Results for “regulatory” — Page 41

DOE OSTI2025

Architecting the Grid Edge: Ensuring Reliability and Resilience

Changes in technology, customer expectations, and business and regulatory environments are rapidly evolving causing fundamental changes in the nation’s electrical infrastructure. Nowhere is this more apparent that at the “grid edge”, where there is an increasing number of new devices and systems, as well as complex new interactions between them. This is leading to the traditional relationship between the end-use customers and their utilities being expanded by an increasing number of stakeholders, each with their own operational and financial objectives, governed by regulatory policy. While there are concerns about the rapidly increasing complexity negatively impacting reliable and resilience of the electrical infrastructure, these changes are also bringing new resources and opportunities that hold great potential if they can be properly coordinated. This white paper outlines the considerations for the coordination of multi-stakeholder objectives with electric utility requirements using the concept of grid services. Describing a framework that enables new stakeholders to achieve their local technical and economic objectives, while simultaneously delivering operational benefits to the electrical infrastructure. The concepts of grid architecture are presented as a tool to evaluate how stakeholders might participate in, and benefit from, services, and how utilities can make decision on the reliance on services to ensure reliability and resilience, translating abstract concepts into actionable information for utilities and grid edge stakeholders. The end result of proper coordination, informed by grid architecture, will be a range of new devices and systems, operated by new stakeholders, achieving their local objectives while also increasing the reliability, resilience, security, and affordability of the nation’s critical electrical infrastructure.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2025

Architecting the Grid Edge: Ensuring Reliability and Resilience

Changes in technology, customer expectations, and business and regulatory environments are rapidly evolving causing fundamental changes in the nation’s electrical infrastructure. Nowhere is this more apparent that at the “grid edge”, where there is an increasing number of new devices and systems, as well as complex new interactions between them. This is leading to the traditional relationship between the end-use customers and their utilities being expanded by an increasing number of stakeholders, each with their own operational and financial objectives, governed by regulatory policy. While there are concerns about the rapidly increasing complexity negatively impacting reliable and resilience of the electrical infrastructure, these changes are also bringing new resources and opportunities that hold great potential if they can be properly coordinated. This white paper outlines the considerations for the coordination of multi-stakeholder objectives with electric utility requirements using the concept of grid services. Describing a framework that enables new stakeholders to achieve their local technical and economic objectives, while simultaneously delivering operational benefits to the electrical infrastructure. The concepts of grid architecture are presented as a tool to evaluate how stakeholders might participate in, and benefit from, services, and how utilities can make decision on the reliance on services to ensure reliability and resilience, translating abstract concepts into actionable information for utilities and grid edge stakeholders. The end result of proper coordination, informed by grid architecture, will be a range of new devices and systems, operated by new stakeholders, achieving their local objectives while also increasing the reliability, resilience, security, and affordability of the nation’s critical electrical infrastructure.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2025

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Facility Radionuclide Emission Points and Sampling Systems

Battelle–Pacific Northwest Division operates numerous research and development laboratories in Washington State. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) contracts to Battelle at Richland facilities on both the DOE Hanford Site and the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) Richland campus. These facilities have the potential for radionuclide air emissions. The PNNL contract with DOE also includes operations at the PNNL-Sequim campus in Sequim, where there is also the potential for radionuclide air emissions. This document is a periodic update that describes current PNNL facility emission units and sampling systems. The National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP [40 Code of Federal Regulations 61, Subpart H]) requires an assessment of all emission units that have the potential for radionuclide air emissions. Emission units are registered with the State of Washington. Potential emissions from emission units are assessed annually by PNNL staff. Sampling, monitoring, and other regulatory compliance requirements are designated based on the potential to-emit dose criteria, a graded approach to facility-identified potential impact categories, and regulatory requirements. The purpose of this document is to describe the facility radionuclide air emission sampling program and provide current and historical facility emission unit system performance, operation, and design information. For sampled emission units, the building, exhaust unit, control technologies, and sample extraction details are provided. Additionally, applicable configuration drawings, figures, and photographs are included. For non-sampled emission units, emission estimation and radionuclide source details are provided. Site-wide permits for the lowest potential impact category are described. Deregistered/transitioned emission unit details are also provided as necessary for at least 5 years post-closure/transition. Currently, five emission units are sampled continuously for particulate radionuclides at PNNL managed facilities on the PNNL-Richland campus (3 of the 5) and on the Hanford Site (2 of the 5). Four of these units have sampling systems that comply with the American National Standards Institute/Health Physics Society (ANSI/HPS) N13.1–2011 standard for sampling from stacks and ducts of nuclear facilities, and the fifth is grandfathered and compliant with the older ANSI N13.1–1969 standard. In addition, the PNNL-managed Hanford Site 325 Building EP 325-01-S stack is sampled continuously for emissions of tritium. No emissions sampling is required for the single licensed emission unit on the PNNL-Sequim campus.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2024

Critical Literature Review of Low Global Warming Potential (GWP) Refrigerants and their Environmental Impact

Refrigeration and air conditioning currently account for ~20% of the total electricity consumption in buildings around the world. Over the next three decades as global temperatures are projected to increase, urbanization and economic growth will lead to an increased demand for refrigeration and cooling. Most commonly used refrigerants belong to the five following classes: (i) chlorofluorocarbons, (ii) hydrochlorofluorocarbons, (iii) hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), (iv) hydrofluoroolefins (HFOs), and (v) natural refrigerants. Over the past century, there have been shifts in which compounds were used for refrigeration to improve safety and durability, allow for ozone protection, and, most recently, to reduce global warming potential (GWP). Although technological advances have led to increased cooling capacity and safer refrigerants, emissions from refrigeration systems can affect the environment by contributing to greenhouse gas emissions or by depleting the ozone layer, depending on the gas emitted. The focus is increasingly on adopting compounds that are both efficient at cooling and effective for reducing emissions and other adverse environmental impacts. Because of policy and regulatory changes to avert ozone depletion and global climate change, much discussion has centered on the environmental impacts of next-generation refrigerants. Of particular interest are the fluorinated refrigerants, HFCs and HFOs, most of which are defined as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and their breakdown products (especially trifluoroacetic acid). The US Environmental Protection Agency in 2021 drafted a Strategic Roadmap for PFAS, which has already resulted in an increase in investment in research on these compounds and has restricted the release of PFAS into the environment through the implementation of monitoring and reporting requirements. A critical evaluation of fluorinated refrigerants and their breakdown products with respect to persistence, biodegradation and toxicity, and global warming potential is needed to guide environmental regulations. This document aims to perform a critical review of the relevant scientific data on the most common refrigerants currently used, their degradation products, and their alternatives. Where available, estimates of precursor production quantities and existing environmental regulatory information are reviewed. Key data of interest for the evaluation include physicochemical properties, environmental fate parameters, ecological or human health toxicity/risk information, and GWP for compounds of interest.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2025

Southwest Regional Partnership on Carbon Sequestration: Phase III (Final Scientific/Technical Report)

The Southwest Regional Partnership on Carbon Sequestration (SWP) is one of 7 regional partnerships formed in 2003 under the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships (RCSPs) initiative. The overall purpose of the initiative was to help determine and implement the technology, infrastructure, and regulations most appropriate to promote carbon storage in different regions of the country. Covering Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, and parts of Texas, Wyoming, and Kansas, the SWP evaluated regional carbon storage and utilization potential and focused on technologies and sites that could complement the region’s strong position in energy production. The project progressed through three phases: • Phase I (2003–2005): Characterized regional geologic formations and CO 2 sources, assessed sequestration potential, and identified pilot test sites. • Phase II (2005–2013): Conducted small-scale field tests to validate sequestration methods, including geologic and terrestrial projects. • Phase III (2008–2022): Demonstrated large-scale CO 2 injection at a commercial oil field to test monitoring, verification, and long-term storage strategies. This report covers Phase III. The final project site, the Farnsworth Unit (FWU) in Texas, provided real-world testing of reservoir characterization, monitoring, and risk evaluation tools and processes that could be used in any commercial scale carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) project. Extensive data collection and analysis helped refine best practices for reservoir characterization, injection monitoring, and storage verification. The SWP contributed to national databases, DOE best practice manuals, and regional geological assessments to support future sequestration efforts. Key lessons learned include the importance of robust data management, strategic site selection, regulatory navigation, and effective industry collaboration. The project’s findings will inform ongoing and future carbon storage initiatives. Task 1 (Regional Characterization) • The SWP continued to participate in national outreach efforts and NATCARB. • The SWP evaluated multiple potential sites before selecting the FWU as the primary field test location. Task 2 (Public Outreach and Education) • The SWP contributed to national databases, DOE best practice manuals, and regional geological assessments to support future sequestration efforts. Task 3 (Permitting and Regulatory Compliance) • The SWP ensured compliance with federal and state regulations, including National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements. • The SWP obtained all necessary permits for drilling, injection, and monitoring activities. Task 4 (Site Characterization and Planning) • The SWP developed work plans for four key activities: characterization, simulation, monitoring and verification, and risk evaluation. • The SWP collected and synthesized legacy data from multiple sources to build initial static geological models and dynamic reservoir models demonstrating project feasibility. • The SWP conducted an initial risk evaluation and developed mitigation plans. Task 5 (Field Operations and Data Collection) • The SWP drilled, logged, and cored three characterization wells to gather critical subsurface data. • The SWP conducted multiple geophysical surveys, including 3D seismic, crosswell seismic, and vertical seismic profiling, to improve reservoir characterization. Task 6 (Monitoring and Verification) • The SWP performed extensive geological characterization using data from characterization wells and seismic surveys. • The SWP established a surface monitoring network to track CO 2 flux in soil gas, groundwater chemistry, and near-surface atmospheric CO 2 levels. • The SWP built and refined reservoir models to study the effects of relative permeability on simulation behavior and improve calibration with experimental data. Task 7 (Risk Assessment and Model Refinement) • The SWP conducted multiple studies to evaluate reservoir integrity, predict CO 2 plume behavior and improve predictive modeling capabilities. • The SWP refined geological models and used them to enhance the accuracy of simulation models. • The SWP continued quantitative risk assessment of top-ranked risks and strengthened the link between qualitative and quantitative risk methodologies.

02 PETROLEUM↗

DOE OSTI2025

Bioremediation of Chlorinated Volatile Organic Compounds: DOE Experiences and Lessons Learned

From the mid-1980s to the present, the Department of Energy (DOE) has developed, tested, and deployed diverse bioremediation strategies for chlorinated volatile organic compounds (cVOCs). A systematic review of these projects after decades of activity provides an opportunity to identify crosscutting themes and lessons learned. The knowledge provided by a DOE bioremediation retrospective represents a resource to support current and future bioremediation operations, and future decisions related to cVOC bioremediation. This systematic review examined the design, objectives, performance and outcomes for remediation projects at DOE sites including Savannah River, Hanford, Idaho, Mound and Pinellas. The results were used to identify emergent themes to provide actionable insights. The bioremediation retrospective technical team first developed standardized criteria to support the systematic review. Then, the evaluation was performed using a sequential process that was informed by local technical experts who identified and provided the structured information that served as the basis for the evaluation. The participation of these experts was invaluable to the effort. Importantly, DOE cVOC bioremediation efforts were implemented based on the foundational knowledge developed by U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) strategic and applied environmental technology development and certification programs, as well as technical, policy and regulatory guidance from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council (ITRC), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), industry, and universities. To maximize the value of the DOE cVOC bioremediation retrospective, the systematic review strategy focused on identifying important DOE-specific experiences, trends and lessons learned that would extend the knowledge available from these other key entities.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2025

Annual Status Report (FY 2024): Performance Assessment for the Integrated Disposal Facility

The purpose of this Annual Summary Report (ASR) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 is to evaluate the continued adequacy of the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF) Performance Assessment (PA) and Disposal Authorization Statement (DAS). This report consolidates relevant monitoring data, modeling analyses, and regulatory reviews to demonstrate a reasonable expectation that the PA objectives and performance measures will be met, as required under DOE O 435.1. The ASR follows the guidance in DOE-STD-5002-2017, which provides a framework for maintaining the validity of the DAS through periodic assessment of facility performance and compliance with waste disposal requirements. The IDF is a near-surface disposal facility designed to receive and permanently dispose of low-level waste (LLW) and mixed low-level waste (MLLW) generated from Hanford Site operations. The facility consists of two double-lined disposal cells equipped with leak detection and leachates recovery systems to ensure environmental protection. Waste planned for disposal includes vitrified low-activity waste (LAW) and solid secondary waste (SSW) from the Hanford Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP). At the end of FY 2024, the IDF had not yet received any waste, as it remains in a pre-operational state. Disposal activities will begin with the hot commissioning of the WTP LAW Vitrification Facility using the Direct-Feed Low-Activity Waste (DFLAW) approach in Calendar Year (CY) 2025. This ASR justifies the continued adequacy of the PA and DAS by reviewing key documents and data sources. these sources are listed in Table A-2 in Appendix A.4): The Operating Disposal Authorization Statement (ODAS) for the IDF (DOE-EM, 2021) remains in effect, with no outstanding conditions or key issues affecting its implementation. Based on the comprehensive review of PA analyses, monitoring data, and regulatory compliance activities, this ASR concludes that the IDF remains in compliance with DOE O 435.1, and there is reasonable assurance that the PA performance objectives will be met once disposal operations commence in CY 2025.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2024

Intelligent Manufacturing for Extreme Environments Conference Proceedings

The Intelligent Manufacturing for Extreme Environments (IMEE) workshop was held at the Center for Advanced Energy Studies (CAES) in Idaho Falls, Idaho, May 2–3, 2023, in support of the United States (U.S.) National Science Foundation (NSF) Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research: Workshop Opportunities (EPSCoR-WO) program. This workshop featured keynote speakers, panels, and breakout sessions with 58 participants. Nuclear reactors need to operate under extreme service conditions, such as high temperatures, corrosive environments, and high-radiation doses. Hence, reactor components must be able to withstand those conditions. The participants envision a future where on demand manufacture of components for small modular reactors (SMRs), microreactors, and other advanced reactor designs are possible. In this future, regulatory bodies accept validated manufacturing processes and standardized feedstocks, thus eliminating the need for individual component testing. However, the necessary technologies and regulatory policies needed for this future do not exist today. Successful innovation would revolutionize the nuclear power sector, enable fast commercial development, create economic opportunities in the U.S., reduce the carbon footprint and associated risks, and promote a skilled and highly competitive workforce. The objective of the workshop was to convene world-class experts, researchers, educators, and students to identify gaps and envision solutions for five interrelated challenges for intelligent manufacturing in extreme environments. The key outcomes of the conference were: (1) to take the opportunity for researchers and educators to network and form collaborations; and (2) to produce a full report to inform policy-makers, industry, and the academic community of various challenges and opportunities in the nuclear energy sector.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

DOE OSTI2025

Fossil Energy in the Hydrogen Economy – A Carbon-Water-Energy Nexus Adaptive Evaluation Platform

This project develops tools to evaluate fossil energy within the hydrogen economy. In particular, the project seeks to explore the Carbon-Water-Energy Nexus and develop adaptive evaluation tools. The primary goal of this project was to evaluate fossil-based hydrogen production methods with an emphasis on their sustainability, particularly with respect to carbon emissions and water use. The overall technical objectives that guided this evaluation consisted of 1) technology assessment, which sought to establish a comprehensive baseline of existing and emerging technologies for the generation, transportation, storage, and end use of hydrogen derived from fossil fuels, 2) carbon footprint analysis through quantification and analysis of carbon emissions associated with these hydrogen technologies, and identification of novel strategies and technologies that can effectively mitigate the carbon footprint, 3) water intensity assessment by evaluating the water needs (water-energy nexus) associated with different fossil fuel-based hydrogen technologies and proposing strategies to reduce water use, thus ensuring sustainable resource management, and 4) review of regulatory, policy and economic trends were examined to provide an overview of the factors influencing the adoption and integration of fossil fuel-derived hydrogen technologies into current energy markets. Beyond the technical outcomes, this project contributed to 5) education and workforce development through targeted training and educational opportunities for engineering students, preparing the next generation of professionals with technical, economic, and regulatory expertise in the hydrogen economy. Ultimately, this effort was intended to train the future workforce to provide useful insights to policymakers, industry stakeholders, and the broader energy community to facilitate informed decisions and responsible development within the hydrogen economy.

08 HYDROGEN↗

DOE OSTI2024

Critical Literature Review of Low Global Warming Potential (GWP) Refrigerants and their Environmental Impact

Refrigeration and air conditioning currently account for ~20% of the total electricity consumption in buildings around the world. Over the next three decades as global temperatures are projected to increase, urbanization and economic growth will lead to an increased demand for refrigeration and cooling. Most commonly used refrigerants belong to the five following classes: (i) chlorofluorocarbons, (ii) hydrochlorofluorocarbons, (iii) hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), (iv) hydrofluoroolefins (HFOs), and (v) natural refrigerants. Over the past century, there have been shifts in which compounds were used for refrigeration to improve safety and durability, allow for ozone protection, and, most recently, to reduce global warming potential (GWP). Although technological advances have led to increased cooling capacity and safer refrigerants, emissions from refrigeration systems can affect the environment by contributing to greenhouse gas emissions or by depleting the ozone layer, depending on the gas emitted. The focus is increasingly on adopting compounds that are both efficient at cooling and effective for reducing emissions and other adverse environmental impacts. Because of policy and regulatory changes to avert ozone depletion and global climate change, much discussion has centered on the environmental impacts of next-generation refrigerants. Of particular interest are the fluorinated refrigerants, HFCs and HFOs, most of which are defined as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and their breakdown products (especially trifluoroacetic acid). The US Environmental Protection Agency in 2021 drafted a Strategic Roadmap for PFAS, which has already resulted in an increase in investment in research on these compounds and has restricted the release of PFAS into the environment through the implementation of monitoring and reporting requirements. A critical evaluation of fluorinated refrigerants and their breakdown products with respect to persistence, biodegradation and toxicity, and global warming potential is needed to guide environmental regulations. This document aims to perform a critical review of the relevant scientific data on the most common refrigerants currently used, their degradation products, and their alternatives. Where available, estimates of precursor production quantities and existing environmental regulatory information are reviewed. Key data of interest for the evaluation include physicochemical properties, environmental fate parameters, ecological or human health toxicity/risk information, and GWP for compounds of interest.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2025

PFAS Removal by Ion Exchange Resins: Background and Knowledge Gaps with Respect to the Hanford Site

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) have been a rising concern for the past two decades, with the United States Department of Defense and Environmental Protection Agency investing millions of dollars in research into remediation and clean-up technologies. Due to the environmental persistence, toxicity, biological uptake, and ongoing changes in both federal and state regulatory space, understanding the fate and transport of PFAS compounds has been of growing concern to the US Department of Energy (DOE). The DOE’s Hanford Site is investigating historical use of PFAS and will be doing site characterization for PFAS. Thus, PFAS have not yet been identified as a contaminant concern in regulatory documents. Based on historical records that mention the discharge of aqueous film-forming foam containing PFAS and having on-site fire stations (a risk factor for PFAS contamination), it seems likely that environmental releases of PFAS may have occurred. Pump and treat (P&T) remediation is the selected remedy for multiple groundwater contaminant plumes at Hanford. These P&T systems use ion exchange (IX) as a component of aboveground treatment, with the specific resins depending on the target contaminants. There is potential that these IX resins may be able to remove PFAS from groundwater, but investigation is needed to understand affinity/selectivity and removal capacity given the groundwater composition and the operating conditions. This report provides background on PFAS uses and chemistry, then provides a review of IX resin applications for PFAS, identifying knowledge gaps. Recommendations are provided regarding research needed to address knowledge gaps and acquire information needed to propose IX as a future PFAS remediation technology at the Hanford Site, as well as other U.S. Department of Energy sites. Generally, PFAS compounds are fluorinated substances that contain at least one fully fluorinated methyl or methylene carbon – with a few noted exceptions, any chemical with at least a perfluorinated methyl group (–CF3) or a perfluorinated methylene group (–CF2–) is a PFAS. These chemical compounds are characterized as non-biodegradable, non-reactive, non-photolytic, and hydrolysis resistant. This makes them highly recalcitrant within the environment, however polyfluoroalkyl materials are less recalcitrant as the carbon chains contain C–H bonds which are more easily broken than carbon – fluorine (C–F) bonds. The backbone carbon structures are commonly punctuated with a head group, the most well-known of them are perfluorooctanesulfonic acid and perfluorooctanoic acid, which possess a sulfonate and a carboxylate group, respectively. IX resins are marketed for the removal of PFAS from water systems and industrial water, however, the mechanism of removal is not as well understood as for anion or cation removal. A better understanding of the mechanism of removal would enable the development of IX resins that have improved specificity for PFAS removal. Four knowledge gaps were identified: 1) the effect of dissolved ions on the IX resin PFAS removal effectiveness, 2) the effect of additional primary contaminants of concern (PCOCs) or secondary contaminants of concern (SCOCs) on the effectiveness of PFAS via IX resin, 3) the mechanisms of PFAS removal from water, and 4) practical solutions to IX resin regeneration and waste disposal.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2025

Dose Exceedance Distance Sensitivity Based on Parametric Uncertainty

Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) collaborated with the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response (NSIR) and Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) to investigate the reasonable variability in the estimation of dose exceedance distances. SNL performed calculations using the MACCS code to elucidate the sensitivity of dose exceedance distances to variations in user input parameters.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

DOE OSTI2023

Regulators’ Financial Toolbox: Behind-the-Meter (BTM) Energy Storage Summary

On October 10, 2023, NARUC’s Center for Partnerships & Innovation (CPI) hosted a Regulators’ Financial Toolbox Webinar on the topic of Behind-the-Meter (BTM) Energy Storage. The webinar featured opening remarks by the Honorable Katherine Peretick, Commissioner, Michigan Public Service Commission; and presentations by Ryan Chan, Principal Strategic Analyst, Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E); Arushi Sharma Frank, Energy Market Design Lead and Senior Counsel for Energy Regulatory Matters and Greg Thurnher, Technical Program Manager, Tesla; and Mark LeBel, Senior Associate, Regulatory Assistance Project (RAP).

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2025

Material Control & Accounting Modeling Developments for a Generic TRISO Fuel Fabrication Facility

The Material Protection, Accounting, and Control Technologies (MPACT) program utilizes modeling and simulation to assess Material Control and Accountability (MC&A) concerns for a variety of nuclear facilities. The Sandia National Laboratories (SNL)-developed Fissile Facility Flow Modeler (F3M) and the Material Accountancy Performance Indicator Toolkit (MAPIT) have historically provided MPACT with the capability to analyze MC&A approaches for nuclear facilities to determine that these facilities meet regulatory requirements. In FY25, improvements on the application of the F3M and MAPIT tools to simulate a generic TRi-structural ISOtropic (TRISO) fuel fabrication facility were successfully completed. The generic TRISO fuel fabrication F3M model captures the entire TRISO fuel fabrication process and is adaptable to any final TRISO fuel form, including spherical pebbles and cylindrical compacts loaded into graphite prismatic blocks. Comprehensive F3M/MAPIT functionality for the generic TRISO fuel fabrication model has been demonstrated. This modeling framework can be applied to support the U.S. Department of Energy and domestic nuclear industry stakeholders in developing MC&A approaches for advanced fuel fabrication facilities via statistical tests that demonstrate compliance to regulatory requirements.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2022

Energy Resilience Reference Guide Chapter One: Developing A Shared Definition of Energy Resilience

The NARUC Resilience Reference Guide is envisioned as a one-stop primer for state public utility commissions (PUCs) to assist in the development of a shared language, valuation framework, and educational tool on the topic of energy resilience. The resilience of the energy system has increasingly become part of commissions’ regulatory scope so informed decisions are made regarding how to best enhance system resiliency. Several states have already established evaluative resilience criteria (via legislative statute or regulatory directive). This guide is intended to summarize many of the critical topic areas within energy resilience and to facilitate adoption of resilience valuation frameworks by which PUCs can weigh investment decisions regarding energy system resiliency.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2023

Energy Resilience Reference Guide Chapter Two: Developing a Shared Framework to Value Resilience Investments

The NARUC Resilience Reference Guide is envisioned as a one-stop primer for state public utility commissions (PUCs) to assist in the development of a shared language, valuation framework, and educational tool on the topic of energy resilience. The resilience of the energy system has increasingly become part of commissions’ regulatory scope so informed decisions are made regarding how to best enhance system resiliency. Several states have already established evaluative resilience criteria (via legislative statute or regulatory directive). This guide is intended to summarize many of the critical topic areas within energy resilience and to facilitate adoption of resilience valuation frameworks by which PUCs can weigh investment decisions regarding energy system resiliency.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2023

Energy Resilience Reference Guide, Chapter Three: Climate Resilience Strategies for Regulators

The NARUC Energy Resilience Reference Guide is envisioned as a one-stop primer for state public utility commissions (PUCs) to assist in the development of a shared language, valuation framework, and educational tool on the topic of energy resilience. The resilience of the energy system has increasingly become part of commissions’ regulatory scope so informed decisions are made regarding how to best enhance system resilience. Several states have already established evaluative resilience criteria (via legislative statute or regulatory directive). This guide is intended to succinctly summarize many of the critical topic areas within energy resilience and to facilitate adoption of resilience valuation frameworks by which PUCs can weigh investment decisions regarding energy system resiliency.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2020

FAST-1.0 Software Acceptance Testing Report

The purpose of this document is to detail the software testing of FAST-1.0 through unit, integration, and assessment tests. More than 400 tests were designed to provide coverage of the requirements for FAST-1.0. These requirements were developed in the NRC Statement of Work (SOW) for NRC Agreement Number NRC-HQ-25-14-D-001 and are transcribed to this document as part of the Software Quality Assurance Plan for the FAST Code System, PNNL-28767. FAST 1.0 represents the merger of the FRAPCON and FRAPTRAN codes and as such FAST-1.0 performs steady state and transient fuel performance calculations described below. FAST-1.0 calculates the steady state response of light-water reactor fuel rods during long-term burnup. The code calculates temperature, pressure, and deformation of a fuel rod as functions of time-dependent fuel rod power and coolant boundary conditions. The phenomena modeled by the code include: 1) heat conduction through fuel and cladding to the coolant; 2) cladding elastic and plastic deformation; 3) fuel-cladding mechanical interaction; 4) fission gas release from the fuel and rod internal pressure; and 5) cladding oxidation. FAST is used to perform independent calculations for regulatory evaluations of fuel performance under normal operation and anticipated operational occurrences (AOOs). FAST calculates the temperature and deformation history of a fuel rod as a function of time-dependent fuel rod power and coolant boundary conditions. The phenomena modeled by FAST include: 1) heat conduction; 2) heat transfer from cladding to coolant; 3) elastic-plastic fuel and cladding deformation; 4) cladding oxidation; 5) fission gas release; and 6) fuel rod gas pressure. FAST code assessment, development and maintenance drive a significant portion of the NRC fuel research activities and the tools are used in a substantial number of regulatory products. Given the centrality of the FAST code to the effectiveness of fuel research, it is critical to assess, develop and maintain this tool.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗