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 307 records · Page 17

Colonie, New York, FUSRAP Site: Pathway from Remediation to Redevelopment - 19465

The Colonie, New York, Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) Site consists of a 4.5-hectare (11.2-acre) US Department of Energy (DOE)-owned vacant property (Main Site) and 56 commercial and residential vicinity properties (VPs). The site was owned and operated by National Lead Industries (NL) from 1937 to 1984. The Main Site was used for manufacturing fuel and weapons components using uranium and thorium. Depleted uranium dust was emitted from exhaust stacks that contaminated the site and the VPs. NL also filled in portions of the site with industrial waste and released contaminants to groundwater. The state court shut the plant down in 1984. The site was acquired by DOE in 1985, which remediated the VPs and began to remediate the Main Site up to 1997. The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) undertook remedial actions beginning in 1997. The site has three Operable Units (Main Site, Groundwater, and VPs). The Main Site soil was remediated to residential standards except for three small easement areas. The soils in the easement areas are safe for exposure to workers. There is a groundwater plume beneath the site that will require the use of monitoring and temporary land use controls until cleanup standards are met. The VPs require no further action. A 2-year transition period from USACE to the DOE Office of Legacy Management (LM) began on June 18, 2018, with the receipt of the Site Closeout Report from USACE. LM has determined that the 4.5-hectare site is excess to its mission needs and intends to pursue sale of the property for redevelopment. There are several processes required before the disposal can occur. Organizations with similar sites that are federally owned and ready for private redevelopment may benefit from reviewing the Colonie site disposition processes. This paper will discuss (1) Determining disposal alternatives for the Colonie, New York, site. (2) Describing the federal requirements for the disposal of excess real property. (3) Communicating to stakeholders that the site is ready for disposal. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Geographic Information System Based Emergency Response Training Assessments for DOE Radioactive Materials Transport - 20027

Safety and security are priorities of U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) radioactive materials shipping campaigns. In the more than 70-year history of domestic transport of spent nuclear fuel (SNF), there has never been a transportation-related radiological injury. To support transportation planning, among the tools that DOE uses is the Stakeholder Tool for Assessing Radioactive Transportation (START). START contains geospatial data and transportation route analyses capabilities designed to support a range of DOE transportation planning initiatives. One of those functions is the capability to support emergency response planning and training for State and Tribal jurisdictions located on routes used for DOE shipments of radioactive materials. As part of the Department's commitment to public safety, DOE provides federally-funded radiological response training to emergency responders along DOE radioactive materials transportation corridors through its Transportation Emergency Preparedness Program (TEPP). START contains spatial data representing the locations and emergency-response capabilities of fire departments, police, hospitals, State emergency response centers, and where TEPP-trained personnel are based. The START tool supports State and Tribal users' ability to evaluate emergency-response coverage on active and potential DOE radioactive materials transport routes through their jurisdictions, provide expected response times to reach the scene of an incident, identify equipment available to support a response, and identify the number of response personnel and their respective training levels. In addition, START can be used to identify gaps in coverage along a transportation corridor where additional radiological emergency response training may be needed. This paper describes the data, features, and functionality DOE uses to provide a resource for emergency response training needs assessments for States and Tribes along active and potential routes for transporting radioactive materials, and illustrates its use. It also discusses future plans to integrate TEPP and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) radiological training data to provide a more comprehensive source of geospatial information on personnel who have received equivalent radiological response training. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Environmental Report 2021

The purposes of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Environmental Report 2021 are to record Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s (LLNL’s) compliance with environmental standards and requirements, describe LLNL’s environmental protection and remediation programs, and present the results of environmental monitoring at the two LLNL sites—the Livermore Site and Site 300. The report is prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) by LLNL’s Environmental Functional Area. Submittal of the report satisfies requirements under DOE Order 231.1B, “Environment, Safety and Health Reporting,” and DOE Order 458.1, “Radiation Protection of the Public and Environment.” The report is distributed electronically and is available at https://saer.llnl.gov/, the website for the LLNL annual environmental report. Previous LLNL annual environmental reports beginning with 1994 are also on the website. Some references in the electronic report text are underlined, which indicates that they are clickable links. Clicking on one of these links will open the related document, data workbook, or website. Sampling location maps throughout this report were created using ArcGIS® software by Esri. The report begins with an executive summary, which provides the purpose of the report and an overview of LLNL’s compliance and monitoring results. The first three chapters provide background information: Chapter 1 is an overview of the location, meteorology, and hydrogeology of the two LLNL sites; Chapter 2 is a summary of LLNL’s compliance with environmental regulations; and Chapter 3 is a description of LLNL’s environmental programs with an emphasis on the Environmental Management System including pollution prevention. The majority of the report covers LLNL’s environmental monitoring programs and monitoring data for 2021: effluent and ambient air monitoring and dose assessment (Chapter 4); waters, including wastewater, storm water runoff, surface water, rain, and groundwater (Chapter 5); and terrestrial, including soil, sediment, vegetation, foodstuff, ambient radiation, and special status wildlife and plants (Chapter 6). The remaining two chapters discuss LLNL’s groundwater remediation program (Chapter 7), and quality assurance for the environmental monitoring programs (Chapter 8). Complete monitoring data, which are summarized in the body of the report, are provided in Appendix A. The report uses Système International units, consistent with the federal Metric Conversion Act of 1975 and Executive Order 12770, “Metric Usage in Federal Government Programs” (1991). For ease of comparison to environmental reports issued prior to 1991, dose values and many radiological measurements are given in both metric and U.S. customary units. A conversion table is provided in the glossary. The report is the responsibility of LLNL’s Environmental Functional Area. Monitoring data were obtained through the combined efforts of the Environmental Functional Area; Environmental Restoration Department; Physical and Life Sciences Environmental Monitoring Radiological Laboratory; and the Radiation Protection Functional Area.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Site Environmental Report for 2017

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL, Berkeley Lab) is a multi-program scientific facility operated by the University of California (UC) for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Berkeley Lab’s research is focused on the physical, biological, environmental, and computational sciences with the objective of delivering scientific knowledge and discoveries pertinent to DOE’s mission. This annual report describes environmental protection activities and potential impacts resulting from LBNL operations conducted in 2017. The format and content of this report satisfy the requirements of both DOE Order 231.1B, Administrative Change 1 (Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting) and the operating contract between UC and DOE (DOE Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231, also known as Contract 31). Activities are planned and conducted with full regard to protecting employees, the public, and the environment, as well as complying with all applicable environmental, safety, and health laws and regulations. Berkeley Lab implements an Environmental Management System (EMS) to oversee these compliance activities and continually improve overall environmental performance while maintaining operational capability and sustaining its overall mission. The effectiveness of the EMS and environmental programs is reviewed annually as part of the performance evaluation process of Contract 31. For fiscal year (FY) 2017, which began October 1, 2016, and ended September 30, 2017, the EMS was given a performance rating of B plus for its management of environmental activities (on a scale from A plus as the highest grade to F as the lowest). The measurement and rating system was developed jointly by Berkeley Lab, UC, and DOE. The FY 2017 rating was based on how Berkeley Lab met the objective in DOE’s FY 2017 Performance Evaluation and Measurement Plan (Appendix B in Contract 31, Section J) of providing an efficient and effective EMS. Six significant accomplishments, which ranged from effective teaming on projects and with regulatory agencies to improved program assessment approaches, were factors in the rating. The EMS was also graded through the federal Office of Management and Budget’s annual EMS performance metrics, in which a reporting scorecard rates elements of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14001 standard and the degree of integration between the EMS and Berkeley Lab’s sustainable practices. Overall scores fall into one of three categories: green (highest), yellow (middle), or red (lowest). For FY 2017, Berkeley Lab received a score of green, as described in more detail in Chapter 2. An overview of environmental protection and restoration programs is provided, including information about compliance activities, operating permits, and regulatory agency inspections that occurred during 2017. Thirteen minor violations issued during City of Berkeley inspections of above and underground storage tanks, treatment units, and hazardous waste storage areas are discussed in this chapter. This report also includes information on environmental monitoring performed in 2017. The results of these monitoring activities confirmed that groundwater cleanup actions continue to show improving conditions, and all emissions and discharges from LBNL operations were within environmental compliance release limits, with the exception of some stormwater discharges. Most stormwater discharges measured throughout the LBNL site fall within acceptable levels established by the state’s stormwater permit; however, iron and aluminum exceeded Numeric Action Levels. To reduce iron and aluminum discharge levels, Berkeley Lab is aggressively implementing controls such as construction of asphaltic berms and check dams to restrain and filter runoff to storm drains, and installation of filtration units in storm drain basins to collect sediment and absorb metal contaminants. The radiological dose assessments performed in 2017 concluded that the maximum potential dose to a hypothetical resident from Berkeley Lab’s airborne radionuclide releases was approximately 0.1% of the DOE and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency annual limit of 10 millirem per year (mrem/yr); the potential dose from all radiation sources at Berkeley Lab was approximately 0.06% of the average natural background radiation dose of 310 mrem/yr in the United States, and about 0.2% of the DOE annual limit of 100 mrem/yr from all sources.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Site Environmental Report for 2018

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL, Berkeley Lab) is a multi-program scientific facility operated by the University of California (UC) for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Berkeley Lab’s research is focused on the physical, biological, environmental, and computational sciences, with the objective of delivering scientific knowledge and discoveries pertinent to DOE’s mission. This annual report describes environmental protection activities and potential impacts resulting from LBNL operations conducted in 2018. The format and content of this report satisfy the requirements of both DOE Order 231.1B, Administrative Change 1 (Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting) and the operating contract between UC and DOE (DOE Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231, also known as Contract 31). LBNL activities are planned and conducted with full regard to protecting employees, the public, and the environment, as well as complying with all applicable environmental, safety, and health laws and regulations. As presented in Chapter 2, Berkeley Lab implements an Environmental Management System (EMS) to oversee environmental compliance activities and continually improve overall environmental performance while maintaining operational capability and sustaining its overall mission. The effectiveness of the EMS and environmental programs is reviewed annually as part of the performance evaluation process of Contract 31. For fiscal year (FY) 2018, which began October 1, 2017, and ended September 30, 2018, the EMS was given a performance rating of B plus for its management of environmental activities (on a scale from A plus as the highest grade, to F as the lowest). The measurement and rating system was developed jointly by Berkeley Lab, UC, and DOE. The FY 2018 rating was based on how Berkeley Lab met the objective in DOE’s FY 2018 Performance Evaluation and Measurement Plan (Appendix B in Contract 31, Section J) of providing an efficient and effective EMS. Six significant accomplishments, which ranged from effective teaming on projects and with regulatory agencies to improved program assessment approaches, were factors in the rating. The EMS was also graded through the federal Office of Management and Budget’s annual EMS performance metrics, in which a reporting scorecard rates elements of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14001 standard and the degree of integration between the EMS and Berkeley Lab’s sustainable practices. Overall scores fall into one of three categories: green (highest), yellow (middle), or red (lowest). For FY 2018, Berkeley Lab received a score of green. A week-long formal conformity audit of the EMS was conducted at the end of July by a qualified external party, as is required every three years. The audit team found that Berkeley Lab’s EMS continues to conform to the ISO standard with no major nonconformance. An overview of environmental protection and restoration programs is provided in Chapter 3, including information about compliance activities, operating permits, and regulatory agency inspections and audits that occurred during 2018. Twenty-one minor violations and two Class II violations were issued during agency inspections of programs governing aboveground and underground storage tanks, hazardous waste treatment units, hazardous waste storage areas, hazardous materials management, and wastewater, stormwater, and air emission sources. This report also includes information on environmental monitoring performed in 2018 (Chapter 4). The results of these monitoring activities confirmed that groundwater cleanup actions have been effective in reducing concentrations of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the groundwater, although concentrations appear to be reaching asymptotic levels in some areas. Site groundwater plumes are stable or are attenuating, and VOCs are not migrating off site. All emissions and discharges from LBNL operations were within environmental compliance release limits except oxides of nitrogen and carbon monoxide from boilers (under 5 million BTUs) from Buildings 2, 66, and 88. The radiological dose assessments (Chapter 5) performed in 2018 concluded that the maximum potential dose to a hypothetical resident from Berkeley Lab’s airborne radionuclide releases was approximately 0.04% of the DOE and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency annual limit of 10 millirem per year (mrem/yr); the potential dose from all radiation sources at Berkeley Lab was approximately 0.15% of the average natural background radiation dose of 310 mrem/yr in the United States, and about 0.5% of the DOE annual limit of 100 mrem/yr from all sources.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Sun Grant/DOE Regional Feedstock Partnership: Final Technical Report

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the Sun Grant Initiative initiated the Regional Feedstock Partnership (referred to as the Partnership) in 2007 primarily to address information gaps associated with the likelihood for realization of the sustainable and reliable production of a billion-tons of biomass annually to support the U.S. bioenergy industry by the year 2030. Publication of The Technical Feasibility of a Billion-Ton Annual Supply (Perlack et al., 2005) in 2005, with its associated yield assumptions, led to the realization that the yield goals and assumptions utilized in that analysis required careful validation. To achieve the overall goal of validating key yield assumptions, the following objectives were developed: 1. Establishment of replicated field trials across regions to determine the impact of crop residue removal (primarily corn and small grains) on future grain yields and soil health. 2. Establishment of replicated field trials of some of the most promising dedicated energy crops (herbaceous annuals and perennials, as well as woody perennials) to demonstrate the potential performance of these feedstocks across the U.S. 3. Assessment of feedstock resources to be used to estimate a sustainable national supply potential. Teams composed of representatives from Land Grant Universities, USDA ARS, DOE National Laboratories, industry, and other federal agencies were identified and assembled to address each of these objectives. For Objective 1, members of the USDA ARS’ Resilient Economic Agricultural Practices (REAP) team combined with university personnel to leverage on-going work and established new trials to determine sustainable corn residue removal rates. In addition, universities across the continental U.S. conducted surveys of published past research to define parameters for the use of cereal grain residue (primarily wheat) as a biomass feedstock. For Objective 2, and based on input from DOE, USDA, Land Grant university scientists, and others, several herbaceous and woody energy crop species were selected for new or further evaluation across wide geographic areas as cellulosic feedstock sources. Species teams were organized to assess the yield potential of candidate herbaceous feedstocks including sorghum, energycane, Miscanthus x giganteus (hereafter referred to as miscanthus), switchgrass, and mixed perennial species (primarily grasses and some legumes) on Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) land. Woody species will be critical components of the bioenergy sector; therefore, species teams were also organized for shrub willow and hybrid poplar (Populus spp.). Field trials of each species were utilized to determine yield potential across the U.S. For Objective 3, a GIS resource team was organized with representatives from each of the five Sun Grant regions. While some regional assessments were made, the multi-institutional team decided that the group from Oregon State University would utilize their PRISM ELM model to estimate national yield potential of the various species evaluated. The following are key outcomes and impacts • The Partnership demonstrated the production potential of diverse herbaceous and woody feedstocks across much of the U.S. for 5-7 consecutive growing seasons. Long-term studies such as this are not commonly possible due to limitations in funding cycles. • Long-term field trials were valuable in demonstrating the importance of agronomic management practices and genetic resources to yield of sorghum, switchgrass, miscanthus, energycane, CRP mixed perennial grasses, poplar, and willow. • National yield potential maps were developed for all species evaluated in the Partnership. • Sustainable corn stover removal rates were quantified for use by producers, harvesters, and commercial lignocellulosic biorefineries. • Data from the Partnership field trials not only validated initial Billion Ton estimates, but were instrumental in developing both the Billion Ton Update in 2011, and especially the 2016 Billion Ton Report. • The Partnership provided the opportunity to assemble and conserve a poplar germplasm collection that contains more than 20,000 clones for use in breeding programs. New clones resulting from crosses made using this germplasm collection have resulted in significantly improved cultivars that could be scaled up and deployed. • Further validation of improved yields of new varieties/cultivars of biomass sorghum, energycane, hybrid poplars, and shrub willows was produced by the Partnership. • The Partnership demonstrated the potential of energycane in northern parts of the southeastern U.S., particularly in relation to sugarcane varieties. • For certain feedstocks (e.g., CRP mixed grasses, switchgrass, willow, and poplar), production economics were ascertained through Partnership field trials. • Biomass samples collected as part of the Partnership are also being used to populate Idaho National Laboratory’s Bioenergy Feedstock Library. • Because of the size and scope of the Partnership, workforce development was a key component and outcome. Numerous undergraduate students (25), graduate students (15 MS and 8 PhD), and postdoctoral researchers (7) were trained by Partnership participants. This will help to prepare individuals for careers in the emerging fields of plant breeding, biomass production, feedstock supply logistics, and biomass conversion processes. • More than 130 scientific publications have been authored by Partnership team members. Numerous other presentations, outreach publications, book chapters, and websites have also been developed to further the continued development of the bioeconomy.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Middlesex South FUSRAP Site: Collaboration Towards Beneficial Reuse - 20338

The US Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Legacy Management (LM) manages DoE's post-closure responsibilities and ensures the future protection of human health and the environment with respect to sites that have no continuing DOE mission after undergoing remediation. LM's beneficial reuse program promotes the LM strategic goal to sustainably manage and optimize use of public lands. The beneficial reuse program aims to repurpose former contaminated sites to restore the environment, protect the public health, revitalize communities, and spur economic growth. Benefits from the reuse of a site may increase the local tax base, facilitate job growth, utilize existing infrastructure, and enhance or protect natural resources. Beneficial reuse also promotes protectiveness by ensuring activities are compatible with long-term maintenance and protection of public health and the environment, as well as by retaining good stewardship of natural resources. LM actively participates in promoting the economic development vision of the surrounding communities by collaborating with local communities to promote regional or municipal initiatives. The Borough of Middlesex, New Jersey, has prepared the Lincoln Boulevard Redevelopment Plan, which will reinvent a once-viable downtown and enhance the quality of life for the community. The Middlesex South, New Jersey, Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) site lies within the boundaries of this redevelopment area. In support of this development plan, the Borough is interested in acquiring the site for its Department of Public Works and to increase street access in the future commercial district to be built near adjacent properties. The opportunity to put the FUSRAP site into productive use aligns with LM's mission and strategic goals. In support of beneficial reuse activities, DOE can dispose of excess real property using several mechanisms. The two disposal options applicable to the Middlesex south site include (1) utilizing the US General Services Administration (GSA) or (2) using the Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations Section 770, 'Transfer of Real Property at Defense Nuclear Facilities for Economic Development' (known as a '770 transfer') process. Using the 770 transfer requires economic development as the primary driver, and a specific redevelopment proposal must be submitted. If there is no interest in specific economic development, the GSA option becomes the default mechanism for disposal of the property. In the case of the Middlesex south site, the 770 transfer process is being utilized and the Borough has submitted its economic development proposal to LM. Although LM is encouraged by the opportunity to put the site into productive use, the Middlesex south site is currently on the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Priorities List and remediation is being performed by the US Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). Consequently, any property transfer must meet the requirements under CERCLA Section 120(h), 'Property Transferred by Federal Agencies.' As the groundwater remedy will not be in place for several years, approval would be required from the US EPA administrator and the governor of the state of New Jersey to perform an early transfer of the site (before all response actions have been completed). The time frame for these approvals to occur under the normal process conflicts with the proposed redevelopment schedule; therefore, various options for expedited sale, transfer, or lease of portions of the site to the Borough were evaluated. The subsequent decision on a mutually beneficial path forward was the result of a collaborative effort between LM, USACE, the Borough and its redevelopment team, EPA, and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

An Information Template for Evaluating the Relative Priority of Remediation Projects that Pose a Risk to Receptors - 18674

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has one of the largest remediation tasks in the world, in terms of the number of sites, the complexity of individual sites, the number of remediation projects at individual sites, and the full range of stakeholders involved. The question of how to decide what projects to initiate, at any point of time and how to prioritize the deployment of resources for these tasks, occurs both within and among sites. The Consortium for Risk Evaluation developed a Risk-informed Prioritization Framework for Oak Ridge Reservation. Our goal was to develop a risk-informed methodology for prioritizing remediation projects for the Department of Energy's Oak Ridge Reservation that can be adapted to other remediation projects elsewhere. The heart of the framework is a template that includes information about each site necessary to make prioritization decisions. The information in the template describes the environment (hazard, pathway, consequences), the receptors (workers, public, ecological) and the risk management considerations (cost, risk reduction effectiveness, capacity, efficiency and sequencing). The questions in the template provide a wide range of information that managers and regulators need to make decisions, and that Tribes and the public need to evaluate the efficacy of remediation decisions. Completing the template will also help identify data gaps, model parameters needed, and the agencies or individuals responsible for obtaining the information. The information presented in the Template will be useful for regulators (DOE, Environmental Protection Agency, states, Tribes), managers and workers at the sites, trustees of natural resources, site neighbors, and the general public, but more importantly, provides an example of information needed to rate the priority of remediation projects. DOE, other federal and state trustees, and regulators were included in all phases of the development, including the scope, overseeing its development, and evaluation of projects. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

2022 Site Environmental Report: Idaho National Laboratory

The INL Site’s operations, as well as the ongoing cleanup mission involve a commitment to environmental stewardship and full compliance with environmental protection laws. As part of this commitment, the INL Site Environmental Report is prepared annually to inform the public, regulators, stakeholders, and other interested parties of the INL Site’s environmental performance during the year. This report is published for U.S. Department of Energy, Idaho Operations Office (DOE-ID) in compliance with DOE O 231.1B, “Environment, Safety and Health Reporting.” The purpose of the report is to provide the following: (1) Present the INL Site, mission, and programs, (2) Report compliance status with applicable federal, state, and local regulations, (3) Describe the INL Site environmental programs and activities, (4) Summarize results of environmental monitoring, (5) Discuss potential radiation doses to the public residing in the vicinity of the INL Site, (6) Report on ecological monitoring and research conducted by contractors and affiliated agencies and by independent researchers through the Idaho National Environmental Research Park, (7) Describe quality assurance methods used to ensure confidence in monitoring data, and (8) Provide supplemental technical data and reports that support the INL Site Environmental Report (https://idahoeser.inl.gov/publications.html).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

USACE FUSRAP Records Management Challenges in the Digital Age - 20242

In late 2016, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) implemented a Headquarters-supported nationwide records management initiative managed by the USACE-New England District to address the digitization and organization of Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) project files. This initiative will prepare USACE FUSRAP for moving toward a fully electronic system of records management. Additionally, the records management initiative streamlines the process and prepares the Administrative Record (AR) and Permanent Record (PR) file for transfer from USACE to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)-Office of Legacy Management (LM) following project closeout. Over the past couple of years, USACE and DOE-LM have been working to finalize a joint guidance document to assist in the FUSRAP records transition process. However, there remain key records management topics that require further discussion and development. Specifically, these topics include the implementation, process, and procedure for the capture of social media records and compliance with Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 USC 794d), as amended. Due to advances in technology and the ease of communication it provides, USACE is using social media more often to interface with the public than 5, 10 or 15 years ago. The identification and capture of these records are challenging because it requires each USACE district or producer of a record to track what has been released through social media so that it can be captured as part of the AR or PR. USACE is currently evaluating processes and procedures for social media records capture. This paper explores how social media is being used by USACE across FUSRAP projects and best practices for the capture of social media records. Public accessibility to the project AR is required under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, which USACE FUSRAP must follow. As USACE FUSRAP ARs are converted to a digital format, greater accessibility to the files can be provided through web sites or other electronic media. However, Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act must be considered when releasing electronic files to the public. Under Section 508, government agencies must ensure that information is made available to the public in a format that provides equal access to persons with disabilities. This paper discusses the electronic records requirements under Section 508 and addresses broad implementation of compliance across large digital records sets. Records management challenges are presented in the context of the FUSRAP records management program; however, these records management considerations and best practices are applicable across all Federal agency records management programs. Examples presented will further aid in understanding electronic records requirements that may be included on new USACE FUSRAP contracts as well as upcoming National Archives Records Administration requirements that will move us toward an electronic government. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Hanford Direct Feed Low Activity Waste Real Time Monitoring Program - 18336

Effective operation of the Low-Activity Waste (LAW) Facility at Hanford will rely on information provided from monitoring and control of chemical process streams to maintain safety and environmental compliance, product quality, and operational efficiency. The LAW Facility has been designed as a contact-maintained facility and it was recognized that establishing a real time, in-line monitoring program could have substantial benefits to the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of River Protection in the long-term, which include significant time savings, increased processing efficiency and effectiveness, reducing worker exposure to radiation and chemical hazards, reducing secondary wastes, and a better understanding of the flowsheet to support direct-feed LAW (DFLAW). The Assistant Manager/Federal Project Director for the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) Project chartered a multidisciplinary integrated technical team comprised of federal, contractor, and national laboratory staff to develop a phased program to support this initiative. A three-phase approach was adopted: - Phase 1: Requirements and Opportunities Analysis for Sampling Reduction; - Phase 2: Applications and Benefits Determination; - Phase 3: Qualification and Demonstration. The focus of Phase 1 is to identify the drivers behind any requirements for sampling and any opportunities to benefit from a real-time monitoring program. The effort identified 18 sample points and approximately 2,600 potential samples to be collected annually with analytical methods to be performed approximately 18,000 times annually. Based on Savannah River National Laboratory experience and discussions with WTP Analytical Laboratory personnel, these sample analyses will generate approximately 5,000 L of liquid secondary waste and approximately 1,300 m{sup 3} of solid secondary waste each year. Additional solid and liquid secondary wastes will be generated from sample collection. A preliminary evaluation indicates that employing real-time, in-line monitoring, mass balances, and periodic sampling could significantly reduce the number of samples collected, analytical methods performed, and secondary waste generated. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

LANL Regular Employee Population and Demographics, FY15-21

This document summarizes an effort to compile and analyze the LANL regular employee population’s demographic attributes and trends between FY15-FY21 using MicroStrategy, a web-based data analytics and visualization tool. LANL’s HR Division collected and prepared data for the Weapons Program’s annual reporting activities for the 2017 through 2023 NNSA Stockpile Stewardship and Management Plan (SSMP). Los Alamos workforce data represent the fiscal year-end snapshot of the permanent employee population who are categorized by the Common Occupational Classification System (COCS). This work enables further analyses, including trends for all workforce attributes presented in the SSMPs as well as a definition of a crosswalk between COCS categorization and the internal laboratory job classification hierarchy. Data for other sites and the federal workforce, as shown in the SSMPs, are included and corresponding figures can be visualized within the MicroStrategy tool. A portable, Excel-based version of the tool was developed and shared with the multi-site workforce working group. This summary highlights selected aspects of the LANL regular workforce. The data analyses and visualizations communicate insights within three major themes regarding permanent LANL employees: 1) demographic transformation, 2) attrition, and 3) skills. Regarding demographic transformation, and consistent with the general trend across the enterprise, early career regular employees are the fastest growing group, with growth ranging between 12-34% year-to-year over the seven-year period analyzed. The data also reflect effects of internal and external factors on attrition; the large spike in separations in FY18 aligns with the contract transition from LANS to Triad and the dip in attrition between FY20-FY21 is likely a result of the global pandemic. The population of regular employees in general management, engineer, and operator COCS categories have the fastest growth rates amongst all the occupational categories. The MicroStrategy and Excel tools provide additional details and trends.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Assessment of Quality Management for Transport Packages Not Requiring Authority Design Approval - 18194

The majority of transports of radioactive materials are carried out in packages which don't need a package design approval of a competent authority. Low active radioactive materials are transported in such kind of packages e.g. in the medical and pharmaceutical industry and in the nuclear industry as well. In Germany the decision to phase out nuclear energy leads to a strong demand for packages to transport low and middle active radioactive waste due to the dismantling and decommissioning of nuclear power plants. According to IAEA regulations the 'non-competent authority approved package types' are the excepted packages and the industrial packages of Type IP-1, IP-2 and IP-3 and of Type A. For the packages of Type IP-2, IP-3 and Type A an assessment by the German competent authority is required for the quality management for the design, manufacture, testing, documentation, use, maintenance and inspection. In general a compliance audit of the manufacturer of the packaging is required during this assessment procedure. Their regulatory level in the IAEA regulations is not comparable with the regulatory density for packages requiring competent authority design approval. The countries apply different approaches within the assessment of the quality assurance measures in the management system as well as in the quality assurance program of a special package design. To use the package or packaging in a safe manner and in compliance with the regulations a management system for each phase of the life of the package or packaging is necessary. In order to help manufactures, which measurements and documents are needed for the assessment procedure, BAM developed a guideline. The guideline BAM-GGR 016 [5] describes the needed quality management for the design, manufacture, testing, documentation, use, maintenance and inspection of a packaging and the package. The poster to be presented will explain the different requirements of the quality assurance measures and give examples. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

A section 110 evaluation of the 10,500-foot blast line civil effects structures and military trenches associated with the apple-2 test, area 1, nevada national security site, nye county, nevada

The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) has tasked Desert Research Institute (DRI) with identifying and evaluating additional resources that contribute to the significance of the Apple-2 Historic District as part of a Section 110 effort. Apple-2 was a 1955 atmospheric test in which the Federal Civil Defense Administration (FCDA) conducted an extensive civil effects program named Operation Cue. The objective of Operation Cue was to understand the blast and thermal effects of the test by using a simulated community of residential buildings, industrial structures, utilities, and commercial equipment arranged at various distances from ground zero (GZ). Military operations conducted by the Department of Defense (DoD) as part of the Desert Rock VI exercise were also associated with the Apple-2 test. The Apple-2 Historic District was originally defined in 2000 by Johnson and Edwards as 15 highly visible contributing elements dispersed across the landscape. Since its original recording, DRI has conducted additional archival research and this report details the identification and evaluation results of testing-related material remains at a distance of 10,500 ft from the Apple-2 GZ. Between 2017 and 2020, DRI conducted fieldwork at 10,500 ft from the Apple-2 GZ, revisited previously recorded contributing elements, and identified and evaluated newly recorded resources associated with Operation Cue as well as DoD operations. In total, DRI revisited or newly identified 15 principal resources. Of these, 13 are located within the historic district and contribute to the district’s significance. A set of military trenches and the associated material remains are discontiguous from the district, but also contribute to the district’s significance.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Interior Athabascan Energy Capacity Building Network (Final Report)

Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC) is the traditional tribal consortium for the 37 federally recognized Tribes and villages of Interior Alaska. TCC is based on a belief in tribal self-determination and the need for regional Native unity. TCC is a nonprofit organization that works toward meeting the needs and challenges for more than 10,000 Alaska Natives (mostly Alaskan Athabaskans) in Interior Alaska. With support from DOE-OIE’s Inter-Tribal Technical Assistance grant, TCC’s goal was to expand and build on the solid foundation of work that the existing TCC Energy Program established through the creation of the Interior Athabascan Energy Network (IAEN). More specifically, the IAEN was designed to create a network of village-based energy champions across the interior and hold quarterly teleconferences and annual inperson meetings. Among the greatest impacts of the IAEN were the creation and support of realistic, communitybased energy projects that produced tangible results such as fuel savings and skills and capacity development among local staff as well as establishment of an energy team that included TCC staff, Tribal participants, technical consultants, and support agencies. The DOE-TA funding allowed us to provide technical assistance to our Tribal communities to develop energy projects, and to foster a network consisting of Tribal community members and energy experts that has strengthened the ability in the region to troubleshoot energy issues, develop meaningful projects, envision a clean energy future, and to share project successes and challenges. The funding from DOE was a catalyst for growth, has created opportunities for learning and knowledge sharing, and has led to the development of cost saving energy projects. Most importantly, the DOE project allowed energy champions around the region to share their knowledge, experiences, and expertise to create place-based solutions and has forged inter-Tribal relationships that will continue to be an asset for years to come. Through information exchange that occurred at out IAEN annual meetings and other events, this technical assistance grant award has spurred a spinoff project that is focused on establishing a collaborative of independent utilities that work together to solve energy problems and share services to operate and maintain their electric utilities. We have indentified at least 10 and possibly 12 communities that are interested in collaborating in managing their utilities to reduce costs and increase reliability. As well, by identifying and supporting Community Energy Champions in the Interior villages and adding capacity to the TCC Energy Program, we were able to create actionable community energy plans, develop specific projects, and increase local capacity, skills, and literacy around clean energy initiatives.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

WBS 4.2.1.31 Integrated Life Cycle Sustainability Analysis

The main objective of this project (following the 2017 BETO Program Peer-Review) is to provide BETO with a coherent methodology and modeling framework based on life cycle (LCA) and economic input-output analysis, tested and vetted with stakeholders, to better understand the effects of an expanding U.S. bioeconomy at specific levels including economic dimensions such as jobs, gross domestic product (value added), and environmental criteria such as air pollutant emissions, water and land use, ecotoxicity, and others. This supports a 2019 milestone in the BETO MYP and simultaneously addresses a gap previously identified in the BETO program and highlighted, e.g., by BETO Program Peer Reviewers in 2015 and 2017. To fill in this gap, NREL started collaborating with developers of the national level U.S. Environmentally-Extended Input-Output (USEEIO) model in FY18. This peer-reviewed, open source model is based on publicly available data, and developed and maintained by U.S. EPA where it has been the basis for EPA's Sustainable Material Management analyses and program. Also, USEEIO was initially designed for use with EPA's Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemicals and Other Environmental Impacts (TRACI). It aligns well with similar efforts including the Federal LCA Commons and the Sustainable Acquisition Program at the Department of Defense (DoD). In FY18, NREL convened stakeholders from federal agencies, universities, and private sector entities to identify and form a common understanding of (1) models describing the U.S. economy and how to build off of them, (2) a bioeconomy definition for the next modeling steps, (3) the (sub)sectors that can/should be used in the framework, and (4) opportunities for collaboration and data sharing. NREL then created a first order model by disaggregating, i.e., separating the economic activities associated with and attributed to a selected product of the bioeconomy: corn ethanol. Corn ethanol is well studied and has a significant amount of public, validated economic industry information. This is important as disaggregation is a critical step in creating a representative and accurate framework. Corn ethanol served as a validation test case for the method and framework. By the end of FY18, the team was able to generate several scenarios for corn ethanol on national and selected regional levels providing results on the absolute and relative (Megajoule) effects in several environmental and economic impact categories. A second objective of the project is to inform BETO's strategic decision making, specifically its sustainability research portfolio, by engaging in, evaluating, and synthesizing selected global multi-year activities from the perspectives of a variety of complex multilateral and multi-stakeholder processes that pertain to bioenergy. This helps to (1) identify gaps, barriers, and critical areas for future BETO bioenergy and sustainability assessments; (2) identify opportunities and challenges to a sustainable U.S. bioeconomy; and (3) contribute to and disseminate BETO information to and from major global bioenergy and sustainability efforts. This project's work with multilateral organizations ensures that U.S. science-based viewpoints are considered and helps to balance the influence of the large number of countries with the same centralized philosophy. This engagement builds a more solid foundation for sustainable biomass and bioenergy systems in the U.S. and in the world. Working with multi-lateral, international platforms including IEA Bioenergy, Global Bio-Energy Partnership (GBEP), and their partner organizations also allows engagement with important stakeholders including policy makers, industry, NGOs, and academia.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Natural Resources Assessment for the SNS Second Target Station, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

The US Department of Energy’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is a leading institution in advanced materials, supercomputing, neutrons, and nuclear science. As a research laboratory managed by UT-Battelle, LLC for DOE, ORNL has national priorities in energy, security, and scientific discovery that necessitate facility improvements and expansions. DOE is also committed to environmental stewardship. The laboratory is located on the ~32,000-acre Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR), much of which is categorized as a National Environmental Research Park and a state Wildlife Management Area. DOE works with the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency (TWRA), Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC), US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), US Department of Agriculture, and other agencies to serve as an effective steward of the ORR. Accordingly, project managers must conform to environmental regulations, agreements, and policies at the federal, state, and institutional levels. Per 40 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) 1508.14, potential effects on research and science education on the National Environmental Research Park represent potential impacts of federal actions. Moreover, federal actions that affect the quantity and quality of hunting opportunities and deer reduction harvest on the Oak Ridge Wildlife Management Area must be considered whenever other aspects of the human environment (as defined by NEPA) are affected. The Spallation Neutron Source (SNS) is a premiere facility at ORNL that provides advanced capabilities in neutron scattering to promote new discoveries and research opportunities in material sciences, physics, chemistry, biological sciences, and others. A conceptual design for a Second Target Station (STS) has been in consideration for several years. The STS is intended to complement and enhance existing ORNL capabilities, notably research and exploration of complex materials. The proposed STS will involve development of existing natural areas on the ORR, which might contain sensitive resources that require mitigation or avoidance in accordance with existing policies and regulation. This report summarizes current knowledge of natural and cultural resources within the STS project area. At the time of this report, the proposed STS project consisted of an operations area comprising 55.4 acres (22.4 ha) and a total review area for potential construction comprising ~224 acres (90.6 ha). The review area is located primarily within forested natural areas of the ORR with minor development in the form of power-line rights-of-way and secondary/graveled roads (Figure 1). The primary goal was to evaluate potential effects on sensitive resources that might result from development of the STS. In addition to onthe-ground surveys during summer 2009 and fall 2019 to summer 2020 by ORNL Natural Resources Management Program and Aquatic Ecology Group staff, this report makes use of historical (pre-1995) and contemporary (1995 to present) data from additional confirmed sources (e.g., TDEC). Likewise, forest conditions were compiled primarily from a 2013 forest inventory effort for Forest Management Compartment 17 and supplemented with limited ground observations in 2019. The individuals who obtained and compiled the data that are presented here are familiar with and routinely assess sensitive resources on the ORR.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Accelerating Nuclear Facility Mission Completion Through an Improved Chemical Hazard Control Strategy - 20460

Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) 10 CFR 830, Nuclear Safety Management [1], explicitly identifies hazardous materials in addition to radioactive materials when establishing the scope of materials that must be evaluated in Hazard Category (HC) 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities. This inclusion has led to a near decade-long progression of more and more rigorous application of chemical hazard controls in these facilities. The progressive addition of more rigorous chemical hazard controls has occurred across the Department of Energy (DOE) Complex, having been driven by contractors and regulators alike. However, chemical hazards in other DOE facilities have been, and continue to be, controlled using traditional industrial safety centered strategies. Thus, identical chemical hazards are controlled using dramatically different approaches based solely on the facility type. Not only are the controls different, the analysis and derivation rigor and requirements are also significantly different. In particular, chemical control derivation and application in non-nuclear facilities are much less onerous than the comprehensive hazard analysis process used in nuclear facilities, even in circumstances in which chemicals are not initiators to, or do not exacerbate a nuclear event. While the derivation and control approaches used in these two types of facilities are disparate, the safety results are similarly effective based on a review of reported chemical events from 2014 through 2018. While both approaches achieve comparable safety outcomes, the approach used in nuclear facilities results in significantly greater preparation costs and implementation costs. Furthermore, the problem with the differing approach is not relegated to the control preparation and implementation burden. The operational impact of potentially unnecessary controls slows mission completion without a corresponding increase in safety, not to mention the dilution of the importance of Technical Safety Requirements. The proposed solution must first include a critical and thorough examination of DOE Complex and top-tier chemical industry chemical hazard control practices, coupled with a similar examination of the driving facility regulatory requirements. Results from the examination can then be used to fuel a bold departure from current chemical control practices in Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities. Development of an improved and consistent chemical hazard control process would follow, one that continues to ensure safety while accelerating mission completion and significantly reducing the burden associated with chemical hazard control development and implementation. The improved process must establish a hierarchy where radiological hazards are addressed using safety class and safety significant controls and chemical hazards are addressed using overarching safety management programs (with limited unique exceptions). The improved Hazard Category 1,2, and 3 nuclear facility chemical hazard control strategy, while compliant with 10 CFR 830 [1], would be founded on the requirements in 10 CFR 851, Worker Safety and Health Program [2], and the complementary DOE O 151.1D, Comprehensive Emergency Management System [3]. In this way, the Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facility chemical hazard control strategy would, wherever appropriate, be the same process used at other DOE Complex facilities. Ultimately, the improved process will maintain safety and significantly reduce costs and life cycle risk through faster mission completion. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗