Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Independent Oversight”

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.

Tracking and Protecting High-Value/High-Visibility Assets

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory’s (PNNL’s) Independent Oversight (IO) office led an assessment to evaluate PNNL’s approach to tracking and protecting high-value/high-visibility assets. The approach used by the assessment team included a review of requirements (including records), staff interviews, on-site and virtual walkthroughs of lab spaces, review of data, and the development of three separate workflows to capture PNNL’s current practices in the areas of controlled substances, select toxins, and precious metals. Summary results are provided within the report, including all findings and opportunities for improvement (OFIs).

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

Environmental Air Monitoring at LANL: 2023 External Program Assessment [Slides]

Radioactive Air Emissions Management evaluates radiological impacts of LANL operations on members of the public, identifies and quantifies releases, and assesses impacts. It is not directly affiliated with cleanup operations or programmatic work and has independent oversight. The focus areas in Environmental Compliance Programs are stack emissions measurements, ambient air measurements, minor source operations evaluations, data management and quality assurance, collaboration with Meteorology program, and collaboration with Dose Assessment program (EPC-ES).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Idaho National Laboratory Integrated Multisite SSHAC Level 3: Probabilistic Volcanic Hazards Assessment

The Idaho National Laboratory (INL) resides on the eastern Snake River Plain (ESRP), part of the Snake River Plain (SRP) with a complex origin and geologic history of volcanism. Much of the Quaternary (last 2.58 million years) volcanism within 400 km of INL is genetically associated with a major thermal anomaly referred to as the Yellowstone hotspot, which is currently located more than 180 km northeast of INL. Near INL, local volcanic sources include silicic domes near its southern border, and numerous dike-fed basaltic vents of the ESRP, some of which are near or within the INL boundaries. Quantitative probabilistic assessments of screened-in volcanic hazardous phenomena for nine different facility complexes at the INL are presented for a Senior Seismic Hazard Analysis Committee (SSHAC) Level 3 (SL3) study. The comprehensive, integrated multisite SSHAC study consists of a single regional Probabilistic Volcanic Hazards Assessment (PVHA) that pertains to all nine INL facility complexes, with site-specific information developed at each respective area of interest (AOI), referred to as the "INL facility AOI" (Figure ES-1). Hazard products are generated for specified INL facility AOIs for use by multiple stakeholders from different agencies in risk-informed decision-making regarding site selection, operations, and design of nuclear facilities at INL, consistent with U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulatory guidance. The study also serves as the basis for future periodic safety assessments required for existing DOE facilities, such as 10-year evaluations of natural-phenomena hazards. Elements of the INL PVHA including initial characterization, screening, quantitative assessments of eruption and hazard potential, and consideration of facility needs are conducted using the three phases of the SSHAC process: evaluation, integration, and documentation. As per regulatory guidance, the SSHAC framework provided the necessary processes and procedures for the PVHA Technical Integration (TI) team, at three workshops, five formal working meetings and many TI team remote meetings, to conduct initial characterization, screen the volcanic hazards, create PVHA model inputs, exercise those models in the PVHA, consider facility-specific volcanic hazard needs, and perform final hazard calculations. The Participatory Peer Review Panel (PPRP) provided independent oversight and performed process and technical reviews of the PVHA throughout its duration. The study included an extensive New Data Collection and Analyses (NDCA) program developed by the PVHA TI team to reduce uncertainties in hazard-significant elements in the PVHA model. NDCA activities generated 20 reports providing important contributory datasets and results to the project database for characterizing the ESRP. For example, a report compiling the dimensions of ESRP shield volcanoes and lava fields was used to construct volcanic footprints (areas of impact), was compared with data from INL subsurface cores, and was used to validate the results of lava-flow inundation modeling on the contemporary terrain. Another example is the acquisition of aeromagnetic data over INL and its surrounding area, with maps of buried magmatic features (e.g., subsurface volcanoes and swarms of feeder dikes) that informed the PVHA conceptual model of volcanism. The SSHAC evaluation process was used to conduct all elements of the PVHA including initial characterization and screening. Existing data and NDCA activities provided the foundation to develop the tectonomagmatic conceptual model of volcanism for the region of geographical interest in the SRP and Yellowstone hotspot volcanic system, and for considering volcanoes in the western US. Considering Quaternary volcanic sources active during this period, the screening approach identified and evaluated magma compositions, types of eruptive and intrusive phenomena, types of hazardous phenomena, and proximity of sources to INL. The PVHA TI team evaluated 18 types of magmatic sources in terms of 20 potentially hazardous phenomena, resulting in 360 screening decisions. The screening process resulted in 140 screened-in hazardous volcanic phenomena for Quaternary volcanic sources 1) proximal to INL facility complexes in the ESRP (64 basaltic and 54 silicic), 2) regional sources associated with the Yellowstone caldera system and Blackfoot Reservoir volcanic field (7), and 3) more distal sources from thirteen Cascade volcanoes and two volcanoes at Long Valley caldera (CA).

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

Benchmarking the Lab Fellows Program

PNNL’s Fellows are recognized as having attained the institution’s highest level of scientific and technical achievement. These individuals are internationally recognized by their peers and have demonstrated innovation and leadership throughout their careers. PNNL’s Independent Oversight (IO) office led an assessment to benchmark how other research and development organizations identify, advance, recognize, and utilize their Fellows.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

The Transactive Energy Network Template Metamodel

While transactive energy, which is defined as an allocation of electricity based on dynamically discovered values or prices, has been extensively studied, its uptake and use has been slow. This report describes a tool, the transactive network template, which should hasten the creation and uptake of transactive energy networks. Some basic principles of transactive energy are familiar from existing wholesale electricity markets. Locational prices are calculated today for zones within bulk electric transmission systems. Locational prices differ while accounting for the locational costs of electricity generation and the losses and constraints incurred when electricity is transmitted from generators and distributed to consumers. A transactive energy network might include these transmission zones. However, current research strives to apply transactive energy also in electricity distribution circuits, buildings, and even for individual generating and consuming devices. At the same time, researchers explore how to apply transactive energy in real time during increasingly shorter time intervals. Automated computational agents become necessary as transactive energy becomes applied to smaller circuit zones and at faster dynamic timescales. A transactive energy network is an example of a multi-agent system. Each zone in the network is represented by its transactive agent, which makes decisions for and acts on behalf of a business entity that is responsible for and manages one of the circuit regions. A transactive energy network is also an example of a decentralized, distributed control system. Control decisions and responsibilities are distributed among the network’s transactive agents. The transactive agents are independent; that is, there typically is no centralized authority or oversight function. Instead, transactive agents exchange transactive signals and thereby negotiate the prices and quantities of electricity that they will exchange. Initially, the circuit regions and responsibilities of transactive agents appear to be very dissimilar. Each circuit region may comprise transmission, distribution, or building-level circuits. Each has a unique position and electrical connectivity within the transactive energy network. Each possesses unique assets that either generate or consume electricity, and these (e.g., renewable energy generator, diesel generator, aggregate utility load, building load, space conditioning, refrigerator, etc.) may further differ in their price flexibility and in their strategies for responding to dynamic electricity prices. Given such diversity, an implementer’s first inclination might be to start from scratch to define all these devices and to engineer their seemingly unique interactions. Given that each implementer’s perspective may be narrow within a transactive energy network, it is unlikely that uniquely engineered systems would interact well. This is where the transactive network template is applicable. The transactive network template is a metamodel that has been developed to guide implementers as they configure their own transactive agent within a network of such agents. The object-oriented design of the transactive network template provides basic code object types that may be used and extended by implementers to represent each of the assets in their circuit region. These objects further facilitate the transactive agent’s necessary computations, which are divided among responsibilities to schedule power usage, balance electric supply and demand, and coordinate the exchange of electricity with the other transactive agents. This report addresses the conceptual transactive network template design. Implementers are directed to more formal design documents and reference implementations. A Python™-based1 reference implementation of the transactive network template has been coded, and three implementations have been configured to represent a national laboratory and two university campuses. Version 2 of the transactive node template generalizes the market class and its methods to facilitate multiple, and more diverse market coordination mechanisms than were facilitated by and demonstrated using Version 1. Version 3 includes new Appendix B, which addresses the designs of methods that would make dynamic prices track approved electricity rates. In the future, the author wishes to make the transactive network template more generally applicable to networks that require more accurate power flow. Development of the transactive network template is jointly funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy and the DOE Office of Electricity. In late 2015, one of the first projects to be funded by the DOE Grid Laboratory Modernization Laboratory Consortium was the Clean Energy and Transactive Campus project, led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. DOE funds were matched by an investment by the Washington Department of Commerce through its Clean Energy Fund. The transactive network template was developed to guide the implementation of transactive energy networks within this project’s scope.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Navigating United States Standards and Regulation for Digital Energy Systems

This report provides an analysis of the U.S. standards and regulatory landscape for digital energy systems, focusing on cybersecurity, safety, and reliability requirements. It examines the interplay between federal mandates, state regulations, voluntary industry standards, and utility-specific policies, highlighting critical gaps between compliance and real-world risk mitigation. While NERC CIP standards enforce cybersecurity for Bulk Electric System assets, distribution-level infrastructure and emerging technologies often fall outside mandatory oversight, creating vulnerabilities. The report identifies systemic challenges such as reliance on self-attestation, uneven state adoption of safety codes, and lagging standards for advanced technologies like battery energy storage and inverter-based resources. Through a detailed gap analysis, it underscores the urgency of proactive risk-based approaches, independent verification, and strategic engagement with state and federal entities. Recommendations include adopting tiered security frameworks, strengthening procurement practices, and addressing emerging technology risks to ensure resilient and secure digital energy infrastructure. This guidance is intended for utilities, regulators, and stakeholders navigating compliance obligations and seeking to enhance cybersecurity and safety beyond minimum standards.

24 - POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

A Community Guide to Regulatory Barriers Affecting Microgrids (Reports 1-3)

In response to growing risks of power outages from extreme weather and aging infrastructure, communities are increasingly exploring the potential of microgrids to provide reliable energy access. Microgrids offer promising solutions to meet this challenge but face a complex landscape of non-technical barriers, particularly regulations concerning the provision and distribution of energy. Most existing legal and regulatory frameworks were designed for a centralized, one-way power system, and are often poorly suited to handle systems that independently balance distributed energy resources with local load. This three-part report series provides a strategic analysis of existing regulatory and legal factors affecting microgrid deployments to help non-technical community leaders and decision-makers better understand the feasibility of a microgrid in their community. -Report No. 1: Foundational Issues Facing Microgrids details the universal policy barriers all microgrids face, including utility interconnection processes, rate structures, and local permitting. -Report No. 2: Single Property Microgrids outlines how direct asset ownership and operating behind-the-meter can bypass some regulatory oversight, using the Blue Lake Rancheria microgrid as a case study. -Report No. 3: Multi-Property Microgrids tackles the complex challenges of crossing public rights-of-way and navigating utility franchise rights, highlighting the Coventry microgrid project. The series equips decision-makers with phased frameworks to navigate financial and regulatory complexities, engage effectively with local utilities and Authorities Having Jurisdiction (AHJs), and structure successful microgrid projects.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗