblo Depot Activity, Colorado. Final report

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1994-04-11

    This report presents the results of the Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act (CERFA) investigation conducted by Environmental Resources Management (ERM) at Pueblo Depot Activity (PUDA), a U.S. Government property selected for closure by the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission. Under CERFA, Federal agencies are required to identify expeditiously real property that can be immediately reused and redeveloped. Satisfying this objective requires the identification of real property where no hazardous substances or petroleum products, regulated by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), were stored for one year or more, known to have been released, or disposed. Pueblo depot activity, CERFA, Base closure, BRAC.

  13. National Environmental Policy Act Compliance Strategy for the Remote-Handled Low-level Waste Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect

    Peggy Hinman

    2010-10-01

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) needs to have disposal capability for remote-handled low level waste (LLW) generated at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) at the time the existing disposal facility is full or must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the INL Subsurface Disposal Area in approximately the year 2017.

  14. Compliance of disposal orbits with the French Space Operations Act: The Good Practices and the STELA tool

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Le Fèvre, C.; Fraysse, H.; Morand, V.; Lamy, A.; Cazaux, C.; Mercier, P.; Dental, C.; Deleflie, F.; Handschuh, D. A.

    2014-01-01

    Space debris mitigation is one objective of the French Space Operations Act (FSOA), in line with Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee (IADC) recommendations, through the removal of non-operational objects from populated regions. At the end of their mission, space objects are to be placed on orbits that will minimize future hazards to space objects orbiting in the same region. The FSOA, which came into force in 2010, ensures that technical risks associated with space activities are properly mitigated. The Act confers CNES a central support role in providing technical expertise to government on regulations dealing with space operations. In order to address the compliance of disposal orbits with the law technical requirements, CNES draws up Good Practices as well as a dedicated tool, Semi-analytic Tool for End of Life Analysis (STELA). The verification of the criteria of the French Space Operations Act requires long term orbit propagation to evaluate the evolution of the orbital elements over long time scales (up to more than 100 years). The Good Practices define the minimum dynamical model required to compute the orbital evolution with sufficient accuracy, and detail key computation hypotheses such as drag and reflecting areas, drag coefficient, reflectivity coefficient, solar activity, atmospheric density model and so on. They also recommend a methodology adapted to each orbit type (LEO, GEO, GTO) to assess the criteria of the French Space Operations Act. The most recent works have concerned GTO, for which some couplings occur between dynamic perturbations. A small change in the initial conditions or in the estimation of the drag effect will significantly change the entrance conditions in resonance areas and thus the orbital evolution. To cope with this difficulty, a statistical method has been developed. This paper gives an overview of the Good Practices for orbit propagation in LEO, GEO and GTO as well as a brief description of the STELA tool. It

  15. Postconstruction report of the United Nuclear Corporation Disposal Site at the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Environmental Restoration Program

    SciTech Connect

    Oakley, L.B.; Siberell, J.K.; Voskuil, T.L.

    1993-06-01

    Remedial actions conducted under the auspices of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) were completed at the Y-12 United Nuclear Corporation (UNC) Disposal Site in August 1992. The purpose of this Postconstruction Report is to summarize numerous technical reports and provide CERCLA documentation for completion of the remedial actions. Other CERCLA reports, such as the Feasibility Study for the UNC Disposal Site, provide documentation leading up to the remedial action decision. The remedial action chosen, placement of a modified RCRA cap, was completed successfully, and performance standards were either met or exceeded. This remedial action provided solutions to two environmentally contaminated areas and achieved the goal of minimizing the potential for contamination of the shallow groundwater downgradient of the site, thereby providing protection of human health and the environment. Surveillance and maintenance of the cap will be accomplished to ensure cap integrity, and groundwater monitoring downgradient of the site will continue to confirm the acceptability of the remedial action chosen.

  16. Reference manual for toxicity and exposure assessment and risk characterization. CERCLA Baseline Risk Assessment

    SciTech Connect

    1995-03-01

    The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA, 1980) (CERCLA or Superfund) was enacted to provide a program for identifying and responding to releases of hazardous substances into the environment. The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA, 1986) was enacted to strengthen CERCLA by requiring that site clean-ups be permanent, and that they use treatments that significantly reduce the volume, toxicity, or mobility of hazardous pollutants. The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) (USEPA, 1985; USEPA, 1990) implements the CERCLA statute, presenting a process for (1) identifying and prioritizing sites requiring remediation and (2) assessing the extent of remedial action required at each site. The process includes performing two studies: a Remedial Investigation (RI) to evaluate the nature, extent, and expected consequences of site contamination, and a Feasibility Study (FS) to select an appropriate remedial alternative adequate to reduce such risks to acceptable levels. An integral part of the RI is the evaluation of human health risks posed by hazardous substance releases. This risk evaluation serves a number of purposes within the overall context of the RI/FS process, the most essential of which is to provide an understanding of ``baseline`` risks posed by a given site. Baseline risks are those risks that would exist if no remediation or institutional controls are applied at a site. This document was written to (1) guide risk assessors through the process of interpreting EPA BRA policy and (2) help risk assessors to discuss EPA policy with regulators, decision makers, and stakeholders as it relates to conditions at a particular DOE site.

  17. Guidance document publications list - Office of Environmental Policy and Assistance RCRA/CERCLA Division (EH-413)

    SciTech Connect

    1995-08-01

    This document provides a listing of Guidance Documents from the RCRA/CERCLA Division for August 1995. Documents are listed under the following categories: RCRA Guidance Manuals; RCRA Information Briefs; CERCLA Guidance Manuals; CERCLA Regulatory Bulletins; RCRA/CERCLA Guidance Manuals; TSCA Guidance Manuals; TSCA Information Briefs; and, Cross Cut Manuals.

  18. 2003 Sitewide Institutional Controls Annual Assessment Report for Hanford CERCLA Response Action

    SciTech Connect

    TEIMOURI, A.E.

    2003-07-01

    The purpose of this assessment as specified in the Institutional Controls (IC) Plan was two-fold: (1) to evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of ICs associated with ''Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980'' (CERCLA) Records of Decision (RODs); and (2) to identify corrective actions as necessary. Additionally, this assessment covered an assessment of sitewide ICs at the Hanford Site. The IC Plan was approved by the Tri-Party agencies July 2002, ''Sitewide Institutional Controls Plan for Hanford CERCLA Response Actions,'' DOE/RL-2001-41, Revision 0. The goal of the Plan was to identify ICs for current CERCLA response actions, describe how they are implemented and maintained, and serve as a reference for the selection of ICs in the future. Section 4.2 of the IC Plan summarizes the objectives for the assessment as follows: ''A focused and periodic self-assessment and reporting of ICs provides for an evaluation of the effectiveness of the controls and the opportunity for cost-effective improvements.

  19. Decision analysis applications and the CERCLA process

    SciTech Connect

    Purucker, S.T.; Lyon, B.F. |

    1994-06-01

    Quantitative decision methods can be developed during environmental restoration projects that incorporate stakeholder input and can complement current efforts that are undertaken for data collection and alternatives evaluation during the CERCLA process. These decision-making tools can supplement current EPA guidance as well as focus on problems that arise as attempts are made to make informed decisions regarding remedial alternative selection. In examining the use of such applications, the authors discuss the use of decision analysis tools and their impact on collecting data and making environmental decisions from a risk-based perspective. They will look at the construction of objective functions for quantifying different risk-based perspective. They will look at the construction of objective functions for quantifying different risk-based decision rules that incorporate stakeholder concerns. This represents a quantitative method for implementing the Data Quality Objective (DQO) process. These objective functions can be expressed using a variety of indices to analyze problems that currently arise in the environmental field. Examples include cost, magnitude of risk, efficiency, and probability of success or failure. Based on such defined objective functions, a project can evaluate the impact of different risk and decision selection strategies on data worth and alternative selection.

  20. A sensitivity analysis of hazardous waste disposal site climatic and soil design parameters using HELP3

    SciTech Connect

    Adelman, D.D.; Stansbury, J.

    1997-12-31

    The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Subtitle C, Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, And Liability Act (CERCLA), and subsequent amendments have formed a comprehensive framework to deal with hazardous wastes on the national level. Key to this waste management is guidance on design (e.g., cover and bottom leachate control systems) of hazardous waste landfills. The objective of this research was to investigate the sensitivity of leachate volume at hazardous waste disposal sites to climatic, soil cover, and vegetative cover (Leaf Area Index) conditions. The computer model HELP3 which has the capability to simulate double bottom liner systems as called for in hazardous waste disposal sites was used in the analysis. HELP3 was used to model 54 combinations of climatic conditions, disposal site soil surface curve numbers, and leaf area index values to investigate how sensitive disposal site leachate volume was to these three variables. Results showed that leachate volume from the bottom double liner system was not sensitive to these parameters. However, the cover liner system leachate volume was quite sensitive to climatic conditions and less sensitive to Leaf Area Index and curve number values. Since humid locations had considerably more cover liner system leachate volume than and locations, different design standards may be appropriate for humid conditions than for and conditions.

  1. H.R. 4984: A Bill to amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act to regulate the use of hazardous waste as fuel for energy recovery, the operation of cement kilns that burn hazardous waste as fuel, the disposal of cement kiln dust waste, and related activities. Introduced in the House of Representatives, One Hundred Third Congress, Second Session, August 18, 1994

    SciTech Connect

    1994-12-31

    The report H.R. 4984 is a bill to amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act to regulate the use of hazardous waste as fuel for energy recovery, the operation of cement kilns that burn hazardous waste as fuel, the disposal of cement kiln dust waste. The proposed legislative text is provided.

  2. CERCLA Site Assessment questions and answers (Qs&As)

    SciTech Connect

    Traceski, T.T.

    1993-11-09

    This documents contains commonly asked questions and corresponding answers (Qs&As) on the CERCLA Site Assessment process. These questions were derived from DOE element responses to a solicitation calling for the identification of (unresolved) issues associated with the conduct of CERCLA site assessments, and from inquiries received during a series of Site Assessment Workshops provided by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Office of Environmental Guidance, RCRA/CERCLA Division (EH-231). Answers to these questions were prepared by EH-231 in cooperation with the EPA Federal Facilities Team in Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Site Assessment Branch, and in coordination with the Office of Environmental Compliance, Facilities Compliance Division (EH-222).

  3. Feasibility study for the United Nuclear Corporation Disposal Site at the Oak Ridge Y-12 plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1991-02-01

    In July 1990, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) directed the Department of Energy Oak Ridge Operations to comply with Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) requirements for the remediation of the United Nuclear Corporation (UNC) Disposal Site located at the Y-12 Plant, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. EPA, Waste Management Branch, had approved a closure plan in December 1989 for the UNC Disposal Site. This feasibility study (FS) is a fully satisfy the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Contingency Plan (NCP) requirements for support of the selection of a remedial response for closure of the UNC Disposal Site. For two years the UNC Disposal Site accepted and disposed of waste from the decommissioning of a UNC uranium recovery facility in Wood River Junction, Rhode Island. Between June 1982 and November 1984, the UNC Disposal Site received 11,000 55-gal drums of sludge fixed in cement, 18,000 drums of contaminated soil, and 288 wooden boxes of contaminated building and process demolition materials. The FS assembles a wide range of remedial technologies so the most appropriate actions could be selected to remediate potential contamination to below MCLs and/or to below the maximum level of acceptable risk. Technologies were evaluated based on technical effectiveness, ease of implementation, and costs. Applicable technologies were then selected for alternative development. 33 refs., 9 figs., 27 tabs.

  4. 48 CFR 252.223-7006 - Prohibition on storage and disposal of toxic and hazardous materials.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... 102 of CERCLA (42 U.S.C. 9602) (40 CFR part 302); (ii) Materials that are of an explosive, flammable... disposal of toxic and hazardous materials. 252.223-7006 Section 252.223-7006 Federal Acquisition... and disposal of toxic and hazardous materials. As prescribed in 223.7103(a), use the following...

  5. 48 CFR 252.223-7006 - Prohibition on storage and disposal of toxic and hazardous materials.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 102 of CERCLA (42 U.S.C. 9602) (40 CFR part 302); (ii) Materials that are of an explosive, flammable... disposal of toxic and hazardous materials. 252.223-7006 Section 252.223-7006 Federal Acquisition... and disposal of toxic and hazardous materials. As prescribed in 223.7103(a), use the following...

  6. STABILIZATION/SOLIDIFICATION OF CERCLA AND RCRA WASTES

    EPA Science Inventory

    This Handbook provides U.S. EPA regional staff responsible for reviewing CERCLA remedial action plans and RCRA permit applications with a tool for interpreting information on stabilization/solidification treatment. As a practical day-to-day reference guide, it will also provide t...

  7. The marriage of RCRA and CERCLA at the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site

    SciTech Connect

    Shelton, D.C.; Brooks, L.M.

    1998-11-01

    A key goal of the Rocky Flats Cleanup Agreement (RFCA) signed in July of 1996 was to provide a seamless marriage of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) (and other media specific programs) and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the implementing agencies of each. This paper examines the two years since the signing of RFCA and identifies the successes, failures, and stresses of the marriage. RFCA has provided an excellent vehicle for regulatory and substantive progress at the Department of Energy`s Rocky Flats facility. The key for a fully successful marriage is to build on the accomplishments to date and to continually improve the internal and external systems and relationships. To date, the parties can be proud of both the substantial accomplishment of substantive environmental work and the regulatory systems that have enabled the work.

  8. Issues and Recommendations Arising from the Idaho National Laboratory Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Composite Analysis - 13374

    SciTech Connect

    Rood, Arthur S.; Schafer, Annette L.; Sondrup, A. Jeff

    2013-07-01

    Development of the composite analysis (CA) for the Idaho National Laboratory's (INLs) proposed remote-handled (RH) low-level waste (LLW) disposal facility has underscored the importance of consistency between analyses conducted for site-specific performance assessments (PAs) for LLW disposal facilities, sites regulated by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) [1], and residual decontamination and decommissioning (D and D) inventories. Consistency is difficult to achieve because: 1) different legacy sources and compliance time-periods were deemed important for each of the sites evaluated at INL (e.g., 100 years for CERCLA regulated facilities vs. 1,000 years for LLW disposal facilities regulated under U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 435.1 [2]); 2) fate and transport assumptions, parameters, and models have evolved through time at the INL including the use of screening-level parameters vs. site-specific values; and 3) evaluation objectives for the various CERCLA sites were inconsistent with those relevant to either the PA or CA including the assessment of risk rather than effective dose. The proposed single site-wide CA approach would provide needed consistency, allowing ready incorporation of new information and/or facilities in addition to being cost effective in terms of preparation of CAs and review by the DOE. A single site-wide CA would include a central database of all existing INL sources, including those from currently operating LLW facilities, D and D activities, and those from the sites evaluated under CERCLA. The framework presented for the INL RH-LLW disposal facility allows for development of a single CA encompassing air and groundwater impacts. For groundwater impacts, a site-wide MODFLOW/MT3D-MS model was used to develop unit-response functions for all potential sources providing responses for a grid of receptors. Convolution and superposition of the response functions are used to compute groundwater

  9. Threatened and endangered wildlife species of the Hanford Site related to CERCLA characterization activities

    SciTech Connect

    Fitzner, R.E.; Weiss, S.G.; Stegen, J.A.

    1994-06-01

    The US Department of Energy`s (DOE) Hanford Site has been placed on the National Priorities List, which requires that it be remediated under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) or Superfund. Potentially contaminated areas of the Hanford Site were grouped into operable units, and detailed characterization and investigation plans were formulated. The DOE Richland Operations Office requested Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC) to conduct a biological assessment of the potential impact of these characterization activities on the threatened, endangered, and sensitive wildlife species of the Hanford Site. Additional direction for WHC compliances with wildlife protection can be found in the Environmental Compliance Manual. This document is intended to meet these requirements, in part, for the CERCLA characterization activities, as well as for other work comparable in scope. This report documents the biological assessment and describes the pertinent components of the Hanford Site as well as the planned characterization activities. Also provided are accounts of endangered, threatened, and federal candidate wildlife species on the Hanford Site and information as to how human disturbances can affect these species. Potential effects of the characterization activities are described with recommendations for mitigation measures.

  10. Efficacy of CERCLA remedies in light of five-year reviews.

    SciTech Connect

    Hocking, E. K.; Martino, L.; Environmental Assessment

    2003-01-01

    Reviews of several remedies selected and implemented under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended, revealed deficiencies in remedy protectiveness although the remedy had only been in place for five years. Many of these deficiencies should have been foreseeable, and therefore preventable, at the time the remedy was selected. Analysis of successes and deficiencies noted in the CERCLA five-year reviews highlights the pivotal role that monitoring plans and land use controls have in ensuring remedy protectiveness. The analysis demonstrated that remedy protectiveness assessments and remedy modification justifications depend on robust site and remedy monitoring plans as well as on adequately developed conceptual site models. Comprehensive understanding and inferences regarding past, present, and future land and resource use at the remedy selection stage can enhance remedy protectiveness because stakeholders can determine if land use controls are necessary and if they can be implemented and enforced. The findings from this analysis of five-year reviews of remedy protectiveness are applicable to initial remedy selection decisions and subsequent enhancements of their effectiveness through time.

  11. A guide to CERCLA site assessment. Environmental Guidance

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1994-02-01

    This Pocket Guide is a condensed version of information provided in three EPA documents: Guidance for Performing Preliminary Assessments Under CERCLA, Guidance for Performing Site Inspections Under CERCLA, and Hazard Ranking System Guidance Manual. Additionally the guide provides a DOE perspective on site assessment issues and information on the Federal Agency Hazardous Waste Compliance Docket as well as data sources for DOE site assessments. The guide is intended to present this information in a simple, portable, and direct manner that will allow the user to effectively focus on those aspects of the site assessment process of interest. The guide is not intended as a substitute for the three EPA guidance documents mentioned previously. DOE investigators should be thoroughly familiar with the EPA guidance before conducting site assessments. Use this pocketguide as an overview of procedures and requirements and as a field guide.

  12. Federal Agency Liability under the Superfund Act: It Goes Beyond Federal Facilities

    SciTech Connect

    Raymond Takashi Swenson

    2004-02-01

    While many readers of the Federal Facilities Environmental Journal are involved with the performance of Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) cleanup on Department of Defense and Department of Energy facilities, many may be unfamiliar with the much broader CERCLA liability of federal agencies under other circumstances. This article places the various kinds of federal agency CERCLA liability into that wider context and serves as a lessons learned for environmental managers who want to avoid creating new CERCLA liability for their agencies.

  13. US DOE-EM On-Site Disposal Cell Working Group - Fostering Communication On Performance Assessment Challenges

    SciTech Connect

    Seitz, Roger R.; Suttora, Linda C.; Phifer, Mark

    2014-03-01

    On-site disposal cells are in use and being considered at several U.S. Department of Energy (USDOE) sites as the final disposition for large amounts of waste associated with cleanup of contaminated areas and facilities. These facilities are typically developed with regulatory oversight from States and/or the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) in addition to USDOE. The facilities are developed to meet design standards for disposal of hazardous waste as well as the USDOE performance based standards for disposal of radioactive waste. The involvement of multiple and different regulators for facilities across separate sites has resulted in some differences in expectations for performance assessments and risk assessments (PA/RA) that are developed for the disposal facilities. The USDOE-EM Office of Site Restoration formed a working group to foster improved communication and sharing of information for personnel associated with these Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) disposal cells and work towards more consistent assumptions, as appropriate, for technical and policy considerations related to performance and risk assessments in support of a Record of Decision and Disposal Authorization Statement. The working group holds teleconferences, as needed, focusing on specific topics of interest. The topics addressed to date include an assessment of the assumptions used for performance assessments and risk assessments (PA/RAs) for on-site disposal cells, requirements and assumptions related to assessment of inadvertent intrusion, DOE Manual 435.1-1 requirements, and approaches for consideration of the long-term performance of liners and covers in the context of PAs. The working group has improved communication among the staff and oversight personnel responsible for onsite disposal cells and has provided a forum to identify and resolve common concerns.

  14. 76 FR 69733 - Proposed CERCLA Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement; Tracy Lead Battery Site, Tracy, MN

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2011-11-09

    ... AGENCY Proposed CERCLA Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement; Tracy Lead Battery Site, Tracy, MN AGENCY... of past response costs concerning the Tracy Lead Battery Site in Tracy, Minnesota with the following.... Comments should reference the Tracy Lead Battery Site and EPA Docket No. CERCLA-05-2012-0001 and should...

  15. 75 FR 8346 - Proposed CERCLA Administrative Settlement; Anderson-Calhoun Mine and Mill Site, Leadpoint, WA

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-02-24

    ..., as amended (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. 9622(i), notice is hereby given of a proposed administrative..., Washington, with settling party Blue Tee Corporation. The settlement requires the settling party to pay $1... 107(a) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9606 or 9607(a), for recovery of past costs and for the performance of...

  16. Evaluation of Groundwater Impacts to Support the National Environmental Policy Act Environmental Assessment for the INL Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project

    SciTech Connect

    Annette Schafer, Arthur S. Rood, A. Jeffrey Sondrup

    2011-12-23

    Groundwater impacts have been analyzed for the proposed remote-handled low-level waste disposal facility. The analysis was prepared to support the National Environmental Policy Act environmental assessment for the top two ranked sites for the proposed disposal facility. A four-phase screening and analysis approach was documented and applied. Phase I screening was site independent and applied a radionuclide half-life cut-off of 1 year. Phase II screening applied the National Council on Radiation Protection analysis approach and was site independent. Phase III screening used a simplified transport model and site-specific geologic and hydrologic parameters. Phase III neglected the infiltration-reducing engineered cover, the sorption influence of the vault system, dispersion in the vadose zone, vertical dispersion in the aquifer, and the release of radionuclides from specific waste forms. These conservatisms were relaxed in the Phase IV analysis which used a different model with more realistic parameters and assumptions. Phase I screening eliminated 143 of the 246 radionuclides in the inventory from further consideration because each had a half-life less than 1 year. An additional 13 were removed because there was no ingestion dose coefficient available. Of the 90 radionuclides carried forward from Phase I, 57 radionuclides had simulated Phase II screening doses exceeding 0.4 mrem/year. Phase III and IV screening compared the maximum predicted radionuclide concentration in the aquifer to maximum contaminant levels. Of the 57 radionuclides carried forward from Phase II, six radionuclides were identified in Phase III as having simulated future aquifer concentrations exceeding maximum contaminant limits. An additional seven radionuclides had simulated Phase III groundwater concentrations exceeding 1/100th of their respective maximum contaminant levels and were also retained for Phase IV analysis. The Phase IV analysis predicted that none of the thirteen remaining

  17. Annual report of 1991 groundwater monitoring data for the Kerr Hollow Quarry and Chestnut Ridge Sediment Disposal Basin at the Y-12 Plant: Reporting and statistical evaluation of the subsequent year (sixth) data

    SciTech Connect

    McMahon, L.W.; Mercier, T.M.

    1992-02-01

    This annual report has historically been prepared to meet the annual reporting requirements of the Tennessee Department of and Environment and Conservation (TDEC), Hazardous Waste Management Regulation 1200-1-11-.05 (6)(e), for detection monitoring data collected on Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) wells in place around facilities which are accorded interim status. The regulatory authority for these units at the Y-12 Plant is currently in transition. A Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) with an effective date of January 1, 1992, has been negotiated with the Department of Energy (DOE) for the Oak Ridge Reservation. This agreement provides a framework for remediation of the Oak Ridge Reservation so that both RCRA and CERCLA requirements are integrated into the remediation process and provides for State, EPA, and DOE to proceed with CERCLA as the lead regulatory requirement and RCRA as an applicable or relevant and appropriate requirement. This report is presented for the RCRA certified wells for two interim status units at the Y-12 Plant. These units are Kerr Hollow Quarry and Chestnut Ridge Sediment Disposal Basin. Kerr Hollow is currently undergoing clean closure under RCRA. The Chestnut Ridge Sediment Disposal Basin (CRSDB) was closed in 1989 under a TDEC approved RCRA closure plan. The relevance of a RCRA Post-Closure Permit to either of these units is a matter of contention between DOE and TDEC since the FFA does not contemplate post-closure permits.

  18. Approaches to consider covers and liners in a low-level waste disposal facility performance assessment

    SciTech Connect

    Seitz, Roger; Phifer, Mark; Suttora, Linda

    2015-03-17

    On-site disposal cells are in use and being considered at several USDOE sites as the final disposition for large amounts of waste associated with cleanup of contaminated areas and facilities. These disposal cells are typically regulated by States and/or the USEPA in addition to having to comply with requirements in DOE Order 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management. The USDOE-EM Office of Site Restoration formed a working group to foster improved communication and sharing of information for personnel associated with these Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) disposal cells and work towards more consistent assumptions, as appropriate, for technical and policy considerations related to performance and risk assessments in support of a Record of Decision and Disposal Authorization Statement. One task completed by the working group addressed approaches for considering the performance of covers and liners/leachate collection systems in the context of a performance assessment (PA). A document has been prepared which provides recommendations for a general approach to address covers and liners/leachate collection systems in a PA and how to integrate assessments with defense-in-depth considerations such as design, operations and waste acceptance criteria to address uncertainties. Specific information and references are provided for details needed to address the evolution of individual components of cover and liner/leachate collection systems. This information is then synthesized into recommendations for best practices for cover and liner system design and examples of approaches to address the performance of covers and liners as part of a performance assessment of the disposal system.

  19. 40 CFR Appendix Vii to Part 268 - LDR Effective Dates of Surface Disposed Prohibited Hazardous Wastes

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-07-01

    ...-disposed elemental phosphorus processing wastes May 26, 2000. D004 Newly identified D004 and mineral... Small quantity generators, CERCLA response/RCRA corrective action, initial generator's solvent-water... corrective action, initial generator's solvent-water mixtures, solvent-containing sludges and solids Nov....

  20. 40 CFR Appendix Vii to Part 268 - LDR Effective Dates of Surface Disposed Prohibited Hazardous Wastes

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-07-01

    ...-disposed elemental phosphorus processing wastes May 26, 2000. D004 Newly identified D004 and mineral... Small quantity generators, CERCLA response/RCRA corrective action, initial generator's solvent-water... corrective action, initial generator's solvent-water mixtures, solvent-containing sludges and solids Nov....

  1. 40 CFR Appendix Vii to Part 268 - LDR Effective Dates of Surface Disposed Prohibited Hazardous Wastes

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-07-01

    ...-disposed elemental phosphorus processing wastes May 26, 2000. D004 Newly identified D004 and mineral... Small quantity generators, CERCLA response/RCRA corrective action, initial generator's solvent-water... corrective action, initial generator's solvent-water mixtures, solvent-containing sludges and solids Nov....

  2. 40 CFR Appendix Vii to Part 268 - LDR Effective Dates of Surface Disposed Prohibited Hazardous Wastes

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-07-01

    ...-disposed elemental phosphorus processing wastes May 26, 2000. D004 Newly identified D004 and mineral... Small quantity generators, CERCLA response/RCRA corrective action, initial generator's solvent-water... corrective action, initial generator's solvent-water mixtures, solvent-containing sludges and solids Nov....

  3. 77 FR 69620 - Casmalia Disposal Site; Notice of Proposed CERCLA Administrative De Minimis Settlement

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-11-20

    ... Engineering Corporation, Antioch Unified School District, Apex Drum Company, Inc., APL Limited, Aratex... Rafael, City of Santa Fe Springs, Commercial Plating and Engineering Corporation, Inc., Concorde... Company, Keystone Automotive Industries, Inc., Kingsbacher-Murphy, Wesco Division, Lamsco West Inc.,...

  4. Disposal methods

    NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

    Friedlander, Alan

    1991-01-01

    A number of disposal options for space nuclear reactors and the associated risks, mostly in the long term, based on probabilities of Earth reentry are discussed. The results are based on a five year study that was conducted between 1978 and 1983 on the space disposal of high level nuclear waste. The study provided assessment of disposal options, stability of disposal or storage orbits, and assessment of the long term risks of Earth reentry of the nuclear waste.

  5. Technical Scope and Approach for the 2004 Composite Analysis of Low Level Waste Disposal at the Hanford Site

    SciTech Connect

    Kincaid, Charles T.; Bryce, Robert W.; Buck, John W.

    2004-07-09

    A composite analysis is required by U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Manual 435.1-1 to ensure public safety through the management of active and planned low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities associated with the Hanford Site (DOE/HQ-Manual 435.1-1). A Composite Analysis is defined as ''a reasonably conservative assessment of the cumulative impact from active and planned low-level waste disposal facilities, and all other sources from radioactive contamination that could interact with the low-level waste disposal facility to affect the dose to future members of the public''. At the Hanford Site, a composite analysis is required for continued disposal authorization for the immobilized low-activity waste, tank waste vitrification plant melters, low level waste in the 200 East and 200 West Solid Waste Burial Grounds, and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) waste in the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility. The 2004 Composite Analysis will be a site-wide analysis, considering final remedial actions for the Columbia River corridor and the Central Plateau at the Hanford Site. The river corridor includes waste sites and facilities in each of the 100 Areas as well as the 300, 400, and 600 Areas. The remedial actions for the river corridor are being conducted to meet residential land use standards with the vision of the river corridor being devoted to a combination of recreation and preservation. The ''Central Plateau'' describes the region associated with operations and waste sites of the 200 Areas. DOE is developing a strategy for closure of the Central Plateau area by 2035. At the time of closure, waste management activities will shrink to a Core Zone within the Central Plateau. The Core Zone will contain the majority of Hanford's permanently disposed waste

  6. SEMINAR PUBLICATION: DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF RCRA/CERCLA FINAL COVERS

    EPA Science Inventory

    Cover systems are an essential part of all land disposal facilities. Covers control moisture infiltration from the surface into closed facilities and limit the formation of leachate and its migration to ground water. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Subparts G, K...

  7. RCRA, Superfund and EPCRA hotline training module. Introduction to: Statutory overview of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (updated February 1998); Directive

    SciTech Connect

    1998-06-01

    This module presents a brief overview of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), the statute through which Congress established EPA`s hazardous substance release reporting and cleanup program, known as the Superfund program. This module presents information of the CERCLA statute only, not the regulations promulgated pursuant to the statute.

  8. COMPOSITE ANALYSIS OF LLW DISPOSAL FACILITIES AT THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY'S SAVANNAH RIVER SITE

    SciTech Connect

    Hiergesell, R; Mark Phifer, M; Frank02 Smith, F

    2009-01-08

    Composite Analyses (CA's) are required per DOE Order 435.1 [1], in order to provide a reasonable expectation that DOE low-level waste (LLW) disposal, high-level waste tank closure, and transuranic (TRU) waste disposal in combination with Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and deactivation and decommissioning (D&D) actions, will not result in the need for future remedial actions in order to ensure radiological protection of the public and environment. This Order requires that an accounting of all sources of DOE man-made radionuclides and DOE enhanced natural radionuclides that are projected to remain on the site after all DOE site operations have ceased. This CA updates the previous CA that was developed in 1997. As part of this CA, an inventory of expected radionuclide residuals was conducted, exposure pathways were screened and a model was developed such that a dose to the MOP at the selected points of exposure might be evaluated.

  9. 77 FR 38802 - Proposed CERCLA Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement; Standex International Corporation

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-06-29

    ... AGENCY Proposed CERCLA Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement; Standex International Corporation AGENCY... a proposed administrative settlement for recovery of past response costs concerning the Trinity... hereby given of a proposed administrative settlement for recovery of past response costs concerning...

  10. 76 FR 51029 - Proposed CERCLA Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement; Carpenter Avenue Mercury Site, Iron...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2011-08-17

    ... AGENCY Proposed CERCLA Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement; Carpenter Avenue Mercury Site, Iron... Mercury site in Iron Mountain, Dickenson County, Michigan with the following settling parties: The.... Comments should reference the Carpenter Avenue Mercury site, Iron Mountain, Dickenson County, Michigan...

  11. H.R. 2752: A Bill to amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act to prohibit the transportation of solid waste from the State in which the waste was generated to another State for purposes of treatment, storage, or disposal, unless the State in which the waste was generated has in effect a law prohibiting nonreturnable beverage containers. Introduced in the House of Representatives, One Hundred Third Congress, First Session, July 27, 1993

    SciTech Connect

    1993-12-31

    The report H.R. 2752 is a bill to amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act to prohibit the transportation of solid waste from the State to which the waste was generated to another State for purposes of treatment, storage, or disposal, unless the State in which the state was generated has in effect a law prohibiting non-returnable beverage containers. The proposed legislative text is provided.

  12. H.R. 1085: A Bill to amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act to provide congressional authorization for State and local flow control authority over solid waste, and for other purposes. Introduced in the House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourth Congress, First Session, February 28, 1995

    SciTech Connect

    1995-12-31

    The report H.R. 1085 is a bill to amend the Solid Waste Disposal Act to provide congressional authorization for State and local flow control authority over solid waste. The proposed legislative text is provided.

  13. Defining the role of risk assessment in the comprehensive environmental response compensation and liability act remedial investigation process at the DOE-OR

    SciTech Connect

    Miller, P.D.; McGinn, C.W.; White, R.K.; Purucker, S.T.; Redfearn, A.

    1994-03-08

    Cleanup of hazardous waste sites under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) is a complicated and painstaking process, particularly at facilities with a multitude of individual hazardous waste sites, each having a multitude of chemicals and radonuclides. The US Department of Energy-Oak Ridge, Environmental Restoration Division (DOE-OR/ERD) administers five such facilities which are undergoing environmental cleanup under the CERCLA Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS) process or the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) investigation process. The nature of the wastes treated, stored, or disposed of at the US DOE-OR sites is heterogeneous and often unknown. The amount of environmental sampling, chemical analysis, and document preparation and review required to support a baseline risk assessment alone at each facility often requires years before arriving at a final Record of Decision. Therefore, there is clearly a need to streamline the investigative and decision processes in order to realize the US Environmental Protection Agency`s (EPA) goal of reducing contaminant levels to those that are protective human health and the environment in a timely and cost-effective manner.

  14. Hazardous substances, CERCLA, and nanoparticles - can the three be reconciled?

    PubMed

    Bashaw, John

    2012-01-01

    Toxicology research in the nanotechnology area has focused primarily on human inhalation, ingestion or dermal exposure. Less research has been published on the impact to ecological systems resulting from a release of nanomaterials. Environmental laws such as CERCLA ("Superfund") address the release of "hazardous substances" by obligating the party releasing the substance to (a) report the release and (b) investigate the nature and extent of the release and to then remediate it to some objective cleanup standard. Applying this regime to the release of nanomaterials, however, is complicated. First, is the nanomaterial a hazardous waste, toxic substance, or hazardous substance as defined under the environmental laws? A compound that may be defined as hazardous or toxic could have properties at the nano level that are distinctly non-hazardous. Second, what constitutes a release of a nanoparticle that would require reporting under applicable environmental laws? Typically, release reporting is based upon the weight of the hazardous substance that is released, but for nanomaterials a weight threshold might be meaningless. Third, how do you sample nanoparticles in the field and analyze them using existing instrumentation? There are few approved tests for nanomaterials. Fourth, how do you determine an objective risk-based cleanup standard for the thousands of possible nanomaterials? PMID:22942872

  15. Magnesium battery disposal characteristics

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Soffer, Louis; Atwater, Terrill

    1994-12-01

    This study assesses the disposal characteristics of U.S. Army procured military magnesium batteries under current Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous waste identification regulations administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Magnesium batteries were tested at 100, 50, 10 and 0 percent remaining state of charge. Present findings indicate that magnesium batteries with less than 50 percent remaining charge do not exceed the federal regulatory limit of 5.0 mg/L for chromium. All other RCRA contaminates were below regulatory limits at all levels of remaining charge. Assay methods, findings, disposal requirements and design implications are discussed.

  16. Characterization and remediation of soil prior to construction of an on-site disposal facility at Fernald

    SciTech Connect

    Hunt, A.; Jones, G.; Janke, R.; Nelson, K.

    1998-03-01

    During the production years at the Feed Materials Production Center (FMPC), the soil of the site and the surrounding areas was surficially impacted by airborne contamination. The volume of impacted soil is estimated at 2.2 million cubic yards. During site remediation, this contamination will be excavated, characterized, and disposed of. In 1986 the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Energy (DOE) entered into a Federal Facility Compliance Agreement (FFCA) covering environmental impacts associated with the FMPC. A site wide Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) was initiated pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (CERCLA). The DOE has completed the RI/FS process and has received approval of the final Records of Decision. The name of the facility was changed to the Fernald Environmental Management Project (FEMP) to emphasize the change in mission to environmental restoration. Remedial actions which address similar scopes of work or types of contaminated media have been grouped into remedial projects for the purpose of managing the remediation of the FEMP. The Soil Characterization and Excavation Project (SCEP) will address the remediation of FEMP soils, certain waste units, at- and below-grade material, and will certify attainment of the final remedial limits (FRLs) for the FEMP. The FEMP will be using an on-site facility for low level radioactive waste disposal. The facility will be an above-ground engineered structure constructed of geological material. The area designated for construction of the base of the on-site disposal facility (OSDF) is referred to as the footprint. Contaminated soil within the footprint must be identified and remediated. Excavation of Phase 1, the first of seven remediation areas, is complete.

  17. 40 CFR 355.33 - What release quantities of EHSs and CERCLA hazardous substances trigger the emergency release...

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-07-01

    ....4 of 40 CFR 302.4 in the column labeled “final RQ.” How To Comply ... CERCLA hazardous substances trigger the emergency release notification requirements of this subpart? 355... Release Notification Who Must Comply § 355.33 What release quantities of EHSs and CERCLA...

  18. 40 CFR 355.33 - What release quantities of EHSs and CERCLA hazardous substances trigger the emergency release...

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-07-01

    ....4 of 40 CFR 302.4 in the column labeled “final RQ.” How To Comply ... CERCLA hazardous substances trigger the emergency release notification requirements of this subpart? 355... Release Notification Who Must Comply § 355.33 What release quantities of EHSs and CERCLA...

  19. 40 CFR 355.33 - What release quantities of EHSs and CERCLA hazardous substances trigger the emergency release...

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-07-01

    ....4 of 40 CFR 302.4 in the column labeled “final RQ.” How To Comply ... CERCLA hazardous substances trigger the emergency release notification requirements of this subpart? 355... Release Notification Who Must Comply § 355.33 What release quantities of EHSs and CERCLA...

  20. 40 CFR 355.33 - What release quantities of EHSs and CERCLA hazardous substances trigger the emergency release...

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-07-01

    ....4 of 40 CFR 302.4 in the column labeled “final RQ.” How To Comply ... CERCLA hazardous substances trigger the emergency release notification requirements of this subpart? 355... Release Notification Who Must Comply § 355.33 What release quantities of EHSs and CERCLA...

  1. 40 CFR 355.33 - What release quantities of EHSs and CERCLA hazardous substances trigger the emergency release...

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-07-01

    ....4 of 40 CFR 302.4 in the column labeled “final RQ.” How To Comply ... CERCLA hazardous substances trigger the emergency release notification requirements of this subpart? 355... Release Notification Who Must Comply § 355.33 What release quantities of EHSs and CERCLA...

  2. 75 FR 34117 - Proposed CERCLA Section 122(h) Cost Recovery Settlement for the H.M. Quackenbush, Inc. Superfund...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-06-16

    ... AGENCY Proposed CERCLA Section 122(h) Cost Recovery Settlement for the H.M. Quackenbush, Inc. Superfund... recovery settlement agreement pursuant to Section 122(h) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9622(h), regarding the H.M... requires Frederick H. Hagar (``Settling Party''), CEO, Chairman and majority shareholder of...

  3. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) contingency plan for hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal units at the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1994-08-01

    The Y-12 RCRA Contingency Plan will be continually reviewed and revised if any of the following occur: the facility permit is revised, the plan is inadequate in an emergency, the procedures can be improved, the operations of the facility change in a way that alters the plan, the emergency coordinator changes, or the emergency equipment list changes. Copies of the Y-12 Emergency Management Plan are available at the Plant Shift Superintendent`s Office and the Emergency Management Office. This document serves to supplement the Y-12 Emergency Management Plan to be appropriate for all RCRA hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal units. The 90-day accumulation areas at the Y-12 Plant have a separate contingency supplement as required by RCRA and are separate from this supplement.

  4. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) general contingency plan for hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal units at the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant

    SciTech Connect

    Skaggs, B.E.

    1993-11-01

    The Y-12 RCRA Contingency Plan will be continually reviewed and revised if any of the following occur: the facility permit is revised, the plan is inadequate in an emergency, the procedures herein can be improved, the operations of the facility change in a way that alters the plan, the emergency coordinator changes, or the emergency equipment list changes. Copies of the Y-12 Emergency Management Plan are available at the Plant Shift Superintendent`s Office and the Emergency Management Office. This document serves to supplement the Y-12 Emergency Management Plan to be appropriate for all RCRA hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal units. The 90-day accumulation areas at the Y-12 Plant have a separate contingency supplement as required by RCRA and are separate from this supplement.

  5. Hazardous Substance Release Reporting Under CERCLA, EPCR {section}304 and DOE Emergency Management System (EMS) and DOE Occurrence Reporting Requirements. Environmental Guidance

    SciTech Connect

    Traceski, T.T.

    1994-06-01

    Releases of various substances from DOE facilities may be subject to reporting requirements under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), as well as DOE`s internal ``Occurrence Reporting and Processing of Operations Information`` and the ``Emergency Management System`` (EMS). CERCLA and EPCPA are Federal laws that require immediate reporting of a release of a Hazardous Substance (HS) and an Extremely Hazardous Substance (EHS), respectively, in a Reportable Quantity (RQ) or more within a 24-hour period. This guidance uses a flowchart, supplemental information, and tables to provide an overview of the process to be followed, and more detailed explanations of the actions that must be performed, when chemical releases of HSs, EHSs, pollutants, or contaminants occur at DOE facilities. This guidance should be used in conjunction with, rather than in lieu of, applicable laws, regulations, and DOE Orders. Relevant laws, regulations, and DOE Orders are referenced throughout this guidance.

  6. Disposable Scholarship?

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Miller, Fredrick

    2004-01-01

    The digital materials that faculty produce for their classrooms often are saved only to storage devices that might become obsolete in a few years. Without an institutional effort to provide access systems, storage, and services for their digital media, are campuses in danger of creating "Disposable Scholarship"? In this article, the author…

  7. Disposal rabbit

    DOEpatents

    Lewis, L.C.; Trammell, D.R.

    1983-10-12

    A disposable rabbit for transferring radioactive samples in a pneumatic transfer system comprises aerated plastic shaped in such a manner as to hold a radioactive sample and aerated such that dissolution of the rabbit in a solvent followed by evaporation of the solid yields solid waste material having a volume significantly smaller than the original volume of the rabbit.

  8. Disposable rabbit

    DOEpatents

    Lewis, Leroy C.; Trammell, David R.

    1986-01-01

    A disposable rabbit for transferring radioactive samples in a pneumatic transfer system comprises aerated plastic shaped in such a manner as to hold a radioactive sample and aerated such that dissolution of the rabbit in a solvent followed by evaporation of the solid yields solid waste material having a volume significantly smaller than the original volume of the rabbit.

  9. 75 FR 35456 - Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) or Superfund...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-06-22

    ..., Brownfields Amendments, Section 104(k); Notice of Revisions to FY2011 Guidelines for Brownfields Assessment... to assess and clean up brownfield sites. EPA's Brownfields Program provides funds to empower states... 2011, EPA has revised the Brownfields Grant Proposal Guidelines (guidelines) and is soliciting...

  10. 76 FR 73622 - Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) or Superfund...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2011-11-29

    ... defined in the Federal Register Notice at 67 FR 67181, Nov. 4, 2002, are also eligible for funding under... section 128(a) cooperative agreements in their PPG 69 FR 51,756 (2004). Section 128(a) funds used to... tribes requesting FY12 funds $XX,XXX $XX,XXX must submit a summary of the planned use of the funds...

  11. 78 FR 73525 - Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) or Superfund...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-12-06

    ...: Strategic Plan Goal 3: Cleaning Up Communities and Advancing Sustainable Development, Strategic Plan...). Intertribal consortia, as defined in the Federal Register Notice at 67 FR 67181, Nov. 4, 2002, are also... development and operation of systems that ensure long term maintenance of the public record,...

  12. 43 CFR 2743.2 - New disposal sites.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... 43 Public Lands: Interior 2 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false New disposal sites. 2743.2 Section 2743.2... Public Purposes Act: Solid Waste Disposal § 2743.2 New disposal sites. (a) Public lands may be conveyed... determines may include the disposal, placement, or release of any hazardous substance subject to...

  13. 43 CFR 2743.3 - Leased disposal sites.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... Public Purposes Act: Solid Waste Disposal § 2743.3 Leased disposal sites. (a) Upon request by or with the... plan of development, for solid waste disposal or for any other purpose that the authorized officer... applicable to the disposal of solid wastes and hazardous substances; (2) Conveyances shall be made only...

  14. 43 CFR 2743.3 - Leased disposal sites.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... Public Purposes Act: Solid Waste Disposal § 2743.3 Leased disposal sites. (a) Upon request by or with the... plan of development, for solid waste disposal or for any other purpose that the authorized officer... applicable to the disposal of solid wastes and hazardous substances; (2) Conveyances shall be made only...

  15. 43 CFR 2743.3 - Leased disposal sites.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... Public Purposes Act: Solid Waste Disposal § 2743.3 Leased disposal sites. (a) Upon request by or with the... plan of development, for solid waste disposal or for any other purpose that the authorized officer... applicable to the disposal of solid wastes and hazardous substances; (2) Conveyances shall be made only...

  16. CERCLA {section}103 and EPCRA {section}304 Release Notification Requirements update

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1995-01-01

    This guidance document updates and clarifies information provided in an earlier guidance document published by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) entitled Guidance for Federal Facilities on Release Notification Requirements under CERCLA and SARA Title III (EPA 9360.7-06; November 1990). Since publication of that earlier guidance document, several significant events have occurred that affect the reporting obligations of facilities owned or operated by the Department of Energy (DOE), including the publication of Executive Order 12856--Federal Compliance with Right-to-Know Laws and Pollution Prevention Requirements--and a rejection by the US Court of Appeals of EPA`s interpretation of the term release into the environment. In preparing this guidance document, the Office of Environmental Policy and Assistance, RCRA/CERCLA Division (EH-413), has documented responses to queries from DOE field elements on CERCLA and EPCRA release reporting requirements, as well as incorporating those Questions and Answers from the previous document that remain germane to DOE`s reporting obligations under CERCLA and EPCRA.

  17. 77 FR 31010 - Proposed CERCLA Agreement for Recovery of Past Response Costs; Piqua Hospital Site

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-05-24

    ... AGENCY Proposed CERCLA Agreement for Recovery of Past Response Costs; Piqua Hospital Site AGENCY... of past response costs concerning the Piqua Hospital Site (Site ID Number B5RB) in Piqua, Ohio with...: 312-353-6121. Comments should reference the Piqua Hospital Site in Piqua, Ohio and EPA Docket No....

  18. 78 FR 40738 - Proposed CERCLA Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement; Double H Pesticide Burial Site

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-07-08

    ... AGENCY Proposed CERCLA Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement; Double H Pesticide Burial Site AGENCY... incurred for the Double H Pesticide Burial Site in Grandview, Yakima County, Washington. Under this proposed settlement, the settling parties are Double H, L.P.; James T. Hansen; Linda L. Hansen; George...

  19. 75 FR 57272 - Proposed CERCLA Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement; Gilberts/Kedzie Site, Village of...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-09-20

    ... AGENCY Proposed CERCLA Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement; Gilberts/Kedzie Site, Village of Gilberts... settlement for recovery of past response costs concerning the Gilberts/Kedzie Site in the Village of Gilberts... whose telephone number is (312) 353- 3804. Comments should reference the Gilberts/Kedzie Site and...

  20. 77 FR 9652 - Proposed CERCLA Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement; Lake Linden Superfund Site in Lake...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-02-17

    ... AGENCY Proposed CERCLA Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement; Lake Linden Superfund Site in Lake Linden... administrative settlement for recovery of past response costs concerning the Lake Linden Superfund Site in Lake..., Chicago, Illinois, C-14J, 60604, (312) 886-6609. Comments should reference the Lake Linden Superfund...

  1. 75 FR 21292 - Proposed CERCLA Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement Agreement; AVX Corporation

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-04-23

    ... AGENCY Proposed CERCLA Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement Agreement; AVX Corporation AGENCY... administrative settlement for recovery of projected future response oversight costs and performance of work... removal action, pre- payment of future response oversight costs, payment for long-term care of the...

  2. 77 FR 64513 - Proposed Administrative Agreement for Collection of CERCLA Past Costs

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-10-22

    ... AGENCY Proposed Administrative Agreement for Collection of CERCLA Past Costs AGENCY: U.S Environmental... collection of a percentage of past response costs at the Ultimate Industries, Inc. Site. Respondent has agreed to pay $8,000 out of total past costs of approximately $83,776.10, in return for a covenant not...

  3. 40 CFR 35.6325 - Title and EPA interest in CERCLA-funded property.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-07-01

    ... has an interest in equipment that is an integral part of services to individuals, such as pipes, lines... 40 Protection of Environment 1 2011-07-01 2011-07-01 false Title and EPA interest in CERCLA-funded property. 35.6325 Section 35.6325 Protection of Environment ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY GRANTS...

  4. 40 CFR 35.6325 - Title and EPA interest in CERCLA-funded property.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-07-01

    ... has an interest in equipment that is an integral part of services to individuals, such as pipes, lines... 40 Protection of Environment 1 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Title and EPA interest in CERCLA-funded property. 35.6325 Section 35.6325 Protection of Environment ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY GRANTS...

  5. 77 FR 52021 - Proposed CERCLA Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent for the Mercury Refining...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-08-28

    ... AGENCY Proposed CERCLA Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent for the Mercury Refining... ``Settling Parties'') pertaining to the Mercury Refining Superfund Site (``Site'') located in the Towns of... each Settling Party to the EPA Hazardous Substance Superfund Mercury Refining Superfund Site...

  6. 78 FR 40140 - Proposed CERCLA Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent for the Mercury Refining...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-07-03

    ... AGENCY Proposed CERCLA Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent for the Mercury Refining... between EPA and Titan Wheel Corporation of Illinois (hereafter ``Titan'') pertaining to the Mercury.... Comments should be sent to the individual identified below and should reference the Mercury...

  7. Chemical Stockpile Disposal Program

    SciTech Connect

    Krummel, J.R.; Policastro, A.J.; Olshansky, S.J.; McGinnis, L.D.

    1990-10-01

    As part of the Chemical Stockpile Disposal Program mandated by Public Law 99--145 (Department of Defense Authorization Act), an independent review is presented of the US Army Phase I environmental report for the disposal program at the Pine Bluff Arsenal (PBA) in Arkansas. The Phase I report addressed new and additional concerns not incorporated in the final programmatic environmental impact statement (FPEIS). Those concerns were addressed by examining site-specific data for the PBA and by recommending the scope and content of a more detailed site- specific study. This dependent review evaluates whether the new site-specific data presented in the Phase I report would alter the decision in favor of on-site disposal that was reached in the FPEIS, and whether the recommendations for the scope and content of the site-specific study are adequate. Based on the methods and assumptions presented in the FPEIS, the inclusion of more detailed site-specific data in the Phase I report does not change the decision reached in the FPEIS (which favored on-site disposal at PBA). It is recommended that alternative assumptions about meteorological conditions be considered and that site-specific data on water, ecological, socioeconomic, and cultural resources, and emergency planning and preparedness be considered explicitly in the site-specific EIS decision-making process. 13 refs., 1 fig.

  8. Chemical Stockpile Disposal Program

    SciTech Connect

    Krummel, J.R.; Policastro, A.J.; Olshansky, S.J.; McGinnis, L.D.

    1990-10-01

    As part of the Chemical Stockpile Disposal Program mandated by Public Law 99--145 (Department of Defense Authorization Act), an independent review is presented of the US Army Phase I environmental report for the disposal program at the Umatilla Depot Activity (UMDA) in Hermiston, Oregon. The Phase I report addressed new and additional concerns not incorporated in the final programmatic environmental impact statement (FPEIS). Those concerns were addressed by examining site-specific data for the Umatilla Depot Activity and by recommending the scope and content of a more detailed site-specific study. This independent review evaluates whether the new site-specific data presented in the Phase I report would alter the decision in favor of on-site disposal that was reached in the FPEIS, and whether the recommendations for the scope and content of the site-specific study are adequate. Based on the methods and assumptions presented in the FPEIS, the inclusion of more detailed site-specific data in the Phase I report does not change the decision reached in the FPEIS (which favored on-site disposal at UMDA). It is recommended that alternative assumptions about meteorological conditions be considered and that site-specific data on water, ecological, socioeconomic, and cultural resources; seismicity; and emergency planning and preparedness be considered explicitly in the site-specific EIS decision-making process. 7 refs., 1 fig.

  9. Disposal phase experimental program plan

    SciTech Connect

    1997-01-31

    The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) facility comprises surface and subsurface facilities, including a repository mined in a bedded salt formation at a depth of 2,150 feet. It has been developed to safely and permanently isolate transuranic (TRU) radioactive wastes in a deep geological disposal site. On April 12, 1996, the DOE submitted a revised Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Part B permit application to the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED). The DOE anticipates receiving an operating permit from the NMED; this permit is required prior to the start of disposal operations. On October 29, 1996, the DOE submitted a Compliance Certification Application (CCA) to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in accordance with the WIPP land Withdrawal Act (LWA) of 1992 (Public Law 102-579) as amended, and the requirements of Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR) Parts 191 and 194. The DOE plans to begin disposal operations at the WIPP in November 1997 following receipt of certification by the EPA. The disposal phase is expected to last for 35 years, and will include recertification activities no less than once every five years. This Disposal Phase Experimental Program (DPEP) Plan outlines the experimental program to be conducted during the first 5-year recertification period. It also forms the basis for longer-term activities to be carried out throughout the 35-year disposal phase. Once the WIPP has been shown to be in compliance with regulatory requirements, the disposal phase gives an opportunity to affirm the compliance status of the WIPP, enhance the operations of the WIPP and the national TRU system, and contribute to the resolution of national and international nuclear waste management technical needs. The WIPP is the first facility of its kind in the world. As such, it provides a unique opportunity to advance the technical state of the art for permanent disposal of long-lived radioactive wastes.

  10. Biodegradation of oil refinery wastes under OPA and CERCLA

    SciTech Connect

    Gamblin, W.W.; Banipal, B.S.; Myers, J.M.

    1995-12-31

    Land treatment of oil refinery wastes has been used as a disposal method for decades. More recently, numerous laboratory studies have been performed attempting to quantify degradation rates of more toxic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon compounds (PAHs). This paper discusses the results of the fullscale aerobic biodegradation operations using land treatment at the Macmillan Ring-Free Oil refining facility. The tiered feasibility approach of evaluating biodegradation as a treatment method to achieve site-specific cleanup criteria, including pilot biodegradation operations, is discussed in an earlier paper. Analytical results of biodegradation indicate that degradation rates observed in the laboratory can be met and exceeded under field conditions and that site-specific cleanup criteria can be attained within a proposed project time. Also prevented are degradation rates and half-lives for PAHs for which cleanup criteria have been established. PAH degradation rates and half-life values are determined and compared with the laboratory degradation rates and half-life values which used similar oil refinery wastes by other in investigators (API 1987).

  11. 77 FR 51534 - Notice of Proposed Prospective Purchaser Agreement Pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-08-24

    ... Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, as Amended (``CERCLA''), and the Solid Waste Disposal Act... (``CERCLA''), and the Solid Waste Disposal Act, commonly referred to as the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, as amended by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (``RCRA''), notice...

  12. Corrective action management unit application for the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect

    Evans, G.C.

    1994-06-01

    The Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF) is to accept both CERCLA (EPA-regulated) and RCRA (Ecology-regulated) remediation waste. The ERDF is considered part of the overall remediation strategy on the Hanford Site, and as such, determination of ERDF viability has followed both RCRA and CERCLA decision making processes. Typically, determination of the viability of a unit, such as the ERDF, would occur as part of record of decision (ROD) or permit modification for each remediation site before construction of the ERDF. However, because construction of the ERDF may take a significant amount of time, it is necessary to begin design and construction of the ERDF before final RODs/permit modifications for the remediation sites. This will allow movement of waste to occur quickly once the final remediation strategy for the RCRA and CERCLA past-practice units is determined. Construction of the ERDF is a unique situation relative to Hanford Facility cleanup, requiring a Hanford Facility specific process be developed for implementing the ERDF that would satisfy both RCRA and CERCLA requirements. While the ERDF will play a significant role in the remediation process, initiation of the ERDF does not preclude the evaluation of remedial alternatives at each remediation site. To facilitate this, the January 1994 amendment to the Tri-Party Agreement recognizes the necessity for the ERDF, and the Tri-Party Agreement states: ``Ecology, EPA, and DOE agree to proceed with the steps necessary to design, approve, construct, and operate such a ... facility.`` The Tri-Party Agreement requires the DOE-RL to prepare a comprehensive ``package`` for the EPA and Ecology to consider in evaluating the ERDF. The package is to address the criteria listed in 40 CFR 264.552(c) for corrective action management unit (CAMU) designation and a CERCLA ROD. This CAMU application is submitted as part of the Tri-Party Agreement-required information package.

  13. Radioactive mixed waste disposal

    SciTech Connect

    Jasen, W.G.; Erpenbeck, E.G.

    1993-02-01

    Various types of waste have been generated during the 50-year history of the Hanford Site. Regulatory changes in the last 20 years have provided the emphasis for better management of these wastes. Interpretations of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (AEA), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), and the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA) have led to the definition of radioactive mixed wastes (RMW). The radioactive and hazardous properties of these wastes have resulted in the initiation of special projects for the management of these wastes. Other solid wastes at the Hanford Site include low-level wastes, transuranic (TRU), and nonradioactive hazardous wastes. This paper describes a system for the treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD) of solid radioactive waste.

  14. Reporting continuous releases of hazardous and extremely hazardous substances under CERCLA and EPCRA

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1995-01-01

    This guidance is designed to provide basic instruction to US DOE and DOE operations contractor personnel on how to characterize CERCLA and EPCRA hazardous substance releases as continuous and how to prepare and deliver continuousreleasee reports to Federal, State, and local authorities. DOE staff should use this guidance as an overview of the continuous release requirements, a quick ready reference guide for specific topics concerning continuous releases and a step-by-step guide for the process of identifying and reporting continuous releases.

  15. Intergovernmental consultation and coordination and emergency response: The relationship between ICCB (Intergovernmental Consultation and Coordination Board) and SARA (Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986) Title III in the US Army's Chemical Stockpile Disposal Program

    SciTech Connect

    Feldman, D.L.

    1989-02-01

    The relationship between Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) and the Intergovernmental Consultation and Coordination Board (ICCB) in the US Army's Chemical Stockpile Disposal Program (CSDP) is examined from four perspectives: (1) the current status and likely future direction of SARA implementation in the eight CSDP continental United States sites; (2) the applicability of SARA to the CSDP; (3) the effect of SARA information management upon the ICCB; and (4) challenges posed by SARA in the areas of public participation and intergovernmental relations which make the interface between emergency planning and intergovernmental relations in the CSDP more complex than originally envisioned in the program's Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement. The emergency planning structures developed by SARA have important parallels with the CSDP's ICCB. It is important to maintain a separation between these emergency planning structures and ICCBs, which will handle additional concerns other than emergency planning. While considerable variation exists in patterns of SARA Title III implementation in CSDP states, shared characteristics include: (1) Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs) faced with problems of staffing, resources, and membership attrition; (2) unclear lines of planning authority in some LEPCs; and (3) the legitimization of unconventional participation in emergency planning. 34 refs., 1 tab.

  16. Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act (CERFA) report, Former Army Reserve Center, Gaithersburg, Maryland. Final report

    SciTech Connect

    Hacker, G.; Walters, G.; Ward, L.

    1994-04-01

    This report presents the results of the Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act (CERFA) conducted by Environmental Resources Management (ERM) at the former Army Reserve Center, Gaithersburg (ARC), a U.S. Government property selected for closure by the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission. Under CERFA, Federal agencies are required to identity expeditiously real property that can be immediately reused and redeveloped. Satisfying this objective requires the identification of real property where no hazardous substances or petroleum products, regulated by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), were stored for one year or more, known to have been released, or disposed. ARC is an 18-acre site located in Gaithersburg, Maryland. ARC was used for a variety of activities from 1955-1986. has served as a Nike Missile Control Site, as a communications and electronics research facility, and as an Army Reserve Center. Activities of environmental concern were mainly associated with construction, testing, and maintenance of electronic systems. The site has been vacant since 1986. Former Army Reserve Center, Gaithersburg, CERFA, Base closure, BRAC.

  17. The Remote Handled Immobilization Low Activity Waste Disposal Facility Environmental Permits & Approval Plan

    SciTech Connect

    DEFFENBAUGH, M.L.

    2000-08-01

    The purpose of this document is to revise Document HNF-SD-ENV-EE-003, ''Permitting Plan for the Immobilized Low-Activity Waste Project, which was submitted on September 4, 1997. That plan accounted for the interim storage and disposal of Immobilized-Low Activity Waste at the existing Grout Treatment Facility Vaults (Project W-465) and within a newly constructed facility (Project W-520). Project W-520 was to have contained a combination of concrete vaults and trenches. This document supersedes that plan because of two subsequent items: (1) A disposal authorization that was received on October 25, 1999, in a U. S. Department of Energy-Headquarters, memorandum, ''Disposal Authorization Statement for the Department of Energy Hanford site Low-Level Waste Disposal facilities'' and (2) ''Breakthrough Initiative Immobilized Low-Activity Waste (ILAW) Disposal Alternative,'' August 1999, from Lucas Incorporated, Richland, Washington. The direction within the U. S. Department of Energy-Headquarters memorandum was given as follows: ''The DOE Radioactive Waste Management Order requires that a Disposal authorization statement be obtained prior to construction of new low-level waste disposal facility. Field elements with the existing low-level waste disposal facilities shall obtain a disposal authorization statement in accordance with the schedule in the complex-wide Low-Level Waste Management Program Plan. The disposal authorization statement shall be issued based on a review of the facility's performance assessment and composite analysis or appropriate CERCLA documentation. The disposal authorization shall specify the limits and conditions on construction, design, operations, and closure of the low-level waste facility based on these reviews. A disposal authorization statement is a part of the required radioactive waste management basis for a disposal facility. Failure to obtain a disposal authorization statement or record of decision shall result in shutdown of an operational

  18. Site Safety Plan for Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory CERCLA investigations

    SciTech Connect

    Bainer, R.; Duarte, J.

    1993-07-01

    The safety policy of LLNL is to take every reasonable precaution in the performance of work to protect the environment and the health and safety of employees and the public, and to prevent property damage. With respect to hazardous agents, this protection is provided by limiting human exposures, releases to the environment, and contamination of property to levels that are as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA). It is the intent of this Plan to supply the broad outline for completing environmental investigations within ALARA guidelines. It may not be possible to determine actual working conditions in advance of the work; therefore, planning must allow the opportunity to provide a range of protection based upon actual working conditions. Requirements will be the least restrictive possible for a given set of circumstances, such that work can be completed in an efficient and timely fashion. Due to the relatively large size of the LLNL Site and the different types of activities underway, site-specific Operational Safety Procedures (OSPs) will be prepared to supplement activities not covered by this Plan. These site-specific OSPs provide the detailed information for each specific activity and act as an addendum to this Plan, which provides the general plan for LLNL Main Site operation.

  19. 25 CFR 700.125 - Disposal of property.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-04-01

    ... 25 Indians 2 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false Disposal of property. 700.125 Section 700.125 Indians THE OFFICE OF NAVAJO AND HOPI INDIAN RELOCATION COMMISSION OPERATIONS AND RELOCATION PROCEDURES Acquisition and Disposal of Habitations and/or Improvements § 700.125 Disposal of property. Property acquired by the Commission pursuant to the Act shall...

  20. Land Disposal Transparency and Efficiency Act

    THOMAS, 113th Congress

    Rep. Miller, Jeff [R-FL-1

    2013-08-01

    02/10/2014 Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. (All Actions) Tracker: This bill has the status Passed HouseHere are the steps for Status of Legislation:

  1. The Nexus between ecological risk assessment and natural resource damage assessment under CERCLA: introduction to a Society of Environmental Toxicology and ChemistryTechnical Workshop.

    PubMed

    Stahl, Ralph G; Gouguet, Ron; Charters, David; Clements, Will; Gala, Will; Haddad, Robert; Helm, Roger; Landis, Wayne; Maki, Al; Munns, Wayne R; Young, Dale

    2009-10-01

    A SETAC Technical Workshop titled "The Nexus Between Ecological Risk Assessment and Natural Resource Damage Assessment Under CERCLA: Understanding and Improving the Common Scientific Underpinnings," was held 18-22 August 2008 in Gregson, Montana, USA, to examine the linkage, nexus, and overlap between ecological risk assessment (ERA) and natural resource damage assessment (NRDA) under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). Experts from a broad range of relevant scientific, legal, and policy disciplines convened to 1) ascertain the potential for improved scientific harmonization of the processes of ERA and NRDA; 2) identify where statutory, regulatory, or scientific constraints might exist that would constrain or preclude the harmonization of the 2 processes; 3) determine approaches that might overcome these constraints; and 4) recommend research or potential changes in regulatory policies that might serve to improve both processes. This is the introduction to a series of 3 papers that describe the findings and conclusions of this workshop. Although unanimity was not achieved on all technical, legal, or policy questions posed to the participants, some consensus areas did arise. First, there appear to be few if any legal constraints to using the environmental data collected for ERA or NRDA for both processes. Second, although it is important to recognize and preserve the distinctions between ERA and NRDA, opportunities for data sharing exist, particularly for the characterization of environmental exposures and derivation of ecotoxicological information. Thus, effective coordination is not precluded by the underlying science. Where a cooperative, interactive process is involved among the response agencies, the natural resource trustees, and the responsible party(s), technical, legal or regulatory constraints can be minimized. Finally, one approach that might enhance the potential applicability of data collected for the ERA

  2. 33 CFR 401.19 - Disposal and discharge systems.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-07-01

    ... a sewage disposal system enabling compliance with the Vessel Pollution and Dangerous Chemicals regulations (Canada), the U.S. Clean Water Act and the U.S. River and Harbor Act, and amendments thereto. (b...; or (2) Retained on board in covered, leak-proof containers, until such time as it can be disposed...

  3. CERCLA and RCRA requirements affecting cleanup of a hazardous waste management unit at a Superfund site: A case study

    SciTech Connect

    Walsh, T.J.

    1995-03-01

    The Fernald Environmental Management Project (FEMP) attempted to address both RCRA and CERCLA requirements at the fire training facility (FTF) by integrating a CERCLA removal action work plan with a RCRA closure plan. While the regulatory agencies involved with the FTF cleanup agreed the integrated document was a good idea, implementation proved complicated, owing to disposition of clean debris from a Superfund site, treatment of contaminated media, duration of cleanup activities, and cleanup certification. While all the complications have not been resolved, solutions to all have been proposed to Ohio EPA and U.S. EPA. Both agencies have worked closely with FEMP to find the most effective fulfillment of RCRA and CERCLA requirements.

  4. Preoperational Subsurface Conditions at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Service Waste Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect

    Ansley, Shannon Leigh

    2002-02-01

    The Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC) Service Wastewater Discharge Facility replaces the existing percolation ponds as a disposal facility for the INTEC Service Waste Stream. A preferred alternative for helping decrease water content in the subsurface near INTEC, closure of the existing ponds is required by the INTEC Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Record of Decision (ROD) for Waste Area Group 3 Operable Unit 3-13 (DOE-ID 1999a). By August 2002, the replacement facility was constructed approximately 2 miles southwest of INTEC, near the Big Lost River channel. Because groundwater beneath the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) is protected under Federal and State of Idaho regulations from degradation due to INEEL activities, preoperational data required by U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 5400.1 were collected. These data include preexisting physical, chemical, and biological conditions that could be affected by the discharge; background levels of radioactive and chemical components; pertinent environmental and ecological parameters; and potential pathways for human exposure or environmental impact. This document presents specific data collected in support of DOE Order 5400.1, including: four quarters of groundwater sampling and analysis of chemical and radiological parameters; general facility description; site specific geology, stratigraphy, soils, and hydrology; perched water discussions; and general regulatory requirements. However, in order to avoid duplication of previous information, the reader is directed to other referenced publications for more detailed information. Documents that are not readily available are compiled in this publication as appendices. These documents include well and borehole completion reports, a perched water evaluation letter report, the draft INEEL Wellhead Protection Program Plan, and the Environmental Checklist.

  5. CERCLA interim action at the Par Pond unit: A case study

    SciTech Connect

    Hickey, H.M.; Matthews, S.S.; Neal, L.W.; Weiss, W.R.

    1993-11-01

    The Par Pond unit designated under CERCLA consists of sediments within a Savannah River Site (SRS) cooling water reservoir. The sediments are contaminated with radionuclides and nonradioactive constituents from nuclear production reactor operations. The mercury in Par Pond is believed to have originated from the Savannah River. Because of Par Pond Dam safety Issues, the water level of the reservoir was drawn down, exposing more than 1300 acres of contaminated sediments and triggering the need for CERCLA interim remedial action. This paper presents the interim action approach taken with Par Pond as a case study. The approach considered the complexity of the Par Pond ecosystem, the large size of Par Pond, the volume of contaminated sediments, and the institutional controls existing at SRS. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considers units with large volumes of low-concentration wastes, as is the case with Par Pond, to be {open_quotes}special sites.{close_quotes} Accordingly, EPA guidance establishes that the range of alternatives developed focus primarily on containment options and other remedial approaches that mitigate potential risks associated with the {open_quotes}special site.{close_quotes} The remedial alternatives, according to EPA, are not to be prohibitively expensive or difficult to implement. This case study also is representative of the types of issues that will need to be addressed within the Department of Energy (DOE) complex as nuclear facilities are transitioned to inactive status and corrective/remedial actions are warranted.

  6. 75 FR 984 - Draft Recommended Interim Preliminary Remediation Goals for Dioxin in Soil at CERCLA and RCRA Sites

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-01-07

    ... AGENCY RIN 2050-ZA05 Draft Recommended Interim Preliminary Remediation Goals for Dioxin in Soil at CERCLA... announcing a 50-day public comment period for draft recommended interim preliminary remediation goals (PRGs) developed in the Draft Recommended Interim Preliminary Remediation Goals for Dioxin in Soil at...

  7. A Cercla-Based Decision Model to Support Remedy Selection for an Uncertain Volume of Contaminants at a DOE Facility

    SciTech Connect

    Christine E. Kerschus

    1999-03-31

    The Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant (PGDP) operated by the Department of Energy is challenged with selecting the appropriate remediation technology to cleanup contaminants at Waste Area Group (WAG) 6. This research utilizes value-focused thinking and multiattribute preference theory concepts to produce a decision analysis model designed to aid the decision makers in their selection process. The model is based on CERCLA's five primary balancing criteria, tailored specifically to WAG 6 and the contaminants of concern, utilizes expert opinion and the best available engineering, cost, and performance data, and accounts for uncertainty in contaminant volume. The model ranks 23 remediation technologies (trains) in their ability to achieve the CERCLA criteria at various contaminant volumes. A sensitivity analysis is performed to examine the effects of changes in expert opinion and uncertainty in volume. Further analysis reveals how volume uncertainty is expected to affect technology cost, time and ability to meet the CERCLA criteria. The model provides the decision makers with a CERCLA-based decision analysis methodology that is objective, traceable, and robust to support the WAG 6 Feasibility Study. In addition, the model can be adjusted to address other DOE contaminated sites.

  8. 77 FR 66462 - Proposed CERCLA Settlement Relating to the Digital Equipment Corp. Site a/k/a the PCB Horizon...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-11-05

    ... From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Proposed CERCLA Settlement Relating to the Digital Equipment Corp. Site a/k/a the PCB Horizon Site... incurred or to be incurred at or in connection with the Digital Equipment Corp. Superfund Site, a/k/a...

  9. 77 FR 31611 - Proposed CERCLA Section 122(g)(4) Administrative Agreement and Order on Consent for the Mercury...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-05-29

    ... AGENCY Proposed CERCLA Section 122(g)(4) Administrative Agreement and Order on Consent for the Mercury... the Mercury Refining Superfund Site (``Site'') located in the Towns of Guilderland and Colonie, Albany... Hazardous Substance Superfund Mercury Refining Superfund Site Special Account, which combined total...

  10. In-Situ Radiological Surveys to Address Nuclear Criticality Safety Requirements During Remediation Activities at the Shallow Land Disposal Area, Armstrong County, Pennsylvania - 12268

    SciTech Connect

    Norris, Phillip; Mihalo, Mark; Eberlin, John; Lambert, Mike; Matthews, Brian

    2012-07-01

    Cabrera Services Inc. (CABRERA) is the remedial contractor for the Shallow Land Disposal Area (SLDA) Site in Armstrong County Pennsylvania, a United States (US) Army Corps of Engineers - Buffalo District (USACE) contract. The remediation is being completed under the USACE's Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) which was established to identify, investigate, and clean up or control sites previously used by the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and its predecessor, the Manhattan Engineer District (MED). As part of the management of the FUSRAP, the USACE is overseeing investigation and remediation of radiological contamination at the SLDA Site in accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), 42 US Code (USC), Section 9601 et. seq, as amended and, the National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Section 300.430(f) (2). The objective of this project is to clean up radioactive waste at SLDA. The radioactive waste contains special nuclear material (SNM), primarily U-235, in 10 burial trenches, Cabrera duties include processing, packaging and transporting the waste to an offsite disposal facility in accordance with the selected remedial alternative as defined in the Final Record of Decision (USACE, 2007). Of particular importance during the remediation is the need to address nuclear criticality safety (NCS) controls for the safe exhumation and management of waste containing fissile materials. The partnership between Cabrera Services, Inc. and Measutronics Corporation led to the development of a valuable survey tool and operating procedure that are essential components of the SLDA Criticality Safety and Material Control and Accountability programs. Using proven existing technologies in the design and manufacture of the Mobile Survey Cart, the continued deployment of the Cart will allow for an efficient and reliable methodology to

  11. 77 FR 123 - Proposed CERCLA Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement; North Hollywood Operable Unit of the San...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-01-03

    ..., California, with the following settling party: Waste Management Recycling & Disposal Services of California, Inc., dba Bradley Landfill & Recycling Center. The settlement requires the settling party to pay...

  12. Disposal requirements for PCB waste

    SciTech Connect

    1994-12-01

    Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) are a class of organic chemicals that had become widely used in industrial applications due to their practical physical and chemical properties. Historical uses of PCBs include dielectric fluids (used in utility transformers, capacitors, etc.), hydraulic fluids, and other applications requiring stable, fire-retardant materials. Due to findings that PCBs may cause adverse health effects and due to their persistence and accumulation in the environment, the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), enacted on october 11, 1976, banned the manufacture of PCBs after 1978 [Section 6(e)]. The first PCB regulations, promulgated at 40 CFR Part 761, were finalized on February 17, 1978. These PCB regulations include requirements specifying disposal methods and marking (labeling) procedures, and controlling PCB use. To assist the Department of Energy (DOE) in its efforts to comply with the TSCA statute and implementing regulations, the Office of Environmental Guidance has prepared the document ``Guidance on the Management of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs).`` That document explains the requirements specified in the statute and regulations for managing PCBs including PCB use, storage, transport, and disposal. PCB materials that are no longer in use and have been declared a waste must be disposed of according to the requirements found at 40 CFR 761.60. These requirements establish disposal options for a multitude of PCB materials including soil and debris, liquid PCBs, sludges and slurries, containers, transformers, capacitors, hydraulic machines, and other electrical equipment. This Information Brief supplements the PCB guidance document by responding to common questions concerning disposal requirements for PCBs. It is one of a series of Information Briefs pertinent to PCB management issues.

  13. Compliance under the Community Right-to-Know Act

    SciTech Connect

    Bradford, J.R.; Vaughn, R.C.; Breazeale, A.

    1995-12-31

    In 1986, the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) provided additional funding to continue and greatly expand the cleanup program begun under CERCLA. Title III of SARA contains the provisions of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA). SARA Title III may prove to be more pervasive and more demanding for industry than any of the other many rules and regulations promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency. The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act has four major provisions: planning for chemical emergencies; emergency notification of chemical accidents and releases; reporting of hazardous chemical inventories; and toxic chemical release reporting.

  14. ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND DISPOSAL OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS AT A RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY

    SciTech Connect

    Romano, Stephen; Welling, Steven; Bell, Simon

    2003-02-27

    The use of hazardous waste disposal facilities permitted under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (''RCRA'') to dispose of low concentration and exempt radioactive materials is a cost-effective option for government and industry waste generators. The hazardous and PCB waste disposal facility operated by US Ecology Idaho, Inc. near Grand View, Idaho provides environmentally sound disposal services to both government and private industry waste generators. The Idaho facility is a major recipient of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers FUSRAP program waste and received permit approval to receive an expanded range of radioactive materials in 2001. The site has disposed of more than 300,000 tons of radioactive materials from the federal government during the past five years. This paper presents the capabilities of the Grand View, Idaho hazardous waste facility to accept radioactive materials, site-specific acceptance criteria and performance assessment, radiological safety and environmental monitoring program information.

  15. Disposal of controlled substances. Final rule.

    PubMed

    2014-09-01

    This rule governs the secure disposal of controlled substances by registrants and ultimate users. These regulations will implement the Secure and Responsible Drug Disposal Act of 2010 by expanding the options available to collect controlled substances from ultimate users for the purpose of disposal, including: Take-back events, mail-back programs, and collection receptacle locations. These regulations contain specific language allowing law enforcement to voluntarily continue to conduct take-back events, administer mail-back programs, and maintain collection receptacles. These regulations will allow authorized manufacturers, distributors, reverse distributors, narcotic treatment programs (NTPs), hospitals/clinics with an on-site pharmacy, and retail pharmacies to voluntarily administer mail-back programs and maintain collection receptacles. In addition, this rule expands the authority of authorized hospitals/clinics and retail pharmacies to voluntarily maintain collection receptacles at long-term care facilities. This rule also reorganizes and consolidates previously existing regulations on disposal, including the role of reverse distributors.

  16. 21 CFR 1250.79 - Garbage disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-04-01

    ... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false Garbage disposal. 1250.79 Section 1250.79 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) REGULATIONS UNDER CERTAIN OTHER ACTS ADMINISTERED BY THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION INTERSTATE CONVEYANCE SANITATION Servicing Areas for Land and...

  17. 21 CFR 1250.79 - Garbage disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-04-01

    ... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false Garbage disposal. 1250.79 Section 1250.79 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) REGULATIONS UNDER CERTAIN OTHER ACTS ADMINISTERED BY THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION INTERSTATE CONVEYANCE SANITATION Servicing Areas for Land and...

  18. 21 CFR 1250.79 - Garbage disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-04-01

    ... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false Garbage disposal. 1250.79 Section 1250.79 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) REGULATIONS UNDER CERTAIN OTHER ACTS ADMINISTERED BY THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION INTERSTATE CONVEYANCE SANITATION Servicing Areas for Land and...

  19. 21 CFR 1250.79 - Garbage disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-04-01

    ... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false Garbage disposal. 1250.79 Section 1250.79 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) REGULATIONS UNDER CERTAIN OTHER ACTS ADMINISTERED BY THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION INTERSTATE CONVEYANCE SANITATION Servicing Areas for Land and...

  20. 77 FR 19716 - Notice of Filing of Consent Decree Pursuant to the Clean Air Act, CERCLA and EPCRA

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-04-02

    ...), Department of Justice Case Number 90-5-1-1-06025/3. During the public comment period, the Consent Decree may... From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Notice... of Justice will receive for a period of thirty (30) days from the date of this publication...

  1. TREATMENT OF CERCLA (COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT) LEACHATES BY CARBON-ASSISTED ANAEROBIC FLUIDIZED BEDS (Journal)

    EPA Science Inventory

    Two anaerobic granular activated carbon (GAC) expanded-bed bioreactors were tested as pretreatment units for the decontamination of hazardous leachates containing volatile and semivolatile synthetic organic chemicals (SOCs). The different characteristics of the two leachate feed...

  2. 33 CFR 401.19 - Disposal and discharge systems.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-07-01

    ... a sewage disposal system enabling compliance with the Canadian Garbage Pollution Prevention Regulations, the Canadian Great Lakes Sewage Pollution Prevention Regulations, the U.S. Clean Water Act, and..., leak-proof containers, until such time as it can be disposed of in accordance with the provisions...

  3. 33 CFR 401.19 - Disposal and discharge systems.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-07-01

    ... a sewage disposal system enabling compliance with the Canadian Garbage Pollution Prevention Regulations, the Canadian Great Lakes Sewage Pollution Prevention Regulations, the U.S. Clean Water Act, and..., leak-proof containers, until such time as it can be disposed of in accordance with the provisions...

  4. 33 CFR 401.19 - Disposal and discharge systems.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-07-01

    ... a sewage disposal system enabling compliance with the Canadian Garbage Pollution Prevention Regulations, the Canadian Great Lakes Sewage Pollution Prevention Regulations, the U.S. Clean Water Act, and..., leak-proof containers, until such time as it can be disposed of in accordance with the provisions...

  5. 33 CFR 401.19 - Disposal and discharge systems.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-07-01

    ... a sewage disposal system enabling compliance with the Canadian Garbage Pollution Prevention Regulations, the Canadian Great Lakes Sewage Pollution Prevention Regulations, the U.S. Clean Water Act, and..., leak-proof containers, until such time as it can be disposed of in accordance with the provisions...

  6. 5 CFR 582.401 - Aggregate disposable earnings.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-01-01

    ... 5 Administrative Personnel 1 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Aggregate disposable earnings. 582.401 Section 582.401 Administrative Personnel OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT CIVIL SERVICE REGULATIONS... Aggregate disposable earnings. In accordance with the Consumer Credit Protection Act, the...

  7. 43 CFR 9265.5 - Non-sale disposals, general.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... 43 Public Lands: Interior 2 2012-10-01 2012-10-01 false Non-sale disposals, general. 9265.5 Section 9265.5 Public Lands: Interior Regulations Relating to Public Lands (Continued) BUREAU OF LAND... Vegetative Resources Management § 9265.5 Non-sale disposals, general. Commission of any of the acts listed...

  8. 43 CFR 9265.5 - Non-sale disposals, general.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... 43 Public Lands: Interior 2 2013-10-01 2013-10-01 false Non-sale disposals, general. 9265.5 Section 9265.5 Public Lands: Interior Regulations Relating to Public Lands (Continued) BUREAU OF LAND... Vegetative Resources Management § 9265.5 Non-sale disposals, general. Commission of any of the acts listed...

  9. 50 CFR 27.94 - Disposal of waste.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 8 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false Disposal of waste. 27.94 Section 27.94... NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTEM PROHIBITED ACTS Other Disturbing Violations § 27.94 Disposal of waste. (a... manager, or the draining or dumping of oil, acids, pesticide wastes, poisons, or any other types...

  10. 50 CFR 27.94 - Disposal of waste.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... 50 Wildlife and Fisheries 9 2012-10-01 2012-10-01 false Disposal of waste. 27.94 Section 27.94... NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTEM PROHIBITED ACTS Other Disturbing Violations § 27.94 Disposal of waste. (a... manager, or the draining or dumping of oil, acids, pesticide wastes, poisons, or any other types...

  11. ICD Complex Operations and Maintenance Plan

    SciTech Connect

    Gibson, P. L.

    2007-06-25

    This Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan describes how the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) conducts operations, winterization, and startup of the Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility (ICDF) Complex. The ICDF Complex is the centralized INL facility responsible for the receipt, storage, treatment (as necessary), and disposal of INL Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) remediation waste.

  12. Disposable Diapers Are OK.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Poore, Patricia

    1992-01-01

    A personal account of measuring the pros and cons of disposable diaper usage leads the author to differentiate between a garbage problem and environmental problem. Concludes the disposable diaper issue is a political and economic issue with a local environmental impact and well within our abilities to manage. (MCO)

  13. Subsurface Pathway Flow and Transport Modeling for the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory's Subsurface Disposal Area

    SciTech Connect

    Magnuson, Swen O

    2002-08-01

    Migration of contaminants through the complex subsurface at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory's Subsurface Disposal Area was simulated for an ongoing Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability (CERCLA) assessment. A previously existing model for simulating flow and transport through the vadose zone for this site was updated to incorporate information obtained from recent characterization activities. Given the complexity of the subsurface at this site, the simulation results were acknowledged to be uncertain. Rather than attempt parametric approaches to quantify uncertainty, it was recognized that conceptual uncertainty involving the controlling processes was likely dominant. So, the effort focused on modeling different scenarios to evaluate the impact of the conceptual uncertainty.

  14. Subsurface Pathway Flow and Transport Modeling for the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory's Subsurface Disposal Area

    SciTech Connect

    Magnuson, S.O.

    2002-05-10

    Migration of contaminants through the complex subsurface at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory's Subsurface Disposal Area was simulated for an ongoing Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability (CERCLA) assessment. A previously existing model for simulating flow and transport through the vadose zone for this site was updated to incorporate information obtained from recent characterization activities. Given the complexity of the subsurface at this site, the simulation results were acknowledged to be uncertain. Rather than attempt parametric approaches to quantify uncertainty, it was recognized that conceptual uncertainty involving the controlling processes was likely dominant. So, the effort focused on modeling different scenarios to evaluate the impact of the conceptual uncertainty.

  15. Hazardous Substances, CERCLA, and Nanoparticles – Can the Three be Reconciled?

    PubMed Central

    Bashaw, John

    2012-01-01

    Toxicology research in the nanotechnology area has focused primarily on human inhalation, ingestion or dermal exposure. Less research has been published on the impact to ecological systems resulting from a release of nanomaterials. Environmental laws such as CERCLA (“Superfund”) address the release of “hazardous substances” by obligating the party releasing the substance to (a) report the release and (b) investigate the nature and extent of the release and to then remediate it to some objective cleanup standard. Applying this regime to the release of nanomaterials, however, is complicated. First, is the nanomaterial a hazardous waste, toxic substance, or hazardous substance as defined under the environmental laws? A compound that may be defined as hazardous or toxic could have properties at the nano level that are distinctly non-hazardous. Second, what constitutes a release of a nanoparticle that would require reporting under applicable environmental laws? Typically, release reporting is based upon the weight of the hazardous substance that is released, but for nanomaterials a weight threshold might be meaningless. Third, how do you sample nanoparticles in the field and analyze them using existing instrumentation? There are few approved tests for nanomaterials. Fourth, how do you determine an objective risk-based cleanup standard for the thousands of possible nanomaterials? PMID:22942872

  16. Comparison of adICPR vs. UNET to evaluate surface water issues at a CERCLA site

    SciTech Connect

    Cockcroft, B.F.; Campbell, C.M.

    1994-12-31

    A model of the surface water flow regime for the site was developed to evaluate the recommended remedial action alternative. The widely used and accepted Corps of Engineers` HEC-1 and HEC-2 computer programs were used for the traditional hydrologic and steady-state hydraulic analyses. Evaluation of the dynamic (i.e., unsteady) flows through the interconnected low areas was not as straight-forward and consensus on which program to use was an issue. Thus, two computer programs were used; the privately developed Advanced Interconnected Channel and Pond Routing (adICPR) program and UNET -- One-Dimensional Unsteady Flow Through a Full Network of Open Channels developed by the US Army Corps of Engineers` Hydrologic Engineering Center. The two unsteady flow programs were interchanged in the overall surface water model of the site to evaluate the recommended remedial action alternatives. This paper presents a comparison of the two unsteady flow programs and the corresponding results. Most noteworthy, however, this paper identifies and demonstrates a lesson for future evaluations to improve the cost effectiveness of the CERCLA process. The lesson being that the selection of, and the consensus on, design criteria and objectives play a more critical and influential role in the overall evaluation and selection of the remedial action alternative than the differences between the two computer programs.

  17. Current legislation governing clinical waste disposal.

    PubMed

    Moritz, J M

    1995-06-01

    The paper considers UK and EC Legislation regulating clinical waste disposal. The legal definition of clinical waste is distinguished from both 'health care waste' and 'infectious waste'. Waste can be pre-treated so as to enable it to be disposed of through the normal waste stream. The legislation is looked at by reference to (i) production and storage; (ii) handling and transportation; and (iii) disposal. It is vitally important to draw up a waste management strategy. Effective segregation at source is a key factor in the waste management strategy and it will enable hospital authorities to make economic savings in waste disposal costs. The Paper considers the Duty of Care under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and stresses the obligation on each person in the waste disposal chain to discharge the Duty. Landfilling as a method of disposal is discouraged except for waste where no possibility of infection arises. There are problems with hospital incinerators meeting modern emission standards. Requirements for licensing new incinerators are examined. The new Waste Management Licensing Regulations 1994 require applications for Waste Management Licenses to demonstrate technical and financial competence as 'fit and proper persons'. The Paper concludes by examining penalties for breach of regulatory provisions.

  18. Disposal of BRC wastes containing short-lived radionuclides

    SciTech Connect

    Rogers, V.C.; Baird, R.D.

    1986-01-01

    As part of its responsibility for the safe disposal of low-level (radioactive) waste (LLW), the Texas Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Authority sponsored an analysis of the use of permitted sanitary landfills for the disposal of wastes containing only low concentrations of radionuclides with half-lives of <300 days. Analyses have been performed giving limits on concentrations and total curies annually disposed for 56 short-lived radionuclides. The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act, enacted in December 1985, has directed the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to develop standards and procedures for considering and acting on petitions for below regulatory concern (BRC) radioactive waste disposal within 6 months. The NRC has developed a de minimis biomedical waste disposal rule for H-3 and C-14 that places limits on concentrations that can be disposed of without regard to radioactivity. Likewise, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is developing a regulation for the disposal of BRC radioactive wastes in a sanitary landfill as part of their LLW disposal rulemaking. The purpose of this study is to: 1) conduct multipathway risk assessments using the same methodology that is being used by the EPA for the technical support of their BRC rulemaking; 2) obtain radionuclide concentration and annual total curie limits from the results of the risk assessments by limiting the health impacts to guideline values used in this analysis; and 3) present other restrictions or conditions that emerge from the analysis.

  19. Subseabed disposal transportation system

    SciTech Connect

    Allen, Jr., G. C.; Vernon, M. E.; Anderson, D. R.

    1980-01-01

    Transportation requirements and interfaces are being considered in the evaluation of the seabed disposal option. Technical direction and planning are on-going to ensure the development of major transportation systems in support of the seabed disposal option. Factors which affect the risk and effectiveness of transportation are being included in site selection criteria. However, detailed development of port facilities and transport/emplacement equipment is still several years into the future. (DMC)

  20. Elements of a CERCLA action at a former Army ammunition plant

    SciTech Connect

    Tucker, D.F.; Marotz, G.A.; Frazier, G.F.

    1999-07-01

    The Sunflower Army Ammunition Plant covers 44 km{sup 2} and is located near several large population centers. Leased sites within the plant are now being used for various activities including recreation and manufacturing. Plans are in place for conversion of an additional 3,000 ha to a commercial amusement park. Some 400 structures from the plant remain and most must be removed if further ventures are to take place. Many of the buildings are structurally unsound or contain potentially hazardous materials, such as explosive residues, lead sheathing or asbestos shingles, that were stored or used in the construction of the structures. State and federal agencies agreed that the buildings should be destroyed, but the method to do so was unclear. Analysis on building by building basis revealed that in many cases explosive residue made it unsafe to remove the buildings by any other method rather than combustion. Completion of a comprehensive destruction plan that included ground-level monitoring of combustion plumes, and burn scheduling under tightly prescribed micro and mesoscale meteorological conditions was approved by the EPA as a non-time critical removal action under CERCLA in 1996; the US Army was designated as the lead agency. Personnel at the University of Kansas assisted in developing the destruction plan and helped conduct two test burns using the comprehensive plan protocols. Results of one test burn scenario on June 26, 1997, intended as a test of probable dispersion safety margin and covered extensively by print and television media, the EPA and State agencies, are described in this paper. The selected building was smaller than typical of the buildings on the plant site. The events leading to a burn decision on the test day are used to illustrate the decision-making process.

  1. Process for Transition of Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act Title II Disposal Sites to the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Legacy Management for Long-Term Surveillance and Maintenance

    SciTech Connect

    2012-03-01

    This document presents guidance for implementing the process that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Legacy Management (LM) will use for assuming perpetual responsibility for a closed uranium mill tailings site. The transition process specifically addresses sites regulated under Title II of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) but is applicable in principle to the transition of sites under other regulatory structures, such as the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program.

  2. 75 FR 65465 - Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future, Disposal Subcommittee

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-10-25

    ...This notice announces an open meeting of the Disposal Subcommittee. The Disposal Subcommittee is a subcommittee of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (the Commission). The establishment of subcommittees is authorized in the Commission's charter. The Commission was organized pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. No. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) (the Act). This......

  3. Nuclear Waste Disposal

    SciTech Connect

    Gee, Glendon W.; Meyer, Philip D.; Ward, Andy L.

    2005-01-12

    Nuclear wastes are by-products of nuclear weapons production and nuclear power generation, plus residuals of radioactive materials used by industry, medicine, agriculture, and academia. Their distinctive nature and potential hazard make nuclear wastes not only the most dangerous waste ever created by mankind, but also one of the most controversial and regulated with respect to disposal. Nuclear waste issues, related to uncertainties in geologic disposal and long-term protection, combined with potential misuse by terrorist groups, have created uneasiness and fear in the general public and remain stumbling blocks for further development of a nuclear industry in a world that may soon be facing a global energy crisis.

  4. Mercury issues related to NPDES and the CERCLA watershed project at the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant

    SciTech Connect

    1996-11-01

    The purpose of this document is to present the current understanding of the issues and options surrounding compliance with the current National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit conditions. This is a complicated issue that directly impacts, and will be directly impacted by, ongoing CERCLA activities in Lower East Fork Poplar Creek and the Clinch River/Poplar Creek. It may be necessary to reconstitute the whole and combine actions and decisions regarding the entire creek (origin to confluence with the Clinch River) to develop a viable long-term strategy that meets regulatory goals and requirements as well as those of DOE`s 10-Year Plan and the new watershed management permitting approach. This document presents background information on the Reduction of Mercury in Plant Effluents (RMPE) and NPDES programs insofar as it is needed to understand the issues and options. A tremendous amount of data has been collected to support the NPDES/RMPE and CERCLA programs. These data are not presented, although they may be referenced and conclusions based on them may be presented, as necessary, to support discussion of the options.

  5. Nanomaterial disposal by incineration

    EPA Science Inventory

    As nanotechnology-based products enter into widespread use, nanomaterials will end up in disposal waste streams that are ultimately discharged to the environment. One possible end-of-life scenario is incineration. This review attempts to ascertain the potential pathways by which ...

  6. Radioactive waste disposal package

    DOEpatents

    Lampe, Robert F.

    1986-01-01

    A radioactive waste disposal package comprising a canister for containing vitrified radioactive waste material and a sealed outer shell encapsulating the canister. A solid block of filler material is supported in said shell and convertible into a liquid state for flow into the space between the canister and outer shell and subsequently hardened to form a solid, impervious layer occupying such space.

  7. Radioactive waste disposal package

    DOEpatents

    Lampe, Robert F.

    1986-11-04

    A radioactive waste disposal package comprising a canister for containing vitrified radioactive waste material and a sealed outer shell encapsulating the canister. A solid block of filler material is supported in said shell and convertible into a liquid state for flow into the space between the canister and outer shell and subsequently hardened to form a solid, impervious layer occupying such space.

  8. Waste disposal package

    DOEpatents

    Smith, M.J.

    1985-06-19

    This is a claim for a waste disposal package including an inner or primary canister for containing hazardous and/or radioactive wastes. The primary canister is encapsulated by an outer or secondary barrier formed of a porous ceramic material to control ingress of water to the canister and the release rate of wastes upon breach on the canister. 4 figs.

  9. Plumbing and Sewage Disposal.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Sutliff, Ronald D.; And Others

    This self-study course is designed to familiarize Marine enlisted personnel with the principles of plumbing and sewage disposal used by Marine Hygiene Equipment Operators to perform their mission. The course contains three study units. Each study unit begins with a general objective, which is a statement of what the student should learn from the…

  10. Oil field waste disposal costs at commercial disposal facilities

    SciTech Connect

    Veil, J.A.

    1997-10-01

    The exploration and production segment of the U.S. oil and gas industry generates millions of barrels of nonhazardous oil field wastes annually. In most cases, operators can dispose of their oil fields wastes at a lower cost on-site than off site and, thus, will choose on-site disposal. However, a significant quantity of oil field wastes are still sent to off-site commercial facilities for disposal. This paper provides information on the availability of commercial disposal companies in different states, the treatment and disposal methods they employ, and how much they charge. There appear to be two major off-site disposal trends. Numerous commercial disposal companies that handle oil field wastes exclusively are located in nine oil-and gas-producing states. They use the same disposal methods as those used for on-site disposal. In addition, the Railroad Commission of Texas has issued permits to allow several salt caverns to be used for disposal of oil field wastes. Twenty-two other oil- and gas-producing states contain few or no disposal companies dedicated to oil and gas industry waste. The only off-site commercial disposal companies available handle general industrial wastes or are sanitary landfills. In those states, operators needing to dispose of oil field wastes off-site must send them to a local landfill or out of state. The cost of off-site commercial disposal varies substantially, depending on the disposal method used, the state in which the disposal company is located, and the degree of competition in the area.

  11. Status on disposal of greater-than-Class C

    SciTech Connect

    Plummer, T.L.

    1995-12-31

    The Department of Energy (DOE) has developed a plan for the management and disposal of commercially generated greater-than-Class C (GTCC) low-level radioactive waste. The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 made DOE responsible for disposal of GTCC waste. The act requires that GTCC waste be disposed in a Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)-licensed facility. The NRC has amended 10 CFR 61 to express a preference for geologic disposal of GTCC waste. Based on reassessment studies, legislative guidance, and stakeholder involvement, a revised plan has been formulated to provide for total management of GTCC waste. The plan has four major thrusts: (1) plan for GTCC waste storage at the generator site until disposal is available, (2) establish storage for GTCC sealed sources posing health and safety risk to the public, (3) facilitate storage for other GTCC waste posing health and safety risk to the public, and (4) plan for co-disposal of GTCC waste in a geologic disposal site with similar waste types. The revised plan focuses on applying available resources to near- and long-term needs.

  12. Disposal of Some Problem Chemicals.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Journal of Chemical Education, 1978

    1978-01-01

    Describes procedures for the disposal of chemicals commonly used in secondary school chemistry laboratories. Special reference is given to inorganic salts. It is suggested that cyanides and other highly toxic salts should be disposed of by experts. (MA)

  13. Low level tank waste disposal study

    SciTech Connect

    Mullally, J.A.

    1994-09-29

    Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC) contracted a team consisting of Los Alamos Technical Associates (LATA), British Nuclear Fuel Laboratories (BNFL), Southwest Research Institute (SwRI), and TRW through the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Technical Support Contract to conduct a study on several areas concerning vitrification and disposal of low-level-waste (LLW). The purpose of the study was to investigate how several parameters could be specified to achieve full compliance with regulations. The most restrictive regulation governing this disposal activity is the National Primary Drinking Water Act which sets the limits of exposure to 4 mrem per year for a person drinking two liters of ground water daily. To fully comply, this constraint would be met independently of the passage of time. In addition, another key factor in the investigation was the capability to retrieve the disposed waste during the first 50 years as specified in Department of Energy (DOE) Order 5820.2A. The objective of the project was to develop a strategy for effective long-term disposal of the low-level waste at the Hanford site.

  14. Treatment and Disposal of Unanticipated 'Scavenger' Wastewater

    SciTech Connect

    Payne, W.L.

    2003-09-15

    The Savannah River Site often generates wastewater for disposal that is not included as a source to one of the site's wastewater treatment facilities that are permitted by the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control. The techniques used by the SRS contract operator (Westinghouse Savannah River Company) to evaluate and treat this unanticipated 'scavenger' wastewater may benefit industries and municipalities who experience similar needs. Regulations require that scavenger wastewater be treated and not just diluted. Each of the pollutants that are present must meet effluent permit limitations and/or receiving stream water quality standards. if a scavenger wastewater is classified as 'hazardous' under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) its disposal must comply with RCRA regulations. Westinghouse Savannah River Company obtained approval from SCDHEC to dispose of scavenger wastewater under specific conditions that are included within the SRS National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit. Scavenger wastewater is analyzed in a laboratory to determine its constituency. Pollutant values are entered into spreadsheets that calculate treatment plant removal capabilities and instream concentrations. Disposal rates are computed, ensuring compliance with regulatory requirements and protection of treatment system operating units. Appropriate records are maintained in the event of an audit.

  15. Disposal of low-level radioactive wastes.

    PubMed

    Hendee, W R

    1986-07-01

    The generation of low-level radioactive waste is a natural consequence of the societal uses of radioactive materials. These uses include the application of radioactive materials to the diagnosis and treatment of human disease and to research into the causes of human disease and their prevention. Currently, low level radioactive wastes are disposed of in one of three shallow land-burial disposal sites located in Washington, Nevada, and South Carolina. With the passage in December 1980 of Public Law 96-573, "The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act," the disposal of low-level wastes generated in each state was identified as a responsibility of the state. To fulfill this responsibility, states were encouraged to form interstate compacts for radioactive waste disposal. At the present time, only 37 states have entered into compact agreements, in spite of the clause in Public Law 96-573 that established January 1, 1986, as a target date for implementation of state responsibility for radioactive wastes. Recent action by Congress has resulted in postponement of the implementation date to January 1, 1993.

  16. Diaper area and disposable diapers.

    PubMed

    Erasala, G N; Romain, C; Merlay, I

    2011-01-01

    Since the 1960s, cloth diapers have been replaced by disposable diapers. The evolution of healthier skin in the diaper area has been demonstrated in parallel to that of disposable diapers. The improvements of disposable diapers--fit, dryness, comfort--have been based on the understanding of factors playing a role in the development of diaper dermatitis.

  17. Hanford Site National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Characterization

    SciTech Connect

    Neitzel, Duane A.; Bunn, Amoret L.; Duncan, Joanne P.; Eschbach, Tara O.; Fowler, Richard A.; Fritz, Brad G.; Goodwin, Shannon M.; Harvey, David W.; Hendrickson, Paul L.; Hoitink, Dana J.; Horton, Duane G.; Last, George V.; Poston, Ted M.; Prendergast-Kennedy, Ellen L.; Rohay, Alan C.; Scott, Michael J.; Thorne, Paul D.

    2002-09-01

    This document describes the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Hanford Site environment. It is updated each year and is intended to provide a consistent description of the Hanford Site environment for the many National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents being prepared by DOE contractors. No statements of significance or environmental consequences are provided. This year's report is the thirteenth revision of the original document published in 1988 and is (until replaced by the fourteenth revision) the only version that is relevant for use in the preparation of Hanford NEPA, State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) documents. The two chapters included in this document (Chapters 4 and 6) are numbered to correspond to the chapters where such information is typically presented in environmental impact statements (Weiss) and other Hanford Site NEPA or CERCLA documentation. Chapter 4.0 (Affected Environment) describes Hanford Site climate and meteorology, geology, hydrology, ecology, cultural, archaeological, and historical resources, socioeconomics, occupational safety, and noise. Chapter 6.0 (Statutory and Regulatory Requirements) describes federal and state laws and regulations, DOE directives and permits, and presidential executive orders that are applicable to the NEPA documents prepared for Hanford Site activities.

  18. Hanford Site National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Characterization, Revision 15

    SciTech Connect

    Neitzel, Duane A.; Bunn, Amoret L.; Burk, Kenneth W.; Cannon, Sandra D.; Duncan, Joanne P.; Fowler, Richard A.; Fritz, Brad G.; Harvey, David W.; Hendrickson, Paul L.; Horton, Duane G.; Last, George V.; Poston, Ted M.; Prendergast-Kennedy, Ellen L.; Reidel, Steve P.; Scott, Michael J.; Thorne, Paul D.; Woody, Dave M.

    2003-09-01

    This document describes the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Hanford Site environment. It is updated each year and is intended to provide a consistent description of the Hanford Site environment for the many National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents being prepared by DOE contractors. No statements of significance or environmental consequences are provided. This year's report is the thirteenth revision of the original document published in 1988 and is (until replaced by the fourteenth revision) the only version that is relevant for use in the preparation of Hanford NEPA, State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) documents. The two chapters included in this document (Chapters 4 and 6) are numbered to correspond to the chapters where such information is typically presented in environmental impact statements (Weiss) and other Hanford Site NEPA or CERCLA documentation. Chapter 4.0 (Affected Environment) describes Hanford Site climate and meteorology, geology, hydrology, ecology, cultural, archaeological, and historical resources, socioeconomics, occupational safety, and noise. Chapter 6.0 (Statutory and Regulatory Requirements) describes federal and state laws and regulations, DOE directives and permits, and presidential executive orders that are applicable to the NEPA documents prepared for Hanford Site activities.

  19. Hanford Site National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Characterization

    SciTech Connect

    Neitzel, Duane A.; Antonio, Ernest J.; Eschbach, Tara O.; Fowler, Richard A.; Goodwin, Shannon M.; Harvey, David W.; Hendrickson, Paul L.; Hoitink, Dana J.; Horton, Duane G.; Last, George V.; Poston, Ted M.; Prendergast, Ellen L.; Rohay, Alan C.; Thorne, Paul D.

    2001-09-01

    This document describes the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Hanford Site environment. It is updated each year and is intended to provide a consistent description of the Hanford Site environment for the many National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents being prepared by DOE contractors. No statements of significance or environmental consequences are provided. This year's report is the thirteenth revision of the original document published in 1988 and is (until replaced by the fourteenth revision) the only version that is relevant for use in the preparation of Hanford NEPA, State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) documents. The two chapters included in this document (Chapters 4 and 6) are numbered to correspond to the chapters where such information is typically presented in environmental impact statements (Weiss) and other Hanford Site NEPA or CERCLA documentation. Chapter 4.0 (Affected Environment) describes Hanford Site climate and meteorology, geology, hydrology, ecology, cultural, archaeological, and historical resources, socioeconomics, occupational safety, and noise. Chapter 6.0 (Statutory and Regulatory Requirements) describes federal and state laws and regulations, DOE directives and permits, and presidential executive orders that are applicable to the NEPA documents prepared for Hanford Site activities.

  20. Hanford Site National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Characterization Report

    SciTech Connect

    Neitzel, Duane A.; Bunn, Amoret L.; Cannon, Sandra D.; Duncan, Joanne P.; Fowler, Richard A.; Fritz, Brad G.; Harvey, David W.; Hendrickson, Paul L.; Hoitink, Dana J.; Horton, Duane G.; Last, George V.; Poston, Ted M.; Prendergast-Kennedy, Ellen L.; Reidel, Steve P.; Rohay, Alan C.; Scott, Michael J.; Thorne, Paul D.

    2004-09-22

    This document describes the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Hanford Site environment. It is updated each year and is intended to provide a consistent description of the Hanford Site environment for the many National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents being prepared by DOE contractors. No statements of significance or environmental consequences are provided. This year's report is the sixteenth revision of the original document published in 1988 and is (until replaced by the seventeenth revision) the only version that is relevant for use in the preparation of Hanford NEPA, State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) documents. The two chapters included in this document (Chapters 4 and 6) are numbered to correspond to the chapters where such information is typically presented in environmental impact statements (Weiss) and other Hanford Site NEPA or CERCLA documentation. Chapter 4.0 (Affected Environment) describes Hanford Site climate and meteorology, geology, hydrology, ecology, cultural, archaeological, and historical resources, socioeconomics, occupational safety and health, and noise. Chapter 6.0 (Statutory and Regulatory Requirements) describes federal and state laws and regulations, DOE directives and permits, and presidential executive orders that are applicable to the NEPA documents prepared for Hanford Site activities.

  1. Fiscal year 1995 progress in implementing Section 120 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. Ninth annual report to Congress

    SciTech Connect

    1996-09-01

    Congress passed the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Public Law 96-510), commonly known as Superfund, in 1980. The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) which amended CERCLA in 1986, added Section 120 regarding the cleanup of contaminated sites at Federal facilities. Under Section 120(e)(5) of CERCLA, each department, agency, or instrumentality of the Federal government responsible for compliance with Section 120 must submit an annual report to Congress concerning its progress in implementing the requirements of Section 120. The report must include information on the progress in reaching Interagency Agreements (IAGs), conducting Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Studies (RI/FSs), and performing remedial action. Federal agencies that own or operate facilities on the National priorities List (NPL) are required to begin an RI/FS for these facilities within 6 months after being placed on the NPL. Remediation of these facilities is addressed in an IAG between the Federal agency, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and in some instances the state within which the facility is located. This report provides the status of ongoing activities being performed in support of CERCLA Section 120 at DOE facilities. This includes activities conducted to reach IAGs and progress in conducting remedial actions.

  2. Marine sewage disposal

    SciTech Connect

    Sullivan, D.W.

    1981-03-03

    An activated sludge marine sewage disposal apparatus is described that includes an aeration chamber immediately adjacent to a flooded settling tank, rising above a disinfectant chamber and a holding chamber disposed around the lower part of the tank. Flow from the aeration chamber to the settling tank is through a port in the common wall between the aeration chamber and settling tank, and up inside a pond separated from the rest of the tank by a downwardly flaring baffle of skirt depending from the top of the tank. A single shimmer at the center of the area at the top of the pond picks up floating solids and returns them to the top of the aeration chamber. A vent disposed directly over the shimmer continuously draws off air and gas to the aeration chamber. A sludge return line picks up heavy solids for the bottom of the tank and returns them to the top of the aeration chamber through a riser located in the aeration chamber. Liquid in the settling tank flows out through a submerged perforated pipe into a standpipe in the aeration chamber, with is located centrally in the aeration chamber, and overflows through an inverted U tube, vented to the aeration chamber, the tube connecting to a downcomer sending the liquid back through the common wall to the disinfectant compartment. When sufficient volume of fluid accumulates in the disinfectant compartment, it overflows into a holding tank, from which it emerges via a port.

  3. The Nexus Between Ecological Risk Assessment and Natural Resources Damage Assessment Under CERCLA: Introduction to a Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry Techincal Workshop

    EPA Science Inventory

    A SETAC Technical Workshop titled “The Nexus Between Ecological Risk Assessment and Natural Resource Damage Assessment Under CERCLA: Understanding and Improving the Common Scientific Underpinnings,” was held 18–22 August 2008 in Gregson, Montana, USA, to examine the linkage, nexu...

  4. A primer for health care managers: data sanitization, equipment disposal, and electronic waste.

    PubMed

    Andersen, Cathy M

    2011-01-01

    In this article, security regulations under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act concerning data sanitization and the disposal of media containing stored electronic protected health information are discussed, and methods for effective sanitization and media disposal are presented. When disposing of electronic media, electronic waste-or e-waste-is produced. Electronic waste can harm human health and the environment. Responsible equipment disposal methods can minimize the impact of e-waste. Examples of how health care organizations can meet the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act regulations while also behaving responsibly toward the environment are provided. Examples include the environmental stewardship activities of reduce, reuse, reeducate, recover, and recycle.

  5. Alternative concepts for Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal: Conceptual design report. [Contains glossary

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1987-06-01

    This conceptual design report is provided by the Department of Energy's Nuclear Energy Low-Level Waste Management Program to assist states and compact regions in developing new low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal facilities in accordance with the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendment Act of 1985. The report provides conceptual designs and evaluations of six widely considered concepts for LLW disposal. These are shallow land disposal (SLD), intermediate depth disposal (IDD), below-ground vaults (BGV), above-ground vaults (AGV), modular concrete canister disposal (MCCD), earth-mounded concrete bunker (EMCB). 40 refs., 45 figs., 77 tabs.

  6. Landfill disposal systems

    PubMed Central

    Slimak, Karen M.

    1978-01-01

    The current status of landfill disposal of hazardous wastes in the United States is indicated by presenting descriptions of six operating landfills. These landfills illustrate the variety of techniques that exist in landfill disposal of hazardous wastes. Although some landfills more effectively isolate hazardous waste than others, all landfills must deal with the following problems. Leachate from hazardous waste landfills is generally highly polluted. Most landfills attempt to contain leachate at the site and prevent its discharge to surface or groundwaters. To retain leachate within a disposal area, subsurface barriers of materials such as concrete, asphalt, butyl rubber, vinyl, and clay are used. It is difficult to assure that these materials can seal a landfill indefinitely. When a subsurface barrier fails, the leachate enters the groundwater in a concentrated, narrow band which may bypass monitoring wells. Once a subsurface barrier has failed, repairs are time-consuming and costly, since the waste above the repair site may have to be removed. The central problem in landfill disposal is leachate control. Recent emphasis has been on developing subsurface barriers to contain the wastes and any leachate. Future emphasis should also be on techniques for removing water from hazardous wastes before they are placed in landfills, and on methods for preventing contact of the wastes with water during and after disposal operations. When leachate is eliminated, the problems of monitoring, and subsurface barrier failure and repair can be addressed, and a waste can be effectively isolated. A surface seal landfill design is recommended for maintaining the dry state of solid hazardous wastes and for controlling leachate. Any impervious liner is utilized over the top of the landfill to prevent surface water from seeping into the waste. The surface barrier is also the site where monitoring and maintenance activities are focused. Barrier failure can be detected by visual

  7. Space disposal of nuclear wastes

    NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

    Priest, C. C.; Nixon, R. F.; Rice, E. E.

    1980-01-01

    The DOE has been studying several options for nuclear waste disposal, among them space disposal, which NASA has been assessing. Attention is given to space disposal destinations noting that a circular heliocentric orbit about halfway between Earth and Venus is the reference option in space disposal studies. Discussion also covers the waste form, showing that parameters to be considered include high waste loading, high thermal conductivity, thermochemical stability, resistance to leaching, fabrication, resistance to oxidation and to thermal shock. Finally, the Space Shuttle nuclear waste disposal mission profile is presented.

  8. 49 CFR 599.401 - Requirements and limitations for disposal facilities that receive trade-in vehicles under the...

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... facilities that receive trade-in vehicles under the CARS program. 599.401 Section 599.401 Transportation... SAVE ACT PROGRAM Disposal of Trade-in Vehicle § 599.401 Requirements and limitations for disposal facilities that receive trade-in vehicles under the CARS program. (a) The disposal facility must: (1)...

  9. 76 FR 67209 - Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2011-10-31

    ... Liability Act and the Texas Solid Waste Disposal Act Notice is hereby given that on October 24, 2011, a..., and Liability Act (``CERCLA''), 42 U.S.C. 9601-9675, and the Texas Solid Waste Disposal Act, Texas... releases of solid wastes and hazardous substances at and from the Naval Weapons Industrial Reserve Plant...

  10. Radioactive waste material disposal

    DOEpatents

    Forsberg, Charles W.; Beahm, Edward C.; Parker, George W.

    1995-01-01

    The invention is a process for direct conversion of solid radioactive waste, particularly spent nuclear fuel and its cladding, if any, into a solidified waste glass. A sacrificial metal oxide, dissolved in a glass bath, is used to oxidize elemental metal and any carbon values present in the waste as they are fed to the bath. Two different modes of operation are possible, depending on the sacrificial metal oxide employed. In the first mode, a regenerable sacrificial oxide, e.g., PbO, is employed, while the second mode features use of disposable oxides such as ferric oxide.

  11. Radioactive waste material disposal

    DOEpatents

    Forsberg, C.W.; Beahm, E.C.; Parker, G.W.

    1995-10-24

    The invention is a process for direct conversion of solid radioactive waste, particularly spent nuclear fuel and its cladding, if any, into a solidified waste glass. A sacrificial metal oxide, dissolved in a glass bath, is used to oxidize elemental metal and any carbon values present in the waste as they are fed to the bath. Two different modes of operation are possible, depending on the sacrificial metal oxide employed. In the first mode, a regenerable sacrificial oxide, e.g., PbO, is employed, while the second mode features use of disposable oxides such as ferric oxide. 3 figs.

  12. INL Sitewide Operations and Maintenance Report for CERCLA Response Actions - FY2006

    SciTech Connect

    B. E. Olaveson

    2006-10-02

    This report documents how remedies mandated by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act for the Idaho National Laboratory Site were operated and maintained during Fiscal Year 2006. The activities addressed in the INEEL Sitewide Operations and Maintenance Plan are reported in this document.

  13. Title III list of lists: Consolidated list of chemicals subject to the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) and section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act, as ammended. Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, and Title III of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, April 1995

    SciTech Connect

    1995-04-01

    This consolidated list has been prepared to help firms handling chemicals determine whether they need to submit reports under sections 302, 304, or 313 of SARA Title III (EPCRA) and, for a specific chemical, what reports may need to be submitted. It will also help firms determine whether they will be subject to accident prevention regulations under CAA section 112(r). Separate lists are also provided of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) waste streams and unlisted hazardous wastes, and of radionuclides reportable under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA). These lists should be used as a reference tool, not as a definitive source of compliance information.

  14. 78 FR 29145 - Request for Public Comment on New Proposed Categorical Exclusion for Real Property Disposal Under...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-05-17

    ... SECURITY Coast Guard Request for Public Comment on New Proposed Categorical Exclusion for Real Property Disposal Under the National Environmental Policy Act AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Notice of... Policy Act by establishing a new categorical exclusion (CATEX) for real property disposal undertaken...

  15. Fiscal Year 1994 progress in implementing Section 120 of the Comprehensive Environmental Rresponse, Compensation, and Liability Act. Eighth annual report to Congress

    SciTech Connect

    1995-07-01

    Congress passed the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Public Law 96-510), commonly known as Superfund, in 1980. The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) (Public Law 99-499), which amended CERCLA in 1986, added Section 120 regarding the cleanup of contaminated sites at Federal facilities. Under Section 120(e)(5) of CERCLA, each department, agency, or instrumentality of the Federal government responsible for compliance with Section 120 must submit an annual report to Congress concerning its progress in implementing the requirements of Section 120. The report must include information on the progress in reaching Interagency Agreements (IAGs), conducting Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Studies (RI/FSs), and performing remedial actions. Federal agencies that own or operate facilities on the National Priorities List (NPL) are required to begin an RI/FS for these facilities within 6 months after being placed on the NPL. Remediation of these facilities is addressed in an IAG between the Federal agency, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and in some instances the state within which the facility is located. This report, prepared by the U.S. Department of Energy`s (DOE`s) Office of Environmental Management, is being submitted to Congress in accordance with Section 120(e)(5) of CERCLA. It is DOE`s Eighth Annual Report to Congress and provides information on DOE`s progress in implementing CERCLA Section 120 in Fiscal Year 1994 (FY 94), i.e., from October 1, 1993, to September 30, 1994. In this report the words {open_quotes}site{close_quotes} and {open_quotes}facility{close_quotes} are used interchangeably.

  16. 40 CFR 229.3 - Transportation and disposal of vessels.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-07-01

    ... of the Act are hereby granted a general permit to transport vessels from the United States, and all... transport vessels from any location for the purpose of disposal in the ocean subject to the following conditions: (1) Except in emergency situations, as determined by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and/or...

  17. 21 CFR 1250.75 - Disposal of human wastes.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-04-01

    ... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false Disposal of human wastes. 1250.75 Section 1250.75 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) REGULATIONS UNDER CERTAIN OTHER ACTS ADMINISTERED BY THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION INTERSTATE...

  18. 21 CFR 1250.75 - Disposal of human wastes.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-04-01

    ... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false Disposal of human wastes. 1250.75 Section 1250.75 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) REGULATIONS UNDER CERTAIN OTHER ACTS ADMINISTERED BY THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION INTERSTATE...

  19. Federal Real Property Disposal Enhancement Act of 2011

    THOMAS, 112th Congress

    Sen. Pryor, Mark L. [D-AR

    2011-03-03

    03/03/2011 Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. (All Actions) Tracker: This bill has the status IntroducedHere are the steps for Status of Legislation:

  20. Federal Real Property Disposal Enhancement Act of 2011

    THOMAS, 112th Congress

    Rep. Quigley, Mike [D-IL-5

    2011-03-17

    04/01/2011 Referred to the Subcommittee on Government Organization, Efficiency, and Financial Management. (All Actions) Tracker: This bill has the status IntroducedHere are the steps for Status of Legislation:

  1. Excess Federal Building and Property Disposal Act of 2012

    THOMAS, 112th Congress

    Rep. Chaffetz, Jason [R-UT-3

    2011-02-11

    03/21/2012 Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. (All Actions) Tracker: This bill has the status Passed HouseHere are the steps for Status of Legislation:

  2. Secure and Responsible Drug Disposal Act of 2009

    THOMAS, 111th Congress

    Sen. Klobuchar, Amy [D-MN

    2009-06-18

    06/18/2009 Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (All Actions) Notes: For further action, see S.3397, which became Public Law 111-273 on 10/12/2010. Tracker: This bill has the status IntroducedHere are the steps for Status of Legislation:

  3. Secure and Responsible Drug Disposal Act of 2009

    THOMAS, 111th Congress

    Rep. Stupak, Bart [D-MI-1

    2009-03-05

    04/27/2009 Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. (All Actions) Notes: For further action, see S.3397, which became Public Law 111-273 on 10/12/2010. Tracker: This bill has the status IntroducedHere are the steps for Status of Legislation:

  4. 77 FR 71842 - Exemption of Material for Proposed Disposal Procedures at the US Ecology Idaho Resource...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-12-04

    ... COMMISSION Exemption of Material for Proposed Disposal Procedures at the US Ecology Idaho Resource..., at the US Ecology Idaho (USEI) Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Subtitle C hazardous... 70.17 Exemption of Humboldt Bay Power Plant Waste For Disposal at US Ecology, Inc'' (2) Email...

  5. 40 CFR 761.213 - Use of manifest-Commercial storage and disposal facility requirements.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-07-01

    ... AGENCY (CONTINUED) TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS (PCBs) MANUFACTURING, PROCESSING, DISTRIBUTION IN COMMERCE, AND USE PROHIBITIONS PCB Waste Disposal Records and Reports § 761.213... or disposal facility receives PCB waste accompanied by a manifest, the owner, operator or...

  6. Mixed waste characterization, treatment & disposal focus area

    SciTech Connect

    1996-08-01

    The mission of the Mixed Waste Characterization, Treatment, and Disposal Focus Area (referred to as the Mixed Waste Focus Area or MWFA) is to provide treatment systems capable of treating DOE`s mixed waste in partnership with users, and with continual participation of stakeholders, tribal governments, and regulators. The MWFA deals with the problem of eliminating mixed waste from current and future storage in the DOE complex. Mixed waste is waste that contains both hazardous chemical components, subject to the requirements of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and radioactive components, subject to the requirements of the Atomic Energy Act. The radioactive components include transuranic (TRU) and low-level waste (LLW). TRU waste primarily comes from the reprocessing of spent fuel and the use of plutonium in the fabrication of nuclear weapons. LLW includes radioactive waste other than uranium mill tailings, TRU, and high-level waste, including spent fuel.

  7. 26 CFR 301.7326-1 - Disposal of forfeited or abandoned property in special cases.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-04-01

    ... narcotic drugs, see 21 CFR 302.56. For the disposal of forfeited marihuana, see 26 CFR (1939) 152.99 and 152.100 (Regulations under the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937, as amended). (c) Firearms. For...

  8. 26 CFR 301.7326-1 - Disposal of forfeited or abandoned property in special cases.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-04-01

    ... narcotic drugs, see 21 CFR 302.56. For the disposal of forfeited marihuana, see 26 CFR (1939) 152.99 and 152.100 (Regulations under the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937, as amended). (c) Firearms. For...

  9. 26 CFR 301.7326-1 - Disposal of forfeited or abandoned property in special cases.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-04-01

    ... narcotic drugs, see 21 CFR 302.56. For the disposal of forfeited marihuana, see 26 CFR (1939) 152.99 and 152.100 (Regulations under the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937, as amended). (c) Firearms. For...

  10. 26 CFR 301.7326-1 - Disposal of forfeited or abandoned property in special cases.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-04-01

    ... narcotic drugs, see 21 CFR 302.56. For the disposal of forfeited marihuana, see 26 CFR (1939) 152.99 and 152.100 (Regulations under the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937, as amended). (c) Firearms. For...

  11. 26 CFR 301.7326-1 - Disposal of forfeited or abandoned property in special cases.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-04-01

    ... narcotic drugs, see 21 CFR 302.56. For the disposal of forfeited marihuana, see 26 CFR (1939) 152.99 and 152.100 (Regulations under the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937, as amended). (c) Firearms. For...

  12. Melter Disposal Strategic Planning Document

    SciTech Connect

    BURBANK, D.A.

    2000-09-25

    This document describes the proposed strategy for disposal of spent and failed melters from the tank waste treatment plant to be built by the Office of River Protection at the Hanford site in Washington. It describes program management activities, disposal and transportation systems, leachate management, permitting, and safety authorization basis approvals needed to execute the strategy.

  13. Nuclear waste disposal in space

    NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

    Burns, R. E.; Causey, W. E.; Galloway, W. E.; Nelson, R. W.

    1978-01-01

    Work on nuclear waste disposal in space conducted by the George C. Marshall Space Flight Center, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and contractors are reported. From the aggregate studies, it is concluded that space disposal of nuclear waste is technically feasible.

  14. Integrated Disposal Facility Risk Assessment

    SciTech Connect

    MANN, F. M.

    2003-06-03

    An environmental risk assessment associated with the disposal of projected Immobilized Low-Activity Waste, solid wastes and failed or decommissioned melters in an Integrated Disposal Facility was performed. Based on the analyses all performance objectives associated with the groundwater, air, and intruder pathways were met.

  15. 78 FR 48868 - Proposed Cercla Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement; MassDOT, MassDOT Route 1 Right-of-Way...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-08-12

    ... AGENCY Proposed Cercla Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement; MassDOT, MassDOT Route 1 Right-of-Way...), concerning the MassDOT Route 1 Right-of-Way Site in Chelsea, Massachusetts with the following Settling Party... should refer to: In re: MassDOT Route 1 Right-of- Way Site, U.S. EPA Docket No.01-2013-0031. FOR...

  16. Title III list of lists: Consolidated list of chemicals subject to the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) and section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act, as amended. Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986, and Title III of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1994-06-01

    The consolidated chemical list includes chemicals subject to reporting requirements under Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), also known as the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), and chemicals listed under section 112(r) of Title III the Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments of 1990. This consolidated list has been prepared to help firms handling chemicals determine whether they need to submit reports under sections 302, 304, or 313 of SARA Title III (EPCRA) and, for a specific chemical, what reports may need to be submitted. Separate lists are also provided of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) waste streams and unlisted hazardous wastes, and of radionuclides reportable under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA). These lists should be used as reference tool, not as a definitive source of compliance information. The chemicals on the consolidated list are ordered by Chemical Abstract Service (CAS) registry number. Categories of chemicals, which do not have CAS registry numbers, but which are cited under CERCLA, EPCRA section 313, and the CAA, are placed at the end of the list. More than one chemical name may be listed for one CAS number, because the same chemical may appear on different lists under different names.

  17. INL Sitewide Operations and Maintenance Report for CERCLA Response Actions - FY 2005

    SciTech Connect

    D. R. Fitch

    2005-09-22

    This report documents how remedies mandated by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act for the Idaho National Laboratory Site were operated and maintained during fiscal year 2005. The activities addressed in the INEEL Sitewide Operations and Maintenance Plan are reported in this document. Waste Area Groups 7 and 8 are not reported in this document. Waste Area Group 7 is an operating facility, and the status of its operations is reported directly to the regulatory agencies. Waste Area Group 8 is excluded from this report, because it falls outside the direct control of U.S. Department of Energy Idaho Operations Office. The INEEL Sitewide Institutional Controls Plan discusses the inspection, maintenance, repair, and reporting activities involving institutional controls at the Idaho National Laboratory Site. Therefore, the maintenance of institutional controls is not discussed in this report. The Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Comprehensive Facilities and Land Use Plan provides a reference to support this report by providing current and projected facility and land uses and by listing the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act sites.

  18. Radioactive waste disposal in simulated peat bog repositories

    SciTech Connect

    Schell, W.R.; Massey, C.D.

    1987-01-01

    The Low Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980 and the Low Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 have required state governments to be responsible for providing low-level waste (LLW) disposal facilities in their respective areas. Questions are (a) is the technology sufficiently advanced to ensure that radioactive wastes can be stored for 300 to 1000 yr without entering into any uncontrolled area. (b) since actual experience does not exist for nuclear waste disposal over this time period, can the mathematical models developed be tested and verified using unequivocal data. (c) how can the public perception of the problem be addressed and the potential risk assessment of the hazards be communicated. To address the technical problems of nuclear waste disposal in the acid precipitation regions of the Northern Hemisphere, a project was initiated in 1984 to evaluate an alternative method of nuclear waste disposal that may not rely completely on engineered barriers to protect the public. Certain natural biogeochemical systems have been retaining deposited materials since the last Ice Age (12,000 to 15,000 yr). It is the authors belief that the biogeochemical system of wetlands and peat bogs may provide an example of an analogue for a nuclear waste repository system that can be tested and verified over a sufficient time period, at least for the LLW disposal problem.

  19. Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation: Waste Disposal In Engineered Trench #3

    SciTech Connect

    Hamm, L. L.; Smith, F. G. III; Flach, G. P.; Hiergesell, R. A.; Butcher, B. T.

    2013-07-29

    Because Engineered Trench #3 (ET#3) will be placed in the location previously designated for Slit Trench #12 (ST#12), Solid Waste Management (SWM) requested that the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) determine if the ST#12 limits could be employed as surrogate disposal limits for ET#3 operations. SRNL documented in this Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation (UDQE) that the use of ST#12 limits as surrogates for the new ET#3 disposal unit will provide reasonable assurance that Department of Energy (DOE) 435.1 performance objectives and measures (USDOE, 1999) will be protected. Therefore new ET#3 inventory limits as determined by a Special Analysis (SA) are not required.

  20. Nanomaterial disposal by incineration.

    PubMed

    Holder, Amara L; Vejerano, Eric P; Zhou, Xinzhe; Marr, Linsey C

    2013-09-01

    As nanotechnology-based products enter into widespread use, nanomaterials will end up in disposal waste streams that are ultimately discharged to the environment. One possible end-of-life scenario is incineration. This review attempts to ascertain the potential pathways by which nanomaterials may enter incinerator waste streams and the fate of these nanomaterials during the incineration process. Although the literature on incineration of nanomaterials is scarce, results from studies of their behavior at high temperature or in combustion environments for other applications can help predict their fate within an incinerator. Preliminary evidence suggests nanomaterials may catalyze the formation or destruction of combustion by-products. Depending on their composition, nanomaterials may undergo physical and chemical transformations within the incinerator, impacting their partitioning within the incineration system (e.g., bottom ash, fly ash) and the effectiveness of control technology for removing them. These transformations may also drastically affect nanomaterial transport and impacts in the environment. Current regulations on incinerator emissions do not specifically address nanomaterials, but limits on particle and metal emissions may prove somewhat effective at reducing the release of nanomaterials in incinerator effluent. Control technology used to meet these regulations, such as fabric filters, electrostatic precipitators, and wet electrostatic scrubbers, are expected to be at least partially effective at removing nanomaterials from incinerator flue gas. PMID:23880913

  1. Nanomaterial disposal by incineration.

    PubMed

    Holder, Amara L; Vejerano, Eric P; Zhou, Xinzhe; Marr, Linsey C

    2013-09-01

    As nanotechnology-based products enter into widespread use, nanomaterials will end up in disposal waste streams that are ultimately discharged to the environment. One possible end-of-life scenario is incineration. This review attempts to ascertain the potential pathways by which nanomaterials may enter incinerator waste streams and the fate of these nanomaterials during the incineration process. Although the literature on incineration of nanomaterials is scarce, results from studies of their behavior at high temperature or in combustion environments for other applications can help predict their fate within an incinerator. Preliminary evidence suggests nanomaterials may catalyze the formation or destruction of combustion by-products. Depending on their composition, nanomaterials may undergo physical and chemical transformations within the incinerator, impacting their partitioning within the incineration system (e.g., bottom ash, fly ash) and the effectiveness of control technology for removing them. These transformations may also drastically affect nanomaterial transport and impacts in the environment. Current regulations on incinerator emissions do not specifically address nanomaterials, but limits on particle and metal emissions may prove somewhat effective at reducing the release of nanomaterials in incinerator effluent. Control technology used to meet these regulations, such as fabric filters, electrostatic precipitators, and wet electrostatic scrubbers, are expected to be at least partially effective at removing nanomaterials from incinerator flue gas.

  2. Challenges in establishing LLW disposal capacity: Pennsylvania`s perspective

    SciTech Connect

    Dornsife, W.P.; Saraka, L.J.

    1989-11-01

    Even though Pennsylvania is host state for the Compact, state implementing legislation was non-existent until early 1988. In February of 1998 Governor Casey signed the Los-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Act (Act) into law. The Act incorporates three years of Departmental work and interaction with the legislature, a Public Advisory Committee on Low-Level Waste, many interest groups and the general public. It is a comprehensive Act that: provides the Department with broad powers and duties to manage, license and regulate a low-level waste disposal program; requires development phase; and establishes benefits and guarantees for communities affected by the establishment and operation of a low-level waste site. The Department considers that its powers and duties to manage, license and regulate a low-level waste disposal program begins with interpreting the provisions established by the Act. Interpretation will establish how the Department intends to implement its authority. The Department is communicating interpretations through various methods such as regulation, policy, and written or verbal guidance. Interpretations typically require a mix of technical, policy, and social solutions to clarify concepts established by law. This paper identifies select items established by law that require technical solutions. Its purpose is to share some creative approaches for solving unmanageable legislature requirements.

  3. Regulatory requirements affecting disposal of asbestos-containing waste

    SciTech Connect

    1995-11-01

    Many U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facilities are undergoing decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) activities. The performance of these activities may generate asbestos-containing waste because asbestos was formerly used in many building materials, including floor tile, sealants, plastics, cement pipe, cement sheets, insulating boards, and insulating cements. The regulatory requirements governing the disposal of these wastes depend on: (1) the percentage of asbestos in the waste and whether the waste is friable (easily crumbled or pulverized); (2) other physical and chemical characteristics of the waste; and (3) the State in which the waste is generated. This Information Brief provides an overview of the environment regulatory requirements affecting disposal of asbestos-containing waste. It does not address regulatory requirements applicable to worker protection promulgated under the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHAct), the Mining Safety and Health Act (MSHA), or the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).

  4. Cost recovery for CERCLA response actions at DOD facilities. Master's thesis

    SciTech Connect

    Barzler, P.M.

    1994-09-01

    Literally thousands of sites throughout the United States are contaminated with hazardous wastes. In order to prioritize the cleanup of the sites posing the greatest threat to the public Congress directed the President to establish a National Priorities List (NPL) under Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. Hazardous waste sites are evaluated and ranked according to the risks posed to the public health and the environment. Those sites with the highest ranking represent priority response targets and are placed on the NPL. There are 1,286 such polluted sites included on the NPL with another 12,800 candidates for addition on the list. The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that as many as 3,000 sites will eventually be a federal cleanup priority.

  5. ACT: Acting Out Central Theme.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Kise, Joan Duff

    1982-01-01

    The author describes ACT (Acting Out Central Theme), a method for dealing with psychomotor, cognitive, and affective domains in slow readers. The ACT approach involves three sessions which focus on discussion of a theme such as friendship, presentaton of the theme as a skit, and assignment of topics to individual students. (SW)

  6. New DEA rules expand options for controlled substance disposal.

    PubMed

    Peterson, David M

    2015-03-01

    Prescription drug abuse and overdose are rapidly growing problems in the United States. The United States federal Disposal of Controlled Substances Rule became effective 9 October 2014, implementing the Secure and Responsible Drug Disposal Act of 2010 (Disposal Act). These regulations target escalating prescription drug misuse by reducing accumulation of unused controlled substances that may be abused, diverted or accidentally ingested. Clinical areas that can now participate in collecting unused controlled substances include retail pharmacies, hospitals or clinics with an onsite pharmacy, and narcotic treatment programs. Collection methods include placing a controlled substance collection receptacle or instituting a mail-back program. Because prompt onsite destruction of collected items is required of mail-back programs, collection receptacles are more likely to be used in clinical areas. Retail pharmacies and hospitals or clinics with an onsite pharmacy may also place and maintain collection receptacles at long-term care facilities. The Act and Rule are intended to increase controlled substance disposal methods and expand local involvement in collection of unused controlled substances. Potential barriers to participating in controlled substance collection include acquisition of suitable collection receptacles and liners, lack of available space meeting the necessary criteria, lack of employee time for verification and inventory requirements, and program costs.

  7. Disposable diapers: a hygienic alternative.

    PubMed

    Kamat, Maithili; Malkani, Ram

    2003-11-01

    The use of disposable diapers has offered improved health care benefits. Urine and fecal matter leakage from the cloth nappies and the hand-to-mouth behavior in infants leads to many illnesses with a feco-oral mode of transmission. Also, the tender skin of the infant is more prone to nappy rash. The modern age disposable diapers, when compared to cloth nappy, have displayed a superior ability in containment of urine and feces, thereby reducing contamination and transmission of infection. Also disposable diapers contain Super Absorbent Material (SAM) that successfully reduces the incidence of nappy rash. PMID:14703226

  8. The Nuclear Waste Policy Act, as amended with appropriations acts appended

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1994-03-01

    The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 provides for the development of repositories for the disposal of high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel, to establish a program of research, development and demonstration regarding the disposal of high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel. Titles 1 and 2 cover these subjects. Also included in this Act are: Title 3: Other provisions relating to radioactive waste; Title 4: Nuclear waste negotiation; Title 5: Nuclear waste technical review board; and Title 6: High-level radioactive waste. An appendix contains excerpts from appropriations acts from fiscal year 1984--1994.

  9. Biological assessment for rare and endangered plant species: Related to CERCLA characterization activities

    SciTech Connect

    Sackschewsky, M.R.

    1992-04-01

    Environmental characterization in support of hazardous, radioactive, and mixed waste cleanup (in accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980) can involve a large number of both nonintrusive and intrusive activities. Many of these activities could have a detrimental impact on listed plant species. These impacts can be minimized by following simple conservation policies while conducting the various field activities. For instance, frequent off-road vehicular traffic and have a severe impact on native habitats and, therefore, should be kept to a minimum. Personnel performing the field activities should be trained to preserve, respect, and minimize their impact on native habitat while performing work in the field. In addition, areas where sampling is planned should be surveyed for the presence of listed plant species before the initiation of the field activities. Extremely distributed areas could be exempted from this requirement provided adequate habitat assessments have been performed by qualified personnel. Twelve special status plant species are known to survive on or very near the Hanford Site. None of these species currently are listed as Federal Threatened or Endangered Species. However, four local species currently are candidates for federal protection. These species are the Northern Wormwood (Artemisia campestris ssp. borealis var. wormskioldii), Persistantsepal Yellowcress (Rorippa columbiae), Hoover's Desert Parsley (Lomatium tuberosum), and Columbia Milkvetch (Astragalus columbianus).

  10. Biological assessment for rare and endangered plant species: Related to CERCLA characterization activities

    SciTech Connect

    Sackschewsky, M.R.

    1992-04-01

    Environmental characterization in support of hazardous, radioactive, and mixed waste cleanup (in accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980) can involve a large number of both nonintrusive and intrusive activities. Many of these activities could have a detrimental impact on listed plant species. These impacts can be minimized by following simple conservation policies while conducting the various field activities. For instance, frequent off-road vehicular traffic and have a severe impact on native habitats and, therefore, should be kept to a minimum. Personnel performing the field activities should be trained to preserve, respect, and minimize their impact on native habitat while performing work in the field. In addition, areas where sampling is planned should be surveyed for the presence of listed plant species before the initiation of the field activities. Extremely distributed areas could be exempted from this requirement provided adequate habitat assessments have been performed by qualified personnel. Twelve special status plant species are known to survive on or very near the Hanford Site. None of these species currently are listed as Federal Threatened or Endangered Species. However, four local species currently are candidates for federal protection. These species are the Northern Wormwood (Artemisia campestris ssp. borealis var. wormskioldii), Persistantsepal Yellowcress (Rorippa columbiae), Hoover`s Desert Parsley (Lomatium tuberosum), and Columbia Milkvetch (Astragalus columbianus).

  11. The Texas Solution to the Nation's Disposal Needs for Irradiated Hardware - 13337

    SciTech Connect

    Britten, Jay M.

    2013-07-01

    The closure of the disposal facility in Barnwell, South Carolina, to out-of-compact states in 2008 left commercial nuclear power plants without a disposal option for Class B and C irradiated hardware. In 2012, Waste Control Specialists LLC (WCS) opened a highly engineered facility specifically designed and built for the disposal of Class B and C waste. The WCS facility is the first Interstate Compact low-level radioactive waste disposal facility to be licensed and operated under the Low-level Waste Policy Act of 1980, as amended in 1985. Due to design requirements of a modern Low Level Radioactive Waste (LLRW) facility, traditional methods for disposal were not achievable at the WCS site. Earlier methods primarily utilized the As Low as Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) concept of distance to accomplish worker safety. The WCS method required the use of all three ALARA concepts of time, distance, and shielding to ensure the safe disposal of this highly hazardous waste stream. (authors)

  12. Ultimate disposal of scrubber wastes

    NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

    Cohenour, B. C.

    1978-01-01

    Part of the initial concern with using the wet scrubbers on the hypergolic propellants was the subsequential disposal of the liquid wastes. To do this, consideration was given to all possible methods to reduce the volume of the wastes and stay within the guidelines established by the state and federal environmental protection agencies. One method that was proposed was the use of water hyacinths in disposal ponds to reduce the waste concentration in the effluent to less than EPA tolerable levels. This method was under consideration and even in use by private industry, municipal governments, and NASA for upgrading existing wastewater treatment facilities to a tertiary system. The use of water hyacinths in disposal ponds appears to be a very cost-effective method for reduction and disposal of hypergolic propellants.

  13. Advantages of disposable endoscopic accessories.

    PubMed

    Petersen, B T

    2000-04-01

    Despite the prevailing emphasis on falling reimbursements and cost containment, the use of disposable endoscopic accessories has grown tremendously. They offer simplicity of use, certain sterility, and reduced labor costs in exchange for higher purchase costs per procedure and the burden of waste disposal. Disposable accessories provide greater variety, complexity, and utility. They carry a cost burden that may be acceptable when the devices are difficult to reprocess, when they incorporate features that justify the added cost, or when their unit cost approaches purchase plus reprocessing costs for reusable alternatives, such as for biopsy forceps. Units with small volumes may prefer the ease of disposable accessories independent of relative cost issues, while large high-volume units may need to evaluate cost data more carefully to maintain sustainable practices.

  14. Optimization of Waste Disposal - 13338

    SciTech Connect

    Shephard, E.; Walter, N.; Downey, H.; Collopy, P.; Conant, J.

    2013-07-01

    From 2009 through 2011, remediation of areas of a former fuel cycle facility used for government contract work was conducted. Remediation efforts were focused on building demolition, underground pipeline removal, contaminated soil removal and removal of contaminated sediments from portions of an on-site stream. Prior to conducting the remediation field effort, planning and preparation for remediation (including strategic planning for waste characterization and disposal) was conducted during the design phase. During the remediation field effort, waste characterization and disposal practices were continuously reviewed and refined to optimize waste disposal practices. This paper discusses strategic planning for waste characterization and disposal that was employed in the design phase, and continuously reviewed and refined to optimize efficiency. (authors)

  15. Human intrusion in geologic disposal

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1993-12-31

    This report discusses the possibility of human intrusion into the WIPP facility, an undergound disposal facility for alpha-bearing wastes. The probability of exploratory drilling occurring at the site is described.

  16. Americium product solidification and disposal

    SciTech Connect

    Mailen, J.C.; Campbell, D.O.; Bell, J.T.; Collins, E.D.

    1987-01-01

    The americium product from the TRUEX processing plant needs to be converted into a form suitable for ultimate disposal. An evaluation of the disposal based on safety, number of process steps, demonstrated operability of the processes, production of low-level alpha waste streams, and simplicity of maintenance with low radiation exposures to personnel during maintenance, has been made. The best process is to load the americium on a cation exchange resin followed by calcination or oxidation of the resin after loading.

  17. The Necessity of Geologic Disposal

    SciTech Connect

    R. Linden

    2004-07-01

    Nuclear wastes are the radioactive byproducts of nuclear power generation, nuclear weapons production, and other uses of nuclear material. Experts from around the world agree that deep geologic disposal of nuclear waste in a mined repository is the most environmentally sound means of removing these potential sources of radiation from interaction with the biosphere. Of the 360 millirem of background radiation received annually by the average American, from both natural and man-made sources, less than 1 millirem results from the nuclear fuel cycle. Spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste, destined for geologic disposal, are located at 126 sites in 39 states. The proposed repository site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, is far more isolated from the general population than any sites where these radioactive materials are presently located. Only solid forms of high-level wastes will be transported for disposal in a geologic repository. For more than 50 years, nuclear materials have been safely transported in North America, Europe, and Asia, without a single significant radiation release. Since the 1950s, select panels from the National Academy of Sciences-National Research Council and interagency advisory groups, and international experts selected by the OECD/Nuclear Energy Agency, have examined the environmental, ethical, and intergenerational aspects of nuclear waste disposal, plus alternatives to geologic disposal. All have concluded that deep geologic disposal in a mined repository is clearly the preferred option. The concept of deep geologic disposal is based on the analogy to ore deposits, which are formed deep within the Earth's crust, commonly remain isolated from the biosphere for millions to billions of years, and are, generally, extremely difficult to detect. Before selecting the unsaturated tuffs at Yucca Mountain, DOE evaluated salt formations, basalts, and both crystalline and sedimentary rocks. Other nations generating nuclear power also plan to use

  18. 41 CFR 102-75.435 - Does the Airport and Airway Development Act of 1970, as amended (Airport Act of 1970), apply to...

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-07-01

    ... 41 Public Contracts and Property Management 3 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Does the Airport and Airway Development Act of 1970, as amended (Airport Act of 1970), apply to the transfer of airports to... PROPERTY DISPOSAL Surplus Real Property Disposal Property for Public Airports § 102-75.435 Does the...

  19. Five-Year Review of CERCLA Response Actions at the Idaho National Laboratory

    SciTech Connect

    W. L. Jolley

    2007-02-01

    This report summarizes the documentation submitted in support of the five-year review or remedial actions implemented under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act Sitewide at the Idaho National Laboratory. The report also summarizes documentation and inspections conducted at the no-further-action sites. This review covered actions conducted at 9 of the 10 waste area groups at the Idaho National Laboratory, i.e. Waste Area Groups 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, and 10. Waste Area Group 8 was not subject to this review, because it does not fall under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of Energy Idaho Operations Office. The review included past site inspections and monitoring data collected in support of the remedial actions. The remedial actions have been completed at Waste Area Groups 2, 4, 5, 6, and 9. Remedial action reports have been completed for Waste Area Groups 2 and 4, and remedial action reports are expected to be completed during 2005 for Waste Area Groups 1, 5, and 9. Remediation is ongoing at Waste Area Groups 3, 7, and 10. Remedial investigations are yet to be completed for Operable Units 3-14, 7-13/14, and 10-08. The review showed that the remedies have been constructed in accordance with the requirements of the Records of Decision and are functioning as designed. Immediate threats have been addressed, and the remedies continue to be protective. Potential short-term threats are being addressed though institutional controls. Soil cover and cap remedies are being maintained properly and inspected in accordance with the appropriate requirements. Soil removal actions and equipment or system removals have successfully achieved remedial action objectives identified in the Records of Decision. The next Sitewide five-year review is scheduled for completion by 2011.

  20. Enhanced Clean Air Act enforcement

    SciTech Connect

    Faletto, J.S.

    1997-09-01

    The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 added new enforcement authorities which will change the way the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the States and environmental groups litigate enforcement actions. EPA, the States and ordinary citizens now have at their disposal an extensive array of enforcement options to deter or penalize those who violate requirements of the Clean Air Act or State Implementation Plans (SIPs). These new enforcement authorities take on even greater significance for major sources covered by the Title V Operating Permit Program.

  1. Conceptual Uncertainty and Parameter Sensitivity in Subsurface Pathway Flow and Transport Modeling for the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory's Subsurface Disposal Area

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Magnuson, S. O.

    2002-05-01

    As part of an ongoing CERCLA evaluation, the migration of contaminants through the hydrologically complex subsurface at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Subsurface Disposal Area (SDA) were modeled. The 180-meter thick vadose zone beneath the SDA is primarily composed of extrusive basalt flows that are extensively fractured. These flows are interrupted by thin, mostly continuous sedimentary interbeds that were deposited through aeolian and fluvial processes during periods of volcanic quiescence. The subsurface pathway modeling for the CERCLA assessment has been conducted in phases utilizing the results of characterization activities. The most recent model for the SDA used an equivalent porous continuum approach in a three-dimensional domain to represent movement of water and contaminants in the subsurface. Given the complexity of the subsurface at this site, the simulation results were acknowledged to be uncertain. This presentation will provide an overview of the current modeling effort for the SDA and how conceptual uncertainty was addressed by modeling different scenarios. These scenarios included assignment of infiltration boundary conditions, the effect of superimposing gaps in the interbeds, including the effect within the vadose zone from Big Lost River water discharged to the spreading areas approximately 1 km away, and a simplistic approximation to represent facilitated transport. Parametric sensitivity simulations were used to determine possible effects from assigned transport parameters such as partition coefficients and solubility limits that can vary widely with presumed geochemical conditions. Comparisons of simulated transport results to measured field concentrations in both the vadose zone and in the underlying Snake River Plain aquifer were made to determine the representativeness of the model results. Results of the SDA subsurface transport modeling have been used in part to guide additional field characterization

  2. The residuals analysis project: Evaluating disposal options for treated mixed low-level waste

    SciTech Connect

    Waters, R.D.; Gruebel, M.M.; Case, J.T.; Letourneau, M.J.

    1997-03-01

    For almost four years, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) through its Federal Facility Compliance Act Disposal Workgroup has been working with state regulators and governors` offices to develop an acceptable configuration for disposal of its mixed low-level waste (MLLW). These interactions have resulted in screening the universe of potential disposal sites from 49 to 15 and conducting ``performance evaluations`` for those fifteen sites to estimate their technical capabilities for disposal of MLLW. In the residuals analysis project, we estimated the volume of DOE`s MLLW that will require disposal after treatment and the concentrations of radionuclides in the treated waste. We then compared the radionuclide concentrations with the disposal limits determined in the performance evaluation project for each of the fifteen sites. The results are a scoping-level estimate of the required volumetric capacity for MLLW disposal and the identification of waste streams that may pose problems for disposal based on current treatment plans. The analysis provides technical information for continued discussions between the DOE and affected States about disposal of MLLW and systematic input to waste treatment developers on disposal issues.

  3. Juggling Act

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Rudalevige, Andrew

    2009-01-01

    Two education bills from George W. Bush's first term are long overdue for reauthorization. One, of course, is the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), passed in late 2001. The other is the Education Sciences Reform Act (ESRA), which in November 2002 replaced the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI) with a new Institute of Education…

  4. Remedial Action Assessment System (RAAS): Evaluation of selected feasibility studies of CERCLA (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act) hazardous waste sites

    SciTech Connect

    Whelan, G. ); Hartz, K.E.; Hilliard, N.D. and Associates, Seattle, WA )

    1990-04-01

    Congress and the public have mandated much closer scrutiny of the management of chemically hazardous and radioactive mixed wastes. Legislative language, regulatory intent, and prudent technical judgment, call for using scientifically based studies to assess current conditions and to evaluate and select costeffective strategies for mitigating unacceptable situations. The NCP requires that a Remedial Investigation (RI) and a Feasibility Study (FS) be conducted at each site targeted for remedial response action. The goal of the RI is to obtain the site data needed so that the potential impacts on public health or welfare or on the environment can be evaluated and so that the remedial alternatives can be identified and selected. The goal of the FS is to identify and evaluate alternative remedial actions (including a no-action alternative) in terms of their cost, effectiveness, and engineering feasibility. The NCP also requires the analysis of impacts on public health and welfare and on the environment; this analysis is the endangerment assessment (EA). In summary, the RI, EA, and FS processes require assessment of the contamination at a site, of the potential impacts in public health or the environment from that contamination, and of alternative RAs that could address potential impacts to the environment. 35 refs., 7 figs., 1 tab.

  5. Disposal of mixed waste: Technical, institutional, and policy factors

    SciTech Connect

    Waters, R.D.; Gruebel, M.M.; Letourneau, M.J.; Case, J.T.

    1996-03-01

    In conjunction with the affected States as part of their interactions required by the Federal Facilities Compliance Act, the Department of Energy has been developing a process for a disposal configuration for its mixed low-level waste (MLLW). This effort, spanning more than two years, has reduced the potential disposal sites from 49 to 15. The remaining 15 sites have been subjected to a performance evaluation to determine their strengths and weaknesses for disposal of MLLW. The process has included institutional and policy factors as well as strictly technical analyses, and technical analyses must be supported by technical analyses, and technical analyses must be performed within a framework which includes some institutional considerations, with the institutional considerations selected for inclusion largely a matter of policy. While the disposal configuration process is yet to be completed, the experience to date offers a viable approach for solving some of these issues. Additionally, several factors remain to be addressed before an MLLW disposal configuration can be developed.

  6. Tank Waste Disposal Program redefinition

    SciTech Connect

    Grygiel, M.L.; Augustine, C.A.; Cahill, M.A.; Garfield, J.S.; Johnson, M.E.; Kupfer, M.J.; Meyer, G.A.; Roecker, J.H.; Holton, L.K.; Hunter, V.L.; Triplett, M.B.

    1991-10-01

    The record of decision (ROD) (DOE 1988) on the Final Environmental Impact Statement, Hanford Defense High-Level, Transuranic and Tank Wastes, Hanford Site, Richland Washington identifies the method for disposal of double-shell tank waste and cesium and strontium capsules at the Hanford Site. The ROD also identifies the need for additional evaluations before a final decision is made on the disposal of single-shell tank waste. This document presents the results of systematic evaluation of the present technical circumstances, alternatives, and regulatory requirements in light of the values of the leaders and constitutents of the program. It recommends a three-phased approach for disposing of tank wastes. This approach allows mature technologies to be applied to the treatment of well-understood waste forms in the near term, while providing time for the development and deployment of successively more advanced pretreatment technologies. The advanced technologies will accelerate disposal by reducing the volume of waste to be vitrified. This document also recommends integration of the double-and single-shell tank waste disposal programs, provides a target schedule for implementation of the selected approach, and describes the essential elements of a program to be baselined in 1992.

  7. ACT Test

    MedlinePlus

    ... this page helpful? Also known as: ACT; Activated Coagulation Time Formal name: Activated Clotting Time Related tests: ... in the blood called platelets and proteins called coagulation factors are activated in a sequence of steps ...

  8. Acting Atoms.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Farin, Susan Archie

    1997-01-01

    Describes a fun game in which students act as electrons, protons, and neutrons. This activity is designed to help students develop a concrete understanding of the abstract concept of atomic structure. (DKM)

  9. 41 CFR 102-41.200 - Are there special disposal provisions for firearms that are seized and forfeited for a violation...

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-01-01

    ... disposal provisions for firearms that are seized and forfeited for a violation of the National Firearms Act... Handling Firearms § 102-41.200 Are there special disposal provisions for firearms that are seized and forfeited for a violation of the National Firearms Act? Yes, firearms seized and forfeited for a...

  10. 41 CFR 102-41.200 - Are there special disposal provisions for firearms that are seized and forfeited for a violation...

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-01-01

    ... disposal provisions for firearms that are seized and forfeited for a violation of the National Firearms Act... Handling Firearms § 102-41.200 Are there special disposal provisions for firearms that are seized and forfeited for a violation of the National Firearms Act? Yes, firearms seized and forfeited for a...

  11. 41 CFR 102-41.200 - Are there special disposal provisions for firearms that are seized and forfeited for a violation...

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-07-01

    ... disposal provisions for firearms that are seized and forfeited for a violation of the National Firearms Act... Handling Firearms § 102-41.200 Are there special disposal provisions for firearms that are seized and forfeited for a violation of the National Firearms Act? Yes, firearms seized and forfeited for a...

  12. 41 CFR 102-41.200 - Are there special disposal provisions for firearms that are seized and forfeited for a violation...

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-07-01

    ... disposal provisions for firearms that are seized and forfeited for a violation of the National Firearms Act... Handling Firearms § 102-41.200 Are there special disposal provisions for firearms that are seized and forfeited for a violation of the National Firearms Act? Yes, firearms seized and forfeited for a...

  13. 41 CFR 102-41.200 - Are there special disposal provisions for firearms that are seized and forfeited for a violation...

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-01-01

    ... disposal provisions for firearms that are seized and forfeited for a violation of the National Firearms Act... Handling Firearms § 102-41.200 Are there special disposal provisions for firearms that are seized and forfeited for a violation of the National Firearms Act? Yes, firearms seized and forfeited for a...

  14. Changes ahead for Hazwaste disposal

    SciTech Connect

    Eilbott, E.

    1995-05-01

    Though hazardous waste disposal standards have been the norm for more than a decade, requiring compliance with transportation, treatment, storage and disposal rules for RCRA Subtitle C wastes. Major changes are in the works, however. For the last two years, EPA has held wide-ranging discussions with a broad variety of interests, including state regulators, waste generating industries, waste management companies, and environmental groups on how to get {open_quotes}low-risk{close_quotes}wastes out of the hazardous waste system. The new political climate ushered in with last November`s elections has intensified these efforts. This article takes you on a brief tour of two key initiatives being feverishly worked on by all those with a stake in Federal laws governing hazardous waste disposal.

  15. Steam generator waste disposal options

    SciTech Connect

    Fisher, H.O.M.

    1994-12-31

    The steam generator waste stream has been examined, and disposal options associated with the decommissioning of the reference pressurized water reactor (PWR) power station have been investigated as described in NUREG/CR-0130. Specifically, the removal and disposal of the steam generators and those activities and associated occupational doses inherent in the activities have been examined. The results of this effort are compared in this paper to more recent data for the reference PWR contained in NUREG/CR-5884, and a determination of the appropriate volumes and activities is made. These data are used to complete projections of steam generator waste volumes and activities generated from light water reactor decommissioning using the DECON decommissioning alternative. Several disposal options for the steam generators are considered and the segmentation, one-piece waste package, and smelting options are detailed.

  16. Depleted uranium disposal options evaluation

    SciTech Connect

    Hertzler, T.J.; Nishimoto, D.D.; Otis, M.D.

    1994-05-01

    The Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Environmental Restoration and Waste Management, has chartered a study to evaluate alternative management strategies for depleted uranium (DU) currently stored throughout the DOE complex. Historically, DU has been maintained as a strategic resource because of uses for DU metal and potential uses for further enrichment or for uranium oxide as breeder reactor blanket fuel. This study has focused on evaluating the disposal options for DU if it were considered a waste. This report is in no way declaring these DU reserves a ``waste,`` but is intended to provide baseline data for comparison with other management options for use of DU. To PICS considered in this report include: Retrievable disposal; permanent disposal; health hazards; radiation toxicity and chemical toxicity.

  17. Final disposal of radioactive waste

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Freiesleben, H.

    2013-06-01

    In this paper the origin and properties of radioactive waste as well as its classification scheme (low-level waste - LLW, intermediate-level waste - ILW, high-level waste - HLW) are presented. The various options for conditioning of waste of different levels of radioactivity are reviewed. The composition, radiotoxicity and reprocessing of spent fuel and their effect on storage and options for final disposal are discussed. The current situation of final waste disposal in a selected number of countries is mentioned. Also, the role of the International Atomic Energy Agency with regard to the development and monitoring of international safety standards for both spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste management is described.

  18. Disposable telemetry cable deployment system

    DOEpatents

    Holcomb, David Joseph

    2000-01-01

    A disposable telemetry cable deployment system for facilitating information retrieval while drilling a well includes a cable spool adapted for insertion into a drill string and an unarmored fiber optic cable spooled onto the spool cable and having a downhole end and a stinger end. Connected to the cable spool is a rigid stinger which extends through a kelly of the drilling apparatus. A data transmission device for transmitting data to a data acquisition system is disposed either within or on the upper end of the rigid stinger.

  19. Fiscal year 1996 progress in implementing Section 120 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. Tenth annual report to Congress

    SciTech Connect

    1997-12-01

    Congress passed the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (Public Law 96-510), commonly known as Superfund, in 1980. The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) (Public Law 99-499), which amended CERCLA in 1986, added Section 120 regarding the cleanup of contaminated sites at Federal facilities. Under Section 120(e)(5) of CERCLA, each department, agency, or instrumentality of the Federal government responsible for compliance with Section 120 must submit an annual report to Congress concerning its progress in implementing the requirements of Section 120. The report must include information on the progress in reaching Interagency Agreements (IAGs), conducting remedial investigation and feasibility studies (RI/FSs), and performing remedial actions. Federal agencies that own or operate facilities on the National Priorities List (NPL) are required to begin an RI/FS for these facilities within 6 months after being placed on the NPL. Remediation of these facilities is addressed in an IAG between the Federal agency, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and in some instances the state within which the facility is located.

  20. 49 CFR 599.401 - Requirements and limitations for disposal facilities that receive trade-in vehicles under the...

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... SAVE ACT PROGRAM Disposal of Trade-in Vehicle § 599.401 Requirements and limitations for disposal... more than 7 days after receiving the vehicle, report the vehicle to NMVTIS as a scrap vehicle. (2... or hazardous vehicle components prior to crushing or shredding in accordance with applicable...

  1. 49 CFR 599.401 - Requirements and limitations for disposal facilities that receive trade-in vehicles under the...

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... SAVE ACT PROGRAM Disposal of Trade-in Vehicle § 599.401 Requirements and limitations for disposal... more than 7 days after receiving the vehicle, report the vehicle to NMVTIS as a scrap vehicle. (2... or hazardous vehicle components prior to crushing or shredding in accordance with applicable...

  2. 49 CFR 599.401 - Requirements and limitations for disposal facilities that receive trade-in vehicles under the...

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... SAVE ACT PROGRAM Disposal of Trade-in Vehicle § 599.401 Requirements and limitations for disposal... more than 7 days after receiving the vehicle, report the vehicle to NMVTIS as a scrap vehicle. (2... or hazardous vehicle components prior to crushing or shredding in accordance with applicable...

  3. 49 CFR 599.401 - Requirements and limitations for disposal facilities that receive trade-in vehicles under the...

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... SAVE ACT PROGRAM Disposal of Trade-in Vehicle § 599.401 Requirements and limitations for disposal... more than 7 days after receiving the vehicle, report the vehicle to NMVTIS as a scrap vehicle. (2... or hazardous vehicle components prior to crushing or shredding in accordance with applicable...

  4. 10 CFR 40.27 - General license for custody and long-term care of residual radioactive material disposal sites.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 1 2012-01-01 2012-01-01 false General license for custody and long-term care of residual radioactive material disposal sites. 40.27 Section 40.27 Energy NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION DOMESTIC...) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, for disposal sites under title I of the Uranium...

  5. HANDBOOK: SEPTAGE TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL

    EPA Science Inventory

    The principal purpose of the handbook is to present an up-to-date review of available design, performance, operation and maintenance, cost, and energy information pertaining to the receiving, treatment, and disposal of septage. Septage is the liquid and solid material pumped from...

  6. Sludge Treatment, Utilization, and Disposal.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Dick, Richard I.

    1978-01-01

    Presents the 1978 literature review of wastewater treatment. This review covers such areas: (1) industrial and hazardous sludges; (2) chemical sludges; (3) stabilization and combustion; (4) ocean disposal; and (5) land application. A list of 411 references is also presented. (HM)

  7. Geological considerations in hazardouswaste disposal

    USGS Publications Warehouse

    Cartwright, K.; Gilkeson, R.H.; Johnson, T.M.

    1981-01-01

    Present regulations assume that long-term isolation of hazardous wastes - including toxic chemical, biological, radioactive, flammable and explosive wastes - may be effected by disposal in landfills that have liners of very low hydraulic conductivity. In reality, total isolation of wastes in humid areas is not possible; some migration of leachate from wastes buried in the gound will always occur. Regulations should provide performance standards applicable on a site-by-site basis rather than rigid criteria for site selection and design. The performance standards should take into account several factors: (1) the categories, segregation, degradation and toxicity of the wastes; (2) the site hydrogeology, which governs the direction and rate of contaminant transport; (3) the attenuation of contaminants by geochemical interactions with geologic materials; and (4) the release rate of unattenuated pollutants to surface or groundwater. An adequate monitoring system is essential. The system should both test the extent to which the operation of the site meets performance standards and provide sufficient warning of pollution problems to allow implementation of remedial measures. In recent years there has been a trend away from numerous, small disposal sites toward fewer and larger sites. The size of a disposal site should be based on the attenuation capacity of the geologic material, which has a finite, though generally not well-defined, limit. For slowly degradable wastes, engineered sites with leachate-collection systems appear to be only a temporary solution since the leachate collected will also require final disposal. ?? 1981.

  8. Safe disposal of surplus plutonium

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Gong, W. L.; Naz, S.; Lutze, W.; Busch, R.; Prinja, A.; Stoll, W.

    2001-06-01

    About 150 tons of weapons grade and weapons usable plutonium (metal, oxide, and in residues) have been declared surplus in the USA and Russia. Both countries plan to convert the metal and oxide into mixed oxide fuel for nuclear power reactors. Russia has not yet decided what to do with the residues. The US will convert residues into a ceramic, which will then be over-poured with highly radioactive borosilicate glass. The radioactive glass is meant to provide a deterrent to recovery of plutonium, as required by a US standard. Here we show a waste form for plutonium residues, zirconia/boron carbide (ZrO 2/B 4C), with an unprecedented combination of properties: a single, radiation-resistant, and chemically durable phase contains the residues; billion-year-old natural analogs are available; and criticality safety is given under all conceivable disposal conditions. ZrO 2/B 4C can be disposed of directly, without further processing, making it attractive to all countries facing the task of plutonium disposal. The US standard for protection against recovery can be met by disposal of the waste form together with used reactor fuel.

  9. Disposing of Canada's used fuel

    SciTech Connect

    Torgerson, D.F.

    1990-01-01

    The Canadian Nuclear Fuel Waste Management Program is assessing the permanent disposal of used nuclear fuel in a waste vault located 500 to 1,000 m deep in the Precambrian granitic rock of the Canadian Shield. The specific objectives of the program are to develop and demonstrate the technology to site, design, build, and operate a disposal facility in a way that creates no, or negligible, burden on future generations. In addition, the program must develop a methodology to evaluate the performance of the disposal system against safety criteria and demonstrate that sites are likely to exist in the Canadian Shield that satisfy regulatory criteria. These criteria are very stringent. As in other national high-level waste management programs, the Canadian concept for the permanent disposal of nuclear fuel wastes employs a multiple barrier system for isolating contaminants from the environment. The current phase of the work is generic in nature and is not site specific. Research and development (R and D) has advanced to the point where the generic concept will be evaluated under the Canadian environmental assessment review process, which involves public hearings and independent scientific review.

  10. Envirocare a unique technology for the disposal of low-level radioactive waste

    SciTech Connect

    Rafti, A.; Hahn, R.E.

    1996-10-01

    Envirocare of Utah, Inc. operates a disposal facility for Low-Level Radioactive Waste (LLRW) at Clive, Utah which is located 75 miles west of Salt Lake City in the Great Salt Lake Desert. This facility is the newest of the three operating radioactive waste disposal sites and is the only site that has been licensed after the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). It is specifically designed and operated to provide for the disposal of High Volume, Low Activity Radioactive Wastes (LARW). Unlike the other operating site which accepts all classes (Class A, B, & C) of LLRW, Envirocare is limited by its Radioactive Material License to accepting only Class A waste. Because it is limited to only Class A waste, the disposal technologies which can be employed for the disposal of this material are more varied than those available to the other sites, since they also handle Class B & C LLRW.

  11. Optimizing High Level Waste Disposal

    SciTech Connect

    Dirk Gombert

    2005-09-01

    If society is ever to reap the potential benefits of nuclear energy, technologists must close the fuel-cycle completely. A closed cycle equates to a continued supply of fuel and safe reactors, but also reliable and comprehensive closure of waste issues. High level waste (HLW) disposal in borosilicate glass (BSG) is based on 1970s era evaluations. This host matrix is very adaptable to sequestering a wide variety of radionuclides found in raffinates from spent fuel reprocessing. However, it is now known that the current system is far from optimal for disposal of the diverse HLW streams, and proven alternatives are available to reduce costs by billions of dollars. The basis for HLW disposal should be reassessed to consider extensive waste form and process technology research and development efforts, which have been conducted by the United States Department of Energy (USDOE), international agencies and the private sector. Matching the waste form to the waste chemistry and using currently available technology could increase the waste content in waste forms to 50% or more and double processing rates. Optimization of the HLW disposal system would accelerate HLW disposition and increase repository capacity. This does not necessarily require developing new waste forms, the emphasis should be on qualifying existing matrices to demonstrate protection equal to or better than the baseline glass performance. Also, this proposed effort does not necessarily require developing new technology concepts. The emphasis is on demonstrating existing technology that is clearly better (reliability, productivity, cost) than current technology, and justifying its use in future facilities or retrofitted facilities. Higher waste processing and disposal efficiency can be realized by performing the engineering analyses and trade-studies necessary to select the most efficient methods for processing the full spectrum of wastes across the nuclear complex. This paper will describe technologies being

  12. Title III (SARA and Clean Air Act Amendments) Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act and accidental release prevention consolidated chemical list (for microcomputers). Data file

    SciTech Connect

    1995-04-01

    This consolidated chemical list includes chemicals subject to reporting requirements under Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), also known as the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), and chemicals listed under section 112(r) of Title III of the Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments of 1990. This consolidated list has been prepared to help firms handling chemicals determine whether they need to submit reports under sections 302, 304, or 313 of SARA Title III (EPCRA) and, for a specific chemical, what reports may need to be submitted. It will also help firms determine wether they will be subject to accident prevention regulations under CAA section 112(r). Separate lists are also provided of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) waste streams and unlisted hazardous wastes, and of radionuclides reportable under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA). These lists should be used as a reference tool, not as a definitive source of compliance information. Compliance information for EPCRA is published in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 40 CFR Parts 302, 355, and 372. Compliance information for CAA section 112(r) will be published in 40 CFR Part 68. This revision reflects regulatory changes through December 1994. The chemicals on the consolidated list are ordered by Chemical Abstract Service (CAS) registry number. Categories of chemicals, which do not have CAS registry numbers, but which are cited under CERCLA, EPCRA section 313, and the CAA, are placed at the end of the list. For reference purposes, the chemicals (with their CAS numbers) are ordered alphabetically following the CAS-order list. Long chemical names may have been truncated to facilitate printing of this list. The list includes chemicals referenced under five federal statutory provisions.

  13. Siting Study for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project

    SciTech Connect

    Lisa Harvego; Joan Connolly; Lance Peterson; Brennon Orr; Bob Starr

    2010-10-01

    The U.S. Department of Energy has identified a mission need for continued disposal capacity for remote-handled low-level waste (LLW) generated at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). An alternatives analysis that was conducted to evaluate strategies to achieve this mission need identified two broad options for disposal of INL generated remote-handled LLW: (1) offsite disposal and (2) onsite disposal. The purpose of this study is to identify candidate sites or locations within INL boundaries for the alternative of an onsite remote handled LLW disposal facility and recommend the highest-ranked locations for consideration in the National Environmental Policy Act process. The study implements an evaluation based on consideration of five key elements: (1) regulations, (2) key assumptions, (3) conceptual design, (4) facility performance, and (5) previous INL siting study criteria, and uses a five-step process to identify, screen, evaluate, score, and rank 34 separate sites located across INL. The result of the evaluation is identification of two recommended alternative locations for siting an onsite remote-handled LLW disposal facility. The two alternative locations that best meet the evaluation criteria are (1) near the Advanced Test Reactor Complex and (2) west of the Idaho Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act Disposal Facility.

  14. Disposal of NORM waste in salt caverns

    SciTech Connect

    Veil, J.A.; Smith, K.P.; Tomasko, D.; Elcock, D.; Blunt, D.; Williams, G.P.

    1998-07-01

    Some types of oil and gas production and processing wastes contain naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM). If NORM is present at concentrations above regulatory levels in oil field waste, the waste requires special disposal practices. The existing disposal options for wastes containing NORM are limited and costly. This paper evaluates the legality, technical feasibility, economics, and human health risk of disposing of NORM-contaminated oil field wastes in salt caverns. Cavern disposal of NORM waste is technically feasible and poses a very low human health risk. From a legal perspective, there are no fatal flaws that would prevent a state regulatory agency from approving cavern disposal of NORM. On the basis of the costs charged by caverns currently used for disposal of nonhazardous oil field waste (NOW), NORM waste disposal caverns could be cost competitive with existing NORM waste disposal methods when regulatory agencies approve the practice.

  15. 48 CFR 245.603 - Disposal methods.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 48 Federal Acquisition Regulations System 3 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Disposal methods. 245.603 Section 245.603 Federal Acquisition Regulations System DEFENSE ACQUISITION REGULATIONS SYSTEM, DEPARTMENT... Contractor Inventory 245.603 Disposal methods....

  16. Summary of Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) Potential Impacts Related to Hanford Cleanup and the Tri-Party Agreement (TPA)

    SciTech Connect

    IWATATE, D.F.

    2000-07-14

    This white paper provides an initial assessment of the potential impacts of the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) regulations (and proposed revisions) on the Hanford site cleanup and addresses concerns that MTCA might impose inappropriate or unachievable clean-up levels and drive clean-up costs higher. The white paper and supporting documentation (Appendices A and B) provide DOE with a concise and up-to-date review of potential MTCA impacts to cost and schedule for the Hanford site activities. MTCA, Chapter 70.105D RCW, is the State of Washington's risk based law governing clean-up of contaminated sites and is implemented by The Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) under the MTCA Clean-up Regulations, Chapter 173-340 WAC. Hanford cleanup is subject to the MTCA requirements as Applicable, Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) for those areas of Hanford being managed under the authority of the Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), and the state Dangerous Waste Regulations. MTCA provides Ecology with authority to implement site clean-up actions under both the federal RCRA and CERCLA regulations as well as the state regulations. Most of the Hanford clean-up actions are being implemented under the CERCLA program, however, there is a trend is toward increased use of MTCA procedures and standards. The application of MTCA to the Hanford clean-up has been an evolving process with some of the Hanford clean-up actions considering MTCA standards as an ARAR and using MTCA procedures for remedy selection. The increased use and application of MTCA standards and procedures could potentially impact both cost and schedule for the Hanford cleanup.

  17. 7 CFR 2902.52 - Disposable tableware.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-01-01

    ... 7 Agriculture 15 2011-01-01 2011-01-01 false Disposable tableware. 2902.52 Section 2902.52... Items § 2902.52 Disposable tableware. (a) Definition. Products made from, or coated with, plastic resins... disposable tableware. By that date, Federal agencies that have the responsibility for drafting or...

  18. 48 CFR 945.603 - Disposal methods.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... 48 Federal Acquisition Regulations System 5 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false Disposal methods. 945.603 Section 945.603 Federal Acquisition Regulations System DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY CONTRACT MANAGEMENT GOVERNMENT PROPERTY Reporting, Redistribution, and Disposal of Contractor Inventory 945.603 Disposal methods....

  19. 48 CFR 2845.603 - Disposal methods.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... 48 Federal Acquisition Regulations System 6 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false Disposal methods. 2845.603 Section 2845.603 Federal Acquisition Regulations System DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT GOVERNMENT PROPERTY Reporting, Redistribution, and Disposal of Contractor Inventory 2845.603 Disposal...

  20. Concept for Underground Disposal of Nuclear Waste

    NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

    Bowyer, J. M.

    1987-01-01

    Packaged waste placed in empty oil-shale mines. Concept for disposal of nuclear waste economically synergistic with earlier proposal concerning backfilling of oil-shale mines. New disposal concept superior to earlier schemes for disposal in hard-rock and salt mines because less uncertainty about ability of oil-shale mine to contain waste safely for millenium.

  1. 40 CFR 279.81 - Disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-07-01

    ... management requirements of parts 260 through 266, 268, 270 and 124 of this chapter. (b) Disposal of... THE MANAGEMENT OF USED OIL Standards for Use as a Dust Suppressant and Disposal of Used Oil § 279.81... disposed in accordance with the requirements of parts 257 and 258 of this chapter....

  2. Safe Disposal of Highly Reactive Chemicals.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Lunn, George; Sansone, Eric B.

    1994-01-01

    Provides specific procedures for the disposal of a variety of highly reactive chemicals and reports the results of a study of their safe disposal. Disposal of some problematic sulfur-containing compounds are included. Procedures are based on a combination of literature review and author development. (LZ)

  3. 40 CFR 721.85 - Disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-07-01

    ... the substance is any method of: (a) Disposal of the process stream associated with any use of the... regulations. (1) Incineration. (2) Landfill. (3) Deep well injection. (b) Disposal of the process stream.... (1) Incineration. (2) Landfill. (3) Deep well injection. (c) Disposal of the use stream...

  4. 40 CFR 721.85 - Disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-07-01

    ... the substance is any method of: (a) Disposal of the process stream associated with any use of the... regulations. (1) Incineration. (2) Landfill. (3) Deep well injection. (b) Disposal of the process stream.... (1) Incineration. (2) Landfill. (3) Deep well injection. (c) Disposal of the use stream...

  5. 40 CFR 721.85 - Disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-07-01

    ... the substance is any method of: (a) Disposal of the process stream associated with any use of the... regulations. (1) Incineration. (2) Landfill. (3) Deep well injection. (b) Disposal of the process stream.... (1) Incineration. (2) Landfill. (3) Deep well injection. (c) Disposal of the use stream...

  6. 48 CFR 945.603 - Disposal methods.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 48 Federal Acquisition Regulations System 5 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Disposal methods. 945.603 Section 945.603 Federal Acquisition Regulations System DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY CONTRACT MANAGEMENT GOVERNMENT PROPERTY Reporting, Redistribution, and Disposal of Contractor Inventory 945.603 Disposal methods....

  7. 48 CFR 2845.603 - Disposal methods.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 48 Federal Acquisition Regulations System 6 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 true Disposal methods. 2845.603 Section 2845.603 Federal Acquisition Regulations System DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Contract Management GOVERNMENT PROPERTY Reporting, Redistribution, and Disposal of Contractor Inventory 2845.603 Disposal...

  8. 32 CFR 644.315 - Disposal priorities.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-07-01

    ... 32 National Defense 4 2011-07-01 2011-07-01 false Disposal priorities. 644.315 Section 644.315 National Defense Department of Defense (Continued) DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY (CONTINUED) REAL PROPERTY REAL ESTATE HANDBOOK Disposal § 644.315 Disposal priorities. Consistent with the best interest of the...

  9. 32 CFR 644.315 - Disposal priorities.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-07-01

    ... 32 National Defense 4 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 true Disposal priorities. 644.315 Section 644.315 National Defense Department of Defense (Continued) DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY (CONTINUED) REAL PROPERTY REAL ESTATE HANDBOOK Disposal § 644.315 Disposal priorities. Consistent with the best interest of the...

  10. [Assessment of disposable crystal laryngoscope blade].

    PubMed

    Ohshita, Naohiro; Tsutsumi, Yasuo M; Kakuta, Nami; Kawano, Hiroaki; Tomiyama, Yoshinobu; Oshita, Shuzo

    2010-06-01

    We evaluated Disposable Crystal Laryngoscope Blades in terms of preventing infection. Most anesthesiologists were satisfied with the view offered by the Disposable Crystal Laryngoscope Blade; however more force is necessary to lift the epiglottis during intubation. It may be more difficult to use by residents, inexperienced anesthesiologist, or emergency medical technicians, although the Disposable Crystal Laryngoscope blade is useful for preventing infection.

  11. Disposable remote zero headspace extractor

    DOEpatents

    Hand, Julie J.; Roberts, Mark P.

    2006-03-21

    The remote zero headspace extractor uses a sampling container inside a stainless steel vessel to perform toxicity characteristics leaching procedure to analyze volatile organic compounds. The system uses an in line filter for ease of replacement. This eliminates cleaning and disassembly of the extractor. All connections are made with quick connect fittings which can be easily replaced. After use, the bag can be removed and disposed of, and a new sampling container is inserted for the next extraction.

  12. The disposal of military aircraft

    NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

    Warner, Edward P

    1922-01-01

    The end of the war saw every belligerent with vast stocks of aircraft and aircraft supplies in all stages of usefulness, much of the material being absolutely new. The question of the best method of getting rid of this accumulation is one which has been agitating those responsible for its disposal for more than three years now, but no wholly satisfactory solution has yet been reached.

  13. Risk management for outsourcing biomedical waste disposal – Using the failure mode and effects analysis

    SciTech Connect

    Liao, Ching-Jong; Ho, Chao Chung

    2014-07-15

    Highlights: • This study is based on a real case in hospital in Taiwan. • We use Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) as the evaluation method. • We successfully identify the evaluation factors of bio-medical waste disposal risk. - Abstract: Using the failure mode and effects analysis, this study examined biomedical waste companies through risk assessment. Moreover, it evaluated the supervisors of biomedical waste units in hospitals, and factors relating to the outsourcing risk assessment of biomedical waste in hospitals by referring to waste disposal acts. An expert questionnaire survey was conducted on the personnel involved in waste disposal units in hospitals, in order to identify important factors relating to the outsourcing risk of biomedical waste in hospitals. This study calculated the risk priority number (RPN) and selected items with an RPN value higher than 80 for improvement. These items included “availability of freezing devices”, “availability of containers for sharp items”, “disposal frequency”, “disposal volume”, “disposal method”, “vehicles meeting the regulations”, and “declaration of three lists”. This study also aimed to identify important selection factors of biomedical waste disposal companies by hospitals in terms of risk. These findings can serve as references for hospitals in the selection of outsourcing companies for biomedical waste disposal.

  14. Safe disposal of prescribed medicines.

    PubMed

    Bergen, Phillip J; Hussainy, Safeera Y; George, Johnson; Kong, David Cm; Kirkpatrick, Carl Mj

    2015-06-01

    The National Return and Disposal of Unwanted Medicines Program provides a free and safe method for the disposal of unwanted and expired medicines. This stops drugs being dumped in landfill and waterways. An audit showed that over 600 tonnes of medicines are returned through the program. A substantial proportion of these medicines were still within their expiry dates. Salbutamol, insulin and frusemide are the most commonly discarded medicines. More than $2 million of public money is wasted each year. Hoarding and non-adherence to treatment contribute to waste. Health professionals may be able to help minimise waste by informing patients about the importance of completing prescribed courses of treatment, and discouraging them from hoarding medicines after reaching the safety net threshold on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. Prescribe no more than the required quantity of medicines. When starting a new therapy, prescribe a minimal quantity in case the drug is unsuitable for the patient. Advise patients to return all unwanted medicines to a pharmacy for disposal. PMID:26648628

  15. SPS salvage and disposal alternatives

    NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

    1980-01-01

    A wide range of salvage options exist for the satellite power system (SPS) satellite, ranging from use in and beyond geosynchronous orbit to use in low Earth orbit to return and use on Earth. The satellite might be used intact to provide for various purposes, it might be cannibalized, or it might be melted down to supply materials for space- or ground-based products. The use of SPS beyond its nominal lifetime provides value that can be deducted from the SPS capital investment cost. It is shown that the present value of the salvage value of the SPS satellites, referenced to the system initial operation data, is likely to be on the order of five to ten percent of its on-orbit capital cost. (Given a 30 year satellite lifetime and a four percent discount rate, the theoretical maximum salvage value is 30.8 percent of the initial capital cost). The SPS demonstration satellite is available some 30 years earlier than the first full-scale SPS satellite and has a likely salvage value on the order of 80 percent of its on site capital cost. In the event that it becomes desirable to dispose of either the demonstration or full-scale SPS satellite, a number of disposal options appear to exist for which intact disposal costs are less than one percent of capital costs.

  16. SPS salvage and disposal alternatives

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    1980-06-01

    A wide range of salvage options exist for the satellite power system (SPS) satellite, ranging from use in and beyond geosynchronous orbit to use in low Earth orbit to return and use on Earth. The satellite might be used intact to provide for various purposes, it might be cannibalized, or it might be melted down to supply materials for space- or ground-based products. The use of SPS beyond its nominal lifetime provides value that can be deducted from the SPS capital investment cost. It is shown that the present value of the salvage value of the SPS satellites, referenced to the system initial operation data, is likely to be on the order of five to ten percent of its on-orbit capital cost. (Given a 30 year satellite lifetime and a four percent discount rate, the theoretical maximum salvage value is 30.8 percent of the initial capital cost). The SPS demonstration satellite is available some 30 years earlier than the first full-scale SPS satellite and has a likely salvage value on the order of 80 percent of its on site capital cost. In the event that it becomes desirable to dispose of either the demonstration or full-scale SPS satellite, a number of disposal options appear to exist for which intact disposal costs are less than one percent of capital costs.

  17. Hanford land disposal restrictions plan for mixed wastes

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1990-10-01

    Since the early 1940s, the Hanford Site has been involved in the production and purification of nuclear defense materials. These production activities have resulted in the generation of large quantities of liquid and solid radioactive mixed waste. This waste is subject to regulation under authority of both the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) and the Atomic Energy Act. The State of Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology), the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the US Department of Energy (DOE) have entered into an agreement, the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) to bring Hanford Site Operations into compliance with dangerous waste regulations. The Tri-Party Agreement was amended to require development of the Hanford Land Disposal Restrictions Plan for Mixed Wastes (this plan) to comply with land disposal restrictions requirements for radioactive mixed waste. The Tri-Party Agreement requires, and the this plan provides, the following sections: Waste Characterization Plan, Storage Report, Treatment Report, Treatment Plan, Waste Minimization Plan, a schedule, depicting the events necessary to achieve full compliance with land disposal restriction requirements, and a process for establishing interim milestones. 34 refs., 28 figs., 35 tabs.

  18. 41 CFR 102-75.10 - What basic real property disposal policy governs disposal agencies?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-07-01

    ... 41 Public Contracts and Property Management 3 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false What basic real property disposal policy governs disposal agencies? 102-75.10 Section 102-75.10 Public Contracts and Property... PROPERTY 75-REAL PROPERTY DISPOSAL General Provisions § 102-75.10 What basic real property disposal...

  19. 10 CFR 61.51 - Disposal site design for land disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-01-01

    ....51 Energy NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (CONTINUED) LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND DISPOSAL OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE Technical Requirements for Land Disposal Facilities § 61.51 Disposal site design for land... contact of standing water with waste during disposal, and the contact of percolating or standing...

  20. 10 CFR 61.51 - Disposal site design for land disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-01-01

    ....51 Energy NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (CONTINUED) LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND DISPOSAL OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE Technical Requirements for Land Disposal Facilities § 61.51 Disposal site design for land... contact of standing water with waste during disposal, and the contact of percolating or standing...

  1. 10 CFR 61.51 - Disposal site design for land disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-01-01

    ....51 Energy NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (CONTINUED) LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND DISPOSAL OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE Technical Requirements for Land Disposal Facilities § 61.51 Disposal site design for land... contact of standing water with waste during disposal, and the contact of percolating or standing...

  2. 10 CFR 61.51 - Disposal site design for land disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-01-01

    ....51 Energy NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (CONTINUED) LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND DISPOSAL OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE Technical Requirements for Land Disposal Facilities § 61.51 Disposal site design for land... contact of standing water with waste during disposal, and the contact of percolating or standing...

  3. 10 CFR 61.51 - Disposal site design for land disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 2 2012-01-01 2012-01-01 false Disposal site design for land disposal. 61.51 Section 61.51 Energy NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (CONTINUED) LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND DISPOSAL OF... result in erosion that will require ongoing active maintenance in the future. (6) The disposal site...

  4. Project Execution Plan for the Remote Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project

    SciTech Connect

    Danny Anderson

    2014-07-01

    As part of ongoing cleanup activities at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL), closure of the Radioactive Waste Management Complex (RWMC) is proceeding under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (42 USC 9601 et seq. 1980). INL-generated radioactive waste has been disposed of at RWMC since 1952. The Subsurface Disposal Area (SDA) at RWMC accepted the bulk of INL’s contact and remote-handled low-level waste (LLW) for disposal. Disposal of contact-handled LLW and remote-handled LLW ion-exchange resins from the Advanced Test Reactor in the open pit of the SDA ceased September 30, 2008. Disposal of remote-handled LLW in concrete disposal vaults at RWMC will continue until the facility is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the SDA (approximately at the end of fiscal year FY 2017). The continuing nuclear mission of INL, associated ongoing and planned operations, and Naval spent fuel activities at the Naval Reactors Facility (NRF) require continued capability to appropriately dispose of contact and remote handled LLW. A programmatic analysis of disposal alternatives for contact and remote-handled LLW generated at INL was conducted by the INL contractor in Fiscal Year 2006; subsequent evaluations were completed in Fiscal Year 2007. The result of these analyses was a recommendation to the Department of Energy (DOE) that all contact-handled LLW generated after September 30, 2008, be disposed offsite, and that DOE proceed with a capital project to establish replacement remote-handled LLW disposal capability. An analysis of the alternatives for providing replacement remote-handled LLW disposal capability has been performed to support Critical Decision-1. The highest ranked alternative to provide this required capability has been determined to be the development of a new onsite remote-handled LLW disposal facility to replace the existing remote-handled LLW disposal vaults at the SDA. Several offsite DOE

  5. Sewage sludge disposal apparatus and method of disposal

    SciTech Connect

    Williams, R.M.

    1981-01-20

    A system is described for disposing of sewage sludge by treating the sludge in apparatus which processes the sludge through relatively inert gas drying and grinding stages and utilized as much of the dried and ground sludge as is needed to produce heat for maintaining the drying process in the system once the system has become substantially self sufficient on use of the sludge as the drying heat source. The remaining excess sludge is then in a form either granular or fine suitable for direct sale.

  6. Carbon Dioxide Capture and Disposal

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Lackner, K. S.

    2002-05-01

    Unless carbon dioxide from fossil fuel combustion is captured and disposed of safely and permanently, the concerns over climate change will eventually lead to the demise of fossil fuels. Because of their importance in today's energy market the phasing out of fossil fuels would likely precipitate a major energy crisis. Mineral sequestration and extraction of carbon dioxide from the air are two advanced technologies for carbon sequestration that aim at maintaining access to the vast fossil energy resources for centuries to come. While it is straightforward to dispose of carbon dioxide in limited amounts and for a limited time, permanent disposal of trillions of tons of carbon poses serious challenges. The formation of solid mineral carbonates from readily available minerals would provide safe and permanent storage. Capture of carbon dioxide from air makes it possible to sequester carbon dioxide emissions from sources other than power plants. This is important considering that even the relatively minor reductions suggested by the Kyoto Accord would have required the US to eliminate carbon dioxide emissions comparable to those of the entire 1990 coal fired power plant fleet. Capture of carbon dioxide from the air, would make it possible to close the carbon cycle in the transportation sector without phasing out liquid hydrocarbon fuels. It eliminates the need for long distance transport of carbon dioxide and allows the continued use of the existing energy infrastructure. Mineral sequestration at remote sites combined with on site carbon dioxide capture from air, would allow for long term stabilization of atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. I will outline the current state of the technology and point to advances required before these approaches are ready for large-scale implementation.

  7. Generic Crystalline Disposal Reference Case

    SciTech Connect

    Painter, Scott Leroy; Chu, Shaoping; Harp, Dylan Robert; Perry, Frank Vinton; Wang, Yifeng

    2015-02-20

    A generic reference case for disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste in crystalline rock is outlined. The generic cases are intended to support development of disposal system modeling capability by establishing relevant baseline conditions and parameters. Establishment of a generic reference case requires that the emplacement concept, waste inventory, waste form, waste package, backfill/buffer properties, EBS failure scenarios, host rock properties, and biosphere be specified. The focus in this report is on those elements that are unique to crystalline disposal, especially the geosphere representation. Three emplacement concepts are suggested for further analyses: a waste packages containing 4 PWR assemblies emplaced in boreholes in the floors of tunnels (KBS-3 concept), a 12-assembly waste package emplaced in tunnels, and a 32-assembly dual purpose canister emplaced in tunnels. In addition, three failure scenarios were suggested for future use: a nominal scenario involving corrosion of the waste package in the tunnel emplacement concepts, a manufacturing defect scenario applicable to the KBS-3 concept, and a disruptive glaciation scenario applicable to both emplacement concepts. The computational approaches required to analyze EBS failure and transport processes in a crystalline rock repository are similar to those of argillite/shale, with the most significant difference being that the EBS in a crystalline rock repository will likely experience highly heterogeneous flow rates, which should be represented in the model. The computational approaches required to analyze radionuclide transport in the natural system are very different because of the highly channelized nature of fracture flow. Computational workflows tailored to crystalline rock based on discrete transport pathways extracted from discrete fracture network models are recommended.

  8. Fracking, wastewater disposal, and earthquakes

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    McGarr, Arthur

    2016-03-01

    In the modern oil and gas industry, fracking of low-permeability reservoirs has resulted in a considerable increase in the production of oil and natural gas, but these fluid-injection activities also can induce earthquakes. Earthquakes induced by fracking are an inevitable consequence of the injection of fluid at high pressure, where the intent is to enhance permeability by creating a system of cracks and fissures that allow hydrocarbons to flow to the borehole. The micro-earthquakes induced during these highly-controlled procedures are generally much too small to be felt at the surface; indeed, the creation or reactivation of a large fault would be contrary to the goal of enhancing permeability evenly throughout the formation. Accordingly, the few case histories for which fracking has resulted in felt earthquakes have been due to unintended fault reactivation. Of greater consequence for inducing earthquakes, modern techniques for producing hydrocarbons, including fracking, have resulted in considerable quantities of coproduced wastewater, primarily formation brines. This wastewater is commonly disposed by injection into deep aquifers having high permeability and porosity. As reported in many case histories, pore pressure increases due to wastewater injection were channeled from the target aquifers into fault zones that were, in effect, lubricated, resulting in earthquake slip. These fault zones are often located in the brittle crystalline rocks in the basement. Magnitudes of earthquakes induced by wastewater disposal often exceed 4, the threshold for structural damage. Even though only a small fraction of disposal wells induce earthquakes large enough to be of concern to the public, there are so many of these wells that this source of seismicity contributes significantly to the seismic hazard in the United States, especially east of the Rocky Mountains where standards of building construction are generally not designed to resist shaking from large earthquakes.

  9. DOE SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL DISPOSAL CONTAINER

    SciTech Connect

    F. Habashi

    1998-06-26

    The DOE Spent Nuclear Fuel Disposal Container (SNF DC) supports the confinement and isolation of waste within the Engineered Barrier System of the Mined Geologic Disposal System (MGDS). Disposal containers are loaded and sealed in the surface waste handling facilities, transferred to the underground through the access mains, and emplaced in emplacement drifts. The DOE Spent Nuclear Fuel Disposal Container provides long term confinement of DOE SNF waste, and withstands the loading, transfer, emplacement, and retrieval loads and environments. The DOE SNF Disposal Containers provide containment of waste for a designated period of time, and limit radionuclide release thereafter. The disposal containers maintain the waste in a designated configuration, withstand maximum handling and rockfall loads, limit the individual waste canister temperatures after emplacement. The disposal containers also limit the introduction of moderator into the disposal container during the criticality control period, resist corrosion in the expected repository environment, and provide complete or limited containment of waste in the event of an accident. Multiple disposal container designs may be needed to accommodate the expected range of DOE Spent Nuclear Fuel. The disposal container will include outer and inner barrier walls and outer and inner barrier lids. Exterior labels will identify the disposal container and contents. Differing metal barriers will support the design philosophy of defense in depth. The use of materials with different failure mechanisms prevents a single mode failure from breaching the waste package. The corrosion-resistant inner barrier and inner barrier lid will be constructed of a high-nickel alloy and the corrosion-allowance outer barrier and outer barrier lid will be made of carbon steel. The DOE Spent Nuclear Fuel Disposal Containers interface with the emplacement drift environment by transferring heat from the waste to the external environment and by protecting

  10. Hazardous waste disposal and the clinical laboratory.

    PubMed

    Armbruster, D A

    1990-01-01

    Negligent, unregulated hazardous waste management has resulted in real and potential threats to public health and safety. The federal government has responded with laws and regulations aimed at the producers of hazardous waste, including clinical laboratories. Clinical laboratory managers must understand how the requirements apply to their facilities and how to comply with them, or risk violating the law. The Resources Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) imposes controls on hazardous waste management through the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Transportation (DOT) regulate these activities through 40 CFR and 49 CFR, respectively. 49 CFR specifies the characteristics of hazardous waste and lists more than 400 toxic chemicals, including several commonly used in clinical laboratories. Laboratories must conduct chemical inventories to determine if they should obtain an EPA identification number as a hazardous waste generator. Most clinical laboratories can operate satellite accumulation points and accumulate, store, transport, and dispose of waste in accordance with EPA and DOT regulations. Regulations pertaining to infectious waste, sure to affect many clinical laboratories, are being developed now by the EPA. The tracking system mandated by the federal government can be supplemented by state and local authorities and poses a significant regulatory challenge to clinical laboratory managers.

  11. Geochemical Aspects of Radioactive Waste Disposal

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Moody, Judith B.

    1984-04-01

    The author's stated purpose in writing this book is to summarize the large number of government-sponsored research reports on the geochemical aspects of high-level nuclear waste isolation. Although this book has a 1984 publication date, the majority of the cited documents were published before 1982. Unfortunately, passage of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA) of 1982 and its signing into law by President Reagan (January 1983) [U.S. Congress, 1983] has significantly altered the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (CRWM) Program. Therefore this book does not accurately reflect the present U.S. program in geologic disposal of high-level nuclear waste. For example, chapter 2, “Radioactive Waste Management,” is almost 3 years out of date in a field that is changing rapidly (see U.S. DOE [1984a] for the current status of the CRWM Program). Additionally, the source material, which forms the input for this book, is chiefly grey literature, i.e., the referenced documents may or may not have undergone peer review and therefore do not represent the technical judgment of the scientific community. Also, this book only presents a selective sampling of information because the literature cited does not include a representative selection of the widespread available literature on this topic.

  12. Fluorescent ballast and lamp disposal issues

    SciTech Connect

    Leishman, D.L.

    1996-12-01

    All around the world, governments, utility companies, and private businesses are attempting to reduce the amount of energy consumed. In the US alone, new economic strategies and programs are being created to facilitate this process. For instance, the recent enactment of the National Energy Policy Act, the Environmental Protection Agency`s (EPA) Green Lights Program, and a surge of utility involvement in Demand Side Management (DSM) Commercial/Industrial Direct Install and Rebate Programs. Many of these problems target commercial/industrial lighting system retrofits as one of the most cost effective avenues for reducing the consumption of energy. Due to this trend, hundreds of millions of lighting ballasts and lamps are being discarded. The benefits of these programs result in enormous reductions in fossil fuels (and subsequent carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxide emissions) required to generate the displaced electricity. Throughout the US, however, there is an increasing concern for the environmental impacts surrounding the accelerated disposal of both lighting ballasts and lamps. Regulations initially established were for a one by one, retirement (failure) process rather than promoted obsolescence and forced retirement of lamp groups or entire systems (truckloads of old technologies). Recognizing this trend and the potential negative environmental effects, federal, state, and local regulators are reevaluating the impacts and are being asked to promulgate policies to specifically address this situation.

  13. Aerosol can waste disposal device

    DOEpatents

    O'Brien, Michael D.; Klapperick, Robert L.; Bell, Chris

    1993-01-01

    Disclosed is a device for removing gases and liquid from containers. The ice punctures the bottom of a container for purposes of exhausting gases and liquid from the container without their escaping into the atmosphere. The device includes an inner cup or cylinder having a top portion with an open end for receiving a container and a bottom portion which may be fastened to a disposal or waste container in a substantially leak-proof manner. A piercing device is mounted in the lower portion of the inner cylinder for puncturing the can bottom placed in the inner cylinder. An outer cylinder having an open end and a closed end fits over the top portion of the inner cylinder in telescoping engagement. A force exerted on the closed end of the outer cylinder urges the bottom of a can in the inner cylinder into engagement with the piercing device in the bottom of the inner cylinder to form an opening in the can bottom, thereby permitting the contents of the can to enter the disposal container.

  14. Participatory management of waste disposal.

    PubMed

    Noosorn, Narongsak

    2005-05-01

    The general objective of this study was to develop a sustainable waste disposal management model in Yom riverside communities by creating a sense of ownership in the project among the villagers and encourage the community to identify problems based on their socio-cultural background. The participatory approach was applied in developing a continual learning process between the researcher and stakeholders. The Tub Phueng community of Si Samrong, Sukhothai Province was selected as the location for this study. From the population of 240 households in the area, 40 stakeholders were selected to be on the research team. The team found that the waste in this community was comprised of 4 categories: 1. Occupation: discarded insecticide containers used for farming activities; 2. Consumption: plastic bags and wrappers form pre-packed foods; 3. Traditional activities: after holding ceremonies and festivities, the waste was dumped in the river; and 4. Environmental hygiene: waste water from washing, bathing, toileting, cooking and cleaning was directly drained into the Yom River. The sustainable waste disposal model developed to manage these problems included building simple waste-water treatment wells, digging garbage holes, prosecuting people who throw garbage into the river, withdrawing privileges from people who throw garbage into the river, and establishing a garbage center. Most of the villagers were satisfied with the proposed model, looked forward to the expected positive changes, and thought this kind of solution would be easy to put into practice.

  15. Disposable optics for microscopy diagnostics

    PubMed Central

    Vilmi, Pauliina; Varjo, Sami; Sliz, Rafal; Hannuksela, Jari; Fabritius, Tapio

    2015-01-01

    The point-of-care testing (POCT) is having increasing role on modern health care systems due to a possibility to perform tests for patients conveniently and immediately. POCT includes lot of disposable devices because of the environment they are often used. For a disposable system to be reasonably utilized, it needs to be high in quality but low in price. Optics based POCT systems are interesting approach to be developed, and here we describe a low-cost fabrication process for microlens arrays for microscopy. Lens arrays having average lens diameter of 222 μm with 300 μm lens pitch were fabricated. The lenses were characterized to have standard deviation of 0.06 μm in height and 4.61 μm in diameter. The resolution limit of 3.9μm is demonstrated with real images, and the images were compared with ones made with glass and polycarbonate lens arrays. The image quality is at the same level than with the glass lenses and the manufacturing costs are very low, thus making them suitable for POCT applications. PMID:26586153

  16. Disposable optics for microscopy diagnostics.

    PubMed

    Vilmi, Pauliina; Varjo, Sami; Sliz, Rafal; Hannuksela, Jari; Fabritius, Tapio

    2015-11-20

    The point-of-care testing (POCT) is having increasing role on modern health care systems due to a possibility to perform tests for patients conveniently and immediately. POCT includes lot of disposable devices because of the environment they are often used. For a disposable system to be reasonably utilized, it needs to be high in quality but low in price. Optics based POCT systems are interesting approach to be developed, and here we describe a low-cost fabrication process for microlens arrays for microscopy. Lens arrays having average lens diameter of 222 μm with 300 μm lens pitch were fabricated. The lenses were characterized to have standard deviation of 0.06 μm in height and 4.61 μm in diameter. The resolution limit of 3.9μm is demonstrated with real images, and the images were compared with ones made with glass and polycarbonate lens arrays. The image quality is at the same level than with the glass lenses and the manufacturing costs are very low, thus making them suitable for POCT applications.

  17. Disposable optics for microscopy diagnostics

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Vilmi, Pauliina; Varjo, Sami; Sliz, Rafal; Hannuksela, Jari; Fabritius, Tapio

    2015-11-01

    The point-of-care testing (POCT) is having increasing role on modern health care systems due to a possibility to perform tests for patients conveniently and immediately. POCT includes lot of disposable devices because of the environment they are often used. For a disposable system to be reasonably utilized, it needs to be high in quality but low in price. Optics based POCT systems are interesting approach to be developed, and here we describe a low-cost fabrication process for microlens arrays for microscopy. Lens arrays having average lens diameter of 222 μm with 300 μm lens pitch were fabricated. The lenses were characterized to have standard deviation of 0.06 μm in height and 4.61 μm in diameter. The resolution limit of 3.9μm is demonstrated with real images, and the images were compared with ones made with glass and polycarbonate lens arrays. The image quality is at the same level than with the glass lenses and the manufacturing costs are very low, thus making them suitable for POCT applications.

  18. Aerosol can waste disposal device

    DOEpatents

    O'Brien, M.D.; Klapperick, R.L.; Bell, C.

    1993-12-21

    Disclosed is a device for removing gases and liquid from containers. The device punctures the bottom of a container for purposes of exhausting gases and liquid from the container without their escaping into the atmosphere. The device includes an inner cup or cylinder having a top portion with an open end for receiving a container and a bottom portion which may be fastened to a disposal or waste container in a substantially leak-proof manner. A piercing device is mounted in the lower portion of the inner cylinder for puncturing the can bottom placed in the inner cylinder. An outer cylinder having an open end and a closed end fits over the top portion of the inner cylinder in telescoping engagement. A force exerted on the closed end of the outer cylinder urges the bottom of a can in the inner cylinder into engagement with the piercing device in the bottom of the inner cylinder to form an opening in the can bottom, thereby permitting the contents of the can to enter the disposal container. 7 figures.

  19. Double acting bit holder

    DOEpatents

    Morrell, Roger J.; Larson, David A.; Ruzzi, Peter L.

    1994-01-01

    A double acting bit holder that permits bits held in it to be resharpened during cutting action to increase energy efficiency by reducing the amount of small chips produced. The holder consist of: a stationary base portion capable of being fixed to a cutter head of an excavation machine and having an integral extension therefrom with a bore hole therethrough to accommodate a pin shaft; a movable portion coextensive with the base having a pin shaft integrally extending therefrom that is insertable in the bore hole of the base member to permit the moveable portion to rotate about the axis of the pin shaft; a recess in the movable portion of the holder to accommodate a shank of a bit; and a biased spring disposed in adjoining openings in the base and moveable portions of the holder to permit the moveable portion to pivot around the pin shaft during cutting action of a bit fixed in a turret to allow front, mid and back positions of the bit during cutting to lessen creation of small chip amounts and resharpen the bit during excavation use.

  20. Low-level radioactive waste disposal technologies used outside the United States

    SciTech Connect

    Templeton, K.J.; Mitchell, S.J.; Molton, P.M.; Leigh, I.W.

    1994-01-01

    Low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal technologies are an integral part of the waste management process. In the United States, commercial LLW disposal is the responsibility of the State or groups of States (compact regions). The United States defines LLW as all radioactive waste that is not classified as spent nuclear fuel, high- level radioactive waste, transuranic waste, or by-product material as defined in Section II(e)(2) of the Atomic Energy Act. LLW may contain some long-lived components in very low concentrations. Countries outside the United States, however, may define LLW differently and may use different disposal technologies. This paper outlines the LLW disposal technologies that are planned or being used in Canada, China, Finland, France, Germany, Japan, Sweden, Taiwan, and the United Kingdom (UK).

  1. Optimal evaluation of infectious medical waste disposal companies using the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process

    SciTech Connect

    Ho, Chao Chung

    2011-07-15

    Ever since Taiwan's National Health Insurance implemented the diagnosis-related groups payment system in January 2010, hospital income has declined. Therefore, to meet their medical waste disposal needs, hospitals seek suppliers that provide high-quality services at a low cost. The enactment of the Waste Disposal Act in 1974 had facilitated some improvement in the management of waste disposal. However, since the implementation of the National Health Insurance program, the amount of medical waste from disposable medical products has been increasing. Further, of all the hazardous waste types, the amount of infectious medical waste has increased at the fastest rate. This is because of the increase in the number of items considered as infectious waste by the Environmental Protection Administration. The present study used two important findings from previous studies to determine the critical evaluation criteria for selecting infectious medical waste disposal firms. It employed the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process to set the objective weights of the evaluation criteria and select the optimal infectious medical waste disposal firm through calculation and sorting. The aim was to propose a method of evaluation with which medical and health care institutions could objectively and systematically choose appropriate infectious medical waste disposal firms.

  2. Expediting the commercial disposal option: Low-level radioactive waste shipments from the Mound Plant

    SciTech Connect

    Rice, S.; Rothman, R.

    1995-12-31

    In April, Envirocare of Utah, Inc., successfully commenced operation of its mixed waste treatment operation. A mixed waste which was (a) radioactive, (b) listed as a hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and (c) prohibited from land disposal was treated using Envirocare`s full-scale Mixed Waste Treatment Facility. The treatment system involved application of chemical fixation/stabilization technologies to reduce the leachability of the waste to meet applicable concentration-based RCRA treatment standards. In 1988, Envirocare became the first licensed facility for the disposal of naturally occurring radioactive material. In 1990, Envirocare received a RCRA Part B permit for commercial mixed waste storage and disposal. In 1994, Envirocare was awarded a contract for the disposal of DOE mixed wastes. Envirocare`s RCRA Part B permit allows for the receipt, storage, treatment, and disposal of mixed wastes that do not meet the land-disposal treatment standards of 40 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) 268. Envirocare has successfully received, managed, and disposed of naturally occurring radioactive material, low-activity radioactive waste, and mixed waste from government and private generators.

  3. Optimal evaluation of infectious medical waste disposal companies using the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process.

    PubMed

    Ho, Chao Chung

    2011-07-01

    Ever since Taiwan's National Health Insurance implemented the diagnosis-related groups payment system in January 2010, hospital income has declined. Therefore, to meet their medical waste disposal needs, hospitals seek suppliers that provide high-quality services at a low cost. The enactment of the Waste Disposal Act in 1974 had facilitated some improvement in the management of waste disposal. However, since the implementation of the National Health Insurance program, the amount of medical waste from disposable medical products has been increasing. Further, of all the hazardous waste types, the amount of infectious medical waste has increased at the fastest rate. This is because of the increase in the number of items considered as infectious waste by the Environmental Protection Administration. The present study used two important findings from previous studies to determine the critical evaluation criteria for selecting infectious medical waste disposal firms. It employed the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process to set the objective weights of the evaluation criteria and select the optimal infectious medical waste disposal firm through calculation and sorting. The aim was to propose a method of evaluation with which medical and health care institutions could objectively and systematically choose appropriate infectious medical waste disposal firms.

  4. Conceptual Design Report: Nevada Test Site Mixed Waste Disposal Facility Project

    SciTech Connect

    NSTec Environmental Management

    2009-01-31

    Environmental cleanup of contaminated nuclear weapons manufacturing and test sites generates radioactive waste that must be disposed. Site cleanup activities throughout the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) complex are projected to continue through 2050. Some of this waste is mixed waste (MW), containing both hazardous and radioactive components. In addition, there is a need for MW disposal from other mission activities. The Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Record of Decision designates the Nevada Test Site (NTS) as a regional MW disposal site. The NTS has a facility that is permitted to dispose of onsite- and offsite-generated MW until November 30, 2010. There is not a DOE waste management facility that is currently permitted to dispose of offsite-generated MW after 2010, jeopardizing the DOE environmental cleanup mission and other MW-generating mission-related activities. A mission needs document (CD-0) has been prepared for a newly permitted MW disposal facility at the NTS that would provide the needed capability to support DOE's environmental cleanup mission and other MW-generating mission-related activities. This report presents a conceptual engineering design for a MW facility that is fully compliant with Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and DOE O 435.1, 'Radioactive Waste Management'. The facility, which will be located within the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) at the NTS, will provide an approximately 20,000-cubic yard waste disposal capacity. The facility will be licensed by the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP).

  5. Risk management for outsourcing biomedical waste disposal - using the failure mode and effects analysis.

    PubMed

    Liao, Ching-Jong; Ho, Chao Chung

    2014-07-01

    Using the failure mode and effects analysis, this study examined biomedical waste companies through risk assessment. Moreover, it evaluated the supervisors of biomedical waste units in hospitals, and factors relating to the outsourcing risk assessment of biomedical waste in hospitals by referring to waste disposal acts. An expert questionnaire survey was conducted on the personnel involved in waste disposal units in hospitals, in order to identify important factors relating to the outsourcing risk of biomedical waste in hospitals. This study calculated the risk priority number (RPN) and selected items with an RPN value higher than 80 for improvement. These items included "availability of freezing devices", "availability of containers for sharp items", "disposal frequency", "disposal volume", "disposal method", "vehicles meeting the regulations", and "declaration of three lists". This study also aimed to identify important selection factors of biomedical waste disposal companies by hospitals in terms of risk. These findings can serve as references for hospitals in the selection of outsourcing companies for biomedical waste disposal.

  6. Federal facilities compliance act waste management

    SciTech Connect

    Bowers, J; Gates-Anderson, D; Hollister, R; Painter, S

    1999-07-06

    Site Treatment Plans (STPs) developed through the Federal Facilities Compliance Act pose many technical and administrative challenges. Legacy wastes managed under these plans require Land Disposal Restriction (LDR) compliance through treatment and ultimate disposal. Although capacity has been defined for most of the Department of Energy wastes, many waste streams require further characterization and many need additional treatment and handling beyond LDR criteria to be able to dispose of the waste. At Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), the Hazardous Waste Management Division has developed a comprehensive Legacy Waste Program. The program directs work to manage low level and mixed wastes to ensure compliance with nuclear facility rules and its STP. This paper provides a survey of work conducted on these wastes at LLNL. They include commercial waste treatment and disposal, diverse forms of characterization, inventory maintenance and reporting, on-site treatment, and treatability studies. These activities are conducted in an integrated fashion to meet schedules defined in the STP. The processes managing wastes are dynamic due to required integration of administrative, regulatory, and technical concerns spanning the gamut to insure safe proper disposal.

  7. Mechanical performance of disposable surgical needle holders.

    PubMed

    Francis, E H; Towler, M A; Moody, F P; McGregor, W; Himel, H N; Rodeheaver, G T; Edlich, R F

    1992-01-01

    The mechanical performance of disposable Webster surgical needle holders supplied by three different surgical instrument companies was determined by recording the forces (clamping moment) applied by the different needle holder jaws to curved surgical needles. This investigation demonstrated that there was a large variability in the mechanical performance of the disposable needle holders supplied by each surgical instrument company. In addition, the mechanical performance of the disposable needle holder of each surgical instrument company was distinctly different.

  8. Act resilient.

    PubMed

    Joseph, Genie; Bice-Stephens, Wynona

    2014-01-01

    Attendees have reported changing from being fearful to serene, from listless to energized, from disengaged to connected, and becoming markedly less anxious in a few weeks. Anecdotally, self-reported stress levels have been reduced by over 50% after just one class. Attendees learn not to be afraid of their feelings by working with emotions in a playful manner. When a person can act angry, but separate himself from his personal story, the emotional energy exists in a separate form that is not attached to specific events, and can be more easily dealt with and neutralized. Attendees are taught to "take out the emotional trash" through expressive comedy. They become less intimated by their own emotional intensity and triggers as they learn how even metaphorical buckets of anger, shame, guilt and hurt can be emotionally emptied. The added benefit is that this is accomplished without the disclosure of personal information of the requirement to reexperience past pain which can trigger its own cascade of stress. PMID:24706248

  9. Engineering evaluation of projected solid-waste-disposal practices. Volume 2: Case studies

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Hayward, J. C.; Rothfuss, E. H., Jr.; Flick, W. J.; Hawk, T. S.; Quay, J. A.

    1982-09-01

    Estimates of the cost impacts of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) for hazardous and non-hazardous large volume waste classification scenarios on eight power plants was presented. Seven of the power plants were chosen to represent the range of waste management technologies and disposal site conditions existing in the United States today. The eighth site was a fictitious site used to further evaluate the feasibility of ocean disposal of large volume utility wastes. For each site, the professional design team acted in the role of a consultant retained by the utility to bring its waste disposal program into complete compliance with RCRA. First, a conceptual design was developed for each scenario. Then, cost estimates were developed for both scenarios, as well as for current operations. The cost estimates for current operations were performed in order to show the base cases necessary to determine RCRA's cost impacts.

  10. Effects from past solid waste disposal practices.

    PubMed

    Johnson, L J; Daniel, D E; Abeele, W V; Ledbetter, J O; Hansen, W R

    1978-12-01

    This paper reviews documented environmental effects experience from the disposal of solid waste materials in the U.S. Selected case histories are discussed that illustrate waste migration and its actual or potential effects on human or environmental health. Principal conclusions resulting from this review were: solid waste materials do migrate beyond the geometric confines of the initial placement location; environmental effects have been experienced from disposal of municipal, agricultural, and toxic chemical wastes; and utilization of presently known science and engineering principles in sitting and operating solid waste disposal facilities would make a significant improvement in the containment capability of shallow land disposal facilities.

  11. Effects from past solid waste disposal practices.

    PubMed Central

    Johnson, L J; Daniel, D E; Abeele, W V; Ledbetter, J O; Hansen, W R

    1978-01-01

    This paper reviews documented environmental effects experience from the disposal of solid waste materials in the U.S. Selected case histories are discussed that illustrate waste migration and its actual or potential effects on human or environmental health. Principal conclusions resulting from this review were: solid waste materials do migrate beyond the geometric confines of the initial placement location; environmental effects have been experienced from disposal of municipal, agricultural, and toxic chemical wastes; and utilization of presently known science and engineering principles in sitting and operating solid waste disposal facilities would make a significant improvement in the containment capability of shallow land disposal facilities. PMID:367769

  12. 10 CFR 61.52 - Land disposal facility operation and disposal site closure.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-01-01

    ... vertical controls as checked against USGS or NGS record files. (8) A buffer zone of land must be maintained between any buried waste and the disposal site boundary and beneath the disposed waste. The buffer...

  13. 10 CFR 61.52 - Land disposal facility operation and disposal site closure.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-01-01

    ... vertical controls as checked against USGS or NGS record files. (8) A buffer zone of land must be maintained between any buried waste and the disposal site boundary and beneath the disposed waste. The buffer...

  14. 10 CFR 61.52 - Land disposal facility operation and disposal site closure.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-01-01

    ... vertical controls as checked against USGS or NGS record files. (8) A buffer zone of land must be maintained between any buried waste and the disposal site boundary and beneath the disposed waste. The buffer...

  15. 49 CFR Appendix E to Part 599 - Disposal Facility Certification Form

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-10-01

    ... 49 Transportation 7 2013-10-01 2013-10-01 false Disposal Facility Certification Form E Appendix E to Part 599 Transportation Other Regulations Relating to Transportation (Continued) NATIONAL HIGHWAY... CONSUMER ASSISTANCE TO RECYCLE AND SAVE ACT PROGRAM Pt. 599, App. E Appendix E to Part...

  16. 49 CFR Appendix E to Part 599 - Disposal Facility Certification Form

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-10-01

    ... 49 Transportation 7 2012-10-01 2012-10-01 false Disposal Facility Certification Form E Appendix E to Part 599 Transportation Other Regulations Relating to Transportation (Continued) NATIONAL HIGHWAY... CONSUMER ASSISTANCE TO RECYCLE AND SAVE ACT PROGRAM Pt. 599, App. E Appendix E to Part...

  17. 49 CFR Appendix E to Part 599 - Disposal Facility Certification Form

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-10-01

    ... 49 Transportation 7 2014-10-01 2014-10-01 false Disposal Facility Certification Form E Appendix E to Part 599 Transportation Other Regulations Relating to Transportation (Continued) NATIONAL HIGHWAY... CONSUMER ASSISTANCE TO RECYCLE AND SAVE ACT PROGRAM Pt. 599, App. E Appendix E to Part...

  18. 75 FR 61228 - Board Meeting: Technical Lessons Gained From High-Level Nuclear Waste Disposal Efforts

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-10-04

    ... From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office NUCLEAR WASTE TECHNICAL REVIEW BOARD Board Meeting: Technical Lessons Gained From High-Level Nuclear Waste Disposal Efforts Pursuant to its authority under section 5051 of Public Law 100-203, Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act...

  19. 49 CFR Appendix E to Part 599 - Disposal Facility Certification Form

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... 49 Transportation 7 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false Disposal Facility Certification Form E Appendix E to Part 599 Transportation Other Regulations Relating to Transportation (Continued) NATIONAL HIGHWAY... CONSUMER ASSISTANCE TO RECYCLE AND SAVE ACT PROGRAM Pt. 599, App. E Appendix E to Part...

  20. Disposable plasmonic plastic SERS sensor.

    PubMed

    Oo, S Z; Chen, R Y; Siitonen, S; Kontturi, V; Eustace, D A; Tuominen, J; Aikio, S; Charlton, M D B

    2013-07-29

    The 'Klarite™' SERS sensor platform consisting of an array of gold coated inverted square pyramids patterned onto a silicon substrate has become the industry standard over the last decade, providing highly reproducible SERS signals. In this paper, we report successful transfer from silicon to plastic base platform of an optimized SERS substrate design which provides 8 times improvement in sensitivity for a Benzenethiol test molecule compared to standard production Klarite. Transfer is achieved using roll-to-roll and sheet-level nanoimprint fabrication techniques. The new generation plastic SERS sensors provide the added benefit of cheap low cost mass-manufacture, and easy disposal. The plastic replicated SERS sensors are shown to provide ~10(7) enhancement factor with good reproducibility (5%).

  1. NEP processing, operations, and disposal

    NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

    Stancati, Mike

    1993-01-01

    Several recent studies by ASAO/NPO staff members at LeRC and by other organizations have highlighted the potential benefits of using Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP) as the primary transportation means for some of the proposed missions of the Space Exploration Initiative. These include the potential to reduce initial mass in orbit and Mars transit time. Modular NEP configurations also introduce fully redundant main propulsion to Mars flight systems adding several abort or fall back options not otherwise available. Recent studies have also identified mission operations, such as on orbital assembly, refurbishment, and reactor disposal, as important discriminators for propulsion system evaluation. This study is intended to identify and assess 'end-to-end' operational issues associated with using NEP for transporting crews and cargo between Earth and Mars. We also include some consideration of lunar cargo transfer as well.

  2. Nuclear waste disposal educational forum

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1982-10-18

    In keeping with a mandate from the US Congress to provide opportunities for consumer education and information and to seek consumer input on national issues, the Department of Energy's Office of Consumer Affairs held a three-hour educational forum on the proposed nuclear waste disposal legislation. Nearly one hundred representatives of consumer, public interest, civic and environmental organizations were invited to attend. Consumer affairs professionals of utility companies across the country were also invited to attend the forum. The following six papers were presented: historical perspectives; status of legislation (Senate); status of legislation (House of Representatives); impact on the legislation on electric utilities; impact of the legislation on consumers; implementing the legislation. All six papers have been abstracted and indexed for the Energy Data Base.

  3. Planning for greater confinement disposal

    SciTech Connect

    Gilbert, T.L.; Luner, C.; Meshkov, N.K.; Trevorrow, L.E.; Yu, C.

    1985-01-01

    A report that provides guidance for planning for greater-confinement disposal (GCD) of low-level radioactive waste is being prepared. The report addresses procedures for selecting a GCD technology and provides information for implementing these procedures. The focus is on GCD; planning aspects common to GCD and shallow-land burial are covered by reference. Planning procedure topics covered include regulatory requirements, waste characterization, benefit-cost-risk assessment and pathway analysis methodologies, determination of need, waste-acceptance criteria, performance objectives, and comparative assessment of attributes that support these objectives. The major technologies covered include augered shafts, deep trenches, engineered structures, hydrofracture, improved waste forms, and high-integrity containers. Descriptive information is provided, and attributes that are relevant for risk assessment and operational requirements are given. 10 refs., 3 figs., 2 tabs.

  4. Magnesite disposal of carbon dioxide

    SciTech Connect

    Lackner, K.S.; Butt, D.P.; Wendt, C.H.

    1997-08-01

    In this paper we report our progress on developing a method for carbon dioxide disposal whose purpose it is to maintain coal energy competitive even is environmental and political pressures will require a drastic reduction in carbon dioxide emissions. In contrast to most other methods, our approach is not aiming at a partial solution of the problem, or at buying time for phasing out fossil energy. Instead, its purpose is to obtain a complete and economic solution of the problem, and thus maintain access to the vast fossil energy reservoir. A successful development of this technology would guarantee energy availability for many centuries even if world economic growth the most optimistic estimates that have been put forward. Our approach differs from all others in that we are developing an industrial process which chemically binds the carbon dioxide in an exothermic reaction into a mineral carbonate that is thermodynamically stable and environmentally benign.

  5. The NUMO Strategy for HLW and TRU Waste Disposal

    SciTech Connect

    Kitayama, K.; Oda, Y.

    2008-07-01

    Shortly after the Nuclear Waste Management Organization of Japan (NUMO) was established, we initiated an open call to all municipalities, requesting volunteers to host a repository for vitrified HLW. The first volunteer applied for a preliminary literature survey phase last January but, unfortunately, it withdrew the application in April. This failure provided an invaluable lesson for both the relevant authorities and NUMO; subsequently the Atomic Energy Commission of Japan and associated organizations are examining a support plan to back up NUMO's open solicitation. On another front, a recent amendment of 'The Specified Radioactive Waste Final Disposal Act' also allocates specific 'TRU' waste for deep geological disposal, requiring a demonstration of safety to a similar level as that for HLW. To implement the radioactive waste disposal project, NUMO has developed a methodology appropriate to our specific boundary conditions - the NUMO Structured Approach. This takes into account, in particular, our need to balance competing goals, such as operational safety, post-closure safety and cost, during repository tailoring to specific sites. The most important challenge for NUMO is, however, to attract volunteers. We believe that our open and structured R and D program is critical to demonstrate technical competence which, in turn, enhances the credibility of our various public relations activities. (authors)

  6. A disposable blood cyanide sensor.

    PubMed

    Tian, Yong; Dasgupta, Purnendu K; Mahon, Sari B; Ma, Jian; Brenner, Matthew; Wang, Jian-Hua; Boss, Gerry R

    2013-03-20

    Deaths due to smoke inhalation in fires are often due to poisoning by HCN. Rapid administration of antidotes can result in complete resuscitation of the patient but judicious dosing requires the knowledge of the level of cyanide exposure. Rapid sensitive means for blood cyanide quantitation are needed. Hydroxocyanocobinamide (OH(CN)Cbi) reacts with cyanide rapidly; this is accompanied by a large spectral change. The disposable device consists of a pair of nested petri dish bottoms and a single top that fits the outer bottom dish. The top cover has a diametrically strung porous polypropylene membrane tube filled with aqueous OH(CN)Cbi. One end of the tube terminates in an amber (583nm) light emitting diode; the other end in a photodiode via an acrylic optical fiber. An aliquot of the blood sample is put in the inner dish, the assembly covered and acid is added through a port in the cover. Evolved HCN diffuses into the OH(CN)Cbi solution and the absorbance in the long path porous membrane tube cell is measured within 160 s. The LOD was 0.047, 1.0, 0.15, 5.0 and 2.2 μM, respectively, for water (1 mL), bovine blood (100 μL, 1 mL), and rabbit blood (20 μL, 50 μL). RSDs were<10% in all cases and the linear range extended from 0.5 to 200 μM. The method was validated against a microdiffusion approach and applied to the measurement of cyanide in rabbit and human blood. The disposable device permits field measurement of blood cyanide in <4 min.

  7. Consolidated list of chemicals subject to reporting under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act. (Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986)

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1992-01-01

    The consolidated chemical list includes chemicals subject to reporting requirements under Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), also known as the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA). It has been prepared to help firms handling chemicals determine whether they need to submit reports under sections 302, 304, or 313 of Title III and, for a specific chemical, what reports may need to be submitted. Separate lists are also provided of RCRA waste streams and unlisted hazardous wastes, and of radionuclides reportable under CERCLA. The lists should be used as a reference tool, not as a definitive source of compliance information. Compliance information is published in the Code of Federal Regulations, 40 CFR Parts 302, 355, and 372. The chemicals on the consolidated list are ordered by Chemical Abstract Service (CAS) registry number. Categories of chemicals, which do not have CAS registry numbers, but which are cited under CERCLA and section 313, are placed at the end of the list. For reference purposes, the chemicals (with their CAS numbers) are ordered alphabetically following the CAS-order list. Long chemical names may have been truncated to facilitate printing of the list.

  8. DOSE ASSESSMENTS FROM THE DISPOSAL OF LOW-ACTIVITY WASTES IN RCRA-C DISPOSAL CELLS

    EPA Science Inventory

    Modeling the long-term performance of the RCRA-C disposal cell and potential doses to off-site receptors is used to derive maximum radionuclide specific concentrations in the wastes that would enable these wastes to be disposed of safely using the RCRA-C disposal cell technology....

  9. Directions in low-level radioactive waste management: A brief history of commercial low-level radioactive waste disposal

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1990-10-01

    This report presents a history of commercial low-level radioactive waste management in the United States, with emphasis on the history of six commercially operated low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities. The report includes a brief description of important steps that have been taken during the 1980s to ensure the safe disposal of low-level waste in the 1990s and beyond. These steps include the issuance of Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 61, Licensing Requirements for the Land Disposal of Radioactive Waste, the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980, the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985, and steps taken by states and regional compacts to establish additional disposal sites. 42 refs., 13 figs., 1 tab.

  10. Disposal and reuse of Myrtle Beach Air Force Base, South Carolina final environmental impact statement. Final report

    SciTech Connect

    1993-02-01

    Pursuant to the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, Myrtle Beach AFB closed in March 1993. This EIS was prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act to analyze the potential environmental consequences of the disposal of the base. Although disposal will create few direct impacts, reuse by others will create indirect impacts. The EIS analyzes the effects a range of reasonable foreseeable alternative reuses may have on the local community; including land use and aesthetics, transportation, utilities, hazardous materials/wastes, geology and soils, water resources, air quality, noise, biological resources, and cultural resources. Preservation covenants within the disposal document could eliminate or reduce any negative environmental effects to a non-adverse level. Because the Air Force is disposing of the property, some of the mitigation measures are beyond Air Force control. Remediation of Installation Restoration Program sites will continue to be the responsibility of the Air Force.

  11. Remediation of Hanford's N-reactor liquid waste disposal sites.

    PubMed

    Sitsler, Robert B; DeMers, Steven K

    2003-02-01

    Hanford's N-Reactor operated from 1963 to 1987 generating approximately 9 x 10(7) m3 of radioactive and hazardous liquid effluent as a result of reactor operations. Two liquid waste disposal sites, essentially large trenches designed to filter contaminants from the water as it percolates through the soil column, were established to dispose of the effluent. The discharges to the sites included cooling water from the reactor primary, spent fuel storage, and periphery systems, along with miscellaneous drainage from reactor support facilities. Today, both sites are classified as Treatment Storage and Disposal Facilities under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, which makes them priority sites for remediation. The two sites cover approximately 4,100 m2 and 9,300 m2, respectively. Remediation of the sites requires removing a combined total of approximately 2.6 x 10(8) kg of contaminated soil and debris. Principal radionuclides contained in the soil/debris are 60Co, 137Cs, 239Pu, and 90Sr. Remediation of these waste sites requires demolishing concrete structures and excavating, hauling, and disposing of contaminated soils in work areas containing high levels of contamination and whole body dose rates in excess of 1 mSv h-1. The work presents unique radiological control challenges, such as minimizing external dose to workers in a constantly changing outdoor work environment, maintaining contamination control during removal of a water distribution trough filled with highly contaminated sludge, and minimizing outdoor airborne contamination during size reduction of highly contaminated pipelines. Through innovative approaches to dose reduction and contamination control, Hanford's Environmental Restoration Contractor has met the challenge, completing the first phase on schedule and with a total project exposure below the goal of 0.1 person-Sv. PMID:12564346

  12. Sewage Disposal in Port Harcourt, Nigeria.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Ayotamuno, M. J.

    1993-01-01

    This survey of the Port Harcourt, Nigeria, sewage disposal system exemplifies sewage disposal in the developing world. Results reveal that some well-constructed and maintained drains, as well as many open drains and septic tanks, expose women and children to the possibility of direct contact with parasitic organisms and threaten water resources.…

  13. 10 CFR 850.32 - Waste disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 4 2012-01-01 2012-01-01 false Waste disposal. 850.32 Section 850.32 Energy DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY CHRONIC BERYLLIUM DISEASE PREVENTION PROGRAM Specific Program Requirements § 850.32 Waste disposal. (a) The responsible employer must control the generation of beryllium-containing waste, and...

  14. 10 CFR 850.32 - Waste disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 4 2013-01-01 2013-01-01 false Waste disposal. 850.32 Section 850.32 Energy DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY CHRONIC BERYLLIUM DISEASE PREVENTION PROGRAM Specific Program Requirements § 850.32 Waste disposal. (a) The responsible employer must control the generation of beryllium-containing waste, and...

  15. 10 CFR 850.32 - Waste disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 4 2014-01-01 2014-01-01 false Waste disposal. 850.32 Section 850.32 Energy DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY CHRONIC BERYLLIUM DISEASE PREVENTION PROGRAM Specific Program Requirements § 850.32 Waste disposal. (a) The responsible employer must control the generation of beryllium-containing waste, and...

  16. 10 CFR 850.32 - Waste disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 4 2011-01-01 2011-01-01 false Waste disposal. 850.32 Section 850.32 Energy DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY CHRONIC BERYLLIUM DISEASE PREVENTION PROGRAM Specific Program Requirements § 850.32 Waste disposal. (a) The responsible employer must control the generation of beryllium-containing waste, and...

  17. 7 CFR 3203.10 - Disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-01-01

    ... 7 Agriculture 15 2014-01-01 2014-01-01 false Disposal. 3203.10 Section 3203.10 Agriculture..., DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE GUIDELINES FOR THE TRANSFER OF EXCESS COMPUTERS OR OTHER TECHNICAL EQUIPMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 14220 OF THE 2008 FARM BILL § 3203.10 Disposal. When property received under this...

  18. 7 CFR 3203.10 - Disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-01-01

    ... 7 Agriculture 15 2013-01-01 2013-01-01 false Disposal. 3203.10 Section 3203.10 Agriculture..., DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE GUIDELINES FOR THE TRANSFER OF EXCESS COMPUTERS OR OTHER TECHNICAL EQUIPMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 14220 OF THE 2008 FARM BILL § 3203.10 Disposal. When property received under this...

  19. 40 CFR 279.81 - Disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-07-01

    ... Disposal. (a) Disposal of hazardous used oils. Used oils that are identified as a hazardous waste and... nonhazardous used oils. Used oils that are not hazardous wastes and cannot be recycled under this part must be... Protection of Environment ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (CONTINUED) SOLID WASTES (CONTINUED) STANDARDS...

  20. 40 CFR 279.81 - Disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-07-01

    ... Disposal. (a) Disposal of hazardous used oils. Used oils that are identified as a hazardous waste and... nonhazardous used oils. Used oils that are not hazardous wastes and cannot be recycled under this part must be... Protection of Environment ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (CONTINUED) SOLID WASTES (CONTINUED) STANDARDS...

  1. 40 CFR 279.81 - Disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-07-01

    ... Disposal. (a) Disposal of hazardous used oils. Used oils that are identified as a hazardous waste and... nonhazardous used oils. Used oils that are not hazardous wastes and cannot be recycled under this part must be... Protection of Environment ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (CONTINUED) SOLID WASTES (CONTINUED) STANDARDS...

  2. 40 CFR 279.81 - Disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-07-01

    ... Disposal. (a) Disposal of hazardous used oils. Used oils that are identified as a hazardous waste and... nonhazardous used oils. Used oils that are not hazardous wastes and cannot be recycled under this part must be... Protection of Environment ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (CONTINUED) SOLID WASTES (CONTINUED) STANDARDS...

  3. Crystalline and Crystalline International Disposal Activities

    SciTech Connect

    Viswanathan, Hari S.; Chu, Shaoping; Reimus, Paul William; Makedonska, Nataliia; Hyman, Jeffrey De'Haven; Karra, Satish; Dittrich, Timothy M.

    2015-12-21

    This report presents the results of work conducted between September 2014 and July 2015 at Los Alamos National Laboratory in the crystalline disposal and crystalline international disposal work packages of the Used Fuel Disposition Campaign (UFDC) for DOE-NE’s Fuel Cycle Research and Development program.

  4. Medications at School: Disposing of Pharmaceutical Waste

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Taras, Howard; Haste, Nina M.; Berry, Angela T.; Tran, Jennifer; Singh, Renu F.

    2014-01-01

    Background: This project quantified and categorized medications left unclaimed by students at the end of the school year. It determined the feasibility of a model medication disposal program and assessed school nurses' perceptions of environmentally responsible medication disposal. Methods: At a large urban school district all unclaimed…

  5. Petroleum Engineering Techniques for HLW Disposal

    SciTech Connect

    van den Broek, W. M. G. T.

    2002-02-25

    This paper describes why petroleum engineering techniques are of importance and can be used for underground disposal of HLW (high-level radioactive waste). It is focused on rock salt as a geological host medium in combination with disposal of the HLW canisters in boreholes drilled from the surface. Both permanent disposal and disposal with the option to retrieve the waste are considered. The paper starts with a description of the disposal procedure. Next disposal in deep boreholes is treated. Then the possible use of deviated boreholes and of multiple boreholes is discussed. Also waste isolation aspects and the implications of the HLW heat generation are treated. It appears that the use of deep boreholes can be beneficial, and also that--to a certain extent--borehole deviation offers possibilities. The benefits of using multiple boreholes are questionable for permanent disposal, while this technique cannot be applied for retrievable disposal. For the use of casing material, the additional temperature rise due to the HLW heat generation must be taken into account.

  6. High-level waste processing and disposal

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Crandall, J. L.; Drause, H.; Sombret, C.; Uematsu, K.

    The national high level waste disposal plans for France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Japan, and the United States are covered. Three conclusions are reached. The first conclusion is that an excellent technology already exists for high level waste disposal. With appropriate packaging, spent fuel seems to be an acceptable waste form. Borosilicate glass reprocessing waste forms are well understood, in production in France, and scheduled for production in the next few years in a number of other countries. For final disposal, a number of candidate geological repository sites have been identified and several demonstration sites opened. The second conclusion is that adequate financing and a legal basis for waste disposal are in place in most countries. Costs of high level waste disposal will probably and about 5 to 10% to the costs of nuclear electric power. Third conclusion is less optimistic.

  7. Fluorescent ballast and lamp disposal issues

    SciTech Connect

    Leishman, D.L.

    1996-05-01

    All around the world, governments, utility companies, and private businesses are attempting to reduce the amount of energy consumed. In the United States alone, new economic strategies and programs are being created to facilitate this process. For instance, the recent enactment of the National Energy Policy Act, the Environmental Protection Agency`s (EPA) Green Lights Program, and a surge of utility involvement in Demand Side Management (DSM) Commercial/Industrial Direct Install and Rebate Programs. Many of these programs target Commercial/Industrial lighting system retrofits as one of the most cost effective avenues for reducing the consumption of energy. Due to this trend, hundreds of millions of lighting ballasts and lamps are being pulled out of existing buildings and discarded. The benefits of these programs result in enormous reductions in fossil fuels (and subsequent carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxide emissions) required to generate the displaced electricity. Throughout the United States, however, there is an increasing concern for the environmental impacts surrounding the accelerated disposal of both lighting ballasts and lamps. Regulations initially established were for a {open_quotes}one by one,{close_quotes} retirement (failure) process rather than promoted obsolescence and forced retirement of lamp groups or entire systems (truckloads of old technologies). Recognizing this trend and the potential negative environmental effects federal state, and local regulators are in the process of reevaluating the impacts and are being asked to promulgate policies to specifically address this situation. While it is anticipated that regulations pertaining to PCB ballasts will become better focused, the regulations regarding fluorescent lamps are, really, yet to be finalized. As interested and involved parties continue to become more aware of all the impacts, we can expect clearer direction.

  8. Large Component Removal/Disposal

    SciTech Connect

    Wheeler, D. M.

    2002-02-27

    This paper describes the removal and disposal of the large components from Maine Yankee Atomic Power Plant. The large components discussed include the three steam generators, pressurizer, and reactor pressure vessel. Two separate Exemption Requests, which included radiological characterizations, shielding evaluations, structural evaluations and transportation plans, were prepared and issued to the DOT for approval to ship these components; the first was for the three steam generators and one pressurizer, the second was for the reactor pressure vessel. Both Exemption Requests were submitted to the DOT in November 1999. The DOT approved the Exemption Requests in May and July of 2000, respectively. The steam generators and pressurizer have been removed from Maine Yankee and shipped to the processing facility. They were removed from Maine Yankee's Containment Building, loaded onto specially designed skid assemblies, transported onto two separate barges, tied down to the barges, th en shipped 2750 miles to Memphis, Tennessee for processing. The Reactor Pressure Vessel Removal Project is currently under way and scheduled to be completed by Fall of 2002. The planning, preparation and removal of these large components has required extensive efforts in planning and implementation on the part of all parties involved.

  9. Processing Irradiated Beryllium For Disposal

    SciTech Connect

    T. J. Tranter; R. D. Tillotson; N. R. Mann; G. R. Longhurst

    2005-11-01

    The purpose of this research was to develop a process for decontaminating irradiated beryllium that will allow it to be disposed of through normal radwaste channels. Thus, the primary objectives of this ongoing study are to remove the transuranic (TRU) isotopes to less than 100 nCi/g and remove {sup 60}Co, and {sup 137}Cs, to levels that will allow the beryllium to be contact handled. One possible approach that appears to have the most promise is aqueous dissolution and separation of the isotopes by selected solvent extraction followed by precipitation, resulting in a granular form for the beryllium that may be fixed to prevent it from becoming respirable and therefore hazardous. Beryllium metal was dissolved in nitric and fluorboric acids. Isotopes of {sup 241}Am, {sup 239}Pu, {sup 85}Sr, and {sup 137}Cs were then added to make a surrogate beryllium waste solution. A series of batch contacts was performed with the spiked simulant using chlorinated cobalt dicarbollide (CCD) and polyethylene glycol diluted with sulfone to extract the isotopes of Cs and Sr. Another series of batch contacts was performed using a combination of octyl (phenyl)-N,N-diisobutylcarbamoylmethylphosphine oxide (CMPO) in tributyl phosphate (TBP) diluted with dodecane for extracting the isotopes of Pu and Am. The results indicate that greater than 99.9% removal can be achieved for each isotope with only three contact stages.

  10. Disposal configuration options for future uses of greater confinement disposal at the Nevada Test Site

    SciTech Connect

    Price, L.

    1994-09-01

    The US Department of Energy (DOE) is responsible for disposing of a variety of radioactive and mixed wastes, some of which are considered special-case waste because they do not currently have a clear disposal option. The DOE`s Nevada Field Office contracted with Sandia National Laboratories to investigate the possibility of disposing of some of this special-case waste at the Nevada Test Site (NTS). As part of this investigation, a review of a near-surface and subsurface disposal options that was performed to develop alternative disposal configurations for special-case waste disposal at the NTS. The criteria for the review included (1) configurations appropriate for disposal at the NTS; (2) configurations for disposal of waste at least 100 ft below the ground surface; (3) configurations for which equipment and technology currently exist; and (4) configurations that meet the special requirements imposed by the nature of special-case waste. Four options for subsurface disposal of special-case waste are proposed: mined consolidated rock, mined alluvium, deep pits or trenches, and deep boreholes. Six different methods for near-surface disposal are also presented: earth-covered tumuli, above-grade concrete structures, trenches, below-grade concrete structures, shallow boreholes, and hydrofracture. Greater confinement disposal (GCD) in boreholes at least 100 ft deep, similar to that currently practiced at the GCD facility at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site at the NTS, was retained as the option that met the criteria for the review. Four borehole disposal configurations are proposed with engineered barriers that range from the native alluvium to a combination of gravel and concrete. The configurations identified will be used for system analysis that will be performed to determine the disposal configurations and wastes that may be suitable candidates for disposal of special-case wastes at the NTS.

  11. Occupational radiation exposures associated with alternative methods of low-level waste disposal

    SciTech Connect

    Herrington, W.N.; Harty, R.; Merwin, S.E.

    1987-05-01

    The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments (LLRWPA) Act of 1985 assigns the responsibility for disposal of low-level radioactive wastes to individual states. The Act also mandates that the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), in consultation with states and other interested parties, identify disposal methods other than shallow land burial (SLB), the method currently used at the three low-level waste (LLW) disposal sites operating in the United States. The NRC contracted with Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) to compare projected occupational exposures associated with the SLB method and five alternative disposal methods, including below ground vaults (BGV), above ground vaults (AGV), earth mounded concrete bunkers (EMCB), augured holes (AH) and minded cavities (MC). This report is intended to inform state and local governments about these projected exposures in anticipation of their participation in siting new low-level waste disposal facilities. The results of this study suggest that, with the design and operation assumptions made in this study, occupational dose equivalents for the five methods examined in detail would be highest for the EMCB method (1.81 person-mrem/m/sup 3/ of waste disposed). The lowest occupational dose equivalents would occur for the AH method (1.29 person-mrem/m/sup 3/). Projected occupational dose equivalents for SLB, BGV, and AGV disposal methods are 1.38, 1.47, and 1.61 person-mrem/m/sup 3/, respectively. Based on simularities between the reference BGV and MC facilities, it was projected that the occupational dose equivalents for a MC facility would be 40% higher than for the reference BGV facility. 17 refs., 15 figs., 13 tabs.

  12. Framework for DOE mixed low-level waste disposal: Site fact sheets

    SciTech Connect

    Gruebel, M.M.; Waters, R.D.; Hospelhorn, M.B.; Chu, M.S.Y.

    1994-11-01

    The Department of Energy (DOE) is required to prepare and submit Site Treatment Plans (STPS) pursuant to the Federal Facility Compliance Act (FFCAct). Although the FFCAct does not require that disposal be addressed in the STPS, the DOE and the States recognize that treatment of mixed low-level waste will result in residues that will require disposal in either low-level waste or mixed low-level waste disposal facilities. As a result, the DOE is working with the States to define and develop a process for evaluating disposal-site suitability in concert with the FFCAct and development of the STPS. Forty-nine potential disposal sites were screened; preliminary screening criteria reduced the number of sites for consideration to twenty-six. The DOE then prepared fact sheets for the remaining sites. These fact sheets provided additional site-specific information for understanding the strengths and weaknesses of the twenty-six sites as potential disposal sites. The information also provided the basis for discussion among affected States and the DOE in recommending sites for more detailed evaluation.

  13. Salt caverns for oil field waste disposal.

    SciTech Connect

    Veil, J.; Ford, J.; Rawn-Schatzinger, V.; Environmental Assessment; RMC, Consultants, Inc.

    2000-07-01

    Salt caverns used for oil field waste disposal are created in salt formations by solution mining. When created, caverns are filled with brine. Wastes are introduced into the cavern by pumping them under low pressure. Each barrel of waste injected to the cavern displaces a barrel of brine to the surface. The brine is either used for drilling mud or is disposed of in an injection well. Figure 8 shows an injection pump used at disposal cavern facilities in west Texas. Several types of oil field waste may be pumped into caverns for disposal. These include drilling muds, drill cuttings, produced sands, tank bottoms, contaminated soil, and completion and stimulation wastes. Waste blending facilities are constructed at the site of cavern disposal to mix the waste into a brine solution prior to injection. Overall advantages of salt cavern disposal include a medium price range for disposal cost, large capacity and availability of salt caverns, limited surface land requirement, increased safety, and ease of establishment of individual state regulations.

  14. Disposal of Unused Medicines: What You Should Know

    MedlinePlus

    ... Medicine Safe Disposal of Medicines Disposal of Unused Medicines: What You Should Know Share Tweet Linkedin Pin ... PDF - 94B) (revised April 2016). Back to top Medicines recommended for disposal by flushing: medicine and active ...

  15. 32 CFR 644.503 - Methods of disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-07-01

    ... ESTATE HANDBOOK Disposal Disposal of Standing Timber, Crops, and Embedded Gravel, Sand and Stone § 644.503 Methods of disposal. Standing timber, crops, sand, gravel, or stone-quarried products,...

  16. 32 CFR 644.503 - Methods of disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-07-01

    ... ESTATE HANDBOOK Disposal Disposal of Standing Timber, Crops, and Embedded Gravel, Sand and Stone § 644.503 Methods of disposal. Standing timber, crops, sand, gravel, or stone-quarried products,...

  17. 32 CFR 644.503 - Methods of disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-07-01

    ... ESTATE HANDBOOK Disposal Disposal of Standing Timber, Crops, and Embedded Gravel, Sand and Stone § 644.503 Methods of disposal. Standing timber, crops, sand, gravel, or stone-quarried products,...

  18. 32 CFR 644.503 - Methods of disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-07-01

    ... ESTATE HANDBOOK Disposal Disposal of Standing Timber, Crops, and Embedded Gravel, Sand and Stone § 644.503 Methods of disposal. Standing timber, crops, sand, gravel, or stone-quarried products,...

  19. 32 CFR 644.503 - Methods of disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-07-01

    ... ESTATE HANDBOOK Disposal Disposal of Standing Timber, Crops, and Embedded Gravel, Sand and Stone § 644.503 Methods of disposal. Standing timber, crops, sand, gravel, or stone-quarried products,...

  20. 78 FR 24716 - Information Collection: Disposal of Mineral Materials

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-04-26

    ... Forest Service Information Collection: Disposal of Mineral Materials AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. ACTION... currently approved information collection, Disposal of Mineral Materials. DATES: Comments must be received..., including holidays. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title: Disposal of Mineral Materials. OMB Number:...

  1. Guidance on administrative response cost settlements under Section 122(h) of CERCLA and administrative cashout settlements with peripheral parties under Section 122(h) of CERCLA and Attorney General authority. Final report

    SciTech Connect

    Breen, B.; Gelber, B.

    1998-09-30

    The purpose of this memorandum and its attachments is to provide guidance on administrative response cost settlements entered under Section 122(h)(1) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, and on administrative ``cashout`` settlements with peripheral parties under Section 122(h)(1) of CERLCA and the authority of the Attorney General. Part 1 of this memorandum provides an overview of the guidance and explains the context in which the attached model settlements should be used. Part 2 of this memorandum explains the statutory provision, defines relevant terms, discusses the various types of administrative response cost settlements and the scope of covenants not to sue and reservations of rights in those settlements, provides guidance on amount of payment and use of premiums in future cost settlements, provides guidance on amount of payment and use of premiums in future cost settlements, and briefly discusses contribution protection clauses in such settlements. Part 3 outlines how administrative response cost settlements should be documented by the Regions and, when necessary, reviewed and approved by the Department of Justice (DOJ or the Department) and/or the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance in EPA Headquarters (OECA). Part 4 explains the public comment requirements for administrative response cost settlements. Finally, Part 5 addresses enforcement of such settlements.

  2. Project report for the commercial disposal of mixed low-level waste debris

    SciTech Connect

    Andrews, G.; Balls, V.; Shea, T.; Thiesen, T.

    1994-05-01

    This report summarizes the basis for the commercial disposal of Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) mixed low-level waste (MLLW) debris and the associated activities. Mixed waste is radioactive waste plus hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The critical factors for this project were DOE 5820.2A exemption, contracting mechanism, NEPA documentation, sampling and analysis, time limitation and transportation of waste. This report also will provide a guide or a starting place for future use of Envirocare of Utah or other private sector disposal/treatment facilities, and the lessons learned during this project.

  3. Future trends which will influence waste disposal.

    PubMed Central

    Wolman, A

    1978-01-01

    The disposal and management of solid wastes are ancient problems. The evolution of practices naturally changed as populations grew and sites for disposal became less acceptable. The central search was for easy disposal at minimum costs. The methods changed from indiscriminate dumping to sanitary landfill, feeding to swine, reduction, incineration, and various forms of re-use and recycling. Virtually all procedures have disabilities and rising costs. Many methods once abandoned are being rediscovered. Promises for so-called innovations outstrip accomplishments. Markets for salvage vary widely or disappear completely. The search for conserving materials and energy at minimum cost must go on forever. PMID:570105

  4. Ultrasonic technology improves drill cuttings disposal

    SciTech Connect

    Avern, N.; Copercini, A.

    1997-07-01

    Advancements are being made by employing ultrasonics for onsite cuttings size reduction for slurrification prior to disposal. The size reduction proficiency of this new ultrasonics slurrification system as a medium to reduce the particle size of drill cuttings presents operators with a system that can enhance existing disposal techniques. This article presents results from a recent field trial, where ultrasonic processors were used to Agip (UK) Limited to reduce the particle size of drill cuttings prior to disposal into the water column and natural dispersement.

  5. Future trends which will influence waste disposal.

    PubMed

    Wolman, A

    1978-12-01

    The disposal and management of solid wastes are ancient problems. The evolution of practices naturally changed as populations grew and sites for disposal became less acceptable. The central search was for easy disposal at minimum costs. The methods changed from indiscriminate dumping to sanitary landfill, feeding to swine, reduction, incineration, and various forms of re-use and recycling. Virtually all procedures have disabilities and rising costs. Many methods once abandoned are being rediscovered. Promises for so-called innovations outstrip accomplishments. Markets for salvage vary widely or disappear completely. The search for conserving materials and energy at minimum cost must go on forever. PMID:570105

  6. Disposal of medical waste: a legal perspective.

    PubMed

    Du Toit, Karen; Bodenstein, Johannes

    2013-09-03

    The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa provides that everyone has the right to an environment that is not harmful to their health and well-being. The illegal dumping of hazardous waste poses a danger to the environment when pollutants migrate into water sources and ultimately cause widespread infection or toxicity, endangering the health of humans who might become exposed to infection and toxins. To give effect to the Constitution, the safe disposal of hazardous waste is governed by legislation in South Africa. Reports of the illegal disposal of waste suggest a general lack of awareness and training in regard to the safe disposal of medical waste. 

  7. Marine disposal of radioactive wastes

    NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

    Woodhead, D. S.

    1980-03-01

    In a general sense, the main attraction of the marine environment as a repository for the wastes generated by human activities lies in the degree of dispersion and dilution which is readily attainable. However, the capacity of the oceans to receive wastes without unacceptable consequences is clearly finite and this is even more true of localized marine environments such as estuaries, coastal waters and semi-enclosed seas. Radionuclides have always been present in the marine environment and marine organisms and humans consuming marine foodstuffs have always been exposed, to some degree, to radiation from this source. The hazard associated with ionizing radiations is dependent upon the absorption of energy from the radiation field within some biological entity. Thus any disposal of radioactive wastes into the marine environment has consequences, the acceptability of which must be assessed in terms of the possible resultant increase in radiation exposure of human and aquatic populations. In the United Kingdom the primary consideration has been and remains the safe-guarding of public health. The control procedures are therefore designed to minimize as far as practicable the degree of human exposure within the overall limits recommended as acceptable by the International Commission on Radiological Protection. There are several approaches through which control could be exercised and the strengths and weaknesses of each are considered. In this review the detailed application of the critical path technique to the control of the discharge into the north-east Irish Sea from the fuel reprocessing plant at Windscale is given as a practical example. It will be further demonstrated that when human exposure is controlled in this way no significant risk attaches to the increased radiation exposure experienced by populations of marine organisms in the area.

  8. 27 CFR 72.81 - Authority for disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-04-01

    ... Disposal of Forfeited Firearms, Ammunition, Explosive Materials, or Contraband Cigarettes § 72.81 Authority for disposal. Forfeited firearms, aummunition, explosive materials, or contraband cigarettes, not...

  9. 27 CFR 72.81 - Authority for disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-04-01

    ... Disposal of Forfeited Firearms, Ammunition, Explosive Materials, or Contraband Cigarettes § 72.81 Authority for disposal. Forfeited firearms, aummunition, explosive materials, or contraband cigarettes, not...

  10. The National Low-Level Radioactive Waste Act: Success or failure?

    SciTech Connect

    Paton, R.F.

    1997-07-01

    Prior to 1980, Washington, Nevada, and South Carolina had the only commercial low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal sites in the country. Tired of shouldering the nation`s burden for LLW disposal, these three states restricted and closed access to the disposal facilities located within their states. Without safe disposal access for the hundreds of commercial LLW generators nationwide, an environmental and political crisis developed. In 1980, Congress passed the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act (the Act) as a means to avert the crisis. Nine compact regions with 44 states have been formed to develop a reasonable framework to ensure that a long-term national waste disposal system is in place. So why do we not have one?

  11. Method of Disposing of Corrosive Gases

    DOEpatents

    Burford, W.B. III; Anderson, H.C.

    1950-07-11

    Waste gas containing elemental fluorine is disposed of in the disclosed method by introducing the gas near the top of a vertical chamber under a downward spray of caustic soda solution which contains a small amount of sodium sulfide.

  12. Nuclear waste disposal: The technical challenges

    SciTech Connect

    Crowley, K.D.

    1997-06-01

    Public safety and billions of taxpayer dollars are at stake in the efforts to solve formidable technical problems associated with the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and defense waste.{copyright} {ital 1997 American Institute of Physics.}

  13. 40 CFR 191.24 - Disposal standards.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-07-01

    ... undisturbed performance after disposal shall not cause the levels of radioactivity in any underground source of drinking water, in the accessible environment, to exceed the limits specified in 40 CFR part...

  14. 40 CFR 191.24 - Disposal standards.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-07-01

    ... undisturbed performance after disposal shall not cause the levels of radioactivity in any underground source of drinking water, in the accessible environment, to exceed the limits specified in 40 CFR part...

  15. 40 CFR 191.24 - Disposal standards.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-07-01

    ... undisturbed performance after disposal shall not cause the levels of radioactivity in any underground source of drinking water, in the accessible environment, to exceed the limits specified in 40 CFR part...

  16. 40 CFR 191.24 - Disposal standards.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-07-01

    ... undisturbed performance after disposal shall not cause the levels of radioactivity in any underground source of drinking water, in the accessible environment, to exceed the limits specified in 40 CFR part...

  17. Procedures for RIA I-125 waste disposal

    SciTech Connect

    Hidalgo, J.U.; Shepard, E.S.; Ball, J.M.; Colomb, K.D.

    1982-04-01

    I-125 can be effectively removed from coated tubes and plastic beads used as solid-phase separators by a 50% household bleach solution. This technique enables the user to dispose of these separators into common trash.

  18. Arsenic Treatment Residuals: Quantities, Characteristics and Disposal

    EPA Science Inventory

    This presentation provides information on the quantities, the characteristics and the disposal options for the common arsenic removal technologies. The technologies consist of adsorption media, iron removal, coagulation/filtration and ion exchange. The information for the prese...

  19. 10 CFR 850.32 - Waste disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-01-01

    ...-contaminated equipment and other items that are disposed of as waste, through the application of waste minimization principles. (b) Beryllium-containing waste, and beryllium-contaminated equipment and other...

  20. Waste disposal options report. Volume 2

    SciTech Connect

    Russell, N.E.; McDonald, T.G.; Banaee, J.; Barnes, C.M.; Fish, L.W.; Losinski, S.J.; Peterson, H.K.; Sterbentz, J.W.; Wenzel, D.R.

    1998-02-01

    Volume 2 contains the following topical sections: estimates of feed and waste volumes, compositions, and properties; evaluation of radionuclide inventory for Zr calcine; evaluation of radionuclide inventory for Al calcine; determination of k{sub eff} for high level waste canisters in various configurations; review of ceramic silicone foam for radioactive waste disposal; epoxides for low-level radioactive waste disposal; evaluation of several neutralization cases in processing calcine and sodium-bearing waste; background information for EFEs, dose rates, watts/canister, and PE-curies; waste disposal options assumptions; update of radiation field definition and thermal generation rates for calcine process packages of various geometries-HKP-26-97; and standard criteria of candidate repositories and environmental regulations for the treatment and disposal of ICPP radioactive mixed wastes.

  1. Physical oceanographic processes at candidate dredged-material disposal sites B1B and 1M offshore San Francisco

    SciTech Connect

    Sherwood, C.R.; Denbo, D.W.; Downing, J.P. ); Coats, D.A. )

    1990-10-01

    The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), San Francisco District, has identified two candidate sites for ocean disposal of material from several dredging projects in San Francisco Bay. The disposal site is to be designated under Section 103 of the Ocean Dumping Act. One of the specific criteria in the Ocean Dumping Act is that the physical environments of the candidate sites be considered. Toward this goal, the USACE requested that the Pacific Northwest Laboratory conduct a study of physical oceanographic and sediment transport processes at the candidate sites, B1B and 1M. The results of that study are presented in this report. 40 refs., 27 figs., 10 tabs.

  2. 76 FR 40343 - Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2011-07-08

    ... FR 37329). * * * * * Changes: Retention and disposal: Delete entry and replace with ``Professional... Department of the Army Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD. ACTION: Notice to amend a system of records. SUMMARY: The Department of the Army is proposing to amend a...

  3. 75 FR 61453 - Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-10-05

    ... Defense. A0036-2 USAAA System Name: Army Audit Agency System for Information Storage System Location: U.S..., Retrieving, Accessing, Retaining, and Disposing of Records in the System: Storage: Electronic storage media... Department of the Army Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records AGENCY: Department of the Army; DoD....

  4. Disposal of radioactive iodine in space

    NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

    Burns, R. E.; Defield, J. G.

    1978-01-01

    The possibility of space disposal of iodine waste from nuclear power reactors is investigated. The space transportation system utilized relies upon the space shuttle, a liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen orbit transfer vehicle, and a solid propellant final stage. The iodine is assumed to be in the form of either an iodide or an iodate, and calculations assume that the final destination is either solar orbit or solar system escape. It is concluded that space disposal of iodine is feasible.

  5. Stability of disposal rooms during waste retrieval

    SciTech Connect

    Brandshaug, T.

    1989-03-01

    This report presents the results of a numerical analysis to determine the stability of waste disposal rooms for vertical and horizontal emplacement during the period of waste retrieval. It is assumed that waste retrieval starts 50 years after the initial emplacement of the waste, and that access to and retrieval of the waste containers take place through the disposal rooms. It is further assumed that the disposal rooms are not back-filled. Convective cooling of the disposal rooms in preparation for waste retrieval is included in the analysis. Conditions and parameters used were taken from the Nevada Nuclear Waste Storage Investigation (NNWSI) Project Site Characterization Plan Conceptual Design Report (MacDougall et al., 1987). Thermal results are presented which illustrate the heat transfer response of the rock adjacent to the disposal rooms. Mechanical results are presented which illustrate the predicted distribution of stress, joint slip, and room deformations for the period of time investigated. Under the assumption that the host rock can be classified as ``fair to good`` using the Geomechanics Classification System (Bieniawski, 1974), only light ground support would appear to be necessary for the disposal rooms to remain stable. 23 refs., 28 figs., 2 tabs.

  6. Disposal facility data for the interim performance

    SciTech Connect

    Eiholzer, C.R.

    1995-05-15

    The purpose of this report is to identify and provide information on the waste package and disposal facility concepts to be used for the low-level waste tank interim performance assessment. Current concepts for the low-level waste form, canister, and the disposal facility will be used for the interim performance assessment. The concept for the waste form consists of vitrified glass cullet in a sulfur polymer cement matrix material. The waste form will be contained in a 2 {times} 2 {times} 8 meter carbon steel container. Two disposal facility concepts will be used for the interim performance assessment. These facility concepts are based on a preliminary disposal facility concept developed for estimating costs for a disposal options configuration study. These disposal concepts are based on vault type structures. None of the concepts given in this report have been approved by a Tank Waste Remediation Systems (TWRS) decision board. These concepts will only be used in th interim performance assessment. Future performance assessments will be based on approved designs.

  7. State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) environmental checklist forms for 304 Concretion Facility Closure Plan. Revision 2

    SciTech Connect

    Not Available

    1993-11-01

    The 300 Area of the Hanford Site contains reactor fuel manufacturing facilities and several research and development laboratories. Recyclable scrap uranium with zircaloy-2 and copper silicon alloy, uranium-titanium alloy, beryllium/zircaloy-2 alloy, and zircaloy-2 chips and fines were secured in concrete billets (7.5-gallon containers) in the 304 Facility, located in the 300 Area. The beryllium/zircaloy-2 alloy and zircaloy-2 chips and fines are designated as mixed waste with the characteristic of ignitability. The concretion process reduced the ignitability of the fines and chips for safe storage and shipment. This process has been discontinued and the 304 Facility is now undergoing closure as defined in the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of 1976 and the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Dangerous Waste Regulations, WAC 173-303-040. This closure plan presents a description of the 304 Facility, the history of materials and waste managed, and the procedures that will be followed to close the 304 Facility. The 304 Facility is located within the 300-FF-3 (source) and 300-FF-5 (groundwater) operable units, as designated in the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) (Ecology et al. 1992). Contamination in the operable units 300-FF-3 and 300-FF-5 is scheduled to be addressed through the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980 remedial action process. Therefore, all soil remedial action at the 304 Facility will be conducted as part of the CERCLA remedial action of operable units 300-FF-3 and 300-FF-5.

  8. Trace metal contamination of Beaufort's Dyke, North Channel, Irish Sea: a legacy of ordnance disposal.

    PubMed

    Callaway, Alexander; Quinn, Rory; Brown, Craig J; Service, Matthew; Benetti, Sara

    2011-11-01

    Beaufort's Dyke is a disused ordnance disposal ground within the North Channel of the Irish Sea. Over 1 million tonnes of ordnance were disposed of in the dyke over a 40 year period representing a substantial volume of trace metal pollutants introduced to the seabed. Utilising particle transport modelling software we simulated the potential transport of metal particles from Beaufort's Dyke over a 3 month period. This demonstrated that Beaufort's Dyke has the potential to act as a source for trace metal contamination to areas beyond the submarine valley. Trace metal analysis of sediments from the Dyke and surrounding National Marine Monitoring Programme areas demonstrate that the Dyke is not the most contaminated site in the region. Particle transport modelling enables the transport pathways of trace metal contaminants to be predicted. Implementation of the technique in other munitions disposal grounds will provide valuable information for the selection of monitoring stations.

  9. Pulp fiction - The volunteer concept (or how not to site additional LLRW disposal capacity)

    SciTech Connect

    Burton, D.A.

    1995-12-31

    Experiences of compacts and of individual states throughout the nation indicate that low-level radioactive waste disposal siting processes, based from the beginning upon the volunteer concept are fraught with problems. Most apparent among these problems is that the volunteer concept does not lead to scientifically and technically based siting endeavors. Ten years have passed since the Amendments Act of 1985, and no compact or state has been - successful in providing for new LLRW disposal capacity. That failure can be traced in part to the reliance upon the volunteer concept in siting attempts. If success is to be achieved, the future direction for LLRW management must focus on three areas: first, a comprehensive evaluation of all LLRW management options, including reduction of waste generated and on-site storage; secondly, a comprehensive evaluation of the current as well as projected waste stream, to determine the amount of disposal capacity actually needed; and, finally, sound scientifically and technically based siting processes.

  10. Deep borehole disposal of high-level radioactive waste.

    SciTech Connect

    Stein, Joshua S.; Freeze, Geoffrey A.; Brady, Patrick Vane; Swift, Peter N.; Rechard, Robert Paul; Arnold, Bill Walter; Kanney, Joseph F.; Bauer, Stephen J.

    2009-07-01

    Preliminary evaluation of deep borehole disposal of high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel indicates the potential for excellent long-term safety performance at costs competitive with mined repositories. Significant fluid flow through basement rock is prevented, in part, by low permeabilities, poorly connected transport pathways, and overburden self-sealing. Deep fluids also resist vertical movement because they are density stratified. Thermal hydrologic calculations estimate the thermal pulse from emplaced waste to be small (less than 20 C at 10 meters from the borehole, for less than a few hundred years), and to result in maximum total vertical fluid movement of {approx}100 m. Reducing conditions will sharply limit solubilities of most dose-critical radionuclides at depth, and high ionic strengths of deep fluids will prevent colloidal transport. For the bounding analysis of this report, waste is envisioned to be emplaced as fuel assemblies stacked inside drill casing that are lowered, and emplaced using off-the-shelf oilfield and geothermal drilling techniques, into the lower 1-2 km portion of a vertical borehole {approx}45 cm in diameter and 3-5 km deep, followed by borehole sealing. Deep borehole disposal of radioactive waste in the United States would require modifications to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act and to applicable regulatory standards for long-term performance set by the US Environmental Protection Agency (40 CFR part 191) and US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (10 CFR part 60). The performance analysis described here is based on the assumption that long-term standards for deep borehole disposal would be identical in the key regards to those prescribed for existing repositories (40 CFR part 197 and 10 CFR part 63).

  11. Subseabed Disposal Program Plan. Volume I. Overview

    SciTech Connect

    1981-07-01

    The primary objective of the Subseabed Disposal Program (SDP) is to assess the scientific, environmental, and engineering feasibility of disposing of processed and packaged high-level nuclear waste in geologic formations beneath the world's oceans. High-level waste (HLW) is considered the most difficult of radioactive wastes to dispose of in oceanic geologic formations because of its heat and radiation output. From a scientific standpoint, the understanding developed for the disposal of such HLW can be used for other nuclear wastes (e.g., transuranic - TRU - or low-level) and materials from decommissioned facilities, since any set of barriers competent to contain the heat and radiation outputs of high-level waste will also contain such outputs from low-level waste. If subseabed disposal is found to be feasible for HLW, then other factors such as cost will become more important in considering subseabed emplacement for other nuclear wastes. A secondary objective of the SDP is to develop and maintain a capability to assess and cooperate with the seabed nuclear waste disposal programs of other nations. There are, of course, a number of nations with nuclear programs, and not all of these nations have convenient access to land-based repositories for nuclear waste. Many are attempting to develop legislative and scientific programs that will avoid potential hazards to man, threats to other ocean uses, and marine pollution, and they work together to such purpose in meetings of the international NEA/Seabed Working Group. The US SDP, as the first and most highly developed R and D program in the area, strongly influences the development of subseabed-disposal-related policy in such nations.

  12. 36 CFR 13.1912 - Solid waste disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-07-01

    ... 36 Parks, Forests, and Public Property 1 2011-07-01 2011-07-01 false Solid waste disposal. 13.1912....1912 Solid waste disposal. (a) A solid waste disposal site may accept non-National Park Service solid waste generated within the boundaries of the park area. (b) A solid waste disposal site may be...

  13. 36 CFR 13.1604 - Solid waste disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-07-01

    ... 36 Parks, Forests, and Public Property 1 2011-07-01 2011-07-01 false Solid waste disposal. 13.1604... Solid waste disposal. (a) A solid waste disposal site may accept non-National Park Service solid waste generated within the boundaries of the park area. (b) A solid waste disposal site may be located within...

  14. 36 CFR 13.1008 - Solid waste disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-07-01

    ... 36 Parks, Forests, and Public Property 1 2011-07-01 2011-07-01 false Solid waste disposal. 13.1008... § 13.1008 Solid waste disposal. (a) A solid waste disposal site may accept non-National Park Service solid waste generated within the boundaries of the park area. (b) A solid waste disposal site may...

  15. 36 CFR 13.1912 - Solid waste disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-07-01

    ... 36 Parks, Forests, and Public Property 1 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Solid waste disposal. 13.1912....1912 Solid waste disposal. (a) A solid waste disposal site may accept non-National Park Service solid waste generated within the boundaries of the park area. (b) A solid waste disposal site may be...

  16. 36 CFR 13.1604 - Solid waste disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-07-01

    ... 36 Parks, Forests, and Public Property 1 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Solid waste disposal. 13.1604... Solid waste disposal. (a) A solid waste disposal site may accept non-National Park Service solid waste generated within the boundaries of the park area. (b) A solid waste disposal site may be located within...

  17. 36 CFR 13.1118 - Solid waste disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-07-01

    ... 36 Parks, Forests, and Public Property 1 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Solid waste disposal. 13.1118... Provisions § 13.1118 Solid waste disposal. (a) A solid waste disposal site may accept non-National Park Service solid waste generated within the boundaries of the park area. (b) A solid waste disposal site...

  18. 36 CFR 13.1008 - Solid waste disposal.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-07-01

    ... 36 Parks, Forests, and Public Property 1 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Solid waste disposal. 13.1008... § 13.1008 Solid waste disposal. (a) A solid waste disposal site may accept non-National Park Service solid waste generated within the boundaries of the park area. (b) A solid waste disposal site may...

  19. 40 CFR 228.3 - Disposal site management responsibilities.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-07-01

    ... 40 Protection of Environment 25 2014-07-01 2014-07-01 false Disposal site management... DUMPING CRITERIA FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF DISPOSAL SITES FOR OCEAN DUMPING § 228.3 Disposal site management responsibilities. (a) Management of a site consists of regulating times, rates, and methods of disposal...

  20. 40 CFR 228.3 - Disposal site management responsibilities.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-07-01

    ... 40 Protection of Environment 26 2012-07-01 2011-07-01 true Disposal site management... DUMPING CRITERIA FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF DISPOSAL SITES FOR OCEAN DUMPING § 228.3 Disposal site management responsibilities. (a) Management of a site consists of regulating times, rates, and methods of disposal...