SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “compliance”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 667 records · Page 37

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2023

Performance Assessment for the E-Area Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility at the Savannah River Site: Appendix H

This section provides supporting material for the development of DU-specific final inventory limits for the GW pathways for every generic waste form and SWF parent radionuclide requiring an inventory limit. The final inventory limits are based on nominal PA transport simulations using PORFLOW as reported in Chapter 5. The nominal PA settings represent the compliance case where some modeling parameter settings are defined based on conservative (pessimistically leaning) arguments. In the overall computational approach employed in this PA, a multitiered radionuclide screening process is adopted as discussed in Chapter 2, Section 2.3.7. In the multitiered process, the initial list of 1,252 parent radionuclides is shortened substantially using conservative, but simple, transport models, along with a reasonably low cutoff criterion of 0.1% SOF value. Multidimensional PORFLOW flow and transport modeling is employed for every parent radionuclide that failed the GW screening. The generic waste form limits represent Tier-3 analyses, while Tier-4 analyses are employed for SWF limits, where warranted.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2022

Large-scale Hydrogen Storage – Risk Assessment Seattle City Light and Port of Seattle [Abstract]

This CRADA presents the strategy that Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) and Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) will take to support Seattle City Light (SCL), and the Port of Seattle (Port) in performing a risk assessment of large-scale hydrogen storage. Risk assessment is often used to ensure that adequate measures are taken to protect workers and the public, the environment, infrastructure, and assets. A detailed risk assessment can also be used to direct funding and upgrades, to specific components and sub-systems in order to mitigate risks to the larger system. In this way risk assessments are often employed as a part of a larger risk management strategy, with the goal of minimizing the occurrence of hazards and to identify means to limit their consequences. Risk assessment is often used to engage and inform regulators, and to communicate how specific regulations are being met. However, it is important to note that the proposed work is not intended for SCL and the Port to use in order to gain regulatory acceptance for their proposed activities. The work performed as a part of this effort will be a preliminary risk assessment for early-stage component and system designs and should be considered research and development (R&D). As such, the proposed work will be performed to a quality level and design maturity consistent with R&D and is not considered appropriate for final safety analysis and regulatory compliance purposes. Previous and on-going work at SCL and the Port demonstrated the utility of deploying hydrogen systems at the Port. The deployment of hydrogen at the Port is a part of a larger vision of using hydrogen to address a range of issues for SCL and the Port. These include large-scale fueling of MD/HD vehicles, cargo-handling equipment (CHE), and harbor vessels to reduce emissions; support of adjacent LD vehicles; support of critical port operations during extreme events (i.e., resiliency); deferral of more capital- and time-intensive electrical distribution system upgrades while still supporting evolving port operations and decarbonization efforts; facilitating electrification by establishing energy storage as a grid resource, starting at strategic port locations; creation of a flexible market resource that can be used by SCL to generate revenue via arbitrage; support of planned future maritime operations that involve heavy use of hydrogen for ocean-going vessels; and future end-use applications involving natural gas pipeline hydrogen injection. Ultimately, the success of these activities is underpinned by the deployed storage capacity. Large-scale deployment of hydrogen systems will require hydrogen storage at a scale that has not been demonstrated. In addition, the ideal location for such multi-use systems is near the end user which will often necessitate deploying into urban and/or industrial areas. A detailed risk assessment using the Port as a test case is necessary to ensure the deployment of large-scale hydrogen is successful. Many technologies have been proposed for hydrogen storage; however, these technologies need to be analyzed as they apply to an actual site. The physical infrastructure and hydrogen use cases for the Port will be analyzed, and a risk assessment for compressed hydrogen, liquified hydrogen, and Liquid Organic Hydrogen Carrier (LOHC) storage will be performed. These risk assessments will be useful for understanding how each of these technologies would perform in terms of facility and public safety. The operating states of the proposed hydrogen systems at the Port will be analyzed and incorporated into the storage risk assessment. Scalability will also be analyzed to understand how future port uses would affect the overall risk assessment. Finally, using the risk assessment as a tool to inform engagement and to gain stakeholder acceptance will be explored.

08 HYDROGEN↗

DOE OSTI2022

Advanced Heterogeneous Integration Enabled by 3D Freestanding Membranes—From Material Growths to Applications

For the future of electronics such as bioelectronics, 3D integrated electronics, and bendable electronics, the need for flexibility and stackability of electronic products has substantially grown up. However, conventional wafer-based single-crystalline semiconductors cannot catch up with such trends because they are bound to thick rigid wafers such that they are neither flexible nor stackable. Although polymer-based organic electronic materials are more compatible as they are mechanically compliant and less costly than inorganic counterparts, their electronic/photonic performance is substantially inferior to that of single-crystalline inorganic materials. Such performance-mechanical compliance dilemma could be resolved by developing methods to obtain cheap, flexible, stackable, single-crystalline inorganic systems. Such dream electronic systems could be realized by producing single-crystalline freestanding membranes. For the past few decades, various layer transfer techniques (a.k.a layer liftoff techniques) have been developed to produce single-crystalline freestanding membranes. In today's talk, I will present the survey of the layer liftoff techniques and go over how these strategies unlock new ways of manufacturing advanced electronic systems. In addition, I will introduce unprecedented artificial heterostructure devices enabled by stacking of those freestanding 3D material membranes, e.g., the world's smallest vertically-stacked full-color micro-LEDs, the world's best multiferroic devices, chip-less wireless e-skin, and reconfigurable hetero-integrated chips with AI accelerators.

Kim, Jeehwan↗

DOE OSTI2023

TA-18-1 Slotin Building Restoration – Summary of Work to be Performed

The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) requires LANL to identify, evaluate, record, and protect eligible historic properties like TA-18-1 Slotin Building. The Environmental Protection and Compliance-Environmental Stewardship (EPC-ES) Cultural Resources program consults with the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on undertakings that may affect these properties. TA-18-1 Slotin Building is an exceptionally significant Manhattan Project Property that has been determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and is included within the boundary of the Manhattan Project National Historical Park. The building was constructed in 1946 and served as laboratory space for criticality testing. It is the location of the May 1946 criticality accident that resulted in the death of Louis Slotin. As a result of the accident, new procedures and designs for criticality experiments were implemented to prevent further accidents.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗

DOE OSTI2022

Advanced Heterogeneous Integration Enabled by 3D Freestanding Membranes—From Material Growths to Applications

Kim, Jeehwan↗

DOE OSTI2022

2D material-based layer transfer: Challenges and opportunities

For future of electronics such as bioelectronics, 3D integrated electronics, and bendable electronics, needs for flexibility and stackability of electronic products have substantially grown up. However, conventional wafer-based single-crystalline semiconductors cannot catch up with such trends because they are bound to the thick rigid wafers such that they are neither flexible nor stackable. Although polymer-based organic electronic materials are more compatible as they are mechanically complaint and less costly than inorganic counterparts, their electronic/photonic performance is substantially inferior to that of single-crystalline inorganic materials. For the past few decades, many different strategies to mitigate such performance-mechanical compliance dilemma by developing methods to obtain cheap, flexible, stackable, single-crystalline inorganic systems. In today’s talk, I will discuss about various strategies to realize such a dream electronic system and how these strategies unlock new ways of manufacturing advanced electronic systems. One of the most promising approaches is to fabricate freestanding ultrathin membranes from existing functional material wafers by peeling the active layers from the top. I will overview all freestanding membrane methods and especially dive deeply into 2D materials-based layer transfer (2DLT) technique that has been recently emerging as one of the very promising options. In the 2DLT process, one can produce single-crystalline freestanding membranes from 3D materials by performing remote epitaxy or van der Waals epitaxy on 2D materials followed by peeling active single-crystalline films from the 2D materials. I will discuss about the challenges and opportunities of this technology. In addition, I will present unprecedented artificial heterostructures that can be enabled by stacking those freestanding 3D material membranes.

Kim, Jeehwan↗

DOE OSTI2023

Preliminary IHLW Formulation Algorithm Description

This report documents the initial algorithm that could be used by the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) in batching high-level waste (HLW) and glass-forming chemicals (GFCs) in the HLW melter feed preparation vessel (MFPV) (HFP-VSL-00001 and -00005). Not all Hanford tank waste can be accommodated by the models developed for this report and significant expansion of the model boundaries could be achievable to reduce the WTP mission life and total canister production count. The immobilized HLW (IHLW) must meet a series of constraints to be acceptable for disposal in the Monitored Geologic Repository, which are contained in the Specification 1 of the Contract (DOE 2000), the Waste Acceptance Product Specifications (WAPS, DOE 1996), and the Waste Acceptance System Requirements Document (WASRD, DOE 2007). The IHLW Waste Form Compliance Plan (WCP, 24590-HLW-PL-RT-07-0001, Rev 3) specifies that the formulation algorithm will be developed and used to comply with the constraints associated with glass composition and properties. This report is not an engineering calculation, does not provide design input, and is not an engineering study. Algorithm inputs include the chemical analyses of the blended HLW in the HLW blend vessel (HBV) (HLP-VSL-00028, the volume and composition of the MFPV heel, the volume and composition of the MFPV after waste addition, the volume and composition of MFPV batch after GFC addition, the compositions of individual GFCs, and the mass of glass in each canister. In addition to these inputs, uncertainties in the HLW composition and processing parameters are included in the algorithm. Using the above inputs, the algorithm calculates the following outputs: 1) the volume of HLW to be transferred from the HBV to the MFPV, 2) the mass of each GFC for addition to the MFPV, 3) the composition of the glass that will be produced along with uncertainties, and 4) the predicted properties, with associated uncertainties, of the resulting IHLW. The algorithm uses the property-composition models to calculate properties with associated uncertainties and compares them with various constraints to ensure that a processable feed is formulated and a compliant IHLW is produced. The GFC additions are determined using an optimization approach to provide high confidence that the HLW glass will meet all product quality requirements and key processing constraints. For most HLW batches there are many possible glass compositions that meet all constraints. In these cases, the glass composition is optimized for a series of target component concentrations and target property values. The algorithm also incorporates process measurement and product quality uncertainties, based on the work of Piepel et al. (2005). Estimates of the various process and measurement uncertainties that affect glass compositions and predicted glass properties have been previously reported (Piepel et al. 2005, 2006) and the impacts of these estimated uncertainties on the IHLW composition envelope that meets product quality and processing-related properties with sufficient confidence were evaluated. The details of work performed to date to develop this initial GFC addition and batching algorithm are summarized in Sections 4 and 5. An example data set is used to illustrate the calculations of the algorithm summarized in Section 6. Finally, in Section 7, there is a statement of the required work to achieve a final operational IHLW formulation control algorithm. This report is not an engineering calculation, does not provide design input, and is not an engineering study.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2022

INTERSECT Architecture Specification: System-of-systems Architecture (Version 0.5)

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL)’s Self-driven Experiments for Science / Interconnected ScienceEcosystem (INTERSECT) architecture project, titled “An Open Federated Architecture for the Laboratory of the Future”, creates an open federated hardware/software architecture for the laboratory of the future using a novel system of systems (SoS) and microservice architecture approach, connecting scientific instruments, robot-controlled laboratories and edge/center computing/data resources to enable autonomous experiments, “self-driving” laboratories, smart manufacturing, and artificial intelligence (AI)-driven design, discovery and evaluation. The architecture project is divided into three focus areas: design patterns; SoS architecture; and microservices architecture. The design patterns area focuses on describing science use cases as design patterns that identify and abstract the involved hardware/software components and their interactions interms of control, work and data flow. The SoS architecture area focuses on an open architecture specification for the federated ecosystem that clarifies terms, architectural elements, the interactions between them and compliance. The microservices architecture describes blueprints for loosely coupled microservices, standardized interfaces, and multi-programming language support. This document is the SoS Architecture specification only, and captures the system of systems architecture design for the INTERSECT Initiative and its components. It is intended to provide a deep analysis and specification of how the INTERSECT platform will be designed, and to link the scientific needs identified across disciplines with the technical needs involved in the support, development, and evolution of a science ecosystem. PLEASE NOTE: This is a working document and reflects current discussions and design activity among the authors. There may be inconsistencies within the document as different parts evolve at a different pace. We invite comments and thoughts from the public on this and following working drafts. The first finished version of this document is scheduled for release in September 2023.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2022

Impact of FERC Order 2222 on DER Participation Rules in US Electricity Markets

Electricity markets in the bulk grid are beginning to implement market mechanisms that support the procurement of flexible capabilities from wide range of technologies, including distributed energy resources (DERs). The flexibility of these resources will help counterbalance supply uncertainties from large-scale integration of variable renewable generation. To encourage development of distributed and aggregated market participants, FERC Order 2222 was issued in September 2020 to require each Independent System Operator (ISO) in the US to implement rules that enable broader participation from aggregations of DERs in the bulk market. The following paper first describes the generic design of ISO markets before introducing the new market participation rules that ISOs have proposed for compliance with Order 2222. The paper then describes how software performance issues may continue to affect the eligibility requirements and offer structures for DER aggregations participating in ISOs, noting that continued research on computational methods may help reduce burdens for DER integration. The prospects for transmission and distribution system coordination is second major issue discussed, which will require minor changes to existing processes in the short term. In the longer term, there is more opportunity for more wide-ranging reforms, such as the development of a Distribution System Operator (DSO) framework. Newly proposed market rules may affect how Transactive Energy Systems (TES) will help facilitate efficient formation of DER aggregations and operation of the individual DERs within an aggregation. Within the TES context, the challenge is to fully understand how resource eligibility and operational and planning coordination methods will affect the design and implementation of TES.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2021

Post-Closure Report for Closed Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Corrective Action Units, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada: For Calendar Year 2020 (Rev. 2)

This report serves as the combined annual report for post-closure activities in compliance with the requirements listed in Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Permit Number NEV HW0101 associated with the following closed corrective action units (CAUs): 1) CAU 90, Area 2 Bitcutter Containment; 2) CAU 91, Area 3 U-3fi Injection Well; 3) CAU 92, Area 6 Decon Pond Facility; 4) CAU 110, Area 3 WMD U-3ax/bl Crater; 5) CAU 111, Area 5 WMD Retired Mixed Waste Pits; 6) CAU 112, Area 23 Hazardous Waste Trenches The locations of the sites are shown in Figure ES-1. This report covers calendar year 2020. The post-closure requirements for these sites are described in RCRA Permit NEV HW0101 and are summarized in each CAU-specific section of this report. The results of the inspections, a summary of maintenance activities, and an evaluation of monitoring data are presented in this report. Site inspections are conducted annually at CAUs 90, 91, and 112; semiannually at CAUs 92 and 110; and quarterly at CAU 111. Additional inspections are conducted at CAUs 92 and 111 if precipitation occurs in excess of 1.0 inch in a 24-hour period. Inspections include an evaluation of the condition of the units, including covers, fences, signs, gates, and locks. At CAUs 110 and 111, soil moisture monitoring and subsidence surveys are conducted in addition to the visual inspections. At CAU 110, the site fence, gate, lock, and use restriction signs are evaluated. At CAU 111, an ecological survey, direct radiation monitoring, air monitoring, radon flux monitoring, and groundwater monitoring are also conducted. This report will address all monitoring item notes above except groundwater monitoring. Groundwater monitoring is documented in the Nevada National Security Site Data Report: Groundwater Monitoring Program Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site. All required inspections, maintenance, and monitoring were conducted in accordance with the post-closure requirements of the permit. Revision 6 of RCRA Permit NEV HW0101 was issued effective December 10, 2015, and remained in effect until December 10, 2020. At the time of this report submittal, the new RCRA permit application was in review.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

Finding of Effect, And Mitigation Documentation for Building 23-620, Mercury, Area 23, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) plans to demolish Building 23-620 in the town of Mercury (Nevada State Historic Preservation Office [SHPO] Resource No. B15283), which is on the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) in Nye County, Nevada (see Figure 1). The purpose of the undertaking is related to the modernization of Mercury for future mission needs. The NNSA/NFO will implement this undertaking in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement between the National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office and the Nevada State Historic Preservation Officer Regarding Modernization and Operational Maintenance of the Nevada National Security Site, at Mercury in Nye County, Nevada, hereafter referred to as the Mercury PA. Building 23-620 was built in 1968 as office space for the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory (LASL), who worked on the design and engineering of nuclear weapons. In the 1990s, it became a maintenance facility for Reynolds Electrical & Engineering Company (REECo), and eventually, it became the Real Estate Services building in 2004. The town of Mercury and the immediate surrounding area have been formally determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (National Register, NRHP) as the Mercury Historic District (MHD, SHPO Resource No. D230) under Criteria A and C for its importance in supporting nuclear testing and scientific research from 1951 through 1992. Building 23-620 was identified as a contributing element to the MHD in a 2018 architectural survey of the district (Reno et al.) and recorded on a Nevada Architectural Resource Assessment (ARA) form (Reno et al. 2017). Building 23-620 was also identified in Appendix C of the Mercury PA as a Category I contributing element, indicating that it might be individually eligible for the NRHP. It is a historic property for the purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and subject to the stipulations of the Mercury PA. Mitigation Report: The purpose of this letter report is to submit documentation related to the mitigation of the demolition of Building 23-620 (Nevada State Historic Preservation Office [SHPO] Resource No. B15283) in the Mercury Historic District (MHD, SHPO Resource No. D230). This submission is intended to comply with the stipulations in the Programmatic Agreement between the National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office and the Nevada State Historic Preservation Officer Regarding Modernization and Operational Maintenance of the Nevada National Security Site, at Mercury in Nye County, Nevada, hereafter referred to as the Mercury PA.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2022

Evaluation of Building 23-620, Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory J-3 Office, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) plans to demolish Building 23-620, the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory (LASL) J-3 Office Building (Nevada State Historic Preservation Office [SHPO] Resource No. B15283) at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) in Nye County, Nevada. The NNSA/NFO is implementing a long-term project to modernize the town of Mercury for future mission needs. The project is considered an undertaking subject to review under Title 54 of United States Code (USC) § 306108, commonly known as Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, Title 54 USC § 300101, et seq., and its implementing regulations, Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations (36 CFR) Part 800. In 2018, Desert Research Institute (DRI) completed an architectural survey of the town of Mercury. This effort resulted in the identification, recordation, and evaluation of the Mercury Historic District (MHD, SHPO Resource No. D230), including the identification of its contributing elements (Reno et al. 2018). The MHD was recommended eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP, National Register) under the Secretary of the Interior’s (SOI) Significance Criteria A and C, as defined in 36 CFR Part 60.4, as a significant concentration of buildings and structures with a direct and important association with Cold War-era nuclear testing from 1951 through 1992. It has not been evaluated under Criteria B and D to date. As part of a larger modernization program for Mercury, the NNSA/NFO and the SHPO executed the 2018 Programmatic Agreement between the National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office and the Nevada State Historic Preservation Officer regarding Modernization and Operational Maintenance of the Nevada National Security Site, at Mercury in Nye County, Nevada (Mercury PA). The Mercury PA includes streamlined Section 106 procedures for undertakings in the MHD based on contributing element categories. Building 23-620 is identified in Appendix C of the Mercury PA as a Category I contributing element, indicating that it might be individually eligible for the NRHP. It is a historic property for the purposes of Section 106 compliance and subject to the stipulations of the Mercury PA. Per Stipulation VI of the Mercury PA, when the Area of Potential Effect (APE) for an undertaking includes Category I elements, the NNSA/NFO must evaluate the Category I elements for individual NRHP eligibility under all of the SOI Significance Criteria prior to initiating any activity that may affect the elements. The purpose of this report is to evaluate Building 23-620 as a potential individually eligible historic property in fulfillment of Stipulation VI of the Mercury PA. The evaluation detailed herein concludes that Building 23-620 is not individually eligible for listing in the NRHP. Although it retains aspects of integrity and continues to contribute to the MHD, it is not individually significant under any of the SOI Significance Criteria.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

Low-Activity Waste Melter Process (LMP) System Design Description (Rev. 4)

This system design description (SDD) defines the technical, functional, and performance requirements of the low-activity waste (LAW) melter process system (LMP). This document details the waste treatment requirements, environmental compliance requirements, and authorization basis requirements of the LMP system as they are currently known and understood. This SDD describes the process and functional design requirements of the LMP, including the following: 1) Services and utility requirements, operating materials and supplies, and other external interfaces; 2) Operations limits and design bases; 3) Other criteria and requirements pertinent to the design of the LMP system; 4) Boundaries, system interfaces, and functional description of the LMP system. The LMP system is composed of two LAW melters of the same design with the contingency to add the third. Also included in the LMP system are the pour spouts, which are positioned under the melter discharge chambers of each melter, and the container level detectors. The boundaries, system interfaces, and functional description of the LMP system are provided in Section 2.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2023

SolarAPP+ Performance Review (2022 Data)

The Solar Automated Permit Processing Plus (SolarAPP+) platform is an online portal to facilitate and expedite rooftop solar photovoltaic (PV) permitting processes. SolarAPP+ allows PV contractors to upload system specifications, have those specifications automatically reviewed for code compliance, and receive instant approval for code-compliant systems. SolarAPP+ also provides inspection checklists to verify installation practices and adherence to approved designs. SolarAPP+ is available to authorities having jurisdiction (AHJs) at no cost. This report is part of an ongoing series of reviews of SolarAPP+ performance. Consistent with previous performance reviews, we summarize SolarAPP+ adoption trends to date and compare various metrics for PV systems permitted through SolarAPP+ versus systems permitted through conventional AHJ permitting processes. As of the end of 2022, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) had contacted over 1,500 AHJs with significant solar permitting volume regarding SolarAPP+. Of those, 607 AHJs had at least expressed interest in the platform. 16 AHJs had begun piloting the platform and 15 of these had publicly launched the platform by the end of 2022. In 2022, 206 installers submitted 11,092 permits through the SolarAPP+ platform, including 708 permits for solar+storage systems. SolarAPP+ permits accounted for around 37% of all permits issued in participating AHJs. We compare permitting timelines through SolarAPP+ to traditional AHJ permitting processes to assess the platform's performance. Consistent with previous SolarAPP+ performance reviews, we find that permitting timelines are significantly shorter for SolarAPP+ projects. Based on median timelines, a typical SolarAPP+ project is permitted and inspected 8 business days sooner than traditional projects. We estimate that automatic SolarAPP+ permitting saved between 3,500 and 13,900 hours of AHJ staff time in 2022. Finally, we find evidence that SolarAPP+ may improve inspection outcomes, with SolarAPP+ projects failing inspections about 28% less frequently than traditional projects.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Hanford Site Composite Analysis Special Analysis: Inventory and Solid Waste Release Modeling for the LLBG Sensitivity Case - UCAQ-22-01 Inventory Discrepancies for 218-E-12B, 218-W-3A, and 218-W-3AE in the Hanford Site Composite Analysis

This environmental calculation file (ECF) documents the methodologies, assumptions, and results of four sensitivity analyses that reevaluate the representativeness of solid-waste radionuclide inventory and release rate from three solid waste sites included in the recently completed Hanford Site Composite Analysis (CA) (DOE-RL-2019-52, Composite Analysis for Low-Level Waste Disposal in the Hanford Site Central Plateau (FY 2020), Rev. 1) (hereinafter called the CA Update). Specifically, this ECF reevaluates the representativeness of the base case inventory and radionuclide waste release rates from three solid waste sites (i.e., 218-E-12B, 218-W-3A, and 218-W-3AE) and two radionuclides (i.e., carbon-14 [C-14] and technetium-99 [Tc-99]). These three waste sites and two radionuclides were identified as being the most significant contributors to groundwater contamination and dose in the CA Update for the Inner Area boundary at times periods after the compliance period. This ECF first evaluates the representativeness of the C-14 and Tc-99 inventory and second, radionuclide release rates for the three waste sites1. If the inventory and release rates assumed in the CA Update are determined to be not representative, as hypothesized in the CA Update, then this ECF evaluates the impact of more representative inventories and release rates on the transfer of radionuclides to the vadose zone. The four analyses described in this ECF are as follows: 1) 218-E-12B C-14 Inventory and Release Rate Sensitivity Case – Determine the representativeness of the C-14 inventory and associated waste release rate from the 218-E-12B waste site assumed in the CA Update. If the inventory and associated waste release are more appropriately characterized as being different from the assumptions in the CA Update, then update the predicted C-14 release rate and compare the results to the results presented in the CA Update (DOE/RL-2019-52); 2) 218-W-3A C-14 Inventory and Release Rate Sensitivity Case – Determine the representativeness of the C-14 inventory and associated waste release rate from the 218-W-3A waste site assumed in the CA Update. If the inventory and associated waste release are more appropriately characterized as being different from the assumptions in the CA Update, then update the predicted C-14 release rate and compare the results to the results presented in the CA Update (DOE/RL-2019-52); 3) 218-W-3AE Tc-99 Release Rate Sensitivity Case – Determine the representativeness of the Tc-99 inventory and associated waste release rate from the 218-W-3AE waste site assumed in the CA Update. If the inventory and associated waste release are more appropriately characterized as being different from the assumptions in the CA Update, then update the predicted Tc-99 release rate and compare the results to the results presented in the CA Update (DOE/RL-2019-52); 4) 218-W-3AE Tc-99 Release Footprint Sensitivity Case – Determine the representativeness of the Tc-99 waste area footprint for the 218-W-3AE waste site assumed in the CA Update. If the footprint of the waste is more appropriately characterized as being different from the assumptions in the CA Update, then update the predicted Tc-99 release rate and compare the results to the result presented in the CA Update (DOE/RL-2019-52).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2021

EFA Soil Project Work Order: 554001

Sample analyses were conducted using methodology as outlined in GEL Laboratories, LLC (GEL) Standard Operating Procedures. Any technical or administrative problems during analysis, data review, and reduction are contained in the analytical case narratives in the enclosed data package. The enclosed data package contains the following sections: General Narrative, Chain of Custody and Supporting Documentation, and data from the following fractions: General Chemistry, Metals and Radiochemistry. This package, to the best of my knowledge, is in compliance with technical and administrative requirements.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

Cultural Resource Management Plan for Brookhaven National Laboratory

The Cultural Resource Management Plan (CRMP) for Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) provides an organized guide that describes or references the facets and interrelationships of cultural resources at BNL. Management strategies included within this CRMP are designed to adequately identify the cultural resources that BNL and DOE consider significant and to acknowledge associated management actions. A principal objective of the CRMP is to reduce the need for additional regulatory documents and to serve as the basis for a formal agreement between the DOE and the New York State Historic Preservation Officer (NYSHPO). The BNL CRMP is designed to be a “living document.” Each section includes identified gaps in the management plan, with proposed goals and actions for addressing each gap. The plan will be periodically revised to incorporate new documentation. The current (2023) update incorporates new findings and/or updated text based on completed or ongoing projects related to cultural resources at BNL since inception of the last updated CRMP in 2013. Historically, Brookhaven National Laboratory had little need for cultural resource management because many of its buildings were less than 50 years old. Most of the features that are potentially eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places were protected simply by avoiding the features. Compliance with cultural resource laws and regulations has included archeological surveys, such as those associated with the 1977 Final Environmental Impact Statement for Brookhaven National Laboratory and the 1978 Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Proton-Proton Storage Accelerator Facility (ISABELLE). In 1979, World War I trenches associated with the former Camp Upton and located near ISABELLE were determined to be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places; however, many of these trenches had been destroyed by construction work. In 1991, the NYSHPO provided BNL with a letter indicating that only three structures and features were likely to be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. Between 1991 and 1999, little work associated with cultural resource management was accomplished. Beginning in 1999, awareness for the need of a program to manage cultural resources grew out of the realization that over half of the buildings at BNL were either 50 years old or were reaching that age and were, therefore, subject to the requirements in Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. This fact, concomitant with the decontamination and decommissioning of the Brookhaven Graphite Research Reactor (BGRR) and the subsequent determination of BGRR’s eligibility for listing as an historical site, fueled the need for developing and implementing a more structured program for managing cultural resources at BNL.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

Recent Code Developments/Improvements to SAM Multi-dimensional Flow Model

The System Analysis Module (SAM) is under development at Argonne National Laboratory as a modern system-level modeling and simulation tool for advanced non-light water reactor safety analyses. In addition to its conventional one-dimensional flow network module, the multi-dimensional flow model of SAM offers significant benefits to its end-users, including the U.S. NRC, who uses it to develop reference models for advanced reactor concepts. This report provides a summary of the recent progress achieved under DOE-NE’s Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation program in the continuous code development and improvements of the SAM code, specifically its multi-dimensional flow model. The improvements include enhancements to the physical model, code usability, addressing user feedback, and compliance with the SQA program standards that aim to enhance and maintain the quality of the software.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗