Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “environmental assurance”

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
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

Approach to Quality Assurance for Complex Environmental Modeling - 20407

A strong Quality Assurance (QA) program for complex environmental modeling is essential for regulatory and public acceptance and trust, but it does not have to be onerous. Neptune and Company, Inc. (Neptune) has developed a strong QA program that improves transparency, traceability, reproducibility, and therefore, defensibility and trust. Neptune's QA program has evolved over the past 27 years, transitioning from an ad hoc QA program, to a program that is currently Nuclear Quality Assurance-1 (NQA-1) compliant, and will soon be NQA-1/DOE approved for DOE EM modeling work. In addition, Neptune is a qualified laboratory assessor and qualified auditor for reference materials, a proficiency testing provider, and fully complies with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) QA program. Neptune's President and CEO, Kelly Black, was recently named the Chairperson of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Technical Committee 69, Application of Statistical Methods. A strong QA program has been developed for Neptune's radiological performance assessment (PA) program. Although pieces of their QA program are currently in development, their current program includes document control using Subversion, issue tracking and work flow tracking using JIRA, and transparency and traceability via a system of 'calc sheets' for documentation of all data analysis and modeling combined with 'check print' documentation of QA checking, and rigorous model testing and configuration control. All work is reviewed by an independent subject matter expert who is not associated with the collection and assembly of information, for an internal peer review. The program is enforced with a handful of Standard Operation Procedures (SOPs), Work Instructions, QA Project Plans (QAPPs), and Quality Management Plans (QMPs) that are updated frequently, with required annual training and acknowledgment. In addition, effective communication of modeling approaches and results to clients and stakeholders are integral to their QA program. Many of their models are built using the GoldSim modeling platform, for which their models are well-known for their level of transparency, documentation, and QA traceability. This level of QA is also applied to their process-level models. Neptune has taken some lessons learned from the extremely rigorous QA program required for the Yucca Mountain Project (YMP), and imposed the YMP requirements of complete traceability, transparency, and reproducibility, but avoided the inflexibility of a QA program that likely contributed to the suspect e-mails in 2005 that resulted in loss of trust in the YMP, and in nuclear waste disposal (and nuclear power) in general. There are far too many examples of loss of public trust due to poor QA that could have been easily avoided with a simple and straight-forward QA program combined with stakeholder engagement. The purpose of this paper is to share features of Neptune's Radiological Performance Assessment program QA program, and some of their QA related lessons learned over the past 27 years of QA for complex environmental modeling. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2025

Hawaii Threat Brief

The Digital Energy Transformation is redefining how power systems operate, integrating physical infrastructure with digital technologies to enhance efficiency, visibility, and resilience. For islanded and digitally modernizing systems like Hawai‘i’s, this shift presents both new opportunities and evolving challenges in cybersecurity, supply chain assurance, and environmental resilience. This brief provides an overview of critical infrastructure dependencies and systemic risks associated with increasing digital integration. It summarizes recent energy-sector threat activity and case studies that illustrate adversary tactics and supply chain vulnerabilities, and identifies pathways to strengthen resilience.

25 - ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2023

Los Alamos National Laboratory 2022 Annual Site Environmental Report (Rev. 2)

Los Alamos National Laboratory (Laboratory) annual site environmental reports are prepared each year by the Laboratory’s environmental organizations as required by U.S. Department of Energy Order 231.1B, Administrative Change 1, Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting, and Order 458.1, Administrative Change 4, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment. The chapters in this report discuss our compliance with environmental laws, regulations, and orders (Chapter 2, Compliance Summary); how we manage the Laboratory’s environmental performance and assure the quality of data from analysis of environmental samples (Chapter 3, Environmental Programs and Analytical Data Quality); how we monitor for air emissions of radioactive materials and for weather conditions (Chapter 4, Air Quality); how we monitor for effects of Laboratory operations on groundwater quality (Chapter 5, Groundwater Protection); how we monitor the levels of chemicals and radionuclides in storm water runoff and sediment (Chapter 6, Watershed Quality); how we monitor for the levels and effects of chemicals and radionuclides in plants, animals, soil, and vegetation (Chapter 7, Ecosystem Health); and finally, what radioactive dose or risk from chemical exposure that members of the public could experience as a result of Laboratory operations (Chapter 8, Public Dose and Risk Assessment).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

West Valley Demonstration Project Annual Site Environmental Report (CY2019)

The report, prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy West Valley Demonstration Project office (DOE-WVDP), summarizes the environmental protection program at the WVDP for calendar year (CY) 2019. Monitoring and surveillance of the facilities used by the DOE are conducted to verify protection of public health and safety and the environment. The report is a key component of DOE’s effort to keep the public informed of environmental conditions at the WVDP. The quality assurance protocols applied to the environmental monitoring program ensure the validity and accuracy of the monitoring data. In addition to demonstrating compliance with environmental laws, regulations, and directives, evaluation of data collected in 2019 continued to indicate that WVDP activities pose no threat to public health or safety, or to the environment.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Annual Environmental Report 2019

The purposes of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) Environmental Report 2019 are to record LLNL's compliance with environmental standards and requirements, describe LLNL’s environmental protection and remediation programs, and present the results of environmental monitoring at the two LLNL sites—the Livermore Site and Site 300. The report is prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) by LLNL’s Environmental Functional Area. Submittal of the report satisfies requirements under DOE Order 231.1B, “Environment, Safety and Health Reporting,” and DOE Order 458.1, “Radiation Protection of the Public and Environment.” The report begins with an executive summary, which provides the purpose of the report and an overview of LLNL’s compliance and monitoring results. The first three chapters provide background information: Chapter 1 is an overview of the location, meteorology, and hydrogeology of the two LLNL sites; Chapter 2 is a summary of LLNL’s compliance with environmental regulations; and Chapter 3 is a description of LLNL’s environmental programs with an emphasis on the Environmental Management System including pollution prevention. The majority of the report covers LLNL’s environmental monitoring programs and monitoring data for 2019: effluent and ambient air monitoring and dose assessment (Chapter 4); waters, including wastewater, storm water runoff, surface water, rain, and groundwater (Chapter 5); and terrestrial, including soil, sediment, vegetation, foodstuff, ambient radiation, and special status wildlife and plants (Chapter 6). The remaining two chapters discuss LLNL’s groundwater remediation program (Chapter 7), and quality assurance for the environmental monitoring programs (Chapter 8). Complete monitoring data, which are summarized in the body of the report, are provided in Appendix A.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Environmental Report 2021

The purposes of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Environmental Report 2021 are to record Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s (LLNL’s) compliance with environmental standards and requirements, describe LLNL’s environmental protection and remediation programs, and present the results of environmental monitoring at the two LLNL sites—the Livermore Site and Site 300. The report is prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) by LLNL’s Environmental Functional Area. Submittal of the report satisfies requirements under DOE Order 231.1B, “Environment, Safety and Health Reporting,” and DOE Order 458.1, “Radiation Protection of the Public and Environment.” The report is distributed electronically and is available at https://saer.llnl.gov/, the website for the LLNL annual environmental report. Previous LLNL annual environmental reports beginning with 1994 are also on the website. Some references in the electronic report text are underlined, which indicates that they are clickable links. Clicking on one of these links will open the related document, data workbook, or website. Sampling location maps throughout this report were created using ArcGIS® software by Esri. The report begins with an executive summary, which provides the purpose of the report and an overview of LLNL’s compliance and monitoring results. The first three chapters provide background information: Chapter 1 is an overview of the location, meteorology, and hydrogeology of the two LLNL sites; Chapter 2 is a summary of LLNL’s compliance with environmental regulations; and Chapter 3 is a description of LLNL’s environmental programs with an emphasis on the Environmental Management System including pollution prevention. The majority of the report covers LLNL’s environmental monitoring programs and monitoring data for 2021: effluent and ambient air monitoring and dose assessment (Chapter 4); waters, including wastewater, storm water runoff, surface water, rain, and groundwater (Chapter 5); and terrestrial, including soil, sediment, vegetation, foodstuff, ambient radiation, and special status wildlife and plants (Chapter 6). The remaining two chapters discuss LLNL’s groundwater remediation program (Chapter 7), and quality assurance for the environmental monitoring programs (Chapter 8). Complete monitoring data, which are summarized in the body of the report, are provided in Appendix A. The report uses Système International units, consistent with the federal Metric Conversion Act of 1975 and Executive Order 12770, “Metric Usage in Federal Government Programs” (1991). For ease of comparison to environmental reports issued prior to 1991, dose values and many radiological measurements are given in both metric and U.S. customary units. A conversion table is provided in the glossary. The report is the responsibility of LLNL’s Environmental Functional Area. Monitoring data were obtained through the combined efforts of the Environmental Functional Area; Environmental Restoration Department; Physical and Life Sciences Environmental Monitoring Radiological Laboratory; and the Radiation Protection Functional Area.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) (Annual Site Environmental Report (ASER), Calendar Year 2022)

The report, prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy West Valley Demonstration Project office (DOE-WVDP), summarizes the environmental protection program at the WVDP for calendar year (CY) 2022. Monitoring and surveillance of the facilities used by the DOE are conducted to verify protection of public health and safety and the environment. The report is a key component of DOE’s effort to keep the public informed of environmental conditions at the WVDP. The quality assurance protocols applied to the environmental monitoring program ensure the validity and accuracy of the monitoring data. In addition to demonstrating compliance with environmental laws, regulations, and directives, evaluation of data collected in 2022 continued to indicate that WVDP activities pose no threat to public health or safety, or to the environment.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2024

West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) Annual Site Environmental Report (ASER) for Calendar Year 2023

The report, prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy West Valley Demonstration Project office (DOE-WVDP), summarizes the environmental protection program at the WVDP for calendar year (CY) 2023. Monitoring and surveillance of the facilities used by the DOE are conducted to verify protection of public health and safety and the environment. The report is a key component of DOE’s effort to keep the public informed of environmental conditions at the WVDP. The quality assurance protocols applied to the environmental monitoring program ensure the validity and accuracy of the monitoring data. In addition to demonstrating compliance with environmental laws, regulations, and directives, evaluation of data collected in 2023 continued to indicate that WVDP activities pose no threat to public health or safety, or to the environment.

Record of Decision↗
DOE OSTI2022

West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) Annual Site Environmental Report (ASER) for Calendar Year 2021

The report, prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy West Valley Demonstration Project office (DOE-WVDP), summarizes the environmental protection program at the WVDP for calendar year (CY) 2021. Monitoring and surveillance of the facilities used by the DOE are conducted to verify protection of public health and safety and the environment. The report is a key component of DOE’s effort to keep the public informed of environmental conditions at the WVDP. The quality assurance protocols applied to the environmental monitoring program ensure the validity and accuracy of the monitoring data. In addition to demonstrating compliance with environmental laws, regulations, and directives, evaluation of data collected in 2021 continued to indicate that WVDP activities pose no threat to public health or safety, or to the environment.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2025

West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) Annual Site Environmental Report (ASER) for Calendar Year 2024

The report, prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy West Valley Demonstration Project office (DOE-WVDP), summarizes the environmental protection program at the WVDP for calendar year (CY) 2024. Monitoring and surveillance of the facilities used by the DOE are conducted to verify protection of public health and safety and the environment. The report is a key component of DOE’s effort to keep the public informed of environmental conditions at the WVDP. The quality assurance protocols applied to the environmental monitoring program ensure the validity and accuracy of the monitoring data. In addition to demonstrating compliance with environmental laws, regulations, and directives, evaluation of data collected in 2024 continued to indicate that WVDP activities pose no threat to public health or safety, or to the environment.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) Annual Site Environmental Report (ASER) for Calendar Year 2025

The report, prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy West Valley Demonstration Project office (DOE-WVDP), summarizes the environmental protection program at the WVDP for calendar year (CY) 2025. Monitoring and surveillance of the facilities used by the DOE are conducted to verify protection of public health and safety and the environment. The report is a key component of the DOE’s effort to keep the public informed of environmental conditions at the WVDP. The quality assurance protocols applied to the environmental monitoring program ensure the validity and accuracy of the monitoring data. In addition to demonstrating compliance with environmental laws, regulations, and directives, the evaluation of data collected in 2025 continued to indicate that WVDP activities posed no threat to public health or safety, or to the environment.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) Annual Site Environmental Report (ASER) for Calendar Year 2020

West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) Annual Site Environmental Report (ASER) for Calendar Year 2020. The report, prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy West Valley Demonstration Project office (DOE-WVDP), summarizes the environmental protection program at the WVDP for calendar year (CY) 2020. Monitoring and surveillance of the facilities used by the DOE are conducted to verify protection of public health and safety and the environment. The report is a key component of DOE’s effort to keep the public informed of environmental conditions at the WVDP. The quality assurance protocols applied to the environmental monitoring program ensure the validity and accuracy of the monitoring data. In addition to demonstrating compliance with environmental laws, regulations, and directives, evaluation of data collected in 2020 continued to indicate that WVDP activities pose no threat to public health or safety, or to the environment.

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act↗
DOE OSTI2021

Transition to Online Cable Insulation Condition Monitoring

Nuclear power plant cables were originally qualified for 40 year life and generally have not required specific test verification to assure service availability through the initial plant qualification period. However, license renewals to 60 and 80 years of operation require a cable aging management program that depends on some form of test and verification to assure fitness for service. Environmental stress (temperature, radiation, chemicals, water, and mechanical) varies dramatically within a nuclear power plant and, in some cases, cables have degraded and required repair or replacement before their qualified end-of-life period. In other cases, cable conditions have been mild and dependable cable performance confirmed to extend well beyond the initial qualified life. Most offline performance-based testing requires cables to be de-coupled and de-energized for specially trained technicians to perform testing. These offline tests constitute an expensive operational burden that limits the economic viability of nuclear power plants. Although initial investment may be higher, new online test practices are emerging as options or complements to offline testing that avoid or minimize the regularly scheduled offline test burden. These online methods include electrical and fiber-optic partial discharge measurement, spread spectrum time or frequency domain reflectometry, distributed temperature profile measurements, and local interdigital capacitance measurement of insulation characteristics. Introduction of these methods must be supported by research to confirm efficacy plus either publicly financed or market driven investment to support the start-up expense of cost-effective instrumentation to monitor cable condition and assure reliable operation. This work summarizes various online cable assessment technologies plus introduces a new cable motor test bed to assess some of these technologies in a controlled test environment.

Glass, Samuel W.↗
DOE OSTI2024

The effect of monitoring complexity on stakeholder acceptance of CO2 geological storage projects in the US gulf coast region

Environmental monitoring at geologic CO 2 storage sites is required by regulations for the purposes of environmental protection and emissions accounting in the case of leakage to surface. However, another very important goal of environmental monitoring is to assure stakeholders that the project is monitored for safety and effectiveness. With current efforts to optimize monitoring for cost-effectiveness, the question remains: will optimization of monitoring approaches degrade stakeholder assurance, or do heavily-instrumented sites communicate higher risk to a stakeholder? We report the results of a stakeholder survey in Gulf Coast states of the US where carbon capture and storage (CCS) is developing quickly. We rely on a 2 by 2 factorial experiment in which we manipulate message complexity (complex v. simple) and social norm (support from scientists v. support from community members). Subjects were randomly assigned to one of four conditions: 1) complex message with scientist support; 2) complex message with community member support; 3) simple message with scientist support; or 4) simple message with community member support. In addition to the experimental stimuli, subjects were also asked about their need for cognition, attitudes toward science and scientists, attitudes about climate change and support for carbon capture and storage (CCS). Our sample is drawn from residents in states bordering the western Gulf of Mexico (Texas, Louisiana, Florida) where CO 2 geologic storage is being planned both onshore and offshore. The results offer important implications for public outreach efforts to key stakeholders.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

2021 Idaho National Laboratory Site Environmental Report

The INL Site’s operations, as well as the ongoing cleanup, necessarily involve a commitment to environmental stewardship and full compliance with environmental protection laws. As part of this commitment, the INL Site Environmental Report is prepared annually to inform the public, regulators, stakeholders, and other interested parties of the INL Site’s environmental performance during the year. This report is published for the DOE-ID in compliance with DOE O 231.1B, “Environment, Safety and Health Reporting.” Its purpose is to: • Present the INL Site, mission, and programs • Report compliance status with applicable federal, state, and local regulations • Describe the INL Site environmental programs and activities • Summarize results of environmental monitoring • Discuss potential radiation doses to the public residing in the vicinity of the INL Site • Report on ecological monitoring and research conducted by contractors and affiliated agencies and by independent researchers through the Idaho National Environmental Research Park • Describe quality assurance methods used to ensure confidence in monitoring data • Provide supplemental technical data and reports that support the INL Site Environmental Report (https://idahoeser.inl.gov/publications.html).

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2023

2022 Site Environmental Report: Idaho National Laboratory

The INL Site’s operations, as well as the ongoing cleanup mission involve a commitment to environmental stewardship and full compliance with environmental protection laws. As part of this commitment, the INL Site Environmental Report is prepared annually to inform the public, regulators, stakeholders, and other interested parties of the INL Site’s environmental performance during the year. This report is published for U.S. Department of Energy, Idaho Operations Office (DOE-ID) in compliance with DOE O 231.1B, “Environment, Safety and Health Reporting.” The purpose of the report is to provide the following: (1) Present the INL Site, mission, and programs, (2) Report compliance status with applicable federal, state, and local regulations, (3) Describe the INL Site environmental programs and activities, (4) Summarize results of environmental monitoring, (5) Discuss potential radiation doses to the public residing in the vicinity of the INL Site, (6) Report on ecological monitoring and research conducted by contractors and affiliated agencies and by independent researchers through the Idaho National Environmental Research Park, (7) Describe quality assurance methods used to ensure confidence in monitoring data, and (8) Provide supplemental technical data and reports that support the INL Site Environmental Report (https://idahoeser.inl.gov/publications.html).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Computational Tools and Workflows for Quantitative Risk Assessment and Decision Support for Geologic Carbon Storage Sites: Progress and Insights from the U.S. DOE’s National Risk Assessment Partnership

The 2005 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Special Report on CCS raised the profile of CO2 capture and storage (CCS) as an important technology for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. CCS is now recognized as a key component of most climate change mitigation scenarios. Since publication of that report the international research, development, and deployment (RD&D) community has advanced key technical aspects, clarified regulatory requirements, explored value chain and infrastructure solutions, and developed incentive paradigms to enable and promote large-scale deployment of CCS. These efforts have included research to better characterize geologic storage resources, to improve injection performance and storage efficiency, to assess and manage subsurface environmental risks, and to advance monitoring technologies to assure system conformance. These efforts have helped to build confidence in the viability of geologic carbon storage (GCS), but stakeholder concerns about long-term risks and liability associated with GCS remain a hurdle to broad acceptance and large-scale deployment of CCS. Since 2010, the U.S. DOE’s National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP) – a research collaboration between five contributing national laboratories – has worked to establish and demonstrate methods and tools to quantify and manage the subsurface environmental risks associated with GCS, amidst uncertainty. This work supports the Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management Carbon Transport and Storage Program’s goal of advancing safe and secure commercial-scale GCS deployment. To address the technical challenge of simulating the physical response of the GCS site to large-scale CO2 injection, NRAP has adopted an approach that relies on coupling computationally efficient reduced-order and/or data-driven proxy models of important system components (i.e., storage reservoir, sealing caprock, leakage pathways, intermediate formations, overlying groundwater aquifers, and the atmosphere) in integrated assessment framework. That integrated model of the physical system is complemented with fit-for purpose functionality to support site characterization and risk-related decisions. The recently released NRAP Phase II toolset includes the Open-Source Integrated Assessment Model (NRAP-Open-IAM) for evaluation of trends in leakage risk and potential impact, tools to support monitoring design optimization (Designs for Risk Evaluation and Management – DREAM v3.0 and Passive Seismic Monitoring Tool - PSMT), and tools for state of stress evaluation (State-of-Stress Analysis Tool - SOSAT) and forecasting induced seismicity risk. The NRAP team has also released a pair of reports describing conceptual workflows to incorporate physics-based, quantitative risk assessment into many of the design, planning, operation, and closure decisions for GCS projects. An online catalogue highlights published studies where these tools and methods are demonstrated. In this presentation, the utility of these products to assess risks and address key stakeholder questions will be highlighted through examples, and related insights about the safety and security of geologic carbon storage in qualified storage sites will be discussed. The prospect of rapid, large-scale deployment of GCS technology to aggressively reduce anthropogenic CO2 emissions requires careful consideration of interference between multiple commercial-scale storage projects within a basin. Going forward, NRAP is expanding and adapting site-scale risk quantification tools and methods to enable assessment of risks and inform management decisions for basin-scale deployment. Increasingly, this work will leverage next-generation approaches for surrogate modelling, fast prediction, and advanced visualization enabled by machine learning and artificial intelligence to promote virtual learning, scenario evaluation, and augment risk-based decision making.

quantitative risk assessment, geologic carbon stor↗