Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “reporting”

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 109 records · Page 6

Fermilab Report - Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory Monthly Report, June 1979

Fermilab is engaged in several new ventures building for the future of the Laboratory and for excursions into new energy ranges. At the same time, it should be remembered that Fermilab also carries out a vigorous program of particle physics at 400 GeV, or thereabouts, with experimenters from a host of different institutions and a number of different countries. This program, which will be the backbone of Fermilab until the era of TeV physics begins, depends completely on reliable operation of the Fermilab accelerator at the intensities and in the modes needed for experiments. There has not been a review of accelerator operation in these pages since August, 1976, and it seems appropriate to discuss the progress of the accelerator.

Cole, F. T.↗

Reported Energy and Cost Savings from the DOE ESPC IDIQ Program: FY 2024

Energy Savings Performance Contracts (ESPCs)are a contractual mechanism that allow a federal agency to procure energy savings and facility improvements without upfront capital costs to reduce costs and resiliency. ESPCs are covered under FAR Part 23.2, and 42 USC § 8287. Section 8287(a)(2)(A) of Title 42 of the U.S. Code requires that each energy savings performance contract (ESPC) undergo an annual energy audit, resulting in a separate audit report for every project. The objective of the present report is to compile and analyze all annual ESPC audit reports issued between October 1, 2023, and September 30, 2024, for projects awarded under Generations 1, 2, and 3 of DOE’s ESPC IDIQ contracts. During this period, 205 measurement and verification (M&V) reports were produced for 200 projects; the total number of reports exceeds the number of projects because some projects generated more than one report(for example, a few projects measure savings twice per year and produce two audit reports annually, each covering a different six-month period). By aggregating the results from these individual audits, the report determines the portfolio-wide realization rate of energy and cost savings for all active ESPC projects awarded under DOE’s IDIQ program. For all 205audit reports, sufficient information was available to compare project-level estimated, reported, and guaranteed cost savings. Reported cost savings accounted for ESCO verified savings per each project’s M&V plan. The total reported cost savings for the period addressed were $\$$647.8million,compared with the total guaranteed cost savings of $\$$601.6million. On average across the reported projects: •ESPC contractors guaranteed 92.8% of the estimated cost savings• projects reported achieving 100.0% of the estimated cost savings• projects reported achieving 107.7% of the guaranteed cost savings. The M&V performed for the period indicated adjustments for government operations and maintenance impacts to savings amount to$\$$43.9millionandcould be restored with the original operational parameters for impacted projects. Accounting for this potential cost savings impact, these projects still realized 100.4% of the guaranteed cost savings. The information on estimated and reported energy savings was collected and compared for all 205of the reports examined. Based on site energy, estimated savings totaled 14.88million MMBtu, and reported savings were 15.33million MMBtu; 3.1% greater than the estimated energy savings. All of the reports examined contained sufficient information to calculate source energy savings. Based on site-adjusted source energy, total estimated energy savings were 20.90 million MMBtu, and reported savings were 21.22million MMBtu, 101.5% of the estimated energy savings. For water savings, the estimated savings were 11,539,055 kGal and the reported savings were 13,315,930 kGal. This means 1,776,875 kGal more water was saved than estimated, which is about 15% higher than the estimate. These results indicate that, overall, the reported energy savings slightly exceeded the estimated values, while estimated water savings significantly exceeded estimated values, suggesting that the projects achieved greater cost savings than originally projected. The total annual expense for the ESCOs to perform annual M&V audits and reporting was $\$$10.02million. Through this effort, $\$$647.8 million in annual cost savings was verified. The M&V results indicated that $\$$43.9 million of these verified savings reflected adjustments due to government operations A-6and maintenance impacts, which could be restored under the original operational parameters for the affected projects. These findings show the value of M&V that only costs 1.7%of the guaranteed cost savings to ensure guarantees are met.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Characterization and Analysis of the Energy-Reporting Accuracy of Connected Devices

Emerging energy-efficient building systems increasingly exhibit greater functionality, often requiring multiple operating modes (e.g. white-tunability for lighting products and data traffic for devices with networked, integrated sensors). This increased functionality makes energy consumption estimates more complex. Given that these functions consume energy, the energy performance of such building systems is dependent on what operating modes they use and how much time they spend in each mode. Devices and systems that can report their own energy consumption mitigate this energy-performance uncertainty. This study explores the energy-reporting accuracy of market-available connected electrical outlets. The study considers two residential-market products (five units each, one outlet per unit) and three commercial-market products (two units each, 18 to 24 outlets per unit) with the ability to report power drawn and/or energy consumed by devices connected to their receptacles. The products were purchased through typical market channels. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) conducted testing in December 2018 at its Connected Lighting Test Bed (CLTB), using a custom-developed test setup and method adapted from industry standards. The setup collected energy-consumption data reported by the outlet devices under test (DUTs) at one-minute intervals and compared that data with measurements taken by a reference meter over a range of test conditions. The residential products reported power draw but not interval or cumulative energy consumption. The commercial products reported both power draw and cumulative energy consumption. Relative reporting error (RRE) was calculated for all measurements, and analysis of the results revealed variations across devices and test conditions. The total number of measurements (50 for each residential product, 60 for each commercial product) offers an appreciable comparison of performance at the make/model level. The average RRE of the residential products derived from reported power draw was -0.02% and -1.20%. The average RRE for two of the three the commercial products derived from reported power draw was worse than those of the residential products (-2.40%, -2.72%, -0.36%). The internal integration of power over time, used to calculate cumulative energy consumption, typically occurs at current and voltage sampling rates much higher than once per minute. This suggests that the average commercial-product RRE derived from reported energy consumption should be very consistent and better than performance based on reported power draw. However, the RRE derived from reported energy consumption varied significantly across the three makes of commercial-market products and was uniformly less accurate than performance based on reported power draw. Subsequent analysis identified a number of root causes for this decrease in performance, most of which were related to reporting resolution. The goals of this study are to generate awareness of building systems capable of reporting their own energy consumption, further interest in the value of energy data for a variety of uses, draw attention to how the accuracy of reported metrics can be characterized, and quantify the performance variation found in marketavailable products. The results of this study and subsequent related work may be relevant to stakeholders in industry-specification and standards-development organizations. The methods this study employs could inform test and measurement procedures and performance classifications for connected outlets, lighting products, and other building systems capable of reporting their own energy consumption. The study concludes with stakeholder recommendations, including the following: • Energy-reporting device and system manufacturers developing products that report energy consumption should characterize the accuracy of reported metrics using a reference meter calibrated by an independent laboratory that was accredited by an ILAC MRA signatory (and whose scope of accreditation explicitly covers energy measurement), and should include this information on product data sheets. • Standards and specification development organizations should develop application-specific performance classifications that end users can understand and relate to their energy-data use needs (e.g., 2% accuracy class for utility streetlight energy billing needs, or 10% accuracy class for ESCO performance verification needs). • Current or potential owners, operators, and specifiers of energy-reporting building systems should rigorously analyze the dependency of current and planned energy-data use cases on accuracy, noting in particular the dependence (or lack thereof) on relative vs. absolute accuracy, and on trueness vs. precision (i.e., repeatability), and should communicate use-case needs to industry standards and specification organizations.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

Characterization and Analysis of the Energy-Reporting Accuracy of Connected Devices

Emerging energy-efficient building systems increasingly exhibit greater functionality, often requiring multiple operating modes (e.g. white-tunability for lighting products and data traffic for devices with networked, integrated sensors). This increased functionality makes energy consumption estimates more complex. Given that these functions consume energy, the energy performance of such building systems is dependent on what operating modes they use and how much time they spend in each mode. Devices and systems that can report their own energy consumption mitigate this energy-performance uncertainty. This study explores the energy-reporting accuracy of market-available connected electrical outlets. The study considers two residential-market products (five units each, one outlet per unit) and three commercial-market products (two units each, 18 to 24 outlets per unit) with the ability to report power drawn and/or energy consumed by devices connected to their receptacles. The products were purchased through typical market channels. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) conducted testing in December 2018 at its Connected Lighting Test Bed (CLTB), using a custom-developed test setup and method adapted from industry standards. The setup collected energy-consumption data reported by the outlet devices under test (DUTs) at one-minute intervals and compared that data with measurements taken by a reference meter over a range of test conditions. The residential products reported power draw but not interval or cumulative energy consumption. The commercial products reported both power draw and cumulative energy consumption. Relative reporting error (RRE) was calculated for all measurements, and analysis of the results revealed variations across devices and test conditions. The total number of measurements (50 for each residential product, 60 for each commercial product) offers an appreciable comparison of performance at the make/model level. The average RRE of the residential products derived from reported power draw was -0.02% and -1.20%. The average RRE for two of the three the commercial products derived from reported power draw was worse than those of the residential products (-2.40%, -2.72%, -0.36%). The internal integration of power over time, used to calculate cumulative energy consumption, typically occurs at current and voltage sampling rates much higher than once per minute. This suggests that the average commercial-product RRE derived from reported energy consumption should be very consistent and better than performance based on reported power draw. However, the RRE derived from reported energy consumption varied significantly across the three makes of commercial-market products and was uniformly less accurate than performance based on reported power draw. Subsequent analysis identified a number of root causes for this decrease in performance, most of which were related to reporting resolution. The goals of this study are to generate awareness of building systems capable of reporting their own energy consumption, further interest in the value of energy data for a variety of uses, draw attention to how the accuracy of reported metrics can be characterized, and quantify the performance variation found in marketavailable products. The results of this study and subsequent related work may be relevant to stakeholders in industry-specification and standards-development organizations. The methods this study employs could inform test and measurement procedures and performance classifications for connected outlets, lighting products, and other building systems capable of reporting their own energy consumption. The study concludes with stakeholder recommendations, including the following: • Energy-reporting device and system manufacturers developing products that report energy consumption should characterize the accuracy of reported metrics using a reference meter calibrated by an independent laboratory that was accredited by an ILAC MRA signatory (and whose scope of accreditation explicitly covers energy measurement), and should include this information on product data sheets. • Standards and specification development organizations should develop application-specific performance classifications that end users can understand and relate to their energy-data use needs (e.g., 2% accuracy class for utility streetlight energy billing needs, or 10% accuracy class for ESCO performance verification needs). • Current or potential owners, operators, and specifiers of energy-reporting building systems should rigorously analyze the dependency of current and planned energy-data use cases on accuracy, noting in particular the dependence (or lack thereof) on relative vs. absolute accuracy, and on trueness vs. precision (i.e., repeatability), and should communicate use-case needs to industry standards and specification organizations.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Environmental Report 2021

The purposes of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Environmental Report 2021 are to record Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s (LLNL’s) compliance with environmental standards and requirements, describe LLNL’s environmental protection and remediation programs, and present the results of environmental monitoring at the two LLNL sites—the Livermore Site and Site 300. The report is prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) by LLNL’s Environmental Functional Area. Submittal of the report satisfies requirements under DOE Order 231.1B, “Environment, Safety and Health Reporting,” and DOE Order 458.1, “Radiation Protection of the Public and Environment.” The report is distributed electronically and is available at https://saer.llnl.gov/, the website for the LLNL annual environmental report. Previous LLNL annual environmental reports beginning with 1994 are also on the website. Some references in the electronic report text are underlined, which indicates that they are clickable links. Clicking on one of these links will open the related document, data workbook, or website. Sampling location maps throughout this report were created using ArcGIS® software by Esri. The report begins with an executive summary, which provides the purpose of the report and an overview of LLNL’s compliance and monitoring results. The first three chapters provide background information: Chapter 1 is an overview of the location, meteorology, and hydrogeology of the two LLNL sites; Chapter 2 is a summary of LLNL’s compliance with environmental regulations; and Chapter 3 is a description of LLNL’s environmental programs with an emphasis on the Environmental Management System including pollution prevention. The majority of the report covers LLNL’s environmental monitoring programs and monitoring data for 2021: effluent and ambient air monitoring and dose assessment (Chapter 4); waters, including wastewater, storm water runoff, surface water, rain, and groundwater (Chapter 5); and terrestrial, including soil, sediment, vegetation, foodstuff, ambient radiation, and special status wildlife and plants (Chapter 6). The remaining two chapters discuss LLNL’s groundwater remediation program (Chapter 7), and quality assurance for the environmental monitoring programs (Chapter 8). Complete monitoring data, which are summarized in the body of the report, are provided in Appendix A. The report uses Système International units, consistent with the federal Metric Conversion Act of 1975 and Executive Order 12770, “Metric Usage in Federal Government Programs” (1991). For ease of comparison to environmental reports issued prior to 1991, dose values and many radiological measurements are given in both metric and U.S. customary units. A conversion table is provided in the glossary. The report is the responsibility of LLNL’s Environmental Functional Area. Monitoring data were obtained through the combined efforts of the Environmental Functional Area; Environmental Restoration Department; Physical and Life Sciences Environmental Monitoring Radiological Laboratory; and the Radiation Protection Functional Area.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

ESS-DIVE Unoccupied Aerial Systems (UAS) Reporting Format v1

Here we present documentation of the ESS-DIVE reporting format for Unoccupied Aerial System (UAS) data and metadata. This reporting format provides guidance to data contributors on how to store data to maximize their discoverability, facilitate their efficient reuse, and add value to individual datasets. For data users, the reporting format will better allow data repositories to optimize data search and extraction, and more readily integrate similar data into harmonized synthesis products. The reporting format provides templates and guidance for the reporting of metadata for UAS experimental campaigns, individual flights, platform and sensor description. To improve data access and discoverability, the reporting format proposes a data description scheme of Levels based on the degree of processing, where Level 0 includes raw data, through to Level 3 being derived data end products. A range of examples of data types for each Level are given, with suggested file naming schemes. The reporting format presented here is intended to form a foundation for future development that will accommodate new UAS technologies and approaches to data access and use in the future. The reporting format documentation is maintained and updated on the ESS-DIVE Community Space GitHub at https://github.com/ess-dive-community/essdive-uas. This data package is the first published version of this reporting format, and comprises a zip file of the complete content of https://github.com/ess-dive-community/essdive-uas v1.0. The zip contains the reporting format description, instructions and variable definitions in GitHub markdown language (*.md) and metadata templates in csv format. The reporting format is designed to be compatible with other ESS-DIVE formats, and it is specifically recommended that this reporting format be used in conjunction with the File-level metadata (FLMD) and comma separated values (csv) reporting formats for submission to the ESS-DIVE repository.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Addressing delayed case reporting in infectious disease forecast modeling

Infectious disease forecasting is of great interest to the public health community and policymakers, since forecasts can provide insight into disease dynamics in the near future and inform interventions. Due to delays in case reporting, however, forecasting models may often underestimate the current and future disease burden. In this paper, we propose a general framework for addressing reporting delay in disease forecasting efforts with the goal of improving forecasts. We propose strategies for leveraging either historical data on case reporting or external internet-based data to estimate the amount of reporting error. We then describe several approaches for adapting general forecasting pipelines to account for under- or over-reporting of cases. We apply these methods to address reporting delay in data on dengue fever cases in Puerto Rico from 1990 to 2009 and to reports of influenza-like illness (ILI) in the United States between 2010 and 2019. Through a simulation study, we compare method performance and evaluate robustness to assumption violations. Our results show that forecasting accuracy and prediction coverage almost always increase when correction methods are implemented to address reporting delay. Some of these methods required knowledge about the reporting error or high quality external data, which may not always be available. Provided alternatives include excluding recently-reported data and performing sensitivity analysis. This work provides intuition and guidance for handling delay in disease case reporting and may serve as a useful resource to inform practical infectious disease forecasting efforts.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗

Core Analysis E-Reports Produced for the Southwest Regional Partnership on Carbon Sequestration for Wells 13-10A, 13-14, and 32-8 of the Farnsworth Unit, Texas

The submission is three electronic reports (e-reports) produced by Terra Tek, a former Schlumberger company, for and under the oversight of the Southwest Regional Partnership on Carbon Sequestration (SWP). The SWP designed and implemented a coring and core analysis program in conjunction with the previous field operator Chaparral Energy, L.L.C. The main SWP contacts who oversaw the coring and core analysis program, including geologic core descriptions and sample selection for testing by the Terra Tek, are listed below in the Authors section. The three reports are for Wells 13-10A, 13-14, and 32-8 of the Farnsworth Unit, TX, a site of the SWP's CO2 storage and enhanced oil recovery project. The e-reports include many data types that are not listed in full detail here, but may include: geomechanical, geochemical, and petrophysical measurements; white light and UV core photos; spectral gamma logs on the core; and Heterogeneous Rock Analysis logs. Fracture core review reports are included for Wells 13-14 and 32-8. The three e-reports each have many subfolders with the various types of data in spreadsheets, pdfs, image files, or other formats. The main e-reports for each well are listed by the well name. The sub-folder “E-Report” for each well has a Report.html file, which, when opened, will have hyperlinks to the various data sets and information. The files in the zipped folder will need to be extracted for the Report.html files to work properly. These authors thank Joseph Hall, a geologist formerly of Chaparral Energy, L.L.C., for assistance in designing the coring program, his geologic expertise of the Farnsworth Unit, and his assistance with characterizing the core. Christopher Gillespie, of Terra Tek at the time, managed the myriad geomechanical, geochemical, and petrophysical measurements provided by Terra Tek for this project. The core from which the samples were collected for this project are housed at the Subsurface Data and Core Libraries of the New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources, Socorro, New Mexico, USA. Funding for this project is provided by the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) through the Southwest Regional Partnership on Carbon Sequestration (SWP) under Award No. DE-FC26-05NT42591. 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 U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-NA0003525. These e-reports describe objective technical results and analysis. Any subjective views or opinions that might be expressed in the reports do not necessarily represent the views of the US Department of Energy or the United States Government.

Caprock↗

Prevalence of Self-Reported Bothersome Tinnitus in U.S. Army Soldiers From January 1, 2015, Through September 30, 2019

Purpose: Tinnitus is a symptom of auditory dysfunction or injury and can be a precursor to permanent hearing loss. Tinnitus can interfere with communication, sleep, concentration, and mood; when this occurs, it is referred to as bothersome tinnitus. Annual hearing surveillance in the U.S. Army includes screening for bothersome tinnitus. Estimating the prevalence of self-reported bothersome tinnitus can facilitate prioritization of prevention and education efforts. The objective of this study was to examine Army hearing conservation data to estimate the prevalence of self-reported bothersome tinnitus as a function of age, hearing, sex, service component, and pay grade. Method: The study employed a cross-sectional, retrospective design. Records from 1,485,059 U.S. Army Soldiers retrieved from the Defense Occupational and Environmental Health Readiness System–Hearing Conservation were analyzed. Descriptive statistics and multinomial logistic regression analysis were used to estimate the prevalence of bothersome tinnitus and its associations with Soldiers' demographic characteristics. Results: The estimated prevalence of self-reported bothersome tinnitus was 17.1% between January 1, 2015, and September 30, 2019; 13.6% of the Soldiers reported “bothered a little” and 3.5% reported “bothered a lot.” Proportionally, the prevalence of self-reported bothersome tinnitus was higher for males, older Soldiers, and Reserve Component Soldiers. For every 1-year increase in age, the odds of self-reporting “bothered a little” tinnitus relative to “bothered not at all tinnitus” would be expected to increase by 2.2% (2.1%, 2.3%), and the odds of self-reporting “bothered a lot” tinnitus relative to “bothered not at all” tinnitus would be expected to increase by 3.6% (3.5%, 3.7%). Conclusions: The self-reported prevalence of bothersome tinnitus in the U.S. Army (17.1%) is substantially higher than that of the general population, where prevalence of bothersome tinnitus is estimated at 6.6%. Examination of bothersome tinnitus among Soldiers is an important step toward optimizing prevention, education, and intervention efforts.

Audiology & Speech-Language Pathology↗

ESS-DIVE reporting format for leaf-level gas exchange data and metadata

Here we present documentation of the ESS-DIVE reporting format for leaf-level gas exchange data and metadata. This reporting format provides guidance to data contributors on how to store data to maximize their discoverability, facilitate their efficient reuse, and add value to individual datasets. For data users, the reporting format will better allow data repositories to optimize data search and extraction, and more readily integrate similar data into harmonized synthesis products. The reporting format specifies data table variable naming and unit conventions, as well as metadata characterizing experimental conditions and protocols. For common data types that were the focus of this initial version of the reporting format, i.e., survey measurements, dark respiration, carbon dioxide and light response curves, and parameters derived from those measurements, we took a further step of defining required additional data that would maximize the potential reuse of those data types. To aid data contributors and the development of data ingest tools by data repositories we provided a translation table comparing the outputs of common gas exchange instruments. The reporting format presented here is intended to form a foundation for future development that will incorporate additional data types and variables as gas exchange systems and measurement approaches advance in the future. The reporting format documentation is maintained and updated on the ESS-DIVE Community Space GitHub. This data package is the first published version of this reporting format, and comprises a zip file of the complete content of https://github.com/ess-dive-community/essdive-leaf-gas-exchange v1.0. The zip contains the reporting format description, guidelines, variable tables and instructions in GitHub markdown language (*.md) and 2 metadata templates as spreadsheets with drop down options (*.xlsx files, also function in GoogleSheets).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

2019 LANL Radionuclide Air Emissions Report

In June 2020, Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) submitted letter ESHQSS: 20-025 to Region 6 of the Unites States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This letter transmitted the 2019 LANL Radionuclide Air Emissions Report to the EPA. This report summarizes LANL operations, air emissions of radionuclides, and subsequent off-site dose consequence from these emissions for calendar year 2019. This report is issued to meet requirements of 40 CFR 61 Subpart H, National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities. This regulation, called the Radionuclide NESHAP, establishes a limit of 10 millirem per year to the maximally exposed member of the public and requires an annual report to be submitted to the appropriate EPA Region by June 30th of each year. LANL’s off-site dose from airborne emissions of radionuclides in 2019 was 0.43 millirem. The normal practice is to issue this report directly to EPA Region 6 in June of each year, and then after the report is accepted by the EPA, re-issue the report for inclusion in the LANL Electronic Public Reading Room (EPRR). This second part is usually done in July of each year, but this step was overlooked in July 2020 due to other commitments. We regret this error. This omission was noted in late 2020; we are submitting the 2019 LANL Radionuclide Air Emissions Report to the EPRR now in December 2020. Aside from the addition of this cover sheet explaining the delay, the report is unchanged from the version submitted to EPA Region 6 in June.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Annual Site Environment Report for Calendar Year 2023 - Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory

This report provides the US Department of Energy (DOE) and the public with information on the level of radioactive and non-radioactive pollutants (if any) that are added to the environment as a result of Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory’s (PPPL) operations. This report fulfills the annual public reporting requirements of DOE Order 231.1B. The results of PPPL’s 2023 environmental surveillance and monitoring program are presented and discussed. The report also summarizes environmental initiatives, assessments, and community involvement programs that were undertaken in 2023. This report provides the US Department of Energy (DOE) and the public with information on the level of radioactive and non-radioactive pollutants (if any) that are added to the environment as a result of Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory’s (PPPL) operations. This report fulfills the annual public reporting requirements of DOE Order 231.1B. The results of PPPL’s 2023 environmental surveillance and monitoring program are presented and discussed. The report also summarizes environmental initiatives, assessments, and community involvement programs that were undertaken in 2023. In 2023, PPPL’s radiological environmental monitoring program measured tritium in the air at onsite sampling stations. Using highly sensitive air monitors, PPPL is capable of detecting small changes in the ambient levels of tritium. The operation of monitors located on D-site is used to demonstrate compliance with the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) regulations. Also included in PPPL’s radiological environmental monitoring program, are water monitoring – ground, surface, and waste waters. PPPL’s radiological monitoring program characterized the background levels of tritium in the environment and those data are presented in this report. Ground water monitoring continued under New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection’s (NJDEP) Site Remediation Program regulations. PPPL monitored for non-radiological contaminants, mainly volatile organic compounds (components of common degreasing solvents). In 2023, PPPL complied with permit limits for surface water and sanitary wastewater discharges. PPPL was honored with an award for EPEAT-certified electronics purchasing from the Global Electronics Council on July 27, 2023.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗

Addendum 2 to the Closure Report for CAU 577 Area 5 Chromium Containing Waste Disposal Cells, NNSS, Nevada

Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 577, “Area 5 Chromium Containing Waste Disposal Cells,” includes five low-level waste cells at the Nevada National Security Site Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site where buried waste received from Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., was subsequently determined to contain chromium that exceeded the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure regulatory limit, which would require the waste to carry hazardous waste code D007. CAU 577 was created to satisfy the requirements of the Settlement Agreement (SA) executed between the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) and the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) on April 25, 2019 (NDEP 2019). The SA required that the chromium-containing waste received from NFS would be addressed following the closure process laid out in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO). The FFACO process ensures proper closure of the chromium-containing waste and documentation of that closure through FFACO-type documents. The following three Corrective Action Sites (CASs) were closed, and their closure was documented in the Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 577: Area 5 Chromium Containing Waste Disposal Cells, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, DOE/EMNV--0030, dated September 2021 (U.S. Department of Energy [DOE] Environmental Management [EM] Nevada Program 2021a): • CAS 05-21-02, Waste Disposal Cell 12 • CAS 05-21-03, Waste Disposal Cell 15 • CAS 05-21-04, Waste Disposal Cell 17 Closure of the following CAS was previously documented in the Addendum to the Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 577: Area 5 Chromium Containing Waste Disposal Cells, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, DOE/EMNV--0030-ADD, dated September 2022 (DOE EM Nevada Program 2022): • CAS 05-21-05, Waste Disposal Cell 20 This second addendum to the Closure Report documents the closure activities that have occurred for CAS 05-21-06, Waste Disposal Cell 21. This is the last CAS in CAU 577. The final waste shipment was placed in the waste disposal cell on November 21, 2022. Following this, closure activities began on November 28, 2022, and were conducted according to the Corrective Action Decision Document/Corrective Action Plan (CADD/CAP) for CAU 577 (DOE EM Nevada Program 2021b). The following closure activities were performed: • Constructing an engineered evapotranspiration cover • Installing two subsidence monuments and vadose zone monitoring equipment • Seeding the cover with a mixture of native plant species • Installing four concrete monuments on the corners of the cover and placing two use restriction (UR) warning signs on each monument These activities fulfill applicable federal and state regulations for closure of CAS 05-21-06 and minimize potential future exposure pathways to buried waste. Completed closure activities are also consistent with closure of the nine historical Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) units included in Section 10.2.2 of the RCRA Permit that governs hazardous waste management activities at the Nevada National Security Site (Permit NEV HW0101) (NDEP 2023). UR documentation for this CAS is included in Appendix B of this report. The post-closure plan is presented in detail in the CADD/CAP for CAU 577 (DOE EM Nevada Program 2021b), and the requirements are summarized in Section 5.2 of this document. In accordance with paragraph 5D of the SA, a request to incorporate the requirements for post-closure monitoring of CAU 577 was included with the permit application for RCRA Permit NEV HW0101 that was submitted in January 2022 (NNSA/NFO 2022). The request included the post-closure requirements for the three CASs that had been closed at the time of submittal of the application as well as requirements that would be implemented upon future approval of closure of the remaining two CASs. All CAU 577 post-closure monitoring requirements have been captured in the April 4, 2023, Revision 7 of the RCRA Permit (NDEP 2023). As the RCRA Permit NEV HW0101 has been revised since the submittal of the original CAU 577 Closure Report (DOE EM Nevada Program 2021a) and Addendum 1 (DOE EM Nevada Program 2022), the post-closure requirements in this Addendum 2 report do not align with the previous documents. Specific changes resulting from the issuance of Revision 7 of the RCRA Permit are discussed in Section 5.2 of this report. The requirements in this report are consistent with the current permit (NDEP 2023) and supersede all requirements listed in the CAU 577 Closure Report and Addendum 1. All CAU 577 post-closure requirements should be conducted in accordance with the version of the RCRA Permit that is current at the time of the activities being performed. The DOE EM Nevada Program is requesting a Notice of Completion from NDEP for closure of CAU 577. Although CAU 577 is not a legacy site, the FFACO process is being followed to ensure proper closure of the chromium-containing waste. Therefore, transfer of CAU 577 from Appendix III of the FFACO to Appendix IV, Closed Corrective Action Units, is requested, as all closure activities have been completed.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Fluorescent and Bioluminescent Reporter Mouse-Adapted Ebola Viruses Maintain Pathogenicity and Can Be Visualized in Vivo

Abstract Ebola virus (EBOV) causes lethal disease in humans but not in mice. Here, we generated recombinant mouse-adapted (MA) EBOVs, including 1 based on the previously reported serially adapted strain (rMA-EBOV), along with single-reporter rMA-EBOVs expressing either fluorescent (ZsGreen1 [ZsG]) or bioluminescent (nano-luciferase [nLuc]) reporters, and dual-reporter rMA-EBOVs expressing both ZsG and nLuc. No detriment to viral growth in vitro was seen with inclusion of MA-associated mutations or reporter proteins. In CD-1 mice, infection with MA-EBOV, rMA-EBOV, and single-reporter rMA-EBOVs conferred 100% lethality; infection with dual-reporter rMA-EBOV resulted in 73% lethality. Bioluminescent signal from rMA-EBOV expressing nLuc was detected in vivo and ex vivo using the IVIS Spectrum CT. Fluorescent signal from rMA-EBOV expressing ZsG was detected in situ using handheld blue-light transillumination and ex vivo through epi-illumination with the IVIS Spectrum CT. These data support the use of reporter MA-EBOV for studies of Ebola virus in animal disease models.

Immunology↗

Accuracy of self‐reported weight, height and body mass index among older people in Japan

Aim Weight and height are usually self‐reported in population‐based epidemiological surveys. While the accuracy of self‐reports has been extensively studied in younger populations, less is known in older populations. We investigated the accuracy of self‐reported weight, height and body mass (BMI) in an older cohort in Japan, where overweight/obesity and underweight coexist. Methods We used data from older Japanese adults (≥65 years) participating in the Japan Gerontological Evaluation Study in 2016 to 2017 (7357 men and 9271 women). Self‐report data were linked to objective data obtained from clinical examinations. Results The mean ± standard deviation (SD) age was 74.5 ± 5.8 years, mean ± SD weight, height and BMI were 55.7 ± 10.1 kg, 156.0 ± 8.9 cm and 22.8 ± 3.1, respectively. Results showed high intraclass correlation coefficients for self‐reported and measured values (0.97 for weight; 0.96 for height). While weight/height were overestimated among men (weight by 0.096 kg; height by 0.27 cm) and women (weight by 0.18 kg; height by 0.27 cm), BMI tended to be slightly underestimated (−0.034 kg/m 2 for men; −0.037 kg/m 2 for women). However, the absolute differences between self‐reported and measured values were not negligible; people had a higher risk for both under‐ and overestimation of their BMI category with increasing age. Lower education predicted BMI overestimation, whereas lower income predicted BMI underestimation. Conclusions Overall accuracy of self‐reported body habitus was higher in this cohort of older Japanese compared with previous reports. Nevertheless, misclassification of BMI due to the misreporting of their weight/height was more common among the oldest‐old, as well as those with lower education and income. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2020; 20: 803–810 .

Yazawa, Aki↗

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Annual Environmental Report 2019

The purposes of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) Environmental Report 2019 are to record LLNL's compliance with environmental standards and requirements, describe LLNL’s environmental protection and remediation programs, and present the results of environmental monitoring at the two LLNL sites—the Livermore Site and Site 300. The report is prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) by LLNL’s Environmental Functional Area. Submittal of the report satisfies requirements under DOE Order 231.1B, “Environment, Safety and Health Reporting,” and DOE Order 458.1, “Radiation Protection of the Public and Environment.” The report begins with an executive summary, which provides the purpose of the report and an overview of LLNL’s compliance and monitoring results. The first three chapters provide background information: Chapter 1 is an overview of the location, meteorology, and hydrogeology of the two LLNL sites; Chapter 2 is a summary of LLNL’s compliance with environmental regulations; and Chapter 3 is a description of LLNL’s environmental programs with an emphasis on the Environmental Management System including pollution prevention. The majority of the report covers LLNL’s environmental monitoring programs and monitoring data for 2019: effluent and ambient air monitoring and dose assessment (Chapter 4); waters, including wastewater, storm water runoff, surface water, rain, and groundwater (Chapter 5); and terrestrial, including soil, sediment, vegetation, foodstuff, ambient radiation, and special status wildlife and plants (Chapter 6). The remaining two chapters discuss LLNL’s groundwater remediation program (Chapter 7), and quality assurance for the environmental monitoring programs (Chapter 8). Complete monitoring data, which are summarized in the body of the report, are provided in Appendix A.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗