SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “LABORATORY”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 199 records · Page 11

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2017

Characterizing the Laboratory Market

Laboratories are estimated to be 3-5 times more energy intensive than typical office buildings and offer significant opportunities for energy use reductions. Although energy intensity varies widely, laboratories are generally energy intensive due to ventilation requirements, the research instruments used, and other health and safety concerns. Because the requirements of laboratory facilities differ so dramatically from those of other buildings, a clear need exists for an initiative exclusively targeting these facilities. The building stock of laboratories in the United States span different economic sectors, include governmental and academic institution, and are often defined differently by different groups. Information on laboratory buildings is often limited to a small subsection of the total building stock making aggregate estimates of the total U.S. laboratories and their energy use challenging. Previous estimates of U.S. laboratory space vary widely owing to differences in how laboratories are defined and categorized. A 2006 report on fume hoods provided an estimate of 150,000 laboratories populating the U.S. based in part on interviews of industry experts, however, a 2009 analysis of the 2003 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) generated an estimate of only 9,000 laboratory buildings. This report draws on multiple data sources that have been evaluated to construct an understanding of U.S. laboratories across different sizes and markets segments. This 2016 analysis is an update to draft reports released in October and December 2016.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2026

Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program: FY 2025 Completed Projects

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is the US Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) largest multiprogram science, technology, and energy laboratory. It possesses distinctive capabilities in a variety of fields, such as neutron science, computing, advanced materials, and nuclear science and technology. Using these capabilities, ORNL conducts basic and applied research and development (R&D) to support DOE’s overarching mission “to ensure America’s security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions.” As a national resource, ORNL also applies its capabilities and skills to the specific needs of other federal agencies and customers through the DOE Strategic Partnership Projects (SPP) Program. Information about the laboratory and its programs is available on the ORNL website. The Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) Program at ORNL operates under the authority of DOE Order 413.2C, Laboratory Directed Research and Development, which establishes DOE’s requirements for the program while providing the laboratory director broad flexibility for program implementation. The LDRD Program funds are obtained through a charge to all laboratory programs. Although it represents a relatively small portion of the overall research budget, the LDRD Program plays an essential role in maintaining the laboratory’s ability to respond to national needs. The program allows ORNL to improve its distinctive capabilities and enhance its ability to conduct cutting-edge R&D. In accordance with the DOE order, R&D projects funded through the LDRD Program at ORNL support the goals of • maintaining the scientific and technical vitality of the laboratory, • enhancing the laboratory’s ability to address future DOE missions, • fostering creativity and stimulating exploration of forefront areas of science and technology, • serving as a proving ground for new concepts in R&D, and • supporting high-risk, potentially high-value R&D. This report provides an overview of the LDRD Program at ORNL in FY 2025 and contains summaries of all the LDRD research projects that concluded between October 1, 2024, and September 30, 2025.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2012

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Environmental Report 2011

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) is a premier research laboratory that is part of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). As a national security laboratory, LLNL is responsible for ensuring that the nation’s nuclear weapons remain safe, secure, and reliable. The Laboratory also meets other pressing national security needs, including countering the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and strengthening homeland security, and conducting major research in atmospheric, earth, and energy sciences; bioscience and biotechnology; and engineering, basic science, and advanced technology. The Laboratory is managed and operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS), and serves as a scientific resource to the U.S. government and a partner to industry and academia. LLNL operations have the potential to release a variety of constituents into the environment via atmospheric, surface water, and groundwater pathways. Some of the constituents, such as particles from diesel engines, are common at many types of facilities while others, such as radionuclides, are unique to research facilities like LLNL. All releases are highly regulated and carefully monitored. LLNL strives to maintain a safe, secure and efficient operational environment for its employees and neighboring communities. Experts in environment, safety and health (ES&H) support all Laboratory activities. LLNL’s radiological control program ensures that radiological exposures and releases are reduced to as low as reasonably achievable to protect the health and safety of its employees, contractors, the public, and the environment. LLNL is committed to enhancing its environmental stewardship and managing the impacts its operations may have on the environment through a formal Environmental Management System. The Laboratory encourages the public to participate in matters related to the Laboratory’s environmental impact on the community by soliciting citizens’ input on matters of significant public interest and through various communications. The Laboratory also provides public access to information on its ES&H activities. LLNL consists of two sites—an urban site in Livermore, California, referred to as the “Livermore site,” which occupies 1.3 square miles; and a rural Experimental Test Site, referred to as “Site 300,” near Tracy, California, which occupies 10.9 square miles. In 2011 the Laboratory had a staff of approximately 6800.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

DOE OSTI2013

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Environmental Report 2012

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) is a premier research laboratory that is part of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). As a national security laboratory, LLNL is responsible for ensuring that the nation’s nuclear weapons remain safe, secure, and reliable. The Laboratory also meets other pressing national security needs, including countering the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and strengthening homeland security, and conducting major research in atmospheric, earth, and energy sciences; bioscience and biotechnology; and engineering, basic science, and advanced technology. The Laboratory is managed and operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS), and serves as a scientific resource to the U.S. government and a partner to industry and academia. LLNL operations have the potential to release a variety of constituents into the environment via atmospheric, surface water, and groundwater pathways. Some of the constituents, such as particles from diesel engines, are common at many types of facilities while others, such as radionuclides, are unique to research facilities like LLNL. All releases are highly regulated and carefully monitored. LLNL strives to maintain a safe, secure and efficient operational environment for its employees and neighboring communities. Experts in environment, safety and health (ES&H) support all Laboratory activities. LLNL’s radiological control program ensures that radiological exposures and releases are reduced to as low as reasonably achievable to protect the health and safety of its employees, contractors, the public, and the environment. LLNL is committed to enhancing its environmental stewardship and managing the impacts its operations may have on the environment through a formal Environmental Management System. The Laboratory encourages the public to participate in matters related to the Laboratory’s environmental impact on the community by soliciting citizens’ input on matters of significant public interest and through various communications. The Laboratory also provides public access to information on its ES&H activities. LLNL consists of two sites—an urban site in Livermore, California, referred to as the “Livermore Site,” which occupies 1.3 square miles; and a rural Experimental Test Site, referred to as “Site 300,” near Tracy, California, which occupies 10.9 square miles. In 2012 the Laboratory had a staff of approximately 7000.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2014

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Environmental Report 2013

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) is a premier research laboratory that is part of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). As a national security laboratory, LLNL is responsible for ensuring that the nation’s nuclear weapons remain safe, secure, and reliable. The Laboratory also meets other pressing national security needs, including countering the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and strengthening homeland security, and conducting major research in atmospheric, earth, and energy sciences; bioscience and biotechnology; and engineering, basic science, and advanced technology. The Laboratory is managed and operated by Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS), and serves as a scientific resource to the U.S. government and a partner to industry and academia. LLNL operations have the potential to release a variety of constituents into the environment via atmospheric, surface water, and groundwater pathways. Some of the constituents, such as particles from diesel engines, are common at many types of facilities while others, such as radionuclides, are unique to research facilities like LLNL. All releases are highly regulated and carefully monitored. LLNL strives to maintain a safe, secure and efficient operational environment for its employees and neighboring communities. Experts in environment, safety and health (ES&H) support all Laboratory activities. LLNL’s radiological control program ensures that radiological exposures and releases are reduced to as low as reasonably achievable to protect the health and safety of its employees, contractors, the public, and the environment. LLNL is committed to enhancing its environmental stewardship and managing the impacts its operations may have on the environment through a formal Environmental Management System. The Laboratory encourages the public to participate in matters related to the Laboratory’s environmental impact on the community by soliciting citizens’ input on matters of significant public interest and through various communications. The Laboratory also provides public access to information on its ES&H activities. LLNL consists of two sites—an urban site in Livermore, California, referred to as the “Livermore Site,” which occupies 1.3 square miles; and a rural Experimental Test Site, referred to as “Site 300,” near Tracy, California, which occupies 10.9 square miles. In 2013 the Laboratory had a staff of approximately 6,300.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2018

Summary of Observations from the 2017 Federal Radiological Monitoring and Assessment Center (FRMAC) Laboratory Analysis Training and Capstone Event

On August 15th thru 17th, 2017 the Federal Radiological Monitoring and Assessment Center (FRMAC) Laboratory Analysis division, the FRMAC Fly Away Laboratory (FAL), the FRMAC Assessment division, and the Mobile Environmental Response Laboratory (MERL) held a training and capstone event for staff from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Remote Sensing Laboratory (RSL), Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), and Sandia National Laboratories (SNL). LAB-100, "Sample Control Training", LAB-200 "QA Specialist Training", and LAB-300 "Laboratory Analysis Manager Training" was given the first two days of the event. The purpose of the training and capstone event was to meet training requirements for billeted FRMAC Lab Analysis staff from RSL, LLNL, and SNL as well as raise awareness of the FRMAC Lab Analysis process with EPA staff as part of a Federal Emergency Management Agency — Nuclear Incident Response Team (FEMA-NIRT) laboratory standardization project. An objective of the standardization project was to help improve the transition of operations from DOE to EPA during a response. To do this effectively, detailed knowledge of the FRMAC Lab Analysis process by the EPA is needed. This training provided a good opportunity for this knowledge transfer. A capstone was held after the two-day training event to allow participants to practice the skills they learned in a realistic scenario. A scenario that was previously developed for a quarterly Consequence Management drill (i.e. Dark Phoenix) was used as the basis for the capstone, with laboratory analysis focused injects used to drive the exercise play. Each position within the FRMAC Lab Analysis Division exercised to specific objectives and helped to uncover gaps in the established processes. The lessons learned during this capstone are broken out in the following categories: Sample Control, In-Situ Gamma Spectroscopy, Analysis Request Forms (ARF), Shipping, QA/QC, Fly Away Laboratory (FAL), and Management.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2021

Materials Challenges and Opportunities for Energy Generation, Conversion, Delivery, and Storage (Applied Energy Tri-Laboratory Consortium Workshop Report)

This report documents the outcomes of the Tri-Laboratory Materials Workshop that was held July 31 and August 1, 2019 to begin addressing the needs, opportunities, and challenges associated with the development, fabrication, and testing of the needed materials and components for integrated hybrid energy systems (i.e., incorporating nuclear, fossil, and renewables for electric and thermal applications). This was accomplished by assembling the research program leads and principal investigators at Idaho National Laboratory (INL), National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), who support the research and development of new technology and system integration. The team then identified and prioritized key materials development needs. This effort was intended to enhance communications and synergy among the Tri-Lab partners. Advanced functional and structural materials are central to transformative energy technologies for energy generation, conversion, delivery, and storage. With that in mind, the workshop focused on identifying and assessing the foundational materials research needs at both the basic and applied levels. Materials challenges include the ability to withstand harsh environments, such as high temperatures and pressures, corrosion, oxidation, or irradiation while maintaining flexible mission profiles and long service lifespans. Advanced energy system material challenges and needs range from materials for the capture, upgrading/concentration, storage, and delivery of low-grade heat to materials for high temperature environments that involve liquid metals, molten salt, and very high temperature gas heat delivery and storage systems. Material improvements are needed for hybrid energy systems due to accelerated corrosion and stress-fatigue failure of materials and equipment, which results from increased frequency and amplitude of thermal, mechanical, and electrical cycling of systems components. Multifunctional materials are needed for high temperature solid-oxide fuel cells, advanced electrochemical reactors, and in-process separation. Relative to materials manufacturing, application of advanced additive and subtractive methods need to be understood to develop both thin-layer homogenous materials and materials of graded composition. Materials modeling and machine learning will be critical to accelerate the design and production of power electronics, and nuclear reactor materials and fuel, as well as to gain an understanding of beneficial materials phenomena or deleterious microstructure evolution. There is also a need for standardized models, computational structures, data reporting protocols and modeling tools across the three laboratories. This would allow consistent results, analysis, and data sharing. Combining computational capabilities between the three laboratories (e.g., hardware, software) would greatly increase computational capabilities and throughput. The workshop identified the need for laboratories to anticipate and address problems that will occur during scale-up. Laboratory work must connect with industry to ensure that research focuses on processes that are scalable and marketable. Industry input and perspective are essential to guide laboratory research to meet these requirements and deploy new technology in industrial demonstrations. Another aspect of scale-up is the integration of multiple systems since new challenges often arise at the subsystem interfaces. Establishing a scale-up manufacturing demonstration/pilot plant, potentially as an industrial user facility, would be beneficial to the laboratories and industry. That modular scale-up manufacturing demonstration/pilot plant would allow researchers to find and resolve interface problems that cannot be identified by focusing only on individual parts. Communication exchanges among the organizers, attendees, and workshop survey responses indicate that the workshop was successful in achieving its goal to identify key technology gaps and research needs. Strong positive feedback was received on the sharing of ideas, capabilities, talent, and passion to move forward on the materials-related action items.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

DOE OSTI2023

Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program: FY 2021 Completed Projects

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is the US Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) largest multiprogram science, technology, and energy laboratory. It possesses distinctive capabilities in neutron science, computing, advanced materials, nuclear science and technology, and other fields. Using these capabilities, ORNL conducts basic and applied R&D to support DOE’s overarching mission “to ensure America’s security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions.”1 As a national resource, ORNL also applies its capabilities and skills to specific needs of other federal agencies and customers through the DOE Strategic Partnership Projects (SPP) Program. Information about the laboratory and its programs is available on the ORNL website.2 The Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) Program at ORNL operates under the authority of the DOE Order 413.2C, “Laboratory Directed Research and Development,”3 which establishes DOE’s requirements for the program while providing the laboratory director broad flexibility for program implementation. The LDRD Program funds are obtained through a charge to all laboratory programs. Although it represents a relatively small portion of the overall research budget, the LDRD Program plays an essential role in maintaining the laboratory’s ability to respond to national needs. The program allows ORNL to improve its distinctive capabilities and to enhance its ability to conduct cutting-edge R&D. In accordance with the DOE order, R&D projects funded through the LDRD Program at ORNL support the following goals: (1) maintain the scientific and technical vitality of the laboratory; (2) enhance the laboratory’s ability to address future DOE missions; (3) foster creativity and stimulate exploration of forefront areas of science and technology; (4) serve as a proving ground for new concepts in R&D; and (5) support high-risk, potentially high-value R&D. This report provides an overview of the LDRD Program at ORNL in FY 2021 and contains summaries of all LDRD research projects that concluded between October 1, 2020, and September 30, 2021.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2025

Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program: FY 2024 Completed Projects Report

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is the US Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) largest multiprogram science, technology, and energy laboratory. It possesses distinctive capabilities in a variety of fields, such as neutron science, computing, advanced materials, and nuclear science and technology. Using these capabilities, ORNL conducts basic and applied research and development (R&D) to support DOE’s overarching mission “to ensure America’s security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions.” As a national resource, ORNL also applies its capabilities and skills to the specific needs of other federal agencies and customers through the DOE Strategic Partnership Projects (SPP) Program. Information about the laboratory and its programs is available on the ORNL website. The Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) Program at ORNL operates under the authority of DOE Order 413.2C, Laboratory Directed Research and Development,3 which establishes DOE’s requirements for the program while providing the laboratory director broad flexibility for program implementation. The LDRD Program funds are obtained through a charge to all laboratory programs. Although it represents a relatively small portion of the overall research budget, the LDRD Program plays an essential role in maintaining the laboratory’s ability to respond to national needs. The program allows ORNL to improve its distinctive capabilities and to enhance its ability to conduct cutting-edge R&D. In accordance with the DOE order, R&D projects funded through the LDRD Program at ORNL support the goals of • maintaining the scientific and technical vitality of the laboratory; • enhancing the laboratory’s ability to address future DOE missions; • fostering creativity and stimulating exploration of forefront areas of science and technology; • serving as a proving ground for new concepts in R&D; and • supporting high-risk, potentially high-value R&D. This report provides an overview of the LDRD Program at ORNL in FY 2024 and contains summaries of all the LDRD research projects that concluded between October 1, 2023, and September 30, 2024.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2024

Exploring Grid-Interactive Efficient Building Strategies for Laboratories Through Energy Modeling

Laboratories are often overlooked in demand flexibility research due to constraints on their operations as mission critical facilities, despite the major role they play in an organization's emissions. Laboratories consume 3-4 times more energy than a typical office building and are commonly the largest energy users on any campus. Consequently, most laboratories in the United States are significant contributors to their organization's carbon footprint if their energy needs are met through the combustion of fossil fuels. As part of the initiative to decarbonize laboratories, this report documents an analysis on specifically grid-interactive efficient building (GEB) opportunities for reducing energy costs and emissions associated with laboratory operations. The goal of this initiative was to provide a case study and guidance on how to use OpenStudio and REopt as modeling tools for GEB technologies and strategies in laboratory environments across different climate zones in the United States. The analysis found that efficiency-based GEB strategies had the most significant impact on laboratory operations, while load-shedding and load-shifting GEB strategies produced smaller results. The culmination of these approaches applied across all five climate zones generated on average: 1) 28% energy cost savings and 30% greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions, and 2) 4% enhanced energy cost savings under a time-of-use (TOU) pricing schedule compared to traditional pricing schemes. Grid-interactive efficiency building measures were found to produce the greatest energy savings in both electricity and natural gas, particularly in regions with high electrical loads, such as warm climates for cooling. Laboratories that had high levels of natural gas consumption, meanwhile, experienced the greatest emission reductions. The report concludes with an analysis on the opportunities for flexible loads in lab spaces and how small-scale measures in addition to opaque pricing structures for peak demand could become barriers to demand flexibility planning. The report also explores how electrifying laboratory buildings with heat pumps could reduce energy costs and GHG emissions.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2016

2016 Fermilab Laboratory Directed Research & Development Program Plan

Fermilab is executing Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) as outlined by order DOE O 413.2B in order to enhance and realize the mission of the laboratory in a manner that also supports the laboratory’s strategic objectives and the mission of the Department of Energy. LDRD funds enable scientific creativity, allow for exploration of “high risk, high payoff” research, and allow for the demonstration of new ideas, technical concepts, and devices. LDRD also has an objective of maintaining and enhancing the scientific and technical vitality of Fermilab. LDRD is able to fund employee-initiated proposals that address the current strategic objectives and better position Fermilab for future mission needs. The request for such funds is made in consideration of the investment needs, affordability, and directives from DOE and Congress. Review procedures of the proposals will insure that those proposals which most address the strategic goals of the DOE and the Laboratory or which best position Fermilab for the future will be recommended to the Laboratory Director who has responsibility for approval. The execution of each approved project will be the responsibility of the Principal Investigator, PI, who will follow existing Laboratory guidelines to ensure compliance with safety, environmental, and quality assurance practices. A Laboratory Director-appointed LDRD Coordinator will work with Committees, Laboratory Management, other Fermilab Staff, and the PI’s to oversee the implementation of policies and procedures of LDRD and provide the management and execution of this Annual Program Plan. FY16 represents third fiscal year in which LDRD has existed at Fermilab. The number of preliminary proposals (117) submitted in response to the LDRD Call for Proposals indicates very strong interest of the program within the Fermilab community. The first two Calls have resulted in thirteen active LDRD projects – and it is expected that between five and seven new projects will be approved in response to the FY16 Call for Proposals. The implementation of the program compared with FY15 is mostly unchanged except that the program is on the expected normal fiscal year calendar cycle with new projects starting at the beginning of the fiscal year. Because of this, there is some expanded discussion that the Laboratory Director may decide to initiate mid-year Late Start or Strategic- Hire LDRD projects.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2017

Laboratory Directed Research and Development Annual Report FY 2016

A national laboratory must establish and maintain an environment in which creativity and innovation are encouraged and supported in order to fulfill its missions and remain viable in the long term. As such, multiprogram laboratories are given discretion to allocate a percentage of their operating budgets to support research and development projects that align to PNNL’s and DOE’s missions and support the missions of other federal agencies, including DHS, DOD, and others. DOE Order 413.2C sets forth DOE’s Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) policy and guidelines for DOE multiprogram laboratories, and it authorizes the national laboratories to allocate up to 6 percent of their operating budgets to fund the program. LDRD is innovative research and development, selected by the Laboratory Director or his/her designee, for the purpose of maintaining the scientific and technological vitality of the Laboratory. The projects supported by LDRD funding all have demonstrable ties to DOE/DHS missions and may also be relevant to the missions of other federal agencies that sponsor work at the Laboratory. The program plays a key role in attracting the best and brightest scientific staff, which is needed to serve the highest priority DOE mission objectives. Individual project reports comprise the bulk of this LDRD report. The Laboratory focuses its LDRD research on scientific assets that often address more than one scientific discipline.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2018

Laboratory Directed Research and Development Annual Report FY 2017

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2018

Implementing Snowball Metrics in the Battelle-Affiliated DOE National Laboratories

The purpose of the Battelle Snowball Metric Working Group is to use the Snowball Metrics framework to build and employ a method to calculate metrics that will enable Battelle-affiliated National Laboratories to better understand their strengths and weaknesses in a few representative areas. This effort supports the overall aim of these Laboratories to use data-driven and evidence-based metrics to build and monitor effective strategies for evaluating science and technology (S&T) as individual laboratories, and as a Battelle institution. Battelle-affiliated National Laboratories include Brookhaven National Laboratory, Idaho National Laboratory, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2014

Laboratory and Field Testing of Commercially Available Detectors for the Identification of Chemicals of Interest in the Nuclear Fuel Cycle for the Detection of Undeclared Activities

Traditionally, IAEA inspectors have focused on the detection of nuclear indicators as part of infield inspection activities. The ability to rapidly detect and identify chemical as well as nuclear signatures can increase the ability of IAEA inspectors to detect undeclared activities at a site. Identification of chemical indicators have been limited to use in the analysis of environmental samples. Although IAEA analytical laboratories are highly effective, environmental sample processing does not allow for immediate or real-time results to an IAEA inspector at a facility. During a complementary access inspection, under the Additional Protocol, the use of fieldable technologies that can quickly provide accurate information on chemicals that may be indicative of undeclared activities can increase the ability of IAEA to effectively and efficiently complete their mission. The Complementary Access Working Group (CAWG) is a multi-laboratory team with members from Brookhaven National Laboratory, Idaho National Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and Sandia National Laboratory. The team identified chemicals at each stage of the nuclear fuel cycle that may provide IAEA inspectors with indications that proliferation activities may be occurring. The group eliminated all indicators related to equipment, technology and training, developing a list of by-products/effluents, non-nuclear materials, nuclear materials, and other observables. These proliferation indicators were prioritized based on detectability from a conduct of operations (CONOPS) perspective of a CA inspection (for example, whether an inspector actually can access the S&O or whether it is in process with no physical access), and the IAEA’s interest in the detection technology in conjunction with radiation detectors. The list was consolidated to general categories (nuclear materials from a chemical detection technique, inorganic chemicals, organic chemicals, halogens, and miscellaneous materials). The team then identified commercial off the shelf (COTS) chemical detectors that may detect the chemicals of interest. Three chemical detectors were selected and tested both in laboratory settings and in field operations settings at Idaho National Laboratory. The instruments selected are: Thermo Scientific TruDefender FT (FTIR), Thermo Scientific FirstDefender RM (Raman), and Bruker Tracer III SD (XRF). Functional specifications, operability, and chemical detectability, selectivity, and limits of detection were determined. Results from the laboratory and field tests will be presented. This work is supported by the Next Generation Safeguards Initiative, Office of Nonproliferation and International Security, National Nuclear Security Administration.

38 RADIATION CHEMISTRY, RADIOCHEMISTRY, AND NUCLEA↗

DOE OSTI2016

Biosafety and biosecurity in veterinary laboratories

Here, with recent outbreaks of MERS-Cov, Anthrax, Nipah, and Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza, much emphasis has been placed on rapid identification of infectious agents globally. As a result, laboratories are building capacity, conducting more advanced and sophisticated research, increasing laboratory staff, and establishing collections of dangerous pathogens in an attempt to reduce the impact of infectious disease outbreaks and characterize disease causing agents. With this expansion, the global laboratory community has started to focus on laboratory biosafety and biosecurity to prevent the accidental and/or intent ional release o f these agents. Laboratory biosafety and biosecurity systems are used around the world to help mit igate the risks posed by dangerous pathogens in the laboratory. Veterinary laboratories carry unique responsibilities to workers and communities to safely and securely handle disease causing microorganisms. Many microorganisms studied in veterinary laboratories not only infect animals, but also have the potential to infect humans. This paper will discuss the fundamentals of laboratory biosafety and biosecurity.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2022

Ushering in the New Age of Laboratories: Smart Labs in Practice; Preprint

Ventilation is the first line of defense against airborne hazards produced during research activities in laboratories. A vital component to maintaining healthy, safe, indoor air quality, laboratory ventilation systems are often victim to ineffective operation, posing a risk to an organization's most important asset - the researchers. Furthermore, system inefficiencies can lead to up to 50% wasted energy. By providing a framework to improve the safety and energy efficiency through optimized ventilation and operations, the Smart Labs Toolkit guides laboratory stakeholders through a straight-forward, holistic approach to achieving a dynamic Smart Labs program. A Smart Labs program employs a combination of physical, administrative, and management techniques to plan, assess, optimize, and manage high-performance laboratories. Grounded in the Smart Labs methodology, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) implemented a successful Smart Labs program to oversee the design, construction, maintenance, and operations of its laboratories. To accomplish this effort, NREL's key stakeholders created an internal partnership to align NREL's existing laboratories with Smart Labs principles and solidify organizational roles for the safe and efficient operation of laboratory assets. The program provides the groundwork for decarbonization strategies centered around building operation. This paper outlines best practices employed by NREL to develop a cross-cutting Smart Labs team, garner managerial support, and effectively communicate of goals around safety and energy. Strategies include specific Smart Labs best practices, such as implementing a Laboratory Ventilation Risk Assessment - a systematic process for identifying risk due to airborne hazards and informing dynamic, demand-based ventilation to optimize safety and efficiency.

decarbonization↗

DOE OSTI2018

Hydrogeologic Setting and Groundwater Contaminant Conceptual Model, Los Alamos National Laboratory - 18681

Our understanding of the complex hydrogeologic setting at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) has evolved significantly over the previous decade. The semi-arid, high-desert setting consists of generally dry drainages in canyons that head either in uplands to the west of the Laboratory or on the high mountain-front plateau where the Laboratory is spread across approximately 40 square miles. Some canyon drainages have spatially limited reaches with perennial surface water from natural runoff and spring sources and/or from permitted effluent sources. The Rio Grande rift basin-fill stratigraphy includes primary volcanic deposits from pyroclastic eruptions and intermediate composition lava flows, and fluvial and alluvial fan deposits. Highly complex and spatially variable stratigraphy governs the occurrences of three groundwater zones: shallow 'alluvial groundwater', deep perched groundwater, and a thick 'regional' aquifer that is the water supply for the community of Los Alamos and the Laboratory. The current understanding of the hydrogeologic framework was greatly expanded as part of a site hydrogeologic characterization program completed in 2005. Higher resolution information exists in area where more detailed groundwater characterization has been conducted to support specific project objectives. A conceptual model for occurrences of contaminants in each of the three groundwater zones is governed by four factors: contaminant solubility/mobility, the mass of historical release, presence of a continuous hydraulic driver, and 'breakthrough' geology, defined as geology conducive to infiltration of shallow groundwater to deeper groundwater zones. The Laboratory's operations were historically somewhat spatially partitioned. Most of the radionuclide work (and historical releases) was conducted in the northern portion of the Laboratory, high explosives work has taken place exclusively in the southwestern portion, and treated sanitary effluent was released at a limited number of outfalls. Historical material disposal areas (MDAs) are dispersed throughout the Laboratory, and active MDAs are all located on a single dry mesa at the eastern part of the Laboratory. Evidence exists of transport of anthropogenic constituents to the regional aquifer. However, years of groundwater characterization have identified only two cases for which all the key factors were present and a complete contaminant pathway to the regional aquifer has resulted in contamination at levels above an applicable standard. Hexavalent chromium contamination associated with historical use as a corrosion inhibitor in a power plant is present beneath Mortandad Canyon, and RDX contamination associated with high-explosives machining is present beneath Canon de Valle. Each of those project areas have refined conceptual and numerical models that address contaminant migration pathways, spatial extent of perched-intermediate groundwater, mass balance, and fate and transport within the regional aquifer. No known contamination is present in the regional aquifer associated with MDAs, and interestingly, much of the Laboratory's groundwater background dataset is from wells located beneath active MDAs. A comprehensive groundwater monitoring program is in place to track the evolution of chromium and RDX contamination, and to identify any other constituents that may be attributable to historical LANL operations. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗