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 901 records · Page 50
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

Mechanistic Approach to Analyzing and Improving Unconventional Hydrocarbon Production [Slides]

DOE research is developing the physical basis and tools needed to manage pressure effectively to increase recovery efficiency. By coupling fast, accurate physics with machine learning, DOE is producing science-based platforms any operator can use. DOE’s research portfolio is targeting hydrocarbon transport at multiple scales, with the goal of increasing recovery efficiency. DOE’s research has led to new, fast & accurate platforms for predicting gas production from fractured shales. Using data from the MSEEL-I site to calibrate our physics-based model, we have early results on pressure management. We have shown that both mechanical and chemical processes in the matrix can negatively impact production.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2020

Default Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (RHWM) Dose Conversion Factors (DCFs) and Weighting Factors and plutonium-239 equivalent Curie (PE-Ci) methodology for acceptance into the Waste Storage Facilities

DOE-STD-5506-2007 (Ref. 1) is the standard that provides the methodology for preparing hazard analysis and accident analysis for transuranic (TRU) waste facilities. The Waste Storage Facilities hazard and accident analysis for the DSA is developed in accordance with DOE-STD- 5506-2007. Two related issues need to be addressed when implementing DOE-STD-5506-2007 regarding the calculation of consequences from TRU waste releases in accident analysis: Consequences determined in accident analysis must be modeled using inhalation Dose Conversion Factors (DCFs) that are consistent with those from the International Commission on Radiological Protection Publication 72 (ICRP-72, Ref. 2).; The use of a statistical Material at Risk (MAR) representing the distribution of radiological loading of TRU waste containers based on the use of a plutonium-239 equivalent Curie (PE-Ci) methodology. The PE-Ci methodology simplifies accident analysis by allowing one to model releases based on the Curie value of one standard nuclide (e.g., Pu-239) instead of needing to model releases for every potential nuclide of interest. This is accomplished by normalizing the Curie value of all nuclides to a single Curie value of a standard nuclide by using a Weighting Factor that is a ratio of the DCFs associated with the nuclides and that of the standard nuclide. By using the ICRP-72 DCFs to calculate PE-Ci values used in the statistical MAR, the accident analysis that uses that statistical MAR will be consistent with the consequence methodology identified in DOE-STD- 5506-2007.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2020

2020 Exascale Computing Project Annual Meeting (Executive Summary Report)

The Exascale Computing Project (ECP) delivers specific applications, software products, and outcomes on DOE computing facilities. Integration across these elements for specific hardware technologies for exascale system instantiations is fundamental to ECP success. The outcome of the ECP is the delivery of a capable exascale computing ecosystem to provide breakthrough solutions addressing our most critical challenges in scientific discovery, energy assurance, economic competitiveness, and national security. This outcome is not a matter of ensuring more powerful computing systems. The ECP is designed to create more valuable and rapid insights from a wide variety of applications (“capable”), which requires a much higher level of inherent efficacy in all methods, software tools, and ECP-enabled computing technologies to be acquired by DOE laboratories (“ecosystem”). The ECP annual meeting provides a unique opportunity for the core technical expertise in the United States focused on achieving this next plateau of computational science and computing performance to engage in direct discussions on project execution. Face-to-face gatherings in technical communities like this are common and needed for the exchange of scientific ideas and technical performance. The ECP annual meeting stands apart from other technical conferences and meetings in the computing community as it is uniquely and solely focused on the execution of the ECP and the integration of technical activities leading to the creation of the exascale computing ecosystem for the future. The direct interaction of key critical technical staff, who are leaders in their respective fields, and the resulting give-and-take between software, applications, and hardware and the technical co-design therein, is unique and essential to the effective execution of the ECP. The first annual meeting was held in Knoxville, Tennessee, January 31 – February 2, 2017 and brought together, for the first time, a diverse collection of researchers from 16 DOE national laboratories as well as university computer and computational science researchers to discuss shared problems and joint solutions for the development of a capable exascale computing ecosystem. These interactions resulted in focused technical plans and an energized community centered on advances for ECP. The second annual meeting was held in Knoxville, Tennessee, February 5–9, 2018. It included 643 individual thought leaders and performers in application development, software research and deployment, and hardware research and integrators, all of whom are part of the multifaceted, billion dollar HPC community. This meeting provided a platform to discuss and disseminate numerous examples where researchers with common goals and synergistic solutions came together for the first time to deliver tangible results. Additionally, at the 2018 meeting, ECP researchers had the opportunity to digest all US HPC vendor R&D product roadmaps pointing to exascale – not only to learn how their research can play a role, but, more importantly, to influence those roadmaps to ensure successful delivery on DOE applications that will contribute to (if not solve) problems of national interest in national security, science, energy, and health, as well as growing security threats. The third annual meeting was held in Houston, Texas, January 14–17, 2019. With a 19% increase in the number of registrations (768 people), and the change in location, the third annual meeting was considered the most impactful of the three at the time. The new website provided a better platform for the dissemination of the content, the new venue as a meeting hotel instead of a conference center facilitated interactions and discussions after event hours, and the addition of an award-winning mobile event conference app (Whova) transformed dramatically the attendee experience at the event. This fourth annual meeting was held in Houston, Texas, February 3-7, 2020. This meeting had an increase in the number of attendees for a total of 824 people registered (782 attendees) and included numerous enhancements based on feedback and lessons learned from previous meetings, some of which are listed here: Improved quality of the sessions, their material and the whole program.; Had more industry participation and addition of external collaborators from overseas.; Published the full agenda earlier to better accommodate attendance and travel plans based on schedule.; Centralized all sessions in one venue.; Provided additional hotels and room blocks for the attendees.; Improved communication with the audience (links, material, directions, notifications, etc.) to go paperless.; Enhanced side meeting scheduling, management and user experience.; Made available additional space and tables for impromptu meetings and side discussions.; Improved IT and A/V solutions for speakers. In addition, our final survey captured the following points as opportunities for improvement in future meetings: consider a different meeting location that is more pedestrian friendly, reduce talks during working meals to allow more collaboration and informal time, adapt the agenda to acknowledge attendees from different timezones, consider recording some of the tutorials and/or sessions to share broadly with the HPC community, have a larger poster room, provide additional power strips, and improve the WiFi.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2020

FIU Project 3: Waste and D&D Engineering and Technology Development [Slides]

This project focuses on delivering solutions under deactivation and decommissioning (D&D) in support of DOE EM-4.11 as well as IT development for environmental applications (KM-IT for EM-4.11) and waste & material management (WIMS for EM-4.22). All technology development related activities will also engage the Office of Technology Development (EM-3.2). This work is also relevant to infrastructure management activities being carried out at DOE sites such as Oak Ridge, Savannah River, Hanford, Idaho and Portsmouth. As appropriate and within the parameters of the DOE-FIU Cooperative Agreement (CA), coordination at the proper level will occur with the sites and national laboratories involved in the project research efforts as well as with the points-of-contact at DOE HQ (e.g., HQ Project Leads, HQ Field Liaisons, Office of Technology Development, CA Technical Monitor, COR, etc.).

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
DOE OSTI2020

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↗
DOE OSTI2020

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↗
DOE OSTI2020

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↗
DOE OSTI2021

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↗
DOE OSTI2020

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↗
DOE OSTI2021

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↗
DOE OSTI2021

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↗
DOE OSTI2020

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↗
DOE OSTI2021

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↗
DOE OSTI2021

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↗
DOE OSTI2021

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↗
DOE OSTI2021

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↗
DOE OSTI2021

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↗
DOE OSTI2020

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↗