Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “doe”

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 235 records · Page 13
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2012

Lessons Learned From The 200 West Pump And Treatment Facility Construction Project At The US DOE Hanford Site - A Leadership For Energy And Environmental Design (LEED) Gold-Certified Facility

CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation Company (CHPRC) designed, constructed, commissioned, and began operation of the largest groundwater pump and treatment facility in the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) nationwide complex. This one-of-a-kind groundwater pump and treatment facility, located at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation Site (Hanford Site) in Washington State, was built in an accelerated manner with American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds and has attained Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) GOLD certification, which makes it the first non-administrative building in the DOE Office of Environmental Management complex to earn such an award. There were many contractual, technical, configuration management, quality, safety, and LEED challenges associated with the design, procurement, construction, and commissioning of this $95 million, 52,000 ft groundwater pump and treatment facility. This paper will present the Project and LEED accomplishments, as well as Lessons Learned by CHPRC when additional ARRA funds were used to accelerate design, procurement, construction, and commissioning of the 200 West Groundwater Pump and Treatment (2W P&T) Facility to meet DOE's mission of treating contaminated groundwater at the Hanford Site with a new facility by June 28, 2012.

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

The DOE s In-Plant Training (INPLT) Model to Promote Energy Efficiency in the Industrial Sector

In-Plant Training (INPLT) is a new model for developing energy efficiency expertise within the US manufacturing companies participating in the U.S. Department of Energy s (DOE s) Better Buildings, Better Plants Program-a nationwide initiative to drive a 25% reduction in industrial energy intensity in 10 years. INPLTs are designed to fill a market niche by providing hands on training in a real world manufacturing plant environment. Through INPLTs, participants from multiple manufacturing plants, supply chains, utilities, and other external stakeholders learn how to conduct energy assessments, use energy analysis tools to analyze energy saving opportunities, develop energy management systems, and implement energy savings projects. Typical INPLT events are led by DOE-certified Energy Experts and range from 2-4 days. Topics discussed include: identification of cross-cutting or system specific opportunities; introduction to ISO 50001 Energy Management Systems; and energy project implementation and replication. This model is flexible, and can be tailored to suit the needs of specific industries. The INPLTs are a significant departure from the traditional single plant energy assessment model previously employed by DOE. INPLTs shift the focus from the concept of a single-plant s energy profile to a broader focus on training and capacity building among multiple industrial participants. The objective is to enable trainees to identify, quantify, implement and replicate future energy saving projects without continued external assistance. This paper discusses the INPLT model and highlights some of the initial outcomes from the successfully delivered INPLTs and the overall impact in terms of numbers of plants/participants trained, impacted energy footprints, and potential replication of identified opportunities.

In-Plant Training (INPLT) Model↗
DOE OSTI2013

The Evolution of LTS at DOE's Hanford Site

Hanford's Long-Term Stewardship (LTS) Program has evolved from a small, informal process, with minimal support, to a robust program that provides comprehensive transitions from cleanup contractors to long-term stewardship for post-cleanup requirements specified in the associated cleanup decision documents. The LTS Program has the responsibility for almost 100,000 acres of land, along with over 200 waste sites and will soon have six cocooned reactors. Close to 2,600 documents have been identified and tagged for storage in the LTS document library. The program has successfully completed six consecutive transitions over the last two years in support of the U.S. DOE Richland Operations Office's (DOE-RL) near-term cleanup objectives of significantly reducing the footprint of active cleanup operations for the River Corridor. The program has evolved from one that was initially responsible for defining and measuring Institutional Controls for the Hanford Site, to a comprehensive, post remediation surveillance and maintenance program that begins early in the transition process. In 2013, the first reactor area -- the cocooned 105-F Reactor and its surrounding 1,100 acres, called the F Area was transitioned. In another first, the program is expected to transition the five remaining cocooned reactors into the program through using a Transition and Turnover Package (TTP). As Hanford's LTS Program moves into the next few years, it will continue to build on a collaborative approach. The program has built strong relationships between contractors, regulators, tribes and stakeholders and with the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Legacy Management (LM). The LTS Program has been working with LM since its inception. The transition process utilized LM's Site Transition Framework as one of the initial requirement documents and the Hanford Program continues to collaborate with LM today. One example of this collaboration is the development of the LTS Program's records management system in which, LM has been instrumental. The development of a rigorous data collection and records management systems has been influenced and built off of LMs success, which also ensures compatibility between what Hanford's LTS Program develops and LM. In another example, we are exploring a pilot project to ship records from the Hanford Site directly to LM for long-term storage. This pilot would gain program efficiencies so that records would be handled only once. Rather than storage on-site, then shipment to an interim Federal Records Center in Seattle, records would be shipped directly to LM. The Hanford LTS Program is working to best align programmatic processes, find efficiencies, and to benchmark site transition requirements. Involving the Hanford LTS Program early in the transition process with an integrated contractor and DOE team is helping to ensure that there is time to work through details on the completed remediation of transitioning areas. It also will allow for record documentation and storage for the future, and is an opportunity for the program to mature through the experiences that will be gained by implementing LTS Program activities over time.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2014

DOE Zero Energy Ready Home Case Study: Palo Duro Homes — Palo Duro Homes, Albuquerque, NM

This builder was honored for Most DOE Zero Energy Ready Homes Built in the 2014 Housing Innovation Awards. By July 2014, Palo Duro had completed 152 homes since the program began in 2013 (under the original program title DOE Challenge Home), all of them certified to the stringent efficiency requirements of DOE’s Zero Energy Ready Home program.

2014 housing innovation awards↗
DOE OSTI2013

Building America Top Innovations 2012: DOE Challenge Home (Formerly Builders Challenge)

This Building America Top Innovations profile describes DOE’s Builders Challenge. Hundreds of leading-edge builders across the country signed on to the Challenge and more than 14,000 homes earned the label, saving homeowners over $10 million a year in utility bills. DOE’s new program, the DOE Challenge Home, increases the rigor of the guidelines including requiring homes to be Zero Net-Energy Ready.

Building America↗
DOE OSTI2016

Implementation of Enhanced Attenuation at the DOE Mound Site OU-1 Landfill: Accelerating Progress and Reducing Costs

At the US Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Legacy Management, Mound, Ohio, Site, chlorinated organic contaminants (cVOCs) originating from the former solid-waste landfill have impacted groundwater in Operable Unit 1 (OU-1). The baseline groundwater remedy was groundwater pump and treat (P&T). Since the source materials have been removed from the landfill, the Mound core team, which consists of DOE, US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA), Ohio EPA, and other stakeholders, is assessing the feasibility of switching from the active P&T remedy to a passive attenuation-based remedy. Toward this end, an enhanced attenuation (EA) strategy based on the creation of structured geochemical zones was developed. This EA strategy addresses the residual areas of elevated cVOCs in soil and groundwater while minimizing the rebound of groundwater concentrations above regulatory targets (e.g., maximum contaminant levels [MCLs]) and avoiding plume expansion while the P&T system is turned off. The EA strategy has improved confidence and reduced risk on the OU-1 groundwater transition path to monitored natural attenuation (MNA). To better evaluate the EA strategy, DOE is conducting a field demonstration to evaluate the use of edible oils to enhance the natural attenuation processes. The field demonstration is designed to determine whether structured geochemical zones can be established that expedite the attenuation of cVOCs in the OU-1 groundwater. The EA approach at OU-1 was designed based on “structured geochemical zones” and relies on groundwater flow through a succession of anaerobic and aerobic zones. The anaerobic zones stimulate relatively rapid degradation of the original solvent source compounds (e.g., cVOCs such as tetrachloroethene [PCE] and trichloroethene [TCE]). The surrounding aerobic areas encourage relatively rapid degradation of daughter products (such as dichloroethene [DCE] and vinyl chloride [VC]) as well as enhanced cometabolism of TCE resulting from the utilization of methane and other reduced hydrocarbons that are formed and released from the anaerobic zones.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2017

Research and Technology Development Activities to Address the DOE-EM Environmental Mercury Challenge

Human activities have altered trace metal distributions globally. This is especially true for the trace metal mercury (Hg), a pervasive global pollutant that can be methylated to form highly toxic methylmercury (MeHg), which bioaccumulates in aquatic food webs, endangering humans and other biota. Currently there are more than 3,000 mercury-contaminated sites identified worldwide and the United Nations Environment Programme has recently highlighted the risk of this contamination to human health [1, 2]. The Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) represents an example of one of these mercury-contaminated sites. Unlike other contaminants metals, radionuclides, and organic solvents that impact the Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM) cleanup program at the ORR and other DOE sites, mercury has several unique characteristics that make environmental remediation of the Y-12 National Security Complex one of the most formidable challenges ever encountered. These distinctive physicochemical properties for mercury include the following: it is a liquid at ambient temperature and pressure; it is the only metal that biomagnifies; and it is the only contaminant transported as a cation, as a dissolved or gaseous elemental metal (similar to an organic solvent), or as both a cation and a dissolved or gaseous elemental metal under environmental conditions. Because of these complexities, implementing cost effective and sustainable solutions that reduce mercury flux from various primary and secondary contamination sources will require linking basic science understanding and applied research advancements into Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management s (OREM) cleanup process. Currently, DOE is investing in mercury-related research through a variety of programs, including the Office of Science sponsored Critical Interfaces Science Focus Area, EM headquarters sponsored Applied Field Research Initiative, OREM-sponsored Lower East Fork Poplar Creek (LEFPC) Mercury Technology Development Program, Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR), and EM s Minority Serving Institutions Partnership Program. Collectively, these multi-institutional and multidisciplinary programs are generating new tools, knowledge, and remediation approaches that will enable efficient cleanup of mercury contaminated systems locally and globally. In this talk we will highlight the progress made to date in addressing key knowledge gaps required to solve this watershed-scale conundrum.

Pierce, Eric M↗
DOE OSTI2017

Constant Rate Production: DOE Approach to Meeting NASA Needs for RPS for Nuclear-Enabled Launches.

The use of radioisotope power systems (RPS) for nuclear-enabled NASA missions is a long-standing arrangement between DOE and NASA. The requirements for the power system come from NASA, while DOE performs the procurement, fueling, testing and delivery. Recent examples include Mars Science Laboratory and New Horizons. A challenge has been interplay between the schedule for RPS availability from DOE versus the schedule NASA has for competitively selected missions. By mutual agreement, the actual operations to procure an RPS and prepare it for fueling, has always waited until the final selection of a mission. This timeline for a New Frontiers class mission leaves approximately 5-6 years from the time of final mission selection to the actual launch date. The number of RPS used for a Frontier class mission can be 1 to 3 units, i.e., the recent New Frontiers-2025 announcement of opportunity published in December 2016. If 1 or 2 units are needed for a specific mission, the timeline from the decision point to the launch date is a challenge, but doable. The activities taking place in this timeframe would include manufacturing the power system, producing the fuel, and performing the assembly/testing and delivery operations. If the mission selected requires 3 RPS the logistics of accomplishing all activities during the 5-6 years is problematic. The challenge involves appropriate resourcing for plutonium production, heat source production and assembly/testing operations. Typically, the time between RPS-enabled missions involve staffing attrition and reduction at the heat source production and the assembly/testing facilities that can be down to 60-75 percent of peak staffing levels to reduce costs. The duration for increasing staffing in these areas, which includes hiring, nuclear workforce training and obtaining the appropriate security clearance is 2 years. Taking account for this 2 years and the 6 months prior to launch arrival of the RPS at Kennedy Space Center erodes too much of the 5-6 years to comfortably support the use of 3 RPS on a mission and doesn't leave much schedule margin for a 2 RPS unit mission. To provide better support for NASA nuclear-enabled missions a different approach was devised, constant rate production. This involves a higher level of base capability at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Idaho National Laboratory (INL) and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) to provide a stabilized work force. This will enable 10-15 heat sources to be produced annually at LANL, and subsequently shipped to the INL to be placed into a stable intermediate form that enables storage for up to several years that leads to quick production of general purpose heat source modules when a mission is selected. The up-front production of Pu-238 at ORNL is maintained so that there is material constantly in the pipeline. Production of key specialized components at ORNL is also maintained using this model. This allows for a reduction of risk to the nuclear-enabled missions, yet always having quantities of hardware available “on the shelf” to support production of RPS for NASA.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2019

Getting Data Out of the Ground: Modern Data Challenges Facing EGS Collab, the DOE Geothermal Data Repository, and the Geothermal Industry

The amount of data being generated by the geothermal industry is increasing exponentially. Advanced tools, higher resolution sensors, and digitally integrated equipment are providing valuable insight into geothermal exploration and operational efficiencies, but the volumes of data they generate and the unique properties of Enhanced Geothermal System (EGS) projects are creating challenges of their own. This paper explores those challenges and the steps the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is taking to address them through comprehensive data management strategies, improvements to DOE's Geothermal Data Repository (GDR), and the development of a secure data collaboration tool for DOE's Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE) and EGS Collab projects.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2013

US DOE Perspectives on Advisory Board Effectiveness - 13539

Federal missions on the Oak Ridge Reservation began with the Manhattan Project, and continues today with major facilities supporting the Nation's Science and National Security missions. While most of the land area on the Oak Ridge Reservation is free of environmental impacts from these activities, significant legacy contamination is associated with specific facilities and past waste management areas. In 1989, the Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) was placed on National Priorities List, and DOE established its Office of Environmental Management that same year. Three years later, in 1992, the Federal Facility Agreement for the reservation was signed. Three years afterward, the Oak Ridge Site Specific Advisory Board was established to augment ongoing public involvement activities related to Oak Ridge Reservation cleanup activities. One of the early and most impactful decisions the board made was to organize the End Use Working Group. This broad-based group of board members, DOE representatives, and members of the public was formed in 1997 to study future uses for contaminated areas of the reservation. The group was instrumental in building consensus in the Oak Ridge community regarding the long-term end state of reservation lands. The group's recommendations were a fundamental input into Record's of Decision subsequently developed to establish cleanup requirements across the ORR, and they continue to influence decisions being made today. In developing its recommendations on end states, the End Use Working Group came to the realization that long-term stewardship of contaminated areas of the reservation would be necessary, in some cases in perpetuity. It was from this concept that the Oak Ridge SSAB's 15-year involvement in stewardship would begin. A stewardship committee formed by the End Use Working Group wrote Volume 1 of the Stakeholder Report on Stewardship. This document-and its companion Volume 2, which was written a year later-form a crucial foundation for stewardship planning in Oak Ridge and have been referenced around the DOE complex as other sites consider stewardship planning. From these two broad-based initiatives, the board's focus has evolved to increasingly hone in on more specific, project-based recommendations and initiatives. The Oak Ridge Reservation Site Specific Advisory Board has been a highly effective forum for soliciting community input on Oak Ridge Reservation cleanup. Experience in Oak Ridge indicates that the utility of Board recommendations is far higher when the Board is asked to focus on broad programmatic issues, and less useful when the Board attempts to provide advice and recommendations on matters related to technical or project management issues. In Oak Ridge the Board has helped shape the program on many levels including definition of end-state cleanup objectives, budget development, program sequencing, waste management, and decisions concerning preservation of history related to missions implemented on the Oak Ridge Reservation. (authors)

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

DOE's Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board: The Roles, Work, and Assessment of the Constituent Local Boards - 13587

The charter for the Department of Energy's Environmental Management (EM) Site-Specific Advisory Board (SSAB) was approved under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) in 1994. With a unique mandate to provide public input on issues associated with the cleanup of nuclear legacy sites in the U.S., the EM SSAB comprises eight local boards, which are based at major EM sites. While each board is unique to the community in which it is located and reflects the diversity of the local population, the boards are governed by FACA, related regulations, and DOE policies that are intended to standardize agency advisory board operations. The EM SSAB local boards are made up of a diverse group of citizens who want to understand the mission and goals of the EM program and to help EM achieve those goals for the benefit of their communities. Some are quite passionate about their mission; others need to be coaxed into active participation. Maintaining productive relationships and a supportive environment for effective board operations is the challenge of board management for DOE EM and the board members themselves. DOE draws on research findings and best practices literature from academics and practitioners in the field of public involvement in its board management practices. The EM SSAB is also evaluated annually under the law to ensure that the investment of taxpayer dollars in the board is warranted in light of the contributions of the board. Further evaluation takes place at the agency and site levels in order to identify what aspects of board functioning the agency and board members find important to its success and to address areas where improvement is needed. Board contributions, compliance factors, and measurable outcomes related to board products and process areas are key to agency commitment to ongoing support of the boards and to participant satisfaction and thus continued member involvement. In addition to evaluation of these factors in improving board effectiveness, the agency draws on the experience of members to create best practices for the EM SSAB, as a unique form of public involvement. Four areas that have been identified by local board Chairpersons as important to their local board operations are - Enhancing communication between technical and non-technical board members; - Building on common ground toward recommendations; - Public involvement in EM SSAB local board activities; - The EM SSAB annual work plan process. The first three areas are addressed below by current or former chairpersons of the EM SSAB: Ralph Phelps, former Chairperson of the Northern New Mexico Citizens' Advisory Board; Susan Leckband, former Chairperson and current Vice Chairperson of the Hanford Advisory Board; and Val Francis, Vice Chairperson of the Portsmouth (PORTS) SSAB. In addition, Eric Roberts, facilitator of the PORTS SSAB, has contributed to the section on public involvement. In a separate paper for this session, Ralph Young, Chairperson of the Paducah Citizens' Advisory Board addresses the EM SSAB annual work plan process. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2017

Research and Technology Development Activities to Address the DOE-EM Environmental Mercury Challenge - 17497

Human activities have altered trace metal distributions globally. This is especially true for the trace metal mercury (Hg), a pervasive global pollutant that can be methylated to form highly toxic methylmercury (MeHg), which bio-accumulates in aquatic food webs, endangering humans and other biota. Currently there are more than 3,000 mercury-contaminated sites identified worldwide and the United Nations Environment Programme has recently highlighted the risk of this contamination to human health. The Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) represents an example of one of these mercury-contaminated sites. Unlike other contaminants-metals, radionuclides, and organic solvents-that impact the Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM) cleanup program at the ORR and other DOE sites, mercury has several unique characteristics that make environmental remediation of the Y-12 National Security Complex one of the most formidable challenges ever encountered. These distinctive physicochemical properties for mercury include the following: it is a liquid at ambient temperature and pressure; it is the only metal that bio-magnifies; and it is the only contaminant transported as a cation, as a dissolved or gaseous elemental metal (similar to an organic solvent), or as both a cation and a dissolved or gaseous elemental metal under environmental conditions. Because of these complexities, implementing cost effective and sustainable solutions that reduce mercury flux from various primary and secondary contamination sources will require linking basic science understanding and applied research advancements into Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management's (OREM) cleanup process. Currently, DOE is investing in mercury-related research through a variety of programs, including the Office of Science-sponsored Critical Interfaces Science Focus Area, EM headquarters-sponsored Applied Field Research Initiative, OREM-sponsored Lower East Fork Poplar Creek (LEFPC) Mercury Technology Development Program, Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR), and EM's Minority Serving Institutions Partnership Program. Collectively, these multi-institutional and multidisciplinary programs are generating new tools, knowledge, and remediation approaches that will enable efficient cleanup of mercury contaminated systems locally and globally. In this talk we will highlight the progress made to date in addressing key knowledge gaps required to solve this watershed-scale conundrum. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2017

DOE Training Courses for Packaging, Transportation, and Storage of Radioactive Material - 17607

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Packaging Certification Program (PCP), Office of Packaging and Transportation has sponsored a suite of training courses that have been conducted since the early 1990's. More recently, PCP has developed an online tutorial - RAM Packaging Safety Tutorial, as well as several courses developed and taught by several U.S national laboratories. The courses developed and taught by the national laboratories are referred to as the DOE Packaging University. Since 2013 as part of the Packaging University, the DOE PCP has worked with the University of Nevada, Reno (UNR) Mechanical Engineering Department to develop an accredited graduate-level certificate in Nuclear Packaging. This paper provides an overview of the currently offered PCP courses, as well as the UNR graduate certificate in Nuclear Packaging. (authors)

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2016

DOE Climate Change Vulnerability and Adaptation Planning: Three Relevant Case Studies - 16056

Executive Order 13653, Preparing the United States for the Impacts of Climate Change, was issued in 2013. The President emphasized the importance for federal agencies to take action to enhance climate preparedness and resilience. The U.S. Department of Energy released the DOE Climate Change Adaptation Plan in 2014 to build resilience and mitigation across the Department, and to assure inclusion of climate change adaptation as part of its planning and operations. DOE's Office of Environmental Management has an important mission to manage safe cleanup of environmental legacy contamination brought about from five decades of nuclear weapons development and government sponsored nuclear energy research. Specifically, Environmental Management is responsible for remediation of soil and groundwater, deactivation and decommissioning of facilities, and disposal of hazardous and radioactive waste. Three case studies are discussed in this paper that demonstrate the cost benefit and importance for Environmental Management to assess climate change vulnerability and implement planning procedures: 1. Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico has experienced $0.5 billion in unanticipated costs as a result of climate-related events including: extreme drought, wildfires, deluge rains, and historic flooding over the past 15 years. 2. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency American Cyanamid Superfund Site, situated on the New Jersey coast was hit by Hurricane Irene in 2011. Three major contaminated, solvent impoundment berms were breached within the 100-year flood plain, causing major damage to the facility. 3. For radioactive waste disposal facilities in low-lying areas in proximity to groundwater, climate change vulnerability and assessment is prudent for operational management. One such Superfund hazardous and radioactive waste disposal facility, the Environmental Management Waste Management Facility located at the DOE Oak Ridge Reservation in Tennessee, has documented surface and ground water management challenges since construction began in 2001, driven by changing regional weather patterns. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2016

Technology Maturation in Support of DOE 413.3B Project Execution - 16436

The DOE Order 413.3B 'Program and Project Management for the Acquisition of Capital Assets' provides program and project management direction for the acquisition of capital assets with the goal of delivering projects within the original performance baseline (PB), cost and schedule, and fully capable of meeting mission performance, safeguards and security, and environmental, safety, and health requirements. Execution of complex DOE 413.3B projects depends, in part, upon the successful integration of a technology maturation program. The Low Activity Waste Pre-Treatment System (LAWPS) is executing a detailed technology maturation program under the Technology Readiness Level/Technology Maturation Plan (TRL/TMP) guidance of DOE Order 413.3B. The interaction of the technology maturation process and the project execution including technical, programmatic, and contractual execution, has been a critical component for project success. (authors)

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

Panel Session 13: TRU Waste Generator Sites - Implementation of the New US DOE WIPP WAC

This panel focused on the next phase of the US National Transuranic (TRU) Program (NTP) to support shipments to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP: located in Carlsbad, New Mexico, USA). Topics include program changes to increase waste stream approval efficiency, Documented Safety Analysis (DSA)/Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC), TRUPACT-III and Remote Handled (RH) shipments, lessons learned from NTP waste certification and transportation, and NTP transportation stakeholder engagement and support programs. Presentations proposed include: 1 - National TRU Program Update (Kenneth Princen, US DOE (USA)); 2 - WIPP WAC (Rev 9) Implementation (Mark Pearcy, Nuclear Waste Partnership, LLC (USA)); 3 - Remote-Handled (RH) TRU Waste Update (J.R. Stroble, US DOE (USA)); 4 - National TRU Program Transportation Stakeholder Engagement and Support (James Mason, US DOE (USA))

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

Panel Session 83: Development of the DOE Mercury Management Strategy

This panel discussion addressed the current efforts to develop an integrated strategy for managing the mercury (Hg) challenges across the DOE complex, including challenges in remediation of Hg contamination and related ongoing or planned technology development efforts across the EM complex. Panel members discussed opportunities for collaboration in defining and implementing a mercury management strategy for the various sites, national laboratories, and contractors and for all to provide technical information for DOE to develop an integrated, cost effective Hg management strategy. Emphasis of the panel was placed on challenges at the Oak Ridge Reservation and the Savannah River Site. Opening remarks were made by Ming Zhu. Ming stated that the Academy of Sciences recently released a report on the challenges of addressing Hg in the environment; the report leveraged recent remedial efforts. Presentations proposed include: 1 - Approach to Addressing Mercury at Y-12 (Brian Henry, US DOE OREM (USA)); 2 - Mercury Management Strategy (Renee Echols, FireWater Associates, LLC (USA)); 3 - Integration of Science to Address Mercury Clean-up Challenge (Eric Pierce, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (USA)); 4 - Mercury Related Research and Development by CRESP (Kevin Brown, Vanderbilt University - CRESP (USA)); 5 - Lessons Learned from D and D of West COLEX (Kent Fortenberry, UCOR (USA)); 6 - Mercury in the SRS Liquid Waste System (Richard Edwards, Savannah River Remediation (USA)); 7 - TDD Program on Mercury at Savannah River (Bill Wilmarth, Savannah River National Laboratory (USA))

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

Panel Session 105: US DOE LLW On-Site Disposal: LLW Disposal Facility Federal Review Group Review Process

This panel focuses on risk-informed provision for waste management of US DOE radioactive wastes. Detailed information on the high-level radioactive waste interpretation Federal Register Notice will be discussed to better educate the audience in understanding that interpretation. The Co-Chairs and panelists each introduced themselves. Presentations proposed include: 1 - Overview of Public Comments on the Proposed High-Level Radioactive Waste Interpretation (Theresa Kliczewski, US DOE EM (USA)); 2 - ECA Presentation on Implementation Approaches and Expectations for Radwaste Management; DOE Order 435.1 (Kara Colton, Energy Communities Alliance (USA)); 3 - 2019 Grassroots Efforts to Clarify HLW Definition (Rick McLeod, Savannah River Site Community Reuse Organization - SRSCRO (USA))

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗