SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “US NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT”

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.

10 records

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2020

Spent Nuclear Fuel Exploratory Roadmaps - 20054

The U.S. Department of Energy manages nearly 2,500 metric tons of heavy metal (MTHM) of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) resulting from several decades of research, testing, and production reactors [DOE 1995]. This SNF is managed at the DOE Hanford Site in Washington State (Hanford), Idaho National Laboratory (INL), and Savannah River Site in South Carolina (SRS). From 1995 to 2004, the Department of Energy (DOE) made several key programmatic decisions, supported by appropriate documentation in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for the management of SNF [DOE 1995]. These decisions have provided an overarching framework for SNF management, as well as site-specific and SNF-related management decisions for the past two decades. In the years since these decisions were made, with the notable exception of the successful drying and packaging of the production reactor fuel at Hanford, a majority of the decisions have been largely unimplemented. Also, since these decisions were made, a number of changes that bear on considerations relative to the path forward have occurred. A SNF Exploratory Road map activity, identified reasonable alternate pathways for DoE's inventory of SNF. Three fundamental pathways were identified in this activity for the long-term management and disposition of DOE SNF: Direct Disposal Pathway, Existing Processing Pathway and Alternate Processing Pathway. Further actions would be required (e.g., evaluation of NEPA analysis, technology maturity evaluations, refinement of cost and risks, benefits and advantages relative to other alternate paths) to define and inform many key decisions that will result in the selection of the disposition pathways that are most beneficial to the US Government in dispositioning DoE's SNF inventory. DOE is currently managing all SNF safely; however, the age of DOE-owned SNF and facilities for storing and processing SNF, coupled with the uncertainty of the storage duration, necessitates decisions and actions to ensure that the infrastructure will be in place to ensure continued safe and effective long-term management and eventual disposal. The identification of reasonable alternate pathways took these considerations into account in an effort to proactively manage conditions that could challenge the safety of storing and managing DOE SNF over the time periods now contemplated and also to ensure that flexibility is preserved to ensure that the DOE SNF remains compatible with final disposition pathways when they become available. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2020

Oak Ridge Response to Versatile Test Reactor Environmental Impact Statement Data Request

The Versatile Test Reactor (VTR) is a fast-spectrum test reactor being developed in the United States under the direction of the US Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE). The VTR mission is to enable accelerated testing of advanced reactor fuels and materials required for advanced reactor technologies. The conceptual design of the 300 MWth sodium-cooled metallic-fueled pool-type fast reactor has been led by the US National Laboratories in collaboration with General Electric–Hitachi and Bechtel National, Inc. In support of the VTR project, DOE issued a Notice of Intent (NOI) in the Federal Register on August 5, 2019, announcing the intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and its implementing regulations. The EIS will evaluate alternatives for a versatile reactor–based fast-neutron source facility and associated facilities for the preparation, irradiation, and post-irradiation examination (PIE) of test/experimental fuels and materials. Specifically, the NOI identified two siting alternatives for the VTR reactor facility: Idaho National Laboratory (INL) or Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). In addition, the NOI also specified two siting alternatives for VTR fuel fabrication: INL and the Savannah River Site (SRS). This report provides information in response to data requests made to ORNL to fill in site-specific knowledge gaps to develop a high-quality EIS. The responses provided are not required to provide full details in every aspect; instead, they adequately bound possible environmental impacts or provide sufficient information to adequately assess likely environmental impacts. This work is being performed under a subcontract from INL to ORNL using DOE-NE funds and is directed by DOE-NE and DOE-ID. Leidos has been contracted by DOE-NE to write the VTR EIS, so most data requests have come from Leidos but were often routed through INL or DOE-ID. DOE-ID is overseeing the NEPA and EIS processes for the VTR project. Leidos will use the information provided in this report to inform the VTR EIS and will also cite this document to establish a clear, publicly available source of the information. Section 2 of this report briefly describes the proposed ORNL VTR Alternative and illustrates the location of the proposed site for the ORNL VTR Alternative. Sections 3 through 7 provide direct responses to data requests received by ORNL. These sections use a tabular format in which data requests are divided into separate items to be addressed; the items are numbered, the data requests are restated with more topical information included, and then the responses are provided. Initial data requests and follow-on requests for additional information (RAIs) are combined under the original data request fields. Finally, Section 8 presents summarized conclusions and describes future work.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2024

Mapping Support for Targeted Critical Minerals Exploration and Extraction

The United States’ dependency on imported minerals poses significant risks to economic stability and national security due to potential supply disruptions. Recognizing the strategic importance of critical minerals, the Department of Energy (DOE) emphasizes the need for a secure and resilient supply chain to support emissions reduction, technology development, and capitalization on clean energy opportunities. The DOE’s Office of Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains (MESC), in collaboration with the Office of Policy (OP), addresses these vulnerabilities by focusing on upstream domestic critical minerals production, balancing extraction with social and environmental goals, including conservation, environmental justice, and respect for Tribal sovereignty. This report showcases a collaborative effort involving Idaho National Laboratory (INL), Argonne National Laboratory (Argonne), National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to map mineral development potential along with key social and environmental datasets. A geographical information system (GIS)-based web map application was developed as a preliminary tool for environmental analysis, integrating 158 geospatial data layers such as critical habitat, land ownership, economic indicators, and environmental concerns. Data were sourced from agencies like the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and USGS and processed using GIS technology to enhance visualization and analysis. The proposed analysis framework categorizes areas into high, mid, and low concern based on withdrawn lands, special status species, the Economic Development Capacity Index (EDCI) Mining Composite Index, and the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool (CEJST). While the application provides broad visualizations, it is not a substitute for detailed environmental reviews required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Users must conduct further analyses and engage with tribal entities and other stakeholders for comprehensive planning. A case study of the Idaho Cobalt Belt (ICB) in Lemhi County, Idaho, has been provided in the report to illustrate the tool's practical use. This report introduces a GIS application and framework to support stakeholders in identifying and prioritizing areas for critical mineral exploration, promoting secure supply chains, and advancing the nation's energy independence through responsible resource stewardship.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2025

Past Approaches for Spent Nuclear Fuel, Transuranic, and High-Level Waste Disposal in the United States—Part 2: Siting Process, Staged Development, and Public Preferences

This report presents pertinent aspects of the ~50-year United States experience in siting a mined geologic disposal repository for spent nuclear fuel (SNF), transuranic (TRU) waste, and high-level radioactive waste (HLW) as related to site selection and the staged process for site investigations as specified in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and generic and site-specific regulations of the US Department of Energy (DOE), US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The roles of the Environmental Impact Statement and guidance in international consensus standards by the International Atomic Energy Agency are also mentioned. The focus is on siting and developing the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, an operating repository for TRU waste from atomic energy defense activities, and the proposed Yucca Mountain repository for commercial SNF and HLW. In the social dimension, the role of institutional stakeholders is described. Past national surveys related to waste management options for storage and disposal provide insight on public preferences of other stakeholders. The descriptions are intended to help other countries more fully understand the stages adopted for siting and developing repositories in the United States.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2025

Policy implications of net-zero emissions: A multi-model analysis of United States emissions and energy system impacts

Many countries, subnational jurisdictions, and companies are setting net-zero emissions goals; however, questions remain about strategies to reach these targets, policy measures, technology gaps, and economic impacts. Here, we investigate the potential policy implications of reaching economy-wide net-zero CO 2 emissions across the United States by 2050 using results from a multi-model comparison with 14 energy-economic models. Model results suggest that achieving net-zero CO 2 targets depends on policies that accelerate deployment of zero- and low-emitting technologies that have seen rapid cost reductions in recent years (including wind, solar, battery storage, and electric vehicles) as well as relatively nascent options (including carbon capture and storage, advanced biofuels, low-carbon hydrogen, advanced nuclear, and long-duration energy storage). While net-zero policies are likely to lower fossil fuel consumption, including considerable coal and petroleum reductions, achieving net-zero emissions does not necessarily mean phasing out all fossil fuels. Model results indicate that the Inflation Reduction Act’s energy and climate provisions amplify near-term decarbonization but that net-zero policies have larger impacts on long-run outcomes. Stringent climate policy can have large fiscal impacts on tax revenue and government spending—revenues from carbon pricing and subsidies for carbon removal range from 0.1 % to 3.7 % of GDP in 2050 across models. Each dollar per metric ton carbon price leads to a 0.06 % to 0.31 % reduction in economy-wide CO 2 emissions relative to a reference scenario with current policies. Spending on energy across the economy decreases relative to today for many models under reference and net-zero policies, especially as a share of GDP, due primarily to end-use electrification and energy efficiency.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2025

Workshop Summary Report on Using AI Tools to Improve the Efficiency and Outcomes of the NEPA Process: AI for Permitting Workshop at the 2025 National Association of Environmental Professionals (NAEP) Annual Conference

On April 29, 2025, the U.S. Department of Energy and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory hosted a workshop at the National Association of Environmental Professionals 2025 Conference and Training Symposium in Charleston, South Carolina, titled, “Effective and Responsible Use of Customized AI Tools to Improve the Efficiency and Outcomes of the NEPA Process.” The objectives of this workshop were to make environmental practitioners aware of the potential for using artificial intelligence in the National Environmental Policy Act process, demonstrate examples of how artificial intelligence can be integrated effectively to improve efficiency and outcomes and solicit questions and feedback from practitioners. This report summarizes the key points from all talks and case studies, as well as audience questions and feedback on the presentation topics and the broader topic of "AI in permitting". The report concludes by highlighting the key barriers and opportunities for the implementation of AI in permitting, as discussed during the workshop.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

To what extent can decommissioning options for marine artificial structures move us toward environmental targets?

Switching from fossil fuels to renewable energy is key to international energy transition efforts and the move toward net zero. For many nations, this requires decommissioning of hundreds of oil and gas infrastructure in the marine environment. Current international, regional and national legislation largely dictates that structures must be completely removed at end-of-life although, increasingly, alternative decommissioning options are being promoted and implemented. Yet, a paucity of real-world case studies describing the impacts of decommissioning on the environment make decision-making with respect to which option(s) might be optimal for meeting international and regional strategic environmental targets challenging. To address this gap, we draw together international expertise and judgment from marine environmental scientists on marine artificial structures as an alternative source of evidence that explores how different decommissioning options might ameliorate pressures that drive environmental status toward (or away) from environmental objectives. Synthesis reveals that for 37 United Nations and Oslo-Paris Commissions (OSPAR) global and regional environmental targets, experts consider repurposing or abandoning individual structures, or abandoning multiple structures across a region, as the options that would most strongly contribute toward targets. This collective view suggests complete removal may not be best for the environment or society. However, different decommissioning options act in different ways and make variable contributions toward environmental targets, such that policy makers and managers would likely need to prioritise some targets over others considering political, social, economic, and ecological contexts. Current policy may not result in optimal outcomes for the environment or society.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2021

Pollution inequality 50 years after the Clean Air Act: the need for hyperlocal data and action

Fifty years ago the Clean Air Act amendments of 1970 were the first major US legislation that authorized regulation of air pollutants, creating National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQSs) to protect public health and the environment. While US air quality has improved, with average PM 2.5 concentrations in 2016 a third of 1981 levels, air pollution remains a major health risk in the US and globally. Moreover, air pollution impacts are still uneven, with the most polluted US communities of 50 years ago still so today. Air pollution “hot spots” result in disproportionate exposure at neighborhood scales within cities, particularly in disadvantaged communities, but an in-depth understanding at these scales is lacking. This policy perspective discusses how trends in sensor technology, spatial data collection, analytics and retrieval are converging to enable the production of hyperlocal air pollution data, and that this needs to be done in a manner that enables marginalized communities to shape decision making.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2023

Data-Driven Buy Clean: Decarbonization and Beyond

This report was compiled to provide recommendations on the availability of public background data from the U.S. Federal life cycle assessment (LCA) Data Commons to be conformant with the Association for Life Cycle Assessment (ACLCA) 2022 Product Category Rule (PCR) Open Standard to build technical tools that can assist industry in creating more comparable Type II Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) for Federal Buy Clean and sustainability initiatives. The Federal LCA Commons is not only a public data source but also a consistently structured, self-referencing mega-repository for data developed by federal agency experts (in agency repositories) and by academia, nonprofit organizations, and industry (via the US Life Cycle Inventory Database). The Federal LCA Commons Technical Working Group is continuously improving the standardization of data documentation, formatting, and nomenclature to ensure lossless data loading and accurate data representation. This report and appendixes include the following: 1) An introduction to data-driven Buy Clean and decarbonization initiatives at the federal level; 2) The current status and associated challenges with LCA data and EPD standards and comparability; 3) Opportunities for the Federal LCA Commons to support conformance with the ACLCA 2022 PCR Open Standard and provide resources to implement the Federal Sustainability Plan, Buy Clean Program, and Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) sustainability goals and objectives. To date, the Federal LCA Commons is the result of coordinated work by National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), the Argonne National Laboratory (ANL), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the Department of Defense (DoD) and the National Institute of Standards and Technologies (NIST). The Federal LCA Commons will continue to combine databases from the collaborating agencies while remaining a public resource. There are several initiatives among the collaborating agencies to expand the Federal LCA Commons and dedicated federal funding and resources could accelerate and strengthen these initiatives.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2020

Sensitive Resources Assessment and Forest Analysis for the Proposed Versatile Test Reactor, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

The US Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is a leading institution in advanced materials, supercomputing, neutrons, and nuclear science. As a research laboratory managed by UT-Battelle, LLC for DOE, ORNL has national priorities in energy, security, and scientific discovery that necessitate facility improvements and expansions. DOE is also committed to environmental stewardship. The laboratory is located on the ~32,000-acre (~13,000-ha) Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR), much of which is categorized as a National Environmental Research Park (NERP) and a state Wildlife Management Area. DOE works with the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency (TWRA), Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC), US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), US Department of Agriculture, and other agencies to serve as an effective steward of the ORR. Accordingly, project managers must conform to environmental regulations, agreements, and policies at the federal, state, and institutional levels. Per 40 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) 1508.14, potential effects on research and science education also represent potential effects of federal actions on the NERP, and impacts on, e.g., deer harvest, must be considered on the Oak Ridge Wildlife Management Area when other aspects of the human environment are affected. The United States currently has no fast neutron testing capability to support advanced nuclear research and development. The proposed Versatile Test Reactor (VTR) will take advantage of current investments by the US government and private industry in nuclear reactors to expedite the design and construction process, using proven technology to create a world-class scientific infrastructure. The VTR will take advantage of fast neutrons provided by this proven technology, along with a capability to rapidly insert, conduct, and remove state-of-the-art experiments. An advantage of the VTR is that it can support future innovations in experimental capabilities without modifying the facility. The VTR will support progress in a variety of science and technology areas, including testing and qualification of advanced reactor fuels; testing and qualification of innovative structural materials; testing of innovative components and instruments; validation of advanced modeling and simulation tools; and versatility for future technical missions. Through proven technology, the VTR can take advantage of existing reactor designs and operating experience to reduce the risk, cost, and time for design and construction. The top available resources of DOE laboratories, industry, and universities will be used to expedite reactor design and construction toward developing the scientific infrastructure that affords a strong testing capability that can be sustained over many years. This report summarizes current knowledge of natural and cultural resources primarily within the VTR construction area. At the time of this report, the proposed VTR site design includes a construction area of ~150.4 acres (~69.9 ha), which contains an ~51.3-acre (~20.8-ha) operations area, located within forested natural areas of the ORR. The primary goal of the work presented here was to evaluate potential effects on sensitive resources that might result from development and construction activities associated with VTR. In addition to on-the-ground surveys during spring and summer 2020 by the ORNL Natural Resources Management Program and Aquatic Ecology Group staff, this report makes use of historical (pre-1995) and contemporary (1995 to present) data from additional confirmed sources (e.g., TDEC). Likewise, forest conditions were compiled from a 2011 forest inventory and supplemented with limited ground observations in 2020. The individuals who obtained and compiled the data presented here are familiar with and routinely assess sensitive resources on the ORR. Anyone who references this report must consider that the timing of surveys did not permit a complete delineation of the resources that will be affected. If the VTR project proceeds, additional surveys will be required to account for the seasonal patterns of various threatened and endangered species. Data deficiencies and potential resources that likely went undetected are indicated where possible. Accordingly, this report should facilitate more environmentally sound decisions during planning and 2 development of the VTR site, provide a foundation for further assessment of sensitive and cultural resources, and help project managers better address regulatory guidance and DOE policies on sustainable development in compliance with, for example, the US Endangered Species Act (ESA), Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), Tennessee Rare Plant Protection and Conservation Act of 1985, Tennessee Nongame and Endangered or Threatened Wildlife Species Conservation Act of 1974, several federal and state regulations regarding aquatic resource protection, and site-specific policies as outlined in various ORR management plans developed by ORNL and TWRA for DOE.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗