Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “addendum”

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 19 records

SU-E-T-204: Comparison of Absorbed-Dose to Water in High-Energy Photon Beams Based On Addendum AAPM TG-51, IAEA TRS-398, and JSMP 12

Purpose: Several clinical reference dosimetry protocols for absorbed-dose to water have recently been published: The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) published an Addendum to the AAPM’s TG-51 (Addendum TG-51) in April 2014, and the Japan Society of Medical Physics (JSMP) published the Japan Society of Medical Physics 12 (JSMP12), a clinical reference dosimetry protocol, in September 2012. This investigation compared and evaluated the absorbed-dose to water of high-energy photon beams according to Addendum TG-51, International Atomic Energy Agency Technical Report Series No. 398 (TRS-398), and JSMP12. Methods: Differences in the respective beam quality conversion factors with Addendum TG-51, TRS-398, and JSMP12 were analyzed and the absorbed-dose to water using 6- and 10-MV photon beams was measured according to the protocols recommended in Addendum TG-51, TRS-398, and JSMP12. The measurements were conducted using two Farmer-type ionization chambers, Exradin A12 and PTW 30013. Results: The beam quality conversion factors for both the 6- and 10-MV photon beams with Addendum TG-51 were within 0.6%, in agreement with the beam quality conversion factors with TRS-398 and JSMP12. The Exradin A12 provided an absorbed-dose to water ratio from 1.003 to 1.006 with TRS-398 / Addendum TG-51 and from 1.004 to 1.005 with JSMP 12 / Addendum TG-51, whereas the PTW 30013 provided a ratio of 1.001 with TRS-398 / Addendum TG-51 and a range from 0.997 to 0.999 with JSMP 12 / Addendum TG-51. Conclusion: Despite differences in the beam quality conversion factor, no major differences were seen in the absorbed-dose to water with Addendum TG-51, TRS-398, and JSMP12. However, Addendum TG-51 provides the most recent data for beam quality conversion factors based on Monte Carlo simulation and greater detail for the measurement protocol. Therefore, the absorbed-dose to water measured with Addendum TG-51 is an estimate with less uncertainty.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Experimental Test Site 300 (S300): S300 Roadway Improvements - 817 Complex Soil Sampling and Analysis Plan, Addendum 1 (June 2023)

The purpose of this addendum is to amend and update the S300 Roadway Improvements – 817 Complex [project] Soil Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) dated May 2023. Field activities to implement the SAP were completed in May 2023 except for SB-17. SB-17 is therefore included in this addendum. In addition, this addendum amends the SAP by covering an expanded scope of work and project limits. The project limits have been expanded to include areas around Building 818. Sampling at the expanded project area is addressed in this addendum by two additional borings for geotechnical and environmental analyses. The project area consists of the access gate and existing access roads for the Process Area complex. Excavation depths are anticipated to be no deeper than 5 feet from current grade. None of the proposed disturbance areas are within known areas of contamination or mapped controlled excavation area (LLNL 2008). Therefore, this addendum proposes a sampling spacing in the vicinity of Building 818 of about 172 feet (Tier 2) in accordance with the Soil Screening and Management Plan (LLNL 2022). The information contained in this addendum supersedes the May 2023 SAP. However, this addendum only addresses elements of the May 2023 SAP that were modified. Elements of the May 2023 SAP that have not been modified are relevant and will remain in effect.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

SU-G-TeP2-03: Comparison of Standard Dosimetry Protocol in Japan and AAPM TG-51 Addendum in Order to Establish Optimal Dosimetry for FFF Beam

Purpose: Japan Standard Dosimetry of Absorbed dose to water in external beam radiotherapy (JSDP12) is widely used to measure radiation dose in radiotherapy. However, JSDP12 does not take flattening-filter-free (FFF) beam into consideration. In addition, JSDP12 applied TPR20,10 for dose quality index for photon beam. The purpose of this study is to compare JSDP12 with AAPM TG-51 addendum in order to establish optimal dosimetry procedure for FFF beam. Method: We evaluated the ion-recombination factor (ks) and the correction factor of radial beam profile (Prp) in FFF beam dosimetry. The ks was introduced by 2 voltages method and verified by Jaffe’s plot. The Prp was given by both film measurement and calculation of treatment planning system, and compared them. Next, we compared the dose quality indexes (kQ) between TPR20,10 method and PDD(10)x method. Finally we considered optimal dosimetry protocol for FFF photon beam using JSDP12 with referring TG-51 addendum protocols. The FFF photon beams of 6 MV (6X-FFF) and 10 MV (10X-FFF) from TrueBeam were investigated in this study. Results: The ks for 6X-FFF and 10X-FFF beams were 1.005 and 1.010, respectively. The Prp of 0.6 cc ionization chamber for 6X-FFF and 10X-FFF beams (Film, TPS) were (1.004, 1.008) and (1.005, 1.008), respectively. The kQ for 6X-FFF and 10X-FFF beams (JSDP12, TG-51 addendum) were (0.9950, 0.9947) and (0.9851, 0.9845), respectively. The most effective factor for uncertainty in FFF photon beam measurement was Prp for JSDP12 formalism. Total dosimetric differences between JSDP12 and TG-51 addendum for 6X-FFF and 10X-FFF were -0.47% and -0.73%, respectively. Conclusion: The total dosimetric difference between JSDP12 and TG-51 addendum was within 1%. The introduction of kQ given by JSDP is feasible for FFF photon beam dosimetry. However, we think Prp should be considered for optimal dosimetry procedure even if JSDP12 is used for FFF photon beam dosimetry.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

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↗

Addendum to the AAPM's TG-51 protocol for clinical reference dosimetry of high-energy photon beams

An addendum to the AAPM's TG-51 protocol for the determination of absorbed dose to water in megavoltage photon beams is presented. This addendum continues the procedure laid out in TG-51 but new k{sub Q} data for photon beams, based on Monte Carlo simulations, are presented and recommendations are given to improve the accuracy and consistency of the protocol's implementation. The components of the uncertainty budget in determining absorbed dose to water at the reference point are introduced and the magnitude of each component discussed. Finally, the consistency of experimental determination of N{sub D,w} coefficients is discussed. It is expected that the implementation of this addendum will be straightforward, assuming that the user is already familiar with TG-51. The changes introduced by this report are generally minor, although new recommendations could result in procedural changes for individual users. It is expected that the effort on the medical physicist's part to implement this addendum will not be significant and could be done as part of the annual linac calibration.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗

SU-F-T-488: Comparison of the TG-51 and TG-51 Addendum Calibration Protocols

Purpose: To quantify differences between the TG51 and TG51 addendum calibration protocols. Methods: Beam energies of 6X, 6XSRS, 10X, 15X, 23X, 6XFFF, and 10XFFF were calibrated following both the TG51 and TG51 addendum protocols using both a Farmer and a scanning ionization chamber with traceable absorbed dose-to-water calibrations. For the TG51 addendum procedure, the collimating jaws were positioned to define a 10×10cm{sup 2} radiation field, a lead foil was only used for kQ measurements of FFF energies, and a volume-averaging correction was applied based on crossline and inline dose profiles. For the TG51 procedure, the collimating jaws were set to 10×10cm{sup 2} according to the digital readout, and a lead foil was used for kQ measurements of energies greater than 10MV. Results: For beam energies with a flattening filter, absorbed dose-to-water determined by the two protocols differed by 0.1%–0.3%. For FFF beam energies, differences between the protocols were up to 0.2% and 0.8% for the scanning and Farmer ionization chambers, respectively. Differences between the protocols were due to kQ determination, volume-averaging correction, and measurement of raw ionization. Differences in kQ values between the two protocols were up to 0.4% and 0.2% for the scanning and Farmer ionization chambers, respectively. Volume-averaging corrections were less than 0.1% for the scanning ionization chamber, and up to 0.4% and 0.6% for the Farmer ionization chamber in beams with a flattening filter and FFF beams, respectively. Raw ionization measurements differed up to 0.3%±0.07% due to differences in jaw settings. Conclusion: The TG51 and TG51 addendum calibration protocols differed less than 0.3% for the scanning ionization chamber. For the Farmer chamber in FFF energies, volume-averaging corrections of up to 0.6% contributed to calibration differences of up to 0.8%. Failure to verify the radiation field size can produce calibration differences of up to 0.3%.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗

TU-D-201-03: Results of a Survey On the Implementation of the TG-51 Protocol and Associated Addendum On Reference Dosimetry of External Beams

Purpose: The working group on the review and extension of the TG-51 protocol (WGTG51) collected data from American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) members with respect to their current TG-51 and associated addendum usage in the interest of considering future protocol addenda and guidance on reference dosimetry best practices. This study reports an overview of this survey on dosimetry of external beams. Methods: Fourteen survey questions were developed by WGTG51 and released in November 2015. The questions collected information on reference dosimetry, beam quality specification, and ancillary calibration equipment. Results: Of the 190 submissions completed worldwide (U.S. 70%), 83% were AAPM members. Of the respondents, 33.5% implemented the TG-51 addendum, with the maximum calibration difference for any photon beam, with respect to the original TG-51 protocol, being <1% for 97.4% of responses. One major finding is that 81.8% of respondents used the same cylindrical ionization chamber for photon and electron dosimetry, implying that many clinics are foregoing the use of parallel-plate chambers. Other evidence suggests equivalent dosimetric results can be obtained with both cylindrical and parallel-plate chambers in electron beams. This, combined with users comfort with cylindrical chambers for electrons will likely impact recommendations put forward in an upcoming electron beam addendum to the TG-51 protocol. Data collected on ancillary equipment showed 58.2% (45.0%) of the thermometers (barometers) in use for beam calibration had NIST traceable calibration certificates, but 48.4% (42.7%) were never recalibrated. Conclusion: This survey provides a snapshot of TG-51 external beam reference dosimetry practice in radiotherapy centers. Findings demonstrate the rapid take-up of the TG-51 photon beam addendum and raise issues for the WGTG51 to focus on going forward, including guidelines on ancillary equipment and the choice of chamber for electron beam dosimetry.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

Addendum to the Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 529: Area 25 Contaminated Materials, Nevada Test Site, Nevada (Rev. 1)

This document constitutes an addendum to the Corrective Action Decision Document/Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 529: Area 25 Contaminated Materials, Nevada Test Site, Nevada as described in the document Recommendations and Justifications To Remove Use Restrictions Established under the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order dated September 2013. The Use Restriction (UR) Removal document was approved by the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection on October 16, 2013. The approval of the UR Removal document constituted approval of each of the recommended UR removals. In conformance with the UR Removal document, this addendum consists of: This page that refers the reader to the UR Removal document for additional information The cover, title, and signature pages of the UR Removal document The NDEP approval letter The corresponding section of the UR Removal document This addendum provides the documentation justifying the cancellation of the UR for CAS 25-23-17, Contaminated Wash (Parcel H). This UR was established as part of FFACO corrective actions and was based on the presence of total petroleum hydrocarbon diesel-range organics contamination at concentrations greater than the NDEP action level at the time of the initial investigation.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Addendum to the Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 357: Mud Pits and Waste Dump, Nevada Test Site, Nevada (Rev. 0)

This document constitutes an addendum to the Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 357: Mud Pits and Waste Dump, Nevada Test Site, Nevada as described in the document Recommendations and Justifications To Remove Use Restrictions Established under the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order dated September 2013. The Use Restriction Removal document was approved by the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection on October 16, 2013. The approval of the UR Removal document constituted approval of each of the recommended UR removals. In conformance with the UR Removal document, this addendum consists of: This page that refers the reader to the UR Removal document for additional information The cover, title, and signature pages of the UR Removal document; The NDEP approval letter; The corresponding section of the UR Removal document; This addendum provides the documentation justifying the cancellation of the UR for CAS 04-26-03, Lead Bricks. This UR was established as part of FFACO corrective actions and was based on the presence of lead contamination at concentrations greater than the action level established at the time of the initial investigation.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Addendum to the Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 165: Area 25 and 26 Dry Well and Washdown Areas, Nevada Test Site, Nevada (Rev. 0)

This document constitutes an addendum to the Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 165: Area 25 and 26 Dry Well and Washdown Areas, Nevada Test Site, Nevada as described in the document Recommendations and Justifications To Remove Use Restrictions Established under the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order dated September 2013. The Use Restriction Removal document was approved by the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection on October 16, 2013. The approval of the UR Removal document constituted approval of each of the recommended UR removals. In conformance with the UR Removal document, this addendum consists of: This page that refers the reader to the UR Removal document for additional information The cover, title, and signature pages of the UR Removal document The NDEP approval letter The corresponding section of the UR Removal document This addendum provides the documentation justifying the cancellation of the UR for CAS 25-20-01, Lab Drain Dry Well. This UR was established as part of FFACO corrective actions and was based on the presence of tetrachloroethene contamination at concentrations greater than the action level established at the time of the initial investigation. Although total petroleum hydrocarbon diesel-range organics contamination at concentrations greater than the NDEP action level was present at the site, no hazardous constituents of TPH-DRO exceeded the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 9 preliminary remediation goals established at the time of the initial investigation.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey - Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region

# 2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey – Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region The 2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey – Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region covers the Hawaiian island of Oahu and five counties in surrounding islands. An addendum to the nationwide version of the study conducted in 2019, this regional survey provided additional information and spatial granularity about people’s movements to, from, and within the areas under study. ## Data Collection Agency The survey was conducted for the Oahu Metropolitan Planning Organization. ## Survey Methodology Data were collected in two zones: the core area (census blocks in the island of Oahu) and the halo area (five counties in adjacent Hawaiian islands). All trips were assigned an origin zone and a destination zone, as well as a travel mode, purpose, and distance. Sociodemographic information related to age, income, and gender was also collected. ## Survey Records, Data, and Documentation Survey records include 1,154,167,619 trips.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey - Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region

# 2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey – Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region The 2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey – Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region covers the Hawaiian island of Oahu and five counties in surrounding islands. An addendum to the nationwide version of the study conducted in 2019, this regional survey provided additional information and spatial granularity about people’s movements to, from, and within the areas under study. ## Data Collection Agency The survey was conducted for the Oahu Metropolitan Planning Organization. ## Survey Methodology Data were collected in two zones: the core area (census blocks in the island of Oahu) and the halo area (five counties in adjacent Hawaiian islands). All trips were assigned an origin zone and a destination zone, as well as a travel mode, purpose, and distance. Sociodemographic information related to age, income, and gender was also collected. ## Survey Records, Data, and Documentation Survey records include 1,154,167,619 trips.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey - Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region

# 2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey – Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region The 2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey – Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region covers the Hawaiian island of Oahu and five counties in surrounding islands. An addendum to the nationwide version of the study conducted in 2019, this regional survey provided additional information and spatial granularity about people’s movements to, from, and within the areas under study. ## Data Collection Agency The survey was conducted for the Oahu Metropolitan Planning Organization. ## Survey Methodology Data were collected in two zones: the core area (census blocks in the island of Oahu) and the halo area (five counties in adjacent Hawaiian islands). All trips were assigned an origin zone and a destination zone, as well as a travel mode, purpose, and distance. Sociodemographic information related to age, income, and gender was also collected. ## Survey Records, Data, and Documentation Survey records include 1,154,167,619 trips.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey - Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region

# 2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey – Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region The 2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey – Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region covers the Hawaiian island of Oahu and five counties in surrounding islands. An addendum to the nationwide version of the study conducted in 2019, this regional survey provided additional information and spatial granularity about people’s movements to, from, and within the areas under study. ## Data Collection Agency The survey was conducted for the Oahu Metropolitan Planning Organization. ## Survey Methodology Data were collected in two zones: the core area (census blocks in the island of Oahu) and the halo area (five counties in adjacent Hawaiian islands). All trips were assigned an origin zone and a destination zone, as well as a travel mode, purpose, and distance. Sociodemographic information related to age, income, and gender was also collected. ## Survey Records, Data, and Documentation Survey records include 1,154,167,619 trips.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey - Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region

# 2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey – Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region The 2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey – Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region covers the Hawaiian island of Oahu and five counties in surrounding islands. An addendum to the nationwide version of the study conducted in 2019, this regional survey provided additional information and spatial granularity about people’s movements to, from, and within the areas under study. ## Data Collection Agency The survey was conducted for the Oahu Metropolitan Planning Organization. ## Survey Methodology Data were collected in two zones: the core area (census blocks in the island of Oahu) and the halo area (five counties in adjacent Hawaiian islands). All trips were assigned an origin zone and a destination zone, as well as a travel mode, purpose, and distance. Sociodemographic information related to age, income, and gender was also collected. ## Survey Records, Data, and Documentation Survey records include 1,154,167,619 trips.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey - Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region

# 2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey – Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region The 2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey – Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region covers the Hawaiian island of Oahu and five counties in surrounding islands. An addendum to the nationwide version of the study conducted in 2019, this regional survey provided additional information and spatial granularity about people’s movements to, from, and within the areas under study. ## Data Collection Agency The survey was conducted for the Oahu Metropolitan Planning Organization. ## Survey Methodology Data were collected in two zones: the core area (census blocks in the island of Oahu) and the halo area (five counties in adjacent Hawaiian islands). All trips were assigned an origin zone and a destination zone, as well as a travel mode, purpose, and distance. Sociodemographic information related to age, income, and gender was also collected. ## Survey Records, Data, and Documentation Survey records include 1,154,167,619 trips.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey - Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region

# 2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey – Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region The 2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey – Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region covers the Hawaiian island of Oahu and five counties in surrounding islands. An addendum to the nationwide version of the study conducted in 2019, this regional survey provided additional information and spatial granularity about people’s movements to, from, and within the areas under study. ## Data Collection Agency The survey was conducted for the Oahu Metropolitan Planning Organization. ## Survey Methodology Data were collected in two zones: the core area (census blocks in the island of Oahu) and the halo area (five counties in adjacent Hawaiian islands). All trips were assigned an origin zone and a destination zone, as well as a travel mode, purpose, and distance. Sociodemographic information related to age, income, and gender was also collected. ## Survey Records, Data, and Documentation Survey records include 1,154,167,619 trips.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey - Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region

# 2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey – Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region The 2022 Next-Generation National Household Travel Survey – Origin-Destination Data Addendum for the Oahu Region covers the Hawaiian island of Oahu and five counties in surrounding islands. An addendum to the nationwide version of the study conducted in 2019, this regional survey provided additional information and spatial granularity about people’s movements to, from, and within the areas under study. ## Data Collection Agency The survey was conducted for the Oahu Metropolitan Planning Organization. ## Survey Methodology Data were collected in two zones: the core area (census blocks in the island of Oahu) and the halo area (five counties in adjacent Hawaiian islands). All trips were assigned an origin zone and a destination zone, as well as a travel mode, purpose, and distance. Sociodemographic information related to age, income, and gender was also collected. ## Survey Records, Data, and Documentation Survey records include 1,154,167,619 trips.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗