Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “DOE.”

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 829 records · Page 46

ASCR@40: Four Decades of Department of Energy Leadership in Advanced Scientific Computing Research

Throughout its long history, the Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) has built the critical technologies to ensure U.S. leadership in energy science and national security. It has made its parent agency, the Department of Energy (DOE) and its Office of Science, the world’s recognized leader in computational science. ASCR’s stated mission is “to discover, develop, and deploy computational and networking capabilities to analyze, model, simulate, and predict complex phenomena important to the DOE.” To accomplish this goal, ASCR oversees a large complex of computing and networking facilities and is responsible for procuring, deploying and operating high-performance computing (HPC), networking and storage resources; conducting basic research in mathematics and computer science; developing and sustaining a large body of software; and collaborating with other Office of Science programs, academia and industry. ASCR’s computational science leadership has a long history, predating even DOE’s inception. Applied mathematics and advanced computing were both elements of the Manhattan Project’s Theoretical Division. In the 1950s, DOE’s predecessor, the Atomic Energy Commission, created a mathematics program to develop and apply digital computing by supporting researchers at universities and AEC laboratories. Several organizational and name changes later, this program would grow and become ASCR.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

Sandia National Laboratories Annual Site Environmental Report, 2019: Tonopah Test Range, Nevada and Kaua'i Test Facility, Hawai'i

Sandia National Laboratories is a multimission laboratory managed and operated by National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Honeywell International Inc., for the United States Department of Energy (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration. The National Nuclear Security Administration’s Sandia Field Office administers the contract and oversees contractor operations at Sandia National Laboratories, Tonopah Test Range (SNL/TTR) in Nevada and Sandia National Laboratories, Kaua‘i Test Facility (SNL/KTF) in Hawai‘i. Activities at SNL/TTR are conducted in support of DOE weapons programs and have operated at the site since 1957. SNL/KTF has operated as a rocket preparation launching and tracking facility since 1962. DOE and its management and operating contractor are committed to safeguarding the environment, assessing sustainability practices, and ensuring the validity and accuracy of the monitoring data presented in this Annual Site Environmental Report. This report summarizes the environmental protection, restoration, and monitoring programs in place at SNL/TTR and SNL/KTF during calendar year 2019. Environmental topics include air quality, ecology, environmental restoration, oil storage, site sustainability, terrestrial surveillance, waste management, water quality, and implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act. This report is prepared in accordance with and as required by DOE O 231.1B, Admin Change 1, Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting, and has been approved for public distribution.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Challenges for and Pathways Toward Solid-State Batteries

Solid-state batteries utilizing lithium metal anodes have the potential to enable batteries with a specific energy of >500 Wh/kg and an energy density of >1,500 Wh/L for thousands of cycles. When optimized they will improve the energy efficiency, operating temperature range, sustainability, and safety at a lower cost compared to projections for advanced Li-ion batteries. This improved performance is critical for the widespread adoption of electric vehicles and may enable future applications such as electric aviation. Expectations for solid-state batteries are high, there are significant materials and processing challenges that need to be overcome. Some of these challenges are well known; others are more subtle and are just becoming known. The challenges and their solutions must be clearly identified to realize high-energy solid-state Li metal batteries. In the United States, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) funds the majority of energy storage research and development, including solid state battery research. Web of Science publication analysis shows that worldwide DOE is second largest funder. Work on solid state batteries is distributed across different arms of DOE and is coordinated at headquarters to ensure a broad national portfolio for advanced batteries, including lithium batteries and solid-state battery devices. We note that university and national laboratory researchers in the US with a long-standing interest in solid state batteries is a small, integrated community with recognized impact for publications, patents and startup companies. The opportunity for this group to engage for research with international colleagues is growing, fostered by periodic bilateral meetings supported by DOE and by the recent joint US German research program for lithium battery interface studies. These are valuable opportunities to speed solid-state battery development. The ORNL led virtual workshop, overviewed here, confirms the community’s shared vision of the exciting advances, opportunities, and challenges. Further, we are seeing that this workshop has spawned several new informal collaborations and draft proposals. This encourages us to propose future discussion. On May 11, 2020, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) hosted a 6-hour, on-line national workshop to discuss recent advances and most the prominent obstacles to realizing solid-state Li metal batteries. The workshop included more than 30+ experts from national laboratories, universities, and companies, all of whom have worked on solid-state batteries for multiple years. The participants shared recent advances, many not yet in print, illustrating that the community has gained significant new insights for solid-state Li battery materials over the last 5 years. In this report, the major outcomes of the workshop are organized to identify the gaps in our scientific knowledge for four core materials science areas: (1) Li metal anodes, (2) the solid electrolyte in contact with Li metal, (3) active cathode materials and solid-state composite cathodes, and (4) solid electrolytes. Illustrative examples and discussions are reported with the more comprehensive issues in the report. Discussion of additional challenges related to processing of solid-state battery materials and to the designs and architectures for mechanically robust, long-lived batteries received less attention due to time constraints. These are good themes for deeper discussion at a follow-on workshop, where a complete list of critical research topics can be identified.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

Long Range Community Planning Process for Fusion Sciences and Plasma Physics (Final Technical Report)

This grant facilitated the APS-DPP Community Planning Process (DPP-CPP) which was a strategic planning process with the goals of identifying scientific and technological opportunities in the fields of Plasma Physics and Fusion Energy Science, and making consensus recommendations for a strategy to address these opportunities to the DOE Office of Fusion Energy Science Advisory Committee (FESAC). The DPP-CPP was initiated by the APS-DPP executive committee in order to help FESAC fulfill a charge from DOE to develop a strategic plan for the DOE Office of Fusion Energy Science (FES). In this charge, the DOE Deputy Director for Science, Dr. Stephen Binkley, requests “that the Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (FESAC) undertake a new long-range strategic planning activity for the Fusion Energy Sciences (FES) program. The strategic planning activity - to encompass the entire FES research portfolio (namely, burning plasma science and discovery plasma science) - should identify and prioritize the research required to advance both the scientific foundation needed to develop a fusion energy source, as well as the broader FES mission to steward plasma science.” The process as set out in the proposal (and below) was successful in meeting all of its stated goals culminating in the final report to the FESAC subcommittee given the charge.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗

Nuclear Physics Network Requirements Review: One-Year Update

A Nuclear Physics Network Requirements Review, conducted by ESnet in collaboration with the DOE SC, was held on May 8 and 9, 2019. A continuation of this process involves “checkup” procedures to be conducted after one and two years have passed. ESnet and the DOE SC, in collaboration with the previous participants, held a virtual meeting on September 2, 2020, to continue the review process. Topics of discussion included the following: Programmatic updates from the DOE SC ASCR. Programmatic updates from the DOE SC NP. Programmatic updates from ESnet. Brief updates from case study authors. A general discussion and Q&A on findings and actions from the review. This report outlines the areas of discussion, new findings and actions, and updates to the overall process of science for several key NP initiatives since 2019 and looking into 2021.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

Evaluation of the Los Alamos Nuclear Material Packaging Risk Ranking Method

Repackaging nuclear material into robust containers to protect workers and the public has been ongoing at LANL and around the DOE complex for nearly two decades. The number of containers at LANL is around 5,000; limited resources for repackaging material has led to extended repackaging campaigns and the need to prioritize repackaging. Various methodologies have been used to prioritize the repackaging efforts and to demonstrate progress in risk reduction over time (e.g., Boerigter, 1997). The 2000-1 DNFSB recommendation recognized the limited DOE resources for repackaging, and acknowledged the need to “prioritize and schedule tasks to be undertaken with available funds according to consideration of risks.” Later, in DNFSB recommendation 2005-1, in addition to recommending that DOE develop a packaging standard, the Board recommended that “Characterization information should also be used to develop a surveillance program prioritized according to expected material and container risk (including, for example, material type, material form, and the age and type of container).” In response to requests and recommendations from the DOE and DNSFB to prioritize according to worker risk, a risk ranking method based on the potential consequence of dropping a container from 3 meters was developed in 2007 (Smith, 2007) and updated in 2014 (Hoffman, 2014). Various LANL implementation plans for repackaging were developed over the years using this methodology (Stone, 2014). Currently, this method is utilized in conjunction with an algorithm to mitigate programmatic risk to prioritize container repackaging and material processing (Prochnow, 2015). The purpose of this study is to document how the current risk ranking method works, how it is used and potential limitations.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

Analysis of Alternative Core Designs for Fission Surface Power Capability Demonstration Mission (V.1.0)

NASA’s Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD) intends to demonstrate a 10 kWe fission surface power (FSP) system on the surface of the Moon as part of a Capability Demonstration Mission. STMD tasked a joint NASA-DOE team to ‘outline an FSP reactor concept that can be readied for 2027 launch,’ and serves ‘as a pathfinder for future power modules for Mars.’ Tables 1 and 2 respectively list FSP performance requirements and design guidance provided for the study. DOE is the leading agency for the reactor module, reactor controls and radiation shielding, and shares joint responsibility for the overall FSP system. This report summarizes an analysis of alternative reactor classes and shielding configurations carried out by the DOE national laboratories. Representative reactor and shielding configurations were based on heritage and are in alignment with the industry initiatives. This report presents no recommendations on the appropriate choice of fuel or class of reactor that NASA should pursue. Instead the focus here is to provide a summary and findings of analyses carried out by DOE national laboratory personnel.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

Radiological Monitoring Plan for the Oak Ridge Y-12 National Security Complex: Surface Water

DOE Order 458.1 requires that dose estimates consider contributions from all facilities. In the Y-12 Radiological Monitoring Plan (RMP), surface water is monitored at points that reflect individual facilities, as well as at points that reflect the combined contributions of all facilities. This monitoring plan does not consider other potential routes (i.e., airborne releases and food chains). Thus, a complete determination of total effective dose (TED) cannot be made based on this plan alone. The other routes from Y-12, and all routes from other DOE facilities on the Oak Ridge Reservation (e.g., Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and The Heritage Center), must be considered in order to satisfy DOE Order 458.1 requirements. Determination of TED from all sites and pathways is done through the use of dose-assessment models and is documented in the Annual Site Environmental Report. This monitoring plan provides adequate monitoring goals for Y-12 surface water releases to provide input of sufficient sensitivity and accuracy to reliably determine the Y-12 surface water component of the TED. The routine radiological monitoring program is designed to monitor effluents at four types of locations: (1) treatment facilities, (2) other point and area source discharges, (3) instream locations, and (4) production building roof run-off. With this sampling and analysis program, data will be obtained on primary point sources as well as on locations that represent the composite of other potential sources. This plan will be reviewed periodically to determine necessary modifications to the sampling frequencies, parameters, and locations. Modifications, if any, will be based on the analysis of the previous data and its effectiveness in satisfying the objectives of this plan. Appendix A contains graphs of the sum of the DCS fractions for locations and frequencies contained in a previous version of this plan. The data was collected from January 2009 through December 2019. Each sample was analyzed, and each result was divided by the appropriate DCS to compute a DCS fraction. These fractions were summed for all isotopes. According to DOE –STD-1196-2011, the annual average of these sums should be below 1.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Environmental Performance Report 2020 (Annual Site Environmental Report per the U.S. Department of Energy Order 231.1B Chg 1)

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory's (NREL's) Environmental Performance Report provides a description of the laboratory's environmental management activities in 2020, including information on environmental and sustainability performance, environmental compliance activities and status, and environmental protection programs, highlights, and successes. The purpose of this report is to ensure that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the public receive timely, accurate information about events that have positively affected or could adversely affect the health and safety of the public or workers, the environment, or the operations of DOE facilities. This report meets the DOE requirements of the Annual Site Environmental Report (ASER) and has been prepared in accordance with DOE Order 231.1B Chg 1, Environment, Safety and Health Reporting.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

System Model Calculations for the Active Trenches of the Low-Level Burial Grounds, Hanford Site, Washington

Two lined trenches (Trench 31 and 34) located within the 200 West Low-Level Burial Ground (LLBG) area of the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Hanford Site are designated for permanent disposal of low-level radioactive waste (LLW) and mixed low-level radioactive waste (MLLW). In accordance with DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management, radioactive waste shall be managed and disposed in a manner that is protective of worker, public health and safety, and the environment. DOE O 435.1 requires a site-specific radiological performance assessment (PA) that includes calculations of potential releases and subsequent doses to members of the public for a period of 1,000 years after closure of a low-level waste (LLW) disposal facility. The purpose of this environmental calculation file (ECF) is to document the various dose calculations performed to support DOE’s LLBG PA. The dose assessments are performed to evaluate the potential exposure of an all-pathway representative person to radionuclide contaminants of potential concern (COPCs) that may be released from the LLBG Trenches 31 and 34 to the point of calculation (POC) located at the outer edge of a 100 m buffer zone surrounding the trench boundary. This ECF uses inputs from other ECFs and their associated model package reports (MPRs) supporting the LLBG PA. The five major objectives of this ECF are to present the results of the following: (1) Deterministic dose assessments for both groundwater and atmospheric exposure scenarios; (2) Radon-222 (Rn-222) flux emanating at the surface from the disposed wastes; (3) Uncertainty analyses of the groundwater pathway annual dose due to uncertainty in input parameters; (4) Sensitivity analyses of the input parameters that could potentially impact the fate and transport of the contaminants and doses; (5) Doses arising from inadvertent intruder exposure scenarios.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Appropriateness and Readiness of Cold Crucible Vitrification of Calcine Solids at the Idaho Site and H-Canyon Effluent at the Savannah River Site

This report summarizes the results from an assessment of the technology readiness and deployment of cold crucible induction melter (CCIM) technology to vitrify high level waste (HLW) calcine solids at the Idaho Site and H-Canyon liquid effluent at the Savannah River Site (SRS). The assessment was requested by the Department of Energy’s Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM), but is not a DOE 413-3-4a assessment for technology deployment. A joint Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) and Fluor Idaho Cleanup Project (ICP) team with subject matter experts evaluated the existent literature and experience both within the DOE as well as relevant external experience. The technology assessment focused on the site-specific technology readiness and appropriateness based on a number of system factors including feasibility and appropriateness of the technology for the specific site application, the potential extent of the regulatory and design challenges, and evaluation of the ability to deploy within the treatment needs of each site. This initial assessment provides information to support DOE-EM in making a go/no-go decision to carry out additional work on the technology maturation for critical decisions and planning.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

SFWST Disposal Research R&D 5-Year Plan - FY2021 Update.

In the planning for FY2020 in the U.S. DOE NE-81 Spent Fuel and Waste Science and Technology (SFWST) Campaign, the DOE requested development of a plan for activities in the Disposal Research (DR) Research and Development (R&D) over a five (5)-year period, and DOE requested periodic updates to this plan. The DR R&D 5-year plan was provided to the DOE based on the FY2020 priorities and program structure (Sassani et al., 2020) and represents a strategic guide to the work within the DR R&D technical areas (i.e., the Control Accounts), focusing on the highest priority technical thrusts. This FY2021 report is the first update to the DR R&D 5-year plan for the SFWST Campaign DR R&D activities. This 5-year plan will be a living document and is planned to be updated periodically to provide review of accomplishments and for prioritization changes based on aspects including mission progress, external technical work, and changes in SFWST Campaign objectives and/or funding levels (i.e., Program Direction). The updates to this 5-year plan will address the DR R&D that has been completed (accomplishments) and the additional knowledge gaps to be investigated, with any updates to the DR R&D priorities for the next stages of activities.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Project 57 Air Monitoring Report: January 1 through September 30, 2020, with a Review of the Period of Record Radionuclide Analyses

The DOE Environmental Management Nevada Program (EM NV) identified the Project 57 contaminated area as Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 415, Project 57 No. 1 Plutonium Dispersion Site, which consisted of one Corrective Action Site (CAS): NAFR-23- 02, Pu Contaminated Soil (U.S. DOE, 2014). The CAS included several Project 57 operational facilities in addition to the plutonium-contaminated soil. With approval of the State of Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, the DOE closed the Project 57 surface soil contamination site in October 2020. Closure was accomplished by installing a clean soil cap constructed over ground zero and the surrounding areas of the CA that may be entrained with wind-transported soil particles. After completion of the ground zero cap in October 2020, DRI discontinued monitoring of meteorological and associated environmental conditions at the Project 57 site as directed by DOE EM NV. Navarro dismantled air monitoring stations P57-3 and P57-4 and removed the equipment on October 20, 2020. This report presents the meteorological and dust observations and radiological analyses accomplished during the approximately 10 months when the air monitoring data collection equipment was operational during CY2020.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Site Environmental Report–Pantex Plant (CY2020)

The 2020 Annual Site Environmental Report (ASER) summarizes the Pantex Plant’s status, data, and efforts for the environmental compliance, protection, and restoration programs. It has been prepared in accordance with DOE Order 231.1B, Environment, Safety and Health Reporting (DOEa), and DOE Order 458.1, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment (DOEb). These orders outline the requirements for environmental protection programs at DOE facilities to ensure that programs fully comply with applicable federal, state, and local environmental laws and regulations, executive orders, and DOE policies.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Annual Status Report (FY 2020): Performance Assessment for the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility

DOE O 435.1 and DOE M 435.1-1 require that a determination of continued adequacy of the performance assessment (PA) (CP-60089), composite analysis, and disposal authorization statement (DAS) be made annually, and these guidelines must be used to consider the results of data collection and analysis from research, field studies, and monitoring as well as provide the need to update any radioactive waste management basis documents. Beginning in 1996, the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF) started accepting low-level radioactive, hazardous, and mixed wastes generated during cleanup activities at the Hanford Site. ERDF is composed of a series of cells or disposal areas and can accommodate future design expansions as needed. Currently, there are 10 cells. During this reporting period (fiscal year 2020, which extended from October 1, 2019, through September 30, 2020), approximately 3.39E+04 U.S. tons (3.07E+04 metric tons) of waste was disposed at ERDF. From ERDF inception through September 30, 2020, approximately 18.5 million U.S. tons of waste has been disposed at ERDF, which equates to the consumption of approximately 88% of the disposal volume. As a condition of the DAS, disposal operations within ERDF must be in accordance with the waste acceptance criteria (ERDF-00011) that provide specific radionuclide disposal limits, waste form restrictions, and descriptions of acceptable waste packages in compliance with DOE M 435.1-1 requirements. The ERDF waste acceptance criteria stipulate that waste destined for disposal at ERDF be controlled based on source, physical form, and contaminant concentration and activity levels. There have been no changes to the physical configuration of ERDF or to the waste forms (source, physical form, etc.). No new Unreviewed Disposal Question Screenings or Evaluations have been generated during this reporting period. Therefore, there are no noted impacts to the PA, composite analysis, DAS, or radioactive waste management basis documents resulting from the evaluations and screenings. Sum of fraction analysis shows that the disposed inventory meets both the concentration and inventory threshold requirements. A sum of fractions value is computed for ERDF sensitive radionuclides contributing to the all pathways and air pathway inventory limits. Computed values were 8.85E-02 and 1.78E-01, respectively. The disposed waste inventory remained well under the PA imposed limits. Required monitoring was satisfactorily completed during the fiscal year reporting period (fiscal year 2020). Compliance with performance objectives were met as each of the reported values were well below the established limit. Overall, there are no substantive changes to primary PA assumptions nor changes to the PA analysis conclusion; therefore, compliance with DOE O 435.1 and the DAS is maintained.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Demand Response in Industrial Facilities: Peak Electric Demand

The US Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Better Buildings, Better Plants Program (Better Plants) is a voluntary energy efficiency leadership initiative for US manufacturers and water/wastewater entities. The program encourages organizations to commit to reducing the energy intensity of their US operations over a 10-year period, typically by 25%. Companies joining Better Plants are recognized by DOE for their leadership in implementing energy efficiency practices and for reducing their energy intensity. Better Plants Partners are assigned to a Technical Account Manager, who can help companies establish energy intensity baselines, develop energy management plans, and identify key resources and incentives from DOE, other federal agencies, states, utilities, and other organizations that can enable them to reach their goals. Better Plants Partners are expected to report their progress to DOE once a year. This involves establishing an energy intensity baseline upon joining the program and then tracking their progress over time. Demand Response in Industrial Facilities: Peak Electrical Demand is intended to help companies understand peak demand response programs offering by their local utility. Manufacturing industries can learn about time-varying rates and smart technologies they can use to help them reduce their energy bills. This guidance document is applicable to companies participating at either the program or challenge level. Although this guide is intended primarily to assist companies participating in Better Plants, the methodologies and guidance within the document are applicable to any organization interested in understanding peak demand response programs.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

Interior Athabascan Energy Capacity Building Network (Final Report)

Tanana Chiefs Conference (TCC) is the traditional tribal consortium for the 37 federally recognized Tribes and villages of Interior Alaska. TCC is based on a belief in tribal self-determination and the need for regional Native unity. TCC is a nonprofit organization that works toward meeting the needs and challenges for more than 10,000 Alaska Natives (mostly Alaskan Athabaskans) in Interior Alaska. With support from DOE-OIE’s Inter-Tribal Technical Assistance grant, TCC’s goal was to expand and build on the solid foundation of work that the existing TCC Energy Program established through the creation of the Interior Athabascan Energy Network (IAEN). More specifically, the IAEN was designed to create a network of village-based energy champions across the interior and hold quarterly teleconferences and annual inperson meetings. Among the greatest impacts of the IAEN were the creation and support of realistic, communitybased energy projects that produced tangible results such as fuel savings and skills and capacity development among local staff as well as establishment of an energy team that included TCC staff, Tribal participants, technical consultants, and support agencies. The DOE-TA funding allowed us to provide technical assistance to our Tribal communities to develop energy projects, and to foster a network consisting of Tribal community members and energy experts that has strengthened the ability in the region to troubleshoot energy issues, develop meaningful projects, envision a clean energy future, and to share project successes and challenges. The funding from DOE was a catalyst for growth, has created opportunities for learning and knowledge sharing, and has led to the development of cost saving energy projects. Most importantly, the DOE project allowed energy champions around the region to share their knowledge, experiences, and expertise to create place-based solutions and has forged inter-Tribal relationships that will continue to be an asset for years to come. Through information exchange that occurred at out IAEN annual meetings and other events, this technical assistance grant award has spurred a spinoff project that is focused on establishing a collaborative of independent utilities that work together to solve energy problems and share services to operate and maintain their electric utilities. We have indentified at least 10 and possibly 12 communities that are interested in collaborating in managing their utilities to reduce costs and increase reliability. As well, by identifying and supporting Community Energy Champions in the Interior villages and adding capacity to the TCC Energy Program, we were able to create actionable community energy plans, develop specific projects, and increase local capacity, skills, and literacy around clean energy initiatives.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Position Papers for the ASCR Workshop on Cybersecurity and Privacy for Scientific Computing Ecosystems

At the request of the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR), this program committee has been tasked with organizing a workshop to identify basic research needs in cybersecurity and privacy to better support DOE's science and energy mission. As part of the process, the program committee is soliciting community input in the form of position papers to help identify significant use cases, facility issues, and other barriers to enabling verifiably trustworthy computational science while preserving data confidentiality as appropriate for scientific workflows of interest to DOE. The program committee will review these position papers and based on the fit of their area of expertise and interest, selected contributors will have the opportunity to participate in the workshop currently planned as a virtual event November 3-5th, 2021. The thrust areas that will be explored by this workshop are the following: (1) Algorithms for secure, scalable, privacy-enhancing technologies and frameworks, including: Federated AI/ML, Differential privacy, Randomized algorithms, Adversarial modeling & simulation, Graph algorithms, and Formal methods; (2) Platforms to support the entire scientific-computing ecosystem, including edge computing for large-scale experiments, focusing on heterogeneous systems and distributed systems, including: Heterogeneous computing systems, Distributed computing systems, and Secure data architectures; and (3) Data workflows to allow agile use of data while preserving integrity and privacy, making the important properties verifiable either at runtime or post-computation, including: Integrity and provenance and Data management infrastructure. Topics that are out-of-scope for the workshop include discussing specific proposed solutions or areas that are clearly out of DOE's fundamental and applied-sciences mission scope, e.g., cryptography, enterprise security, and general-operations technology.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗