Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Risk Assessment Tool”

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 397 records · Page 22
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

PSA 2025 DPRA for Cyber Optimization

Cyberattacks can have many different attack paths, durations, and goals. There are also many different mitigation options involving hardware, software, and/or humans. Evaluating defense options should include quantitative evaluation of overall effectiveness to make cost and risk-informed decisions. Typical cyberattack modeling methods only provide a qualitative evaluation and have difficulty with time dependent scenarios. The main areas of cybersecurity are confidentiality, integrity, and availability. For companies with cyber-physical systems such as advanced nuclear reactors, cyber-related integrity is a requirement set by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. But companies are also concerned about availability or reliability as a business case. As cyber threats are evolving to a business-for-hire structure, more attacks focus on disrupting business success and reliability, causing financial and economic stability risk. Companies want reliability analysis while optimizing cost, which requires more than safety modeling methods. Dynamic-state-based and Markov-based modeling provides a method for better cyber scenario modeling with timing and conditional features not found in other numerical evaluation methods. EMRALD (Event Modeling Risk Assessment using Lined Diagrams) is a dynamic risk analysis modeling and simulation tool and has features that reduce modeling issues such as state-base explosion found in Markov-based tools. It has been used to model different time-dependent events including plant behavior and operator procedures. As a general modeling tool, EMRALD can also be used to model cyberattack scenarios with varying mitigation options and quantify effectiveness, producing numerical data for risk-informed decisions. This paper uses EMRALD to demonstrate that dynamic risk analysis can be used for cyber threat modeling to provide insights for design decision-making and optimize defense strategies.

97 - MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRS2008

The NASA Robotic Conjunction Assessment Process: Overview and Operational Experiences

Orbital debris poses a significant threat to spacecraft health and safety. Recent events such as China's anti-satellite test and the Breeze-M rocket explosion have led to an even greater awareness and concern in the satellite community. Therefore, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has established requirements that routine conjunction assessment screening shall be performed for all maneuverable spacecraft having perigees less than 2000 km or within 200 km of geosynchronous altitude. NASA s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) has developed an operational collision risk assessment process to protect NASA s high-value unmanned (robotic) assets that has been in use since January 2005. This paper provides an overview of the NASA robotic conjunction assessment process, including descriptions of the new tools developed to analyze close approach data and of the risk mitigation strategies employed. In addition, statistical data describing the number of conjunctions experienced are presented. A debris avoidance maneuver performed by Aura in June of 2008 is described in detail to illustrate the process.

Newman, Lauri Kraft↗
NASA NTRS2013

Practical Application of PRA as an Integrated Design Tool for Space Systems

This paper presents the application of the first comprehensive Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) during the design phase of a joint NASA/NOAA weather satellite program, Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite Series R (GOES-R). GOES-R is the next generation weather satellite primarily to help understand the weather and help save human lives. PRA has been used at NASA for Human Space Flight for many years. PRA was initially adopted and implemented in the operational phase of manned space flight programs and more recently for the next generation human space systems. Since its first use at NASA, PRA has become recognized throughout the Agency as a method of assessing complex mission risks as part of an overall approach to assuring safety and mission success throughout project lifecycles. PRA is now included as a requirement during the design phase of both NASA next generation manned space vehicles as well as for high priority robotic missions. The influence of PRA on GOES-R design and operation concepts are discussed in detail. The GOES-R PRA is unique at NASA for its early implementation. It also represents a pioneering effort to integrate risks from both Spacecraft (SC) and Ground Segment (GS) to fully assess the probability of achieving mission objectives. PRA analysts were actively involved in system engineering and design engineering to ensure that a comprehensive set of technical risks were correctly identified and properly understood from a design and operations perspective. The analysis included an assessment of SC hardware and software, SC fault management system, GS hardware and software, common cause failures, human error, natural hazards, solar weather and infrastructure (such as network and telecommunications failures, fire). PRA findings directly resulted in design changes to reduce SC risk from micro-meteoroids. PRA results also led to design changes in several SC subsystems, e.g. propulsion, guidance, navigation and control (GNC), communications, mechanisms, and command and data handling (C&DH). The fault tree approach assisted in the development of the fault management system design. Human error analysis, which examined human response to failure, indicated areas where automation could reduce the overall probability of gaps in operation by half. In addition, the PRA brought to light many potential root causes of system disruptions, including earthquakes, inclement weather, solar storms, blackouts and other extreme conditions not considered in the typical reliability and availability analyses. Ultimately the PRA served to identify potential failures that, when mitigated, resulted in a more robust design, as well as to influence the program's concept of operations. The early and active integration of PRA with system and design engineering provided a well-managed approach for risk assessment that increased reliability and availability, optimized lifecyc1e costs, and unified the SC and GS developments.

Kalia, Prince↗
NASA NTRS2010

Comparison of ORSAT and SCARAB Reentry Analysis Tools for a Generic Satellite Test Case

Reentry analysis is essential to understanding the consequences of the full life cycle of a spacecraft. Since reentry is a key factor in spacecraft development, NASA and ESA have separately developed tools to assess the survivability of objects during reentry. Criteria such as debris casualty area and impact energy are particularly important to understanding the risks posed to people on Earth. Therefore, NASA and ESA have undertaken a series of comparison studies of their respective reentry codes for verification and improvements in accuracy. The NASA Object Reentry Survival Analysis Tool (ORSAT) and the ESA Spacecraft Atmospheric Reentry and Aerothermal Breakup (SCARAB) reentry analysis tools serve as standard codes for reentry survivability assessment of satellites. These programs predict whether an object will demise during reentry and calculate the debris casualty area of objects determined to survive, establishing the reentry risk posed to the Earth's population by surviving debris. A series of test cases have been studied for comparison and the most recent uses "Testsat," a conceptual satellite composed of generic parts, defined to use numerous simple shapes and various materials for a better comparison of the predictions of these two codes. This study is an improvement on the others in this series because of increased consistency in modeling techniques and variables. The overall comparison demonstrated that the two codes arrive at similar results. Either most objects modeled resulted in close agreement between the two codes, or if the difference was significant, the variance could be explained as a case of semantics in the model definitions. This paper presents the main results of ORSAT and SCARAB for the Testsat case and discusses the sources of any discovered differences. Discussion of the results of previous comparisons is made for a summary of differences between the codes and lessons learned from this series of tests.

Kelley, Robert L.↗
NASA NTRS1998

Testing, Requirements, and Metrics

The criticality of correct, complete, testable requirements is a fundamental tenet of software engineering. Also critical is complete requirements based testing of the final product. Modern tools for managing requirements allow new metrics to be used in support of both of these critical processes. Using these tools, potential problems with the quality of the requirements and the test plan can be identified early in the life cycle. Some of these quality factors include: ambiguous or incomplete requirements, poorly designed requirements databases, excessive or insufficient test cases, and incomplete linkage of tests to requirements. This paper discusses how metrics can be used to evaluate the quality of the requirements and test to avoid problems later. Requirements management and requirements based testing have always been critical in the implementation of high quality software systems. Recently, automated tools have become available to support requirements management. At NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), automated requirements management tools are being used on several large projects. The use of these tools opens the door to innovative uses of metrics in characterizing test plan quality and assessing overall testing risks. In support of these projects, the Software Assurance Technology Center (SATC) is working to develop and apply a metrics program that utilizes the information now available through the application of requirements management tools. Metrics based on this information provides real-time insight into the testing of requirements and these metrics assist the Project Quality Office in its testing oversight role. This paper discusses three facets of the SATC's efforts to evaluate the quality of the requirements and test plan early in the life cycle, thus preventing costly errors and time delays later.

Rosenberg, Linda↗
DOE OSTI2024

Adoption Readiness Level Assessment of Redox Flow Batteries

Adoption readiness levels (ARLs) were developed by the Department of Energy’s Office of Technology Transitions (OTT) to holistically capture barriers to market adoption for a technology. The framework consists of 17 risk dimensions falling into 4 broad categories: Value Proposition, Market Acceptance, Resource Maturity, and License to Operate. OTT’s Commercial Adoption Readiness Assessment Tool (CARAT) can be used to evaluate a technology’s ARL. This work applies CARAT to redox flow batteries to evaluate the level of risk for this technology class across the 17 dimensions. Redox flow batteries were found to bear 1-2 high risk dimensions, 10-11 medium risk dimensions, 5 low risk dimensions, and scored an overall low readiness on the CARAT scoring scale (ranges reflect variation with flow battery chemistry). Herein, we describe the factors and evaluation across the dimensions leading to this score for redox flow batteries.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
NASA NTRS2015

Credibility Assessment of Deterministic Computational Models and Simulations for Space Biomedical Research and Operations

Human missions beyond low earth orbit to destinations, such as to Mars and asteroids will expose astronauts to novel operational conditions that may pose health risks that are currently not well understood and perhaps unanticipated. In addition, there are limited clinical and research data to inform development and implementation of health risk countermeasures for these missions. Consequently, NASA's Digital Astronaut Project (DAP) is working to develop and implement computational models and simulations (M&S) to help predict and assess spaceflight health and performance risks, and enhance countermeasure development. In order to effectively accomplish these goals, the DAP evaluates its models and simulations via a rigorous verification, validation and credibility assessment process to ensure that the computational tools are sufficiently reliable to both inform research intended to mitigate potential risk as well as guide countermeasure development. In doing so, DAP works closely with end-users, such as space life science researchers, to establish appropriate M&S credibility thresholds. We will present and demonstrate the process the DAP uses to vet computational M&S for space biomedical analysis using real M&S examples. We will also provide recommendations on how the larger space biomedical community can employ these concepts to enhance the credibility of their M&S codes.

Mulugeta, Lealem↗
NASA NTRS2005

Knowledge Representation Standards and Interchange Formats for Causal Graphs

In many domains, automated reasoning tools must represent graphs of causally linked events. These include fault-tree analysis, probabilistic risk assessment (PRA), planning, procedures, medical reasoning about disease progression, and functional architectures. Each of these fields has its own requirements for the representation of causation, events, actors and conditions. The representations include ontologies of function and cause, data dictionaries for causal dependency, failure and hazard, and interchange formats between some existing tools. In none of the domains has a generally accepted interchange format emerged. The paper makes progress towards interoperability across the wide range of causal analysis methodologies. We survey existing practice and emerging interchange formats in each of these fields. Setting forth a set of terms and concepts that are broadly shared across the domains, we examine the several ways in which current practice represents them. Some phenomena are difficult to represent or to analyze in several domains. These include mode transitions, reachability analysis, positive and negative feedback loops, conditions correlated but not causally linked and bimodal probability distributions. We work through examples and contrast the differing methods for addressing them. We detail recent work in knowledge interchange formats for causal trees in aerospace analysis applications in early design, safety and reliability. Several examples are discussed, with a particular focus on reachability analysis and mode transitions. We generalize the aerospace analysis work across the several other domains. We also recommend features and capabilities for the next generation of causal knowledge representation standards.

Throop, David R.↗
NASA NTRS2022

Directed Acyclic Graphs: A Tool for Understanding the NASA Human Spaceflight System Risks - Human System Risk Board

For over a decade, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has tracked and configuration-managed approximately 30 risks to astronaut health and performance that occur before, during and after spaceflight. The Human System Risk Board (HSRB), a Health and Medical Technical Authority (HMTA) Board at NASA Johnson Space Center, is the entity responsible for identifying, assessing, analyzing, and monitoring the official understanding of the risk or risk posture for each of the Human System Risks and determining – based on evaluation of the available evidence – when that risk posture changes. The ultimate purpose of tracking and researching these risks is to find ways to reduce the risk that astronaut crews face during spaceflight. Historically, research, development and operations relevant to one risk have been conducted in isolation from other risks; these individual risk ‘silos’ enabled initial characterization of each specific risk. In spaceflight however, the impact of exposure to risk for astronaut crews is cumulative, and not independent of exposures or other risks, as all the adverse effects of the spaceflight environment begin at launch, continue throughout the duration of the mission and in some cases across the lifetime of the crews. In January of 2020, the HSRB at NASA embarked on a pilot project designed to assess the potential value of causal diagramming as a tool to facilitate understanding of these cumulative and interdependent effects as applied within Human System Risk management. This process uses directed acyclic graphs as a means of formalizing a shared mental model of the causal flow of risk among Risk Board stakeholders. Initially this model was to improve communication among those stakeholders, but the potential value exceeds communication alone. The causal diagrams are formulated as directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) to function as a type of knowledge graph for reference for the board and its stakeholders. This document is a sister document to NASA/TM 20220006812 Directed Acyclic Graph Guidance Documentation (1). In that document, the basic guidance for creating and standardizing directed acyclic graphs as tools for cross-risk analysis is provided. This document contains the initial configuration managed DAGs that were created as a result of applying those principles. These initial versions were accepted by the HSRB in January of 2022. Each of the Human System Risks are represented by a DAG that has been reviewed by the larger Human Health and Performance community at NASA including life scientists, physical scientists, physicians, nurses, pharmacists, exercise specialists and more. These results show the starting point for Human System Risk DAGs as shared mental models and communication aids across the boundaries of the various expertise needed to understand and mitigate the human risks in spaceflight. Because they are a starting point, each of these DAGs can be expected to change over time as new or refined evidence becomes available. The process for updating these DAGs can be found in the JSC-66705 Human System Risk Management Plan (2) that is publicly available on the NASA Technical Reports Server.

Erik L. Antonsen↗
DOE OSTI2024

Topological Characterization and Uncertainty Visualization of Atmospheric Rivers

Atmospheric rivers (ARs) are long, narrow regions of water vapor in the Earth's atmosphere that transport heat and moisture from the tropics to the mid-latitudes. ARs are often associated with extreme weather events in North America and contribute significantly to water supply and flood risk. However, characterizing ARs has been a major challenge due to the lack of a universal definition and their structural variations. Existing AR detection tools (ARDTs) produce distinct AR boundaries for the same event, making the risk assessment of ARs a difficult task. Understanding these uncertainties is crucial to improving the predictability of AR impacts, including their landfall areas and associated precipitation, which could cause catastrophic flooding and landslides over the coastal regions. In this work, we develop an uncertainty visualization framework that captures boundary and interior uncertainties, i.e., structural variations, of an ensemble of ARs that arise from a set of ARDTs. We first provide a statistical overview of the AR boundaries using the contour boxplots of Whitaker et al. that highlight the structural variations of AR boundaries based on their nesting relationships. We then introduce the topological skeletons of ARs based on Morse complexes that characterize the interior variation of an ensemble of ARs. We propose an uncertainty visualization of these topological skeletons, inspired by MetroSets of Jacobson et al. that emphasizes the agreements and disagreements across the ensemble members. Through case studies and expert feedback, we demonstrate that the two approaches complement each other, and together they could facilitate an effective comparative analysis process and provide a more confident outlook on an AR's shape, area, and onshore impact.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

National Renewable Energy Laboratory Wildland Fire Management Plan (August 2022-August 2025): February-August 2022

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) is located in a moderate wildfire risk region. The region has a history of damaging wildland fire activity and is also susceptible to changing environmental conditions (drought, elevated temperatures) that may lead to an increase in wildfire frequency and consequence over time. An integrated, site-wide wildland fire management plan is required by the Department of Energy and is to be consistent with the Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy. The NREL Wildland Fire Management Plan (WFMP) provides an integrated approach to reducing risk to wildland fire at NREL. The goals of the WFMP are to protect human health and safety, protect NREL facilities and research, enhance community protection, diminish risk and consequences of wildland fires, and maintain the health of the ecosystem. The WFMP accomplishes these goals through the use of tools such as fire behavior modeling, fire growth modeling, a structure ignition risk assessment, and through the application of robust fire prevention, emergency management, and environmental programs. The NREL WFMP was developed in a collaborative manner with input from regional stakeholders including cities, counties, local fire departments, and other governmental agencies. The WFMP provides for recommendations to reduce overall wildland fire risk to life safety and property at NREL.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

The Digital Assurance for High Consequence Systems (DAHCS) Mission Campaign Whitepaper

The DAHCS (pronounced “Dax”) MC is a 7-year, $\$$45 million research portfolio within Sandia’s Laboratory Directed Research and Development program. The DAHCS MC arose in response to a great need: to ensure that the use of digital technologies does not weaken our nation’s high consequence systems. Digital technologies offer many benefits in speed, cost, and flexibility, and we seek to reap those benefits without introducing new system failures. However, digital technologies cannot be evaluated the same way as analog technologies. Initiatives across the nation highlight the capability gap that prevents efficient, effective digital assurance. The Challenge Today’s digital assurance tools, techniques, and methods are inadequate to confidently characterize, assess, and manage digital risk; they are ad hoc, slow, costly, and rarely scalable to increasingly complex digital technologies. The rapidly evolving cyber threat landscape exacerbates this problem because digital assurance now must secure against digital risks now and in the future, including those introduced by rapidly evolving technologies, adversaries, and systems.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRS1990

The aerospace plane design challenge: Credible computational fluid dynamics results

Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) is necessary in the design processes of all current aerospace plane programs. Single-stage-to-orbit (STTO) aerospace planes with air-breathing supersonic combustion are going to be largely designed by means of CFD. The challenge of the aerospace plane design is to provide credible CFD results to work from, to assess the risk associated with the use of those results, and to certify CFD codes that produce credible results. To establish the credibility of CFD results used in design, the following topics are discussed: CFD validation vis-a-vis measurable fluid dynamics (MFD) validation; responsibility for credibility; credibility requirement; and a guide for establishing credibility. Quantification of CFD uncertainties helps to assess success risk and safety risks, and the development of CFD as a design tool requires code certification. This challenge is managed by designing the designers to use CFD effectively, by ensuring quality control, and by balancing the design process. For designing the designers, the following topics are discussed: how CFD design technology is developed; the reasons Japanese companies, by and large, produce goods of higher quality than the U.S. counterparts; teamwork as a new way of doing business; and how ideas, quality, and teaming can be brought together. Quality control for reducing the loss imparted to the society begins with the quality of the CFD results used in the design process, and balancing the design process means using a judicious balance of CFD and MFD.

Mehta, Unmeel B.↗
DOE OSTI2024

The Integration and Mapping of an Open-Source National Well Resource to Inform Geologic Carbon Storage Site Selection and Risk Prevention: The CO2-Locate Database

Geologic carbon storage (GCS) offers a way to capture and permanently store CO₂ from fossil fuel operations in underground geologic structures, aiding in the transition to a carbon-neutral energy economy. However, CO₂ injection sites can experience gas leakage through existing wells that penetrate storage reservoirs, making knowledge of well locations and characteristics crucial for permitting, infrastructure reusability, and risk assessment in GCS. Currently, public wellbore data from state, federal, and tribal entities are inconsistent and fragmented, with gaps and redundancies. To address this, the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) developed CO2-Locate, an open-source, geospatial database and online application. CO2-Locate integrates over 50 data sources from federal, state, and tribal entities, creating a standardized national well database. Funded by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the database is publicly available through the Energy Data eXchange (EDX) and viewable via the CO2-Locate web mapping application. This tool allows users to query, filter, and visualize well data to support GCS planning, permitting, and risk assessments. This presentation covers the methods used to create CO2-Locate, including data acquisition, processing, attribute mapping, and integration, much of which is automated for future updates. The web mapping application and its role in GCS site selection will also be discussed.

Tetteh, Daniel A.↗
NASA NTRS2014

HRP's Healthcare Spin-Offs Through Computational Modeling and Simulation Practice Methodologies

Spaceflight missions expose astronauts to novel operational and environmental conditions that pose health risks that are currently not well understood, and perhaps unanticipated. Furthermore, given the limited number of humans that have flown in long duration missions and beyond low Earth-orbit, the amount of research and clinical data necessary to predict and mitigate these health and performance risks are limited. Consequently, NASA's Human Research Program (HRP) conducts research and develops advanced methods and tools to predict, assess, and mitigate potential hazards to the health of astronauts. In this light, NASA has explored the possibility of leveraging computational modeling since the 1970s as a means to elucidate the physiologic risks of spaceflight and develop countermeasures. Since that time, substantial progress has been realized in this arena through a number of HRP funded activates such as the Digital Astronaut Project (DAP) and the Integrated Medical Model (IMM). Much of this success can be attributed to HRP's endeavor to establish rigorous verification, validation, and credibility (VV&C) processes that ensure computational models and simulations (M&S) are sufficiently credible to address issues within their intended scope. This presentation summarizes HRP's activities in credibility of modeling and simulation, in particular through its outreach to the community of modeling and simulation practitioners. METHODS: The HRP requires all M&S that can have moderate to high impact on crew health or mission success must be vetted in accordance to NASA Standard for Models and Simulations, NASA-STD-7009 (7009) [5]. As this standard mostly focuses on engineering systems, the IMM and DAP have invested substantial efforts to adapt the processes established in this standard for their application to biological M&S, which is more prevalent in human health and performance (HHP) and space biomedical research and operations [6,7]. These methods have also generated substantial interest by the broader medical community though institutions like the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to develop similar standards and guidelines applicable to the larger medical operations and research community. DISCUSSION: Similar to NASA, many leading government agencies, health institutions and medical product developers around the world are recognizing the potential of computational M&S to support clinical research and decision making. In this light, substantial investments are being made in computational medicine and notable discoveries are being realized [8]. However, there is a lack of broadly applicable practice guidance for the development and implementation of M&S in clinical care and research in a manner that instills confidence among medical practitioners and biological researchers [9,10]. In this presentation, we will give an overview on how HRP is working with the NIH's Interagency Modeling and Analysis Group (IMAG), the FDA and the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) to leverage NASA's biomedical VV&C processes to establish a new regulatory standard for Verification and Validation in Computational Modeling of Medical Devices, and Guidelines for Credible Practice of Computational Modeling and Simulation in Healthcare.

Mulugeta, Lealem↗
NASA NTRS2022

Aggregate Risk Tool for Human Space Flight

This tool utilizes Data fusion capabilities developed from the 2020-2022 Information Fusion (IFDA) IRAD to enhance functionality of a Human Spaceflight (HSF) Aggregate Risk Product developed by the JSC Flight Safety Office. The tool compiles and present risk data from multiple Program and Commercial Provider sources to provide a holistic assessment for Program Managers and Technical Authorities to evaluate residual risk prior to HSF Launches. The aggregation, or coupling of risks from multiple sources (Ex: PRA, variances, anomaly data bases, CRM data, technical review board minutes, Hazard Analysis, etc.) identifies areas of elevated risk in components, systems or mission phases that would otherwise be undetected by non-integrated program risk management tools and possesses. Data is then displayed in an interactive user interface/dashboard that enables users to see potential areas of concern requiring more in-depth analysis.

Patrick M Huckaby↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Aggregate Risk Tool for Human Space Flight

This project utilized Data fusion capabilities developed from the 2020-2022 Information Fusion (IFDA) IRAD to enhance functionality of a Human Spaceflight (HSF) Aggregate Risk Product developed by the JSC Flight Safety Office. The tool compiles and presents risk data from multiple Program and Commercial Provider vehicles to provide a holistic assessment of residual risk to Program Managers and Technical Authorities prior to HSF Launches. The aggregation or coupling of risks from multiple sources (Examples: PRA, variances, anomaly data bases, Program Risk Management data bases, technical review board minutes, Hazard Analysis, etc.) when analyzed, identify potential areas of elevated risk in components, systems or mission phases that would otherwise be undetected by nonintegrated program risk management tools and possesses.

Patrick Huckaby↗
DOE OSTI2020

Choosing the Best Modeling Platform for Radiological Risk Assessment Models - 20468

Radiological risk assessments, in the form of performance or safety assessments, are often required under regulations or guidance for remediation of contaminated land, decommissioning of contaminated buildings or structures, and radioactive waste disposal. These risk assessments are usually supported by fate and transport models that address decay and ingrowth of radionuclides, as well as their movement through engineered systems and the natural environment. These models are often projected thousands, or more, years into the future, largely because the radioactive species change through decay and ingrowth, and hence the magnitude of the radioactive effect changes with time. There are many computer codes that are available to address this type of modeling. They range from addressing specific pathways or processes such as infiltration of water, groundwater, surface water, air, biota, diffusion and advection of water and gases, to those that try to couple all processes together to evaluate the impact of fate and transport through the entire system to places in space and time to which access is assumed. These different types of codes are sometimes separated with the monikers process-level and systems-level codes, although it is often not clear that this separation does justice to the capabilities of the many codes that are available to evaluate fate and transport of radionuclides. The focus of this paper is the latter group of modeling codes. Several systems level modeling codes exist and are used. There are differences between these codes in terms of utility, flexibility, complexity and cost. The purpose of this paper is to compare a few of these codes in the context of work currently being performed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Modeling and Data for Radiological Impact Assessments (MODARIA) II Working Group 1 (WG1). The MODARIA II WG1's main focus is how stakeholder engaged decision analysis can, or should, be applied to radiological contamination problems so that better, longstanding, sustainable, solutions are reached. However, the WG1 also recognizes the potential impact of the modeling tools that are chosen to address radiological risk, which is often a primary objective of decision making for radiological problems. Other objectives might also be important, such as constraining costs, obtaining financing, minimizing impact on ecosystems, saving cultural resources, saving jobs, farmland, environmental justice, etc., in a full decision analysis for a given radiological contamination problem, but none of these other objectives have the same types of complex modeling needs as minimize radiological dose. Consequently, a further focus of WG1 is to evaluate the potential impacts on decision making of the choice of fate and transport, and risk assessment, modeling codes that are used to support decision making. The WG1 will produce a report at the end of 2020 that will focus on an approach to effective decision making and stakeholder engagement. The report will also consider the role that performance assessment modeling should play in the decision-making process, including the impact of the choice of modeling tools or computer codes on risk-informed decision making. Several sites around the World have been made available by Member States for these model comparisons, and several modeling tools have been considered. However, the focus of this paper is on two of the sites, one in Belgium and one in Ukraine, and on three of the tools: NORMALYSA (NORM And Legacy Site Assessment); GoldSim{sup C}, and AMBER{sup C}. The final report from this working group will also cover other modeling tools, including RESRAD, and PC-Cream{sup R}. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗