Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “permitting”

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

Economic Impact of Permitting Timelines on Produced Geothermal Power

Despite having a large geothermal power potential in the United States, only a small fraction has been developed for power generation. Various barriers, including technical, financial, and regulatory permit delays, are attributed to lower contribution of geothermal energy in the national grid. Unpredictable environmental reviews and permitting timelines are some of the non-technical barriers that can cause delays in geothermal exploration and utilization plans. This study shows that the geothermal permitting timelines can vary from six months to several years, depending on the presence or absence of biological resources, cultural resources, and sensitive environmental issues at the project site. The potential impacts of these permit barriers can range from investors abandoning geothermal development to making the product (i.e., electricity) more expensive and uncompetitive.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

A phased workflow to define permit‐ready locations for large volume CO 2 injection and storage

Abstract To‐date, only two UIC Class VI permits have been issued by the US Environmental Protection Agency. We illustrate a four‐phase workflow to first identify regional storage resources and then down‐select sites to yield permit‐ready locations that can accept and store large volumes of CO 2 . Specific permit requirements should guide objectives and define deliverables of respective workflow phases. In the first phase we used available regional data and screened structure and injection zones to locate resources that match CO 2 volumes planned to be captured. Available data were also used to assess presence and depth of usable groundwater, the key resource being protected via permitting. We then used advanced, closed‐form, analytical solutions (EASiTool) to estimate CO 2 injectivity into each hydrologically connected injection compartment. In the second phase we acquired and conditioned additional wireline logs and leased available seismic datasets. We interpreted the depositional systems from wireline well‐log character and mapped sandbody geometry to interpolate injection and confining‐zone distribution. Using available data, we mapped faults and locations of freshwater and overpressure (or other capacity‐limiting geologic parameters) in more detail. In the third phase, we used the augmented geologic data to develop a static model for the selected area, extracted the areas of highest interest, and generated and ran dynamic (flow) models. In a fourth phase, we reduced major uncertainties identified in earlier phases. Our case study indicates that to complete preparation of a permit application requires (1) improved lithologic characterization information (thicknesses and horizontal and vertical connectivity) and (2) better definition of poorly defined local faults. © 2023 The Authors. Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology published by Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

SolarAPP+ ® (Solar Automated Permit Processing Plus) [SWR-19-51]

SolarAPP+ ®: Safe and affordable home solar through permitting automation. NREL has launched a collaborative effort with key code officials, authorities having jurisdiction (AHJs), and the solar industry to develop an instant online solar permitting platform for code compliant residential systems. SolarAPP (Solar Automated Permit Processing) will: -Provide a flexible, web-based PV-permitting tool for residential systems at no-cost to AHJs. -Enable standardization of instant permitting processes. -Evaluate applications for safety and code compliance. -Offer opportunities to incorporate energy storage and expand to other market segments.

Cook, Jeffrey↗

Request for Exemption and Permit Modification for S-6008: Sewer Diversion Complex

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) operates its Sewer Diversion Complex (SDC) under two relevant permits: discharges to air are controlled by Condition 5533 of LLNL’s BAAQMD permit for Source 6008, and discharges to the municipal sewer system are controlled by LLNL’s Wastewater Discharge Permit (Permit #1250). LLNL intends to modify the SDC by changing the currently permitted tanks to new models. Generally, this change will increase the volume of the tanks, update the abatement carbon system to suit the larger volume, and switch to a set of taller but thinner tanks.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Case study on the novel permitting and authorization of PacWave South, a US grid-connected wave energy test facility: Development, challenges, and insights

Marine energy (i.e., energy from waves, tides, currents, and rivers) in the United States is a nascent industry. In particular, permitting processes—an uncertainty for industry advancement that can be costly and time consuming to navigate—have rarely been tested and used for marine energy. The novelty of the marine energy industry and utilization of open ocean permitting processes that were not originally developed for marine energy have led to extensive efforts to gain consensus amongst state and federal regulatory agencies to authorize marine energy projects. In 2021, Oregon State University successfully completed permitting of a wave energy test facility, called PacWave South, off the coast of Oregon, which is designed to advance wave energy research and development. This article documents the multi-year process that Oregon State University used to receive federal and state authorization for a pre-permitted commercial-scale grid connected facility by detailing the development of the test facility, management of uncertainty and challenges, and key decisions. The PacWave South case study provides insights for the larger marine energy community as the industry advances towards commercialization.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗

Reuse Permit I-161-02 Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) for Required Environmental and Process Monitoring Idaho National Laboratory Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) Complex Cold Waste Ponds

The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) issued Reuse Permit No. I-161-02 (hereafter permit) for the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) Complex Cold Waste Ponds (CWP) on November 20, 2014, with minor Modification 1 effective March 7, 2017. Permit Section 3 compliance activity (CA), CA-161-02, requires the permittee to prepare and implement a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) within 6 months of permit issuance. This QAPP is prepared in accordance with CA-161-02 using a template provided by DEQ.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

2018 Idaho National Laboratory Annual Report for Permit to Construct P-2015.0023

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Site operates facilities with potential emissions criteria and hazardous air pollutants. This report documents the calendar year 2018 criteria and hazardous air pollutants emissions and has been prepared to comply with permit to construct (PTC) P-2015-0023, Condition 2.9 and Idaho Administrative Procedures Act (IDAPA) 58.01.01.178, Standard Contents of Permits Establishing a Facility Emissions Cap. IDAPA 58.01.01.178.04 requires that all permits establishing a FEC shall include sufficient reporting to assure compliance with the permit establishing the FEC. Total hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions for the year were 1.49 tons in aggregate and the maximum individual HAP was hydrochloric acid at 1.26 tons. Criteria pollutant emissions were 2.16 tons for sulfur dioxide, 35.6 tons for oxides of nitrogen, 11.6 tons of carbon monoxide, 3.51 tons of total particulate matter and 2.66 tons of VOCs.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

Marine Energy Environmental Toolkit for Permitting and Licensing

The permitting and licensing process for marine energy in the U.S. could take up to 7 years for even small demonstrations or pilot studies despite existing resources like Tethys, MarineCadstre, and the FERC E-Library. The goal of the Marine Energy Environmental Toolkit Project was to increase regulators, developers, and marine energy innovators’ understanding of potential environmental effects of marine energy conversion devices deployments and provide information to make efficient and effective determinations during permitting and licensing; develop a one-stop shop for existing environmental, spatial, regulatory, and scientific data that allows users to access disparate sources of data through a series of tags and spatial queries. The Toolkit (marineenergy.app) builds upon prior U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Water Power Technologies Office (WPTO) investments by pulling from WPTO-funded and outside resources to facilitate the permitting and licensing process, inform technology developers of required permits, and disseminate the latest knowledge of the environmental effects of these devices to regulators, developers, and marine energy innovators and stakeholders.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗

Idaho National Laboratory Annual Report for Permit to Construct P-2015.0023 for Calendar Year 2020

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Site operates facilities with potential emissions criteria and hazardous air pollutants. This report documents the calendar year 2020 criteria and hazardous air pollutants emissions and has been prepared to comply with permit to construct (PTC) P-2015-0023, Condition 2.9 and Idaho Administrative Procedures Act (IDAPA) 58.01.01.178, Standard Contents of Permits Establishing a Facility Emissions Cap (FEC). IDAPA 58.01.01.178.04 requires that all permits establishing a FEC shall include sufficient reporting to assure compliance with the permit establishing the FEC. Total hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions for the year were 0.59 tons in aggregate and the maximum individual HAP was hydrochloric acid at 0.35 tons. Criteria pollutant emissions were 1.23 tons for sulfur dioxide, 40.96 tons for oxides of nitrogen, 11.7 tons of carbon monoxide, 3.01 tons of total particulate matter and 1.98 tons of volatile organic compounds (VOC).

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

Modular evaluation method for subsurface activities (MEMSA). A novel approach for integrating social acceptance in a permit decision-making process for subsurface activities

We investigate how the decision support system ‘Modular Evaluation Method Subsurface Activities’ (MEMSA) can help facilitate an informed decision-making process for permit applications of subsurface activities. To this end, we analyze the extent the MEMSA approach allows for a dialogue between stakeholders in a transparent manner. We use the exploration permit for the underground gas storage facility at the Pieterburen salt dome (Netherlands) as a case study. The results suggest that the MEMSA approach is flexible enough to adjust to changing conditions. Furthermore, MEMSA provides a novel way for identifying structural problems and possible solutions in permit decision-making processes for subsurface activities, on the basis of the sensitivity analysis of intermediate rankings. We suggest that the planned size of an activity should already be specified in the exploration phase, because this would allow for a more efficient use of the subsurface as a whole. We conclude that the host community should be involved to a greater extent and in an early phase of the permit decision-making process, for example, already during the initial analysis of the project area of a subsurface activity. We suggest that strategic national policy goals are to be re-evaluated on a regular basis, in the form of a strategic vision for the subsurface, to account for timing discrepancies between the realization of activities and policy deadlines, because this discrepancy can have a large impact on the necessity and therefore acceptance of a subsurface activity.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Explaining jurisdictional compliance with California’s top-down streamlined solar permitting law (AB 2188)

In the U.S., the process by which residential rooftop solar photovoltaic (PV) system installations are permitted and inspected by an “authority having jurisdiction” (AHJ) varies across AHJs. As the U.S. has roughly 23,000 AHJs with varying degrees of local autonomy, improving the cross-jurisdictional consistency of permitting and inspection is not a straightforward task. One promising approach is a “top-down” streamlined solar permitting (SSP) mandate by U.S. States to their AHJs. This study set out to understand the factors associated with the likelihood that an AHJ either did or did not comply with California’s top-down streamlined solar permitting law, AB2188, and then to consider how these factors might be relevant to the future prospects of top-down SSP outside of California. This report provides background material on AB2188 and tests five hypotheses about the factors that affect the likelihood that an AHJ will comply or not comply with AB2188, as developed from the policy diffusion literature and background knowledge on AB2188 and its implementation.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

Understanding Adoption of a Key Soft Cost Reduction Strategy: Modeling Administrative Choices Regarding Streamlined Solar Permitting (Final Technical Report)

In the U.S., the process by which residential rooftop solar photovoltaic (PV) system installations are permitted and inspected by an “authority having jurisdiction” (AHJ) and interconnected to the grid varies across the country. As the U.S. has roughly 23,000 AHJs and 3,000 utilities with varying degrees of local autonomy, permitting, inspection, and interconnection (PI&I) heterogeneity represents a significant “soft cost” barrier to the growth of the residential solar PV market. Burkhardt et al. (2015), for example, finds that variations in local permitting procedures alone can lead to differences in average residential PV prices of approximately ${$}$0.14-${$}$0.18/W. When the authors considered jurisdictional variation in permitting plus regulatory procedures, that price differential grew to ${$}$0.64-${$}$0.93/W between the least-favorable and most-favorable jurisdictions. The objective of this project was to determine suites of PI&I reforms that fit the preferences of AHJs and utilities nationwide, as mediated through the preferences of PV installers, with the hoped-for impact of significantly improving the consistency of PI&I for solar PV across the U.S. To accomplish this objective, the project team set out to design and implement survey instruments with embedded discrete choice experiments (DCEs) that used individual PI&I reforms as attributes, with levels informed by a detailed understanding of the PI&I reforms. The analysis of the surveys was to include both defined and latent class analysis of the survey results, in order to identify different sets of AHJs and utilities that would prefer different “mass customized” SSP practice combinations. Note that this project would also have advanced the social science by applying well-established choice analysis techniques to the novel setting of public administration.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

Illinois Storage Corridor - CarbonSAFE Phase III: Policy, Regulatory, Legal and Permitting Characteristics; Subtask 5.5

The Illinois Storage Corridor (ISC) project aims to advance the commercial development and implementation of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies within a region in Illinois of suitable geology for carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) storage in deep saline aquifers. The project partners have annual emissions greater than 6.5 million tonnes per year; storage hubs are being explored at two sites—one near the One Earth Energy facility in east-central Illinois, and one near the Prairie State Generating Company campus in southwest Illinois. To implement the technology, legal, policy, and economic considerations must be explored. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) administers the Underground Injection Control (UIC) program and is responsible for issuing Class VI permits to construct and operate CO 2 injection wells, i.e., a UIC Class VI well permit is required to inject CO 2 into the subsurface for geologic sequestration. The largest consideration of the Class VI well requirements is to protect underground sources of drinking water (USDWs). Additionally discussed are considerations for Class VI permits relating to public engagement. Besides permitting, property rights to storage sites, subsurface pore spaces, and areas for pipeline transportation must be secured. Pore space rights is still a novel concept being explored and not yet addressed by the Illinois legislature. It is believed that surface property rights are required for the subsurface pore space below, so long as there is not a separated mineral estate in the subsurface. Illinois legislature has addressed securing rights-of-way for CO 2 transportation, allowing for easements and the exercise of eminent domain to secure such rights. Economically, the incentives for CCS are ever-expanding. Recently, the federal government broadened the availability and increased the dollar-amounts for the § 45Q tax credits for geological storage of carbon oxides. Congress has also authorized the Advanced Industrial Facilities Development Program which allocates billions of dollars in funds to installing technology at industrial facilities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. On the state level, Illinois has had its own incentives for CCS projects since 2009 and expanded its emission-related goals again in 2021. The law enacted in 2021 specifically creates a commission to explore implementing CCS at Prairie State Generating Company, a partner on the Illinois Storage Corridor project.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

The Kinematics of the Permitted C ii λ 6578 Line in a Large Sample of Planetary Nebulae

We present spectroscopic observations of the C ii λ 6578 permitted line for 83 lines of sight in 76 planetary nebulae at high spectral resolution, most of them obtained with the Manchester Echelle Spectrograph on the 2.1 m telescope at the Observatorio Astronómico Nacional on the Sierra San Pedro Mártir. We study the kinematics of the C ii λ 6578 permitted line with respect to other permitted and collisionally excited lines. Statistically, we find that the kinematics of the C ii λ 6578 line are not those expected if this line arises from the recombination of C{sup 2+} ions or the fluorescence of C{sup +} ions in ionization equilibrium in a chemically homogeneous nebular plasma, but instead its kinematics are those appropriate for a volume more internal than expected. The planetary nebulae in this sample have well-defined morphology and are restricted to a limited range in H α line widths (no large values) compared to their counterparts in the Milky Way bulge; both these features could be interpreted as the result of young nebular shells, an inference that is also supported by nebular modeling. Concerning the long-standing discrepancy between chemical abundances inferred from permitted and collisionally excited emission lines in photoionized nebulae, our results imply that multiple plasma components occur commonly in planetary nebulae.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗

E Tunnel Wastewater Disposal System Quarterly Monitoring Report and Annual Summary Report Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Water Pollution Control Permit NEV 96021: Fourth Quarter and Calendar Year 2018

This annual report includes the results of the ETOS sample collection and analysis of the effluent water from the ETOS. The effluent sample was collected on October 9, 2018. Sampling activities were performed in accordance with the requirements of WPC Permit NEV 96021, Revision 1, which is effective October 1, 2013. Although the stated end date of the WPC permit is September 3 O, 2018, the NDEP, in a letter dated September 21, 2018, provided guidance that indicated the WPC Permit NEV 96021, Revision 1, is in effect until NOEP notifies NNSA/NFO otherwise.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Solar permitting, inspection, and interconnection cycletimes and requirements

Twenty three small-to-large residential, commercial, and industrial PV installers submitted project-level data for analysis, which included timestamps for major components of the permitting, inspection, and interconnection process as well as contract and installation dates. NREL calculated median timelines for these processes across the authorities having jurisdiction (AHJs) and utilities represented in the data. Also included are relevant permitting requirements for AHJs and interconnection process requirements for utilities. This dataset represents the underlying results shown in the Solar Time-based Residential Analytics and Cycle time Estimator (SolarTRACE) viewer. This dataset has been reviewed but errors may exist, and it may not be comprehensive. Errors in the sources (e.g., AHJ permitting requirements lists from data partners) may be duplicated in the dataset.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

Efforts to Streamline Permitting of Geothermal Projects in the United States

Geothermal permitting timelines in the United States can be a deterrent to new investment, with geothermal project development taking as long as seven to ten years. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005) in part aimed to streamline aspects of the geothermal permitting process on federally managed public lands. This article summarizes the general regulatory process for developing geothermal projects in the United States and thereafter discusses efforts proposed or undertaken by the U.S. Congress, U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Bureau of Land Management, state governments, and project developers to increase permitting efficiency.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Supplemental Environmental Baseline Survey for Proposed Land Use Permit Modification for Expansion of the Dynamic Explosive Test Site (DETS) 9940 Main Complex Parking Lot

The “subject property” is comprised of a parcel of land within the Kirtland Military Reservation, Bernalillo County, New Mexico, as shown on the map in Appendix B of this document. The land requirement for the parking lot addition to the 9940 Main Complex is approximately 2.7 acres. The scope of this Supplemental Environmental Baseline Survey (SEBS) is for the parking lot addition land transfer only. For details on the original 9940 Main Complex see Environmental Baseline Survey, Land Use Permit Request for the 9940 Complex PERM/0-KI-00-0001, August 21, 2003, and for details on the 9940 Complex Expansion see Environmental Baseline Survey, Proposed Land Use Permit Expansion for 9940 DETS Complex, June 24, 2009. The 2.7-acre parcel of land for the new parking lot, which is the subject of this EBS (also referred to as the “subject property”), is adjacent to the southwest boundary of the original 12.3- acre 9940 Main Complex. No testing is known to have taken place on the subject property site. The only activity known to have taken place was the burial of overhead utility lines in 2014. Adjacent to the subject property, the 9940 Main Complex was originally a 12.3-acre site used by the Department of Energy (DOE) under a land use permit from the United States Air Force (USAF). Historical use of the site, dating from 1964, included arming, fusing, and firing of explosives and testing of explosives systems components. In the late 1970s and early 1980s experiments at the 9940 Main Complex shifted toward reactor safety issues. From 1983 to 1988, fuel coolant interaction (FCI) experiments were conducted, as were experiments with conventional high explosives (HE). Today, the land is used for training of the Nuclear Emergency Response community and for research on energetic materials. In 2009, the original complex was expanded to include four additional 20-acre areas: 9940 Training South, 9940 Training East, T-Range 6, and Training West Landing Zone. The proposed use of the subject property is for the purpose of adding a parking lot to serve the increase in customer vehicles that is occurring as the 9940 Main Complex is more heavily utilized, and as the 2009 Expansion areas come online as operational training facilities. The subject property would be used only for parking, not for testing or training activities. The parking lot would have a gravel surface. Current and future work at the 9940 Main Complex involves arming, fuzing, and firing of explosives and the testing of explosive systems components in both terrestrial and aquatic settings. It also involves specialized training activities for a variety of first responder customers, both DOE and non-DOE agencies. The approach was to perform a document search, supplemented by a visual site inspection, to identify potential environmental contamination associated with the property. Factors evaluated included hazardous substances; petroleum products and derivatives; environmental restoration sites; areas of concern; storage tanks; oil/water separators; grease traps; wash racks; waste tanks; pesticides; military munitions/ordnance; medical or bio-hazardous waste; radioactive waste; solid/municipal waste; indoor air quality; groundwater; wastewater treatment, collection, and disposal/discharge; drinking water quality; utilities; asbestos; polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs); radon; lead-based paint; cultural resources; floodplains; and natural/biological resources. Each of these factors is evaluated separately in Section 5, Findings for Subject Property. The property categorization for this subject property would be considered Category 1- “An area or real property where no storage, release, or disposal of hazardous substances or petroleum products or their derivatives has occurred into the environment or structures or disposed on the subject property (including no migration of these substances from adjacent properties).” There appears to be sufficient information to categorize the subject property and it appears that no further effort needs to be made to obtain additional information. There are no findings of an adverse nature on the subject property itself or from adjacent properties. It is recommended that the proposed transfer of the subject property from the USAF to DOE proceed.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗