Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “federal energy management program”

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 217 records · Page 12
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2021

Evaluation of Data Catalog Software for Hanford Site Environmental Datasets

Environmental information and data underpin achievement of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM) mission at the Hanford Site. The Hanford Environmental Data Management (HEDM) Program is the DOE Richland Operations Office (RL) approach to develop and implement a formal program for managing environmental data and the associated records, materials, and systems at the Hanford Site. The current project, contract, organization, and contractor-specific efforts at managing environmental data sets are insufficient to provide orderly, long-term, site-wide access. A vital element to be created within the HEDM program plan is a catalog of data sources, called the Hanford Environmental Information and Data Index (HEIDI), that will enable long-term access and retrievability for the multiple independent sources of data that might otherwise be difficult to discover. This report compares leading open source and commercial data catalog platforms using criteria to assess the functionality needed to develop the HEIDI catalog of Hanford data sources that connects and exchanges data with established Hanford Local Area Network (HLAN) enterprise information technology systems. Proprietary platforms evaluated included ArcGIS Enterprise Sites, Junar, OpenDataSoft, and Socrata, and non-proprietary platforms included Energy Data eXchange (EDX), Comprehensive Knowledge Archive Network (CKAN), and DKAN (a Drupal-based open data portal based on CKAN). Capabilities supporting data discoverability, retrieval, and archival, as well as metadata standard requirements and integration into the HLAN were rated as either failing to meet requirements (F), meeting requirements (M), or exceeding requirements by delivering additional desired features (E). The lowest rating for any capability area was assigned as the overall rating for the platform. These findings enable DOE-RL and the contractors implementing the HEDM plan to focus on candidate tools likely to meet the requirements for implementing HEIDI. All of the platforms receiving an overall rating of ‘F’ were unable to be deployed on Hanford infrastructure or within dedicated cloud resources. A propriety software-as-a-service (SaaS) model of delivering a data catalog (e.g., found in software such as Junar and OpenDataSoft) favors consistency across customers at the expense of customization and configurable roles that are needed for Hanford work. Hosting data on a shared commercial platform places limits on dataset size (maximum of 240 Mb for OpenDataSoft), a significant limitation for HEIDI implementation. EDX, a government data catalog based on CKAN, received the ‘F’ rating due to an inability to incorporate authentication from HLAN into the system. Among platforms rated ‘M’ or ‘E’, only the Socrata platform had a SaaS delivery model. In contrast to other SaaS platforms, Socrata provided custom roles and gateways that allow local datasets to be incorporated into an online catalog. Socrata also complies with the Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program, a significant benefit for cloud-based management of Hanford data. The other platforms rated ‘M’ or ‘E’, ArcGIS Enterprise Sites, CKAN, and DKAN, provide fully self-hosted options, allowing for greater control and flexibility with the HEIDI catalog. These widely used tools have supportive communities of practice, extensive customization options, and demonstrated deployments that provide evidence that they can meet requirements, often deliver additional desired features, and work well with federal government systems. Completely customized alternatives built on a collection of applications were not evaluated because achieving similar performance to CKAN or DKAN requires substantial resources, especially in the absence of the active communities that have grown to support these tools. ArcGIS Enterprise Sites, Socrata, CKAN, and DKAN were evaluated as strong candidates for successful implementation with HEIDI.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

INL Environmental Monitoring Plan (DOE/ID-11088 Rev. 5)

This plan provides a high-level summary of environmental monitoring performed by various organizations within and around the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Site as required by U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management, and DOE Order 458.1, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment, Guide DOE/EH-0173T, Environmental Regulatory Guide for Radiological Effluent Monitoring and Environmental Surveillance, and in accordance with 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. The purpose of these orders is to 1) implement sound stewardship practices that protect the air, water, land, and other natural and cultural resources that may be impacted by DOE operations, and 2) to establish standards and requirements for the operations of DOE and DOE contractors with respect to protection of the environment and members of the public against undue risk from radiation. This plan describes the organizations responsible for conducting environmental monitoring across the INL Site, the rationale for monitoring, the types of media being monitored, where the monitoring is conducted, and where monitoring results can be obtained. Detailed monitoring procedures, program plans, or other governing documents used by contractors or agencies to implement requirements are referenced in this plan. This plan covers all planned monitoring and environmental surveillance. Non-routine activities such as special research studies and characterization of individual sites for environmental restoration are outside the scope of this plan.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Open Energy Data Initiative (OEDI) FY22-24 (Final Technical Report)

Final technical report for the Open Energy Data Initiative (OEDI) project covering fiscal years FY22 through FY24. The DOE Open Energy Data Initiative (OEDI) is a partnership between the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), and major cloud providers including Amazon, Microsoft, and Google to provide universal access to big data in the cloud. At the heart of OEDI is a centralized repository of high-value energy research datasets aggregated from the U.S. Department of Energy's Program Offices, National Laboratories and other collaborators. It aggregates smaller, domain-specific repositories, allows direct data submissions, and includes support for big data through its energy data lakes. OEDI's data lakes make high-value data universally accessible and help researchers, collaborators and the general public overcome many of the obstacles to accessing and using big data.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Laboratory Directed Research & Development: FY23 Annual Report

Sandia is a federally funded research and development center (FFRDC) focused on developing and applying advanced science and engineering capabilities to mitigate national security threats. This is accomplished through the exceptional staff leading research at the Labs and partnering with universities and companies. Sandia’s LDRD program aims to maintain the scientific and technical vitality of the Labs and to enhance the Labs’ ability to address future national security needs. The program funds foundational, leading-edge discretionary research projects that cultivate and utilize core science, technology, and engineering (ST&E) capabilities. Per Congressional intent (P.L. 101-510) and Department of Energy (DOE) guidance (DOE Order 413.2C, Chg 1), Sandia’s LDRD program is crucial to maintaining the nation’s scientific and technical vitality

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
DOE OSTI2023

RAPID Manufacturing Institute Final Report

The Rapid Advancement of Process Intensification Deployment (RAPID) Manufacturing Institute, founded in 2017, is a public/private partnership between the U.S. Department of Energy and the American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE). RAPID promotes the development, deployment and commercialization of Process Intensification (PI) and Modular Chemical Process Intensification (MCPI) technologies, enabling U.S. manufacturing to reduce energy consumption, improve process efficiencies and lower investment and operating costs. This mission was carried out through parallel work breakdown structure elements including the establishment of committees to guide the operations and technical direction of RAPID, the establishment of management practices and institute processes, education and workforce development (EWD), and six technical focus areas for the development of technologies to advance PI and MCPI. Throughout the initial six-year cooperative agreement, RAPID worked to meet performance metrics which focused on the operation and sustainment of the institute, education and workforce development and the development of PI and MCPI for the advancement of U.S. manufacturing. All these metrics were successfully met through a total of 43 projects which leveraged $\$$70M Federal with $\$$90M cost share. As a result of these efforts, 84 private and public organizations were brought together by RAPID as members to co-invest in R&D, commercialization and deployment of innovative technologies. In the research portfolio, 82% of the 38 projects achieved > 20% energy efficiency improvement. A RAPID Test Network was developed with 51 testbed facilities to enable access to resources, facilities, tools, and expertise. Eight EWD programs were also developed with over 13,000 impressions. RAPID’s efforts to research, develop, demonstrate, and deploy high-impact PI and modular process technology solutions have enabled reduced energy use, increased sustainability, and improved profitability for U.S. manufacturing.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2023

System Analysis Support of Consent-Based Siting Efforts - 23400

To better enable informed decision-making regarding the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle, the Integrated Waste Management (IWM) program within the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE) has been sponsoring the development and application of system analysis tools capable of analyzing various system options for the management of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste. With these tools, integrated waste management system (IWMS) architecture analyses are being conducted to support the future deployment of a comprehensive nuclear waste management system that considers all major back-end aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle (i.e., transportation, storage, and disposal). System analyses and assessments typically use these modeling and simulation tools to investigate things like the implications of changes in various assumptions and parameters such as acceptance rates, receipt logic, facility capacities and capabilities, use of standardized canisters, and different assumed system operation start dates. Some example system analysis results have been published previously. With the passage of the consolidated appropriations acts for fiscal years 2021 and 2022, Congress provided funding and direction for the DOE to move forward with interim storage to support near-term action in managing the nation’s SNF as an important component of an IWMS. Consent-based siting is a phased, adaptive, and collaborative approach to siting facilities that focuses on the needs and concerns of people and communities. Communities participate in the siting process by working carefully through a series of phases and steps with the DOE (as the implementing organization). Each step and phase helps a community determine whether and how hosting a facility to manage SNF is aligned to the community’s goals. By its nature, a consent-based siting process must be transparent, flexible, adaptive, and responsive to community concerns. Thus, the phases and steps are intended to serve as a guide, not a prescriptive set of instructions. System analysis research analysts interface with DOE’s consent-based siting for a federal interim storage program and can perform preliminary system analyses as requested to support various aspects of the consent-based siting team’s work. This paper provides an overview of IWM program’s system analysis activities that support the ongoing consent-based siting process. The questions that decision-makers, planners, communities, and stakeholders might have during the consent-based siting process are similar to questions that have been explored by system analysts previously. Specifically, this paper discusses work that will inform consent-based siting efforts in the areas of community impacts, cost estimates, various SNF acceptance rates by potential facilities, potential consolidated interim storage facility (CISF) capacities and configurations, and the implications of a CISF on the overall waste management system. It is expected that system analysis will continue to be performed to support the consent-based siting process in the future.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2021

G3P3 Phase 3 Project Execution Plan. Issue 1

The National Solar Thermal Test Facility (NSTTF) at Sandia National Laboratories New Mexico (SNL/NM) developed this Project Execution Plan (PEP) to document its process for executing, monitoring, controlling and closing-out Phase 3 of the Gen 3 Particle Pilot Plant G3P3. This plan serves as a resource for stakeholders who wish to be knowledgeable of project objectives and how they will be accomplished. The plan is intended to be used by the development partners, principal investigator, and the federal project director. Project objectives are derived from the mission needs statement, and an integrated project team assists in development of the PEP. This plan is a living document and will be updated throughout the project to describe current and future processes and procedures. The scope of the PEP covers: Cost, schedule, and scope Project reporting Staffing plan Quality assurance plan Environment, safety, security, and health This document is a tailored approach for the Facilities Management and Operations Center (FMOC) to meet the project management principles of DOE Order 413.3B, Program and Project Management for the Acquisition of Capital Assets , and DOE G 413.3-15, DOE Guide for Project Execution Plans. This document will elaborate on content as knowledge of the project is gained or refined.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Calendar Year 2020 Post-Closure Monitoring Report for Corrective Action Unit 99: Rainier Mesa/Shoshone Mountain, Underground Test Area, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada (Rev. 1)

This report presents the results of monitoring conducted for water quality, water levels, and institutional controls in calendar year (CY) 2020 by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Environmental Management (EM) Nevada Program’s Underground Test Area (UGTA) Activity at Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 99, Rainier Mesa/Shoshone Mountain (RM/SM), at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS), Nevada. This report also presents analytical laboratory results (including results of quality assurance/quality control samples, such as field duplicates [FDs]), and verification of use restrictions (URs), institutional controls, and water usage. Groundwater samples were collected; water levels were measured; and well site surveillance was conducted in support of the Underground Test Area Closure Report (CR) for Corrective Action Unit 99: Rainier Mesa/Shoshone Mountain, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada (DOE/EMNV, 2020). Rainier Mesa (RM) was the site of 61 underground nuclear tests, and Shoshone Mountain (SM) was the site of 6 underground nuclear tests. As a result of these activities, which took place from 1957 to 1992, radionuclides (RNs) were released in the subsurface in the vicinity of the detonations. These 67 underground nuclear tests are associated with 66 specific corrective action site (CAS) numbers, as listed in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) (1996, as amended). Two tests, HURON LANDING and DIAMOND ACE (conducted simultaneously), are included within one CAS. The CR (DOE/EMNV, 2020) establishes the regulatory boundaries and regulatory boundary objectives, monitoring program, UR boundaries and URs, and other institutional controls agreed to by EM Nevada Program and the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) for closure of CAU 99. Regulatory boundaries for the RM/SM CAU were established to protect receptors of groundwater from RN contamination within the three downgradient groundwater basins that receive recharge from RM. The SM regulatory boundary was established to verify that RN contamination does not reach the lower carbonate aquifer below SM. The UR boundaries were established based on contaminant simulation forecasts from the flow and transport simulations with consideration of site-specific topographical controls. The URs associated with the UR boundaries were identified to protect onsite workers and the public from inadvertent exposure to contaminated groundwater as forecasted to occur assuming current conditions. The UR is intended to restrict activities that might expose workers to contaminated groundwater within the UR area. In addition to the URs, other institutional controls are established to monitor and limit access to groundwater. These include federal ownership and management in perpetuity, controlled access of the NNSS and surrounding areas, and reporting water use on the NNSS and surrounding hydrographic basins.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Analysis of Powered Air-Purifying Respirator (PAPR) Cartridge Performance Testing on Hanford Tanks SX-101 and SX-104: Volume 2 Raw Analytical Data

As the Tank Operations Contractor for U.S. Department of Energy operations at the Hanford site in Washington State, Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) is responsible for managing highly radioactive wastes stored in tanks at Hanford. WRPS tests of cartridges used in air-purifying respirators (APR) and powered air-purifying respirators (PAPR) commonly used at Hanford Tank Farms. The tests are conducted to determine the period of time the cartridges would provide adequate performance for APRs and PAPRs used to protect workers when exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPC) from any vapors exiting headspaces in the storage tanks. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Standard 29 Code of the Federal Regulations (CFR) 1910.134(d)(3)(iii)(b)(2) specifies that for protection against gases and vapors, employers shall implement a schedule for cartridges to ensure that change-outs occur before the end of service life. The change schedule can be based on objective information or data that ensures cartridge change-outs occur before the end of their service life. The primary function of the WRPS Cartridge Test Program is to obtain objective data to determine service lives for the APR and PAPR cartridges used at Hanford Tank Farms. WRPS contracted with Pacific Northwest National Laboratory to analyze the test data and offer an independent analysis and any recommendations. This report summarizes data analysis of PAPR cartridge testing on headspace vapors from Hanford SX-101 and SX-104 single-shell tanks. Two different PAPR cartridges—one from MSA Safety Inc. (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) and another from 3M (Maplewood, Minnesota)—were assessed on each tank headspace source on separate days. These data represent the first PAPR cartridge testing under the recent WRPS program, as testing to date had been focused on APR cartridges. Volume 1 of this report documents the testing, data analysis, results, conclusions, and recommendations resulting from the PAPR testing on SX-101 and SX-104 headspace vapors. Volume 2 provides an introduction to the raw data, including analytical laboratory analysis results that supported the analysis and conclusions documented in Volume 1.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Analysis of Air-Purifying Respirator (APR) and Powered Air-Purifying Respirator (PAPR) Cartridge Performance Testing on a Hanford AP Tank Farm Exhauster Slipstream: Volume 2 Raw Analytical Data

As the Tank Operations Contractor for U.S. Department of Energy operations at the Hanford site in Washington State, Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) is responsible for managing highly radioactive wastes stored in tanks at Hanford. WRPS tests air-purifying respirator (APR) and powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR) chemical cartridges commonly used at Hanford Tank Farms to determine the period of time that the cartridges would provide adequate performance for APRs and PAPRs used to protect workers when exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPC) from any vapors exiting headspaces in the storage tanks. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Standard promulgated in Title 29 of the Code of the Federal Regulations (CFR) 1910.134(d)(3)(iii)(b)(2) specifies that for protection against gases and vapors, employers shall implement a schedule for cartridges to ensure that change-outs occur before the end of service life. The change schedule can be based on objective information or data that ensures cartridge change-outs occur before the end of their service life.[2-5] The primary function of the WRPS Cartridge Test Program is to obtain objective data to determine service lives for the APR and PAPR cartridges used at Hanford Tank Farms. WRPS contracted with Pacific Northwest National Laboratory to analyze the test data and offer an independent analysis and any recommendations. Volume 1 of this report summarizes data analysis of APR and PAPR cartridge testing on vapors from the AP tank farm exhauster. Previous testing of APR cartridges was conducted on the AP exhauster in June 2016. However, an AP exhauster upgrade was completed in September 2016. Two different APR cartridges from SCOTT Safety (Monroe, North Carolina) were assessed for the new AP exhauster source, along with two different PAPR cartridges—one from MSA Safety Inc. (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) and another from 3M (Maplewood, Minnesota). Volume 2 provides an introduction to the raw data, including analytical laboratory analysis results that supported the analysis and conclusions documented in Volume 1.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Analysis of Air-Purifying Respirator (APR) Cartridge Performance Testing on Hanford Tanks SX-101 and SX-104: Volume 2 - Raw Analytical Data

As the Tank Operations Contractor for U.S. Department of Energy operations at the Hanford site in Washington State, Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) is responsible for managing highly radioactive wastes stored in tanks at Hanford. To protect workers at Hanford Tank Farms, WRPS tests air-purifying respirator (APR) and powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR) chemical cartridges commonly used at the tank farms. The tests were conducted to determine the period of time the cartridges would provide adequate performance for APRs and PAPRs when workers are exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPC) from any vapors exiting headspaces in the storage tanks. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Standard 29 Code of the Federal Regulations (CFR) 1910.134(d)(3)(iii)(b)(2) specifies that for protection against gases and vapors, employers shall implement a schedule for cartridges to ensure that change-outs occur before the end of service life. The change schedule can be based on objective information or data that ensures cartridge change-outs occur before the end of their service life. The primary function of the WRPS Cartridge Test Program is to obtain objective data to determine service lives for the APR and PAPR cartridges used at Hanford Tank Farms. WRPS contracted with Pacific Northwest National Laboratory to analyze the test data and offer an independent analysis and any recommendations. This report summarizes data analysis of APR cartridge testing on headspace vapors from Hanford SX-101 and SX-104 single-shell tanks. Volume 1 of this report documents the testing, data analysis, results, conclusions, and recommendations resulting from the APR testing on SX-101 and SX-104 headspace vapors. Volume 2 provides an introduction to the raw data, including analytical laboratory analysis results that supported the analysis and conclusions documented in Volume 1.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Analysis of Air-Purifying Respirator (APR) and Powered Air-Purifying Respirator (PAPR) Cartridge Performance Testing on Hanford Tanks BY-108 and BY-110 Volume 2: Raw Analytical Data

As the Tank Operations Contractor for U.S. Department of Energy operations at the Hanford site in Washington State, Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) is responsible for managing highly radioactive wastes stored in tanks at Hanford. WRPS tests air-purifying respirator (APR) and powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR) chemical cartridges commonly used by workers at Hanford Tank Farms to determine the period of time that the cartridges would provide adequate performance for APRs and PAPRs used to protect workers when exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPC) from any vapors exiting headspaces in the storage tanks. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Standard promulgated in Title 29 of the Code of the Federal Regulations (CFR) 1910.134(d)(3)(iii)(b)(2) specifies that for protection against gases and vapors, employers shall implement a schedule for cartridges to ensure that change-outs occur before the end of service life. The change schedule can be based on objective information or data that ensures cartridge change-outs occur before the end of their service life. The primary function of the WRPS Cartridge Test Program is to obtain objective data to determine service lives for the APR and PAPR cartridges used at Hanford Tank Farms. WRPS contracted with Pacific Northwest National Laboratory to analyze the test data and offer an independent analysis and any recommendations. This report summarizes data analysis of APR and PAPR cartridge testing on BY-110 and BY-108 headspace vapors, respectively. Two different APR cartridges from SCOTT Safety (Monroe, North Carolina) were assessed for the BY-110 headspace vapors, and two different PAPR cartridges—one from MSA Safety Inc. (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) and another from 3M (Maplewood, Minnesota)—were assessed for the BY-108 headspace vapors. Volume 1 of this report documents the testing, data analysis, results, conclusions, and recommendations resulting from the cartridge testing of vapors from the BY-110 and BY-108 headspaces. Volume 2 provides an introduction to the raw data, including analytical laboratory analysis results that supported the analysis and conclusions documented in Volume 1.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Analysis of Air-Purifying Respirator (APR) and Powered Air-Purifying Respirator (PAPR) Cartridge Performance Testing on a Hanford AX Tank Farm Exhauster Slipstream Volume 2: Raw Analytical Data

As the Tank Operations Contractor for U.S. Department of Energy operations at the Hanford site in Washington State, Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) is responsible for managing highly radioactive wastes stored in tanks at Hanford. To protect workers at Hanford Tank Farms, WRPS tests air-purifying respirator (APR) and powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR) chemical cartridges commonly used at the tank farms. The tests were conducted to determine the period of time the cartridges would provide adequate performance for APRs and PAPRs when workers are exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPC) from any vapors exiting headspaces in the storage tanks. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Standard 29 Code of the Federal Regulations (CFR) 1910.134(d)(3)(iii)(b)(2) specifies that for protection against gases and vapors, employers shall implement a schedule for cartridges to ensure that change-outs occur before the end of service life. The change schedule can be based on objective information or data that ensures cartridge change-outs occur before the end of their service life. The primary function of the WRPS Cartridge Test Program is to obtain objective data to determine service lives for the APR and PAPR cartridges used at Hanford Tank Farms. WRPS contracted with Pacific Northwest National Laboratory to analyze the test data and offer an independent analysis and any recommendations. This report summarizes data analysis of APR and PAPR cartridge testing on a vapor slipstream from the Hanford AX tank farm exhauster. Volume 1 of this report documents the testing, data analysis, results, conclusions, and recommendations resulting from the cartridge testing on AX exhauster slipstream vapors. Volume 2 provides an introduction to the raw data, including analytical laboratory analysis results that supported the analysis and conclusions documented in Volume 1.

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

4.2.1.31 Integrated Life Cycle Sustainability Analysis

This project provides the Department of Energy's Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO) with strategic decision-support for the evaluation of its R&D portfolio by developing, validating, and applying a coherent methodology and consistent model framework to quantify the net effects of an expanding US bioeconomy. The framework fills an analysis gap previously identified by Peer Review and supports a related milestone in BETO's Multi-Year Program Plan. The framework was scoped with inputs from practitioners in academia, national laboratories, and federal agencies. The model is a top-down, economy-wide framework using a coherent methodology to compute environmental and socio-economic metrics. It is purposefully complementary to existing bottom-up, process-based techno-economic and life cycle assessment BETO tools and uses their data as inputs. Presently, the model covers several commercial and near-commercial biofuel routes and an emerging pathway for plastics upcycling. It covers temporal detail across four time-steps and is currently being expanded with a prospective modeling capability. The model has provided analyses for the Third Triennial Report to Congress (RtC3) on the environmental impacts of the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS2), among others. As part of this project, NREL also provides scientific support to BETO in the International Energy Agency's Technology Collaboration Program on Bioenergy (IEA Bioenergy) Task 45 on Sustainability. Here, NREL evaluates and synthesizes activities that develop, compare, or apply metrics, methods, and tools to quantify sustainability effects of bioeconomy products. NREL also coordinates related national lab involvement and a BETO Working Group on Sustainable Land Management.

bioeconomy↗
NASA NTRS2023

Information and Best Practices Related to NASA Nuclear Flight Safety for Space Flights Involving Space Nuclear Systems

The purpose of this handbook is to facilitate a repeatable and robust process that promotes clear and effective interfaces between activities and stakeholders focused on meeting nuclear flight safety requirements for missions utilizing space nuclear systems (SNS), within the context of NASA’s broader nuclear-related activities and interfaces. NPR 8715.26, Nuclear Flight Safety, requires that the NASA project manager “incorporate nuclear flight safety considerations starting with program or project formulation through the point at which the SNS or other radioactive material no longer has the potential to affect Earth’s biosphere.” NASA’s use of SNS inherently involves partnering with other stakeholders to conduct a range of related activities that interface with nuclear flight safety. From a categorical perspective these include: (i) meeting the authorities and licensing requirements for possession and use of nuclear material, as governed by other Federal authorities; (ii) conducting National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) activities for nuclear-enabled missions; (iii) meeting Federal nuclear launch authorization requirements; (iv) conducting radiological contingency planning activities, including those associated with international commitments; (v) performing risk communication and public outreach activities; and (vi) ensuring decommissioning and disposal strategies reflect National policies and interests. It is the intent of this handbook to promote an effective interface between nuclear flight safety and these interrelated categorical activities. In addition to activities undertaken with partnering agencies, there are individual nuclear-related activities and programs that have a nexus to nuclear flight safety, and these include: (i) applicable NASA Standing Review Boards; (ii) the US Department of Energy nuclear safety activities conducted in partnership with NASA under Memoranda of Understanding; (iii) the Department of Defense’s Range Safety activities; (iv) NASA’s general involvement in interagency and international dialogues regarding nuclear safety; (v) the NASA-administered Interagency Nuclear Safety Review Board; (vi) NASA’s program and project governance activities and nuclear-specific Technical Discipline Team activities under the Office of the Chief Engineer; and others. It is the intent of this handbook to promote effective leveraging of these additional interrelated organizational activities, as appropriate.

Donald Helton↗
DOE OSTI2023

Oak Ridge National Laboratory Annual Sustainability Report 2023

ORNL, managed under contract by UT-Battelle LLC, is DOE’s largest science and energy laboratory and, as such, executes the widest range of mission capabilities. Diverse expertise spans a broad range of scientific and engineering disciplines, enabling research and science achievements to accelerate the delivery of solutions to the marketplace. ORNL supports DOE’s national missions of scientific discovery, clean energy, and security. To execute these activities, ORNL has grown significantly over 80 years of continuous operations, consisting of facilities with commissioning dates ranging from the 1940s to the present—an extraordinary set of distinctive scientific facilities and equipment. The complexities of such a variety of facilities require teamwork among divisions, a wide variety of conservation projects, and creative strategies to achieve the desired energy and water savings. Such a diverse and unique set of major facilities, totaling over 5.5 million square feet, with 6,000 employees, requires an innovative plan to accomplish advancements in operational efficiencies. ORNL is tasked with the management of an extraordinary set of distinctive scientific facilities and equipment for DOE. ORNL is mission-driven, and its mission has grown substantially over the decades. ORNL’s core research capabilities provide broad science and technology support for DOE in the areas of energy, environment, and national security. Currently, ORNL is a world leader in materials, neutron, and nuclear science and engineering, and in high-performance computing and data analytics. ORNL’s vast portfolio of research facilities must be maintained and carefully upgraded to protect the nation’s investment in scientific analysis. The goal of sustainable and resilient operations is to enable more effective execution of ORNL’s science and technology mission. Sustainable operational practices and enhanced resilience strive for excellent results while remaining diligent in energy conservation, environmental stewardship, asset management, and community engagement. The Sustainable ORNL Program (Sustainable ORNL) Continuous improvements in operational and business processes must be integrated into the fabric of the ORNL culture to maximize the return from the investment made in modernizing facilities and equipment. The Sustainable ORNL program promotes the legacy of system-wide best practices, management commitment, and employee engagement that will lead ORNL into a future of efficient, resilient, and sustainable operations. ORNL leadership and Sustainable ORNL champions receive regular status reports on the progress of each project and focus area (i.e., roadmap) and periodic summary reports. More information can be found at the program’s website. The Sustainable ORNL roadmap structure endorses 15 vital roadmaps. The figure below summarizes the current project assignments and demonstrates that each project contributes to the wellbeing of the whole. Continuous employee engagement and regular status reports confirm the ideals of the program. The roadmap structure is not static; as the science mission advances and the needs of the organization evolve, the Sustainable ORNL roadmap structure elements are modified to align with developing priorities. In 2022, Sustainable ORNL made roadmap changes to better align ORNL to support new federal requirements that have been issued.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Position Papers for the ASCR Workshop on Cybersecurity and Privacy for Scientific Computing Ecosystems

At the request of the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR), this program committee has been tasked with organizing a workshop to identify basic research needs in cybersecurity and privacy to better support DOE's science and energy mission. As part of the process, the program committee is soliciting community input in the form of position papers to help identify significant use cases, facility issues, and other barriers to enabling verifiably trustworthy computational science while preserving data confidentiality as appropriate for scientific workflows of interest to DOE. The program committee will review these position papers and based on the fit of their area of expertise and interest, selected contributors will have the opportunity to participate in the workshop currently planned as a virtual event November 3-5th, 2021. The thrust areas that will be explored by this workshop are the following: (1) Algorithms for secure, scalable, privacy-enhancing technologies and frameworks, including: Federated AI/ML, Differential privacy, Randomized algorithms, Adversarial modeling & simulation, Graph algorithms, and Formal methods; (2) Platforms to support the entire scientific-computing ecosystem, including edge computing for large-scale experiments, focusing on heterogeneous systems and distributed systems, including: Heterogeneous computing systems, Distributed computing systems, and Secure data architectures; and (3) Data workflows to allow agile use of data while preserving integrity and privacy, making the important properties verifiable either at runtime or post-computation, including: Integrity and provenance and Data management infrastructure. Topics that are out-of-scope for the workshop include discussing specific proposed solutions or areas that are clearly out of DOE's fundamental and applied-sciences mission scope, e.g., cryptography, enterprise security, and general-operations technology.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2023

An Architectural Survey of the Pluto Test Bunker Facility, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), in conjunction with the National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO), proposes to reactivate Building 26-2205 as part of a project to detect foundry-type operations with remote sensing. The project is known as the Signals Exploration Testbed, or SET for short. Building 26-2205 (State Historic Preservation Office [SHPO] Resource No. B11558) is the former Compressor Building for the Pluto Program in Area 26 of the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). Proposed actions at Building 26-2205 include removal of exterior building and site features, such as fencing, concrete pads, a large steel tank, and visible utilities, as well as interior changes to the building’s floor plan. These activities constitute an undertaking subject to review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) (54 United States Code [USC] § 306101) and its implementing regulations, 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 800.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗