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 541 records · Page 30
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

An Overview of the State-of-the-Art Reactor Consequence Uncertainty Assessment Accident Progression Insights

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) with Sandia National Laboratories (Sandia) have completed three uncertainty analyses (UAs) as part of the State-of-the-Art Reactor Consequence Analyses (SOARCA) program. The SOARCA UAs included an integrated evaluation of uncertainty in accident progression, radiological release, and offsite health consequence projections. The UA for Peach Bottom, a boiling-water reactor (BWR) with a Mark I containment located in the State of Pennsylvania, analyzed the unmitigated long-term station blackout SOARCA scenario. The UA for Sequoyah, a 4-loop Westinghouse pressurized-water reactor (PWR) located in the State of Tennessee, analyzed the unmitigated short-term station blackout SOARCA scenario, with a focus on issues unique to the ice condenser containment and the potential for early containment failure due to hydrogen deflagration. The UA for Surry, a 3-loop Westinghouse PWR with a sub-atmospheric large dry containment located in the State of Virginia, analyzed the unmitigated short-term station blackout SOARCA scenario including the potential for thermally-induced steam-generator tube rupture. These three UAs are currently documented in three NUREG/CR reports. This report provides input to planned NRC documentation on the insights and findings from the SOARCA UA program. The purpose of the summary report is to provide a useful reference for regulatory applications that require the evaluation of offsite consequence risk from beyond design basis event severe accidents. This report focuses on the accident progression and source term insights developed from the MELCOR analyses. MELCOR is the NRC's best-estimate, severe accident computer code used in the SOARCA UAs. In anticipation of the SOARCA UA insights work, NRC and Sandia benchmarked the response of the Peach Bottom model to selected reference calculations from the Peach Bottom SOARCA UA. Peach Bottom was the first SOARCA UA performed and was completed in 2015 using the MELCOR 1.8.6 code. The PWR SOARCA UAs evolved the original methodology and utilized the updated MELCOR 2.2 computer code. The Peach Bottom model has been systematically updated for other NRC research efforts and has been updated to MELCOR 2.2. computer code. The findings from the new reference calculations using the updated model with the MELCOR 2.2 code are also integrated into the report. A second objective is an assessment of the applicability of the results to the other nuclear reactors in the U.S. As the key findings are reviewed, judgments are presented on the applicability of the results to other U.S. nuclear power plants. An important objective of the SOARCA program relied on high- fidelity plant-specific modeling. However, the nature of the insights and conclusions allowed judgements to be made on the applicability of the various insights to the same general classification of plant (i.e., BWR or PWR) or the entire fleet of plants. Finally, the results from the SOARCA UA accident progression calculations contain a wealth of information not previously documented in the NUREG/CRs. This report includes new but related information that can be used to benchmark past or support future regulatory decisions related to severe accidents. The new work includes a benchmark of the NUREG-1465 licensing source term definitions, the variability of key accident progression events and timing to radionuclide release, and an improved understanding of the timing and source terms from consequential steam generator tube ruptures. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Sandia authors gratefully acknowledge the significant technical and programmatic contributions from the NRC SOARCA team which are reflected throughout the report. Dr. Tina Ghosh has been involved throughout the SOARCA UAs, providing the primary managerial and technical oversight. The long lists of NRC and Sandia contributors from the SOARCA UAs are cited in the three NUREG/CRs and are also gratefully acknowledged by the small team of authors compiling the results of their efforts. Significant technical contributions, advice, and reviews were provided by Dr. Hossein Esmaili, Dr. Alfred Hathaway, and Dr. Edward Fuller (retired) of the NRC. Dr. Randal Gauntt (retired), Mr. Patrick Mattie, Mr. Joseph Jones (retired), and Dr. Doug Osborn from Sandia are recognized as the SOARCA UA managers guiding the past efforts. There is a comparable list of project managers at the NRC including Ms. Patricia Santiago, Dr. Salman Haq, and Mr. Jon Barr. Sadly, we have lost Mr. Charlie Tinkler and Mr. Robert Prato, who were important contributors to the original SOARCA project. Finally, Mr. Kyle Ross and Mr. Mark Leonard have also retired but were significant technical contributors. Mr. Kyle Ross was the technical lead on all three SOARCA UAs and the original pressurized water reactor SOARCA study. Mr. Leonard was the technical lead on the original boiling water reactor SOARCA study and a key contributor to the first Peach Bottom SOARCA UA. iv

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2020

NTESS Savings and Income Plan Summary Plan Description

National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC (NTESS) is pleased to sponsor the NTESS Savings and Income Plan (401(k) Plan), formerly known as the Sandia Corporation Savings and Income Plan, which is designed to help you build financial resources for the future. The 401(k) Plan can be an important part of saving for your retirement. This Summary Plan Description (SPD) explains how to determine if you are eligible to participate in the 401(k) Plan by saving directly from your wages, if you are eligible to receive employer contributions, when you may make withdrawals from your 401(k) Plan Account, and other important information about the 401(k) Plan. More detailed information is contained in the official NTESS Savings and Income Plan document, which governs the operation of the 401(k) Plan. In the event there is or appears to be any discrepancy between the terms of the 401(k) Plan document and this SPD, the terms of the 401(k) Plan document control.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2020

NTESS Retirement Income Plan Summary Plan Description

National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia LLC (NTESS) is pleased to sponsor for your benefit the NTESS Retirement Income Plan (RIP or Pension Plan), formerly known as the Sandia Corporation Retirement Income Plan, which is designed to provide a source of continuing income during retirement for covered employees. This Summary Plan Description (SPD) explains how to determine if you will be eligible for a benefit from the Pension Plan when you retire or terminate your employment. Under certain circumstances, reduced pension benefits can be continued to your Spouse or a contingent annuitant, following your death. This SPD includes the provisions of the RIP as of January 1, 2020. The pension benefits described in this SPD apply to Eligible Employees (as defined in Questions 1 and 2) who experience a Termination of Employment (as defined in Appendix A) with NTESS or another Affiliated Company (as defined in Appendix A) on or after this date. More detailed information is contained in the NTESS Retirement Income Plan document, which governs the operation of this Pension Plan. In the event there is or appears to be any discrepancy between the terms of the RIP document and this SPD, the terms of the RIP document control.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Energy Intensity Baselining and Tracking Guidance

Each company joining the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Better Buildings, Better Plants Program (Better Plants) commits to establishing an energy consumption and energy intensity (EI) baseline and to tracking its energy performance over a 10-year period against that baseline. The baseline must reflect a company’s energy consumption over a 12-month period, covering all its U.S.-based operations. Energy consumption is calculated by fuel type in terms of primary energy (also known as source energy). EI is broadly defined as the amount of energy consumed per unit of output produced. For this guidance document and for the program, the term energy performance represents an evaluation of a facility’s capacity to use energy efficiently. Metrics used to assess a facility’s energy performance can include EI, energy consumption, improvements in EI, etc. Establishing an energy baseline and tracking system is a critical first step in effectively managing energy use. Developing a baseline can help a company understand energy use within the corporation and give it a point of comparison to evaluate future efforts to improve energy performance. It can also support efforts to validate a company’s energy management activities, improve comparative analyses when using benchmarks, and help in predicting future energy needs. In addition, a company that normalizes its performance data can determine highly defensible measures of energy savings generated through implemented energy efficiency projects. Establishing a baseline and tracking energy performance is also a requirement for ISO 50001 certification. Although basic energy data can be collected through utility bills, most manufacturers will have to perform additional analyses to develop accurate and robust energy baselines and tracking systems. Energy is consumed in many ways within the manufacturing sector and can come from multiple sources. Energy is sometimes generated and sold to other parties or captured and reused on-site. External events can exert a significant impact on a facility or company’s energy use independent of any purposeful efforts to improve energy efficiency. Operational changes, such as production shifts—which may be inevitable for some companies over the 10-year period covered by the program—can also make a big difference in energy use. Since Better Plants asks companies to account for all their U.S.-based operations, mergers, acquisitions, and divestitures can also have significant implications for a company’s energy metrics. This document aims to demystify the sometimes complex baselining process. It devotes special attention to the task of normalizing and adjusting energy consumption to account for external factors, such as weather and production changes. A key recommendation is that companies use regression analysis to normalize their energy consumption data whenever possible. Regression analysis is a statistical technique that estimates the dependence of a variable (i.e., energy use in the context of Better Plants) on one or more independent variables such as ambient temperature, while controlling for the influence of other variables at the same time. A properly developed regression analysis can provide a reliable estimate of energy savings resulting from energy improvement strategies and projects by accounting for the effects of variables such as annual production levels and weather. DOE has developed a companion Energy Performance Indicator software tool (EnPI) to simplify the baselining process. This tool can run regression models, calculate changes in EI at the facility level, and automatically compile facility-level data into a corporate-wide metric. Note that although the relevant equations used to calculate EI are provided in this document, the EnPI tool will automatically perform most calculations for the user. Additionally, Better Plants Partners (Partners) can call on their Technical Account Manager (TAM) to help them establish a baseline and assist with the necessary calculations to track progress.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2020

Gamma Equipment System Requirements by Application

This document outlines a set of requirements for gamma sensitive systems applied to three different applications: (1) homeland security (search and identification); (2) in-situ quantification; and (3) quantification in a material characterization laboratory. These three applications represent a range of activities that a country might use for locating, identifying, and quantifying radioactive material. These applications require increasing accuracy and system advancements, and skill levels. This document considers systems with various detector types and are characterized by their energy resolution: (1) low resolution (e.g., NaI(Tl) scintillation) and (2) higher resolution (e.g., high-purity germanium [HPGe] solid state) systems. The higher resolution systems also include cadmium zinc telluride (CZT) and only mechanically cooled HPGe systems are considered. These detectors and their associated acquisition hardware and analysis software afford a broad range of capabilities with corresponding ranges of complexity, maintainability, and cost. Ultimately, the equipment must meet the measurement goals of the application, and compliance with a given list of hardware specifications does not in itself guarantee meeting those goals. Examples of typical performance objectives for international safeguards applications are documented in International Target Values 2010 for Measurement Uncertainties in Safeguarding Nuclear Materials (IAEA, STR-368, November 2010). Selection of the detector type best suited to a specific application is often a compromise between “state of the art” or best available option and what is practical.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
DOE OSTI2020

Multi-Mechanism Flood Hazard Assessment: Critical Review of Current Practice and Approaches

This report documents the initial findings from the Nuclear Regulatory commission (NRC)-sponsored research project Methods for Estimating Joint Probabilities of Coincident and Correlated Flooding Mechanisms for Nuclear Power Plant Flood Hazard Assessments.1 This research project is a part of NRC’s Probabilistic Flood Hazard Assessment (PFHA) Research Program and will aid the development of guidance on the use of PFHA methods to evaluate infrastructure safety for existing and proposed US nuclear power plants (NPPs). More specifically, this project intends to provide technical background for the development of flood hazard curves for multi-mechanism floods (MMFs). MMFs are flood events caused by more than one flooding mechanism (e.g., flood events due to the simultaneous occurrence of precipitation-induced river flooding and storm surge). Project activities include three main tasks: Task 1—Survey of current concepts and methods in assessing MMF hazards; Task 2—Critical assessment of selected methods and approaches for quantifying probabilistic MMF hazard risk; Task 3—Development of example case studies to illustrate best practices for quantifying probabilistic MMF hazard risk The initial findings from Tasks 1 and 2 are documented in this report. Task 1 comprised a survey of approaches and methods that have been applied to understand and assess flood hazards due to MMFs. Task 2 involved a critical review of the selected approaches and methods. To that end, the scope of this report includes documentation of (1) a reconnaissance-level survey of the current state of concepts and practice for MMF hazard assessment; (2) a generalized MMF assessment framework to address the distinctions among various types of flood-forcing phenomena, flood mechanisms (grouped into three mechanism types), and flood severity metrics; (3) a wide-ranging survey of approaches and methods that have been applied to various flooding phenomena and settings; and (4) a critical assessment of MMF hazard assessment methods. Studies were identified involving MMFs related to coastal flooding mechanisms, fluvial (rivers/streams) flooding mechanisms, and associated combinations of coastal and fluvial flooding mechanisms. Studies were also identified that address MMFs involving coastal and fluvial flooding mechanisms as well as coastal flooding mechanisms along with extreme precipitation (without specific attribution to fluvial or pluvial mechanisms). The studies identified for review in this report included assessments at varying spatial scales (from local to global) with differing geographic regions of focus using both observed and synthetic data. The majority of studies identified and reviewed were site-specific assessments focusing on relatively short return periods. Studies considered a range of flood severity metrics, made differing assumptions regarding the occurrence of extrema, and used multiple statistical techniques; the use of copulas for the development of joint distributions was a particularly popular analysis technique. The literature review highlighted the differences among existing studies relative to terminology used, means of presenting results, framework and techniques employed, and level of sophistication regarding the number and types of variables considered. Despite the significant diversity in existing studies, the review identified several promising techniques that will be considered in future work under this project, including the development of joint distributions for MMFs using copula and Bayesian-motivated approaches.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
DOE OSTI2020

Facility Cybersecurity Framework Best Practices

Federal facilities are increasingly adopting automation and connecting to the Internet creating an energy-internet-of-things environment that converges operational technology (OT) and information technology (IT). Today's buildings increasingly weave together networked sensors and cyber and physical systems that enable data to be collected, aggregated, exchanged, stored and monetized in new ways. Building technological advances have created new energy technology, services, markets and value creation opportunities (e.g. transactive energy, two-way grid communications, machine learning, and increased use of renewable and distributed energy resources). But as larger data sets are being exchanged at faster speeds between an increasing number of OT systems, it becomes more difficult to protect the security of the data lifecycle and the physical equipment it interacts with. These challenges are especially difficult to overcome because the economic and environmental gain (interoperability, big data, social networks and ubiquitous information sharing) are driving these prominent trends in the digital age. Often cybersecurity is an afterthought. The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) funded the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) to develop various cybersecurity tools, trainings, and reports to aid federal facility managers – and other building owners and operators – in better applying frameworks and lessons learned from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Cybersecurity Framework (CSF), risk management framework (RMF), DOE’s cybersecurity capability maturity model (C2M2), and a wide variety of industry best practices and guidance documents (i.e., NIST 800 series, Department of Defense United Facilities Criteria). This set of tools, collectively known as the FEMP Facility-Related Control System Cyber Toolkit (FRCS Cyber Toolkit)2, is focused on cybersecurity concerns from facility-related control systems and other operational technology (OT), such as industrial control systems (ICS). The FRCS Cyber Toolkit can be applied across six of the sixteen critical infrastructure sectors designated by the Department of Homeland Security, including government facilities, healthcare and public health, commercial facilities (e.g., public assembly, offices, lodging), financial services (e.g., banking and insurance), emergency services (e.g., fire and police stations), and information technology. With increasingly converged IT and OT systems, it is crucial to address OT cybersecurity considerations and assess how the seam of these two systems could impact the overall cybersecurity posture of a facility. The objective of this report is to provide an overview of the best possible method to use FRCS Cyber Toolkit (section 2.0) and distilled cybersecurity best practices for the federal facilities to address growing non-linear cyber threats (section 3.0). Recommendations in this document are aggregated from several NIST and other documents (see Appendix A for additional details).

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Sierra/SolidMechanics 4.58 Verification Tests Manual

Presented in this document is a small portion of the tests that exist in the Sierra/SolidMechanics (Sierra/SM) verification test suite. Most of these tests are run nightly with the Sierra/SM code suite, and the results of the test are checked versus the correct analytical result. For each of the tests presented in this document, the test setup, a description of the analytic solution, and comparison of the Sierra/SM code results to the analytic solution is provided. Mesh convergence is also checked on a nightly basis for several of these tests. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems. Additional example problems are provided in the Sierra/SM Example Problems Manual. Note, many other verification tests exist in the Sierra/SM test suite, but have not yet been included in this manual.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Guide for Joint Participation in a DOE Complex Wide SAVY-4000 Surveillance Program

This document describes LANL Storage Program best practices when working with other User Sites to implement DOE M441.1-1 Manual requirements through the use of the SAVY nuclear material packaging system. It is a Manual directive for Field Element Managers to review and approve the SAVY-4000 container series design (with supporting technical basis) as a packaging system for use at their respective sites. This review and approval incorporates an evaluation of the User Site methodology for SAVY surveillance and the process for documenting its nuclear materials storage program. This document aims to assist the Field Element Mangers and User Sites in the processes necessary to credit LANL SAVY surveillance for key elements of the User Site surveillance plan.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Chapter 17: Residential Behavior Evaluation Protocol. The Uniform Methods Project: Methods for Determining Energy Efficiency Savings for Specific Measures, September 2011 - August 2020

This document has been updated in August 2020. This document was developed for the U.S. Department of Energy Uniform Methods Project (UMP). The UMP provides model protocols for determining energy and demand savings that result from specific energy-efficiency measures implemented through state and utility programs. In most cases, the measure protocols are based on a particular option identified by the International Performance Verification and Measurement Protocol; however, this work provides a more detailed approach to implementing that option. Each chapter is written by technical experts in collaboration with their peers, reviewed by industry experts, and subject to public review and comment. The protocols are updated on an as-needed basis. The UMP protocols can be used by utilities, program administrators, public utility commissions,evaluators, and other stakeholders for both program planning and evaluation. To learn more about the UMP, visit the website, https://energy.gov/eere/about-us/ump-home, or download the UMP introduction document at http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy17osti/68557.pdf.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2020

Catalina Repower Feasibility Study: NREL Phases I & II Summary Report

Engineers at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) supported Southern California Edison (SCE) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by conducting technical and economic analyses for energy systems at Santa Catalina (Catalina) Island, which is located 22 miles off the coast of Long Beach, California. This effort was part of a broader Repower Catalina Feasibility Study that was also supported by NV5, an engineering consulting firm and project partner to NREL for this analysis. This document describes NREL’s techno-economic modeling and optimization analysis for the first two phases of this project which focus on supply-side generation and energy storage options for Catalina. SCE’s goal for this analysis is to determine a strategy for electricity generation on Catalina Island that results in lower energy costs, improved energy resiliency, and reduced air emissions. EPA goals for this effort are to reduce emissions of air pollution and encourage renewable energy development on contaminated and formerly contaminated lands when such development is aligned with the community’s vision for the site. Currently, an on-island SCE power plant serves the Catalina Island electrical load with 6 reciprocating diesel generators totaling 9.4 MW; 23 propane-fueled microturbines totaling 1.5 MW; and a 1-MW, 7.2-MWh sodium sulfur battery energy storage system (BESS). In 2017, the electricity consumption on the island was 29.1 GWh, with an average load of 3.3 MW and peak load of approximately 5.5 MW. Considering new environmental standards on diesel generator emissions from California’s South Coast Air Quality Management District, a 60% renewable energy target for 2030 laid out in California’s Senate Bill 100, SCE’s Clean Power Electrification Pathway, and the characteristics of the island’s existing diesel generators, SCE is seeking to evaluate the technical and economic implications of different energy technology options to determine a path forward. Phases I and II of the Repower Catalina Feasibility Study, summarized in this document, evaluated the following: Interconnection with the mainland via an undersea cable; On-island fossil fuel generation, including diesel, propane, and/or liquified natural gas (LNG); On-island renewable energy (RE) technologies, including solar photovoltaics (PV), wind turbines, and wave energy devices; BESS to support the above generation technologies; Initial analysis of the potential impacts of implementing energy efficiency measures. Results indicate strong techno-economic potential for a mix of on-island diesel and/or propane generators, solar PV, BESS, and energy efficiency measures to help SCE and Catalina achieve their goals compliant with California’s emissions and clean energy standards while minimizing electricity life cycle costs (LCC) over the 30-year analysis period. This document summarizes the considerations and findings of Phases I and II, focusing on high-level takeaways from Phase I and more detailed results from Phase II, and discusses a potential path forward for Phase III.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Measuring aerosol collection efficiency for the Bladewerx “New Speclon TM 5” and the older “Speclon TM 5” filter

Bladewerx TM LLC (Rio Rancho, NM) manufactures instrumentation, neutron shielding and activation foils for the radiation protection industry. Specializing in portable alpha/beta air monitors and sample counters, Bladewerx is the source of Speclon TM PTFE filter media that they recommend for high-resolution alpha spectroscopy. Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) utilizes Speclon TM filter material in CAM (Continuous Air Monitor) samplers for workplace air monitoring. The LANL Aerosol Engineering Facility received air filter material from Bladewerx, referred to as “New Speclon 5” in this document, in order to distinguish from filter material that was previously received (referred to as “Speclon 5” in this document). In this document, the aerosol collection efficiency and airflow resistance (pressure drop) were measured for the New Speclon 5 filter material.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment (DUNE), Far Detector Technical Design Report (Volume II: DUNE Physics)

The Physics volume of the DUNE far detector (FD) Technical Design Report (TDR) presents the science program of DUNE. Within, we describe the array of identified scientific opportunities and key goals. Crucially, we also report our best current understanding of the capability of DUNE to realize these goals, along with the detailed arguments and investigations on which this understanding is based. In the context of the complete set of DUNE TDR volumes, a central role for this volume is to document the scientific basis underlying the conception and design of the LBNF/DUNE experimental configurations. As a result, it is the description of DUNE’s experimental capabilities that constitutes the bulk of the document. Key linkages between requirements for successful execution of the physics program and primary specifications of the experimental configurations are drawn and summarized. This document also serves a wider purpose as a statement on the scientific potential of DUNE as a central component within a global program of frontier theoretical and experimental particle physics research. Thus, the presentation also aims to serve as a resource for the particle physics community at large. In this chapter, the scientific goals, the methodologies utilized to obtain sensitivity projections, the corresponding results for selected elements of the scientific program, and the demands placed on the experiment design and performance are presented in summary form. Together with the two chapters that follow, this summary establishes the context for the detailed descriptions specific to each area of research that comprise the remaining chapters.

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Modernization of Technical Requirements for Licensing of Advanced Non-Light Water Reactors: Risk-Informed and Performance-Based Evaluation of Defense-in-Depth Adequacy

This document supports the work contained in Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 18-04 “Risk-Informed Performance-Based Technology Inclusive Guidance for Advanced Reactor Licensing Basis Development” Revision 0. NEI 18-04 presents a modern, technology-inclusive, risk-informed, and performance-based (TI-RIPB) process for selection of Licensing Basis Events (LBEs); safety classification of structures, systems, and components (SSCs) and associated risk-informed special treatments; and determination of defense-in-depth (DID) adequacy for non-LWRs. The NEI guidance document provides one acceptable means for addressing the aforementioned topics as part of demonstrating a specific design provides reasonable assurance of adequate radiological protection. This report provides the framework and associated methodology guidelines and discussion for establishing, then evaluating, confirming, and documenting the adequacy of defense-in-depth (DID) for advanced non-light-water reactor technologies. It was developed as part of the Licensing Modernization Project led by Southern Company and cost-shared by the United States Department of Energy and has benefited from considerable NRC formal reviews and public workshops. The methodology converts the DID philosophy into a structured process that is implementable, embraces existing United States and international definitions and philosophies of DID that set the foundation for the process. It builds on the DID framework developed in the Department of Energy Next Generation Nuclear Plant Project and earlier works on this subject. The approach to establishing DID adequacy involves the incorporation of DID attributes into the plant capabilities and programmatic elements of DID. The integrated evaluation of DID adequacy includes both quantitative elements to incorporate risk-informed and performance-based (RIPB) considerations and qualitative elements that address uncertainties and limitations in the quantitative models and supporting data. Demonstration of DID adequacy ensures that there are multiple layers of defense for risk-significant challenges to the design and that the plant capabilities and programs that support each layer are provided in a manner that minimizes dependencies among these layers. The focus of this report is assurance of DID adequacy with respect to protection of the public from radiological exposures resulting from accidental releases of radioactive material. While other hazards are not specifically addressed, this methodology is expected to be beneficial for determining DID adequacy for them as well. Risk-informed evaluation of DID considers the integrated performance of all plant SSCs and associated programs to manage daily operational activities, transients, and accidents, including the evaluation of strategies for accident prevention and mitigation. The RIPB LBE scenario methodology used in this evaluation defines the challenges to the plant safety features included in the plant design basis and beyond, and the scope of all deterministic and probabilistic safety evaluations. By examining event sequences across the whole spectrum of LBEs, a systematic assessment of DID can be accomplished.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Transition Core Planning and Safety Analyses in Support of LEU Fuel Conversion of the University of Missouri Research Reactor (MURR)

The University of Missouri Research Reactor (MURR®) is one of six U.S. High Performance Research Reactors (USHPRR), including one critical facility, that is working with the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Office of Material Management and Minimization (M3) Reactor Conversion Program to convert from highly enriched uranium (HEU) to low-enriched uranium (LEU) fuel. The M3 Reactor Conversion USHPRR Project objectives include the development of LEU fuel element designs that will ensure safe reactor operations and to maintain the existing experimental performance of each facility. The work is being conducted through many inter-related activities being completed by four Project Pillars: Fuel Qualification (FQ), Fuel Fabrication (FF), Reactor Conversion (RC), and Cross Cutting (CC). A new type of LEU fuel based on an alloy of uranium-10 wt% molybdenum (U-10Mo) is expected to allow the conversion of those USHPRR, like MURR, requiring higher density fuels. The very-high-density LEU U-10Mo monolithic fuel is currently undergoing irradiation testing and post-irradiation examination under a planned and documented fuel qualification effort. The FQ Pillar will document fuel property and fuel performance data and qualify the fuel for use in these reactors. The FF Pillar is fabricating fuel for ongoing and future irradiation tests, as well as conducting fabrication demonstrations to validate or update preliminary fabrication assumptions. The FF Pillar is also working to develop and install commercial manufacturing capacity with the U-10Mo monolithic fuel to produce prototypic fuel. Working with the RC Pillar at Argonne, MURR has progressed through a preliminary fuel element design using preliminary data for the proposed monolithic alloy of U-10Mo. Analyses were completed in previous work that found for typical equilibrium operations with the preliminary LEU fuel element design, in conjunction with a power uprate to 12 MW and appropriate changes to the MURR Limiting safety system settings (LSSS), MURR will have adequate margins to safety for steady-state operations and postulated transient accidents and will have experimental performance in key locations that meets or exceeds current operations with HEU fuel. The purpose of this work is to develop a sequence of transition cycles that will enable MURR to transition from operation with the reactor core loaded with fresh LEU fuel elements only to typical equilibrium operations with mixed-burnup cores following conversion while meeting operational requirements on safety and experimental performance. It is expected that the use of fresh LEU fuel at conversion and subsequent low burnup of the LEU fuel elements that will initially be available for use following conversion will result in critical control blade positions that will substantially change the axial power distribution in the core and the neutron flux available in key experimental locations relative to equilibrium LEU operations. Given the constraints of MURR safety margins, operational practices, and production and research, a novel method has been developed to identify a transition sequence that minimizes the time MURR operates atypically compared to the current prototypic cycles using HEU fuel. The proposed transition sequence moves quickly to the same sort of equilibrium cycles for the LEU fuel that have already been evaluated in documented preliminary safety analyses. Although shifting the neutron flux peak to the lower half of the core during initial cycles with LEU at 12 MW reduces the experiment performance in some key locations relative to current HEU operations at 10 MW, all LEU cores provide an average performance that meets or exceeds that of HEU. An LEU cycle is reached that meets or exceeds the level of experimental performance predicted for current HEU and equilibrium LEU operations in more than 450 key locations identified by a reactor specialist at MURR by the 23rd cycle following conversion and that afterwards will enable MURR to consistently meet its experimental performance requirements. The proposed transition sequence only requires the fabrication of 34 fresh LEU elements in the first year of operation and does not exceed the anticipated availability of fresh elements that can be produced by the fuel fabricator. By the third year after conversion, 22 fresh LEU elements will be required each year, which is the same as expected for equilibrium LEU operations and the same as current operations with HEU fuel. The proposed transition sequence thus combines a relatively short time period before equilibrium burnup is achieved, a temporary increase of fuel elements needed annually relative to typical operations that are within the production capabilities of the fuel fabricator, and demonstrates comparable experimental performance of the LEU cores relative to current HEU operations. Further measures may be taken to reduce any initial experimental performance penalty even further, where possible, by repositioning certain experiments to leverage the increased performance in the lower axial experimental positions in the initial cycles following conversion or leaving the experiments in the irradiation facilities longer in order to achieve the required neutron fluence. This analysis may require refinement depending on the experimental facilities in use at the time of conversion. Nonetheless, the results presented here, including the experimental performance, core burnup, and critical control blade positions throughout the transition cycles, show that the proposed transition cycle fuel management patterns are consistent with what is expected and desired for MURR operation with LEU U-10Mo fuel. Detailed core power distributions from the neutronics models were also used to evaluate safety margins during steady-state operations for the selected transition cycles and the equilibrium LEU core. It is shown that there are adequate safety margins for both steady-state operations and postulated accident scenarios. For the steady-state operations with the preliminary LEU fuel element design the analysis predicts at least 2.49 MW margin to the onset of flow instability at the LSSS power of 15 MW. Considering the LSSS power is 125% of full license power, the margin to OFI is sufficient. In addition, the critical heat flux ratio at LSSS power is well above the requirement of CHFR > 2.0 from NUREG-1537 for all considered cases. For postulated transient accidents, the minimum margin to the fuel temperature safety limit is at least 109 °C. In summary, the proposed sequence of core loadings for MURR operations following conversion to LEU fuel and a power uprate to 12 MW provides sufficient safety margins for both steady-state operations and postulated transient accidents during a proposed sequence of transition cycles to equilibrium operations. Analysis has shown that there are some local experimental performance penalties during the initial cycles. Although there are local shifts in the experimental performance, on average all LEU cores at 12 MW have equal or higher performance than HEU at 10 MW. Temporary adjustments are being planned that will produce suitable experimental performance during these cycles. The results indicate that for the equilibrium LEU core the experimental performance exceeds that of current HEU operations in all key locations while also demonstrating sufficient safety margins.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Model Package Report: Central Plateau Vadose Zone Models

This model package report describes concisely the modeling objectives, conceptualization, implementation, uncertainty and sensitivity, configuration control, limitations, data needs, and recommendations for improvement of the Central Plateau Vadose Zone Models. This collection of models is developed to meet the vadose zone simulation needs of the Hanford Site Composite Analysis (CA), the Hanford Site Cumulative Impact Evaluation (CIE), and are expected to find other applications in Hanford Site remedial cleanup decision-making processes. This model package report describes and documents the development of the models themselves to fulfill technical approaches defined for the CA and the CIE. This report does not document any specific calculation using these models: instead, applications of individual vadose models to perform specific calculations will be documented in environmental calculation files, including inputs and results, as appropriate. Configuration management for the Central Plateau Vadose Zone Models is managed through assignment of unique sequential numerical version numbers and archival of the models in the Environmental Modeling Management Archive.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

SIERRA Multimechanics Module: Aria Verification Manual - Version 4.58

Presented in this document is a portion of the tests that exist in the Sierra Thermal/Fluids verification test suite. Each of these tests is run nightly with the Sierra/TF code suite and the results of the test checked under mesh refinement against the correct analytic result. For each of the tests presented in this document the test setup, derivation of the analytic solution, and comparison of the code results to the analytic solution is provided. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2020

LANL Waste Management

All waste at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL or the Laboratory) is subject to one or more types of regulations and must be managed properly. This document describes LANL requirements for waste generated and managed by waste generators and Treatment and Storage Facilities (TSFs) to ensure compliance with legal mandates and Laboratory requirements as necessary to protect human health, safety, and the environment. This document has been revised as part of a process in which the Laboratory systematically plans, documents, executes, and evaluates its management of regulated waste streams.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗