Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “County”

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 289 records · Page 16

Assessing the Potential for Inadvertent Human Intrusion at the Area 3 and Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Sites on the Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

This paper recommends an approach to inadvertent human intrusion (IHI) at the Area 3 and Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Sites (RWMSs) on the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). IHI analysis uses the consequences of an individual inadvertently contacting buried waste to set waste concentration limits for near-surface disposal of low-level radioactive waste (LLW). Regulatory agencies are increasingly applying risk-informed decision-making to LLW waste management (NRC 2006). Risk-informed decision-making combines scientific risk assessment with stakeholder values and perceptions to determine a level of acceptable risk. Risk considers not only the consequences of an event, but also its probability of occurring.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

UNREVIEWED DISPOSAL QUESTION EVALUATION: Disposal of the TRU Waste Processing Center Mixed Low Level Waste at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

This Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation (UDQE) assesses whether the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Transuranic (TRU) Waste Processing Center Mixed Low Level Waste (MLLW), FWORCHMLLW103, Revision 13 [TWPC 2021]), is suitable for shallow land burial (SLB) at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) on the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). Disposal of the TRU Waste Processing Center MLLW meets all performance objectives of DOE Manual DOE M 435.1-1, Radioactive Waste Management Manual, Chapter IV, Section P (DOE 1999). The TRU Waste Processing Center MLLW waste stream is recommended for acceptance without conditions.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

UNREVIEWED DISPOSAL QUESTION EVALUATION: Disposal of the Idaho National Laboratory Classified Mockup Low-Level Waste, Revision 1, at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

This Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation (UDQE) assesses whether the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Classified Mockup Low-Level Waste (LLW) (INEL208599QR0, Revision 1 [INL 2021]) is suitable for shallow land burial (SLB) at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) on the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). Disposal of the INL Classified Mockup LLW meets all performance objectives of U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Manual DOE M 435.1-1, Radioactive Waste Management Manual, Chapter IV, Section P (DOE 1999). The INL Classified Mockup LLW stream is recommended for acceptance without conditions.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

UNREVIEWED DISPOSAL QUESTION EVALUATION: Disposal of the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Torus Cleanup System Molecular Sieve Dryer Bed at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

This Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation (UDQE) assesses whether the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) Torus Cleanup System Molecular Sieve Dryer Bed (MSDB), PERM000000043, Revision 0 (Perma-Fix [PERM] 2021), is suitable for shallow land burial (SLB) at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) on the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). Disposal of the PPPL Torus Cleanup System MSDB meets all performance objectives of DOE Manual DOE M 435.1-1, Radioactive Waste Management Manual, Chapter IV, Section P (DOE 1999). The PPPL Torus Cleanup System MSDB waste stream is recommended for acceptance without conditions.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

UNREVIEWED DISPOSAL QUESTION EVALUATION: Disposal of the Transuranic Waste Processing Center Low-Level Waste at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

This Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation (UDQE) assesses whether the Transuranic Waste Processing Center (TWPC) Low-Level Waste (LLW), FWORCHLLW0102, Revision 12 (TWPC 2021), is suitable for shallow land burial (SLB) at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) on the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). Disposal of the TWPC LLW meets all performance objectives of DOE Manual DOE M 435.1-1, Radioactive Waste Management Manual, Chapter IV, Section P (DOE 1999). The TWPC LLW waste stream is recommended for acceptance without conditions.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Assessment of Economic Impact of Permitting Timelines on Produced Geothermal Power in Imperial County, California

Despite having a large geothermal power potential in the United States, only a small fraction has been developed for power generation. Various barriers, including technical, financial, and regulatory permit delays, are attributed to lower contribution of geothermal energy in the national grid. Unpredictable environmental reviews and permitting timelines are some of the non-technical barriers that can cause delays in geothermal exploration and utilization plans. Our study shows that the geothermal permitting timelines can vary from six months to several years, depending on the presence or absence of biological resources, cultural resources, and sensitive environmental issues at the project site. The potential impacts of these permit barriers can range from investors abandoning geothermal development to making the product (i.e., electricity) more expensive and uncompetitive. In this study, we conducted economic analysis to assess the impact of permitting timelines on cost of produced electricity from geothermal resources using data from existing geothermal plants as well as prospective sites. In this paper, we present collected timelines data, approach, and results of economic impact of permitting timelines on geothermal power. We evaluated the various environmental management and permit review processes by considering a hypothetical geothermal project in the Salton Sea Known Geothermal Resource Area. Because of the variety of the biological and environmental issues and the involvement of local, state, and federal agencies with overlapping jurisdictions, this project could go through one of the many California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review scenarios that range from the least to the most complex in its circumstances. The fastest CEQA/NEPA review timelines would have the project completed in six years. In contrast, the project would substantially need longer time to complete if it were located in an area with significant environmental resources or cultural issues that required permitting from various agencies. With increasing project completion timelines, the simplified levelized cost of electricity (sLCOE) can be 4 to 11% higher with longer CEQA/NEPA review timelines than the sLCOE value with the fastest CEQA/NEPA review timeline. Lengthier CEQA/NEPA review timelines could also result in loss of $64 million to $227 million in potential revenue. Such significant economic impacts could determine the success of a geothermal project.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗