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 847 records · Page 47

Annual Status Update for OWL

This report represents completion of milestone deliverable M2SF-22SN010309082 Annual Status Update for OWL, which is due on November 30, 2021 as part of the fiscal year 2022 (FY2022) work package SF-22SN01030908. This report provides an annual update on status of FY2021 activities for the work package “OWL - Inventory – SNL”. The Online Waste Library (OWL) has been designed to contain information regarding United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE)-managed (as) high-level waste (DHLW), DOE-managed spent nuclear fuel (DSNF), and other wastes that are likely candidates for deep geologic disposal. Links to the current supporting documents for the data are provided when possible; however, no classified or official-use-only (OUO) data are planned to be included in OWL. There may be up to several hundred different DOE-managed wastes that are likely to require deep geologic disposal. This report contains new information on sodium-bonded spent fuel waste types and wastes forms, which are included in the next release of OWL, Version 3.0, on the Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) External Collaboration Network (ECN). The report also provides an update on the effort to include information regarding the types of vessels capable of disposing of DOE-managed waste.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

FY2021 Savannah River Site Composite Analysis Annual Summary Review

This document provides the Department of Energy (DOE) Order 435.1 and its manual, Radioactive Waste Management (DOE 2021a, 2021b) required Annual Review for the Savannah River Site (SRS) Composite Analysis (CA). Progress made to-date toward addressing the secondary issue from the LFRG review of the 2010 SRS CA has focused primarily upon inventory estimate improvements. Inventory impacts dose in a linear fashion and reduces the uncertainty with the CA conclusions. Maintenance items are addressed, as funding allows, based on the relative risk associated with meeting the performance objectives. Currently, there is minimal risk in exceeding the DOE 100 mrem/yr CA primary dose limit or the DOE 30 mrem/yr dose constraint (administrative limit).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Equitable Demonstration and Deployment Roundtable Report

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) hosted the Equitable Demonstration and Deployment Roundtable on August 25, 2021. The roundtable brought together experts in climate and energy justice, demonstration projects, and renewable energy deployment to explore issues that will lead to greater understanding of the barriers to equity at scale and the role that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) can play to reduce and mitigate them. A large percentage of the participants included experts in energy equity issues from national and local organizations across multiple sectors, both public and private. These individuals engaged with DOE and national laboratory researchers to identify community-based challenges and propose opportunities for DOE to address those challenges to energy demonstration and deployment. The roundtable examined equity considerations for two phases of the energy development process: demonstration and deployment. These two pathways were selected for discussion during the same workshop because they are inextricably linked within the energy ecosystem. Ensuring the deployment of safe, affordable, and reliable energy deployment is DOE's primary goal and energy demonstration projects are a key driver moving technologies from the laboratory to market to achieve this result.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Energy Storage Valuation: A Review of Use Cases and Modeling Tools

An enticing prospect that drives adoption of energy storage systems (ESS) is its ability to be used in a diverse set of use cases and the potential to take advantage of multiple unique value streams. The Energy Storage Grand Challenge (ESGC) technology development pathways for storage technologies draw from a set of use cases in the electrical power system, each with their own specific cost and performance needs. In addition to the need for cost and performance improvements for storage technologies, there a need for robust valuation methods to enable effective policy, investment, business models, and resource planning. There are numerous storage valuation tools available to the public, many of which can analyze the value of an ESS project with inputs and characteristics that reflect a specific storage use case. To effectively reach ESS stakeholders that may be interested in learning about valuation models, this report will draw from publicly available tools developed by the Department of Energy (DOE) and frame their functionalities and capabilities within the context of three distinct use case families. This report examines three of the ESGC use case families in depth and provides a methodology in which interested stakeholders can determine which DOE modeling tool is best suited to value ESS for their specific case. The high-level objectives for this report include: (1) Provide specific sub use-cases for each use case family for further characterization; (2) Provide technical parameters and relevant data for three example use cases that could be used in a valuation tool; (3) Identify a list of publicly available DOE tools that can provide energy storage valuation insights for ESS use case stakeholders; (4) Provide information on the capabilities and different options in each modeling tool; (5) Make conclusions on which are best suited for valuing certain functional/performance requirements and which tools might be applicable to other use cases; and (6) Show the methodology that informs a Model Selection Platform (MSP) framework that educates stakeholders on different DOE models and provides a streamlined way to choose the right model that most closely matches their needs.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

Industrial Assessment Center – integration of education and practice. Final progress report

The goal of the DOE’s Industrial Assessment Center (IAC) program is twofold: first, to help US manufacturing competitiveness by providing assessments and recommendations for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) on energy efficiency, productivity, sustainability and competitiveness – including measuring the impacts of these recommendations on reducing greenhouse gas emissions; and second, to address a growing shortage of engineering professionals with applied energy and manufacturing-related skills by training a diverse cross-section of engineering students through hands-on involvement in these assessments. IUPUI has an IAC, which was established in 2011, in the Department of Mechanical and Energy Engineering, Purdue School of Engineering and Technology, IUPUI. The IAC has won the awards twice. We have built the center that has the expertise and infrastructure for quality energy assessments to manufactures and commercial building owners and aligned our current research and teaching activities to the DOE’ training mission with programs to train the next generation of industrial energy efficiency experts, with theory and hands-on experience in conducting energy assessment for small and median manufacturing enterprises. We have made recommendations that have the potential to save about $20M annually. We also initiated research projects to meet DOE priorities, specifically in the areas of smart manufacturing and cybersecurity. On the energy assessment side, the Center has provided energy assessments to 144 qualified companies, primarily located in Indiana. On the training side, the center has trained students in various programs, such as the department’s Bachelor of Science (BS) programs in Mechanical Engineering (ME) and BS in Energy Engineering (EEN), both are ABET accredited engineering programs, as well as a graduate level Energy Management and Assessment certificate program. At the present, the center has trained 95 students, 43 or them received the DOE issued certificates. Research projects were developed within the center to advance energy efficiency related technologies, which provided excellent opportunities for our trainees. The center has also been building a professional network with utilities, Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP), government agencies, and manufacturing companies, to increase our client base and promote collaborations. The center received the 2019 Center of Excellence of the Year Award and three students received the “Outstanding Achievement in Energy Engineering by an IAC Student” awards in the past five years.

42 ENGINEERING↗

Emissions mitigation technology for advanced water-lean solvent-based CO 2 capture processes

This technical final report submitted to DOE/NETL presents all the research activities performed during the entirety of DE-FE0031660 project-Emissions Mitigation Technology for Advanced Water-Lean Solvent-Based CO 2 Capture Processes which spans from October 2018 through March 2022. RTI International has been conducting studies from fundamental and operational aspects to reduce the overall amine emissions from the advanced Water-Lean Solvent (WLS) systems, specifically RTI’s Non-Aqueous Solvent (NAS). This technical final report will highlight the key findings from project which align closely to the project objectives which are: Identify the contribution of vapor loss, entrainment, and aerosols to the overall emissions of water-lean systems; Determine the significance of CO 2 capture system operating parameters to the amine emissions; Develop an emissions model based on critical operating parameters; Evaluate the effectiveness of emissions mitigation devices to reduce the amine emissions to <1 ppm under flue coal-fired flue gas; and, Determine the contribution of the ECTs to the overall CO 2 capture cost. The following are the key findings based on numerous tests using both lab-scale setups and parametric testing performed at RTI’s Bench-scale Gas Absorption System (BsGAS). During the BP1, the aerosol generation system and monitoring equipment were installed at BsGAS to produce and determine the aerosol characteristics during the NAS CO 2 capture process. The aerosol produced by this setup produced aerosols with the peak diameter and concentration of 50 micron and 1.2E10 7 cm -3 , respectively. These particle sizes and concentrations are matched to those observed in the actual coal-fired power plant flue gases and expected to be found at the absorber inlet of the CO 2 capture system. Over 1,300 hours of parametric testing have been conducted to evaluate the impact of the aerosols and operating conditions during the CO 2 capture with NAS on the overall amine emissions in the treated flue gas. At the worse condition tested, the presence of the aerosols in the flue gas could increase the overall emissions by 10X compared to the baseline emissions from NAS’s vapor pressure. CO 2 capture rate was found to be a main factor impacting the overall emissions as well as aerosol size and concentrations in the absorber off-gas. The higher CO 2 capture rate, the higher amine emissions in the treated gas. The temperature difference between the temperature bulge seen in the absorber and the water wash temperature also impacts the particle growth where the larger the temperature difference, the more amine emissions from aerosols in the treated gas. The majority of the aerosols did not grow substantially in the system, and the particle concentrations remained nearly constant between the absorber inlet and wash outlet. Only a small portion of the particles were found to grow significantly. The high efficiency demister with mesh size of 5-10 micron can be installed to remove a portion of the aerosols from the gas stream leaving the water wash. Overall, these results from parametric testing have established the emission baseline and validate our assumption on the need of emission control technologies (ECT) in order to minimize the emissions from the baseline NAS CO 2 capture process. Over 2,000 of BsGAS operating hours was used to investigate a handful of process improvements which led to a selection of the vital few changes that effectively control the amine emissions. These process improvements are lime-coated-filters for absorber gas inlet, advanced demister at the top of the absorber, a second water wash with amine recovery unit were designed, installed, and tested at BsGAS at the end of BP1. The result showed that the NAS CO 2 capture process with these additional emission control devices could lower the amine emission in the treated gas to about 1 ppm using a simulated coal-fire flue gas stream. The main contributor in lowering the amine emission came from the second water wash with amine recovery unit where the amine concentration in the scrubbing water was kept below 2 wt% through a continuous amine removal via an adsorbent bed, resulting in a low amine vapor pressure. The adsorbent bed was regenerated via a direct steam regeneration and the recover amine was returned to the absorber to minimize wastewater and makeup amine. A flue gas generation system was designed and installed during the first half of BP2 to support the emission testing using a real coal-derived flue gas. The system is capable of generating both coal- and natural gas- derived flue gases with the composition of the gaseous species highly resemble to that of the power plant flue gases. The particulates detected in the coal-derived flue gas showed the mean diameter of 1 micron. The CO 2 capture operating was then proceed using the real coal-derived flue gas where the amine emission was controlled to be about 0-3 ppm for the total run time of about 200 hours. Similar testing was conducted with natural gas-derived flue gas and the result showed a highly amine emission of 30 ppm under the total run time of 200 hours. The Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and the Partial Least Squares Projection to Latent Structures (PLS) techniques were applied to the parametric testing data to derive a multivariate statistical model. The model was validated and trained with half of the data collected, and the predictive ability of the model was evaluated using the remaining half of the data. The resulting empirical model was capable of predicting the overall emissions from the NAS process without the ECTs with ±15% accuracy (average absolute deviation, AAD) in BP1. As more emission data were obtained under the real coal-flue gas in the BP2, the model incorporated these new set of data to reflect the final process configuration, operating parameters, and amine emission. This results in the updated empirical model predicting the amine emission from the NAS CO 2 capture process with 84% goodness-of-fit (R 2 ), 85% predictability (Q 2 ), and 15% AAD. The study evaluates the use of RTI’s Non-Aqueous Solvent technology for 90% CO 2 capture from a net 650 MWe pulverized coal power plant, downstream of the flue-gas desulfurization unit. The captured CO 2 has a purity of > 95% CO 2 , and is dried, compressed to 15.3 MPa (2,215 psia), ready for sequestration. The analysis uses Case B12B from the DOE Baseline study on Bituminous Coal, Revision 4 where the Cansolv CO 2 capture plant is replaced by the RTI CO 2 Capture plant. The CO 2 capture plant has been sized to capture >90% CO 2 from flue gas derived from a net 650 MWe supercritical pulverized coal power plant. The CO 2 capture plant is equipped with emission control technologies that limits the amine emissions to < 1 ppm. Two different cases were evaluated for the technoeconomic study. The key difference between the two cases is the regenerator pressure. In Case 1, the regenerator operates at 0.195 MPa (28.3 psia), whereas in Case 2, the regenerator pressure is 0.44 MPa (64 psia) thus removing the need for the first stage of compression of the eight-stage compression train. Results from the TEA are compared against the DOE reference cases for SCPC plant with and without CO 2 Capture (Case B12A and Case B12B of the DOE Baseline study, respectively). Case 2 with CO 2 regeneration at higher pressure results in the lower cost of CO 2 capture. The total capital cost of the capture process has been estimated using 2018 dollars in Aspen Process Economic Analyzer and was estimated to be $579 MM. The capture plant operation leads to a total parasitic power loss rate of 96 MWe, resulting in a decrease in pulverized coal power plant efficiency of 7.8% points. The resulting cost of electric power increases from 64.4 mills/kWh, for no capture, to 97.5 mills/kWh, with 90% capture, an increase of 51% in the COE. The cost of capturing 90% CO 2 was estimated to be $38.2/tonne-CO 2 , and meets the DOE target of $40/t-CO 2 . Emission control technologies (ECT) investigated in this project includes a second water wash with use of activated carbon beds for removal of amine from the wash water prior to recirculation in the water wash. These ECT allow operation of the CO 2 capture plant with < 1 ppm amine emissions with the treated flue gas and contributes to $2.4/t-CO 2 captured. Amine emissions derived from thermal and oxidative degradations were investigated under this project along with the emissions derived from aerosols for the NAS system. The thermally degraded of the lean NAS showed less than 4% decreased of the original total amine content in the NAS at 150 °C while the result obtained at 120 °C showed no drop in total amine content, suggesting that thermal degradation of the NAS is minimal. These results also suggested that the thermally degraded species are not likely formed and contributed to the emissions due to the low regeneration temperature of the NAS at 90-105 °C. The oxidative degradation, on the other hand, could become problematic as some of these oxidative degraded species were observed during the NAS-5 testing at National Carbon Capture Center (NCCC) and SINTEF in our previous project. The rapid screening of selected inhibitors suggested that oxidative degradation of NAS can be suppressed using thiol containing compounds in amounts of at least 1 mol%. The detailed mechanistic degradation pathway was conceived for a specific amine used in NAS formulation during BP2. he reduction of the nitrosamines caused by the NO x present in the flue gas was also examined. The study suggested that the thermo-chemical treatment of the NAS solvent would be a more effective and economically viable compared to removing NO x at the DCC.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

Candidacy Renewal Report for ICERR Designation

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has established a designation for an International Centre based on Research Reactors (ICERR). The intention of this designation is to provide a vehicle for IAEA member states to access international research-reactor and ancillary nuclear research and development infrastructure. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has made a commitment to world leadership in the development of advanced nuclear energy, science, and technology. To this end, DOE has established programs and initiatives to enhance this leadership role. ICERR designation constitutes an important step in achieving the DOE vision. DOE, represented by Idaho National Laboratory (INL) and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), is submitting this application for re-designation as an IAEA ICERR. Both INL and ORNL have a decades-long and storied history that supports nuclear research, development, and deployment both nationally and internationally. Both have a history of safe and efficient nuclear operations and have demonstrated a track record of international collaboration and cooperation. INL and ORNL are home to two primary and two secondary research reactors. The primary reactors are Advanced Test Reactor at INL, and High-Flux Isotope Reactor at ORNL. Secondary reactors include: Neutron Radiography Reactor at INL, Transient Reactor Test (TREAT) Facility at INL, and INL Advanced Test Reactor: Critical Facility (ATRC). ICERR designation will also include numerous ancillary facilities at both laboratories, including the following: Multiple post-irradiation examination facilities at both INL and ORNL, Radiochemistry hot-cell facilities at ORNL, INL nuclear-fuel-fabrication and materials-science facilities, and INL and ORNL radiological and nuclear analytical capabilities.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

National Smart Manufacturing Strategic Plan: To Facilitate More Rapid Development, Deployment and Adoption of Smart Manufacturing Technologies

Smart manufacturing technologies provide real-time data and insight to improve the productivity, efficiency, and competitiveness of U.S. manufacturing, creating the potential for new jobs in the manufacturing sector. These technologies can support U.S. manufacturers’ ability to increase throughput and energy efficiency, and decrease waste, defects, and costs. A wide range of manufacturing and industrial subsectors, particularly energy-intensive and energy-dependent industries, have the potential to benefit from smart manufacturing technologies. There are technical improvements still needed to reduce the costs and barriers (trained workforce and upskilling, software-hardware integration, cost, and technical barriers to deployment of advanced sensors, computing, and communication technologies for existing manufacturing assets) to the adoption of smart manufacturing technologies, especially to small and medium-sized manufacturers, and subsequently, increase the overall adoption rate of smart manufacturing technologies. This report outlines the Department of Energy’s (DOE) strategic plan to accelerate the development and implementation of smart manufacturing technologies in the United States and the actions DOE has taken to use these technologies in smart manufacturing for the United States. DOE’s plan to facilitate more rapid development, deployment and widespread adoption of smart manufacturing technologies derive from the 2018 Strategy for American Leadership in Advanced Manufacturing. The strategy outlines a vision for America’s leadership in advanced manufacturing including the development of intelligent manufacturing systems to optimize manufacturing facilities and support the manufacturing of transformative materials. DOE’s Clean Energy Smart Manufacturing Innovation Institute (CESMII), a Manufacturing USA Institute, focuses on accelerating the development and adoption of advanced sensors, controls, platforms, and models needed for smart manufacturing. The objective is to enhance U.S. manufacturing productivity and global competitiveness through the research and development of these technologies. Smart manufacturing has the potential to improve the overall performance, energy productivity, and efficiency of manufacturing, fostering the economic competitiveness of the manufacturing sector.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

Parallel Multigrid in Time and Space for Extreme-Scale Computational Science: Chaotic and Hyperbolic Problems

The coming massive parallelism of exascale computing presents a pressing challenge for the many DOE simulations of time-dependent partial differential equations (PDEs), which typically use traditional sequential time stepping methods. Since this traditional approach is inherently serial, it presents a sequential bottleneck when moving to exascale computing, because future performance gains will come through greater concurrency, not faster clock speeds. Thus, the goal of this work is to research parallelism in time, i.e., methods that compute multiple time values simultaneously, not sequentially. The focus will be on hyperbolic and chaotic problems of interest to DOE, with the goal of enabling scalable simulations of time-dependent hyperbolic and chaotic problems on future architectures. The chosen methodology for solving these problems parallel-in-time is multigrid, because multigrid (when it works) is a powerful, optimal, and scalable solver for discretized PDEs. Multigrid is already commonly used in many DOE simulations for scalably and optimally solving space-only PDE problems. The areas of hyperbolic and chaotic problems are chosen because of their relevance to problems of programmatic interest to DOE. However, these problems are also well-known to be difficult for parallelin-time methods, with the most common method, parareal, diverging in many cases. The current stateof-the-art for parallel-in-time at LLNL is the multigrid reduction in time (MGRIT) XBraid package, which also struggles for such problems, while still showing some improvement over parareal. In summary, new methods are needed for an efficient parallel-in-time scheme for hyperbolic and chaotic problems, and this work shall research promising new multigrid methods in this area. In particular, we take inspiration from the Least Squares Shadowing (LSS by Wang) approach for solving chaotic problems. Here, an optimization approach is able to find “well-conditioned” shadow trajectories/solutions to the original “ill-conditioned” chaotic problem. Thus, the new multigrid methods researched here also arise in an optimization context.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

The Third Assessment of the Effects of Climate Change on Federal Hydropower

Understanding the future changes in projected water supplies is a vital objective for federal hydropower facilities tasked with providing low-cost, reliable electricity across a large regional footprint that encompasses a growing customer base, alternative market structures for marketing the electricity, and a more diverse generation asset mix than was historically present when a majority of federal hydropower facilities were built. This study, The Third Assessment of the Effects of Climate Change on Federal Hydropower, directed by Section 9505 of the SECURE Water Act of 2009 (SWA), is the third quinquennial report on evaluating the effects of climate change on hydroelectric energy generated from 132 US federal hydropower plants marketed by four US Department of Energy (DOE) Power Marketing Administrations (PMAs). The technical assessment is conducted by DOE’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, and Texas A&M University under the guidance of DOE’s Water Power Technologies Office. This study is the result of extensive consultation with the four federal PMAs (Bonneville Power Administration [BPA], Western Area Power Administration [WAPA], Southwestern Power Administration [SWPA], and Southeastern Power Administration [SEPA]), as well as other agencies, including federal hydropower owners/operators (the US Army Corps of Engineers, US Bureau of Reclamation [Reclamation]), US Geological Survey, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). The main findings of this assessment, along with the PMA administrators’ recommendations, will be included in a subsequent DOE report to Congress. The assessment method and the technical findings are described in this report.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

Pantex Plant Calendar Year 2021 (Annual Site Environmental Report)

The 2021 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↗

Plan for Scaling Up Hydrogen Production with Nuclear Power Plants

The United States (U.S.) Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) Program Flexible Plant Operations and Generation (FPOG) Pathway is developing options to help U.S. nuclear power plants (NPPs) better integrate with intermittent wind and solar capacity and the recent surge of natural gas power generation. Research is focusing on improving NPP flexibility through hybrid production of electricity and other products, such as hydrogen (H 2 ) and energy storage for the purpose of shifting power production to a later time. In the case of H 2 production, the clean electrical and thermal power from an NPP can be used to split water using electrolysis. This report outlines the opportunity for NPPs to participate in a first-of-akind (FOAK) commercial nuclear H 2 project intended to bring industry partners together to create regional clean H 2 hubs. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) will fund at least one hub up to $1.25 billion as federal cost share totally no less than 50% to execute a nuclear H 2 project. The report discusses the set of activities that are now underway or that are planned for completion by the FPOG Pathway to reduce the economic, technical, regulatory, and safety risks of these projects. DOE cross-program activities are being coordinated to ensure success in the timeframe allowed by the BIL. Figure ES-1 shows the approximate schedule of coordinated research and development (R&D) and pilot demonstration projects leading up to the first commercial nuclear H 2 production project. Execution of this plan requires DOE and industry collaboration. DOE research accomplishments are being provided to the electric utilities or industries looking to participate in the H 2 hub proposal and project execution process.

08 HYDROGEN↗

Are You Philanthropy-Ready? How to Work with Foundations on Mission-Aligned Community Solar

Community solar is emerging as a popular way to deliver a range of economic and social benefits that go beyond clean energy. The US Department of Energy (DOE) has set a goal for America to deploy enough community solar projects to power the equivalent of five million households by 2025 and create $1 billion in energy bill savings. To reach the goal, DOE has created the Community Power Accelerator, as part of the National Community Solar Partnership (NCSP). The Accelerator is an online ecosystem bringing together developers, lenders, foundations, community organizations, and other stakeholders to support the deployment of mission-aligned community solar. The Accelerator is especially focused on projects that deliver "meaningful benefits" to customers and communities, including: access by low- to moderate-income households; greater bill savings; resilience and grid benefits; community ownership; and local workforce development. Many philanthropic organizations are looking at community solar as a way to capture these benefits in their grant-making and investment programs, while also reducing pollution and promoting environmental justice. To help community-based organizations (CBOs), non-profit organizations, and mission-aligned developers seeking philanthropic support, Berkeley Lab and the National Renewable Energy Lab prepared Are You Philanthropy-Ready? How to Work with Foundations on Mission-Aligned Community Solar. The guide provides an overview of how foundations work, gives tips on what they seek in a fundable project, and provides guidance on crafting effective proposals. In short, this guide aims to help the fund-seeker become philanthropy-ready.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

The Impact of Increased Requirements for Verification Measurements of Category III and IV Receipts

As part of the regular nuclear material accounting and control process, sites that have accountable nuclear material regularly perform measurements of the material in their possession. The expectation for the type of measurements and their frequency is set out in Department of Energy (DOE) Order 474.2, and further detailed in each site’s respective material control and accountability (MC&A) plan and associated controlling documents. The measurements of interest in this report are those performed on external (between DOE sites) transfer receipts of Category III or IV accountable materials. In 2020, a revision of DOE Order 474.2 was proposed that would significantly increase the requirement that measurements be performed upon receipt of material, and further, that those measurements be quantitative verification (rather than qualitative confirmatory) measurements. A survey was performed of DOE sites to discuss the impact on their MC&A measurements program if more rigorous verification measurements requirements for Category III and IV receipts were implemented. An assessment of nondestructive assay (NDA) measurement instruments to meet those needs was also performed. Across the board, sites indicated that personnel and budget would cause the largest impact. Sites which are qualified as Category I/II indicated a reduced impact as these sites already have the measurement capabilities and some personnel but would require the acquisition of additional measurement systems. Category III/IV sites indicated a much larger impact as these sites generally have smaller MC&A programs. A few smaller sites stated a measurement program would need to be created to handle the demand. Calorimetry, quantitative gamma spectroscopy and neutron coincidence counting systems were identified as common systems that could meet the verification measurement requirements. The other, and perhaps larger issue is the need for calibration standards for the calorimetry and neutron coincidence counting systems. It is proposed that a comparative study be performed for ISOCS and ISOTOPICS, qualification of a COTS calorimetry system be performed, and development of an AWCC system that uses a neutron generator.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗

Radionuclide Waste Disposal: Development of Multi-scale Experimental and Modeling Capabilities (Final Report)

The DOE EPSCoR Implementation project “Radioactive waste management: Development of multi-scale experimental and modeling capabilities” helped to develop a team of scientists and engineers from Clemson University, South Carolina State University, and the University of South Carolina to address the disposition of nuclear wastes and study the transport of radioisotopes from a waste repository in the near and far field. The project involved 20 faculty from the three institutions as well as 13 postdoctoral fellows, 32 graduate students, and 32 undergraduate students and was active from 2014-2019. Additionally, we forged new collaborations with nine researchers from DOE laboratories SRNL, LLNL, and ANL as well as the University of Manchester and the China Academy of Engineering Physics. The overarching goal of the project was to understand the conditions under which important classes of co-reactants, ranging from counter ions in crystal lattices to dissolved oxygen in pores, control the chemistry and transport characteristics of radionuclides in engineered waste forms and natural soils. Our approach was to characterize the time and length scales over which non-equilibrium states are maintained by rate-limiting, or rate-enhancing, reactions between radionuclides and co-reactants due to interactions between physical mass-transfer processes (i.e., advection, diffusion) and (biogeo) chemical reactions. We have focused our project on three specific classes of reactions relevant to radionuclide transport at DOE legacy sites: ion exchange/substitution, ligand complexation, and redox-mediated reactions. Understanding radionuclide migration requires detailed knowledge of how changes to a system – whether engineered or natural – drive the behavior of co-reactants, which in turn provide the geochemical context controlling radionuclide transport. Student engagement and training were a primary focus of the project in order to create a pipeline of researchers who could work in the area of nuclear waste disposition to support the state and the nation. Over the duration of the project we worked with 32 undergraduate, graduated 18 M.S. students and 14 Ph.D. students, and advised 13 postdoctoral fellows. The Ph.D students and postdocs have primarily taken positions at DOE laboratories, academia, and industry. Through our collaborative team, numerous follow on projects have been started with over $5M in sponsored research. Additionally, thus far the team has published 53 peer reviewed papers and given over 75 technical presentations.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

Data Summary Report for Soil and Slab Sampling at Former Building 175

Lawrence Livermore National Security (LLNS) and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) are in the process of returning the area where Building 175 existed to beneficial use for future site development. The completed assessment will help LLNS and DOE to outline project scope and costs associated with the removal, characterization, and disposal of materials generated when the concrete slab for the former building and any associated remaining subsurface structures are demolished. Slab removal under the Transition & Disposition process requires full screening for potential site contamination to determine appropriate future land use. Borehole locations and depths were designed to correctly assess DOE’s future liability for characterizing residual vadose zone contamination. If a residual source area is identified at depth, DOE will need to evaluate the additional cost of future subsurface cleanup (with limited access) due to planned development. This is necessary to leave the location in a “ready-to-build” status. As a result, Phase II sampling requirements may in some cases extend beyond the construction zone required for slab removal to ensure the necessary due diligence. To avoid the potential spread of contamination and/or the creation of an environmental release by impacting the integrity of known contamination areas (e.g., pit within room 102 and the east to west boundary seam), these locations were not sampled for this project. During demolition of the slab, these locations and their underlying soils should be further evaluated. The assessment was conducted in accord with the May 2022 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Former Building 175 Assessment Soil Sampling and Analysis Plan / Quality Assurance Plan. Thirty-six, direct-push borings were advanced, along with collecting concrete (where present) and soil samples for laboratory analyses. Thirty-two of the borings were advanced to a depth of 25 feet below ground (bgs), and four borings were advanced to a depth of 55 feet bgs. The concrete slab for former Building 175 ranged from approximately 8 inches to over two feet in thickness. Soils encountered during the investigation consisted primarily of clayey silt, with interbeds of sandy gravel and silty sand to the total depth explored of 55 feet bgs. Field photoionization detector readings – checking for volatile organic compound (VOC) vapors in soils, ranged from zero (0) to a peak of 33 parts per million at 25 feet bgs in boring PC-B175- 028. The cause for the peak reading is unknown, however, no visually discolored or odorous soils were encountered during the assessment and all VOC results were below Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s (LLNL’s) Soil Screening and Management Plan (SSMP) soil screening levels (SSL). Groundwater was not encountered during the assessment and is expected to occur at roughly 65 feet bgs in the project area. No metals were detected at concentrations of concern in the concrete core samples collected and analyzed. Low gross alpha and beta activity concentrations were detected in the concrete core samples collected and analyzed. The detected activity concentrations would appear to be from naturally occurring radioactive isotopes, i.e., potassium 40, present in the raw materials used to make concrete and not artificially added. Tritium was not detected above the testing laboratory's Method Detection Limit (MDL) in any of the concrete core samples collected and analyzed. The radioactive isotopes - actinium 228, bismuth 214, lead 212, lead 214, potassium 40, radium 226, radium 228, and thallium 208, were detected at low activity concentrations in the concrete core samples analyzed. Based on the detected activity concentrations, the isotopes would appear to be naturally occurring in the raw materials used to make concrete and not artificially added. Acetone – a common laboratory contaminant, was detected in nine of the soil samples collected and analyzed. Concentrations of two other volatile organic compounds (benzene and tetrachloroethene) were detected in five of the soil samples analyzed. All concentrations were below SSLs. Total petroleum hydrocarbons as diesel range organics were detected at 43.9 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) in the 20-foot bgs duplicate sample from boring PC-B175-007. Total petroleum hydrocarbons as motor oil were detected at 7.20 mg/kg in the 15-foot bgs routine sample from boring PC-B175-001, and at 20.7 mg/kg in the 20-foot bgs duplicate sample from boring PC-B175-007. The SSL for diesel-range TPHs is 260 mg/kg. LLNL does not have an SSL for motor oil range TPHs. No indications of a release, e.g., visibly stained, or odorous soil, were present at the boring locations. No samples collected contained polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in concentrations above the laboratory reporting limit. Arsenic was detected above its SSL of 8.51 mg/kg in the 25-foot bgs routine sample collected from boring PC-B175-023. Nickel was detected above its SSL of 86.0 mg/kg in the 10-foot bgs routine sample from boing PC-B175-005, the 20-foot bgs routine sample from boring PC-B175-025, and the 25-foot bgs routine sample from boring PC-B175-034. The detected concentrations, however, were well below ten times (10x) their respective STLCs. Gross alpha and/or gross beta were detected above their respective SSL activity concentrations in three routine soil samples. Retesting (two per sample) of the samples showed that the initial reported activity concentrations were anomalous. Tritium was not detected in any of the routine or duplicate soil samples collected and analyzed during the investigation. The radioactive isotopes - actinium 228, bismuth 212 and 214, lead 212 and 214, potassium 40, radium 224, 226 and 228, thallium 208, thorium 234 and uranium, were detected at low activity concentrations in the soil samples analyzed for radioactive constituents. The detected isotopes and their associated activity concentrations are typical of those naturally occurring in the marine-type sedimentary deposits underlying the Livermore Valley. No radiological controls are necessary for the soil evaluated.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

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.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Performance Assessment for the Disposal of Low-Level Waste in the 200 East Area Burial Grounds (Annual Status Report FY 2022)

This annual review provides the projected dose estimates of radionuclide inventories disposed in the 200 East Area Low-Level Waste Burial Grounds (LLBGs) since September 26, 1988. These estimates are calculated using the original dose methodology developed in the performance assessment (PA) analysis (WHC-SD-WM-TI-730). The estimates are compared with the performance objectives defined in U.S. Department of Energy requirements (DOE O 435.1 and its companion documents DOE M 435.1-1 and DOE-STD-5002-2017). All performance objectives are currently satisfied, and operational waste acceptance criteria (HNF-EP-0063) and waste acceptance practices continue to be sufficient to maintain compliance with performance objectives. Inventory estimates and associated dose estimates from future waste disposal actions are unchanged from previous years’ evaluations that indicate potential impacts well below performance objectives; therefore, future compliance with DOE O 435.1 is expected.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗