Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Environmental Protection Agency”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 181 records · Page 10
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2022

Curation of a list of chemicals in biosolids from EPA National Sewage Sludge Surveys & Biennial Review Reports

Section 405(d) of the Clean Water Act requires the US Environmental Protection Agency to review sewage sludge regulations every two years to identify any additional pollutants that may occur in biosolids and to set regulations for pollutants identified in biosolids if sufficient scientific evidence shows they may harm human health or the environment. To date, EPA has conducted eight biennial reviews to identify chemical and microbial pollutants and three national sewage sludge surveys to identify pollutants and obtain concentration data for chemicals found in biosolids. Prior to 2021, there was inconsistent reporting of chemicals identified and EPA did not cumulatively track chemicals in biosolids. Through the efforts presented here, EPA produced a list of 726 chemicals and structure-based classes found in biosolids based on biennial reviews and national sewage sludge surveys. Summary statistics of concentration data are also reported for the 484 chemicals found in the three national sewage sludge surveys. The creation of the Biosolids List supports EPA in assessing the potential risk of chemical pollutants found in biosolids.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Catalina Repower Feasibility Study: NREL Phases I & II Summary Report

Engineers at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) supported Southern California Edison (SCE) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by conducting technical and economic analyses for energy systems at Santa Catalina (Catalina) Island, which is located 22 miles off the coast of Long Beach, California. This effort was part of a broader Repower Catalina Feasibility Study that was also supported by NV5, an engineering consulting firm and project partner to NREL for this analysis. This document describes NREL’s techno-economic modeling and optimization analysis for the first two phases of this project which focus on supply-side generation and energy storage options for Catalina. SCE’s goal for this analysis is to determine a strategy for electricity generation on Catalina Island that results in lower energy costs, improved energy resiliency, and reduced air emissions. EPA goals for this effort are to reduce emissions of air pollution and encourage renewable energy development on contaminated and formerly contaminated lands when such development is aligned with the community’s vision for the site. Currently, an on-island SCE power plant serves the Catalina Island electrical load with 6 reciprocating diesel generators totaling 9.4 MW; 23 propane-fueled microturbines totaling 1.5 MW; and a 1-MW, 7.2-MWh sodium sulfur battery energy storage system (BESS). In 2017, the electricity consumption on the island was 29.1 GWh, with an average load of 3.3 MW and peak load of approximately 5.5 MW. Considering new environmental standards on diesel generator emissions from California’s South Coast Air Quality Management District, a 60% renewable energy target for 2030 laid out in California’s Senate Bill 100, SCE’s Clean Power Electrification Pathway, and the characteristics of the island’s existing diesel generators, SCE is seeking to evaluate the technical and economic implications of different energy technology options to determine a path forward. Phases I and II of the Repower Catalina Feasibility Study, summarized in this document, evaluated the following: Interconnection with the mainland via an undersea cable; On-island fossil fuel generation, including diesel, propane, and/or liquified natural gas (LNG); On-island renewable energy (RE) technologies, including solar photovoltaics (PV), wind turbines, and wave energy devices; BESS to support the above generation technologies; Initial analysis of the potential impacts of implementing energy efficiency measures. Results indicate strong techno-economic potential for a mix of on-island diesel and/or propane generators, solar PV, BESS, and energy efficiency measures to help SCE and Catalina achieve their goals compliant with California’s emissions and clean energy standards while minimizing electricity life cycle costs (LCC) over the 30-year analysis period. This document summarizes the considerations and findings of Phases I and II, focusing on high-level takeaways from Phase I and more detailed results from Phase II, and discusses a potential path forward for Phase III.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2023

2022 LANL Radionuclide Air Emissions Report (Rev. 2)

This report describes the emissions of airborne radionuclides from operations at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) for calendar year 2022 and the resulting off-site dose from these emissions. This document fulfills the requirements established by the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants in 40 CFR 61, Subpart H – Emissions of Radionuclides other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities, commonly referred to as the Radionuclide NESHAP or Rad-NESHAP. Compliance with this regulation and preparation of this document is the responsibility of LANL’s Rad NESHAP compliance program, which is part of the Environmental Protection and Compliance (EPC) Division. The information in this report is required under the Clean Air Act and is being submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Headquarters and EPA Region 6. The highest effective dose equivalent (EDE) to an off-site member of the public was calculated using procedures specified by the EPA and described in this report. LANL’s EDE was 0.45 for 2022. The annual limit is 10 millirem per year, established by the EPA in 40 CFR 61 Subpart H. All measured air emissions are modeled to a single location, known as the Maximally Exposed Individual (MEI). During calendar year 2022, LANL continuously monitored radionuclide emissions at 27 “major” release points, or stacks. The Laboratory estimates emissions from an additional 34 “minor” release points using radionuclide usage source terms in lieu of stack monitoring. Also, LANL uses an EPA approved network of air samplers around the Laboratory perimeter to monitor ambient airborne levels of radionuclides. To provide data for dispersion modeling and dose assessment, LANL maintains and operates several meteorological monitoring towers. From these various systems, a comprehensive evaluation is conducted to calculate the MEI dose for the Laboratory. The MEI can be any member of the public at any off-site location where there is a residence, school, business, or office. In 2022, this MEI location was a business at 95 Entrada Drive, located in the eastern end of Los Alamos town site. The primary contributors to the off-site dose at this location are the ambient air data at that location combined with radioactive gas emissions from the LANSCE facility and the collected potential emissions from unmonitored (minor) sources. Overall, the MEI dose in 2022 is similar to that which has been observed in recent years, and it remains well below the EPA’s 10 millirem per year limit. Doses reported to the EPA for the past 10 years are shown in Table E1.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Approach to Quality Assurance for Complex Environmental Modeling - 20407

A strong Quality Assurance (QA) program for complex environmental modeling is essential for regulatory and public acceptance and trust, but it does not have to be onerous. Neptune and Company, Inc. (Neptune) has developed a strong QA program that improves transparency, traceability, reproducibility, and therefore, defensibility and trust. Neptune's QA program has evolved over the past 27 years, transitioning from an ad hoc QA program, to a program that is currently Nuclear Quality Assurance-1 (NQA-1) compliant, and will soon be NQA-1/DOE approved for DOE EM modeling work. In addition, Neptune is a qualified laboratory assessor and qualified auditor for reference materials, a proficiency testing provider, and fully complies with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) QA program. Neptune's President and CEO, Kelly Black, was recently named the Chairperson of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Technical Committee 69, Application of Statistical Methods. A strong QA program has been developed for Neptune's radiological performance assessment (PA) program. Although pieces of their QA program are currently in development, their current program includes document control using Subversion, issue tracking and work flow tracking using JIRA, and transparency and traceability via a system of 'calc sheets' for documentation of all data analysis and modeling combined with 'check print' documentation of QA checking, and rigorous model testing and configuration control. All work is reviewed by an independent subject matter expert who is not associated with the collection and assembly of information, for an internal peer review. The program is enforced with a handful of Standard Operation Procedures (SOPs), Work Instructions, QA Project Plans (QAPPs), and Quality Management Plans (QMPs) that are updated frequently, with required annual training and acknowledgment. In addition, effective communication of modeling approaches and results to clients and stakeholders are integral to their QA program. Many of their models are built using the GoldSim modeling platform, for which their models are well-known for their level of transparency, documentation, and QA traceability. This level of QA is also applied to their process-level models. Neptune has taken some lessons learned from the extremely rigorous QA program required for the Yucca Mountain Project (YMP), and imposed the YMP requirements of complete traceability, transparency, and reproducibility, but avoided the inflexibility of a QA program that likely contributed to the suspect e-mails in 2005 that resulted in loss of trust in the YMP, and in nuclear waste disposal (and nuclear power) in general. There are far too many examples of loss of public trust due to poor QA that could have been easily avoided with a simple and straight-forward QA program combined with stakeholder engagement. The purpose of this paper is to share features of Neptune's Radiological Performance Assessment program QA program, and some of their QA related lessons learned over the past 27 years of QA for complex environmental modeling. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2022

Cost Impacts of Risk-Based Methods for Defining AoR and PISC Duration of a CO 2 Storage Project Using NRAP Tools and FE/NETL CO 2 Saline Storage Cost Model

The purpose of this analysis is to assess the fiscal impact of using risk-based methods to define the area of review (AoR) and post-injection site care (PISC) duration for a geologic carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) storage project. The Office of Fossil Energy (FE)/National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) CO 2 Saline Storage Cost Model (“cost model”) was utilized to evaluate CO 2 storage economics in this study. The cost model is a widely used tool for evaluating CO 2 storage costs in geologic settings. It estimates costs for storage operations conducted under compliance to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Underground Injection Control (UIC) Class VI regulations. This analysis evaluates and compares the costs of storage (on a first-year break-even dollar per tonne [2018$] basis) at the proposed FutureGen 2.0 site as a case study storage location by implementing different approaches to determine AoR and PISC given the prevailing geologic conditions and injection volume and duration considerations. The approaches include the use of 1) risk-based methods to define AoR and PISC duration, 2) an EPA-approved AoR and PISC documented in the FutureGen 2.0 UIC Class VI permit applications, and 3) cost model default settings that utilize uncertainty multipliers to estimate CO 2 plume and pressure front extent as part of AoR determination, as well as a 50-year PISC default. From all three sources, the AoR and PISC specified in the Class VI permit applications for FutureGen 2.0 were the largest and longest relative to the other two sources.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Rules and Tools Crosswalk: A Compendium of Computational Tools to Support Geologic Carbon Storage Environmentally Protective UIC Class VI Permitting

This report identifies computational tools useful for addressing aspects of the dedicated carbon storage (Class VI) well permit application under the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program. The survey was conducted by researchers of the National Energy Technology Laboratory’s (NETL) Research and Innovation Center in collaboration with representatives of the U.S. EPA, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), and the four Regional Initiatives to Accelerate Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage: Carbon Utilization and Storage Partnership of the Western United States (CUSP), Plains CO 2 Reduction Partnership Initiative to Accelerate Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage Deployment (PCOR Partnership), Midwest Regional Carbon Initiative (MRCI), and the Southeast Regional Carbon Utilization and Storage Partnership (SECARB-USA). A total of 59 tools were identified through the elicitation for this report. It is intended to serve as a reference that can be used by geologic carbon storage stakeholders to identify computational tools that may be used to develop Class VI permit applications.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Examining Daily Temporal Characteristics of Oil and Gas Methane Emissions in the Delaware Basin Using Continuous Tower Observations

Top-down studies have found consistent underestimations in the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) methane emissions inventory from the oil and gas (O&G) sector. Many of these studies use observations that bias toward hours when worktime activity occurs. In this study, we analyze over 2 years of methane measurements from a tower network in the Delaware basin to analyze hourly temporal emission patterns. Inversion results suggest a range in emissions from 137 Mg/hr at night to 197 Mg/hr during the day, present during both weekdays and weekends. If these results are applicable to other basins, daytime-influenced methodologies may overestimate daily emission rates by up to 27%. This bias does not reconcile the more than 200% difference between the EPA inventory and top-down estimates in the Delaware basin. This study demonstrates how continuous measurement networks can be combined with detailed activity data to improve bottom-up inventories.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Long-Term Methane Emissions Rate Quantification and Alert System for Natural Gas Storage Wells and Fields

The Department of Energy (DOE) National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) and other critical stakeholders (e.g., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), state regulators, and industry) seek to more accurately characterize and quantify methane emissions from natural gas storage wells. These efforts will reduce uncertainties in estimates of these emissions in USEPA’s current Green House Gas Inventory (GHGI) under their Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP; EPA, 2016). Emission factors currently used to estimate methane emissions from gas storage wells are the same factors used for onshore natural gas production wells (USEPA, 2016). This study has developed a robust and representative dataset of emissions from disaggregated gas station wellhead components and related emission factors that will inform future enhancements to the GHGI and GHGRP. Extensive methane emissions measurements and meteorological data were collected from three active storage facilities representing two of the three types of storage facilities (i.e., depleted gas reservoir and salt cavern) to support development of emissions factors specifically for gas storage wells and associated components. Methane emissions were quantified from both above-ground components (e.g., pipe fittings and valves) and seepage from the ground surface in proximity to gas storage wellheads.

03 NATURAL GAS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Industry Partnerships & Their Role In Reducing Natural Gas Supply Chain Greenhouse Gas Emissions – Phase 2

This analysis is the product of collaboration between Our Nation’s Energy Future (ONE Future) and the United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE) National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL). This analysis is an update to Phase 1 of the collaboration between ONE Future and NETL. Phase 1 had three objectives: 1. Calculate a greenhouse gas (GHG) emission profile representative of ONE Future’s supply chain, including methane (CH 4 ) emission rates. 2. Compare ONE Future’s emission profile to the emission profile for the U.S. natural gas supply chain. 3. Evaluate specific emission reduction opportunities. Phase 2 has two key enhancements over Phase 1: 1. The reporting year of the data is updated from 2016 to 2017. 2. The emission profiles and the specific emission reduction opportunities are regionalized for the ONE Future supply chain. The ONE Future supply chain is based on data provided by ONE Future members for all their U.S. onshore assets. ONE Future’s data are mostly representative of their participation in the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and is supplemented by ONE Future facilities that are not required to report to GHGRP. The U.S. scenario is based on NETL’s life cycle analysis (LCA) of natural gas extraction and power generation, which also uses data from the GHGRP (but does not include non-GHGRP facilities). In addition to the data from these sources, NETL accounted for uncertainty due to data variability, data limitations, and variability in liquids unloading frequency and event duration. This report is a re-issue of the 2020 study (published on July 28, 2020). It revises the device count in the mitigation strategy “pipeline pump-down before maintenance” in the Marginal Abatement Cost (MAC) Analysis section of the report (Section 7). Please see the addendum for more details on this revision and resultant changes. This revision does not change most of our conclusions and recommendations. It only changes the total methane reduced from all the mitigation opportunities (low cost and high cost) from 6.5 Bcf CH 4 /yr to 4.8 Bcf CH 4 /yr.

03 NATURAL GAS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Illinois Storage Corridor, CarbonSAFE Phase III: UIC Class VI Permitting Plan

The Illinois Storage Corridor (ISC) project evaluated two distinct sites to determine the feasibility of commercial-scale CO₂ storage at each. The project leveraged the region's exceptional geological characteristics, particularly the well-characterized Cambro-Ordovician Storage Complex, to enable permanent geological storage of more than 50 million tonnes of CO₂ over 30 years. The two storage sites are located at One Earth Energy (OEE) facility in northcentral Illinois and Prairie State Generating Company (PSGC) in southcentral Illinois. Once operational, these facilities will combine to capture and store more than 6.5 million tonnes of CO₂ per year, positioning the ISC among the largest carbon storage regions globally. Preliminary homogeneous dynamic modeling based on regional and site-specific reservoir characteristics indicates promising injection capabilities at both locations. For the OEE site, modeling predicts a maximum allowable injection rate of 3.7 MTPA, with a baseline scenario of 1.7 MTPA over 30 years producing a CO₂ plume radius of 1.4 miles at end of injection. For the PSGC site, incorporating recent well data, modeling indicates a single-well maximum injection rate of 2.1 MTPA, with a plume radius of 4.2 miles at end of injection for the 60 MT over 30 years scenario. The primary objective of this CarbonSAFE Phase III project is to develop and submit Class VI Underground Injection Control (UIC) permit applications to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5. The permitting plan outlines comprehensive site characterization, Area of Review delineation, monitoring programs, well construction designs, financial responsibility provisions, and post-injection site care procedures necessary to demonstrate safe, permanent CO₂ storage protective of underground sources of drinking water. Three UIC Class VI permit applications for the OEE site were submitted to EPA in October 2022 and are progressing through technical review, with final permit decision projected by June 2026. Through five rounds of Requests for Additional Information and responses, the applications have been refined to address computational modeling, area of review delineation, well integrity, monitoring protocols, and financial assurance requirements. For the PSGC site, finalized characterization and permitting documentation was delivered directly to the facility in July 2023 due to business constraints precluding formal federal regulatory submission. This comprehensive permitting effort builds upon extensive prior subsurface evaluations and demonstration projects that have confirmed the feasibility of widespread commercial-scale carbon storage in the region.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2019

Techno-Economic Analysis and Evaluation of Wet FGD Wastewater Treatment Processes at Existing Plants

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued updated effluent limitation guidelines (ELGs) and standards for the steam electric power generation point source category in November 2015 to strengthen controls on wastewater discharges. Many of the public comments discussed concerns about reliability, and whether Best Available Technology Economically Achievable (BAT) has been adequately demonstrated under a variety of conditions; however, discussion of the cost of electricity (COE) impact of installing the technology on existing coal units was limited. To address the COE impact of installing processes to achieve compliance for wet flue gas desulfurization (FGD) wastewater at existing pulverized coal (PC) plants, this study focused on developing cost and performance estimates of multiple commercial technologies in various configurations, including alternative (non-BAT) compliance processes (e.g., zero valent iron) and overcompliance processes (e.g., brine concentration with fly ash conditioning). Exhibit ES-1 provides the net plant efficiency (η) and COE estimated for each of the selected process configurations in this study. Case 0 is the reference subcritical PC plant, which represents an existing unit discharging wet FGD wastewater to surface water. It is assumed that all existing capital assets are fully depreciated, such that any capital costs reflect only the cost of the wet FGD wastewater treatment systems and plant upgrades required to accommodate the retrofits.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Identifying priority ecosystem services in tidal wetland restoration

Classification systems can be an important tool for identifying and quantifying the importance of relationships, assessing spatial patterns in a standardized way, and forecasting alternative decision scenarios to characterize the potential benefits (e.g., ecosystem services) from ecosystem restoration that improve human health and well-being. We present a top-down approach that systematically leverages ecosystem services classification systems to identify potential services relevant for ecosystem restoration decisions. We demonstrate this approach using the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s National Ecosystem Service Classification System Plus (NESCS Plus) to identify those ecosystem services that are relevant to restoration of tidal wetlands. We selected tidal wetland management documents from federal agencies, state agencies, wetland conservation organizations, and land stewards across three regions of the continental United States (northern Gulf of Mexico, Mid-Atlantic, and Pacific Northwest) to examine regional and organizational differences in identified potential benefits of tidal wetland restoration activities and the potential user groups who may benefit. We used an automated document analysis to quantify the frequencies at which different wetland types were mentioned in the management documents along with their associated beneficiary groups and the ecological end products (EEPs) those beneficiaries care about, as defined by NESCS Plus. Results showed that a top combination across all three regions, all four organizations, and all four tidal wetland types was the EEP naturalness paired with the beneficiary people who care (existence). Overall, the Mid-Atlantic region and the land steward organizations mentioned ecosystem services more than the others, and EEPs were mentioned in combination with tidal wetlands as a high-level, more general category than the other more specific tidal wetland types. Certain regional and organizations differences were statistically significant. Those results may be useful in identifying ecosystem services-related goals for tidal wetland restoration. This approach for identifying and comparing ecosystem service priorities is broadly transferrable to other ecosystems or decision-making contexts.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Aquifer Injection Modeling (AIM) Toolbox User Guide

The Aquifer Injection Modeling Toolbox (“AIM Toolbox”) software was developed by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) to provide a collection of analytical solutions suitable for evaluating the potential extent of the area impacted by subsurface injection operations. Subsurface injection operations are regulated under the EPA’s Underground Injection Control (UIC) program and are typically related to oil/gas development, waste disposal, or subsurface mining or storage. The analytical algorithms provided in the AIM Toolbox each have different approaches/assumptions/focus with respect to the nature and processes in subsurface and the nature of the injection operations. Collectively the set of analysis algorithms provides a broader evaluation of the area that can potentially be impacted by an injection operation. By providing estimates for the injectate plume extent, the software supports technical aspects of planning, evaluation, and overseeing injection activities. That is, the results help assess when further regulatory controls (e.g., monitoring, reporting) may be required and, in the case of disposal into an underground source of drinking water, the extent of the impacted area would require exemption from protection under the Safe Drinking Water Act. The AIM Toolbox software is available as a single-page web application, providing an interface to provide the necessary inputs, and both chart and map panes for visualizing the results. This User Guide describes the AIM Toolbox software, information required, user interactions, and the underlying basis of the calculations.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Jackson, L., Johnson, M.B., Latrach, A., Grimes, D., Martinez, C., and Mclaughlin, J.F., 2024, Multidisciplinary geotechnical data collection, curation, and analysis for conformity with the regulatory framework for geologic carbon storage in Wyoming, USA: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs. Vol. 56, No. 5, 2024, doi: 10.1130/abs/2024AM-405024

Title: Multidisciplinary Geotechnical Data Collection, Curation, and Analysis for Conformity with the Regulatory Framework for Geologic Carbon Storage in Wyoming, USA. Text: Construction and operation of wells for geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide necessitate that they are permitted under the Environmental Protection Agency’s Underground Injection Control Class VI requirements. Class VI wells conform to stringent requirements to ensure long-term safety and integrity of the storage site and the protection of Underground Sources of Drinking Water. Entities pursuing Class VI permitting must provide comprehensive geologic site characterization, including regional geologic structure and stratigraphy, aquifer information, reservoir and confining unit geomechanical properties, geochemical analyses, assessment of trapping capacity and mechanisms, and a variety of other of multidisciplinary geotechnical data. The Wyoming Class VI Site Characterization Database Project is focused on developing a geologic site characterization database of geotechnical information, which has been compiled and verified from established, public databases/entities and scientific literature to expedite Class VI permitting in Sweetwater County within the Greater Green River Basin of southern Wyoming. The preliminary suite of compiled data from 14,000 wells includes 8,000 wells with logs and 7,250 wells with formation tops, ~70 wells with core data (e.g., X-Ray diffraction, petrographic, and petrophysical data), ~2,500 water analyses, ~740 seismic events data, and ~520 bottom-hole temperature measurements. Future work on—and stemming from—this project will include new core analyses, calculation and interpolation of subsurface temperature gradients, mechanical earth models, geochemical simulations, storage capacity estimation, stratigraphic column generation and correlation, and construction of subsurface maps. Finally, this work will help to inspire and facilitate subsurface data compilation and curation beyond Sweetwater County, Wyoming.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2023

A multiscale landscape approach for prioritizing river and stream protection and restoration actions

River and stream conservation programs have historically focused on a single spatial scale, for example, a watershed or stream site. Recently, the use of landscape information (e.g., land use and land cover) at multiple spatial scales and over large spatial extents has highlighted the importance of incorporating a landscape perspective into stream protection and restoration activities. Previously, we developed a novel framework that links information about watershed-, catchment-, and reach-scale integrity with stream biological condition using scatterplots and a landscape integrity map. Here we examined an application of this approach for streams in urban and other settings in King County, Washington State, United States, where we related stream macroinvertebrate condition to two indices of landscape integrity, the US Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA) nationally available Index of Watershed Integrity (IWI) and Index of Catchment Integrity (ICI). We generated a scatterplot of IWI versus ICI for sample sites, where points represented site macroinvertebrate condition from poor to good. The same data were also visualized as a landscape integrity map that displayed catchments of King County according to the level of watershed and catchment integrity (high or low IWI/ICI). Almost three-quarters of poor-condition sites were associated with high-integrity watersheds and catchments (i.e., underperforming sites), which suggested that either one or both national indicators were insufficient for this area, and that sites underperformed because of local-scale factors. In response, we used a catchment-scale indicator related to forest condition (PctForestCat) after examining several GIS-based dispersal indicators from the National Hydrography Dataset and other candidates from the USEPA's StreamCat dataset. We then compared the results of the scatterplots and maps based on the current and original analyses and found that many of the sites previously classified as underperforming now performed as expected, that is, they were poor-condition sites in poor-condition catchments. This analysis demonstrates how results based on a national dataset can be improved by developing an alternative that represents regionally important stressors. The methods used to develop an effective landscape indicator based on StreamCat datasets, and the utility of the multiscale approach, could provide important tools for prioritizing, optimizing, and communicating stream conservation actions.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2019

A risk-based approach to evaluating the Area of Review and leakage risks at CO 2 storage sites

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Class VI regulations for underground carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) injection require owners and operators of storage projects to identify (1) an Area of Review (AoR) that represents the region that may be affected by the injection of CO 2 , and (2) leakage risks that might impact the quality of underground sources of drinking water (USDWs). This article describes how such risks can be determined by accounting for the physical and chemical properties of all components of a CO 2 storage site using elements of the National Risk Assessment Partnership Integrated Assessment Model for Carbon Storage (NRAP-IAM-CS). For this work we used practical data from three sites that are part of two CarbonSAFE (Carbon Storage Assurance Facility Enterprise) projects to demonstrate application of the NRAP-IAM-CS toolset to determine project risk areas. NRAP-IAM-CS was used to estimate the project risk area that could represent the AoR and the impact of leakage through legacy wells to overlying drinking waters at these candidate CO 2 storage sites. Our study shows that risk to USDWs is minimal despite (1) the presence of multiple legacy wells at these sites where the AoR approximates the maximum extent of injected CO 2 or (2) the presence of a much larger AoR approximating the pressure front caused by the injection of CO 2 .

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Heavy-Duty Vehicle Activity Updates for MOVES Using NREL Fleet DNA and CE-CERT Data

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES) is a publicly available tool used by researchers and policymakers to help understand motor vehicle emission sources at a national, county, and project level. Estimates of heavy-duty activity in the most recent version of the model at the time this work was conducted, MOVES2014, was identified as an area in need of improvement. The start activity in MOVES2014 is based on a limited and dated data set. In addition, MOVES2014 relies on drive cycles that represent on-network activity but do not account for idling activity that occurs on off-network roads, such as at a distribution center, while the truck is queuing or during loading and unloading. As a result, MOVES2014 may currently underestimate the number of starts and idle and soak time for heavy-duty trucks in real-world operation. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) has previously leveraged its expansive Fleet DNA database of heavy-duty vehicles to idle and start activity for six of the nine heavy-duty vehicle source types of classes in the MOVES model. The data available in Fleet DNA from 416 conventional, diesel-powered vehicles provided activity estimates from more than 120,000 hours of operation throughout 14,682 vehicle days between October 2006 and January 2016. NREL calculated start fraction, starts per day, soak fraction, and idle fraction by hour of the day for each vehicle type, state, and vocation, and provided results in .CSV files that can be translated to MOVES table inputs. The idle and start activity from this initial analysis of Fleet DNA data was used to develop default idle and start data for heavy-duty vehicles in MOVES3. Satisfied with the results from the Fleet DNA data used for MOVES3, the EPA asked NREL to extend this start/soak/idle analysis using additional data from a larger number of vehicles for a potential future update to the MOVES model. Such a data set was achieved from a project led by the University of California at Riverside, College of Engineering, Center for Environmental Research & Technology (CE-CERT) and funded by California Air Resources Board. Specifically, this data set consists of 90 heavy-duty vehicles operated mainly in California, which can be separated into five of the nine heavy-duty vehicle classes in the MOVES model. In addition, the heavy-duty activity database collected by CE-CERT provided activity estimates from more than 44,000 hours of operation throughout 4,724 vehicle days between November 2014 and September 2016. This report details the analysis of the heavy-duty activity database collected from the University of California at Riverside by providing graphical analysis and context for the start, soak, and idle distributions. The comparison of the related results from both the Fleet DNA and CE-CERT data sets are documented as well.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Oak Ridge National Laboratory EPA Approval Letters and Historical Documentation for a Modification in Applying 40 CFR Part 61 Appendix D

Appendix D of Title 40 Part 61, “Methods for Estimating Radionuclide Emissions,” of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) provides a procedure that US Department of Energy (DOE) facility owners and operators can use to estimate radionuclide emissions to the atmosphere for dose calculations instead of measuring emissions for minor sources under 40 CFR Part 61, Subpart H, “National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities.” The procedure assumes that any radioactive material heated above 100°C is completely vaporized and emitted to the atmosphere. In 1991, the DOE Oak Ridge Reservation (DOE-ORR) requested approval to use different release fractions (RFs) for uranium because of its high melting and boiling points (1,132°C and 3,818°C, respectively). In response to the request, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region IV approved the use of modified RFs for elemental uranium provided no reaction had taken place to alter its chemical form. In 2015, DOE-ORR requested approval to use different RFs for radioactive tungsten, also because of its high melting and boiling points (3,410°C and 5,660°C, respectively). EPA Region IV approved the use of modified RFs for heated radioactive tungsten metal. In accordance with the two precedents set for heating uranium and radioactive tungsten metals, in 2016, DOE-ORR requested approval to use modified RFs in similar fashion for other radioactive solid metals and compounds with melting and boiling points above 500°C that might be heated above 100°C in future research projects and experiments, and again, the EPA Region IV granted approval to use modified RFs for the list of compounds. This document contains the EPA approval letters and historical documentation used in the process to obtain approval for the use of alternative Appendix D emission factors. The approval to DOE-ORR allows modifying the existing regulatory RFs to 1 when radioactive solid metals and compounds are heated to temperatures greater than or equal to the boiling point of the solid, to 10 -3 when radioactive solid metals and compounds are heated to temperatures greater than or equal to 90% of the melting point and less than the boiling point of the solid, and to 10 -6 when radioactive solid materials are heated to temperatures above ambient air temperature but below 90% of the melting point of the solid.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗