Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “SECRETARY”

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 271 records · Page 15
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2012

The Role of the Environmental Management Site Specific Advisory Board under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, With Emphasis on the Northern New Mexico Citizens' Advisory Board - 12482

The Environmental Management Site Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB) is comprised of eight Citizens' Advisory Boards, chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) by the Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management for the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE). The purpose of the EM SSAB is to provide the DOE with recommendations regarding Environmental Management issues from legacy waste produced at major sites across the DOE Complex. The Northern New Mexico Citizens' Advisory Board (NNMCAB) is the site specific advisory board to the DOE on issues of environmental monitoring, remediation, waste management and long-term stewardship at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). The other boards are located at: Hanford, Idaho, Nevada, Paducah, Portsmouth, Oak Ridge and Savannah River. Using broad citizen outreach and input, the SSAB provides an official mechanism for the citizenry at each of these sites to monitor current activities affecting the region and also to have input into the prioritization of future activities. 'The mission of the EM SSAB is to more directly involve stakeholders in EM Planning and decision-making processes for the nuclear weapons complex cleanup. DOE has various means of involving the public in its planning and decision-making processes; the EM SSAB is only one component of EM's public participation program, and is not intended to be an exclusive means of public participation. It is the policy of DOE and EM to conduct it programs in an open and responsive manner, thereby encouraging and providing the opportunity for public participation in its planning and decision-making processes. EM SSAB members are appointed to a two year term and may serve up to three terms. During this time, members are able to hear many presentation from subject matter experts, attend several site tours at their site and across the DOE complex and are able to express their concerns and give input to the prioritization of clean up at each site. It is an excellent education and it is hoped that these members will go out to their communities, friends and family and discuss these issues in an informed manner. Many times our citizens rely only on newspaper articles or the Internet, which are sometimes replete with fear and misinformation. The more stakeholders are able to be truly informed, the more accurate the discourse will be at each of the DOE sites. (author)

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

DOE Progress on Implementing Recommendations of National Academy of Sciences for SNF Transportation - 17087

In 2006, the National Research Council of the United States' National Academy of Sciences (NAS) issued the report Going the Distance? The Safe Transport of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste in the United States. The report's foremost finding was that there were 'no fundamental technical barriers to the safe transport of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste in the United States.' However, it made a number of recommendations to improve safety, communicate risk, and conduct planning and other activities in anticipation of a large-scale transport campaign for spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste (HLW). The Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (BRC), formed by the Secretary of Energy at the request of the President to conduct a comprehensive review of the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle and recommend a new plan, concluded that with respect to transportation issues, the NAS recommendations that had not yet been implemented should be revisited and addressed as appropriate. This paper discusses the NAS recommendations and the current status regarding their implementation, with a focus on actions being taken by DOE. (authors)

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

Section 180(c) Policy Implementation Exercise: Multiple Views - 17383

The Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Nuclear Energy's Office of Integrated Waste Management (formerly the Nuclear Fuels Storage and Transportation Planning Project) recently completed a two-year Section 180(c) Proposed Policy Implementation Exercise (the Exercise) with volunteers from eight states and one Native American Tribe. Under Section 180(c) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended (NWPA), DOE is responsible for providing technical and financial assistance to states and Tribes for training of local public safety officials through whose jurisdictions the Secretary of Energy plans to transport spent nuclear fuel (SNF) or high-level radioactive waste to a NWPA-authorized facility. In the 2000's, DOE staff worked closely with state and tribal representatives to develop a revised proposed policy to implement Section 180(c), including grants for assessment and planning activities, as well as grants for training public safety officials. This revised proposed policy was published in a Federal Register Notice in 2008 (2008 FRN) (73 Federal Register 64933, Oct. 31, 2008). The purpose of the Exercise was to evaluate the efficacy of DOE's 2008 revised proposed policy for implementing Section 180(c), and identify outstanding issues to be resolved. DOE presented an interim update on the Exercise at the 2016 Waste Management Symposium and the Exercise concluded in June 2016. This paper describes the remaining activities of the Exercise that occurred since the 2016 Waste Management Symposium, and presents the perspectives of one state and one Tribal participant in the Exercise as well as DOE's perspective. The paper concludes with a discussion of the lessons learned from the Exercise, what steps are next, and how the Exercise may inform and improve future consultations between DOE and state, tribal, and local public safety officials. (authors)

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

Integrated Disposal Facility Performance Assessment: Modeling Consistency to Support Regulatory Decision Making at Hanford - 17398

Under DOE Order 435.1, 'Radioactive Waste Management', Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC and INTERA, Inc are currently preparing a performance assessment for the Hanford Integrated Disposal Facility, a near-surface low-activity waste disposal facility located on the Hanford Site in southeast Washington State. The disposal facility is expected to receive vitrified low-activity waste produced at the Hanford Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant, as well as other secondary solid wastes generated during the treatment process. The performance assessment performs the analyses that will be relied upon to receive the Disposal Authorization Statement, establish waste acceptance criteria, modify the RCRA permit for the facility and make a waste-incidental-to-reprocessing determination for the vitrified tank waste. In January 2006 in the case State of Washington v. Bodman (Civil No. 2:03-cv-05018-AAM), DOE, the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) and the State of Washington Attorney General's office reached a settlement agreement in Ecology's claim regarding off-site waste shipments to Hanford and the adequacy of modeling in the environmental impact statement. In response to the agreement, the DOE Office of Environmental Management set a policy to establish a consistent use of commercially available and public domain software for a vadose zone and groundwater model platform to support regulatory decisions at Hanford. In October 2012, the Associate Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management released a memorandum to the manager of the Richland Operation Office directing how future environmental modeling activities to support regulatory decision making on the Hanford Site would be undertaken to be consistent with the 2006 settlement agreement. The preparation of the performance assessment must meet DOE Order 435.1 requirements and the additional direction provided by DOE. This paper will identify the approach taken to comply with the requirements in the 2012 memorandum. The paper will describe how environmental modeling performed for the 2017 Integrated Disposal Facility Performance Assessment was planned in a phased approach and how the current modeling is tied to the analyses that supported the decisions made in the environmental impact statement published in 2012. Additionally, the selection and qualification of the software selected to perform modeling activities for the performance assessment will be described. (authors)

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

The U.S. DOE-EM International Program - 17411

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM) has a mission to complete the safe clean-up of the environmental legacy resulting from six decades of weapons production and energy research. This effort is recognized as one of the largest and most diverse and technically complex environmental clean-up operations in the world. The overall strategy to address this challenge includes several components, one of which involves leveraging the expertise within the International community, when applicable. The opportunities related to international collaborations are an important component of the DOE EM strategy for the clean-up mission, providing excellent forums for EM to stay beneficially engaged with the international community and our global partners. EM has been supporting the clean-up mission of the Department through international collaborations for almost 20 years. The EM International Program is sponsored by the DOE EM Office of the Chief of Staff (EM-2.1), which directly supports the DOE-EM Office of Assistant Secretary (EM-1), in coordination with the entire EM organization. The primary objective of the EM International Program is to provide benefit to the Department in successful completion of the EM clean-up mission, through establishing strategic approaches for specific international collaboration initiatives that are focused on appropriate strategic program goals. The EM International Program strategy to support the EM mission includes many facets, but they can generally be grouped into two primary areas. First, the EM International Program maintains, establishes, and/or participates in international agreements such that appropriate mechanisms are available for conducting international collaborations with foreign government organizations, educational institutions and private industry to leverage resources and link international experience and expertise, in support of the EM mission and compliant with US foreign policy. Second, through coordination with the EM Office of Technology Development (EM-3.2), the EM International Program leverages these agreements to identify mutually beneficial opportunities to evaluate, test, and adapt technologies, capabilities, and expertise for application to EM mission needs. These activities directly support goals within the current DOE Strategic Plan 2014 - 2018, issued in April 2014. Working with the Office of Technology Development, the EM International Program is developing a process for identifying and selecting collaborative international technology projects for Fiscal Year 2017 (FY17) that have high potential impact to the EM mission. The technical scope of these activities is expected to span the entire EM mission, including tank waste and nuclear materials management; groundwater and soil remediation; deactivation and decommissioning; and radioactive waste disposal operations. Depending on budget availability, these collaborative activities are expected to be awarded by mid-FY17. (authors)

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

The U.S. DOE-EM international program - 15026

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM) conducts international collaboration activities in support of U.S. policies and objectives regarding the accelerated risk reduction and remediation of the environmental cleanup legacy resulting from the nations' nuclear weapons program and government sponsored nuclear energy research. The EM International Program, supported out of the EM Office of the Associate Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary pursues collaborations with foreign government organizations, educational institutions and private industry to assist in identifying technologies and promote international collaborations that leverage resources and link international experience and expertise. The primary objective of the International Program is to work closely with the various technical program offices within EM (e.g., tank waste and nuclear materials management, groundwater and soil remediation, deactivation and decommissioning) to identify collaborative opportunities related to innovative technologies, as well as best management practices, that support successful completion of the EM mission. This objective is directly aligned with the current DOE Strategic Plan 2014 - 2018, issued in April 2014. In mid-fiscal year (FY) 2014, the International Program awarded several collaborative projects for work scope spanning waste management, tank waste management, groundwater and soil remediation, deactivation and decommissioning (D and D), disposal operations, and nuclear materials disposition initiatives to nine foreign organizations. These projects include both technical and non-technical activities, with opportunities for continuation into FY 2015 and beyond. (authors)

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

Integration of performance assessments and 3116 basis documents within the Savannah River Site liquid waste facilities - 15375

The end of the Cold War has left a legacy of over 136 million liters (36 million gallons) of radioactive waste in the aging waste tanks at the Department of Energy's Savannah River Site (SRS). A robust program is in place to remove waste from these tanks, treat the waste to separate it into a relatively small volume of high-level waste and a large volume of low-level waste, and to actively dispose of the low-level waste on-site. This process allows the US Department of Energy (DOE) to move forward with closure of the cleaned waste tanks and associated ancillary structures. To support performance-based, risk decision making for closure and disposal activities, three individual performance assessments (PAs) have been developed - salt-stone Disposal Facility, F-Tank Farm and H-Tank Farm. In addition, three Waste Determinations (WDs) have been made by the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), under the authority of Section 3116 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (NDAA Section 3116). To support these waste determination decisions, individual '3116 Basis Documents' were developed that describe the assumptions and conditions under which the criteria outlined in NDAA Section 3116 are met. The development of each of the PAs represented a long and arduous effort that involved the development of both deterministic and probabilistic conceptual models of the facilities, the development of assumptions and associated ranges, uncertainty and sensitivity analyses, model data collection and analyses, writing of the actual performance assessment, internal and external peer reviews, and ultimately approval by DOE. Similarly, the development of the 3116 Basis Documents represents similar time and financial commitments. At the end of these efforts, after years of preparation and millions of dollars in investment, we have thousands of pages of highly technical text, tables of data and hundreds of graphs and charts all contained in a series of thick binders that fit neatly on the shelf of a bookcase. We were done - right? Actually, we were just getting started. Performance Assessments and 3116 Basis Documents are living documents that shape day-to-day and long-term decision making in the operation of a low-level waste disposal facility (e.g., salt-stone Disposal Facility) or in area closure activities (e.g., F-Tank Farm or H-Tank Farm). Although these documents do not contain specifically described requirements per se, they do utilize specific assumptions that, if changed significantly, could result in no longer being able to demonstrate that there is reasonable assurance that the required performance objectives or the criteria from NDAA Section 3116 can be met. Savannah River Remediation LLC (SRR), the contractor responsible for Liquid Waste operations at SRS, has not only developed the PAs and 3116 Basis Documents to support this work and shepherded these documents through the DOE approval process, but has also developed the processes and procedures to ensure the successful implementation and integration of these documents into day-to-day decision making within the associated facilities. This paper describes these processes, including the Un-reviewed Waste Management Question process and the PA Maintenance process, and provides specific examples of their successful implementation. (authors)

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

Developing generic design alternatives for dry storage of used nuclear fuel at an interim storage facility - 15480

The Department of Energy (DOE) is beginning to lay the groundwork for implementing interim storage of used nuclear fuel (UNF) as recommended by the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future in their report to the Secretary of Energy published on January 26, 2012. These plans include activities to 1) establish one or more Interim Storage Facilities (ISF) using consent-based siting, and 2) prepare for large-scale transport of UNF. The Administration released its Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste (Strategy) on January 11, 2013. The Strategy includes a phased, adaptive, and consent-based approach to siting and implementing a comprehensive management and disposal system. The Strategy calls for an operational Pilot ISF by 2021, a Larger ISF by 2025, and a geological repository by 2048. The DOE Nuclear Fuels Storage and Transportation Planning Project (NFST) prepared a report in April 2013 titled, -A Project Concept for Nuclear Fuels Storage and Transportation.- This report developed the functions and requirements necessary for development of a Pilot and Larger ISF to meet the framework outlined in the Strategy as follows: - The UNF inventory is limited for the Pilot and Larger ISF as described in the Strategy. - It is assumed that bare fuel will be received in reusable transportation casks in significant quantities for the larger ISF and will not be solely limited to the receipt of fuel in dry storage canister (DSC) as is the Pilot ISF. This assumption was made because the method for accepting UNF from the utilities once the larger ISF begins operating has not yet been decided. - UNF storage alternative concepts identified in previous reports must be more fully developed to support alternative analysis. The purpose of this topic is to report on the development of the generic design alternatives that have been evaluated for the receipt and storage of the UNF at the initial Pilot ISF and Larger ISF. The generic design alternatives have been developed over the past few months by collaboration between the DOE and industry experts experienced in UNF facilities. The design alternatives will enable volunteer host communities to investigate generic design alternatives that could be fully developed for a site-specific location based on their unique design requirements. The design alternatives provide flexibility for additional capabilities to be developed and executed in a modular fashion such that expansion from a Pilot ISF to a Larger ISF could be achieved in an orderly manner. (authors)

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

Cleaning up Hanford: A Deep Borehole Disposal Concept for the Cs/Sr Capsules - 16249

The Hanford site in Washington State is possibly the most radioactive-contaminated site in the USA presenting a major environmental problem requiring urgent clean-up. Sealed capsules containing halides of strontium (Sr) and cesium (Cs) account for over a third of the total radioactivity. Interim storage for a period of 10-half-lives is an unappealing option since many of the capsules contain Cs-135, which has a half-life of 2.3 million years, and the dose received from the shorter-lived isotopes would remain dangerously high for several generations. Deep geological disposal of the capsules would be a safer solution. We discuss a new and revised conceptual model for disposal of the entire Hanford capsule inventory in a single deep geological borehole with a diameter that could be as little as 31 cm. The concept involves placing thirty capsules inside a steel-disposal container. Holes up to this size are regularly drilled to depths much greater than 5 km by the hydrocarbon industry and are well within current drilling capabilities. Numerical modeling work demonstrates the feasibility of the conceptual model. In particular we examine the thermal envelope generated as a function of time enabling decisions to be made on possible fillings for the borehole annulus. Variations on the disposal concept include disposing different combinations of capsules to control the heat output and thus the temperature rise. The results lend support to a comment attributed to Secretary Moniz that the Hanford capsules could be the world's first HLW to be disposed of in a deep borehole. (authors)

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

Low Activity Waste Pretreatment System (LAWPS) Conceptual Design Approach - 16568

The Low Activity Waste Pretreatment System (LAWPS) will be capable of providing the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Project's (WTP) Low Activity Waste Facility (LAW) the feed material needed to operate both of the LAW melters at full capacity. LAWPS will receive supernatant from the Hanford AP tank farm, filter solids from the waste, remove cesium from the waste, and then stage the feed in storage tanks for supplying the LAW facility. The LAWPS project team is currently executing the preliminary design phase of the project leading to Critical Decision 2 (CD-2). CD-2 is the approval of the performance baseline. The Critical Decision 1 (CD-1) package was approved by the Department of Energy Deputy Under Secretary in May 2015. This paper will focus on creating and gaining approval of the CD-1 package and initiating execution of the preliminary design work. The intent of the paper will be to highlight the activities that facilitated achievement of the goals and present key activities that have been performed to increase the likelihood of preliminary design success. Initiating the immobilization of Hanford tank waste will be a tremendous accomplishment. LAWPS is one of the key projects required to achieve this accomplishment. (authors)

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

Planning for Future Implementation of Section 180(c) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act: DOE's Policy Implementation Exercise - 16612

The Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Fuels Storage and Transportation Planning Project (NFST) is currently conducting a 2-year Section 180(c) Proposed Policy Implementation Exercise (the Exercise) with eight states and one Native American Tribe. Under Section 180(c) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (NWPA), as amended, the DOE is responsible for providing technical and financial assistance to states and Tribes through whose jurisdictions the Secretary of Energy plans to transport spent nuclear fuel (SNF) or high-level radioactive waste to a NWPA-authorized facility for training of local public safety officials. In the 2000's, DOE staff worked closely with state and tribal representatives to develop a revised proposed policy to implement Section 180(c), including grants for assessment and planning activities, as well as training for public safety officials. This revised proposed policy was published in a Federal Register Notice in 2008 (2008 FRN) (73 Federal Register 64933, Oct. 31, 2008). The purpose of the current Exercise is to evaluate the efficacy of DOE's 2008 revised proposed policy for implementing Section 180(c), and identify and resolve outstanding issues. This paper describes how the Exercise was collaboratively designed between DOE and state and tribal stakeholders; how it is being conducted; the interim lessons learned from the first year of the Exercise; and how it may inform and improve future consultations between DOE and state, tribal, and local public safety officials. (authors)

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

Alternative Canister Processing Operations at an Interim Storage Facility - 16617

The US Department of Energy (DOE) is laying the groundwork for implementing interim storage of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) in response to recommendations by the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future in their report to the Secretary of Energy published January 2012. These efforts include planning for a Pilot Interim Storage Facility (ISF) and a Larger ISF. In March 2014, the DOE employed the CB and I team to evaluate design alternatives for cask handling operations and storing SNF at an ISF. The report, 'Generic Design Alternatives for Dry Storage of Used Nuclear Fuel', (Alternatives Report) evaluates different aspects of an ISF, including a study on alternative approaches for processing SNF canisters such as different cask handling methods and configurations which might be used to transfer canisters from shipping casks into storage locations at an ISF. The purpose of this paper is to report on the development of alternative cask handling operations that have been evaluated for the receipt and storage of the SNF at an initial Pilot ISF and a Larger ISF. This design study is relevant for host communities considering near-term development of a Pilot ISF. DOE-sponsored system analyses indicate that a processing rate of up to 3,000 MTU/yr (approximately 230 to 300 canisters) would be needed for a single Larger ISF (less if more than one ISF were developed) to remove SNF from commercial nuclear plants in a reasonable amount of time. The study evaluated different canister processing operation methodologies in order to reduce the complexity, cost, and personnel exposure associated with processing operations at an ISF. The conclusions from this design study could help to inform the selection of future canister processing operations for an ISF. (authors)

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

Dependability Assessment of Software for Safety Instrumentation and Control Systems

In its 2013 recommendations to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the Technical Working Group on Nuclear Power Plant Instrumentation and Control (TWG-NPPIC) identified assessment and evaluation of software dependability as a topic of interest for IAEA Member States. To implement the recommendation of the TWG-NPPIC, the IAEA Scientific Secretary for the TWG initiated a consultancy activity in 2014 to develop a technical report describing a dependability assessment framework suitable for safety instrumentation and control (I and C) systems in nuclear power plants (NPPs). The development of the software dependability assessment report has involved three consultancy meetings at IAEA headquarters in Vienna, Austria. The conduct of these meetings allowed consultation among subject matter experts to generate consensus technical information that serves as the content of the report. The technical contributors consist of international experts from academia, industry, regulatory bodies and research organizations. In September 2014, a technical meeting was held in Daejeon, Republic of Korea, to present interim findings of the consultancy effort and to solicit input from representatives of IAEA Member States. The information and technical comments contributed during the technical meeting were addressed in subsequent development of the report. This paper gives an overview of key technical elements of the IAEA report. The IAEA report presents a framework by which a dependability assessment of safety software can be performed. The specified guiding principles provide the basis for establishing an assessment strategy and implementing the assessment process. The assessment framework provides a systematic, coherent structure within which to organize technical and process evidence to satisfy arguments in support of claims about software dependability properties. During the consultancy activity, the participating subject matter experts focused on high level principles, a structured approach, and identification of suitable methods and techniques. However, it was recognized that what remains is to concretize the framework through specific examples and usage experience. Thus, following publication of the report, it is recommended that case studies be performed to illustrate and more precisely define specific phases and elements of the assessment framework. For example, current national assessment approaches could be mapped into the assessment framework to serve as case studies and help to identify any aspects of the assessment framework that needs further definition or adjustment. Additionally, a challenge problem could be defined to engage stakeholders to apply the assessment framework with a common focus. This could help to better illustrate strategic options and approaches to the assessment phases. It also could serve to suggest other considerations and potential sources of evidence not fully covered in the report. Based on findings from case studies, challenge problems and country experience, it should be possible to develop generalized templates to support application of the assessment framework. These findings can be collected to serve as the basis for a User's Guide on dependability assessment of safety software. (authors)

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 1: WMS 2020 Plenary Session

The plenary panel focused on government and industry world leaders speaking on the pressing issues facing radioactive waste management in 2020 and beyond. Panelists included an OECD/ NEA representative for the international community, a Huntington Ingalls Industries representative for the commercial sector, and the US DOE Senior Advisor to the Under Secretary of Science representing DOE Environmental Management. Panelists with presentations: WM2020 Speech (Michael Lempke); Optimization: A Better Path toward Managing Nuclear Decommissioning and Legacies (William Magwood); Update On the DOE Environmental Management Program (William White)

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

A qualitative assessment of current CCF guidance based on a review of safety system digital implementation changes with evolving technology - 148

This paper is a summary of a study performed in support of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to evaluate current policy on software common-cause failure (CCF). The study reported in this paper is one of several that contributed to the technical basis to inform NRC staff. The study first reviewed policies and assessment guidance as discussed in the Staff Requirements Memorandum to the Secretary of the Commission, Office of the NRC (SECY) 93-087, Policy, Technical, and Licensing Issues Pertaining to Evolutionary and Advanced Light Water Reactor (ALWR) Designs, and Branch Technical Position (BTP) 7-19, Guidance on Evaluation of Defense-in-Depth and Diversity in Digital Computer-Based Instrumentation and Control Systems, as well as Chapter 7, 'Instrumentation and Controls', in NUREG-0800, Standard Review Plan for Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants. The study then examined instrumentation and controls (I and C) technology implementations in nuclear power plants in the light of current CCF guidance. The intent was to assess whether the current position on CCF remains appropriate given the evolutions in digital safety system implementations and, if gaps in the guidance were found, to provide recommendations as to how these gaps could be closed. The methodology adopted was to review the vendors' technology and software implementation processes for digital safety systems as technology evolved. The following three representative safety systems were selected to provide illustrative examples: - Eagle 21 was selected to represent vintage microprocessor-based technology used from the 1980's to mid-1990's, - TELEPERM XS (TXS) was selected to represent second generation microprocessor-based technology used from the mid-1990's to the 2000's, and - The advanced logic system (ALS) was selected to represent the latest trend of using technology based on field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs). Technology implementations were reviewed in light of the basic premise of the NRC in BTP 7-19 (Revision 6), that software-based or software-logic-based digital system development errors are a credible source of CCF and therefore are susceptible to CCF because identical copies of the software-based logic and architecture are present in redundant divisions of safety-related systems. BTP 7-19 categorizes firmware and logic developed from software-based development systems all under software. (authors)

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Guidance on EPAct section 707 Emergency Repair and Restoration Vehicle Exclusions: EPAct State and Alternative Fuel Provider Fleet Program Guidance Document

Section 707 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005) amended section 301(9)(E) of EPAct 1992 by adding to the list of vehicles excluded from the definition of "fleet" a new subcategory of emergency motor vehicles, i.e., "vehicles directly used in the emergency repair of transmission lines and in the restoration of electricity service following power outages, as determined by the Secretary." Like other excluded vehicles, these light-duty vehicles (LDVs) do not count (1) when determining whether a fleet is covered under the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) State and Alternative Fuel Provider Fleet Program (Program), and (2) for fleets that are covered under the Program, when calculating annual alternative fuel vehicle (AFV)-acquisition requirements. If AFV models of excluded vehicles are acquired, however, a fleet may count them toward their acquisition requirement by including them in the calculation of the number of AFVs acquired. Exclusion Process.

ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS,ENERGY PLANNING, POLIC↗