Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “DOCUMENTATION”

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 433 records · Page 24

NRIC Asset Suite Engineering and Operations Data Integration Plan

The National Reactor Innovation Center (NRIC), established by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) in August 2019, accelerates the demonstration and deployment of advanced nuclear energy through its mission to inspire stakeholders and the public, empower innovators, and deliver successful outcomes through efficient coordination of partners and resources. NRIC is a national program led by Idaho National Laboratory (INL), enabling collaborators to harness the world-class capabilities of the U.S. National Laboratory System. Committed to demonstrating advanced reactors by the end of 2025, NRIC is designed to bridge the gap between research, development, and the marketplace to help convert some of the Nation’s most promising advanced nuclear reactors into commercial applications by 2030. To meet these needs, NRIC is developing two reactor demonstration test beds at Idaho National Laboratory (INL), the Laboratory for Operation and Testing in the United States (LOTUS) and the Demonstration and Operation of Microreactor Experiments (DOME) test bed. Each test bed involves the modification of existing facilities at INL’s Materials and Fuels Complex (MFC). Retrofitting these facilities to accommodate novel reactors, as well as subsequent but similar NRIC projects, is a non-trivial engineering task and is expected to generate a significant amount of new and revised documentation. Leveraging digital engineering practices, this documentation will be managed in a purpose-built data management tool to facilitate origination, review, and approval while coordinating with the design contractor. The subsequent upload and review of documentation to INL’s existing document control system comprises a long and unnecessarily manual task. An opportunity exists to automate this upload process and save job-hours while continuing to adhere to INL/MFC document management procedures.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

How To Determine and Verify Operations and Maintenance Savings in Energy Savings Performance Contracts

Operations and maintenance (O&M) savings frequently occur in energy savings performance contracts (ESPCs). During FY 2022, 37% of reported annual cost savings for projects awarded under the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) ESPC indefinite delivery indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contracts and in the performance period were due to O&M or other energy- and/or water-related cost savings, with the balance (63%) from utility cost savings (i.e., energy or water cost savings). Sometimes the energy- and water-related cost savings are acknowledged and included in payments within ESPCs; other times, for various reasons, they are not. As presented in this guide, FEMP recommends including energy- and water-related cost savings that are O&M (including related repair and replacement) savings in the financial aspects of an ESPC, to the extent such savings can be documented. Inclusion of these savings will help augment project scopes and/or lower interest costs (by shortening financing terms). However, there is a burden of proof as to what constitutes acceptability in O&M savings that needs to be carefully considered and documented in individual projects. Beyond promoting a key tenet used in U.S. federal performance contracting—that savings must be from actual budgets and therefore based on the level of O&M that is actually occurring, not what should have been performed—FEMP also recommends good practice in establishing and documenting O&M baselines, formulating the rationale for baseline adjustments during the performance period, and conducting ongoing verification activities. This document concludes with five examples of how O&M savings may be handled, in situations ranging from the partial displacement of O&M contracts to consolidation and “virtualization” of servers in data centers. A key theme that permeates this guide is the importance of thoroughly documenting all conditions and assumptions used in the development of and accounting for O&M costs and savings throughout the ESPC life cycle, from baseline-setting to measurement and verification (M&V) of the savings during each year of the performance period. Doing so not only prevents internal claims of non-performance (especially in the case of staff turnover during the contract term), but also simplifies ordering agency and energy service company (ESCO) response in the event of scrutiny from oversight organizations, such as government audits. While this guide focuses on federal ESPCs, it may also be applicable when O&M savings are included in utility energy service contracts (UESCs) and non-federal ESPCs.

Voss, Phil↗

Digitizing and Enhancing Accessibility of the Fusion Safety Archives

This project focuses on the digitization and public accessibility to the Fusion Safety Archives at the Idaho National Laboratory. The first phase involves a thorough review of each document in the physical archives to determine its online availability. For documents that are available online, PDF copies and unique identifiers are collected for database integration. Documents not available online are delivered to Red Inc. for digitization. Additionally, defunct storage devices such as diskettes are sent to INL’s archival department for data retrieval where possible. The second phase of the project involves the creation of a comprehensive database to house the digital copies of the archives. The database will facilitate easy access and management of the digitized documents. Following the database creation, we plan to train a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) based AI on publicly available documents. The trained AI will be integrated into a front-facing application, allowing the public to easily access information from the Fusion Safety Archives. This project aims to preserve valuable historical data, improve accessibility, and promote transparency in fusion safety research.

70 - PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗

ECAR-6580 Rev 0 ASME Section III, Division 5 Analysis of the MARVEL PCS and GVS Top Corner

The purpose of this Engineering Calculations and Analysis Report (ECAR) is to document the structural evaluation for part of the Microreactor Applications Research Validation and Evaluation (MARVEL) Primary Coolant System (PCS) and Guard Vessel System (GVS). For the PCS this relates specifically to the Distribution Plenum (DP), The Intermediate Heat Exchanger (IHX), and the Upper Downcomer (UD). For the GVS, this will include only the top corner that is machined into the DP Top Plate. These components will be evaluated using the 2021 version of ASME Section III, Division 5 [1] which is a design code that governs the construction of vessels, storage tanks, piping, pumps, valves, supports, core support structures and nonmetallic core components for use in high temperature reactor systems and their supporting systems. Materials at high temperature are subject to creep and fatigue mechanisms that require additional analyses that aren’t covered in ASME Section III, Division 1 rules. Division 5 contains two approaches: elastic or inelastic, however, additional Code Cases specific to Division 5, allow for an Elastic-Perfectly Plastic (EPP) approach. The components analyzed in this ECAR will use a combination of the elastic and EPP approach. Only Design and Service Levels A and B are evaluated in this ECAR. Service Level D evaluations for the entire PCS are documented in ECAR-6564, “MARVEL Project Primary Coolant System Pressure Vessel Stress Documentation” [2] and for the entire GVS are documented in ECAR-6574, “MARVEL Guard Vessel System FEA and ASME Analysis” [3]. The Design and Service Level A and B analyses for the PCS Downcomer piping and Core Barrel are documented in ANL-24/36, "Engineering Calculations and Analysis of the Core Barrel and Downcomer Piping in the MARVEL PCS” [4], and the GVS (except for the top corner) is in ECAR-6574, “MARVEL Guard Vessel System FEA and ASME Analysis.” See Section 2.0 for more detail on the analysis boundaries.

21 - SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLAN↗

Large Language Models (LLMs) for Energy Systems Research

The integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) in energy systems research promises transformative results, as demonstrated in this work, particularly in the realms of information retrieval and legal document analysis. We have developed a chat-based interface, specifically designed to query an extensive corpus of technical reports from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). This interface capitalizes on the natural language processing capabilities of LLMs, providing future consumers of NREL research with a user-friendly platform to access and extract valuable information from technical documents, thus enhancing the dissemination of research to the public. In addition to information retrieval, we have employed LLMs to extract renewable energy siting ordinances from a variety of legal documents, a task traditionally driven by significant human labor. This automated extraction not only supports the ongoing development of the high-impact NREL siting ordinance database but also ensures the database's accuracy and comprehensiveness. Crucially, we have augmented the performance of LLMs through the integration of a decision tree framework, resulting in a substantial improvement in extraction accuracy. Comparative analysis with manual efforts has shown that this approach not only rivals but also significantly surpasses human accuracy, heralding increased reliability in legal document analysis for energy systems research. To democratize access to these advancements and foster collaborative research, we introduce the "Energy Language Model" (ELM), an open-source software package. ELM encapsulates the methodologies and tools developed in this work, providing researchers and practitioners with a robust toolkit to conduct similar analyses within their respective domains. Through these contributions, this work underscores the immense potential of LLMs in revolutionizing energy systems research, improving accuracy, efficiency, and accessibility in the field.

automation↗

Approach to Quality Assurance for Complex Environmental Modeling - 20407

A strong Quality Assurance (QA) program for complex environmental modeling is essential for regulatory and public acceptance and trust, but it does not have to be onerous. Neptune and Company, Inc. (Neptune) has developed a strong QA program that improves transparency, traceability, reproducibility, and therefore, defensibility and trust. Neptune's QA program has evolved over the past 27 years, transitioning from an ad hoc QA program, to a program that is currently Nuclear Quality Assurance-1 (NQA-1) compliant, and will soon be NQA-1/DOE approved for DOE EM modeling work. In addition, Neptune is a qualified laboratory assessor and qualified auditor for reference materials, a proficiency testing provider, and fully complies with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) QA program. Neptune's President and CEO, Kelly Black, was recently named the Chairperson of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Technical Committee 69, Application of Statistical Methods. A strong QA program has been developed for Neptune's radiological performance assessment (PA) program. Although pieces of their QA program are currently in development, their current program includes document control using Subversion, issue tracking and work flow tracking using JIRA, and transparency and traceability via a system of 'calc sheets' for documentation of all data analysis and modeling combined with 'check print' documentation of QA checking, and rigorous model testing and configuration control. All work is reviewed by an independent subject matter expert who is not associated with the collection and assembly of information, for an internal peer review. The program is enforced with a handful of Standard Operation Procedures (SOPs), Work Instructions, QA Project Plans (QAPPs), and Quality Management Plans (QMPs) that are updated frequently, with required annual training and acknowledgment. In addition, effective communication of modeling approaches and results to clients and stakeholders are integral to their QA program. Many of their models are built using the GoldSim modeling platform, for which their models are well-known for their level of transparency, documentation, and QA traceability. This level of QA is also applied to their process-level models. Neptune has taken some lessons learned from the extremely rigorous QA program required for the Yucca Mountain Project (YMP), and imposed the YMP requirements of complete traceability, transparency, and reproducibility, but avoided the inflexibility of a QA program that likely contributed to the suspect e-mails in 2005 that resulted in loss of trust in the YMP, and in nuclear waste disposal (and nuclear power) in general. There are far too many examples of loss of public trust due to poor QA that could have been easily avoided with a simple and straight-forward QA program combined with stakeholder engagement. The purpose of this paper is to share features of Neptune's Radiological Performance Assessment program QA program, and some of their QA related lessons learned over the past 27 years of QA for complex environmental modeling. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Current and future federal and state sampling guidance for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in environmental matrices

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a class of emerging contaminants composed of an estimated 5000 to 10,000 human-made, fluorinated, organic chemicals. Due to the complexity of PFAS, the need for multiple environmental matrix considerations and the absence of a promulgated federal standard for environmental sampling and analysis, U.S. states have begun developing health-based regulatory and/or guidance values for a limited number of PFAS in environmental matrices. As there is a growing body of science to inform PFAS sampling guidance standard development, it is important to understand which U.S. states are implementing sampling guidelines and how they plan to handle emerging PFAS. This critical review discusses the current and impending federal and state sampling guidelines for PFAS in environmental matrices, the data gaps surrounding PFAS sampling guidance in U.S. states, and the future impacts of impending guidance documents and regulations. Ten federal guidance documents are available for PFAS sampling guidance and analysis. The maximum number of PFAS covered in these guidance documents is 25 analytes spanning across 8 unique media. While the EPA has developed several different sampling and analytical guidelines for PFAS, there is no formal regulation of PFAS or requirements of states to enforce these guidelines. Consequently, only 31 states have informally adopted sampling guidelines, while the other 19 states have no guidance documentation in place for PFAS. The introduction of new PFAS sampling guidelines by the EPA, as well as updated analytical guidelines that target more PFAS or total organofluoride, is expected to continuously shift the landscape of federal and state guidance for PFAS sampling moving forward.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Visualizing Temporal Topic Embeddings with a Compass

—Dynamic topic modeling is useful at discovering the development and change in latent topics over time. However, present methodology relies on algorithms that separate document and word representations. This prevents the creation of a meaningful embedding space where changes in word usage and documents can be directly analyzed in a temporal context. This paper proposes an expansion of the compass-aligned temporal Word2Vec methodology into dynamic topic modeling. Such a method allows for the direct comparison of word and document embeddings across time in dynamic topics. This enables the creation of visualizations that incorporate temporal word embeddings within the context of documents into topic visualizations. In experiments against the current state-of-the-art, our proposed method demonstrates overall competitive performance in topic relevancy and diversity across temporal datasets of varying size. Simultaneously, it provides insightful visualizations focused on temporal word embeddings while maintaining the insights provided by global topic evolution, advancing our understanding of how topics evolve over time.

Cluster analysis↗

Templates for developing and versioning data standards and reporting formats using GitHub

This data package contains three templates that can be used for creating README files and Issue Templates, written in the markdown language, that support community-led data reporting formats. We created these templates based on the results of a systematic review (see related references) that explored how groups developing data standard documentation use the Version Control platform GitHub, to collaborate on supporting documents. Based on our review of 32 GitHub repositories, we make recommendations for the content of README Files (e.g., provide a user license, indicate how users can contribute) and so 'README_template.md' includes headings for each section. The two issue templates we include ('issue_template_for_all_other_changes.md' and 'issue_template_for_documentation_change.md') can be used in a GitHub repository to help structure user-submitted issues, or can be modified to suit the needs of data standard developers. We used these templates when establishing ESS-DIVE's community space on GitHub (https://github.com/ess-dive-community) that includes documentation for community-led data reporting formats. We also include file-level metadata 'flmd.csv' that describes the contents of each file within this data package. Lastly, the temporal range that we indicate in our metadata is the time range during which we searched for data standards documented on GitHub.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Data from: "A guide to using GitHub for developing and versioning data standards and reporting formats"

These data are the results of a systematic review that investigated how data standards and reporting formats are documented on the version control platform GitHub. Our systematic review identified 32 data standards in earth science, environmental science, and ecology that use GitHub for version control of data standard documents. In our analysis, we characterized the documents and content within each of the 32 GitHub repositories to identify common practices for groups that version control their documents on GitHub.In this data package, there are 8 CSV files that contain data that we characterized from each repository, according to the location within the repository. For example, in 'readme_pages.csv' we characterize the content that appears across the 32 GitHub repositories included in our systematic review. Each of the 8 CSV files has an associated data dictionary file (names appended with '_dd.csv' and here we describe each content category within CSV files.There is one file-level metadata file (flmd.csv) that provides a description of each file within the data package.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Genesis Data Card Schema, Template and Supporting Tools

Genesis Data Cards provide a standardized template and schema for documenting scientific datasets in support of discovery, access, interoperability, reusability, governed use, and AI usability. This release of the Genesis Data Card repository includes a versioned Markdown template, a LinkML schema with generated Pydantic and JSON artifacts, schema documentation, and example completed data cards. Validation tooling is provided to ensure that completed data cards conform to the schema prior to submission. Accompanying documentation for the structured metadata is provided as a Field Reference Guide. The schema and accompanying template provided in this repository address the call for actionable context that enables humans and AI systems to find, access, interpret, cite, and reuse data, and, when appropriate, integrate it into AI and machine learning workflows. The data card is intended to serve as a common metadata artifact intended to support standardized, cross-program dataset documentation across Department of Energy (DOE)-aligned efforts, including but not limited to Genesis Mission-related implementations, the Office of Science, National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), and Advanced Simulation and Computing (ASC) data governance and stewardship initiatives.

data card↗

MCNP6 Source Primer: Release 1.0

This document contains examples of MCNP general source usage to support the MCNP6 User’s Manual. The examples range from basic to advanced sources with different applications. There are also examples of how MCNP can fail and warnings for the users to look for at the output to ensure proper results are being created. The overall aim of this document is to provide solid examples of how to define sources with MCNP as well as how to verify the sources are setup properly. The reasoning for needing such complex sources is not discussed in the present work. Also, this document is not meant to be exhaustive of every MCNP source option and combinations of source options possible. However, it is intended to frequently update this document with new source examples provided by users. Please feel free to contact the MCNP6 development team to learn about how to submit a new or updated source example. Please include “General Sources Primer” in the subject line to route the request to the appropriate developers.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

Scan of an Unpublished Report: "Fission Product Behavior During Severe LWR Accidents: Recommendations for the MELCOR Code System"

This document provides a scanned version of a 1987 SAND report that was never formally published. However, this report was referenced within the MELCOR Reference Manual and, therefore, provides historical information and technical basis for the MELCOR code. This document is being made available to permit users of the MELCOR code access to the information. The title page has been edited to prevent any confusion with regards to the possible documentation identifiers, such as the SAND report number or the intended date of publication. Beyond these modifications, a cover, distribution, and back cover are prepended and appended to the document to conform to modern SAND report style guidelines. The first four chapters of this report were updated and released under the title "Fission Product Behavior During Severe LWR Accidents: Recommendations for the MELCOR Code System. Volume I" and were made available by the U.S. NRC through the Adams database under accession number ML19227A327. No prior release of the remaining content of this report has occurred.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

Verification and Validation of the PLTEMP/ANL Code for Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis of Experimental and Test Reactors

The document compiles in a single volume the verification and validation works done for the PLTEMP/ANL code during the years of its development and improvement. The verification of sixteen capabilities of the PLTEMP/ANL Version 4.3 code that were identified by research reactor analysts as frequently used in their thermal-hydraulic analysis are described and documented. Each chapter of the document deals with the verification or validation of a specific model. The model verification is usually done by comparing the code with hand calculation, Microsoft spreadsheet calculation, or Mathematica calculation. The model validation is done by comparing the code with experimental data or a widely tested code like the RELAP5 code. In addition, some PLTEMP/ANL verification works that are available in the open literature are simply referenced and not included in the document. PLTEMP/ANL has been used in conversion safety analysis reports of several US and foreign research reactors that have been licensed and converted. A list of such reactors is given.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

Vadose Zone Model for B-3A/B Pond for Composite Analysis

The objectives of the vadose modeling for the updated Hanford Site composite analysis (CA) are to simulate the flow and transport of water and radionuclide releases from the surface to the water table and to provide radionuclide transfer rates for the plateau to river (P2R) model, version 8.3 (CP-57037, Model Package Report: Plateau to River Groundwater Model, Version 8.3). Water additions include natural recharge and water discharged to the ground as a result of industrial processes associated with Hanford Site operations. Contaminant sources include radionuclides in water discharged to the ground during operations and radionuclides disposed “dry” in solid waste burial grounds or other means. The following 16 radionuclides were selected for this modeling effort; carbon-14 (C-14), chlorine-36 (Cl-36), tritium (H-3), iodine-129 (I-129), neptunium-237 (Np-237), rhenium-187 (Re-187), strontium-90 (Sr-90), technetium-99 (Tc-99), uranium-232 (U-232), uranium-233 (U-233), uranium-234 (U-234), uranium-235 (U-235), uranium-236 (U-236), uranium-238 (U-238), radium-226 (Ra-226), and thorium-230 (Th-230). The simulation time starts in 1943 and ends at 12070, which is 10,000 years after assumed Hanford Site closure in 2070. The parallel version of the Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (STOMP) simulator officially named the exascale Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (eSTOMP), is used to simulate flow and transport for the vadose models. The documentation for the STOMP code is comprehensive. The theoretical and numerical approaches applied in the STOMP code are documented in a published theory guide (PNNL-12030, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 2.0 Theory Guide). The code has undergone a rigorous verification procedure against analytical solutions, laboratory-scale experiments, and field-scale demonstrations. The application guide (PNNL-11216, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Application Guide) provides instructive examples in the application of the code to classical groundwater problems. The user’s guide (PNNL-15782, STOMP: Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 4.0: User’s Guide) describes the general use, input file formatting, compilation, and execution of the code. The primary output of the vadose zone modeling is radionuclide transfer rates to the groundwater for input into the P2R model. The rates will be summed over the 100 by 100 m P2R grid cells that fall within the vadose zone model source domain. The Hanford Site Central Plateau was subdivided into 26 individual vadose zone models, with 13 in the 200 East Area and 13 in the 200 West Area. Waste sites that have a completed performance assessment (PA) or past-leak analysis were not included as sources of radionuclides. Instead the vadose zone to groundwater transfer rates of the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility, Integrated Disposal Facility, US Ecology, and Waste Management Area C (WMA C) PAs and the past-leak analysis for WMA C were used as direct input to the P2R model. Each of the vadose zone models is documented in separate environmental calculation files (ECFs). This ECF describes the B-3A/B Ponds model. The scope of this ECF is to document the development and results of the B-3 A/B Ponds vadose zone model. CP-63515, Model Package Report: Central Plateau Vadose Zone Models, describes the approach, assumptions, process of determining the number of models required and domain of each model, input data, and processing common to all the models.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Vadose Zone Model for SALDS for Composite Analysis

The objectives of the vadose modeling for the updated Hanford Site composite analysis (CA) are to simulate the flow and transport of water and radionuclide releases from the surface to the water table and to provide radionuclide transfer rates for the plateau to river (P2R) model, version 8.3 (CP-57037, Model Package Report: Plateau to River Groundwater Model, Version 8.3). Water additions include natural recharge and water discharged to the ground as a result of industrial processes associated with Hanford Site operations. Contaminant sources include radionuclides in water discharged to the ground during operations and radionuclides disposed “dry” in solid waste burial grounds or other means. The following 16 radionuclides were selected for this modeling effort: carbon-14 (C-14), chlorine-36 (Cl-36), tritium (H-3), iodine-129 (I-129), neptunium-237 (Np-237), rhenium-187 (Re-187), strontium-90 (Sr-90), technetium-99 (Tc-99), uranium-232 (U-232), uranium-233 (U-233), uranium-234 (U-234), uranium-235 (U-235), uranium-236 (U-236), uranium-238 (U-238), radium-226 (Ra-226), and thorium-230 (Th-230). The simulation time starts in 1943 and ends at 12070, which is 10,000 years after assumed Hanford Site closure in 2070. The parallel version of the Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (STOMP1) simulator, officially named the exascale Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (eSTOMP) is used to simulate flow and transport for the vadose models. The documentation for the STOMP code is comprehensive. The theoretical and numerical approaches applied in the STOMP code are documented in a published theory guide (PNNL-12030, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 2.0 Theory Guide). The code has undergone a rigorous verification procedure against analytical solutions, laboratory-scale experiments, and field-scale demonstrations. The application guide (PNNL-11216, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Application Guide) provides instructive examples in the application of the code to classical groundwater problems. The user’s guide (PNNL-15782, STOMP: Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 4.0: User’s Guide) describes the general use, input file formatting, compilation, and execution of the code. The primary output of the vadose zone modeling is radionuclide transfer rates to the groundwater for input into the P2R model. The rates will be summed over the 100 by 100 m P2R grid cells that fall within the vadose zone model source domain. The Hanford Site Central Plateau was subdivided into 26 individual vadose zone models, with 13 in the 200 East Area and 13 in the 200 West Area. Waste sites that have a completed performance assessment (PA) or past-leak analysis were not included as sources of radionuclides. Instead the vadose zone to groundwater transfer rates of the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility, Integrated Disposal Facility, US Ecology, and Waste Management Area C (WMA C) PAs and the past-leak analysis for WMA C were used as direct input to the P2R model. Each of the vadose zone models is documented in separate environmental calculation files (ECFs). This ECF describes the State-Approved Land Disposal Site (SALDS) model. The scope of this ECF is to document the development and results of the SALDS vadose zone model. CP-63515, Model Package Report: Central Plateau Vadose Zone Models, describes the approach, assumptions, process of determining the number of models required and domain of each model, input data, and processing common to all the models.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Data call questions related to potential NEPA/Data gaps

Based on review of the related NEPA documents, and consideration of the potential gaps in NEPA coverage, a number of questions have been generated. These questions are generally higher level (less detailed) questions that should help to establish the applicability of analyses in existing NEPA documents and the ability of these documents to provide NEPA coverage for the Proposed Action. These questions do not request detailed information about SRS facilities/activities and the Proposed Action like typically would be requested when performing impacts analyses for an EIS. We do not believe detail information is needed; if it is needed, it may be an indication that an SA is not the appropriate level of NEPA documentation for the Proposed Action.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Xyce Parallel Electronic Simulator Reference Guide (Version 7.2)

This document is a reference guide to the Xyce Parallel Electronic Simulator, and is a companion document to the Xyce Users Guide. The focus of this document is (to the extent possible) exhaustively list device parameters, solver options, parser options, and other usage details of Xyce. This document is not intended to be a tutorial. Users who are new to circuit simulation are better served by the Xyce Users Guide.

42 ENGINEERING↗