scholarly journals Experience With Using Code Case 2564 to Design and Certify an Impulsively Loaded Vessel

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brent Haroldsen ◽  
Jerome Stofleth ◽  
Mien Yip ◽  
Allan Caplan
Keyword(s):  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Regulatory Approval ◽  
Department Of Energy ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Us Army ◽  
The Us ◽  
User Design ◽  
Qualification Testing ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Explosive Destruction

Code Case 2564 for the design of impulsively loaded vessels was approved in January 2008. In 2010 the US Army Non-Stockpile Chemical Materiel Program, with support from Sandia National Laboratories, procured a vessel per this Code Case for use on the Explosive Destruction System (EDS). The vessel was delivered to the Army in August of 2010 and approved for use by the DoD Explosives Safety Board in 2012. Although others have used the methodology and design limits of the Code Case to analyze vessels, to our knowledge, this was the first vessel to receive an ASME explosive rating with a U3 stamp. This paper discusses lessons learned in the process. Of particular interest were issues related to defining the design basis in the User Design Specification and explosive qualification testing required for regulatory approval. Specifying and testing an impulsively loaded vessel is more complicated than a static pressure vessel because the loads depend on the size, shape, and location of the explosive charges in the vessel and on the kind of explosives used and the point of detonation. Historically the US Department of Defense and Department of Energy have required an explosive test. Currently the Code Case does not address testing requirements, but it would be beneficial if it did since having vetted, third party standards for explosive qualification testing would simplify the process for regulatory approval.

scholarly journals An Analysis of Variation in the Energy-Related Environmental Impacts of LEED Certified Buildings

2007 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 151-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Christopher Wedding ◽  
Douglas Crawford-Brown
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impacts ◽  
Water Consumption ◽  
Energy Use ◽  
Green Building ◽  
Monte Carlo Analysis ◽  
Department Of Energy ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Future Research ◽  
The Us ◽  
Using Data

The US Green Building Council's (USGBC) LEED guidelines have become the dominant third-party certification program for “green” buildings in the US. Given that buildings use 37% of all energy and 68% of all electricity while contributing substantially to air emission, waste generation, and water consumption issues in the US, one of LEED's purposes is to address the environmental impacts of energy use in buildings. This research analyzes (1) how well the LEED guidelines measure these impacts and (2) which parameters create the most variation among these impacts. Environmental impacts here refer to emissions of carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, mercury, and particulate matter (PM10); solid waste; nuclear waste; and water consumption. Using data from the US Department of Energy, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, the US EPA Energy Star program, and the USGBC, among others, models using Monte Carlo analysis were created to simulate the range of impacts of LEED-certified buildings. Various metrics and statistics were calculated to highlight the significance of variation in these impacts. Future research needs and implications of the results for LEED version 3.0 are also discussed.

Lessons Learned from the Humanitarian Hurricane Medical Relief Response of the US Army 14th Combat Support Hospital for the People of Humacao, Puerto Rico

2018 ◽  
Vol 227 (4) ◽  
pp. S185
Author(s):  
Bethany M. Heidenreich ◽  
Daniel J. Sessions ◽  
Diane F. Hale ◽  
Christopher Jordan ◽  
Eric P. Ahnfeldt
Keyword(s):  
Puerto Rico ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Us Army ◽  
The People ◽  
The Us ◽  
Medical Relief

Independent Technical Reviews for Groundwater and Soil Remediation Projects at US Department of Energy Sites

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dawn S. Kaback ◽  
Grover Chamberlain ◽  
John G. Morse ◽  
Scott W. Petersen
Keyword(s):  
Groundwater Remediation ◽  
Review Process ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Department Of Energy ◽  
Background Information ◽  
The Us ◽  
Sensitive Issues ◽  
Alternative Solutions ◽  
Experienced Team

The US Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management has supported independent technical reviews of soil and groundwater projects at multiple DOE sites over the last 10 years. These reviews have resulted in significant design improvements to remedial plans that have accelerated cleanup and site closure. Many have also resulted in improved understanding of complex subsurface conditions, promoting better approaches to design and implementation of new technologies. Independent technical reviews add value, because they provide another perspective to problem solving and act as a check for especially challenging problems. By bringing in a team of independent experts with a broad experience base, alternative solutions are recommended for consideration and evaluation. In addition, the independence of the panel is significant, because it is able to address politically sensitive issues. The expert panel members typically bring lessons learned from other sites to help solve the DOE problems. In addition, their recommendations at a particular site can often be applied at other sites, making the review even more valuable. The review process can vary, but some common lessons ensure a successful review: • Use a multi-disciplinary broadly experienced team; • Engage the panel early and throughout the project; • Involve regulators and stakeholders in the workshop, if appropriate; • Provide sufficient background information; • Close the workshop with a debriefing followed by a written report. Many groundwater remediation challenges remain at DOE sites. Independent technical reviews have and will ensure that the best capabilities and experience are applied to reduce risks and uncertainties.

Performance-Based Acquisition: A Tool to Reduce Costs and Improve Performance at US Army Environmental Remediation Sites

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nancy Kosko ◽  
Janet Gilman ◽  
Debbie White
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Remediation ◽  
Continuous Process ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Fiscal Year ◽  
Continuous Process Improvement ◽  
Environmental Cleanup ◽  
Us Army ◽  
The Us ◽  
Karst Systems ◽  
Performance Based Contracts

The US Army, like most US federal and state environmental organizations, is faced with limited resources to conduct environmental work, an increasing workload, and challenges in achieving closeout of its environmental cleanup programs. In 2001, in an effort to incorporate proven private sector tools into federal cleanup programs, the Department of Defense (DoD) Business Initiative Council (BIC), initiated the use of Performance-Based Acquisition (PBA) for environmental cleanup. Since fiscal year 2000, the US Army Environmental Command (USAEC) has successfully awarded more than 55 performance-based contracts for environmental remediation. These contracts range in size from $500,000 to $52.4 million, and include closing properties (Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC)) and some of the US Army’s most complex active installations. The contracts address a range of activities including investigation through monitoring and site completion, as well as various technical challenges including dense non-aqueous phase liquids (DNAPL) in ground water, karst systems, munitions and explosives of concern, and biological agents. The contracts are most often firm-fixed price, and 50 percent of the contracts required contractors to purchase environmental insurance in the form of remediation stop loss insurance (also known as cleanup cost cap insurance). The USAEC has conducted continuous process improvement since inception of the initiative. This paper presents results of two studies that were conducted in 2005–2006 to determine what lessons learned can be applied to future activities and to measure performance of contractors currently executing work under the performance based contracts.

scholarly journals TMI-2: Lessons learned by the US Department of Energy: A programmatic perspective

1990 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Schmitt ◽  
H. Reno ◽  
K. Bentley ◽  
D. Owens
Keyword(s):  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Department Of Energy ◽  
The Us

Burn Mass Casualty Management: Lessons Learned

1985 ◽  
Vol 1 (S1) ◽  
pp. 153 ◽  
Author(s):  
William F. McManus
Keyword(s):  
Air Force ◽  
Mass Casualty ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Inhalation Therapy ◽  
Equipment And Supplies ◽  
Us Army ◽  
Quality Patient Care ◽  
Us Air Force ◽  
The Us

Successful management of a mass casualty situation involving 45 injured marines following a fire in Japan demonstrates the important principles of triage, patient movement, quality patient care, logistics, communication and medical direction.Following the accident, the US Army Institute of Surgical Research assembled a burn team consisting of three surgeons, three nurses, one microbiologist and eleven clinical specialists (three of whom were inhalation therapy technicians) and the equipment and supplies necessary to treat and transport these patients. The US Air Force Military Airlift Command transported the team and equipment to Japan in a C–141 Starlifter Medevac plane and pre-positioned a second C–141 in Japan for the return flight. Additional ventilators and supplies were mobilized from Japan, Okinawa, the Philippines and Alaska.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document