Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “environmental assurance”

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 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1986

Dealing with Shuttle payload classifications NMI 8010.1 - A user's interpretation

The Shuttle payload classifications in the NASA Management Instruction (NMI) 8010.1 are examined in terms of risk management. The four payload classes, minimum risk, risk/cost compromise, reflight or repeat flight payload, and minimum single attempt cost, are described. The effects of the classifications on payload product assurance provisions are discussed. Environmental design and test requirements are interpreted in terms of NMI 8010.1.

Gindorf, Tom↗
DOE OSTI2023

2022 Site Environmental Report: Idaho National Laboratory

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

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS1995

Environmental awareness program development

Work this summer in the Office of Safety, Environment, and Mission Assurance began with a review of current initiatives and environmental projects at the Langley Research Center (LaRC). This involved researching many of the documents on file which detail problems which have occurred as well as various approaches which have been used to address these problems. A large portion of the time was spent interviewing and working with each of the engineers, industrial hygienists and other professionals connected with the Office of Environmental Engineering. A few of the projects I worked on include: Researching environmental compliance, and pollution prevention efforts; touring many of the facilities at LaRC to observe the environmental efforts in the work place; researching equipment needs for the recycling/reclamation center; writing scripts for in-house training videos; working with the video production department to produce a training video; developing e-mail distribution list; developing environmental coordinator's database; and working with others to research logistics of recycling and waste minimization efforts.

Steinhauer, David A.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Mishap Response Plan

KSC Medical Operations, in exercising the KSC Psychological Triage Plan, provided crewmember family support following notification of the Columbia accident. KSC Medical Operations also provided field support in working with FEMA and EPA to assure adequate occupational medicine and environmental health care of KSC workers. In addition, the development of policy and procedures for handling and clearing biohazardous debris material in the KSC reconstruction hangar was prepared and implemented.

Scarpa, Philip↗
DOE OSTI2022

Computational Tools and Workflows for Quantitative Risk Assessment and Decision Support for Geologic Carbon Storage Sites: Progress and Insights from the U.S. DOE’s National Risk Assessment Partnership

The 2005 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Special Report on CCS raised the profile of CO2 capture and storage (CCS) as an important technology for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. CCS is now recognized as a key component of most climate change mitigation scenarios. Since publication of that report the international research, development, and deployment (RD&D) community has advanced key technical aspects, clarified regulatory requirements, explored value chain and infrastructure solutions, and developed incentive paradigms to enable and promote large-scale deployment of CCS. These efforts have included research to better characterize geologic storage resources, to improve injection performance and storage efficiency, to assess and manage subsurface environmental risks, and to advance monitoring technologies to assure system conformance. These efforts have helped to build confidence in the viability of geologic carbon storage (GCS), but stakeholder concerns about long-term risks and liability associated with GCS remain a hurdle to broad acceptance and large-scale deployment of CCS. Since 2010, the U.S. DOE’s National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP) – a research collaboration between five contributing national laboratories – has worked to establish and demonstrate methods and tools to quantify and manage the subsurface environmental risks associated with GCS, amidst uncertainty. This work supports the Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management Carbon Transport and Storage Program’s goal of advancing safe and secure commercial-scale GCS deployment. To address the technical challenge of simulating the physical response of the GCS site to large-scale CO2 injection, NRAP has adopted an approach that relies on coupling computationally efficient reduced-order and/or data-driven proxy models of important system components (i.e., storage reservoir, sealing caprock, leakage pathways, intermediate formations, overlying groundwater aquifers, and the atmosphere) in integrated assessment framework. That integrated model of the physical system is complemented with fit-for purpose functionality to support site characterization and risk-related decisions. The recently released NRAP Phase II toolset includes the Open-Source Integrated Assessment Model (NRAP-Open-IAM) for evaluation of trends in leakage risk and potential impact, tools to support monitoring design optimization (Designs for Risk Evaluation and Management – DREAM v3.0 and Passive Seismic Monitoring Tool - PSMT), and tools for state of stress evaluation (State-of-Stress Analysis Tool - SOSAT) and forecasting induced seismicity risk. The NRAP team has also released a pair of reports describing conceptual workflows to incorporate physics-based, quantitative risk assessment into many of the design, planning, operation, and closure decisions for GCS projects. An online catalogue highlights published studies where these tools and methods are demonstrated. In this presentation, the utility of these products to assess risks and address key stakeholder questions will be highlighted through examples, and related insights about the safety and security of geologic carbon storage in qualified storage sites will be discussed. The prospect of rapid, large-scale deployment of GCS technology to aggressively reduce anthropogenic CO2 emissions requires careful consideration of interference between multiple commercial-scale storage projects within a basin. Going forward, NRAP is expanding and adapting site-scale risk quantification tools and methods to enable assessment of risks and inform management decisions for basin-scale deployment. Increasingly, this work will leverage next-generation approaches for surrogate modelling, fast prediction, and advanced visualization enabled by machine learning and artificial intelligence to promote virtual learning, scenario evaluation, and augment risk-based decision making.

quantitative risk assessment, geologic carbon stor↗
NASA NTRS2012

Rapid Analysis, Self-Calibrating Array for Air Monitoring

Human space missions have critical needs for monitoring and control for life support systems. These systems have monitoring needs that include feedback for closed loop processes and quality control for environmental factors. Sensors and monitoring technologies assure that the air environment and water supply for the astronaut crew habitat fall within acceptable limits, and that the life support system is functioning properly and efficiently. The longer the flight duration and the more distant the destination, the more critical it becomes to have carefully monitored and automated control systems for life support. Past experiments with the JPL ENose have demonstrated a lifetime of the sensor array, with the software, of around 18 months. The lifetime of the calibration, for some analytes, was as long as 24 months. We are working on a sensor array and new algorithms that will include sensor response time in the analysis. The preliminary array analysis for two analytes shows that the analysis time, of an event, can be dropped from 45 minutes to less than10 minutes and array training time can be cut substantially. We will describe the lifetime testing of an array and show lifetime data on individual sensors. This progress will lead to more rapid identification of analytes, and faster training time of the array.

Self Calibrating↗
NASA NTRS1992

Kennedy Space Center environmental health program

The Kennedy Space Center's environmental health organization is responsible for programs which assure its employees a healthful workplace under diverse and varied working conditions. These programs encompass the disciplines of industrial hygiene, radiation protection (health physics), and environmental sanitation/pollution control. Activities range from the routine, such as normal office work, to the highly specialized, such as the processing of highly toxic and hazardous materials.

Marmaro, G. M.↗
DOE OSTI2023

Annual Site Environmental Report: 2022 (ASER) for the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory

This report, prepared by the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory (SLAC) for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), SLAC Site Office (SSO), provides a comprehensive summary of the environmental program activities at SLAC for calendar year 2022. Annual Site Environmental Reports (ASERs) are prepared for all DOE sites with significant environmental activities, and distributed to relevant external regulatory agencies and other interested organizations or individuals. To the best of my knowledge, this report accurately summarizes the results of the 2022 environmental monitoring, compliance, and restoration programs at SLAC. This assurance can be made based on SSO and SLAC review of the ASER, and quality assurance protocols applied to monitoring and data analyses at SLAC.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Annual Site Environmental Report: 2023 (ASER) for the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory

This report, prepared by the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory (SLAC) for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), SLAC Site Office (SSO), provides a comprehensive summary of the environmental program activities at SLAC for calendar year 2023. Annual Site Environmental Reports (ASERs) are prepared for all DOE sites with significant environmental activities and distributed to relevant external regulatory agencies and other interested organizations or individuals. To the best of my knowledge, this report accurately summarizes the results of the 2023 environmental monitoring, compliance, and restoration programs at SLAC. This assurance can be made based on SSO and SLAC review of the ASER, and quality assurance protocols applied to monitoring and data analyses at SLAC.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Annual Site Environmental Report: 2021 (ASER) for the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory

This report, prepared by the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory (SLAC) for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), SLAC Site Office (SSO), provides a comprehensive summary of the environmental program activities at SLAC for calendar year 2021. Annual Site Environmental Reports (ASERs) are prepared for all DOE sites with significant environmental activities and distributed to relevant external regulatory agencies and other interested organizations or individuals. To the best of my knowledge, this report accurately summarizes the results of the 2021 environmental monitoring, compliance, and restoration programs at SLAC. This assurance can be made based on SSO and SLAC review of the ASER, and quality assurance protocols applied to monitoring and data analyses at SLAC.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS1972

Fabrication, test and demonstration of critical environment monitoring system

Design and performance of an analytical system for the evaluation of certain environmental constituents in critical environmental areas of the Quality Reliability and Assurance Laboratory are reported. Developed was a self-contained, integrated, minimum sized unit that detects, interrogates, and records those parameters of the environment dictated for control in large storage facilities, clean rooms, temporarily curtained enclosures, and special working benches. The system analyzes humidity, temperature, hydrocarbons particle size, and particle count within prescribed clean areas.

Heimendinger, K. W.↗
DOE OSTI2020

Acquisition and Implementation of a Comprehensive Environmental Permits Linking Tool at Savannah River Site - 20234

Historically, Savannah River Nuclear Solutions LLC (SRNS) tracked environmental regulatory commitments and the requirements from hundreds of permits at the Savannah River Site (SRS) using several separate methods, making integrated compliance assurance cumbersome and labor-intensive. When SRNS experienced an increase in environmental issues in 2017, SRNS management and U.S. Department of Energy - Savannah River (DOE-SR) management decided a single, proactive approach was needed to capture environmental permit information (including regulations, Consent Orders, DOE Orders, and any other state or federally issued statement of requirements), track the tasks necessary to ensure compliance with these requirements, and thereby mitigate the risk of noncompliance. SRNS developed a list of mandatory objectives that the tool must meet to function as a Comprehensive Environmental Permits Linking Tool (CEPLT). A key requirement was the ability to map Site permits to their governed locations and display the associated requirements at the compliance point (e.g., outfall, stack, waste unit, etc.). Several options included modifying existing onsite resources, building a custom onsite solution, purchasing an off-the-shelf solution, and contracting an offsite developer to build a custom solution. SRNS concluded an off-the-shelf solution with configuration and customization options would provide the flexibility to fit the unique needs of Savannah River Site (SRS) while taking advantage of industry-tested software and providing a reduced deployment timeline. SRNS chose Gensuite{sup R} a, a cloud-based solution that offers numerous a la carte applications in the environmental, health, and safety arenas, as the best candidate. SRNS selected three (3) integrated applications (Compliance Calendar, Permit Manager, and Mapper) to function as the CEPLT. The Compliance Calendar module allows for creation and tracking of regulatory commitment tasks assigned to responsible environmental professionals. Permit Manager organizes permits and other requirement documents, linking the commitments in each to Compliance Calendar tasks and/or implementing procedures. Mapper provides GIS capability for mapping the data from the other two modules to their physical onsite locations. The CEPLT was configured to allow for other SRS Site Tenants to eventually utilize the applications. Additionally, DOE-SR uses the CEPLT to provide an overview of contractor environmental compliance activities and to organize DOE-specific documents and tasks. The CEPLT fulfilled the requirement of meeting current compliance needs as well as providing the ability to grow as new organizations are incorporated and functionality is expanded. SRNS now uses the CEPLT to more effectively manage permit requirements, improve knowledge transfer, and increase the Site's overall protection of the environment, the Site worker, and the public. Possible future uses of the system include integration of mobile applications for timely communication of potential non-compliant conditions and DOE complex-wide deployment allowing for enhanced DOE site and Head Quarters oversight. Implementation of CEPLT will result in cost savings, both in terms of dollars and man-hours. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS1981

The laboratory module

Of the five modules comprising the Orbiting Quarantine Facility, the Laboratory Module must provide not only an extensive research capability to permit execution of the protocol, but also the flexibility to accommodate second-order testing if nonterrestrial life is discovered in the sample. The biocontainment barriers that protect the sample and the researchers from cross contamination are described. Specifically, the laboratory layout, laboratory equipment, the environmental control and life support system, and containment assurance procedures are discussed. The metal manipulation arm proposed for use within the biocontainment cabinets is described. Sample receipt and processing procedures are outlined.

Source record↗
DOE OSTI2023

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Annual Site Environmental Report for Calendar Year 2022 (Final Report)

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), one of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science’s 10 national laboratories, provides innovative science and technology development in the areas of energy and the environment, fundamental and computational science, and national security. There are three DOE offices within the Richland area. Two are responsible for the Hanford Site, whereas the Pacific Northwest Site Office (PNSO) oversees PNNL. PNNL prepares this Annual Site Environmental Report to meet the requirements of DOE Order 231.1B, Environmental, Safety and Health Reporting, and DOE Order 458.1, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment, assuring that the public is informed of any PNNL-Richland Campus or PNNL-Sequim Campus event that could adversely affect the health and safety of the public, site staff, or the environment. The report provides a synopsis of ongoing environmental management performance and compliance activities for operations that occur on the PNNL-Richland Campus in Richland, Washington, and at the PNNL-Sequim Campus near Sequim, Washington. It describes the location of and background for each facility; addresses compliance with applicable DOE, federal, state, and local regulations, and site-specific permits; documents environmental monitoring efforts and their status; presents potential radiation doses to staff and the public in the surrounding areas; and describes DOE-required data quality assurance methods used for data verification. The ASER summarizes site compliance with federal, state, and local environmental laws, regulations, policies, directives, permits, and Orders, and provides environmental management performance benchmarks and their status to the public, regulatory agencies, community officials, Native American tribes, and public interest groups.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS1998

Evaluation of HCFC AK 225 Alternatives for Precision Cleaning and Verification

Maintaining qualified cleaning and verification processes are essential in an production environment. Environmental regulations have and are continuing to impact cleaning and verification processing in component and large structures, both at the Michoud Assembly Facility and component suppliers. The goal of the effort was to assure that the cleaning and verification proceeds unimpeded and that qualified, environmentally compliant material and process replacements are implemented and perform to specifications. The approach consisted of (1) selection of a Supersonic Gas-Liquid Cleaning System; (2) selection and evaluation of three cleaning and verification solvents as candidate alternatives to HCFC 225 (Vertrel 423 (HCFC), Vertrel MCA (HFC/1,2-Dichloroethylene), and HFE 7100DE (HFE/1,2 Dichloroethylene)); and evaluation of an analytical instrumental post cleaning verification technique. This document is presented in viewgraph format.

Melton, D. M.↗
DOE OSTI2020

Waste Management Project Success - Regulatory Assurance Systems - 20118

Waste management (WM) and remediation projects are essential within a restorative environmental culture. Despite years of experience, challenges and obstacles associated with efficient and effective WM project execution remain. Although some obstacles are project specific, a common challenge is navigating the regulatory landscape from planning through execution, particularly with first of a kind (FOAK) and first in a while (FIAW) projects. The absence of a comprehensive regulatory assurance strategy places significant hurdles in the path of project success. To clear a path for the successful execution of increasingly complex WM projects, this paper focuses on development of a comprehensive regulatory assurance strategy and implementation plan that effectively engages stakeholders, agencies, and performers to produce project plans that fully and cost effectively integrate applicable regulatory requirements. The most reliable way to align regulatory processes and decisions needed for mission success is through a regulatory assurance system. This system establishes a healthy interface with regulatory decision makers, to work in a collaborative manner, to create a common vision for regulatory decisions on an agreed upon schedule. A regulatory assurance system consists of several elements. Although the mission may vary from cleanup to site closure to nuclear component production, the elements of a regulatory assurance system remain essentially constant and must include: 1) identifying a common vision or end state, 2) developing a long-term, integrated strategy and schedule, 3) establishing a regulatory partnering team consisting of key decision-makers, 4) regular and frequent communication with decision-makers, 5) ensuring consistent surveillance for early identification of issues and changes that may impact the project, 6) quick resolution of emerging issues to prevent schedule impact, 7) identifying core compliance functions, 8) periodically assessing progress of the project as it relates to regulatory assurance and, 9) providing constructive feedback to improve the process. A regulatory assurance system provides a living, multi-faceted approach to planning, visioning, communicating and tracking to avoid surprises and ensure smooth and timely progress to the project. The overall success measures will be whether the system produces common sense regulatory decisions supporting the vision on time without appeal. Effective regulatory frameworks rarely happen on their own. Balanced, common-sense regulatory decisions stem from teams that are trained to work together to achieve shared goals. In this paper, particular attention is placed on the importance of starting with a shared vision for a regulatory assurance and execution strategy that leverages experience to establish optimal approaches. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗