SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Subject Matter Expert”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 109 records · Page 6

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2022

Research and Test Reactor Fuels

PRO-RR is the research reactor focused program element of the broader Proliferation Resistance Optimization program (PRO-X) under the National Nuclear Safety Administration (NNSA) in the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). PRO-X provides a framework for integrating proliferation resistance in nuclear system designs to minimize weapons usable nuclear materials (WUNM) production and diversion pathways while optimizing systems performance for peaceful use missions. PRO-RR applies the PRO-X mission objectives to research reactor system design. This document serves as one of the foundational documents for the PRO-RR-Fuel System Design technical team by documenting current research reactor fuels usage. The PRO-RR-Fuel System Design technical team consists of subject matter experts from Argonne National Laboratory (Argonne) and Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL). In order to determine the preferred fuel of use in upcoming research and test reactors to optimize proliferation resistance, performance, and safety, it is useful to assess the fuels that have been used in the past, or are currently in use. This report reviews the historical and current fuels used in research and test reactors to inform future fuel selection. Chapter 2 discusses the low-enriched uranium (LEU) fuels currently in use in terms of thermal power level and utilization of the reactor. Chapter 3 summarizes the fabrication processes for common fuel types. Chapter 4 discusses in detail the fuel types in use in research and test reactors. A review of the cladding types in use is presented in Chapter 5, and a historical review of research and test reactor fuel fabricators is presented in Chapter 6. The data collection strategy used the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) research reactor database [1] as a starting point. Information on the fuel used was gathered on research reactors (other than critical assemblies) that were listed as operational, planned, or in temporary shutdown in the IAEA database. Data on the fuel type, geometry, enrichment, uranium loading, cladding type, and fabricator were collected for each of the reactors available in the public domain. Sources of data included conference papers, journal articles, and facility and fabricator websites. Data on research reactors operating on LEU fuels are presented in Appendix A, while Appendix B presents data collected on all reactors at the time of publication of this report. Appendix C presents data collected on reactors that were part of the M3 research and test reactor conversion program.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2022

Radiological Considerations Supporting the American Medical Isotope Producer Niowave

This report provides a summary of work performed by Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) during FY22 in support of Niowave, an American Medical Isotope Production (AMIP) facility. SRNL served in a technical support role, funded by NA-231, supporting Niowave in the beginning of non radiological functional testing of their airport facility in FY22. Through this agreement, SRNL provides Niowave access to subject matter experts (SMEs) for questions that may arise during the drafting of engineering plans, facility policies, and/or response procedures. This report summarizes discussions between SRNL and Niowave about guidance concerning issues with the floor of the hot cells, dispersible removable contamination (beta emitting fission product), hot cell operation specifically utilization of cameras or mirrors, and the process for removing contaminated waste from the hot cell. Lessons learned and other various resources provided to Niowave by SRNL during FY22 are referenced in this report. This work was funded through NNSA’s Office of Material Management and Minimization, Conversion Office (NA-231).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2022

Oak Ridge National Laboratory FY 2023 Site Sustainability Plan With FY 2022 Performance Data

At the close of each fiscal year, the US Department of Energy (DOE) Sustainability Performance Division (SPD) issues guidance documents and technical resource aids/tools necessary for DOE sites and national laboratories to complete sustainability reporting requirements. SPD is part of the DOE Office of Asset Management. As required by DOE Order 436.1, Departmental Sustainability, “each site will develop and commit to an annual Site Sustainability Plan (SSP) that identifies its respective contribution toward meeting the DOE’s sustainability goals.” SPD collects and compiles information reported by each site to develop an agency-wide Sustainability Report and Implementation Plan, which is used to report DOE sustainability progress to the federal government as required by all major federal agencies. DOE launched a formal Sustainability Office and annual SSP process in 2011. Each year, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), in concert with the Office of Science (SC), provides the resources essential to fulfill its commitment to deliver a complete and accurate SSP report and quality performance data for entry into the DOE Sustainability Dashboard as managed by SPD. The performance data entered by each DOE site are then combined to disclose the progress of each DOE Program Office and are further combined to show comprehensive progress for the agency. The Office of Asset Management provides assistance to program offices in sustaining their missions, freeing up resources by reducing waste, avoiding excess expenditure on utilities, maximizing productivity, and improving the efficiency of facilities and processes. By focusing on mission needs, programs and associated DOE sites can help the agency meet its sustainability goals, as outlined in federal statutory and regulatory requirements. In FY 2022, the SSP guidance was updated to capture requirements from Executive Order (EO) 14008, Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad, the Energy Act of 2020 (EAct 20), actions outlined in DOE’s Climate Adaptation & Resilience Plan and Sustainability Plan, and EO 14057, Catalyzing Clean Energy Industries and Jobs Through Federal Sustainability. Updates in SSP guidance help to minimize and streamline reporting while simultaneously addressing updated federal requirements. Per DOE, each SSP report should provide an overview of the site’s planned actions, as well as an overview of efforts and accomplishments during the reporting period. SPD collects and compiles information reported by each site to develop DOE’s Annual Sustainability Report, Climate Adaptation & Resilience Plan, and Annual Energy Management Report to Congress. The agency goal has been to lower the reporting burden for sites and increase and improve the consistency of information available to decision makers, allowing them to better identify projects and potential for increased efficiency, as well as to reduce waste, lower emissions, and enhance operational resilience. Sites may elect to produce a more polished publication for their leadership and stakeholders, but this step is no longer required. The ORNL SSP narrative report (this document) and the reporting of DOE SPD Sustainability Dashboard performance data is a collaborative effort of approximately 30 subject matter experts (SMEs) from ORNL facility management and research divisions. Annually, these associates come together to provide a report that can be used by DOE to demonstrate continued agency progress in energy efficiency and sustainable federal operations.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Observations and Lessons Learned From Installing Residential Roofing-Integrated Photovoltaics

Building-sited solar photovoltaics (PV) could play a key role in decarbonizing the building sector either through racked and mounted PV or through Building-integrated PV (BIPV). BIPV is installed into the building envelope itself, with solar cells and/or modules forming the outer layer of a building structure, thus transforming a single-purpose structure into one that serves the dual purposes of the building envelope and electricity. BIPV can be applied to building roofs, facades, awnings, pergolas, windows, skylights, balustrades, and other external surfaces. Given BIPV products vary widely, the focus of this research is residential roofing integrated PV (RIPV), where solar is incorporated into or otherwise replaces the roofing material. Previous research suggests that residential RIPV could reduce customer acquisition, labor, supply chain, and equipment costs. These products have yet to realize these cost savings and deployment remains significantly less than conventional rooftop PV as a relative share of the addressable market in the US. One potential barrier to broader residential roofing integrated PV deployment may be higher costs relative to conventional rooftop PV, primarily because the design and installation of these products is still evolving. Here, we explore residential RIPV cost-reduction opportunities by analyzing installation processes. Our study documents residential RIPV installations at 2 reroofing sites and the equivalent of 9 new construction sites in California through a methodology known as time and motion study. We also conducted interviews with subject-matter experts to identify barriers and solutions to maximize these products' market penetration. Our time and motion study breaks the RIPV installation process into four steps: 1) staging, unloading, and roof preparation; 2) fire resistant underlayment(s) (synthetic material laid between roof shingles and roof deck); 3) flashings and PV installation; and 4) wiring and monitoring. We measure the time required for each step in terms of worker-hours, representing an hour of labor from a single worker. We further normalize process time by dividing worker-hours by kilowatt (kW) of system capacity. The most time-intensive step was flashings and PV installation, taking around 2.4 worker-hours per kW on average and accounting for around 60% of the process time for an average installation. The total installation process took on average about 6.4 and 3.5 worker-hours per kW at the reroofing sites and new construction sites, respectively. For comparison, a previous time and motion study documented a time of 6.9 worker-hours per kW for conventional rooftop PV. The shorter RIPV installation times are consistent with previous studies suggesting that RIPV could be installed faster than conventional rooftop PV. The time and motion results and feedback from interviewees provide insights into potential residential RIPV cost reduction opportunities. Several interviewees suggested that these products would be more efficient if PV installation was more fully integrated into the roofing/construction industries, which currently use separate supply chains and skillsets. Further integration could reduce supply chain delays and labor force redundancies. Future research could explore specific ways to integrate these industries to help realize the cost savings potential of RIPV.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2023

Baseline Fuel Fabrication Facility

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Volume 6: Experiment Facility Spectrum Tailoring (HFIR Futures – Enhanced Capabilities Series)

In-core irradiation experiment research, such as materials and fuels irradiation research and radioisotope production, is one of the primary missions of Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s (ORNL) versatile High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR). In support of the HFIR-Sustaining and Enhancing Neutron Science (SENSe) Initiative, a technically diverse group of ORNL irradiation research subject matter experts formed the Spectrum Tailoring Working Group, with the goal of developing a compendium of experiment facility concepts to enhance irradiation experiment conditions via neutron spectrum tailoring capabilities. The purpose of this report is to document the concepts developed in FY22 and the associated scientific justifications, identify potential facility sponsors, and estimate costs and schedules for each concept. This report documents the efforts performed in FY22, which may continue in FY23 or later pending the direction of the HFIR-SENSe Initiative and the interested sponsors.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Next Generation Integrated PV Products Cost and Workflow Analysis (Final Report)

Residential photovoltaic (PV) costs have fallen consistently for over a decade (Ardani et al. 2018). DOE has subsequently developed a new residential PV cost target for 2030 of $0.05/kilowatt hour (SETO 2023). Ardani et al. (2018) conclude that integrated roofing and PV (RIPV) products may be key to achieving the residential target for both new construction and retrofit residential PV. In RIPV, the PV product is incorporated into or replaces the roofing material. RIPV systems can use conventional crystalline or thin-film technologies, may be aesthetically attractive alternatives to traditional racked and mounted PV systems, and may increase building property values (Cook et al. 2023). These products also have the potential to provide customer acquisition, labor, and equipment cost savings over traditional, racked and mounted residential rooftop PV and several companies have recently introduced integrated roofing and PV (RIPV) products (Cook et al. 2023). In 2022, Tesla was the market leader, representing 94% of RIPV capacity installed in 2022 through its Solar Roof offering, while GAF Energy and its Timberline Solar product was second capturing 3% (Feldman et al. 2023). In this project, NREL analyzed three research questions: (1) How do current RIPV products compare to racked and mounted PV in terms of costs, install times and processes? (2) How are RIPV products installed and are there opportunities for cost savings? (3) What are the key barriers to expanding market opportunities for integrating solar and roofing products? In this project, we explored residential RIPV cost reduction opportunities by analyzing installation processes. Our study documented residential RIPV installations at two reroofing sites (20.52 kilowatts) and the equivalent of nine new construction sites (71.75 kW) in California through a methodology known as time and motion study. We also conducted 15 interviews with subject-matter experts to identify barriers and solutions to maximize these products' market penetration.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2020

Mirostructure Characterization of Friction Consolidated Copper-Nickel using a Machine Learning Approach: Developing Process to Microstructure Associations

Friction consolidation (FC) is a solid phase processing approach where discrete material forms such as powders, chips, nuggets, etc. are densified via shear deformation. The precursors are placed in a billet container and brought in contact with a rotating tool that applying the desirable amount of normal force. Under the combined action of the rotation and normal pressure, the discrete precursor is consolidated through porosity reduction and shear deformation. FC is increasingly being studied as an attractive approach to manufacturing fully dense parts from powder forms owing to its ability to mix, alloy and consolidate difficult-to-process precursors in minimal number of process steps. Material consolidation and deformation in shear consolidation processes have been studied extensively previously for different material combinations previously. However, despite the extensive research in this area, understanding of the mechanistic processes in pore consolidation, deformation-induced mixing and material solubility during FC is still evolving. Material development using solid phase processing approaches such as FC is often performed based on research experience/education, which can be biased. Conventional analysis and simulation tools in this area tend to be successful only when material thermodynamic pathways and microstructural evolution sequences resulting from processing are clearly defined or known. They are not as effective for emerging advanced manufacturing technologies where material evolution pathways are not well established. The ability to predict optimal process parameters based on material chemistry and bulk properties is essential to accelerate materials design and processing, as are an understanding of the relevant structure-processing-property relationships. These structure-processing-property-performance relationships are at the core of materials science research. Microstructure characterization provides the link to these four core areas, often through visualizing material microstructure using imaging techniques. However, linking microstructure image data (i.e., micrographs) to variables of interest (e.g., processing parameters, material chemistry) in a reproducible, generalizable, and quantitative manner is a significant challenge. Typically, quantitatively linking image data to processing history relies on significant domain knowledge and manual or subject matter expert (SME)-heuristic based image analysis. Such an approach to image analysis has the potential to be biased, inefficient, and difficult to replicate.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

DOE OSTI2023

Light Water Sustainability Program: Optimizing Information Automation Using a New Method Based on System-Theoretic Process Analysis

This report describes the interim progress for research supporting the design and optimization of information automation systems for nuclear power plants. Much of the domestic nuclear fleet is currently focused on modernizing technologies and processes, including transitioning toward digitalization in the control room and elsewhere throughout the plant, along with a greater use of automation, artificial intelligence, robotics, and other emerging technologies. While there are significant opportunities to apply these technologies toward greater plant safety, efficiency, and overall cost-effectiveness, optimizing their design and avoiding potential safety and performance risks depends on ensuring that human-performance-related organizational and technical design issues are identified and addressed. This report describes modeling tools and techniques, based on sociotechnical system theory, to support these design goals and their application in the current research effort. The report is intended for senior nuclear energy stakeholders, including regulators, corporate management, and senior plant management. We have developed and employed a method to design an optimized information automation ecosystem (IAE) based on the systems-theoretic constructs underlying sociotechnical systems theory in general and the Systems-Theoretic Accident Modeling and Processes (STAMP) approach in particular. We argue that an IAE can be modeled as an interactive information control system whose behavior can be understood in terms of dynamic control and feedback relationships amongst the system’s technical and organizational components. Up to this point, we have employed a Causal Analysis based on STAMP (CAST) technique to examine a performance- and safety-related incident at an industry partner’s plant that involved the unintentional activation of an emergency diesel generator. This analysis provided insight into the behavior of the plant’s current information control structure within the context of a specific, significant event. Our ongoing analysis is focused on identifying near-term process improvements and longer-term design requirements for an optimized IAE system. The latter analyses will employ a second STAMP-derived technique, System-Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA). STPA is a useful modeling tool for generating and analyzing actual or potential information control structures. Finally, we have begun modeling plantwide organizational relationships and processes. Organizational system modeling will supplement our CAST and STPA findings and provide a basis for mapping out a plantwide information control architecture. CAST analysis findings indicate an important underlying contributor to the incident under investigation, and a significant risk to information automation system performance, was perceived schedule pressure, which exposed weaknesses in interdepartmental coordination between and within responsible plant organizations and challenged the resilience of established plant processes, until a human caused the initiating event. These findings are discussed in terms of their risk to overall system performance and their implications for information automation system resilience and brittleness. We present two preliminary information automation models. The proactive issue resolution model is a test case of an information automation concept with significant near-term potential for application and subsequent reduction in significant plant events. The IAE model is a more general representation of a broader, plantwide information automation system. From our results, we have generated a set of preliminary system-level requirements and safety constraints. These requirements will be further developed over the remainder of our project in collaboration with nuclear industry subject matter experts and specialists in the technical systems under consideration. Additionally, we will continue to pursue the system analyses initiated in the first part of our effort, with a particular emphasis on STPA as the main tool to identify weak or weakening control structures that affect the resilience of organizations and programs. Our intent is to broaden the scope of the analysis from an individual use case to a related set of use cases (e.g., maintenance tasks, compliance tasks) with similar human-system performance challenges. This will enable more generalized findings to refine the Proactive Issue Resolution and IAE models, as well as their system-level requirements and safety constraints. We will use organizational system modeling analyses to supplement STPA findings and model development. We conclude the report with a set of summary recommendations and an initial draft list of system-level requirements and safety constraints for optimized information automation systems.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Supplement to M&V Guidelines: Measurement and Verification for Performance-Based Contracts Version 4.0

Measurement and verification (M&V) are key to determining and confirming the continued operation of, and savings associated with, performance-based contracts. The Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) updates these guidelines to reflect the evolution of M&V to incorporate industry best practices and ensure that savings from these performance-based projects are properly planned, communicated, and realized. FEMP released M&V Guidelines: Measurement and Verification for Federal Energy Projects Version 3.0 in 2008. This document was developed with input from industry-government working groups, previous M&V guideline authors, and national laboratory subject matter experts. The document provided the methods and guidelines, with a focus on federal energy savings performance contracts (ESPCs). When FEMP released M&V Guidelines: Measurement and Verification for Performance-Based Contracts Version 4.0 in 2015, FEMP expanded the intended audience to include anyone (energy managers, procurement officers, and contractors) involved in implementing performance-based contracts. The streamlined M&V Guidelines Version 4.0 provided the procedures and guidelines needed to quantify savings resulting from installing energy-efficient equipment, water conservation, improved operation and maintenance (O&M), renewable energy, and cogeneration projects with a performance-based contract; however, it removed some of the associated details on topics such as developing regression models and sampling plans. The details and information provided in M&V Guidelines v. 3.0 are still pertinent to M&V for performance-based contracts. The objective is to keep FEMP M&V version 4.0 condensed, providing the reference document for specifying M&V methods and procedures and a resource for developing project-specific M&V plans; this supplement provides additional details. The content of this supplement has been updated to include pertinent revisions between M&V version 3.0 and M&V version 4.0 by providing details and updating the content to ensure relevancy.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2023

Summary of Technical Peer Review on the Risk Assessment Framework proposed in Report INL/RPT-22-68656 for Digital Instrumentation and Control Systems

This report summarizes the peer review activities initiated by Idaho National Laboratory (INL) during fiscal year (FY) 2023 for the evaluation and improvement of the methodology developed under the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) Program, Risk Informed Systems Analysis (RISA) Pathway, digital instrumentation and control (DI&C) risk assessment project. In FY 2019, the RISA Pathway initiated a project to develop a risk assessment strategy for delivering a technical basis to support effective and secure DI&C technologies for digital upgrades/designs. A framework was proposed for this strategy, which aims to (1) provide a best-estimate, risk-informed capability to quantitatively and accurately estimate the risk impact of plant modernization, considering the introduction of high safety-significant safety-related (HSSSR) DI&C systems, (2) support and supplement existing risk-informed DI&C design guides by providing quantitative risk information and evidence, (3) offer a capability of design architecture evaluation of various DI&C systems, (4) assure the long-term safety and reliability of HSSSR DI&C systems, and (5) reduce uncertainty in costs and support integration of DI&C systems in the plant. The R&D efforts of this project from FY 2019 through FY 2022 were focused on methodology improvement and demonstration of the proposed framework for the risk assessment and design optimization of safety-critical DI&C systems. Collaborations with the nuclear industry have been initiated to support the reliability and risk assessment of their DI&C systems by using the proposed framework. In FY 2023, the framework has reached to a point for a technical peer review and obtain stakeholder feedback. This peer review activity includes coordination of the reviews performed by a group of industry stakeholders, documentation of the peer review suggestions, providing resolutions and responses to the peer review comments. The objective of this technical peer review is to obtain representative feedback on the proposed framework to improve the technical qualities of its methodology and readiness for deployment to the industry. Feedback may identify potential areas for improvement and further development. The Subject Matter experts were invited to review the latest project report documenting the methodology developed in the project and provide evaluations of the technical qualities of the proposed framework and relevant methods. The reviewed project report is “An Integrated Framework for Risk Assessment of High Safety-significant Safety-related Digital Instrumentation and Control Systems in Nuclear Power Plants: Methodology and Demonstration” INL/RPT-22-68656 (short as “INL/RPT-22-68656” in this report). This peer review report documents the technical questions provided for technical peer review and introduces the technical peer reviewers from the stakeholders including nuclear utilities, regulators, and universities. Comments from technical peer reviewers and the resolutions and responses to these comments are outlined. Insights and lessons learned from the technical peer review are summarized in conclusions and future work. The primary audience of this report are DI&C designers, engineers, and probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) practitioners. This includes stakeholders, such as the nuclear utilities and regulators who consider the deployment and upgrade of DI&C systems, DI&C software developers and reviewers, and cybersecurity specialists.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Finding of No Adverse Effect for the Façade Alteration of Building 23-117, Administration Building, Mercury, Area 23, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) plans to update the façade of Building 23-117 in the town of Mercury (Nevada State Historic Preservation Office [SHPO] Resource No. B15256), which is on the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) in Nye County, Nevada. The purpose of the undertaking is to incorporate Building 23-117 into the new Mercury campus in accordance with the master plan for the modernization of Mercury. The NNSA/NFO will implement this undertaking in accordance with the Programmatic Agreement between the National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office and the Nevada State Historic Preservation Officer Regarding Modernization and Operational Maintenance of the Nevada National Security Site, at Mercury in Nye County, Nevada, hereafter referred to as the Mercury PA. Building 23-117 was built in 1982 as the architect-engineer Administration Building1 for Holmes & Narver, a government contractor who helped design and engineer the town of Mercury and other areas on the NNSS from its inception until the termination of their contract in 1990. The building continued to be used by subsequent government contractors and is currently still in use by MSTS. The town of Mercury and the immediate surrounding area have been formally determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (National Register, NRHP) as the Mercury Historic District (MHD, SHPO Resource No. D230) under Criteria A and C for its importance in supporting nuclear testing and scientific research from 1951 through 1992. Building 23-117 was identified as a contributing element to the MHD in a 2018 architectural survey of the district (Reno et al.) and recorded on a Nevada Architectural Resource Assessment (ARA) form (Reno et al. 2017). It is a historic property for the purposes of compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and is subject to the stipulations of the Mercury PA. The NNSA/NFO requested that Desert Research Institute (DRI), cultural resource subject matter experts, analyze the effects of the proposed project on historic properties in the Area of Potential Effect (APE) and make a recommended finding for the undertaking in accordance with Section 106 of the NHPA and the Mercury PA. The purpose of this letter report is to submit documentation related to the mitigation of the façade alteration of Building 23-117 (Nevada State Historic Preservation Office [SHPO] Resource No. B15256) in the Mercury Historic District (MHD, SHPO Resource No. D230). This submission is intended to comply with the stipulations in the Programmatic Agreement between the National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office and the Nevada State Historic Preservation Officer Regarding Modernization and Operational Maintenance of the Nevada National Security Site at Mercury in Nye County, Nevada, hereafter referred to as the Mercury PA.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

Increased Interpretability for Model-Driven Deception: MARS LDRD Project

Machine learning has been proposed as a solution to several cybersecurity solutions and one of the most promising applications is for digital twins for intrusion detection and driving deceptive defense. However, machine learning techniques often result in a black-box function that is difficult for end users to interpret which for deception limits their ability to effectively define decoys. In this report, an approach to validate the equations learned are accurate is provided and demonstrated. Following, begins the process of addressing this issue for a model-driven deception technology that produces equations representing the physical process controlled by operation technology devices. This research was performed by applying subject matter expert context to machine learned models.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2022

Triton Initiative: FY22 Communications, Outreach, and Engagement End-of-Year Report

The Department of Energy (DOE) Water Power Technologies Office (WPTO) Triton Initiative supports the advancement of the marine energy (ME) industry through environmental monitoring research and technology development. This report presents the results and analysis of the Triton Initiative’s communications, outreach, and engagement (TCOE) efforts in fiscal year 2022. The primary TCOE goals were to: (1) educate and raise awareness of ME and the role of Triton's environmental monitoring research in supporting the industry; (2) build trust with audiences through transparent communications and outreach; and (3) evaluate and refine TCOE tactics based on feedback and metrics. To support these goals, the TCOE team used multiple platforms and approaches. Notable achievements include: (1) 12 newsletter issues sent to 185 subscribers with an average open rate of 56.4%. (2) 10 Triton Stories, resulting in 2,871 collective views contributing to 46% of all Triton website views. (3) 78 Triton-specific social media posts, which generated a total of 81,896 impressions, 1,037 post-clicks, and 7,814 video views. (4) 6,320 Triton website views with increased search engine optimization ranking in several categories. (5) 3 Triton researchers interviewed as guests on two different podcasts, Water Women and Big Deep: An Ocean Podcast. (6) A Triton special issue of the Journal of Marine Science and Engineering (JMSE) featuring 10 peer reviewed publications. All articles ranked in the top 25%, and two in the top 5%, for digital attention of all research outputs scored by Altmetric. (7) A seven-part webinar series called Triton Talks to share and discuss research and results from the research published in the JMSE special issue. Triton leveraged unique opportunities, particularly the JMSE special issue, to disseminate research results to end users, educate stakeholders, and gain valuable feedback. These concerted communication efforts increased exposure across platforms ultimately resulting in greater reach and access across audiences. Based on audience analyses of webinar attendees and newsletter subscribers, the TCOE team was able to successfully engage with general audiences, research partners, and ME stakeholders, including subject matter experts from government agencies, research organizations, and the regulatory community. The TCOE task established channels to gather input and create opportunities for two-way communication with people engaged with Triton’s outreach efforts. The feedback received will enable the TCOE team to support its goals for ongoing evaluation of outreach and engagement tools while continuing to build trust in the ME community and educate diverse audiences about the impactful research conducted by the Triton Initiative. This report is a Triton Initiative Fiscal Year 2022 Quarter 4 Milestone Deliverable due to the DOE WPTO Sponsor on 9/30/2022. An updated version to include data through 9/30/2022 will be delivered in October 2022.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗

DOE OSTI2023

State Energy Justice Roundtable Series: Energy Justice Metrics

The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC), National Association of State Energy Officials (NASEO), and National Governors Association (NGA) hosted a State Energy Justice Roundtable (Roundtable) in April 2022. Participants included federal and state decision-makers, members of community-based organizations, and subject-matter experts. The Roundtable members explored current state efforts to articulate and incorporate energy justice concerns into energy-related decision-making. Participants established connections with one another to better understand the current landscape of existing resources, learn about emerging efforts, and identify ongoing support opportunities for advancing energy justice.This paper is one of five authored by the host organizations on topics that were the focus of the Roundtable. Each paper summarizes key themes, emerging efforts, and group takeaways that were discussed at the Roundtable and should assist state members in developing and meeting their own state goals around energy justice. The papers all include the same discussions of background, introduction, and reading list so they can be read separately. Each paper is written from the perspective of one association and includes options for its members to take actions that could support more equitable state energy policies and programs. The five papers cover: (1) Participation in decision making (NARUC), (2) Customer affordability and arrearages (NARUC), (3) Energy justice metrics (NARUC), (4) Equity in clean energy research and development (NASEO), and (5) Equitable distributed energy resource (DER) access (NGA). The resources and recommendations listed in these papers are not meant to be exhaustive, as this field of study continues to evolve. Although this brief is focused on electricity, energy justice considerations extend to all energy needs and services, including the impact of energy extraction, processing, and distribution functions.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2023

State Energy Justice Roundtable Series: Customer Affordability and Arrearages

The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC), National Association of State Energy Officials (NASEO), and National Governors Association (NGA) hosted a State Energy Justice Roundtable (Roundtable) in April 2022. Participants included federal and state decision-makers, members of community-based organizations, and subject-matter experts. The Roundtable members explored current state efforts to articulate and incorporate energy justice concerns into energy-related decision-making. Participants established connections with one another to better understand the current landscape of existing resources, learn about emerging efforts, and identify ongoing support opportunities for advancing energy justice. This paper is one of five authored by the host organizations on topics that were the focus of the Roundtable. Each paper summarizes key themes, emerging efforts, and group takeaways that were discussed at the Roundtable and should assist state members in developing and meeting their own state goals around energy justice. The papers all include the same discussions of background, introduction, and reading list so they can be read separately. Each paper is written from the perspective of one association and includes options for its members to take actions that could support more equitable state energy policies and programs. The five papers cover: (1) Participation in decision making (NARUC) (2) Customer affordability and arrearages (NARUC) (3) Energy justice metrics (NARUC) (4) Equity in clean energy research and development (NASEO) (5) Equitable distributed energy resource (DER) access (NGA). The resources and recommendations listed in these papers are not meant to be exhaustive, as this field of study continues to evolve. Although this brief is focused on electricity, energy justice considerations extend to all energy needs and services, including the impact of energy extraction, processing, and distribution functions.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2023

State Energy Justice Roundtable Series: Participation in Decision Making

The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC), National Association of State Energy Officials (NASEO), and National Governors Association (NGA) hosted a State Energy Justice Roundtable (Roundtable) in April 2022. Participants included federal and state decision-makers, members of community-based organizations, and subject-matter experts. The Roundtable members explored current state efforts to articulate and incorporate energy justice concerns into energy-related decision-making. Participants established connections with one another to better understand the current landscape of existing resources, learn about emerging efforts, and identify ongoing support opportunities for advancing energy justice. This paper is one of five authored by the host organizations on topics that were the focus of the Roundtable. Each paper summarizes key themes, emerging efforts, and group takeaways that were discussed at the Roundtable and should assist state members in developing and meeting their own state goals around energy justice. The papers all include the same discussions of background, introduction, and reading list so they can be read separately. Each paper is written from the perspective of one association and includes options for its members to take actions that could support more equitable state energy policies and programs. The five papers cover: • Participation in decision making (NARUC) • Customer affordability and arrearages (NARUC) • Energy justice metrics (NARUC) • Equity in clean energy research and development (NASEO) • Equitable distributed energy resource (DER) access (NGA). The resources and recommendations listed in these papers are not meant to be exhaustive, as this field of study continues to evolve. Although this brief is focused on electricity, energy justice considerations extend to all energy needs and services, including the impact of energy extraction, processing, and distribution functions.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2024

Reaction Evolution Flow Chart - The Critical Path to DDT [Slides]

Purpose (and limitations): The following flow-chart identifies and organizes a generalized, and simplified, sequence of necessary conditions for accidental ignition and reaction growth in a consolidated, polymer-bonded explosive (PBX) charge that has been insulted. A ‘yes’ answer to each question will lead down the critical path and produce violent, explosive reactions, up to and possibly including transition to detonation. Alternatively, any ‘no’ answer will serve as an off-ramp from the path resulting in less violent responses. It is important to note that this flow-chart is a high-level tool to flag potential operational vulnerabilities, but lacks the details needed to stand alone as a sole-source for risk determination. Each question represents a significant area of study and, therefore, the flow chart is intended to be supplemented by subject matter expert elicitations.

45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEF↗