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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2012

High Temperature Superconductors: From Delivery to Applications (Presentation from 2011 Ernest Orlando Lawrence Award-winner, Dr. Amit Goyal, and including introduction by Energy Secretary, Dr. Steven Chu)

Dr. Amit Goyal, a high temperature superconductivity (HTS) researcher at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, was named a 2011 winner of the Department of Energy's Ernest Orlando Lawrence Award honoring U.S. scientists and engineers for exceptional contributions in research and development supporting DOE and its mission. Winner of the award in the inaugural category of Energy Science and Innovation, Dr. Goyal was cited for his work in 'pioneering research and transformative contributions to the field of applied high temperature superconductivity, including fundamental materials science advances and technical innovations enabling large-scale applications of these novel materials.' Following his basic research in grain-to-grain supercurrent transport, Dr. Goyal focused his energy in transitioning this fundamental understanding into cutting-edge technologies. Under OE sponsorship, Dr. Goyal co-invented the Rolling Assisted Bi-Axially Textured Substrate technology (RABiTS) that is used as a substrate for second generation HTS wires. OE support also led to the invention of Structural Single Crystal Faceted Fiber Substrate (SSIFFS) and the 3-D Self Assembly of Nanodot Columns. These inventions and associated R&D resulted in 7 R&D 100 Awards including the 2010 R&D Magazine's Innovator of the Year Award, 3 Federal Laboratory Consortium Excellence in Technology Transfer National Awards, a DOE Energy 100 Award and many others. As a world authority on HTS materials, Dr. Goyal has presented OE-sponsored results in more than 150 invited talks, co-authored more than 350 papers and is a fellow of 7 professional societies.

75 CONDENSED MATTER PHYSICS, SUPERCONDUCTIVITY AND↗
DOE OSTI2012

Ernest Orlando Lawrence Awards Ceremony for 2011 Award Winners (Presentations, including remarks by Energy Secretary, Dr. Steven Chu)

The winners for 2011 of the Department of Energy's Ernest Orlando Lawrence Award were recognized in a ceremony held May 21, 2012. Dr. Steven Chu and others spoke of the importance of the accomplishments and the prestigious history of the award. The recipients of the Ernest Orlando Lawrence Award for 2011 are: Riccardo Betti (University of Rochester); Paul C. Canfield (Ames Laboratory); Mark B. Chadwick (Los Alamos National Laboratory); David E. Chavez (Los Alamos National Laboratory); Amit Goyal (Oak Ridge National Laboratory); Thomas P. Guilderson (Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory); Lois Curfman McInnes (Argonne National Laboratory); Bernard Matthew Poelker (Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility); and Barry F. Smith (Argonne National Laboratory).

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗
DOE OSTI2012

Talking the Higgs Boson with Dr. Joseph Incandela: Third Lecture in the DOE Science Speaker Series (includes opening remarks from Dr. Bill Brinkman and introduction by Energy Secretary, Dr. Steven Chu)

In July of 2012, scientists leading two different research teams, working independently of each other, announced that they had almost certain proof of the long-sought Higgs boson. Though Cern did not call the discovery "official", many physicists conceded the evidence was now so compelling they had surely found the missing particle. The formal confirmation will come over the next few months of further investigation. The experiments are taking place at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), and this third lecture in the DOE Science Speaker Series is given by one of those announcing scientists in July. He is Dr. Joseph Incandela, the current spokesperson for the Compact Muon Solenoid (CMS) Experiment at CERN. He was heavily involved in the search for the top quark at Fermi and is from the University of California, Santa Barbara. The title he gives his presentation is "Searching for the genetic code of our universe: Discovery at the LHC."

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗
DOE OSTI2014

Enrico Fermi Awards Ceremony for Dr. Allen J. Bard and Dr. Andrew Sessler, February 2014 (Presentations, including remarks by Energy Secretary, Dr. Ernest Moniz)

The Fermi Award is a Presidential award and is one of the oldest and most prestigious science and technology honors bestowed by the U.S. Government. On February 3, 2014 it was conferred upon two exceptional scientists. The first to be recognized is Dr. Allen J. Bard, 'for international leadership in electrochemical science and technology, for advances in photoelectrochemistry and photocatalytic materials, processes, and devices, and for discovery and development of electrochemical methods including electrogenerated chemiluminescence and scanning electrochemical microscopy.' The other honoree is Dr. Andrew Sessler, 'for advancing accelerators as powerful tools of scientific discovery, for visionary direction of the research enterprise focused on challenges in energy and the environment, and for championing outreach and freedom of scientific inquiry worldwide.' Dr. Patricia Dehmer opened the ceremony, and Dr. Ernest Moniz presented the awards.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Marshall Islands Dose Assessment and Radioecology Program: Report on the (i) 2018 Visual Study of Exterior Concrete of the Cactus Crater Containment Structure (ii) Periodic Monitoring of Groundwater on Runit Island and (iii) Initial Health Risk Assessment from Contaminants in the Cactus Crater Containment Structure

In 2012, Congress passed P.L. 112-149, Insular Areas Act of 2011, which amended the Compact of Free Association Amendments Act of 2003 by assigning Cactus Crater containment monitoring and reporting requirements to the Secretary of Energy (Secretary). Effective January 1, 2012, the Secretary was required to “periodically (but not less frequently than every 4 years) conduct -- (I) a visual study of the concrete exterior of the Cactus Crater Containment Structure on Runit Island; and (II) a radiochemical analysis of the groundwater surrounding and in the Cactus Crater Containment Structure on Runit Island.” 48 U.S.C. 1921b(f)(1)(B)(i). The Secretary was also directed to submit to Congress a report describing the results of each visual survey and the radiochemical analysis and “a determination on whether the surveys and analyses indicate any significant change in the health risks to the people of Enewetak from the contaminants within the Cactus Crater Containment Structure.” 48 U.S.C. 1921b(f)(1)(B)(ii)(II).

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

20 Years of Success: Science, Technology, and the Nuclear Weapons Stockpile

On Oct. 22, 2015, NNSA celebrated the proven success of the Stockpile Stewardship Program at a half-day public event featuring remarks by Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz, Secretary of State John Kerry, and Under Secretary for Nuclear Security and NNSA Administrator Lt. Gen. (retired) Frank G. Klotz. The event also featured remarks by Deputy Secretary of Energy Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall and NNSA Principal Deputy Administrator Madelyn Creedon.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
DOE OSTI2012

Waste Determination Equivalency - 12172

The Savannah River Site (SRS) is a Department of Energy (DOE) facility encompassing approximately 800 square kilometers near Aiken, South Carolina which began operations in the 1950's with the mission to produce nuclear materials. The SRS contains fifty-one tanks (2 stabilized, 49 yet to be closed) distributed between two liquid radioactive waste storage facilities at SRS containing carbon steel underground tanks with storage capacities ranging from 2,800,000 to 4,900,000 liters. Treatment of the liquid waste from these tanks is essential both to closing older tanks and to maintaining space needed to treat the waste that is eventually vitrified or disposed of onsite. Section 3116 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2005 (NDAA) provides the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), a methodology to determine that certain waste resulting from prior reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel are not high-level radioactive waste if it can be demonstrated that the waste meets the criteria set forth in Section 3116(a) of the NDAA. The Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the NRC, signed a determination in January 2006, pursuant to Section 3116(a) of the NDAA, for salt waste disposal at the SRS Saltstone Disposal Facility. This determination is based, in part, on the Basis for Section 3116 Determination for Salt Waste Disposal at the Savannah River Site and supporting references, a document that describes the planned methods of liquid waste treatment and the resulting waste streams. The document provides descriptions of the proposed methods for processing salt waste, dividing them into 'Interim Salt Processing' and later processing through the Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF). Interim Salt Processing is separated into Deliquification, Dissolution, and Adjustment (DDA) and Actinide Removal Process/Caustic Side Solvent Extraction Unit (ARP/MCU). The Waste Determination was signed by the Secretary of Energy in January of 2006 based on proposed processing techniques with the expectation that it could be revised as new processing capabilities became viable. Once signed, however, it became evident that any changes would require lengthy review and another determination signed by the Secretary of Energy. With the maturation of additional salt removal technologies and the extension of the SWPF start-up date, it becomes necessary to define 'equivalency' to the processes laid out in the original determination. For the purposes of SRS, any waste not processed through Interim Salt Processing must be processed through SWPF or an equivalent process, and therefore a clear statement of the requirements for a process to be equivalent to SWPF becomes necessary. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2014

Analysis of Potential Energy Corridors Proposed by the Western Electricity Coordinating Council

This report, Analysis of Potential Energy Corridors Proposed by the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC), was prepared by the Environmental Science Division of Argonne National Laboratory (Argonne). The intent of WECC’s work was to identify planning-level energy corridors that the Department of Energy (DOE) and its affiliates could study in greater detail. Argonne was tasked by DOE to analyze the WECC Proposed Energy Corridors in five topic areas for use in reviewing and revising existing corridors, as well as designating additional energy corridors in the 11 western states. In compliance with Section 368 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct), the Secretaries of Energy, Agriculture, and the Interior (Secretaries) published a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement in 2008 to address the proposed designation of energy transport corridors on federal lands in the 11 western states. Subsequently, Records of Decision designating the corridors were issued in 2009 by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the U.S. Forest Service (USFS). The 2012 settlement of a lawsuit, brought by The Wilderness Society and others against the United States, which identified environmental concerns for many of the corridors requires, among other things, periodic reviews of the corridors to assess the need for revisions, deletions, or additions. A 2013 Presidential Memorandum requires the Secretaries to undertake a continuing effort to identify and designate energy corridors. The WECC Proposed Energy Corridors and their analyses in this report provide key information for reviewing and revising existing corridors, as well as designating additional energy corridors in the 11 western states. Load centers and generation hubs identified in the WECC analysis, particularly as they reflect renewable energy development, would be useful in reviewing and potentially updating the designated Section 368 corridor network. Argonne used Geographic Information System (GIS) technology to analyze the proposed energy corridors in the WECC report in five topic areas: • Federal land jurisdiction, • Existing Section 368 corridors, • Existing transmission lines, • Previously studied corridor locations, and • Protected areas. Analysis methods are explained and tables and maps are provided to describe the results of the analyses in all five topic areas. WECC used a rational approach to connecting the hubs it identified, although there may be opportunities for adapting some of the proposed WECC routes to previously designated Section 368 corridors, for example: • The WECC proposed energy corridors are in fact centerlines of proposed routes connecting hubs of various descriptions related to electric energy transmission. Although the centerlines were sited to avoid sensitive areas, infrastructure proposed within actual pathways or corridors defined by the centerlines would sometimes affect lands where such development would not normally be allowed, such as National Parks and Monuments, National Wildlife Refuges, and Wilderness Areas. • Many WECC proposed energy corridors are sited along centerlines of existing roads, including Interstate Highways, where in some cases additional width to accommodate energy transmission infrastructure may not be available. Examples include the WECC Proposed Corridor along Interstate 70 through Glenwood Canyon in Colorado, and along U.S. Highway 89 across Glen Canyon Dam in Arizona. • Several WECC proposed energy corridors are parallel to designated Section 368 corridors that have already cleared the preliminary steps to right-of-way approval. In many of these cases, the WECC hub connection objectives can be met more efficiently by routing on the designated Section 368 corridors.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
NASA NTRS2003

Pragmatic Leadership Advice from Donald Rumsfeld

When President Gerald Ford appointed Donald Rumsfeld as his Secretary of Defense in 1975, Rumsfeld became the youngest defense secretary in US. history. Today, as defense secretary for President George W. Bush, Rumsfeld is the most senior appointee to hold that post. Between political assignments, he became an expert at turning around troubled corporations. His work at G.D. Searle-now a subsidiary of Pharmacia-earned him awards as an outstanding chief executive officer in the pharmaceutical industry. Rumsfeld's management philosophy is unique and direct, and the best part is he's written it down. While serving in the Ford administration, Rumsfeld wrote a white paper titled Rumsfeld's Rules. These rules were written as guiding principles for White House staff. First published in 1980, the rules were revised and expanded in 2001 to include broader insights on management, work and leadership. They reflect more than 40 years of Rumsfeld's wisdom and experience.

Teany, Douglas R.↗
DOE OSTI2012

Unconventional Staging Package Selection Leads to Cost Savings

In late 2010, U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Deputy Secretary of Energy, Daniel Poneman, directed that an analysis be conducted on the U-233 steel-clad, Zero Power Reactor (ZPR) fuel plates that were stored at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), focusing on cost savings and any potential DOE programmatic needs for the special nuclear material (SNM). The NA-162 Nuclear Criticality Safety Program requested retention of these fuel plates for use in experiments at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). A Secretarial Initiative challenged ORNL to make the first shipment to the NNSS by the end of the 2011 calendar year, and this effort became known as the U-233 Project Accelerated Shipping Campaign. To meet the Secretarial Initiative, National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec), the NNSS Management and Operations contractor, was asked to facilitate the receipt and staging of the U-233 fuel plates in the Device Assembly Facility (DAF). Because there were insufficient staging containers available for the fuel plates, NSTec conducted an analysis of alternatives. The project required a staging method that would reduce the staging footprint while addressing nuclear criticality safety and radiation exposure concerns. To accommodate an intermediate staging method of approximately five years, the NSTec project team determined that a unique and unconventional staging package, the AT-400R, was available to meet the project requirements. By using the AT-400R containers, NSTec was able to realize a cost savings of approximately $10K per container, a total cost savings of nearly $450K.

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

Management and Disposal of U.S. Department of Energy Spent Nuclear Fuel - 19133

Congress created the U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (NWTRB) in the 1987 Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act (Public Law 100-203) to evaluate the technical and scientific validity of activities undertaken by the Secretary of Energy to implement the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. In accordance with this mandate, the NWTRB reviewed the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) efforts to manage the inventory of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) that is under its control (DOE SNF) at several facilities around the country: the Hanford Site in Washington, the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) in Idaho, the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina, and the Fort St. Vrain independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) in Colorado. While disposal of SNF and high-level radioactive waste (HLW) in a deep geologic repository remains the ultimate objective of the DOE nuclear waste management program, there is significant uncertainty about when such a repository will be constructed in the United States. Until disposal occurs, it is essential to manage DOE SNF in a way that will facilitate its eventual disposal, and it is also important to improve understanding of processes related to packaging and storage of the SNF that could affect its future transportation and disposal. The NWTRB's review, which was a multi-year effort, was documented in a report to Congress and the Secretary of Energy and is summarized here. The NWTRB reviewed the quantities and characteristics of DOE SNF at each of the four sites. It also examined DOE packaging and storage activities and plans at each of the sites. The NWTRB highlighted three main issue areas in its review. First, the review identified issues related to managing the aging of DOE SNF and the facilities used to store the DOE SNF. Second, the review addressed issues related to packaging of stored non-naval DOE SNF into a standard canister. Third, the NWTRB assessed issues that could affect disposal of DOE SNF if DOE continues to evaluate a range of repository settings. Based on the information and findings developed as part of its review, the NWTRB made six recommendations to Congress and the Secretary of Energy related to aging management, packaging, and disposal of DOE SNF. DOE has begun to address some of the NWTRB recommendations. (author)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2012

LBNL Computational ResearchTheory Facility Groundbreaking - Full Press Conference. Feb 1st, 2012

Energy Secretary Steven Chu, along with Berkeley Lab and UC leaders, broke ground on the Lab's Computational Research and Theory (CRT) facility yesterday. The CRT will be at the forefront of high-performance supercomputing research and be DOE's most efficient facility of its kind. Joining Secretary Chu as speakers were Lab Director Paul Alivisatos, UC President Mark Yudof, Office of Science Director Bill Brinkman, and UC Berkeley Chancellor Robert Birgeneau. The festivities were emceed by Associate Lab Director for Computing Sciences, Kathy Yelick, and Berkeley Mayor Tom Bates joined in the shovel ceremony.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2014

WE-D-BRE-01: A Sr-90 Irradiation Device for the Study of Cutaneous Radiation Injury

Purpose: To determine dosimetric character for a custom-built Sr-90 beta irradiator designed for the study of Cutaneous Radiation Injury (CRI) in a porcine animal model. In the event of a radiological accident or terrorist event, Sr-90, a fission by-product, will likely be produced. CRI is a main concern due to the low energy and superficial penetration in tissue of beta particles from Sr-90. Seven 100 mCi plaque Sr-90 radiation sources within a custom-built irradiation device create a 40 mm diameter region of radiation-induced skin injury as part of a larger project to study the efficacy of a topical keratin-based product in CRI healing. Methods: A custom-built mobile irradiation device was designed and implemented for in vivo irradiations. Gafchromic™ EBT3 radiochromic film and a PTW Markus chamber type 23343 were utilized for dosimetric characterization of the beta fluence at the surface produced by this device. Films were used to assess 2-dimensional dose distribution and percent depth dose characteristics of the radiation field. Ion chamber measurements provided dose rate data within the field. Results: The radiation field produced by the irradiation device is homogeneous with high uniformity (∼5%) and symmetry (∼3%) with a steep dose fall-off with depth from the surface. Dose rates were determined to be 3.8 Gy/min and 3.3 Gy/min for film and ion chamber measurements, respectively. A dose rate of 3.4 Gy/min was used to calculate irradiation times for in vivo irradiations. Conclusion: The custom-built irradiation device enables the use of seven Sr-90 beta sources in an array to deliver a 40 mm diameter area of homogeneous skin dose with a dose rate that is useful for research purposes and clinically relevant for the induction of CRI. Doses of 36 and 42 Gy successfully produce Grade III CRI and are used in the study of the efficacy of KeraStat™. This project has been funded in whole or in part with Federal funds from the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, Office of the Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services, under Contract No. HHSO100201200007C.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗
DOE OSTI2011

Energy transport corridors: the potential role of Federal lands in states identified by the Energy Policy Act of 2005, section 368(b).

On August 8, 2005, the President signed the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct) into law. In Subtitle F of EPAct, Congress set forth various provisions that would change the way certain federal agencies (Agencies) coordinate to authorize the use of land for a variety of energy-related purposes. As part of Subtitle F of EPAct, Section 368 addresses the issue of energy transportation corridors on federal land for oil, gas, and hydrogen pipelines, as well as electricity transmission and distribution facilities. Because of the critical importance of improving the nation's electrical transmission grid, Congress recognized that electricity transmission issues should receive added attention when the Agencies address corridor location and analysis issues. In Section 368, Congress specifically directed the Agencies to consider the need for upgraded and new facilities to deliver electricity: In carrying out [Section 368], the Secretaries shall take into account the need for upgraded and new electricity transmission and distribution facilities to (1) improve reliability; (2) relieve congestion; and (3) enhance capability of the national grid to deliver electricity. Section 368 does not require the Agencies to consider or approve specific projects, applications for rights-of-way (ROWs), or other permits within designated energy corridors. Importantly, Section 368 does not direct, license, or otherwise permit any on-the-ground activity of any sort. If an applicant is interested in obtaining an authorization to develop a project within any corridor designated under Section 368, the applicant would have to apply for a ROW authorization and applicable permits. The Agencies would consider each application by applying appropriate project-specific reviews under requirements of laws and related regulations, including, but not limited to, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). Under Section 368, Congress divided the United States into two groups of states: the 11 contiguous western states and the remaining states. Direction for energy transportation corridor analysis and selection in the 11 western states was addressed in Section 368(a) of EPAct, while direction for energy transportation corridor analysis and selection in all other states was addressed under Section 368(b) of EPAct. It was clearly the priority of Congress to conduct corridor location studies and designation first on federal lands in the western states. Under Section 368(a), the Agencies produced a programmatic environmental impact statement (EIS), Designation of Energy Corridors on Federal Land in the 11 Western States (DOE and DOI 2008), that was used in part as the basis for designating more than 6,000 mi (9,656 km) of energy transportation corridors on federal land in 11 western states. Under Section 368(a) of EPAct, Congress clearly stated the Agencies needed to (1) designate energy transportation corridors on federal land, (2) conduct the necessary environmental review of the designated corridors, and (3) incorporate the designated corridors into the appropriate land use plans. Congressional direction under Section 368(b) of EPAct differs from that provided under Section 368(a). Specifically, Section 368(b) requires the secretaries of the Agencies, in consultation with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), affected utility industries, and other interested persons, to jointly: (1) Identify corridors for oil, gas, and hydrogen pipelines and electricity transmission and distribution facilities on federal land in states other than the 11 western states identified under Section 368(a) of EPAct, and (2) Schedule prompt action to identify, designate, and incorporate the corridors into the applicable land use plans. While Section 368(a) clearly directs designation as a necessary first step for energy transportation corridors in the 11 western states, Section 368(b) directs the Agencies to first identify corridors and then schedule prompt action to identify, designate, and incorporate the corridors into applicable land use plans. To comply with the congressional direction provided in Section 368(b), the Agencies investigated corridor identification issues in the Section 368(b) states; this report to Congress provides information that could be relevant to possible future designation of energy corridors. Future designations, if appropriate and necessary, would occur when the Agencies undertake revisions and/or updates to land use plans that guide management decisions on lands located within individual administrative units, such as specific National Forests, National Parks, or Wildlife Refuges. At this time, the Agencies are not proposing any actions or decisions related directly or indirectly to designating energy corridors on federal land under Section 368(b) of EPAct.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2012

Lands with Wilderness Characteristics, Resource Management Plan Constraints, and Land Exchanges: Cross-Jurisdictional Management and Impacts on Unconventional Fuel Development in Utah's Uinta Basin

Utah is rich in oil shale and oil sands resources. Chief among the challenges facing prospective unconventional fuel developers is the ability to access these resources. Access is heavily dependent upon land ownership and applicable management requirements. Understanding constraints on resource access and the prospect of consolidating resource holdings across a fragmented management landscape is critical to understanding the role Utah’s unconventional fuel resources may play in our nation’s energy policy. This Topical Report explains the historic roots of the “crazy quilt” of western land ownership, how current controversies over management of federal public land with wilderness character could impact access to unconventional fuels resources, and how land exchanges could improve management efficiency. Upon admission to the Union, the State of Utah received the right to title to more than one-ninth of all land within the newly formed state. This land is held in trust to support public schools and institutions, and is managed to generate revenue for trust beneficiaries. State trust lands are scattered across the state in mostly discontinuous 640-acre parcels, many of which are surrounded by federal land and too small to develop on their own. Where state trust lands are developable but surrounded by federal land, federal land management objectives can complicate state trust land development. The difficulty generating revenue from state trust lands can frustrate state and local government officials as well as citizens advocating for economic development. Likewise, the prospect of industrial development of inholdings within prized conservation landscapes creates management challenges for federal agencies. One major tension involves whether certain federal public lands possess wilderness character, and if so, whether management of those lands should emphasize wilderness values over other uses. On December 22, 2010, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar issued Secretarial Order 3310, Protecting Wilderness Characteristics on Lands Managed by the Bureau of Land Management. Supporters argue that the Order merely provides guidance regarding implementation of existing legal obligations without creating new rights or duties. Opponents describe Order 3310 as subverting congressional authority to designate Wilderness Areas and as closing millions of acres of public lands to energy development and commodity production. While opponents succeeded in temporarily defunding the Order’s implementation and forcing the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to adopt a more collaborative approach, the fundamental questions remain: Which federal public lands possess wilderness characteristics and how should those lands be managed? The closely related question is: How might management of such resources impact unconventional fuel development within Utah? These questions remain pressing independent of the Order because the BLM, which manages the majority of federal land in Utah, is statutorily obligated to maintain an up-to-date inventory of federal public lands and the resources they contain, including lands with wilderness characteristics. The BLM is also legally obligated to develop and periodically update land use plans, relying on information obtained in its public lands inventory. The BLM cannot sidestep these hard choices, and failure to consider wilderness characteristics during the planning process will derail the planning effort. Based on an analysis of the most recent inventory data, lands with wilderness characteristics — whether already subject to mandatory protection under the Wilderness Act, subject to discretionary protections as part of BLM Resource Management Plan revisions, or potentially subject to new protections under Order 3310 — are unlikely to profoundly impact oil shale development within Utah’s Uinta Basin. Lands with wilderness characteristics are likely to v have a greater impact on oil sands resources, particularly those resources found in the southern part of the state. Management requirements independent of lands with wilderness characteristics far overshadow the challenges posed by wilderness issues. Wilderness character issues aside, a need to improve management integration remains. In researching past efforts to manage across the fragmented landscape we found that unilateral actions have been deeply divisive and engendered distrust among those impacted by the action. This distrust can linger for decades. Collaborative efforts, whether intended to protect lands, foster development, or do both, can represent an attractive alternative to unilateral action. Such collaborative efforts are more likely to succeed when they respond to strong incentives to act, evidence widespread involvement and support, and benefit from a committed champion. Projects are all but certain to fail where participants overreach or one of these elements is missing. For more than three decades, the state and federal government have cooperatively pursued land exchanges in order to “block up” isolated state trust lands and eliminate inholdings. These efforts can advance both conservation and development objectives, and are generally conducted in conjunction with efforts to protect extraordinary federal lands. Congress recognized the value of such exchanges and, as part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, directed the Department of the Interior to pursue land exchanges as a means of facilitating environmentally responsible oil shale and oil sands recovery. But land exchanges are not without their challenges. Federal law requires equalizing the value of the lands and resources to be exchanged, and various means of equalizing value have been attempted. More flexible approaches have a higher likelihood of success, but are often criticized as resulting in an economic windfall for one party. Today challenges associated with appraisal and valuation stand as the most significant obstacles in the way of large-scale exchanges. Greater reliance on revenue sharing provisions that prevent an economic windfall to one party and avoid challenges inherent in valuing oil shale and oil sands resources may mark a promising path forward. The success or failure of these efforts could profoundly impact both the prospect of unconventional fuel development and wilderness character protection.

04 OIL SHALES AND TAR SANDS↗
DOE OSTI2014

Phase 1 Development Report for the SESSA Toolkit.

The Site Exploitation System for Situational Awareness ( SESSA ) tool kit , developed by Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) , is a comprehensive de cision support system for crime scene data acquisition and Sensitive Site Exploitation (SSE). SESSA is an outgrowth of another SNL developed decision support system , the Building R estoration Operations Optimization Model (BROOM), a hardware/software solution for data acquisition, data management, and data analysis. SESSA was designed to meet forensic crime scene needs as defined by the DoD's Military Criminal Investigation Organiza tion (MCIO) . SESSA is a very comprehensive toolki t with a considerable amount of database information managed through a Microsoft SQL (Structured Query Language) database engine, a Geographical Information System (GIS) engine that provides comprehensive m apping capabilities, as well as a an intuitive Graphical User Interface (GUI) . An electronic sketch pad module is included. The system also has the ability to efficiently generate necessary forms for forensic crime scene investigations (e.g., evidence submittal, laboratory requests, and scene notes). SESSA allows the user to capture photos on site, and can read and generate ba rcode labels that limit transcription errors. SESSA runs on PC computers running Windows 7, but is optimized for touch - screen tablet computers running Windows for ease of use at crime scenes and on SSE deployments. A prototype system for 3 - dimensional (3 D) mapping and measur e ments was also developed to complement the SESSA software. The mapping system employs a visual/ depth sensor that captures data to create 3D visualizations of an interior space and to make distance measurements with centimeter - level a ccuracy. Output of this 3D Model Builder module provides a virtual 3D %22walk - through%22 of a crime scene. The 3D mapping system is much less expensive and easier to use than competitive systems. This document covers the basic installation and operation of th e SESSA tool kit in order to give the user enough information to start using the tool kit . SESSA is currently a prototype system and this documentation covers the initial release of the tool kit . Funding for SESSA was provided by the Department of Defense (D oD), Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (ASD(R&E)) Rapid Fielding (RF) organization. The project was managed by the Defense Forensic Science Center (DFSC) , formerly known as the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Laboratory (USACIL) . ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors wish to acknowledge the funding support for the development of the Site Exploitation System for Situational Awareness (SESSA) toolkit from the Department of Defense (DoD), Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (ASD(R&E)) Rapid Fielding (RF) organization. The project was managed by the Defense Forensic Science Center (DFSC) , formerly known as the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Laboratory (USACIL). Special thanks to Mr. Garold Warner, of DFSC, who served as the Project Manager. Individuals that worked on the design, functional attributes, algorithm development, system arc hitecture, and software programming include: Robert Knowlton, Brad Melton, Robert Anderson, and Wendy Amai.

Knowlton, Robert G.↗