Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “guidance document”

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 73 records · Page 4

NASA Handbook for Models and Simulations: An Implementation Guide for NASA-STD-7009

The purpose of this Handbook is to provide technical information, clarification, examples, processes, and techniques to help institute good modeling and simulation practices in the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). As a companion guide to NASA-STD- 7009, Standard for Models and Simulations, this Handbook provides a broader scope of information than may be included in a Standard and promotes good practices in the production, use, and consumption of NASA modeling and simulation products. NASA-STD-7009 specifies what a modeling and simulation activity shall or should do (in the requirements) but does not prescribe how the requirements are to be met, which varies with the specific engineering discipline, or who is responsible for complying with the requirements, which depends on the size and type of project. A guidance document, which is not constrained by the requirements of a Standard, is better suited to address these additional aspects and provide necessary clarification. This Handbook stems from the Space Shuttle Columbia Accident Investigation (2003), which called for Agency-wide improvements in the "development, documentation, and operation of models and simulations"' that subsequently elicited additional guidance from the NASA Office of the Chief Engineer to include "a standard method to assess the credibility of the models and simulations."2 General methods applicable across the broad spectrum of model and simulation (M&S) disciplines were sought to help guide the modeling and simulation processes within NASA and to provide for consistent reporting ofM&S activities and analysis results. From this, the standardized process for the M&S activity was developed. The major contents of this Handbook are the implementation details of the general M&S requirements ofNASA-STD-7009, including explanations, examples, and suggestions for improving the credibility assessment of an M&S-based analysis.

Steele, Martin J.↗

Automated Collision Avoidance (ACA) and Automated Return to Course (ARTC) Requirement and Guidance Review: Final

This report's objectives were to review regulatory and guidance documents to identify requirements and considerations for the design and operation of automated systems that perform the functions of automated collision avoidance (ACA) and/or automated return to course (ARTC). The importance of this work is twofold: 1) to help focus efforts addressing new automated collision avoidance and return to course systems requirements and considerations, and 2) in pulling together available requirements from multiple sources, generate a master resource for these automated system requirements and considerations. Reviewed documents include regulations, industry standards and research papers that specifically address ACA and ARTC systems, other automatedl control and guidance systems, ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) and Eurocontrol documents.

Automation↗

Consolidated decommissioning guidance: Financial assurance, recordkeeping, and timeliness. Volume 3

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) consolidated and updated numerous decommissioning guidance documents into this three volume NUREG. Specifically, the three volumes address the following topics: (1) "Decommissioning Process for Materials Licensees"; (2) "Characterization, Survey, and Determination of Radiological Criteria"; and (3) "Financial Assurance, Recordkeeping, and Timeliness." This three-volume NUREG series replaces NUREG-1727 ("NMSS Decommissioning Standard Review Plan," issued September 2000) and NUREG/BR-0241 ("NMSS Handbook for Decommissioning Fuel Cycle and Materials Licensees," issued March 1997). This NUREG series is intended for use by NRC staff, licensees, and others. Volume 3 of this NUREG series provides guidance on the technical aspects of compliance with requirements for timeliness in decommissioning of materials facilities, the requirements for financial assurance for decommissioning, and the recordkeeping requirements related to eventual decommissioning. Licensees should use this guidance in preparing decommissioning plans, license termination plans, final status surveys, and other technical decommissioning reports for submittal to the NRC. The NRC staff will use this guidance in reviewing these documents and related license amendment requests. Volume 3 is intended to apply only to the decommissioning of materials facilities licensed under Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Parts 30, 40, 70, and 72.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Sci-Fri AM: Quality, Safety, and Professional Issues 01: CPQR Technical Quality Control Suite Development including Quality Control Workload Results

A close partnership between the Canadian Partnership for Quality Radiotherapy (CPQR) and the Canadian Organization of Medical Physicist’s (COMP) Quality Assurance and Radiation Safety Advisory Committee (QARSAC) has resulted in the development of a suite of Technical Quality Control (TQC) Guidelines for radiation treatment equipment, that outline specific performance objectives and criteria that equipment should meet in order to assure an acceptable level of radiation treatment quality. The framework includes consolidation of existing guidelines and/or literature by expert reviewers, structured stages of public review, external field-testing and ratification by COMP. The adopted framework for the development and maintenance of the TQCs ensures the guidelines incorporate input from the medical physics community during development, measures the workload required to perform the QC tests outlined in each TQC, and remain relevant (i.e. “living documents”) through subsequent planned reviews and updates. This presentation will show the Multi-Leaf Linear Accelerator document as an example of how feedback and cross-national work to achieve a robust guidance document. During field-testing, each technology was tested at multiple centres in a variety of clinic environments. As part of the defined feedback, workload data was captured. This lead to average time associated with testing as defined in each TQC document. As a result, for a medium-sized centre comprising 6 linear accelerators and a comprehensive brachytherapy program, we evaluate the physics workload to 1.5 full-time equivalent physicist per year to complete all QC tests listed in this suite.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

Determination of Critical Experiment Correlations Using the Sampler Sequence Within SCALE 6.2

The validation of neutron transport methods used in nuclear criticality safety analyses is required by consensus American National Standards Institute/American Nuclear Society (ANSI/ANS) standards. In the last decade, there has been an increased interest in correlations among critical experiments used in validation that have shared physical attributes and which impact the independence of each measurement. The statistical methods included in many of the frequently cited guidance documents on performing validation calculations incorporate the assumption that all individual measurements are independent, so little guidance is available to practitioners on the topic. Typical guidance includes recommendations to select experiments from multiple facilities and experiment series in an attempt to minimize the impact of correlations or common-cause errors in experiments. Recent efforts have been made both to determine the magnitude of such correlations between experiments and to develop and apply methods for adjusting the bias and bias uncertainty to account for the correlations. This paper describes recent work performed at Oak Ridge National Laboratory using the Sampler sequence from the SCALE code system to develop experimental correlations using a Monte Carlo sampling technique. Sampler will be available for the first time with the release of SCALE 6.2, and a brief introduction to the methods used to calculate experiment correlations within this new sequence is presented in this paper. Techniques to utilize these correlations in the establishment of upper subcritical limits are the subject of a companion paper and will not be discussed here. Example experimental uncertainties and correlation coefficients are presented for a variety of low-enriched uranium water-moderated lattice experiments selected for use in a benchmark exercise by the Working Party on Nuclear Criticality Safety Subgroup on Uncertainty Analysis in Criticality Safety Analyses. The results include studies on the effect of fuel rod pitch on the correlations, and some observations are also made regarding difficulties in determining experimental correlations using the Monte Carlo sampling technique.

42 ENGINEERING↗

Determination of critical experiment correlations using the sampler sequence within scale 6.2 - 14602

The validation of neutron transport methods used in nuclear criticality safety analyses is required by consensus American National Standards Institute/American Nuclear Society (ANSI/ANS) standards. In the last decade, there has been an increased interest in correlations among critical experiments used in validation that have shared physical attributes and which impact the independence of each measurement. The statistical methods included in many of the frequently cited guidance documents on performing validation calculations incorporate the assumption that all individual measurements are independent, so little guidance is available to practitioners on the topic. Typical guidance includes recommendations to select experiments from multiple facilities and experiment series in an attempt to minimize the impact of correlations or common-cause errors in experiments. Recent efforts have been made both to determine the magnitude of such correlations between experiments and to develop and apply methods for adjusting the bias and bias uncertainty to account for the correlations. This paper describes recent work performed at Oak Ridge National Laboratory using the Sampler sequence from the SCALE code system to develop experimental correlations using a Monte Carlo sampling technique. Sampler will be available for the first time with the release of SCALE 6.2, and a brief introduction to the methods used to calculate experiment correlations within this new sequence is presented in this paper. Techniques to utilize these correlations in the establishment of upper subcritical limits are the subject of a companion paper and will not be discussed here. Example experimental uncertainties and correlation coefficients are presented for a variety of low-enriched uranium water-moderated lattice experiments selected for use in a benchmark exercise by the Working Party on Nuclear Criticality Safety Subgroup on Uncertainty Analysis in Criticality Safety Analyses. The results include studies on the effect of fuel rod pitch on the correlations, and some observations are also made regarding difficulties in determining experimental correlations using the Monte Carlo sampling technique. (authors)

42 ENGINEERING↗

Idaho National Laboratory’s FY09 & FY10 Greenhouse Gas Report

A greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory is a systematic approach to account for the production and release of certain gases generated by an institution from various emission sources. The gases of interest are those that climate science has identified as related to anthropogenic global climate change. This document presents an inventory of GHGs generated during fiscal year (FY) 2009 and 2010 by Idaho National Laboratory (INL), a Department of Energy (DOE)-sponsored entity, located in southeastern Idaho. In recent years, concern has grown about the environmental impact of GHGs. This, together with a desire to decrease harmful environmental impacts, would be enough to encourage the calculation of an inventory of the total GHGs generated at INL. Additionally, INL has a desire to see how its emissions compare with similar institutions, including other DOE national laboratories. Executive Order 13514 requires that federal agencies and institutions document reductions in GHG emissions. INL's GHG inventory was calculated according to methodologies identified in federal GHG guidance documents using operational control boundaries. It measures emissions generated in three scopes: (1) INL emissions produced directly by stationary or mobile combustion and by fugitive emissions, (2) the share of emissions generated by entities from which INL purchased electrical power, and (3) indirect or shared emissions generated by outsourced activities that benefit INL (occur outside INL's organizational boundaries, but are a consequence of INL's activities). This inventory found that INL generated 103,590 and 102,413 MT of CO2-equivalent emissions during FY09 and FY10, respectively. The following conclusions were made from looking at the results of the individual contributors to INL's FY09 and FY10 GHG inventories: (1) Electricity (including the associated transmission and distribution losses) is the largest contributor to INL's GHG inventory, with over 50% of the CO2e emissions; (2) Other sources with high emissions were stationary combustion (facility fuels), waste disposal (including fugitive emissions from the onsite landfill and contracted disposal), mobile combustion (fleet fuels), employee commuting, and business air travel; and (3) Sources with low emissions were wastewater treatment (onsite and contracted), fugitive emissions from refrigerants, and business ground travel (in personal and rental vehicles). This report details the methods behind quantifying INL's GHG inventory and discusses lessons learned on better practices by which information important to tracking GHGs can be tracked and recorded. It is important to note that because this report differentiates between those portions of INL that are managed and operated by the Battelle Energy Alliance (BEA) and those managed by other contractors, it includes only that large proportion of Laboratory activities overseen by BEA. It is assumed that other contractors will provide similar reporting for those activities they manage, where appropriate.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

Idaho National Laboratory’s FY14 Greenhouse Gas Report

A greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory is a systematic approach to account for the production and release of certain gases generated by an institution from various emission sources. The gases of interest are those that climate science has identified as related to anthropogenic global climate change. This document presents an inventory of GHGs generated during Fiscal Year (FY) 2014 by Idaho National Laboratory (INL), a Department of Energy (DOE) sponsored entity, located in southeastern Idaho. In recent years, concern has grown about the environmental impact of GHGs. This, together with a desire to decrease harmful environmental impacts, would be enough to encourage the calculation of an inventory of the total GHGs generated at INL. Additionally, INL has a desire to see how its emissions compare with similar institutions, including other DOE national laboratories. Executive Order 13514 requires that federal agencies and institutions document reductions in GHG emissions. INL’s GHG inventory was calculated according to methodologies identified in federal GHG guidance documents using operational control boundaries. It measures emissions generated in three scopes: (1) INL emissions produced directly by stationary or mobile combustion and by fugitive emissions, (2) the share of emissions generated by entities from which INL purchased electrical power, and (3) indirect or shared emissions generated by outsourced activities that benefit INL (occur outside INL’s organizational boundaries, but are a consequence of INL’s activities). This inventory found that INL generated 73,521 metric tons (MT) of CO2 equivalent (CO2e ) emissions during FY14. The following conclusions were made from looking at the results of the individual contributors to INL’s FY14 GHG inventory: • Electricity (including the associated transmission and distribution losses) is the largest contributor to INL’s GHG inventory, with over 50% of the CO2e emissions • Other sources with high emissions were stationary combustion (facility fuels), employee commuting, mobile combustion (fleet fuels), business air travel, and waste disposal (including fugitive emissions from the onsite landfill and contracted disposal) • Sources with low emissions were wastewater treatment (onsite and contracted), business ground travel (in personal and rental vehicles), and fugitive emissions from refrigerants. This report details the methods behind quantifying INL’s GHG inventory and discusses lessons learned on better practices by which information important to tracking GHGs can be tracked and recorded. It is important to note that because this report differentiates between those portions of INL that are managed and operated by Battelle Energy Alliance (BEA) and those managed by other contractors, it includes only the large proportion of Laboratory activities overseen by BEA. It is assumed that other contractors will provide similar reporting for those activities they manage, where appropriate.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Idaho National Laboratory’s FY 2016 Greenhouse Gas Report

A greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory is a systematic approach to account for the production and release of certain gases generated by an institution from various emission sources. The gases of interest are those that climate science has identified as related to anthropogenic global climate change. This document presents an inventory of GHGs generated during Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 by Idaho National Laboratory (INL), a Department of Energy (DOE) sponsored entity, located in southeastern Idaho. In recent years, concern has grown about the environmental impact of GHGs. This, together with a desire to decrease harmful environmental impacts, would be enough to encourage the calculation of an inventory of the total GHGs generated at INL. Additionally, INL has a desire to see how its emissions compare with similar institutions, including other DOE national laboratories. Executive Order 13693 requires that federal agencies and institutions document reductions in GHG emissions. INL’s GHG inventory was calculated according to methodologies identified in federal GHG guidance documents using operational control boundaries. It measures emissions generated in three scopes: (1) INL emissions produced directly by stationary or mobile combustion and by fugitive emissions, (2) the share of emissions generated by entities from which INL purchased electrical power, and (3) indirect or shared emissions generated by outsourced activities that benefit INL (occur outside INL’s organizational boundaries, but are a consequence of INL’s activities). This inventory found that INL generated 85,525 metric tons (MT) of CO 2 equivalent (CO 2 e ) emissions during FY 2016. The following conclusions were made from looking at the results of the individual contributors to INL’s FY 2016 GHG inventory: Electricity (including the associated transmission and distribution losses) is the largest contributor to INL’s GHG inventory, with over 50% of the CO 2 e emissions; Other sources with high emissions were employee commuting, mobile combustion (fleet fuels), stationary combustion (facility fuels), business air travel, and waste disposal (fugitive emissions from the onsite landfill); Sources with low emissions were wastewater treatment (onsite and contracted), business ground travel (in personal and rental vehicles), waste disposal (contracted disposal), and fugitive emissions from refrigerants. This report details the methods behind quantifying INL’s GHG inventory and discusses lessons learned on better practices by which information important to tracking GHGs can be tracked and recorded. It is important to note that because this report differentiates between those portions of INL that are managed and operated by Battelle Energy Alliance (BEA) and those managed by other contractors, it includes only the Laboratory activities overseen by BEA. It is assumed that other contractors will provide similar reporting for those activities they manage, where appropriate.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Idaho National Laboratory's FY15 Greenhouse Gas Report

A greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory is a systematic approach to account for the production and release of certain gases generated by an institution from various emission sources. The gases of interest are those that climate science has identified as related to anthropogenic global climate change. This document presents an inventory of GHGs generated during Fiscal Year (FY) 2015 by Idaho National Laboratory (INL), a Department of Energy (DOE) sponsored entity, located in southeastern Idaho. In recent years, concern has grown about the environmental impact of GHGs. This, together with a desire to decrease harmful environmental impacts, would be enough to encourage the calculation of an inventory of the total GHGs generated at INL. Additionally, INL has a desire to see how its emissions compare with similar institutions, including other DOE national laboratories. Executive Order 13693 requires that federal agencies and institutions document reductions in GHG emissions. INL’s GHG inventory was calculated according to methodologies identified in federal GHG guidance documents using operational control boundaries. It measures emissions generated in three scopes: (1) INL emissions produced directly by stationary or mobile combustion and by fugitive emissions, (2) the share of emissions generated by entities from which INL purchased electrical power, and (3) indirect or shared emissions generated by outsourced activities that benefit INL (occur outside INL’s organizational boundaries, but are a consequence of INL’s activities). This inventory found that INL generated 58,330 metric tons (MT) of CO 2 equivalent (CO 2 e ) emissions during FY15. The following conclusions were made from looking at the results of the individual contributors to INL’s FY15 GHG inventory: • Electricity (including the associated transmission and distribution losses) is the largest contributor to INL’s GHG inventory, with over 50% of the CO 2 e emissions • Other sources with high emissions were employee commuting, mobile combustion (fleet fuels), stationary combustion (facility fuels), business air travel, and waste disposal (including fugitive emissions from the onsite landfill and contracted disposal) • Sources with low emissions were wastewater treatment (onsite and contracted), business ground travel (in personal and rental vehicles), and fugitive emissions from refrigerants. This report details the methods behind quantifying INL’s GHG inventory and discusses lessons learned on better practices by which information important to tracking GHGs can be tracked and recorded. It is important to note that because this report differentiates between those portions of INL that are managed and operated by Battelle Energy Alliance (BEA) and those managed by other contractors, it includes only the Laboratory activities overseen by BEA. It is assumed that other contractors will provide similar reporting for those activities they manage, where appropriate.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

Department of Energy – Office of Science: Pacific Northwest Site Office Environmental Monitoring Plan for the DOE-SC PNNL Site

The Pacific Northwest Site Office (PNSO) manages the contract for operations at the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science (DOE-SC) Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) Site in Richland, Washington. Radiological operations at the DOE-SC PNNL Site expanded in 2010 with the completion of facilities at the Physical Sciences Facility. As a result of the expanded radiological work at the site, the Washington State Department of Health (WDOH) has required that offsite environmental surveillance be conducted as part of the PNNL Site Radioactive Air Emissions License. The environmental monitoring and surveillance requirements of various orders, regulations, and guidance documents consider emission levels and subsequent risk of negative human and environmental impacts. This Environmental Monitoring Plan (EMP) describes air surveillance activities at the DOE-SC PNNL Site. The determination of offsite environmental surveillance needs evolved out of a Data Quality Objectives process (Barnett et al. 2010) and Implementation Plan (Snyder et al. 2010). The entire EMP is a compilation of several documents, which include: - the Main Document, this text, (PNNL-20919), - Attachment 1, Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) (PNNL-20919-1), - Attachment 2, Data Management Plan (DMP) (PNNL-20919-2), and - Attachment 3, Dose Assessment Guidance (DAG) (PNNL-20919-3). Although the EMP is considered the compilation of these documents, each covers topics that can be updated independently. As a result, each may have different publication dates. Current version dates can be verified with Effluent Management staff. The procedures, forms, and data management activities described herein may change with radiological research projects at the DOE-SC PNNL Site. The scope of this EMP will evolve as needed, during routine reviews or in response to changes in facility operations. This document provides the SAP, DMP, and DAG effective at the time of publication. Updates to this document will be published at the discretion of the Effluent Management group of PNNL.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

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↗

Radiological Characterization for Decommissioning: International Good Practice and Experience - 18396

The 'Task Group on Radiological Characterization for Decommissioning (TGRCD)' functions under the umbrella of the Nuclear Energy Agency' (NEA) 'Working Party on Decommissioning and Dismantling (WPDD),' which is currently reporting to NEA Radioactive Waste Management Committee (RWMC). The TGRCD task group, which is composed of international experts, has been working since 2014 on a commitment to provide a high-level guidance for characterization practitioners working in nuclear decommissioning. The work has focused on facility characterization from a waste and materials perspective. Radiological characterization is a key activity enabling planning and implementation of decommissioning of nuclear facilities. Effective characterization allows the extent, location and nature of contamination to be determined providing crucial information to facilitate facility dismantling, the management of material and arising waste, protection of workers, the public, the environment and associated cost estimation. The report is written for characterization practitioners who carry out the tactical planning, preparation, optimization and implementation of characterization to support the decommissioning of nuclear facilities and the management of associated materials and waste. It compiles recent experience of NEA member countries in radiological characterization, including the experience of international experts and practitioners; the learning from international case studies and international conferences; and national approaches to the application of international and national regulations, standards and guidance documents. Using this comprehensive approach and evaluation studies, the report identifies relevant good practices and sets out set out practical guidance covering all stages of the characterization process as related to decommissioning. This paper provides a summary of the work conducted and the main findings from the detailed report. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Quality Guidelines for Energy System Studies: Capital Cost Scaling Methodology (Revision 4 Report)

NETL regularly updates legacy analysis with new studies as the Department of Energy objectives change, technology performance improves, costs are reduced, regulations change, market drivers are established, fuel prices fluctuate, and any number of other relevant factors vary in the market. As legacy studies are updated by NETL, the underlying performance and cost of the cases changes, and the methods for interpreting and scaling the cost estimates change. Therefore, it is important that NETL maintain public guidance documents associated with different sets of cost estimates that delineate how a specific set should be scaled. This QGESS report, providing guidance on capital cost scaling, should generally be applied to NETL case costs included in the report “Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 1: Bituminous Coal and Natural Gas to Electricity Revision 4” (BBR4), or any cases derived from the cases presented in the referenced report.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Calculation of Hazard Category 2/3 Threshold Quantities Using Contemporary Dosimetric Data

The purpose of this report is to describe the methodology and selection of input data utilized to calculate updated Hazard Category 2 and Hazard Category 3 Threshold Quantities (TQs) using contemporary dosimetric information. The calculation of the updated TQs will be considered for use in the revision to the Department of Energy (DOE) Technical Standard (STD-) 1027-92 Change Notice (CN)-1, “Hazard Categorization and Accident Analysis Techniques for Compliance with DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports.” The updated TQs documented in this report complement an effort previously undertaken by the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), which in 2014 issued revised Supplemental Guidance documenting the calculation of updated TQs for approximately 100 radionuclides listed in DOE-STD-1027-92, CN-1. The calculations documented in this report complement the NNSA effort by expanding the set of radionuclides to more than 1,250 radionuclides with a published TQ. The development of this report was sponsored by the Department of Energy’s Office of Nuclear Safety (AU-30) within the Associate Under Secretary for Environment, Health, Safety, and Security organization.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

Review of Amendment Delivery and Distribution Methods, and Relevance to Potential In Situ Source Area Treatment at the Hanford Site

The U.S. Department of Energy’s Hanford Site in southeastern Washington State is a complex of multiple facilities where historical release events in the Central Plateau area have resulted in subsurface contamination of the vadose zone, a perched-water zone, and underlying aquifer. Although some contaminants have already migrated through the vadose zone into the groundwater, contaminants remaining in the unsaturated zone are a potential long-term risk as a source for further groundwater contamination. Moreover, a perched-water zone located in the 200-DV-1 Operable Unit at Hanford creates further remediation difficulties. Remediation options are limited for contaminants located in the vadose and perched-water zones within the Central Plateau due to considerable depth, co-located contaminants, and complexities associated with physical and biogeochemical heterogeneities. Existing comprehensive reviews discuss potential remedial technologies relevant to Hanford Site conditions (e.g., deep vadose zone and perched water) and provide treatment technology recommendations. Many of the recommended in situ remediation technologies rely on introduction of amendments into the subsurface to achieve remedial goals. However, there are currently few review or guidance documents that provide a comprehensive look at mechanisms and considerations related to amendment delivery and distribution. This document summarizes amendment types, delivery techniques, subsurface access methods, and the applicability of delivery methods and amendments for specific subsurface target zones, including in the context of Hanford Central Plateau applications. Guidance on the appropriateness of a remedial technology for a specific site and contaminant is not included within this document. Rather, this document is intended to be used when considering remediation technologies and the associated amendments. An overview of amendment types (i.e., liquid, gas, and solids) and access/distribution methods used in subsurface remediation is provided, along with discussion of the maturity level (low, medium, or high), advantages, and limitations that relate to the potential effectiveness of each approach in the context of site-specific factors (subsurface geology, geochemistry, contaminant properties, etc.). There are many Hanford Site-specific factors that influence the suitability and appropriateness of amendment delivery strategies. Excluding amendment delivery approaches that are unsuitable for the Hanford context, each approach was assessed for applicability to the following target zones: unsaturated high permeability, unsaturated low permeability, perched water, saturated high permeability, and saturated low permeability zones. This compilation and discussion related to amendment delivery mechanisms provides a useful resource for evaluating remedial alternatives for source area contamination in the Hanford Central Plateau.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

International Scavenging for First Responder Guidance and Tools: IAEA Products

In fiscal years (FY) 2016 and 2017, with support from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) examined the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) radiological emergency response and preparedness products (guidance and tools) to determine which of these products could be useful to U.S. first responders. The IAEA Incident and Emergency Centre (IEC), which is responsible for emergency preparedness and response, offers a range of tools and guidance documents for responders in recognizing, responding to, and recovering from radiation emergencies and incidents. In order to implement this project, BNL obtained all potentially relevant tools and products produced by the IAEA IEC and analyzed these materials to determine their relevance to first responders in the U.S. Subsequently, BNL organized and hosted a workshop at DHS National Urban Security Technology Laboratory (NUSTL) for U.S. first responders to examine and evaluate IAEA products to consider their applicability to the United States. This report documents and describes the First Responder Product Evaluation Workshop, and provides recommendations on potential steps the U.S. federal government could take to make IAEA guidance and tools useful to U.S. responders.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗

Assessment of Adequacy and Completeness of Standards Endorsed by Regulatory Guides to Molten Salt Reactors

The benefits of using voluntary consensus standards and industry guidance documents and reports are evident in the design and licensing of the current generation of nuclear power plants. The use of voluntary consensus standards and industry guidance and reports facilitates the design and licensing of advanced reactors to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the licensing and regulation of non-light-water reactor (non-LWR) technologies. Most of the regulations, guidance, and standards applicable to nuclear power plants were developed for water-cooled plants, so they may not adequately address factors such as the coolants, materials, temperatures, operations, testing, and maintenance proposed for advanced reactors.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗