DOCSLIB.ORG

Kaiser-Hill Earns 82 % of Available Incentives for 1997 Cleanup Work

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Kaiser-Hill Earns 82 % of Available Incentives for 1997 Cleanup Work ‘ THEADVISOR.’- . A Publication of the Ro‘cky Flats Citizens-AdvisoryBoard -I _- - - - - - - - - - -- 1 J Spring 1998 I 8 1 1 ._^___^ I - - - . I __p I - ._- .- Kaiser-Hill Earns 82 % of Available Incentives for 1997 Cleanup Work I rior to the start of each fiscal year, the Department of , ’ In FY97, Kaiser-Hill earned 100% of :a Energy (DOE) and its contractor, Kaiser-Hil1;negoti- I It. ,P I . 1 ate performance measures and associated incentive I available incentive fees for: I fees for the upcoming year. With most of the reporting and ; I 1 I I evaluation completed, Kaisei-Hill has’received just over $20 Shipment of low-level mixed waste I million in incentive fees ou‘t 0f.a possible $24.6 million for (saltcrete and pondcrete) I cleanup work completed during Fiscal Year (FY) i997. This 1 represents about 82% of the available fee. In comparison, Waste minimization and pollution prevention I. Kaiser-Hill earned about 72% of the incentive fees for the Pre-certification of WlPP waste ’i 1.... work it completed during FY96. Additionally, there are still Waste consolidation and evacuation in the some performance measures open for which Kaiser-Hill I protected area -. could earn fees for FY97. I I Deactivation work in Building 779 and the .. 1. 2- According to DOE’S manager-at Rocky Flats, Jessie ... 1 771 and 886 clusters I Roberson, “While significant progress was made in 1997, .., I . we’re looking to accomplish even more next ye&. 1 *. Environmental remediation (Mound and T1) Successful completion of these performance measures helps ’ 8 Building 771 nuclear holdup measurements I bring the site closer to the goal of accelerated closure in a 1. SmalVdisadvantaged business subcontracting ...... safe, secure and efficient manner.” 4. Comprehensive peiformance (schedule and cost) Under Kaiser-Hil1,’s contract with DOE, the company’is I 1. Life-cycle baseline development reimbursed for the costs it incurs as a result-of doing the .I Additional demolition activities (SS) ,. work at the site. Additionally, it negotiates with DOE an >I* ... ’. amount of money that is available as profit. Fifteen percent f 1 Removal of Building 776/777 pencil tanks (SS) . .- I of this pool is guaranteed, providing that Kaiser-Hill demon- i . Life-cycle baseline revisions (SS) .. , strates an acceptable level of performance. Only the Removal of nuclear materials - Bldg. 776/777 (SS) successful completion of an annual set of performance mea- I* <*Material disposition from environmental restoration sures entitles Kaiker-Hill to the other 85% of available fees. < at Mound and T3n4 (SS) . FY97 performance measures included both standard -1 and superstretch measures. Standard measures are those Automation of security posts/access control which D,OE expects Kaiser-Hill to complete under the exist- , systems (SS) ing closure plan. Superstretch measures are used to 1. Building 444 deactivation (SS) encourage Kaiser-Hill to, go beyond the current baseline plans Additional low level waste shipments (SS) 1 and accelerate completion of work not scheduled or funded in i the current fiscal year. Kaiser-Hill earned 84% of the 1 I’ (SS=superstretch) 4. ... .. ” . ... L__ ... I. .. .- .~ .- ......... I ..... .- . ‘. -I . L. ,. I (continued..... on page 3) ’ . : .. ... .... Highlights Inside: Rocky Flats Updates ....................................... i.2 INEEL Citizens Advisory Board ............................. 6 Review of Soil Action Levels ........i .................. 3 New CAB Staff / Providing Input to CAB ............. 7 State of the Flats Meeting ......’.; ................... i: ....4 Public Meeting Calendar ..........1 ................................ ,8 .. I I \ Updates ‘ Environmental Monitoring CDPHE Assigns New CAB Over the past year, The Advisor has Ex-Oflcio Representative reported on the progress of the evalua- Steve Gunderson recently took over .. tion commissioned by the Citizens as the Colorado Department of Public Advisory Board to look at the environ- Health and Environment’s ex-officio mental monitoring at Rocky Flats. This (non-voting) member on the CAB. evaluation, entitled An Analysis of Steve is a native of Iowa and has been a Environmental Monitoring ut and resident of Colorado since 1981. He around the Rocky Flats Environmental has a Bachelor of Arts in geology from Technology Site, is now available for Augustana College in Illinois. He also has a Master of Science degree in geolo- review on CAB’S web page 2006 Plan Update . gy from the University of California, (www.rfcab.org). A limited-number of The process of developing an accel- Berkeley. Steve worked as a corporate paper copies are available and may be erated closure plan for Rocky Flats and officer in a small Denver based petrole- obtained by contacting the CAB office. other Department of Energy nuclear um exploration and production company sites continues. A Discussion Draft of Work on a companion report, A Citizens prior to joining the state Department of the national 2006 Plan was released in Guide to Environmental Monitoring at Health as a geologist in 1989. June 1997. In December, Rocky Flats Rocky Flats, has been delayed. In 1992, Steve was assigned submitted a slightly modified version of Currently, CAB is reviewing the responsibility for creation of the its plan to DOE-Headquarters in evaluation and is engaged in discussions Emergency Management Program Washington, D.C (available on the with the Rocky Flats contractors respon- (EMP) within the health department. Rocky Flats web page - www.rfets.gov). sible for the environmental monitoring EMP responsibilities included offsite Headquarters is currently in the process programs, as well as representatives emergency planning related to Rocky of synthesizing the individual site plans from the local city governments, the Flats; emergency planning and pre- into an overall national Draft 2006 Plan. Colorado Department of Public Health The release of this version is paredness activities in Colorado relative scheduled for early March. The plan and Environment, and the to DOE radioactive waste shipments, will be available on the DOE web page Environmental Protection Agency. including those destined for WIPP; and at www.em.doe.gov/acc2006. A 45-day These groups have reviewed the evalua- coordinating department activities rela- public comment period will commence tion and have offered comments to tive to hazardous materials spills, public upon the release of the plan, followed CAB. By March of this year, GAB health emergency, and natural disasters. by the development of the Final 2006 . hopes to develop a set of recommenda- As EMP director, Steve was co- plan. A Preliminary Response to tions, based on the evaluation and the chair of the Colorado Emergency Comment document was prepared that discussions with the site and the regula- Planning Commission, chaired the addresses,public comments on the tors, for changes to the current Governor’s Interagency Advisory Group Discussion Draft and is currently avail- environmental monitoring program. on Hazardous Materials, and was a able in Rocky Flats Reading Rooms. One important area that has already member of DOE’S national Transportation External Coordination Rocky Flats’ plan now contains ’ been identified is the need to improve Working Group. only one scenario, in contrast to earlier the way in which environmental moni- versions which offered a number of Steve became the State Rocky Flats toring information and results are shared different cases. Only one substantive Cleanup Agreement Project Manager in with the public. CAB hopes to work change was made in this submittal. January 1998, at which time he was Whereas the June version identified nine collaboratively with the site and the reg- appointed as the Colorado Department buildings that would not be decommis- ulators on new ways to provide this of Public Health and Environment’s ex- sioned under the plan because of information, and thus has delayed the officio representative on CAB. CAB’S potential community reuse, the publication of the Citizens Guide until other ex-officio representatives are Tim December plan includes the D&D costs . these changes can be made. If you have Rehder from the U.S. Environmental for these buildings. Other than this additional questions about the project, Protection Agency and Joe Legare from change and some substantial formatting please contact Ken Korkia at the CAB the U.S. Department of Energy- changes, the document remains the office. Rocky Flats. same as the June discussion draft. .. ..' .. -. ,. I. ,. ' '-. 1. .. I I Review of Soil Action Levels is Now Underway n October 1996, DOE, the State of Colorado and the Environmental I Protection Agency established numeri- cal guidelines for the cleanup of . '4 contaminated soil at Rocky Flats. These guidelines, or Soil Action Levels, provide limits for determining when action must be taken to remove, treat, or otherwise contain soil which is contaminated with plutonium and other radioactive materials. Almost immediately after. these Soil Action Levels were established, members of the communi- ty became concerned because the numbers . were much higher than expected, and based on additional review, were higher than the cleanup levels established for radioactively contaminated soil cleanups in other parts of the world. I c. The Rocky Citizens'Adviso~ . Oversight panel members Bob Kanick, Tom Duvidson, Joe Goldfield, facilitator Board, in a 1996 recommendation, asked hura ill and k~~~M~~~~. that DOE conduct an independent assess- ' ment of the Soil Action Levels. Joining in governments, two from public interest groups, three this request were the cities of Broomfield and Westminster, technicalhcientific experts, and two citizen members. and the office of Congressman David Skaggs. In November During the next two months; the oversight panel will final- 19969 the Department Of Energy agreed to conduct such an . ize the scope of work and hire the contractor who will perform assessment. Shortly thereafter, representatives from CAB, the the evaluation. At this time, the panel would like to complete local governments, and other interested citizens started meeting work on the e;aluation in less than a year, so that the to discuss how such a study might be conducted.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ROCKY FLA TS PLANT HAER No
    ROCKY FLA TS PLANT HAER No. C0-83 (Environmental Technology Site) Bounded by Indiana St. & Rts. 93, 128 & 72 Golden vicinity Jefferson County Colorado PHOTOGRAPHS WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA REDUCED COPIES OF MEASURED DRAWINGS HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD INTERMOUNTAIN SUPPORT OFFICE - DENVER National Park Service P.O. Box 25287 Denver, CO 80225-0287 HISTORIC AMERICAN ENGINEERING RECORD ROCKY FLATS PLANT HAER No. C0-83 (Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site) Location: Bounded by Highways 93, 128, and 72 and Indiana Street, Golden, Jefferson County, Colorado. Date of Construction: 1951-1953 (original plant). Fabricator: Austin Company, Cleveland, Ohio. Present Owner: United States Department of Energy (USDOE). Present Use: Environmental Restoration. Significance: The Rocky Flats Plant (Plant), established in 1951, was a top-secret weapons production plant. The Plant manufactured triggers for use in nuclear weapons and purified plutonium recovered from retired weapons ( called site returns). Activities at the Plant included production, stockpile maintenance, and retirement and dismantlement. Particular emphasis was placed on production. Rocky Flats produced most of the plutonium triggers used in nuclear weapons from 1953 to 1964, and all of the triggers produced from 1964 until 1989, when production was suspended. The Plant also manufactured components for other portions of the weapons since it had the facilities, equipment, and expertise required for handling the materials involved. In addition to production processes, the Plant specialized in research concerning the properties of many materials that were not widely used in other industries, including plutonium, uranium, beryllium, and tritium. Conventional methods for machining plutonium, uranium, beryllium, and other metals were continually examined, modified, and updated in support of weapons production.
    [Show full text]
  • Waste Management Activities for Groundwater Protection Savannah River Plant Aiken, South Carolina
    \ DoE/Els-o120 Final Environmental Impact Statement Waste Management Activities for Groundwater Protection Savannah River Plant Aiken, South Carolina Volume 3 ~+FNTO&@+@ ~ &v a ~ k~ ;%.” $ +6w& ~+e Q $TiTESOf December 1987 United States Department of Energy TABLE OF CONTENTS ~pendix ~ G ASSESSMENT OF ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES FOR NEW DISPOSAL/ STORAGE FACILITIES . ..... ...... G-1 G.1 No-Action Strategy . ..... ...... G-1 G.1.l Sununarvand Objectives . ..... ...... G-1 G.1.2 Groundwater and Surface Water Effects ...... G-4 G.1.3 Nonradioactive Atmospheric Releases . ...... G-4 G.1.4 Ecological Effects . ...... G-5 G.1.5 Radiological Releases . ...... G-5 G.1.6 Archaeological and Historic Resources ...... G-5 G.1.7 SOciOecOnOmics . ...... G-5 G.1.8 Dedication of Site . ...... G-6 G.1.9 Institutional Impacts . ...... G-6 G.l.10 Noise . ...... G–6 G.2 Dedication Strategy . ...... G-6 G.2.1 Summary a;d Objectives . ...... G–6 G.2.2 Groundwater and Surface Water Effects ...... G-7 G.2.2.1 Hazardous Waste . ...... G-7 G.2.2.2 Mixed Waste . ...... G–8 G.2.2.3 Low-Level Radioactive Waste ...... G-8 G.2.3 Nonradioactive Atmospheric Releases . ...... G-13 G.2.4 Ecological Effects . ...... G-14 G.2.5 Radiological Releases . ...... G-14 G.2.5.1 Hazardous Waste . ...... G-14 G.2.5.2 Mixed Waste . ...... G-14 G.2.5.3 Low-Level Radioactive Waste ...... G–15 G.2.6 Archaeological and Historic Resources ...... G-15 G.2.7 Socioeconomic . ...... G-18 G.2.8 Dedication of Site . ...... G–19 G.2.9 Institutional Impacts .
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 15 Facilities and Operations Relevant to the Use and Release Of
    CHAPTER 15 FACILITIES AND OPERATIONS RELEVANT TO THE USE AND RELEASE OF CHEMICALS ABSTRACT This chapter provides information about the major facilities and operations responsible for releases of chemicals to the air and surface water at the Savannah River Site (SRS). The most important facilities and operations were the powerhouses, the separations processes, and raw materials operations. This chapter also describes key sources of information about releases of chemicals, site operations, waste disposal, water treatment, explosions, fires, and spills. RELEASE POINTS AND PROCESSES The SRS has several thousand process exhaust points and “literally tens of thousands of administrative events” according to the Part 70 Operating Permit Application submitted to the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC). Inquiries made to the Air Emissions Inventory database in October 1997 indicate that there were 527 emission points in D-Area; 3023 emission points in A-Area, which includes the powerplant, Savannah River Laboratory (SRL), and Savannah River Ecology Laboratory; 540 emission points in M- Area; 2347 emission points in F-Area, including the Naval Fuels Facility; 2123 emission points in H-Area, including the tritium facilities; 396 in T-Area or TNX; 535 in G-Area or CMX; and from 600 to 650 in each reactor area (Faugl 1996). Six onsite process stacks emitted most of the nonradioactive materials released: three 313-M stacks and one 321-M stack in M-Area and two, 200-ft-high stacks (291/292-H and 291/292-F) in the separations areas. Because of the sensitive nature of some of the information about process equipment, design, and location, exhaust points were combined into one location for each area.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Management Fact Sheets. INSTITUTION Department of Energy, Washington, D.C
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 383 566 SE 056 510 TITLE Environmental Management Fact Sheets. INSTITUTION Department of Energy, Washington, D.C. REPORT NO DOE/EM-0071P PUB DATE Aug 94 NOTE 84p.; Photographs may not reproduce well. PUB TYPE Reports Descriptive (141) EDRS PRICE MFO1 /PC04 Pius Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Energy Education; Environmental Education; *Federal Legislation; *Hazardous Materials; Nuclear Energy; *Pollution; Radiation; Solid Wastes; Technology; *Waste Disposal IDENTIFIERS *Department of Energy; Environmental Law; Environmental Management; Environmental Protection' *Fact Sheets ABSTRACT In recent years, the need for nuclear materials has decreased and the Department of Energy (DOE) has focused greater attention on cleaning up contamination left from past activities. The Office of Environmental Management (EM) within DOE is responsible for managing waste and cleaning up contamination at DOE sites across the nation. This collection of 40 EM Fact Sheets contains information on DOE .nd EM activities in technology development, facility transition and management, radiation in the environment, and related programs and activities. Three major sections contain fact sheets on laws and regulations, waste management, and environmental restoration. Regulations covered include the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act or "Superfund"; the National Environmental Policy Act; and additional statutes affecting DOE's Environmental Management Program. Other tact sheets contain definitions of waste management and environmental restoration and cover activities at DOE regional operations offices. Fact Sheets are a major component of EM's Public Participation Program, which attempts to educate stakeholders in DOE-related environmental issues. EM also sponsors educational progr ms, special topic workshops, and science units for schools.
    [Show full text]
  • RCRA Facility Investigation – Remedial Investigation/ Corrective Measures Study – Feasibility Study Report for the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site
    RCRA Facility Investigation – Remedial Investigation/ Corrective Measures Study – Feasibility Study Report for the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site Section 1.0 Site Background This Report was prepared by Kaiser-Hill Company, L.L.C. for the U.S. Department of Energy June 2006 RCRA Facility Investigation-Remedial Investigation/ Section 1.0 Corrective Measures Study-Feasibility Study Report Site Background TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 SITE BACKGROUND........................................................................................ 1-1 1.1 Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site .......................................... 1-1 1.1.1 Site History.................................................................................. 1-1 1.1.2 Site Mission................................................................................. 1-2 1.1.3 The Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge Act........................... 1-5 1.1.4 National Priority List and Hazardous Waste Activities............... 1-6 1.2 Site Investigations and Cleanup History.................................................. 1-7 1.2.1 Regulatory Framework ................................................................ 1-8 1.2.2 Previous Site Investigations and Configuration......................... 1-17 1.2.3 Remedial Activities (RFCA Accelerated Actions).................... 1-22 1.2.4 CERCLA Five-Year Review ..................................................... 1-29 1.3 Site Conditions for Evaluation in the RI/FS, Proposed Plan, and Final Remedy .................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Waste Management Plan (July 1987)
    REPRODUCED FROM BEST AVAILABLE COPY C0NF-871075--Vol.l-Pt.l & Z §•§!*: 1 § * 's 1 l.f | J | Z £ | t— c, ^i c- * w c w Initiative i'i^gf >•: I! =f u >, -r > — -?-: as 1987 OAK RIDGE MODEL CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS .•= _ ap Waste Management -^ s 11 I = ^ M ^. Volume I 55 c c -^ c C "^ -C C i_ Part 1 1^ I Bis I*eS sponsored by * _ I « -2 3 5 S 2 S £ 5 * ^ .31 -E S c-1 ~ The Department of Energy/Oak Ridge Operations ii c S-^ $ 1 2- 3 §•• Research and Waste Management Division and Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. Prepared by ANALYSAS CORPORATION Printed by MARTIN MARIETTA ENERGY SYSTEMS, INC. for the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY under Contract No. DE-ACC5-840R21400 WSTB CONF-871075—Vol.1-Pt.1 \ DE88 007803 EXECUTIVE STEERING OGMfFFEEE XANCE J. MEZGA EXECUTIVE STEERING COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN ED AEHESCHER DR. lARRy JONES PUBLIC RELATIONS - TOURS UNIVERSITY PARTICIPATION ANNE CAIHOUN CYNTHIA KENERICK AEMENISTRATTVE SUPPORT TECHNICAL PROGRAM CHAIRMAN KWISE DUNLAP JUDITH IAHBERT CCMMUNHY PARnCIPATION CONFERENCE COC3RDINATOR KATHRYN FCREES NELSON PRESENTATICW COORDINATOR DDE IiAISON ROBEKT HHI'lM. IIKY MATIESON ANS TEACHER'S WORKSHOP CONFERENCE COORDINATOR DR. ROBEST JOII£Y •van BOH EXHIBITS - POSTER SESSIONS EXECUTIVE STEERING CCMMTTTEE CHAIRMAN EMERITUS TECHNICAL PROGRAM COMOTIEE CYNTHIA M. KENDRICK CHAIRMAN GARY D. ODXON MIKE C. SMITH J. CARROLL DUGGAN IRVIN G. SPEAS LARRY H. JONES, PhD. DON WILKES J. T. PRILE CM-S1.TK STAFF OOHFJJKENCE COORDINATORS COORDINATOR Judith Lambert Kathryn Forbes Lucy Matteson SESSION COORDINATORS Anne Calhcun Kathryn Forbes
    [Show full text]
  • Deadly Crop in the Tank Farm
    DEADLY CROP IN THE TANK FARM An Assessment of the Management of High-Level Radioactive Wastes in the Savannah River Plant Tank Farm, Based on Official Documents Arjun Makhijani, Ph.D.* Robert AIvarez** Brent Blackwelder, Ph.D.*** * Associate Professor, Capitol Institute of Technology ** Director, Nuclear Weapons and Power Project, Environmental Policy Institute *** Vice-President, Environmental Policy Institute Corrections were made to several pages, in January 2012. Changes to pages 27 and 29 are described at http://www.ieer.org/errata.html. TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface, ............................................... i 1 . Summary and Recommendations ....................... 1 Part I 2. Site Characteristics ................................. 8 3 . Introduction to Tank Farm Operation ................... 16 4 . Technical Problems ................................33 5 . Catastrophic Events ................................55 6. Environmental Contamination......................... 71 7 . Worker Exposures.................................. 100 Part I1 Tables Compiled From The Savannah River Plant 200 Area Fault Tree Data Bank PREFACE Although much attention over Union where U.S. intelligcncc sources the past decade has been focused on and exiled Sovict scientists suggest an accidental large-scale releases of explosion in 1957 scverely contaminated radioactivity from commercial nuclear several hundred square miles and reactors, a similar potential exists at resulted in a major loss of life. A federal nuclear facilities. In recent potential for similar
    [Show full text]
  • The Prosecution of Environmental Crimes at the Department of Energy's Rocky Flats Facility
    THE PROSECUTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL CRIMES AT THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY'S ROCKY FLATS FACILITY January 4, 1993 Rep. Howard Wolpe Chairman Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight House Committee on Science, Space and Technology TABLE OF CONTENTS LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL 3 KEY PARTICIPANTS IN THE ROCKY FLATS PROSECUTION 6 I. INTRODUCTION 9 II. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 12 III. RECOMMENDATIONS 16 IV. THE ROLE OF THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 21 V. THE PLEA AGREEMENT 34 A. Background 34 B. Rockwell Settlement Demands 37 1. Individual Indictments: Evidentiary Bases 40 2. Charges with Offsite Implications 67 3. False Statement, Fraud and Conspiracy Charges 79 4. Nolo Contendere Pleas 81 5. Indemnification 83 6. Debarment 87 7. Global Settlement 88 8. Public Statements 89 9. Grand Jury Report 99 10. Summary 100 VI. THE FINE 102 A. Early Prosecution Discussion 102 B. Settling on $15.5 Million and Inching Up 103 C. Conclusion 105 VII. LACK OF INDICTMENTS OF DOE PERSONNEL 108 VIII. THE ROLE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 112 IX. THE SPECIAL GRAND JURY REPORT 121 X. THE EFFECTS OF THE PROSECUTION 141 ENDNOTE -144 GEORGE E BROWN ..ka Caleornm. CHAIRMAN ROBERT S WALKER TenneyNose I JAMES SENSENes1 NNER. A Wixom.. Vi4RW000 L 105 IIUET No. York JAMES H SCHEUER. Neuf York TOM LEWIS Routs MARILYN LLOYD 14,AASAMI CON NETTER Pennersisinie DAN GLICIOLA.N. Rena. SID MORRISON W oh.ngton HAROLD L VOCKMER. Missouri ROM PADICAPO Cael (KN. SOWARD WOLK_ limhmen U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES RAII. I HOMY Mot hp. RALPH W MALL Tm KAMM W CASVELL 'Snow DAVE MCCURDY. Oklahoma LAMAR SON.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation and Disposal Configuration for DOE-Managed Low-Level and Mixed Low-Level Waste
    DOE/LLW-179 ! t.,-..V m 1 7 1398 fl>P It Transportation and Disposal Configuration for DOE-Managed Low-Level and Mixed Low-Level Waste Radioactive Waste Technical Support Program June 1993 DISTRIBUTION OF THIS DOCUMENT IS UNLIMITED MASTER •"t DISCLAIMER D0E/LLW-179 This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsi• bility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Refer• ence herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recom• mendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. Transportation and Disposal Configuration for DOE-Managed Low-Level and Mixed Low-Level Waste Tom Johnsen Published June 1993 Idaho National Engineering Laboratory EG&G Idaho, Inc. Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Restoration and Waste Management Under DOE Idaho Operations Office Contract DE-AC07-761D01570 ABSTRACT This report briefly examines the current U.S. Department of Energy complex-wide configuration for transportation and disposal of low-level and mixed low-level waste, and also retraces the historical sequence of events and rationale that has guided its development.
    [Show full text]
  • Buildings 771 and 774 Closeout Briefing Summary Prepared by Rik Getty
    Buildings 771 and 774 Closeout Briefing Summary Prepared by Rik Getty Briefing Summary Revision Number Rev 0 (12/05) Approximate Location Northing: 751,000 (approximate center of 771), 751,050 (approximate center of 774) Easting: 2,083,800 (approximate center of 771), 2,084,100 (approximate center of 774) Location Relationship to other Site areas: Buildings 771 and 774 were built into a slope immediately north of the former Buildings 776/777 and south of North Walnut Creek. Historical Information (For a detailed history on Buildings 771 and 774, see References 1 and 2; the following section relies heavily on language used in References 1 and 2). In addition the link below has many interesting photos from the production era in Building 771. http://192.149.55.183/HAER/base/771.htm The HAER reference in the link is part of the Historical American Engineering Record which can be found on the www.rfets.gov homepage under Historical Information. Building 771 Building 771 (B771) construction began in 1951 and operations began in May, 1953. The original designation for B771 was Plant C or 71. After quite a few years the designation changed to 771 just like the original Plant A or 44 became B444 as more and more buildings were added to the site. The original building was a two-story structure built into the side of a hill with most of three sides covered by earth (see Figure 1, page 7). The fourth side, facing north, provided the main entrance to the building. Original building operations included: • plutonium (Pu) foundry, fabrication, and assembly operations; • Pu recovery; • Pu special recovery; • Pu chemistry; • Pu metallurgy research; and, • analytical laboratory operations.
    [Show full text]
  • Rocky Flats Site History Events Leading to the Creation of the Weapons Complex and Events at the Rocky Flats Site from the 1930S to Present by Pat Buffer the 30S
    Rocky Flats Site History events leading to the creation of the weapons complex and events at the Rocky Flats Site from the 1930s to present by Pat Buffer The 30s: 1934 — The Italian physicist Enrico Fermi produces fission. December 1938 — Two scientists in Nazi Germany, Otto Hahn and Fritz Strassmann, discover the process of fission in uranium. Lise Meitner, Hahn’s former colleague (a refugee from Nazism then staying in Sweden) and her nephew, Otto Frisch, confirm the Hahn-Strassmann discovery and communicate their findings to Danish Nobel laureate Niels Bohr. January 26, 1939 — Bohr, accompanied by Fermi, reports on the Hahn-Strassman results at a meeting on theoretical physics in Washington, D.C. August 1939 — Hungarian refugee scientists Lee Szilard, Edward Teller and Eugene Wigner, fearing that the energy released in nuclear fission might be used in bombs by the Germans, persuade Albert Einstein, the century’s premier physicist, to send a letter to President Franklin D. Roosevelt informing him of German atomic research and the potential for a bomb. This letter prompts Roosevelt to form a special committee to investigate the military implications of atomic research. October 1939 — Roosevelt decides to act and appoints Lyman J. Briggs, director of the National Bureau of Standards, head of the Advisory Committee on Uranium. November 1939 — The Uranium Committee recommends that the government purchase graphite and uranium oxide for fission research. The 40s: June 1940 — Vannevar Bush, president of the Carnegie Foundation, is named head of the National Defense Research Committee. The Uranium Committee becomes a scientific subcommittee of Bush’s organization.
    [Show full text]
  • Pollution Prevention Technologies for Plutonium Processing
    A. U.S. Department of Energy Laboratory LALP-93-92 POLLUTION PREVENTION TECHNOLOGIES FOR PLUTONIUM PROCESSING NUCLEAR MATERIALS TECHNOLOGY 1994 LALP-93-92 April 1994 Published by Los Alamos National Laboratory Nuclear Materials Technology Division MS E500 Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545 Coordinator K.K.S. Pillay Editors Carolyn K. Robinson Joan Farnum Graphic Designer Susan L. Carlson Printing Coordination Guadalupe D. Archuleta Brenda R. Valdez For More Information K.K.S. Pillay (505) 667-5428 Page 65 Photos: figure 3—B 1420 01 figure 4—B 1425 15 Los Alamos National Laboratory is operated by the University of California for the U.S. Department of Energy under contract W-7405-ENG-36. An Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer. This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United States Government. Neither the Regents of the University of California, the United States Government, nor any of their employees makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, com- pleteness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, mark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the Regents of the University of California, the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the Regents of the University of California, the United States Government, or any agency thereof.
    [Show full text]