Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Tribal Energy Program”

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.

130 records · Page 8
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2015

The transportation factor in site evaluations for spent nuclear fuel storage and disposal facilities - 15460

New facility siting studies will be necessary to fulfill the Blue Ribbon Commission (BRC) on America's Nuclear Future 2012 recommendation to develop consolidated interim storage (CIS) for spent nuclear fuel in the next decade. Future site evaluations for used nuclear fuel (UNF) storage and disposal facilities must address transportation requirements, especially access to mainline railroads, early in the site selection process. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) in 2013 proposed a strategy for managing spent nuclear fuel in accordance with the BRC recommendations by establishing a pilot interim storage facility by 2021 and a consolidated interim storage facility by 2025. The authors demonstrate that currently available geographic information systems and already adopted siting criteria (defining favorable and unfavorable conditions) allow the identification of the transportation portion of a storage facility siting process to begin without delay. Ready access to the mainline rail system is absolutely critical since existing rail access, or easily constructed access, is a highly favorable condition for successful siting. Despite widespread rail abandonments over the past three decades, vast areas of the United States retain mainline rail service or could connect to existing mainlines by building new rail spurs of less than 25-50 miles. This precondition for transportation planning is critical. Planners need to start with the beginning - availability of rail transportation to and from the interim storage facility/facilities. A second step in transportation screening would be to evaluate those potential site locations within 50 miles of existing mainline railroads using other appropriate variables. This effort could begin with the application of the 1984 repository siting guidelines for transportation (10 CFR 960.5-2-7)[1]. Repository surface facilities have essentially the same transportation requirements as storage facilities. The guidelines in 10 CFR 960 provide a readily available template for evaluating sites based on transportation risks, impacts and costs. Initial site screening, after considering proximity to mainline railroads as the precursory step, should evaluate: 1) proximity to highly populated areas; 2) proximity to interstate highways; 3) proximity to environmentally sensitive areas and lands protected by federal, state, or tribal governments; and 4) proximity to military installations, hazardous materials facilities, or other facilities that might impact transportation safety and security.Several challenges exist which prevent effective transportation planning. The diversity of canister and cask types and SNF characteristics and conditions, the increasingly limited rail access at the shipping sites and the ease with which public attention can be marshalled against a waste management program, all suggest that future efforts need to identify potential storage sites that reduce transportation impacts and costs by reducing near-site transportation construction and reduce total system transportation impacts. This can most easily be accomplished by reducing shipping distances in a process that is easily defined and implemented. The paper concludes that the DOE should develop a site screening and evaluation program with transportation as a central consideration. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2023

Performance Evaluation and Costs of a Combined Ground Source Heat Pump and Solar Photovoltaic Storage System in an Extreme Cold Climate

This report outlines the effectiveness and economics of a ground source heat pump system installed together with solar photovoltaic panels and a battery storage system in a local community building situated in a cold climate. The community building is a tribal building located in Ruby, Alaska. Power from solar photovoltaic panels is supplemented by electricity purchased from the local community microgrid. A ground source heat pump was commissioned three years after the building was occupied, and supplements the heat generated by a boiler for both heat and domestic hot water. Data collected over the 2021-2022 heating season shows that the heat pump is providing heat to the building about 19% of the time with an average coefficient of performance of 2.68, ranging from below 2.5 in winter to above 3.0 in summer. The solar photovoltaic panels provided 4,700 kWh of power used within the building and an additional 2,900 kWh exported to the microgrid. The solar-produced power used within the building nearly offsets the estimated annual electrical draw of the heat pump of 5,700 kWh. Due to the very high costs for shipping and installation to remote locations, projects such as this, while not economically feasible if self-funded, can save the community an estimated $76,051 over a period of 20-years. Fuel prices increasing by more than 25%, or subsidized electricity prices decreasing by more than 25%, make the ground source heat pump a more viable option economically. Unsubsidized electricity prices increasing by 25% or more make a solar photovoltaic system with battery storage nearly economically viable after a 20-year period for commercial or school buildings that are not eligible for Alaska's Power Cost Equalization program.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2019

Preliminary Evaluation of Removing Spent Nuclear Fuel from Shutdown Nuclear Power Plant Sites - 2018 - 19101

This is a technical paper that does not take into account the contractual limitations under the Standard Contract for Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and/or High-Level Radioactive Waste (Standard Contract) (10 CFR Part 961). Under the provisions of the Standard Contract, DOE does not consider spent nuclear fuel in multi-assembly canisters to be an acceptable waste form, absent a mutually agreed to contract amendment. To the extent discussions or recommendations in this paper conflict with the provisions of the Standard Contract, the Standard Contract provisions prevail. The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Integrated Waste Management (DOE-IWM) continues to conduct evaluations of removing spent nuclear fuel (SNF) from shutdown nuclear power plant sites. The 14 shutdown sites included in the evaluation to date have nuclear power reactors that have been permanently shut down and the sites have been decommissioned or are undergoing decommissioning. The 14 shutdown sites are Maine Yankee, Yankee Rowe, Connecticut Yankee, Humboldt Bay, Big Rock Point, Rancho Seco, Trojan, La Crosse, Zion, Crystal River, Kewaunee, San Onofre, Vermont Yankee, and Fort Calhoun. The Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station ceased operations in September 2018 and will be included in future evaluations. The evaluations of the shutdown sites contain four components: - A characterization of the SNF and greater-than-Class C low-level radioactive waste (GTCC waste) inventory; - A description of the on-site infrastructure at the shutdown sites; - An evaluation of the near-site transportation infrastructure and experience at the shutdown sites - An evaluation of the actions necessary to prepare for and remove SNF and GTCC waste. The primary sources for the inventory of SNF were the DOE GC-859 and RW-859 spent nuclear fuel inventory databases. This inventory has been augmented with data obtained from the shutdown sites for SNF discharges that occurred after June 2013. The primary sources for information on the conditions of site and near-site transportation infrastructure and experience included field observations and information collected during visits to the 14 shutdown sites, information provided by managers and staff at the shutdown sites, and Google Earth imagery. Extensive photographs taken during the shutdown site visits have proven to be particularly useful in documenting the current conditions at and near the shutdown sites. Tribal and state representatives, State and Regional Group representatives, and Federal Railroad Administration representatives have participated in 11 of the shutdown site visits. In addition to visiting the shutdown site, site visits often include activities such as meeting with local railroads to discuss the near-site railroad infrastructure and meeting with community engagement panels. Oyster Creek permanently ceased power operations on September 17, 2018 and fuel was removed from the reactor vessel on September 25, 2018. Planning for the Oyster Creek site visit has begun and is conducted in three stages. In the first stage, data and documents that are applicable to Oyster Creek are collected. In the second stage, questions are developed based on the data and documents collected during the first stage. These questions are submitted to the Oyster Creek site approximately one month before the site visit. The third stage involves establishing specific schedules and participants. Participants will likely include tribal and state representatives, the Council of State Governments - Eastern Regional Conference, and the Federal Railroad Administration. State participation will likely include a representative of the State Rail Safety Participation Program, the New Jersey Department of Transportation, and the New Jersey Bureau of Nuclear Engineering. The site visit is tentatively expected to occur in April or May of 2019. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2017

Deep Borehole Disposal Research in the United States - 17427

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Nuclear Energy (NE) manages a research and development (R and D) program for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste in the United States. Deep boreholes are being evaluated for disposal of some smaller DOE-managed waste as an alternative to disposal in a mined geologic repository. The deep borehole disposal concept consists of drilling borehole(s) to a total depth of about 5,000 m (16,400 ft - or greater than three miles) into crystalline basement rock, placing waste packages in the lower emplacement zone portion of the borehole, and sealing and plugging the upper portion of the borehole. The required bottom-hole diameter of the borehole(s) depends on the waste package configuration for the reference concept, but ranges from 22 to 43 cm (8.5 to 17 inches). Additional research and development is desired in several important areas for further consideration of deep borehole disposal of radioactive waste. A Deep Borehole Field Test (DBFT) will be conducted by DOE to further assess the viability of deep borehole disposal as an alternative for the disposal of smaller DOE-managed waste forms. The DBFT will be used to evaluate three main areas: 1) evaluation of the capability for drilling and construction of deep, large-diameter boreholes; 2) downhole scientific analyses to assess hydrogeochemical conditions that control waste stability and containment; and 3) engineering activities to assess the viability and safety of waste package emplacement and retrieval in deep boreholes. The DBFT will include first drilling a characterization borehole, followed by an optional field test borehole, to a total depth of about 5,000 m (16,400 feet) into crystalline basement rock in a geologically stable continental location. The initial smaller diameter characterization borehole will be drilled and completed to facilitate downhole scientific testing and analysis. If site conditions are found to be suitable, DOE intends to drill a larger-diameter field test borehole to evaluate emplacement activities using surrogate waste packages. The surrogate waste packages will not contain any radioactive waste, nor will any radioactive waste be used in these tests. One of the advantages of deep borehole disposal is that it would give DOE the flexibility to consider options for disposal of smaller waste forms. Deep borehole disposal also potentially offers earlier disposal of some wastes than might be possible in a mined repository, and could reduce costs associated with projected treatments of some wastes. In order to accomplish the DBFT, DOE will require the support of multiple national laboratories, along with a site contractor to acquire a suitable test site and to manage the site and the required testing activities. DOE issued a competitive solicitation via a request for proposal (RFP) in July, 2015, which requested proposals to provide a test site and site management services. The contract was awarded in January, 2016, to a team led by Battelle Memorial Institute which included a proposed test site in Pierce County, North Dakota. After efforts to acquire both the initial test site in North Dakota and an alternative proposed site in Spink County, South Dakota were unsuccessful, activities were suspended. The experiences in Pierce County, ND and Spink County, SD highlighted the importance of public engagement and support for the DBFT, and that relevant levels of government and other public stakeholders should be involved from the beginning. Using the lessons learned in North and South Dakota, DOE issued a new RFP on August 22, 2016 which emphasized local, state, and tribal (if applicable) government engagement, as well as public and other stakeholder involvement ahead of proposal submittals and throughout the contract execution phases. The new RFP allowed for multiple initial awards and multiple phases of contract execution. In December, 2016, DOE announced the selection of four companies - AECOM, ENERCON, RE/SPEC, and TerranearPMC - to begin exploring the possibility of conducting a DBFT under the terms of the new RFP. Ultimately, only one site will be chosen for the field test. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗