Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Administration and Management”

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 703 records · Page 39
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI1989

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 30, No. 3, July-September 1989]

Nuclear Safety is a review journal that covers significant developments in the field of nuclear safety. Its scope includes the analysis and control of hazards associated with nuclear energy, operations involving fissionable materials, and the products of nuclear fission and their effects on the environment. Primary emphasis is on safety in reactor design, construction, and operation; however, the safety aspects of the entire fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing, nuclear waste disposal, handling of radioisotopes, and environmental effects of these operations, are also treated. Table of Contents for this issue follows. GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 325 Safety of Framatome Advanced Nuclear Steam Supply Systems Designs by J. A. Charles and D. Lange, 333 Book Review of Nuclear Accidents: Intervention Levels for the Protection of the Public by H. B. Piper; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 335 Living PRA Computer Systems by S. C. Dinsmore and H.-P. Balfanz, 343 Summary of ICAP Assessments of RELAP5/MOD2 by W. E. Driskell and R. G. Hanson; CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 352 Thermal Performance Monitoring System at Maanshan Nuclear Power Plant by H.-J. Chao, Y.-P. Lin, G.-H. Jou, L.-Y. Liao, and Y.-B. Chen; DESIGN FEATURES: 358 Warning Systems for Nuclear Power Plant Emergencies by J. H. Sorensen and D. S. Mileti; WASTE AND SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT: 371 Activities Related to Waste Management Compiled by E G. Silver; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 382 Steam Generator Tube Performance: Experience with Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactors During 1985 by O. S. Tatone and R. L. Tapping, 400 Systems Interaction Analyses: Concepts and Techniques (Part II) by M. D. Muhlheim and G. A. Murphy, 413 Reactor Shutdown Experience Compiled by J. W. Cletcher, 416 Operating U.S. Power Reactors Compiled by E G. Silver; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 440 General Administrative Activities Compiled by E G. Silver, 460 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides by D. S. Queener, 466 Status of Power-Reactor Licensing Activities Compiled by E G. Silver, 470 Proposed Rule Changes as of Mar. 31, 1989; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 334 Proceedings Published, 351 CEC Seminar on Methods and Codes for Assessing the Off-Site Consequences of Nuclear Accidents, 357 Short Course on Multiphase Flow and Heat Transfer: Bases and Applications in A: The Nuclear Power Industry B: The Process Industries, 357 International Conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management, 478 International Topical Meeting on the Safety, Status, and Future of Non-Commercial Reactors and Irradiation Facilities, 475 The Authors.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI1989

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 30, No. 3, July-September 1989]

Nuclear Safety is a review journal that covers significant developments in the field of nuclear safety. Its scope includes the analysis and control of hazards associated with nuclear energy, operations involving fissionable materials, and the products of nuclear fission and their effects on the environment. Primary emphasis is on safety in reactor design, construction, and operation; however, the safety aspects of the entire fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing, nuclear waste disposal, handling of radioisotopes, and environmental effects of these operations, are also treated. Table of Contents for this issue follows. GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 325 Safety of Framatome Advanced Nuclear Steam Supply Systems Designs by J. A. Charles and D. Lange, 333 Book Review of Nuclear Accidents: Intervention Levels for the Protection of the Public by H. B. Piper; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 335 Living PRA Computer Systems by S. C. Dinsmore and H.-P. Balfanz, 343 Summary of ICAP Assessments of RELAP5/MOD2 by W. E. Driskell and R. G. Hanson; CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 352 Thermal Performance Monitoring System at Maanshan Nuclear Power Plant by H.-J. Chao, Y.-P. Lin, G.-H. Jou, L.-Y. Liao, and Y.-B. Chen; DESIGN FEATURES: 358 Warning Systems for Nuclear Power Plant Emergencies by J. H. Sorensen and D. S. Mileti; WASTE AND SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT: 371 Activities Related to Waste Management Compiled by E G. Silver; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 382 Steam Generator Tube Performance: Experience with Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactors During 1985 by O. S. Tatone and R. L. Tapping, 400 Systems Interaction Analyses: Concepts and Techniques (Part II) by M. D. Muhlheim and G. A. Murphy, 413 Reactor Shutdown Experience Compiled by J. W. Cletcher, 416 Operating U.S. Power Reactors Compiled by E G. Silver; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 440 General Administrative Activities Compiled by E G. Silver, 460 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides by D. S. Queener, 466 Status of Power-Reactor Licensing Activities Compiled by E G. Silver, 470 Proposed Rule Changes as of Mar. 31, 1989; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 334 Proceedings Published, 351 CEC Seminar on Methods and Codes for Assessing the Off-Site Consequences of Nuclear Accidents, 357 Short Course on Multiphase Flow and Heat Transfer: Bases and Applications in A: The Nuclear Power Industry B: The Process Industries, 357 International Conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management, 478 International Topical Meeting on the Safety, Status, and Future of Non-Commercial Reactors and Irradiation Facilities, 475 The Authors.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI1992

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 33, No. 1, January-March 1992]

Nuclear Safety is a review journal that covers significant developments in the field of nuclear safety. Its scope includes the analysis and control of hazards associated with nuclear energy, operations involving fissionable materials, and the products of nuclear fission and their effects on the environment. Primary emphasis is on safety in reactor design, construction, and operation; however, the safety aspects of the entire fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing, nuclear waste disposal, handling of radioisotopes, and environmental effects of these operations, are also treated. Table of Contents for this issue follows. GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 1 Technical Note: A New Approach to Fission Reactor Safety, Yu. V. Petrov; 5 Erratum; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 6 Analysis and Modeling of Fission Product Release from Various Uranium-Aluminum Plate-Type Reactor Fuels, R. P. Taleyarkhan; CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 23 Applications of a Surveillance and Diagnostics Methodology Using Neutron Noise From a Pressurized-Water Reactor, R. T. Wood, L. F. Miller, and R. B. Perez; DESIGN FEATURES: 36 Westinghouse Advanced Passive 600 Plant, B. A. McIntyre and R. K. Beck; 47 System 80+™ PWR Safety Design, C. W. Bagnal, R. A. Matzie, and R. S. Turk; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: 58 The MATS Experiments—Mesoscale Atmospheric Transport Studies at the Savannah River Site, A. H. Weber, S. Berman, R. J. Kurzeja, and R. P. Addis; 75 Book Review: Environmental Radioactivity in the European Community 1984-1985-1986, C. A. Little; WASTE AND SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT: 76 Activities Related to Waste and Spent Fuel Management, M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 87 Aging Assessment of BWR Control Rod Drive Systems, R. H. Greene; 100 Reactor Shutdown Experience, Compiled by J. W. Cletcher; 103 Selected Safety-Related Events, Compiled by G. A. Murphy; 110 Operating U.S. Power Reactors, Compiled by M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 129 General Administrative Activities, Compiled by M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver; 139 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides, D. S. Queener; 143 Proposed Rule Changes as of Sept. 30 1991; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 128 Harvard School of Public Health Announces Short Courses; 128 16th Biennial ANS Topical Meeting on Reactor Operating Experience: Present and Future Technologies—Applying Lessons Learned (Call for Papers); 147 The Authors; 150 Indexes to Nuclear Safety, Volume 32; 154 Errata.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI1992

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 33, No. 1, January-March 1992]

Nuclear Safety is a review journal that covers significant developments in the field of nuclear safety. Its scope includes the analysis and control of hazards associated with nuclear energy, operations involving fissionable materials, and the products of nuclear fission and their effects on the environment. Primary emphasis is on safety in reactor design, construction, and operation; however, the safety aspects of the entire fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing, nuclear waste disposal, handling of radioisotopes, and environmental effects of these operations, are also treated. Table of Contents for this issue follows. GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 1 Technical Note: A New Approach to Fission Reactor Safety, Yu. V. Petrov; 5 Erratum; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 6 Analysis and Modeling of Fission Product Release from Various Uranium-Aluminum Plate-Type Reactor Fuels, R. P. Taleyarkhan; CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 23 Applications of a Surveillance and Diagnostics Methodology Using Neutron Noise From a Pressurized-Water Reactor, R. T. Wood, L. F. Miller, and R. B. Perez; DESIGN FEATURES: 36 Westinghouse Advanced Passive 600 Plant, B. A. McIntyre and R. K. Beck; 47 System 80+™ PWR Safety Design, C. W. Bagnal, R. A. Matzie, and R. S. Turk; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: 58 The MATS Experiments—Mesoscale Atmospheric Transport Studies at the Savannah River Site, A. H. Weber, S. Berman, R. J. Kurzeja, and R. P. Addis; 75 Book Review: Environmental Radioactivity in the European Community 1984-1985-1986, C. A. Little; WASTE AND SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT: 76 Activities Related to Waste and Spent Fuel Management, M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 87 Aging Assessment of BWR Control Rod Drive Systems, R. H. Greene; 100 Reactor Shutdown Experience, Compiled by J. W. Cletcher; 103 Selected Safety-Related Events, Compiled by G. A. Murphy; 110 Operating U.S. Power Reactors, Compiled by M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 129 General Administrative Activities, Compiled by M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver; 139 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides, D. S. Queener; 143 Proposed Rule Changes as of Sept. 30 1991; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 128 Harvard School of Public Health Announces Short Courses; 128 16th Biennial ANS Topical Meeting on Reactor Operating Experience: Present and Future Technologies—Applying Lessons Learned (Call for Papers); 147 The Authors; 150 Indexes to Nuclear Safety, Volume 32; 154 Errata.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Photovoltaic Analysis and Response Support (PARS) Platform for Solar Situational Awareness and Resiliency Services

The project's primary objective is to develop a digital-twin based Photovoltaic (PV) Analysis and Response Support (PARS) platform, which aims to provide real-time situational awareness and optimal response plans. This platform is designed to enhance the performance of hybrid PV systems, making them competitive with or even superior to conventional generation resources. The PARS platform enabled the project team to develop and evaluate an extensive suite of grid support functionalities for the hybrid PV systems to enhance grid performance, across key areas including visibility, dispatchability, security, resilience, and reliability. Given the global push toward achieving 100% clean energy by 2035, there is a significant increase in the integration of inverter-based resources (IBRs) throughout the energy grid. Effectively managing the inherent variability and uncertainty associated with IBRs is crucial for ensuring cost-effectiveness, reliability, and security in both the main grid and islanded microgrids. Constrained to a limited array of IEEE test systems or standard feeder models, traditional IBR modeling struggles to assimilate new field data, accurately reflect system dynamics, and adapt to the evolving energy landscape. In our project, we embraced a Digital Twin (DT) strategy for crafting the PARS platform. A digital twin acts as a precise virtual counterpart of a physical system, built on historical data and continuously honed with real-time insights. This enables the high-fidelity DT to accurately mirror current system operations and forecast future scenarios. Consequently, the PARS platform becomes an ideal environment for testing and refining monitoring, control, power, and energy management algorithms designed to boost hybrid PV system performance. The defining feature of the PARS platform, distinguishing it from other advanced simulation tools, is its exceptional adaptability. This is achieved by employing actual network topologies and utilizing real-time field data for fine-tuning and calibration, ensuring a close emulation of real-world conditions. The project deliverables include: 1) High-fidelity IBR models and tools for real-time parameterization, utilizing real-time field measurements to refine IBR models for enhanced accuracy and performance; 2) Grid-forming and Grid-following capabilities to deliver resilience services, including blackstart, voltage and frequency support, cold-load pick-up, power reserves, and three-phase load balancing across grid-connected and microgrid settings; 3) Machine learning-based forecasting tools and methods for generating synthetic data and topologies, creating diverse and realistic simulation environments for evaluating varied operational scenarios; 4) Advanced microgrid power and energy management algorithms for optimizing the integration and operation of PV, storage, and demand response resources within both feeder and community scales. The power grid data sets are provided by four utility companies in North Carolina and the New York Power Administration. Acting as industry advisors, our industry partners communicated stakeholder needs and regulatory standards to the research teams, aiding technology transfer by incorporating the developed methodologies into their daily operations. This collaboration ensures that the PARS platform, functioning as a power system digital twin, enhances our understanding of IBR dynamic behaviors and enables the development and evaluation of IBR control functions that match or exceed the capabilities of conventional synchronous generators.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI1989

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 30, No. 1, January-March 1989]

Nuclear Safety is a review journal that covers significant developments in the field of nuclear safety. Its scope includes the analysis and control of hazards associated with nuclear energy, operations involving fissionable materials, and the products of nuclear fission and their effects on the environment. Primary emphasis is on safety in reactor design, construction, and operation; however, the safety aspects of the entire fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing, nuclear waste disposal, handling of radioisotopes, and environmental effects of these operations, are also treated. Table of Contents for this issue follows. GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 1 International Conference on Thermal Reactor Safety: NUCSAFE 88 by A. P. Malinauskas and J. G. Pruett; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 18 Chernobyl Today: State of Research by A. Yu. Gagarinskii; CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 23 Problems Associated with Routine In-Plant Radioactive Effluent Monitoring Systems at U.S. Light-Water Reactors by Barry G. Wahlig, David M. Walker, Mahmoud R. Ghavi, and John M. Palms; DESIGN FEATURES: 34 Twentieth DOE/NRC Nuclear Air-Cleaning Conference by R. R. Bellamy, D. W. Moeller, and M. W. First, 46 Design Options for the Core Support Structure for Liquid-Metal-Cooled Reactor Plants by J. P. Burelbach, W. J. Kann, J. G. Saiveau, and R. W. Seidensticker; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: 53 The Radiological Consequences of the Chernobyl Accident by L. V. Konstantinov and A. J. González; WASTE AND SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT: 70 Activities Related to Waste Management Compiled by E. G. Silver; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 80 Fuel Performance Annual Report for 1986 by W. J. Bailey, 103 Safety Considerations Related to 12-Hour Shift Schedules by S. Gould, 105 Reactor Shutdown Experience Compiled by J. W. Cletcher, 108 Operating U.S. Power Reactors Compiled by E. G. Silver; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 130 General Administrative Activities Compiled by E. G. Silver, 140 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides by D. S. Queener, 145 Status of Power-Reactor Licensing Activities Compiled by E. G. Silver, 153 Proposed Rule Changes as of Sept. 30, 1988; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 69 Northwestern University Short Course on Radiation Safety, 79 International Seminar on Fission Product Transport Processes in Reactor Accidents, 129 Harvard School of Public Health Offers Short Courses, 152 MIT Offers Summer Short Courses on Reactor Safety and Nodal Analysis, 152 Seminar on Use of PCs in Probabilistic Safety Analysis, 157 The Authors, 160 Indexes to Nuclear Safety, Volume 29.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI1989

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 30, No. 1, January-March 1989]

Nuclear Safety is a review journal that covers significant developments in the field of nuclear safety. Its scope includes the analysis and control of hazards associated with nuclear energy, operations involving fissionable materials, and the products of nuclear fission and their effects on the environment. Primary emphasis is on safety in reactor design, construction, and operation; however, the safety aspects of the entire fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing, nuclear waste disposal, handling of radioisotopes, and environmental effects of these operations, are also treated. Table of Contents for this issue follows. GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 1 International Conference on Thermal Reactor Safety: NUCSAFE 88 by A. P. Malinauskas and J. G. Pruett; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 18 Chernobyl Today: State of Research by A. Yu. Gagarinskii; CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 23 Problems Associated with Routine In-Plant Radioactive Effluent Monitoring Systems at U.S. Light-Water Reactors by Barry G. Wahlig, David M. Walker, Mahmoud R. Ghavi, and John M. Palms; DESIGN FEATURES: 34 Twentieth DOE/NRC Nuclear Air-Cleaning Conference by R. R. Bellamy, D. W. Moeller, and M. W. First, 46 Design Options for the Core Support Structure for Liquid-Metal-Cooled Reactor Plants by J. P. Burelbach, W. J. Kann, J. G. Saiveau, and R. W. Seidensticker; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: 53 The Radiological Consequences of the Chernobyl Accident by L. V. Konstantinov and A. J. González; WASTE AND SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT: 70 Activities Related to Waste Management Compiled by E. G. Silver; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 80 Fuel Performance Annual Report for 1986 by W. J. Bailey, 103 Safety Considerations Related to 12-Hour Shift Schedules by S. Gould, 105 Reactor Shutdown Experience Compiled by J. W. Cletcher, 108 Operating U.S. Power Reactors Compiled by E. G. Silver; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 130 General Administrative Activities Compiled by E. G. Silver, 140 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides by D. S. Queener, 145 Status of Power-Reactor Licensing Activities Compiled by E. G. Silver, 153 Proposed Rule Changes as of Sept. 30, 1988; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 69 Northwestern University Short Course on Radiation Safety, 79 International Seminar on Fission Product Transport Processes in Reactor Accidents, 129 Harvard School of Public Health Offers Short Courses, 152 MIT Offers Summer Short Courses on Reactor Safety and Nodal Analysis, 152 Seminar on Use of PCs in Probabilistic Safety Analysis, 157 The Authors, 160 Indexes to Nuclear Safety, Volume 29.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2025

CRiSPPy: An advanced hydropower scheduling tool for the Colorado River Storage Project

The Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) plays a vital role in delivering reliable and cost-effective hydroelectric power to millions of customers across the western United States. The Colorado River Storage Project (CRSP) carries out WAPA’s mission in Arizona, Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, Wyoming and Texas. Achieving this mission requires effective management of the Colorado River system, and depends on the use of advanced analytical tools and modeling methodologies. For many years, CRSP has relied on the Generation and Transmission Maximization Superlite (GTMax SL) model for its mid-term and long-term hydroscheduling needs. However, the evolving energy market, power system operations, environmental rules, and hydrology conditions, coupled with advancements in computational capabilities, have necessitated the development of a more modern and robust solution. This report introduces the Colorado River Storage Project Python-based (CRiSPPy) model, a new, advanced hydropower scheduling tool developed to address CRSP ever-evolving challenges. CRiSPPy represents a significant leap forward in our ability to model and optimize the operation of the Colorado River system. It incorporates state-of-the-art optimization algorithms, enhanced data management capabilities, and an advanced graphical user interface, providing WAPA CRSP personnel with unprecedented insights and decision-making support. This document details the development, capabilities, and implementation of CRiSPPy. It is intended to serve as a comprehensive resource for WAPA staff, stakeholders, and anyone interested in the future of hydropower scheduling in the Colorado River Basin. We are confident that CRiSPPy will enhance WAPA's mission while adapting to the challenges of a dynamic and increasingly complex environment. The version of CRiSPPy described in this report is the version 2.3. New versions of CRiSPPy will be developed as the tool keeps evolving to address CRSP challenges.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Utility Energy Service Contract Guide: A Resource for Contracting Officers Working on UESC Projects

A Utility Energy Service Contract (UESC) is a limited-source contract between a federal agency and serving utility for energy management services including energy and water efficiency improvements and demand-reduction services. In a UESC, the Contracting Officer (CO) will lead the acquisition effort, supported by technically knowledgeable staff working closely with the utility, to assess potential, investigate technical and economic feasibility, and ensure a fair and reasonable price for design and implementation of the project. The UESC Guide is a compilation of samples and templates developed as a resource to help COs implement Task Orders (TOs) for UESCs under existing U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) Areawide Contracts (AWC). All samples and templates provided in this guide were derived from actual UESC project contract documents and will be available for download on FEMP’s website at https://www.energy.gov/node/850656. Templates in Microsoft Word can be modified to address each agency’s unique acquisition process.

Federal Energy Management Program↗
DOE OSTI2021

FY2020 Savannah River Site Composite Analysis Annual Summary Review

This document provides the Department of Energy (DOE) Order 435.1 and its manual, Radioactive Waste Management (DOE 2021a, 2021b) required Annual Review for the Savannah River Site (SRS) Composite Analysis (CA). Progress made to-date toward addressing the secondary issue from the LFRG review of the 2010 SRS CA has focused primarily upon inventory estimate improvements. Inventory impacts dose in a linear fashion and reduces the uncertainty with the CA conclusions. Maintenance items are addressed, as funding allows, based on the relative risk associated with meeting the performance objectives. Currently, there is minimal risk in exceeding the DOE 100 mrem/yr CA primary dose limit or the DOE 30 mrem/yr dose constraint (administrative limit). Proposed activities, discoveries, new information and changes potentially affecting the 2010 SRS CA are documented in this and earlier Annual Summary reports, and a consolidated list of changes since the 2010 CA is documented in this report. The impact to the CA of changes arising from updated performance assessment (PA) baselines [i.e., Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF), E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility (ELLWF), and F & H Tank Farm (FTF & HTF) closures] is expected to be minor for the following reasons: The primary contributors to the SRS CA dose impact at the Upper Three Runs (UTR) point of assessment (POA) are the H-Canyon and Mixed Waste Management Facility (MWMF), contributing 68% and 9%, respectively, to the dose impact at that POA. The combined contribution to the UTR dose impact from all PA’s (SDF, ELLWF, FTF and HTF) is ~2% of this total. The 2010 SRS CA model validation performed indicates that the CA projected dose, while generally conservative, provides a reasonable representation of the maximum annual doses. Doses evaluated are well below the SRS established 15 mrem/yr administrative limit (Crapse et al. 2011). Based on the assessment presented within this annual review and collective engineering judgement, the conclusions of the 2010 SRS CA remain valid and there is reasonable assurance that SRS will meet the performance objectives delineated in DOE Manual 435.1-1. The 2010 SRS CA should be updated to incorporate PA changes, proposed changes to inventories and sources and model improvements accumulated since the 2010 CA. The timing will be dependent on the completion of the ongoing E-Area PA revision.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

Tonopah Test Range Air Monitoring: Meteorological, Radiological, and Wind Transported Particulate Observations (CY 2019)

In 1963, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) (formerly the Atomic Energy Commission [AEC]), implemented Operation Roller Coaster on the Tonopah Test Range (TTR) and an adjacent area of the Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR) (formerly the Nellis Air Force Range). This operation resulted in radionuclide-contaminated soils at the Double Tracks site and Clean Slate I, II, and III sites. This report documents observations made during ongoing monitoring of radiological, meteorological, and dust conditions at stations installed adjacent to the Clean Slate sites and at the TTR Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) Range Operations Center (ROC). The main objectives of the monitoring effort are to support the DOE Environmental Management Nevada Program (EM NV) in the safe remediation of the environmental legacy of nuclear device development and testing by determining if wind blowing across the Clean Slate sites is transporting particles of radionuclide-contaminated soil beyond the physical and administrative boundaries of the sites, and providing information for designing long-term monitoring of the sites. The monitoring program in 2019 included five stations. Station 400, located within TTR Area 3 and near the ROC, monitors conditions near the local workforce center. Stations 401 and 403 are located on the northern and southeastern perimeter fence lines, respectively, of the Clean Slate III site. Stations 404 and 405 are along the northern and eastern boundary fence, respectively, at Clean Slate II. The stations are generally downwind of the contaminated areas during either northwesterly or southerly winds, which are the predominant wind directions.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Addendum 2 to the Closure Report for CAU 577 Area 5 Chromium Containing Waste Disposal Cells, NNSS, Nevada

Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 577, “Area 5 Chromium Containing Waste Disposal Cells,” includes five low-level waste cells at the Nevada National Security Site Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site where buried waste received from Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., was subsequently determined to contain chromium that exceeded the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure regulatory limit, which would require the waste to carry hazardous waste code D007. CAU 577 was created to satisfy the requirements of the Settlement Agreement (SA) executed between the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) and the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) on April 25, 2019 (NDEP 2019). The SA required that the chromium-containing waste received from NFS would be addressed following the closure process laid out in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO). The FFACO process ensures proper closure of the chromium-containing waste and documentation of that closure through FFACO-type documents. The following three Corrective Action Sites (CASs) were closed, and their closure was documented in the Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 577: Area 5 Chromium Containing Waste Disposal Cells, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, DOE/EMNV--0030, dated September 2021 (U.S. Department of Energy [DOE] Environmental Management [EM] Nevada Program 2021a): • CAS 05-21-02, Waste Disposal Cell 12 • CAS 05-21-03, Waste Disposal Cell 15 • CAS 05-21-04, Waste Disposal Cell 17 Closure of the following CAS was previously documented in the Addendum to the Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 577: Area 5 Chromium Containing Waste Disposal Cells, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, DOE/EMNV--0030-ADD, dated September 2022 (DOE EM Nevada Program 2022): • CAS 05-21-05, Waste Disposal Cell 20 This second addendum to the Closure Report documents the closure activities that have occurred for CAS 05-21-06, Waste Disposal Cell 21. This is the last CAS in CAU 577. The final waste shipment was placed in the waste disposal cell on November 21, 2022. Following this, closure activities began on November 28, 2022, and were conducted according to the Corrective Action Decision Document/Corrective Action Plan (CADD/CAP) for CAU 577 (DOE EM Nevada Program 2021b). The following closure activities were performed: • Constructing an engineered evapotranspiration cover • Installing two subsidence monuments and vadose zone monitoring equipment • Seeding the cover with a mixture of native plant species • Installing four concrete monuments on the corners of the cover and placing two use restriction (UR) warning signs on each monument These activities fulfill applicable federal and state regulations for closure of CAS 05-21-06 and minimize potential future exposure pathways to buried waste. Completed closure activities are also consistent with closure of the nine historical Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) units included in Section 10.2.2 of the RCRA Permit that governs hazardous waste management activities at the Nevada National Security Site (Permit NEV HW0101) (NDEP 2023). UR documentation for this CAS is included in Appendix B of this report. The post-closure plan is presented in detail in the CADD/CAP for CAU 577 (DOE EM Nevada Program 2021b), and the requirements are summarized in Section 5.2 of this document. In accordance with paragraph 5D of the SA, a request to incorporate the requirements for post-closure monitoring of CAU 577 was included with the permit application for RCRA Permit NEV HW0101 that was submitted in January 2022 (NNSA/NFO 2022). The request included the post-closure requirements for the three CASs that had been closed at the time of submittal of the application as well as requirements that would be implemented upon future approval of closure of the remaining two CASs. All CAU 577 post-closure monitoring requirements have been captured in the April 4, 2023, Revision 7 of the RCRA Permit (NDEP 2023). As the RCRA Permit NEV HW0101 has been revised since the submittal of the original CAU 577 Closure Report (DOE EM Nevada Program 2021a) and Addendum 1 (DOE EM Nevada Program 2022), the post-closure requirements in this Addendum 2 report do not align with the previous documents. Specific changes resulting from the issuance of Revision 7 of the RCRA Permit are discussed in Section 5.2 of this report. The requirements in this report are consistent with the current permit (NDEP 2023) and supersede all requirements listed in the CAU 577 Closure Report and Addendum 1. All CAU 577 post-closure requirements should be conducted in accordance with the version of the RCRA Permit that is current at the time of the activities being performed. The DOE EM Nevada Program is requesting a Notice of Completion from NDEP for closure of CAU 577. Although CAU 577 is not a legacy site, the FFACO process is being followed to ensure proper closure of the chromium-containing waste. Therefore, transfer of CAU 577 from Appendix III of the FFACO to Appendix IV, Closed Corrective Action Units, is requested, as all closure activities have been completed.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2022

Measurement Plan for Uncertainty Contributions to 252 Cf Waste Measurements

This measurement plan establishes the methodology for performing and analyzing mock-up measurements of Building 7930 Cell G Cf waste generated from 252 Cf product preparation to better determine the measurement uncertainty contributors. Understanding the uncertainty contributors will establish the total measurement uncertainty. This is critical because it will impact the administrative threshold at which personnel can discriminate between low-level waste (LLW) and transuranic (TRU) waste.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2026

Meta-analysis of North American Arctic and boreal aboveground biomass datasets: assessing accuracy, dynamics, and similarities

The North American arctic and boreal regions (ABRs) are rapidly warming and experiencing intensifying disturbances. Accurately quantifying aboveground biomass (AGB) is critical for understanding the impacts of these changes on the carbon cycle and for designing climate change mitigation strategies. Several AGB maps have been developed for the North American ABRs, including recent contributions from National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Arctic-Boreal Vulnerability Experiment (ABoVE) campaign. However, these maps differ widely in training data, methodology, and resulting AGB density estimates. Presently, a comprehensive comparative evaluation is lacking, making it difficult for users to select datasets suited to their research or management needs. Here, in this study, we conducted a comparative analysis of nine AGB density datasets across North American ABRs, specifically for Alaska and Canada. We (1) summarized AGB by ecoregion and Canadian provinces, (2) evaluated their accuracy against field-based measurements, (3) analyzed spatial and temporal similarities among datasets, and (4) assessed their ability to capture disturbance (fire and harvest) impacts on AGB. We found substantial variation in regional and local AGB estimates across datasets, with overall accuracy ranging from R 2 = 0.25–0.62 and Bias% from −47.8% to 69.9% when validated against field plots. Despite these differences, most datasets have comparatively consistent spatial patterns in AGB (r > 0.8 for most cases). In contrast, agreement on the temporal patterns of AGB change is generally low. We found datasets with spatial resolutions ⩽300 m are capable of capturing disturbance impacts on AGB dynamics, though sensitivity varies across products. Our findings and dataset summary provide guidance for selecting appropriate AGB datasets for different applications within our study area. Our analysis also highlights the need to decrease map bias and increase capability to detect temporal change to decrease uncertainty of AGB datasets potentially by using training data which is representative of major plant functional types within the mapped area.

ABoVE↗
DOE OSTI2021

The Architecture of Area 12 Camp - Nevada's Atomic Ghost Town. An Architectural Survey of Area 12 Camp, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) plans to demolish 10 buildings and one structure in Area 12 Camp at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) in Nye County, Nevada, to meet current and future National Weapons Science, Global and Homeland Security Program, and Environmental Management mission requirements and to reduce dangers to site workers from some of these resources. These demolitions constitute an undertaking subject to review under Title 54 U.S.C. § 306108, commonly known as Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, Title 54 U.S.C. § 300101, et seq., and its implementing regulations, 36 C.F.R. Part 800. These resources were recorded and evaluated as individually ineligible for the National Register of Historic Places (National Register or NRHP) by Menocal and Shaw (2019). Upon review by the Nevada State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and internal review by Desert Research Institute (DRI) and NNSA/NFO staff, it was determined that these resources needed to be rerecorded and evaluated in relation to what appeared to be a National Register-eligible Historic District made up of the entirety of Area 12 Camp. Based on preliminary information, it appeared that all 11 resources would likely be contributing elements of that historic district. With that assumption in mind, recording of the entire proposed Area 12 Camp Historic District was done for three purposes. First, it would result in a definitive significance evaluation of the 11 resources in question. Second, recording of the entire camp would be offered as an appropriate mitigation measure for the demolition of these resources. Third, it would present an essential background for future management of resources within the district boundaries. Prior to the present survey, Area 12 Camp had not yet been systematically recorded; therefore, DRI surveyed an area of approximately 229 acres for architectural resources. This effort resulted in the identification, recording, and evaluation of the Area 12 Camp Historic District (SHPO Resource No. D372), including the identification of its contributing components. This district is recommended eligible for the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria A and C. It is unevaluated under Criteria B and D. The Area 12 Historic District contains 71 Principal Resources, which include landscapes, buildings, and structures. Of these resources, 69 (including 10 of the 11 resources to be removed) are recommended as contributing elements of the historic district during its period of significance corresponding to nuclear testing from 1960 through 1992. During most of the Cold War, the government reservation now called the NNSS was named the Nevada Test Site (NTS).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Midwest Regional Carbon Conversion/Utilization Procurement Grant Workshop

https://events.usea.org/events/midwest-regional-carbon-conversionutilization-procurement-grant-workshop As the U.S. economy moves toward clean energy and a lower carbon future, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is seeking to partner with states, communities, and industries to support the procurement and development of carbon conversion products. These efforts have been enabled by provisions included in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL). As part of the BIL, supporting the Administration’s goal to achieve a carbon-free power sector by 2035 and putting the United States on a path to a net-zero economy by 2050, a new initiative was established within DOE’s Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management through its Carbon Conversion/Utilization Program. The new initiative will establish a demonstration grant program to issue grants to eligible entities to procure commercial and industrial products derived from the conversion of anthropogenic carbon oxides and demonstrate a significant net reduction in life cycle greenhouse gas emissions compared to incumbent technologies, processes, and products. DOE-FECM will establish a demonstration grant program within the Carbon Conversion/Utilization Program to support eligible applicants that procure those commercial and industrial products derived from anthropogenic carbon oxides. Therefore, the Carbon Conversion/Utilization Program, with the assistance of the United States Energy Association (USEA), will conduct a series of workshops (both virtual and in-person) with relevant stakeholders, e.g., product manufacturers, eligible entities, or their representative national organizations (e.g., United States Conference of Mayors, etc.) to solicit input and ideas on challenges and opportunities for a potential grant program.

Larimore, Ryan↗
DOE OSTI2021

CLOSURE REPORT FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION UNIT 577 AREA 5 CHROMIUM CONTAINING WASTE DISPOSAL CELLS

Report will be submitted to the state of Nevada Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 577, “Area 5 Chromium Containing Waste Disposal Cells,” includes five low-level waste cells at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) where buried waste received from Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. (NFS), was subsequently determined to contain chromium that exceeded the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure regulatory limit, which would require the waste to carry hazardous waste code D007. CAU 577 was created to satisfy the requirements of the Settlement Agreement (SA) executed between the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) and the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office on April 25, 2019. The SA required that the chromium-containing waste received from NFS would be addressed following the closure process laid out in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO). The FFACO process ensures proper closure of the chromium-containing waste cells and documentation of that closure through FFACO-type documents (NDEP 2019). As stipulated in Paragraph 5C of the SA, a Corrective Action Decision Document/Corrective Action Plan (CADD/CAP) was prepared that identified and evaluated risks and corrective action alternatives (CAAs) for CAU 577, provided the plan for implementing the recommended CAA, and presented the post-closure plan (U.S. Department of Energy [DOE] Environmental Management [EM] Nevada Program 2021).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2024

Statin Drug‐Drug Interactions: Pharmacokinetic Basis of FDA Labeling Recommendations and Comparison Across Common Tertiary Clinical Resources

Abstract Statins are widely prescribed and highly susceptible to pharmacokinetic (PK)‐based drug–drug interactions (DDIs). To date, there has not been a comprehensive analysis of the basis upon which statin DDI recommendations in US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) prescribing information (PI) are derived. We have conducted such an analysis. We also assessed the degree of concordance of statin DDI recommendations in FDA PI and those provided in common tertiary clinical resources. We catalogued statin DDI information, including PK data and management recommendations, for statin precipitant drugs approved from 2010 to 2021, available from FDA PI and tertiary clinical resource databases. Recommendations were categorized and mapped with associated PK data to assess consistency in the PK basis for labeling recommendations. From the 80 precipitant drugs evaluated, 180 statin DDIs were identified in FDA PI. Dedicated clinical DDI studies were conducted for 54% (n = 97) of these DDIs and 34% (n = 61) of DDI recommendations were extrapolated from clinical data with other statins. Overall, we found that PK‐based statin recommendations were consistent across PI. These findings highlight regulatory precedence for translating information across statins without conducting dedicated clinical DDI studies, which may support future efforts toward streamlining the approach to investigation and labeling of statin DDIs. In addition, with the exception of some notable discrepancies, general concordance was observed between FDA and tertiary resources regarding “Dose Adjustment” and “Avoid Coadministration” recommendations. However, further analyses are warranted across other DDI pairs to determine whether discordance can routinely lead to different clinical recommendations depending on the drug information resource.

Mease, James↗