Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “permit”

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 253 records · Page 14
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

New Beginnings: Optimising Waste and End-state at UK Nuclear Sites to Enable Environmental Permit surrender (the GRR) - 20193

The decommissioning of nuclear sites involves the management of large volumes of radioactive waste, other conventional waste, and the clean-up of land and groundwater contamination. In the UK, the disposal of radioactive waste from nuclear sites is regulated by the Environment Agency (England), Natural Resources Wales (Wales) and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Scotland). All three environment agencies seek to make sure that the generation and disposal of radioactive waste is optimised: ensuring impacts to people are 'as low as reasonably achievable' (ALARA). With a large proportion of UK nuclear sites embarking on decommissioning, the environment agencies have collaboratively developed new guidance: the 'Management of radioactive waste from the decommissioning of nuclear sites: Guidance on the Requirements for Release from radioactive substances regulation' (referred to as the GRR)[1]. The environment agencies worked in liaison with the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR), the UK nuclear safety regulator, and the UK government body responsible, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA). Prior to finalising the guidance, a 12 month trial was completed at three of the NDA's nuclear sites, enabling the environment agencies to test their draft GRR guidance against 'real world scenarios' and the challenge of incorporating its requirements into decommissioning plans. Experience gained during the trial was incorporated into the current version of the GRR, published in July 2018. The GRR represents the 'new beginning' of this paper's title because for the first time, the UK environmental regulators have expressed in detail their requirements for surrender of environmental permits for nuclear sites. The GRR provides a framework for a UK nuclear site to plan, assess and justify its management of radioactive waste and deliver through decommissioning, an optimal, environmentally safe and sustainable end-state. This paper will describe the requirements and technical standards within the GRR, the establishment of defensible clean-up criteria and the production of a Waste Management Plan (WMP), supported by a Site-Wide Environmental Safety Case (SWESC). It will describe the experience gleaned by operators and regulators during the trial and it will highlight current work by regulators to implement the new approach proportionately. Finally, this paper will look forward and outline planned amendments to legislation in the UK affecting nuclear sites that should enable the full benefits of the GRR to be realised in the future. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2024

Nevada National Security Site - Area 5 Waste Received Under Permit SW532

Calendar Year 23 Asbestos Report for Permit SW532 Being resubmitted to address a comment received by NDEP, the weight and volume of two packages on one of the shipments was rounded differently than the quarterly report and we are revising the annual report to match.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

Convection-Permitting Simulations With the E3SM Global Atmosphere Model

This paper describes the first implementation of the Δx = 3.25 km version of the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) global atmosphere model and its behavior in a 40-day prescribed-sea-surface-temperature simulation (January 20 through February 28, 2020). This simulation was performed as part of the DYnamics of the Atmospheric general circulation Modeled On Non-hydrostatic Domains (DYAMOND) Phase 2 model intercomparison. Effective resolution is found to be ~ 6x the horizontal dynamics grid resolution despite using a coarser grid for physical parameterizations. Despite this new model being in an immature and untuned state, moving to 3.25 km grid spacing solves several long-standing problems with the E3SM model. In particular, Amazon precipitation is much more realistic, the frequency of light and heavy precipitation is improved, agreement between the simulated and observed diurnal cycle of tropical precipitation is excellent, and the vertical structure of tropical convection and coastal stratocumulus look good. In addition, the new model is able to capture the frequency and structure of important weather events (e.g., tropical cyclones, extratropical cyclones including atmospheric rivers, and cold air outbreaks). Interestingly, this model does not get rid of the erroneous southern branch of the intertropical convergence zone nor the tendency for strongest convection to occur over the Maritime Continent rather than the West Pacific, both of which are classic climate model biases. Several other problems with the simulation are identified, underscoring the fact that this model is a work in progress.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Mesoscale Convective Systems in DYAMOND Global Convection‐Permitting Simulations

Abstract This study examines the deep convection populations and mesoscale convective systems (MCSs) simulated in the DYAMOND (DYnamics of the atmospheric general circulation modeled on non‐hydrostatic domains) winter project. A storm tracking algorithm is applied to six DYAMOND simulations and a global high‐resolution satellite cloud and precipitation data set for comparison. The simulated frequencies of tropical deep convection and organized convective systems vary widely among models and regions, although robust MCSs are generally underestimated. The diurnal cycles of MCS initiation and mature stages are well simulated, but the amplitudes are exaggerated over land. Most models capture the observed MCS lifetime, cloud shield area, rainfall volume and movement speed. However, cloud‐top height and convective rainfall intensity are consistently overestimated, and stratiform rainfall area and amount are consistently underestimated. Possible causes for the model differences compared to observations and implications for future model developments are discussed.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗