Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “NEVADA”

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 199 records · Page 11
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2016

Special Analysis for the Disposal of the Transuranic Waste Processing Center Mixed Low-Level Waste Stream at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

This special analysis (SA) evaluates whether the Transuranic Waste Processing Center (TWPC) Mixed Low-Level waste stream is suitable for disposal by shallow land burial (SLB) at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) on the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). Disposal of the TWPC Mixed Low-Level waste was meets all U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Manual DOE M 435.1-1, “Radioactive Waste Management Manual,” Chapter IV, Section P performance objectives. The TWPC Mixed Low-Level waste stream is recommended for acceptance without conditions.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2018

Inadvertent Disposal of Chromium Waste at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada

Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. (NFS), a waste generator approved to ship waste to the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS), made 49 waste shipments in the period 2009 to 2015 that were subsequently determined to contain chromium that exceeded the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure regulatory limit, which would require the waste to carry hazardous waste code D007. One of the 49 shipments contained bottles of liquid blowback solution and was returned to NFS for disposition. The remaining 48 shipments consisted of a total of 93 disposal packages of chromium-containing waste that were disposed in seven low-level waste (LLW) cells at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

A Revised Architectural Survey of the Nuclear Engine Maintenance Assembly and Disassembly Facility, Area 25, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) anticipates closure activities under the Federal Facility Agreement Consent Order (FFACO) and eventual demolition of the Engine Maintenance and Disassembly (E-MAD) facility, to meet Environmental Management mission requirements. The NNSA/NFO has obligations under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and its implementing regulations (36 C.F.R. Part 800) to consider the effects of its actions and undertakings on historically important properties and to develop and implement strategies to minimize or mitigate adverse effects to these resources. This Section 106 architectural survey and evaluation of the buildings and structures in the E-MAD facility was done under requirements of 36 C.F.R § 800.4 - Identification of historic properties. Desert Research Institute (DRI) completed an architectural survey of a 21-acre area of potential effect in February 2019. DRI previously surveyed the entire E-MAD facility as a single architectural resource eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP or National Register) under Criteria A and C and Consideration G and as a contributor to the potential Nuclear Rocket Development Station (NRDS) Historic District (Beck et al. 1996).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2019

Understanding End‐of‐Century Snowpack Changes Over California's Sierra Nevada

Abstract This study uses dynamical and statistical methods to understand end‐of‐century mean changes to Sierra Nevada snowpack. Dynamical results reveal that middle‐elevation watersheds experience considerably more rain than snow during winter, leading to substantial snowpack declines by spring. Despite some high‐elevation watersheds receiving slightly more snow in January and February, the warming signal still dominates across the wet season and leads to notable declines by springtime. A statistical model is created to mimic dynamical results for 1 April snowpack, allowing for an efficient downscaling of all available general circulation models from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 5. For all general circulation models and emission scenarios, dramatic 1 April snowpack loss occurs at elevations below 2,500 m, despite increased precipitation in many general circulation models. Only 36% (±12%) of historical 1 April total snow water equivalent volume remains at the century's end under a “business‐as‐usual” emission scenario, with 70% (±12%) remaining under a realistic “mitigation” scenario.

Sun, Fengpeng↗
DOE OSTI2011

Corrective Action Decision Document/Corrective Action Plan for Corrective Action Unit 98: Frenchman Flat, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 1

This CADD/CAP follows the Corrective Action Investigation (CAI) stage, which results in development of a set of contaminant boundary forecasts produced from groundwater flow and contaminant transport modeling of the Frenchman Flat CAU. The Frenchman Flat CAU is located in the southeastern portion of the NNSS and comprises 10 underground nuclear tests. The tests were conducted between 1965 and 1971 and resulted in the release of radionuclides in the subsurface in the vicinity of the test cavities. Two important aspects of the corrective action process are presented within this CADD/CAP. The CADD portion describes the results of the Frenchman Flat CAU data-collection and modeling activities completed during the CAI stage. The corrective action objectives and the actions recommended to meet the objectives are also described. The CAP portion describes the corrective action implementation plan. The CAP begins with the presentation of CAU regulatory boundary objectives and initial use restriction boundaries that are identified and negotiated by NNSA/NSO and the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP). The CAP also presents the model evaluation process designed to build confidence that the flow and contaminant transport modeling results can be used for the regulatory decisions required for CAU closure. The first two stages of the strategy have been completed for the Frenchman Flat CAU. A value of information analysis and a CAIP were developed during the CAIP stage. During the CAI stage, a CAIP addendum was developed, and the activities proposed in the CAIP and addendum were completed. These activities included hydrogeologic investigation of the underground testing areas, aquifer testing, isotopic and geochemistry-based investigations, and integrated geophysical investigations. After these investigations, a groundwater flow and contaminant transport model was developed to forecast contaminant boundaries that enclose areas potentially exceeding the Safe Drinking Water Act radiological standards at any time within 1,000 years. An external peer review of the groundwater flow and contaminant transport model was completed, and the model was accepted by NDEP to allow advancement to the CADD/CAP stage. The CADD/CAP stage focuses on model evaluation to ensure that existing models provide adequate guidance for the regulatory decisions regarding monitoring and institutional controls. Data-collection activities are identified and implemented to address key uncertainties in the flow and contaminant transport models. During the CR stage, final use restriction boundaries and CAU regulatory boundaries are negotiated and established; a long-term closure monitoring program is developed and implemented; and the approaches and policies for institutional controls are initiated. The model evaluation process described in this plan consists of an iterative series of five steps designed to build confidence in the site conceptual model and model forecasts. These steps are designed to identify data-collection activities (Step 1), document the data-collection activities in the 0CADD/CAP (Step 2), and perform the activities (Step 3). The new data are then assessed; the model is refined, if necessary; the modeling results are evaluated; and a model evaluation report is prepared (Step 4). The assessments are made by the modeling team and presented to the pre-emptive review committee. The decision is made by the modeling team with the assistance of the pre-emptive review committee and concurrence of NNSA/NSO to continue data and model assessment/refinement, recommend additional data collection, or recommend advancing to the CR stage. A recommendation to advance to the CR stage is based on whether the model is considered to be sufficiently reliable for designing a monitoring system and developing effective institutional controls. The decision to advance to the CR stage or to return to step 1 of the process is then made by NDEP (Step 5).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2012

Special Analysis of the Area 3 Radioactive Waste Management Site at the Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

This report describes the methods and results of a special analysis (SA) of the Area 3 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) on the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). The purpose of the SA is to determine if the approved performance assessment (PA) and composite analysis (CA) (Shott et al., 2001) remain valid. The Area 3 RWMS PA and CA were prepared as a single document and received conditional approval on October 6, 1999. A conditional Disposal Authorization Statement (DAS) for the Area 3 RWMS was issued on October 20, 1999. Since preparation of the approved PA and CA, new information and additional environmental monitoring data have been used to update the PA and CA. At the same time, continual advancements in computer processors and software have allowed improvement to the PA and CA models. Annual reviews of the PA and CA required by U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order DOE O 435.1 have documented multiple changes occurring since preparation of the PA and CA. Potentially important changes include: Development of a new and improved baseline PA and CA model implemented in the probabilistic GoldSim simulation platform. A significant increase in the waste inventory disposed at the site. Revision and updating of model parameters based on additional years of site monitoring data and new research and development results. Although changes have occurred, many important PA/CA issues remain unchanged, including the site conceptual model, important features, events, and processes, and the points of compliance. The SA is performed to document the current status of the PA/CA model and to quantitatively assess the impact of cumulative changes on the PA and CA results. The results of the SA are used to assess the validity of the approved PA/CA and make a determination if revision of the PA or CA is necessary. The SA was performed using the Area 3 RWMS, version 2.102, GoldSim model, the current baseline PA/CA model. Comparison of the maximum SA results with the PA performance objectives indicates that there continues to be a reasonable expectation of compliance. The resident exposure scenario was evaluated for compliance with the air pathway and all-pathways annual total effective dose (TED) performance objectives. The maximum mean air pathway TED, 7E-6 millisievert (mSv) at 1,000 years (y) has decreased relative to the approved PA and is significantly less than the 0.1 mSv limit. The maximum mean all-pathways annual TED, 7E-5 mSv at 1,000 y has increased but remains a small fraction of the 0.25 mSv limit. The SA maximum mean radon-222 (222Rn) flux density, 0.03 becquerel per square meter per second (Bq m-2 s-1), has increased relative to the PA results but is significantly less than the 0.74 Bq m-2 s-1 limit. The SA results continue to support a conclusion that the disposed waste inventory is protective of intruders and groundwater resources. The maximum mean intruder TED, 0.01 mSv for an acute construction scenario at the U-3ah/at disposal unit, was less than the 5 mSv performance measure. Site monitoring data and research results continue to support a conclusion that a groundwater pathway will not exist within the 1,000 y compliance period. Projected releases to the environment are a small fraction of the performance objectives. Cost-effective options for reducing releases further are unlikely to exist. Therefore, releases from the Area 3 RWMS are judged to be as low as reasonably achievable. Comparison of the maximum CA result with the 0.3 mSv CA dose constraint indicates that no action is required to reduce the dose from the Area 3 RWMS and all interacting sources of residual radioactive contamination. The SA maximum mean CA annual TED, 0.02 mSv at 1,000 y, has increased from the approved CA result but remains less than 10% of the dose constraint. The CA TED continues to be due predominantly to inhalation of plutonium-239 resuspended from soils contaminated by nuclear weapons tests conducted near the Area 3 RWMS. The SA results estimated with the Area 3 RWMS version 2.102 model indicate that changes to the PA and CA do not significantly alter the PA/CA results or conclusions. Although increases occur for the all-pathways annual TED, the 222Rn flux density, and the CA annual TED, all PA and CA results are a small fraction of the performance objectives or dose constraints. The same conclusion was reached for the approved PA and CA. The SA results continue to support a conclusion that there is a reasonable expectation of meeting all performance objectives and the CA dose constraint. There is no need to revise the DAS at this time. The SA results support a conclusion that the Area 3 RWMS PA and CA remain valid, and revision is not necessary at this time.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2013

Special Analysis for the Disposal of the Consolidated Edison Uranium Solidification Project Waste Stream at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

The purpose of this Special Analysis (SA) is to determine if the Oak Ridge (OR) Consolidated Edison Uranium Solidification Project (CEUSP) uranium-233( 233 U) waste stream (DRTK000000050, Revision 0) is acceptable for shallow land burial (SLB) at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) on the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). The CEUSP 233 U waste stream requires a special analysis because the concentrations of thorium- 229 ( 229 Th), 230 Th, 232 U, 233 U, and 234 U exceeded their NNSS Waste Acceptance Criteria action levels. The acceptability of the waste stream is evaluated by determining if performance assessment (PA) modeling provides a reasonable expectation that SLB disposal is protective of human health and the environment. The CEUSP 233 U waste stream is a long-lived waste with unique radiological hazards. The SA evaluates the long-term acceptability of the CEUSP 233 U waste stream for near-surface disposal as a two tier process. The first tier, which is the usual SA process, uses the approved probabilistic PA model to determine if there is a reasonable expectation that disposal of the CEUSP 233 U waste stream can meet the performance objectives of U.S. Department of Energy Manual DOE M 435.1-1, “Radioactive Waste Management,” for a period of 1,000 years (y) after closure. The second tier addresses the acceptability of the OR CEUSP 233 U waste stream for near-surface disposal by evaluating long-term site stability and security, by performing extended (i.e., 10,000 and 60,000 y) modeling analyses, and by evaluating the effect of containers and the depth of burial on performance. Tier I results indicate that there is a reasonable expectation of compliance with all performance objectives if the OR CEUSP 233 U waste stream is disposed in the Area 5 RWMS SLB disposal units. The maximum mean and 95 th percentile PA results are all less than the performance objective for 1,000 y. Monte Carlo uncertainty analysis indicates that there is a high likelihood of compliance with all performance objectives. Tier II results indicate that the long-term performance of the OR CEUSP 233 U waste stream is protective of human health and the environment. The Area 5 RWMS is located in one of the least populated and most arid regions of the U.S. Site characterization data indicate that infiltration of precipitation below the plant root zone at 2.5 meters (8.2 feet) ceased 10,000 to 15,000 y ago. The site is not expected to have a groundwater pathway as long as the current arid climate persists. The national security mission of the NNSS and the location of the Area 5 RWMS within the Frenchman Flat Corrective Action Unit require that access controls and land use restrictions be maintained indefinitely. PA modeling results for 10,000 to 60,000 y also indicate that the OR CEUSP 233 U waste stream is acceptable for near-surface disposal. The mean resident air pathway annual total effective dose (TED), the resident all-pathways annual TED, and the acute drilling TED are less than their performance objectives for 10,000 y after closure. The mean radon-222 (222Rn) flux density exceeds the performance objective at 4,200 y, but this is due to waste already disposed at the Area 5 RWMS and is only slightly affected by disposal of the CEUSP 233 U. The peak resident all-pathways annual TED from CEUSP key radionuclides occurs at 48,000 y and is less than the 0.25 millisievert performance objective. Disposal of the OR CEUSP 233 U waste stream in a typical SLB trench slightly increases PA results. Increasing the depth was found to eliminate any impacts of the OR CEUSP 233 U waste stream. Containers could not be shown to have any significant impact on performance due to the long half-life of the waste stream and a lack of data for pitting corrosion rates of stainless steel in soil. The results of the SA indicate that all performance objectives can be met with disposal of the OR CEUSP 233 U waste stream in the SLB units at the Area 5 RWMS. The long-term performance of the OR CEUSP 233 U waste stream disposed in the near surface is protective of human health and the environment. The waste stream is recommended for disposal without conditions.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2013

Corrective Action Plan for Corrective Action Unit 366: Area 11 Plutonium Valley Dispersion Sites, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada

This Corrective Action Plan has been prepared for Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 366, Area 11 Plutonium Valley Dispersion Sites, in accordance with the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO, 1996 as amended). CAU 366 consists of the following six Corrective Action Sites (CASs) located in Area 11 of the Nevada National Security Site.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2013

Phase I Flow and Transport Model Document for Corrective Action Unit 97: Yucca Flat/Climax Mine, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada, Revision 1 with ROTCs 1 and 2

The Underground Test Area (UGTA) Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 97, Yucca Flat/Climax Mine, in the northeast part of the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) requires environmental corrective action activities to assess contamination resulting from underground nuclear testing. These activities are necessary to comply with the UGTA corrective action strategy (referred to as the UGTA strategy). The corrective action investigation phase of the UGTA strategy requires the development of groundwater flow and contaminant transport models whose purpose is to identify the lateral and vertical extent of contaminant migration over the next 1,000 years. In particular, the goal is to calculate the contaminant boundary, which is defined as a probabilistic model-forecast perimeter and a lower hydrostratigraphic unit (HSU) boundary that delineate the possible extent of radionuclide-contaminated groundwater from underground nuclear testing. Because of structural uncertainty in the contaminant boundary, a range of potential contaminant boundaries was forecast, resulting in an ensemble of contaminant boundaries. The contaminant boundary extent is determined by the volume of groundwater that has at least a 5 percent chance of exceeding the radiological standards of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) (CFR, 2012).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2013

Post-Closure Inspection and Monitoring Report for Corrective Action Unit 417: Central Nevada Test Area Surface, Hot Creek Valley, Nevada

This report presents results of data collected during the annual post-closure site inspections conducted at the Central Nevada Test Area surface Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 417 in May 2011 and July 2012. The annual post-closure site inspections included inspections of the UC-1, UC-3, and UC-4 sites in accordance with the Post-Closure Monitoring Plan provided in the CAU 417 Closure Report (NNSA/NV 2001). The annual inspections conducted at the UC-1 Central Mud Pit (CMP) indicated that the site and soil cover were in good condition. No new fractures or extension of existing fractures were observed and no issues with the fence or gate were identified. The vegetation on the cover continues to look healthy, but the biennial vegetation survey conducted during the 2012 inspection indicated that the total foliar cover was slightly higher in 2009 than in 2012. This may be indicative of a decrease in precipitation observed during the 2-year monitoring period. The precipitation totaled 9.9 inches from July 1, 2010, through June 30, 2011, and 5 inches from July 1, 2011, through June 30, 2012. This decrease in precipitation is also evident in the soil moisture data obtained from the time domain reflectometry sensors. Soil moisture content data show that the UC-1 cover is performing as designed, and evapotranspiration is effectively removing water from the cover.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2013

Underground Test Area Fiscal Year 2012 Annual Quality Assurance Report Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

This report is mandated by the Underground Test Area (UGTA) Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) and identifies the UGTA quality assurance (QA) activities for fiscal year (FY) 2012. All UGTA organizations—U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO); Desert Research Institute (DRI); Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL); Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL); Navarro-Intera, LLC (N-I); National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec); and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)—conducted QA activities in FY 2012. The activities included conducting assessments, identifying findings and completing corrective actions, evaluating laboratory performance, revising the QAPP, and publishing documents. In addition, processes and procedures were developed to address deficiencies identified in the FY 2011 QAPP gap analysis.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2014

Underground Test Area Fiscal Year 2013 Annual Quality Assurance Report Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

This report is required by the Underground Test Area (UGTA) Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) and identifies the UGTA quality assurance (QA) activities for fiscal year (FY) 2013. All UGTA organizations—U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO); Desert Research Institute (DRI); Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL); Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL); Navarro-Intera, LLC (N-I); National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec); and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)—conducted QA activities in FY 2013. The activities included conducting assessments, identifying findings and completing corrective actions, evaluating laboratory performance, and publishing documents. In addition, integrated UGTA required reading and corrective action tracking was instituted.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2014

Special Analysis for the Disposal of the Idaho National Laboratory Unirradiated Light Water Breeder Reactor Rods and Pellets Waste Stream at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

The purpose of this special analysis (SA) is to determine if the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Unirradiated Light Water Breeder Reactor (LWBR) Rods and Pellets waste stream (INEL103597TR2, Revision 2) is suitable for disposal by shallow land burial (SLB) at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS). The INL Unirradiated LWBR Rods and Pellets waste stream consists of 24 containers with unirradiated fabricated rods and pellets composed of uranium oxide (UO2) and thorium oxide (ThO2) fuel in zirconium cladding. The INL Unirradiated LWBR Rods and Pellets waste stream requires an SA because the 229 Th, 230 Th, 232 U, 233 U, and 234 U activity concentrations exceed the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) Action Levels.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2014

Special Analysis for the Disposal of the Neutron Products Incorporated Sealed Source Waste Stream at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

The purpose of this special analysis (SA) is to determine if the Neutron Products Incorporated (NPI) Sealed Sources waste stream (DRTK000000056, Revision 0) is suitable for disposal by shallow land burial (SLB) at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS). The NPI Sealed Sources waste stream consists of 850 60Co sealed sources (Duratek [DRTK] 2013). The NPI Sealed Sources waste stream requires a special analysis (SA) because the waste stream 60Co activity concentration exceeds the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) Action Levels.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2015

External Peer Review Team Report for Corrective Action Unit 97: Yucca Flat/Climax Mine, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada, Revision 0

The peer review team commends the Navarro-Intera, LLC (N-I), team for its efforts in using limited data to model the fate of radionuclides in groundwater at Yucca Flat. Recognizing the key uncertainties and related recommendations discussed in Section 6.0 of this report, the peer review team has concluded that U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is ready for a transition to model evaluation studies in the corrective action decision document (CADD)/corrective action plan (CAP) stage. The DOE, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) clarified the charge to the peer review team in a letter dated October 9, 2014, from Bill R. Wilborn, NNSA/NFO Underground Test Area (UGTA) Activity Lead, to Sam J. Marutzky, N-I UGTA Project Manager: “The model and supporting information should be sufficiently complete that the key uncertainties can be adequately identified such that they can be addressed by appropriate model evaluation studies. The model evaluation studies may include data collection and model refinements conducted during the CADD/CAP stage. One major input to identifying ‘key uncertainties’ is the detailed peer review provided by independent qualified peers.” The key uncertainties that the peer review team recognized and potential concerns associated with each are outlined in Section 6.0, along with recommendations corresponding to each uncertainty. The uncertainties, concerns, and recommendations are summarized in Table ES-1. The number associated with each concern refers to the section in this report where the concern is discussed in detail.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2012

Underground Test Area Activity Quality Assurance Plan Nevada National Security Site, Nevada. Revision 1

This Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) provides the overall quality assurance (QA) requirements and general quality practices to be applied to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) Underground Test Area (UGTA) activities. The requirements in this QAP are consistent with DOE Order 414.1C, Quality Assurance (DOE, 2005); U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Guidance for Quality Assurance Project Plans for Modeling (EPA, 2002); and EPA Guidance on the Development, Evaluation, and Application of Environmental Models (EPA, 2009). NNSA/NSO, or designee, must review this QAP every two years. Changes that do not affect the overall scope or requirements will not require an immediate QAP revision but will be incorporated into the next revision cycle after identification. Section 1.0 describes UGTA objectives, participant responsibilities, and administrative and management quality requirements (i.e., training, records, procurement). Section 1.0 also details data management and computer software requirements. Section 2.0 establishes the requirements to ensure newly collected data are valid, existing data uses are appropriate, and environmental-modeling methods are reliable. Section 3.0 provides feedback loops through assessments and reports to management. Section 4.0 provides the framework for corrective actions. Section 5.0 provides references for this document.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

Underground Test Area Activity Quality Assurance Plan Nevada National Security Site, Nevada. Revision 2

This Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) provides the overall quality assurance (QA) requirements and general quality practices to be applied to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) Underground Test Area (UGTA) activities. The requirements in this QAP are consistent with DOE Order 414.1D, Change 1, Quality Assurance (DOE, 2013a); U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Guidance for Quality Assurance Project Plans for Modeling (EPA, 2002); and EPA Guidance on the Development, Evaluation, and Application of Environmental Models (EPA, 2009). If a participant’s requirement document differs from this QAP, the stricter requirement will take precedence. NNSA/NFO, or designee, must review this QAP every two years. Changes that do not affect the overall scope or requirements will not require an immediate QAP revision but will be incorporated into the next revision cycle after identification. Section 1.0 describes UGTA objectives, participant responsibilities, and administrative and management quality requirements (i.e., training, records, procurement). Section 1.0 also details data management and computer software requirements. Section 2.0 establishes the requirements to ensure newly collected data are valid, existing data uses are appropriate, and environmental-modeling methods are reliable. Section 3.0 provides feedback loops through assessments and reports to management. Section 4.0 provides the framework for corrective actions. Section 5.0 provides references for this document.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

Underground Test Area Fiscal Year 2014 Annual Quality Assurance Report: Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0

This report is required by the Underground Test Area (UGTA) Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) and identifies the UGTA quality assurance (QA) activities from October 1, 2013, through September 30, 2014 (fiscal year [FY] 2014). All UGTA organizations—U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO); Desert Research Institute (DRI); Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL); Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL); National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec); Navarro-Intera, LLC (N-I); and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)—conducted QA activities in FY 2014. The activities included conducting oversight assessments for QAP compliance, identifying findings and completing corrective actions, evaluating laboratory performance, and publishing documents. UGTA Activity participants conducted 25 assessments on topics including safe operations, QAP compliance, activity planning, and sampling. These assessments are summarized in Section 2.0. Corrective actions tracked in FY 2014 are presented in Appendix A. Laboratory performance was evaluated based on three approaches: (1) established performance evaluation programs (PEPs), (2) interlaboratory comparisons, or (3) data review. The results of the laboratory performance evaluations, and interlaboratory comparison results are summarized in Section 4.0. The UGTA Activity published three public documents and a variety of other publications in FY 2014. The titles, dates, and main authors are identified in Section 5.0. The Contract Managers, Corrective Action Unit (CAU) Leads, Preemptive Review (PER) Committee members, and Topical Committee members are listed by name and organization in Section 6.0. Other activities that affected UGTA quality are discussed in Section 7.0. Section 8.0 provides the FY 2014 UGTA QA program conclusions, and Section 9.0 lists the references not identified in Section 5.0.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗