Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “decisions”

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 1,297 records · Page 72
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2011

Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 561: Waste Disposal Areas, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 0 with ROTC 1

CAU 561 comprises 10 CASs: (1) 01-19-01, Waste Dump; (2) 02-08-02, Waste Dump and Burn Area; (3) 03-19-02, Debris Pile; (4) 05-62-01, Radioactive Gravel Pile; (5) 12-23-09, Radioactive Waste Dump; (6) 22-19-06, Buried Waste Disposal Site; (7) 23-21-04, Waste Disposal Trenches ; (8) 25-08-02, Waste Dump; (9) 25-23-21, Radioactive Waste Dump; and (10) 25-25-19, Hydrocarbon Stains and Trench. The purpose of this CADD/CR is to provide justification and documentation supporting the recommendation for closure of CAU 561 with no further corrective action. The purpose of the CAI was to fulfill the following data needs as defined during the DQO process: (1) Determine whether COCs are present; (2) If COCs are present, determine their nature and extent; and (3) Provide sufficient information and data to complete appropriate corrective actions. The following contaminants were determined to be present at concentrations exceeding their corresponding FALs: (1) No contamination exceeding FALs was identified at CASs 01-19-01, 03-19-02, 05-62-01, 12-23-09, and 22-19-06. (2) The surface and subsurface soil within the burn area at CAS 02-08-02 contains arsenic and lead above the FALs of 23 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) and 800 mg/kg, respectively. The surface and subsurface soil within the burn area also contains melted lead slag (potential source material [PSM]). The soil within the waste piles contains polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) above the FALs. The contamination within the burn area is spread throughout the area, as it was not feasible to remove all the PSM (melted lead), while at the waste piles, the contamination is confined to the piles. (3) The surface and subsurface soils within Trenches 3 and 5 at CAS 23-21-04 contain arsenic and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) above the FALs of 23 mg/kg and 0.74 mg/kg, respectively. The soil was removed from both trenches, and the soil that remains at this CAS does not contain contamination exceeding the FALs. Lead bricks and counterweights were also removed, and the soil below these items does not contain contamination that exceeds the FAL for lead. (4) The concrete-like material at CAS 25-08-02 contains arsenic above the FAL of 23 mg/kg. This concrete-like material was removed, and the soil that remains at this CAS does not contain contamination exceeding the FALs. Lead-acid batteries were also removed, and the soil below the batteries does not contain contamination that exceeds the FAL for lead. (5) The surface soils within the main waste dump at the posted southern radioactive material area (RMA) at CAS 25-23-21 contain cesium (Cs)-137 and PCBs above the FALs of 72.9 picocuries per gram (pCi/g) and 0.74 mg/kg, respectively. The soil was removed from the RMA, and the soil that remains at this CAS does not contain contamination exceeding the FALs. (6) The surface and subsurface soils at CAS 25-25-19 do not contain contamination exceeding the FALs. In addition, lead bricks were removed, and the soil below these items does not contain contamination that exceeds the FAL for lead. The following best management practices were implemented: (1) Housekeeping debris at CASs 02-08-02, 23-21-04, 25-08-02, 25-23-21, and 25-25-19 was removed and disposed of; (2) The open trenches at CAS 23-21-04 were backfilled; (3) The waste piles at CAS 25-08-02 were removed and the area leveled to ground surface; and (4) The remaining waste piles at the main waste dump at CAS 25-23-21 were leveled to ground surface. Therefore, NNSA/NSO provides the following recommendations: (1) No further action for CASs 01-19-01, 03-19-02, 05-62-01, 12-23-09, and 22-19-06; (2) Closure in place with an FFACO use restriction (UR) at CAS 02-08-02 for the remaining PAH-, arsenic-, and lead-contaminated soil, and the melted lead PSM. The UR form and map have been filed in the NNSA/NSO Facility Information Management System, the FFACO database, and the NNSA/NSO CAU/CAS files; (3) No further corrective action at CAS 23-21-04, as the lead bricks and counterweights (PSM) have been removed, and the COCs of arsenic and PCBs in soil have been removed; (4) No further corrective action at CAS 25-08-02, as the COC of arsenic in soil has been removed, and the lead-acid batteries have been removed; (5) No further corrective action at CAS 25-23-21, as the COCs of Cs-137 and PCBs in soil have been removed, and the cast-iron pipes have been removed and disposed of; (6) No further corrective action at CAS 25-25-19, as the lead bricks (PSM) been removed; (7) A Notice of Completion to the NNSA/NSO is requested from the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection for closure of CAU 561; and (8) Corrective Action Unit 561 should be moved from Appendix III to Appendix IV of the FFACO.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2012

Initial Risk Analysis and Decision Making Framework

Commercialization of new carbon capture simulation initiative (CCSI) technology will include two key elements of risk management, namely, technical risk (will process and plant performance be effective, safe, and reliable) and enterprise risk (can project losses and costs be controlled within the constraints of market demand to maintain profitability and investor confidence). Both of these elements of risk are incorporated into the risk analysis subtask of Task 7. Thus far, this subtask has developed a prototype demonstration tool that quantifies risk based on the expected profitability of expenditures when retrofitting carbon capture technology on a stylized 650 MW pulverized coal electric power generator. The prototype is based on the selection of specific technical and financial factors believed to be important determinants of the expected profitability of carbon capture, subject to uncertainty. The uncertainty surrounding the technical performance and financial variables selected thus far is propagated in a model that calculates the expected profitability of investments in carbon capture and measures risk in terms of variability in expected net returns from these investments. Given the preliminary nature of the results of this prototype, additional work is required to expand the scope of the model to include additional risk factors, additional information on extant and proposed risk factors, the results of a qualitative risk factor elicitation process, and feedback from utilities and other interested parties involved in the carbon capture project. Additional information on proposed distributions of these risk factors will be integrated into a commercial implementation framework for the purpose of a comparative technology investment analysis.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2021

Pumped Storage Hydropower Valuation Guidebook: A Cost-Benefit and Decision Analysis Valuation Framework

As an energy storage technology, pumped storage hydropower (PSH) supports various aspects of power system operations. However, determining the value of PSH plants and their many services and contributions to the system has been a challenge. While there is a general understanding that PSH resources provide many services and benefits for the operation of power systems, estimating the value of these services—and especially the monetary value of some of those services—has been a challenge. The objective of this project, funded by the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Water Power Technologies Office (WPTO), is to advance the state of the art in assessing the value of PSH plants and their contributions to the power system. The specific goal is to develop detailed, step-by-step valuation guidance that PSH developers, plant owners or operators, and other stakeholders can use to assess the value of existing or potential new PSH plants and their services. The specific goals of this project are: (1) to develop comprehensive and transparent valuation guidance that will support consistent valuation assessments and comparisons of PSH projects or project design alternatives, (2) to test the PSH valuation guidance and its underlying methodology by applying it to two selected PSH projects, and (3) to transfer and disseminate the PSH valuation guidance to the hydropower industry, PSH developers, and other stakeholders. The authors believe that the application of a consistent, transparent, and repeatable valuation process will advance valuation assessments and allow stakeholders to compare valuation analyses performed for different PSH projects or design alternatives. It will also increase the acceptance of valuation results and enable better understanding of the true value that PSH technology brings to the grid.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Am-241, Pu-238, Pu-239/240, and Sr-90 Decision Levels for the Environmental Air Monitoring Program for the Idaho National Laboratory

This report provides a comprehensive analysis of Am-241, Pu-238, Pu-239/240, and Sr-90 radiation data collected from air monitoring sites at or near Idaho National Laboratory from June 2013 through December 2020. These data were used to compute monitoring limits that will be used to assess future measurements of Am-241, Pu-238, Pu-239/240, and Sr-90. Data were analyzed for seasonality, stationarity, and other data issues that may impact the calculation and use of the monitoring limits.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Corrective Action Decision Document/Corrective Action Plan for Corrective Action Units 101 and 102: Central and Western Pahute Mesa Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, Revision 2

This revision was prepared to document changes to the data-collection activities. Specifically, the drilling and completion of the wells have been revised, and enhancements to the surface geophysics measurements have been included. Corrective action is needed because underground radioactive contamination exists in these areas resulting from historic underground nuclear testing. The PM CAUs are located in the northwestern portion of the Nevada National Security Site and comprise 82 corrective action sites. A total of 85 underground nuclear detonations took place within the area covered by the PM CAUs between 1965 and 1992 and resulted in the release of radionuclides in the subsurface in the vicinity of the test cavities.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Agrivoltaic Decision Tools for Perennial and Field Crop Farmers

This article describes a series of spreadsheet-based tools to help farmers estimate costs, revenues, and yields from agricultural production under different configurations of agrivoltaic installations for field and perennial crops. Crop-specific log books allow farmers to project changes in activity-level costs from the field due to agrivoltaic installations. The whole-farm tool helps farmers aggregate activity-level net returns up to the farm level to calculate projections of trade-offs between crop production with or without agrivoltaic installations. We present tools for lettuce and cranberries, but the tools are comprehensive and inclusive and so can be modified for other perennial and field crops.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗