Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “federal office”

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 181 records · Page 10
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2022

Report Series: Evaluation, Finding Of Effect, And Mitigation Documentation For Building 23-113, Mercury, Area 23, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) plans to demolish Building 23-113 in Mercury (Nevada State Historic Preservation Office [SHPO] Resource No. B15236), which is on the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) in Nye County, Nevada. Demolition of Building 23-113 is part of the long-term project to modernize the town of Mercury on the NNSS for future mission needs. The project is considered an undertaking subject to review under Title 54 of United States Code (USC) § 306108, commonly known as Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, Title 54 USC § 300101, et seq., and its implementing regulations, Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations (36 CFR) Part 800. In 2018, Desert Research Institute (DRI) completed an architectural survey of the town of Mercury. This effort resulted in the identification, recordation, and evaluation of the Mercury Historic District (MHD, SHPO Resource No. D230), including the identification of its contributing elements (Reno et al. 2018). The MHD was recommended eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP, National Register) under the Secretary of the Interior’s (SOI) Significance Criteria A and C, as defined in 36 CFR Part 60.4, as a significant concentration of buildings and structures with a direct and important association with Cold War-era nuclear testing from 1951 through 1992. It has not been evaluated under Criteria B and D to date. As part of a larger modernization program for Mercury, the NNSA/NFO and the SHPO executed the 2018 Programmatic Agreement between the National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office and the Nevada State Historic Preservation Officer regarding Modernization and Operational Maintenance of the Nevada National Security Site, at Mercury in Nye County, Nevada (the Mercury PA). The Mercury PA includes streamlined Section 106 procedures for undertakings in the MHD based on contributing element categories. Building 23-113 is identified in Appendix C of the Mercury PA as a Category I contributing element, indicating that it might be individually eligible for the NRHP. It is a historic property for the purposes of Section 106 compliance and subject to the stipulations of the Mercury PA. Per Stipulation VI of the Mercury PA, when the Area of Potential Effect (APE) for an undertaking includes Category I elements, the NNSA/NFO must evaluate the Category I elements for individual NRHP eligibility under all of the SOI Significance Criteria prior to initiating any activity that may affect the elements. Therefore, the purpose of this report is to evaluate Building 23-113 as a potential individually eligible historic property in fulfillment of Stipulation VI of the Mercury PA. The evaluation detailed herein concludes that although Building 23-113 is significant at the local level for its important role as a recreational facility on the NNSS, the building lacks sufficient integrity to convey its significance. It is not individually eligible for listing in the NRHP at any level. The building remains eligible as a contributing element to the MHD.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Advanced Reactor Safeguards Program Roadmap

The Advanced Reactor Safeguards (ARS) program was established in 2020 as part of appropriations for the Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program (ARDP) through the Office of Nuclear Energy in the Department of Energy. The goal of this program is to help address near term challenges that advanced nuclear reactor vendors face in meeting domestic Material Control and Accountancy (MC&A) and Physical Protection System (PPS) requirements for U.S. construction. Existing regulations for safeguards and security, as outlined in the Code of Federal Regulations, were written for large light water reactors, and some of the requirements are not suited to smaller, safer advanced reactor designs. The ARS program seeks to remove roadblocks in the deployment of new and advanced reactors by solving regulatory challenges, reducing safeguards and security costs, and utilizing the latest technologies and approaches for robust plant monitoring and protection. Safeguards and Security by Design (SSBD), or the consideration of safeguards and security requirements early in the design process, is an overarching principle that guides this program. This roadmap discusses the goals of the ARS program, current research, and program plan for the next five years.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Big Hole Drilling Support for Nuclear Testing, 1985-1992: An Architectural Survey of the Area 1 Subdock, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) planned to demolish two buildings at the Area 1 Subdock at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) in Nye County, Nevada, to meet environmental management mission requirements. A review was conducted under Title 54 United States Code (USC) § 306101 (commonly known as Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act) and its implementing regulations, 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 800. As a result, a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) was developed to mitigate the effects of the building demolitions. Stipulation III.B of the MOA requires an architectural survey of the Area 1 Subdock. Prior to this survey, the Subdock had not been systematically recorded. Therefore, an area of approximately 33 hectares (81 acres) was surveyed for historic properties by Desert Research Institute personnel. This effort resulted in the identification, recording, and evaluation of the potential Area 1 Subdock Historic District (SHPO Resource No. D377), including the identification of its contributing components. This district is recommended as eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) under Criteria A and C. It contains 14 primary resources which include individual buildings, structures, storage yards, and infrastructure. Of these resources, all except one are recommended as elements that contribute to the district during its period of significance corresponding to nuclear testing from 1985 through 1992. Four of the resources (B18847, B18848, S2772, S2773) are recommended as individually eligible for the NRHP.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Next Generation System Analysis Model Recently Added Features and Future Plans - Abstract

The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended (NWPA 1982), established the federal government’s responsibility to accept spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste (HLW) from waste owners and generators for ultimate disposition. SNF generated by the current fleet of commercial nuclear reactors is being stored at the reactor sites in spent fuel pools (SFPs) and in dry independent spent fuel storage installations (ISFSIs). The US Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE) is developing an Integrated Waste Management Program (IWMP) comprising a suite of options and supporting analyses to enable future informed choices. The IWMP is applying integrated waste management system architecture analysis, system engineering, and decision analysis principles to inform potential future decisions regarding potential nuclear waste management system architectures. Architecture analyses of the IWM system are being conducted to support the future deployment of a comprehensive system for managing nuclear waste that considers all major aspects of the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle (i.e., transportation, storage, and disposal). The Next Generation System Analysis Model (NGSAM) is an agent-based simulation software tool designed for the express purpose of modeling the IWM system. NGSAM imports data from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Unified Database (e.g., historic assembly information, thermal profiles for assembly heat, at-reactor dry storage loadings) to ensure that the simulation initializes with a realistic representation of the state of commercial SNF in the United States. Recent major enhancements that have been implemented into NGSAM since NGSAM was last presented at the WM2019 conference include: • Tracking of railroad escort and buffer car acquisition. • Addition of heavy haul and barge routes for some sites, as well as support for user-defined inter-modal routes. • Updates to the logic that checks the thermal maps prior to package transport. • Addition of an allocation method that predicts when reactor sites will pack assemblies from their pools for dry storage and allocates packages to those reactor sites in the preceding periods, favoring direct transport packages and reducing the number of packages that reactor sites pack for dry storage at their ISFSIs. • Addition of reactor site family operational limits, which are used to limit the number of loads from the pool and from dry storage at a given reactor site per year. • Support has been added for multiple canister loading maps and packages having multiple compatible transportation overpacks. • Updates in the handling of non-commercial fuel, including a new database containing data to support the updates. • Support for repackaging at reactor sites. • Implementing additional output reports or modifying existing reports. • User edits can now be created and edited via the NGSAM website. • Ability to load packages for dry storage at ISF pools. • Same-type package blending at DOE sites. • Support for multi-mode transloading at reactor sites. These new features have improved NGSAM capabilities and/or improve the user experience with the model and will be discussed in more detail. The initial NGSAM requirements for advanced reactor fuels, reprocessing, treatment, and conditioning are preliminary and are described at a high level in this paper: analysts will provide more specific requirements to the NGSAM team in the future. Additionally, there are many data needs associated with modeling advanced reactors in NGSAM, but many of the data or plans are still in progress and/or yet to be fully defined. However, this document describes an initial exploration of the data relevant to this program. Advanced reactor data will likely require revision as concepts evolve and new considerations are made. This is a technical paper that does not take into account contractual limitations or obligations under the Standard Contract for Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and/or High-Level Radioactive Waste (Standard Contract) (10 CFR Part 961). For example, under the provisions of the Standard Contract, spent nuclear fuel in multi-assembly canisters is not an acceptable waste form, absent a mutually agreed to contract amendment. To the extent discussions or recommendations in this paper conflict with the provisions of the Standard Contract, the Standard Contract governs the obligations of the parties, and this paper in no manner supersedes, overrides, or amends the Standard Contract. This paper reflects technical work which could support future decision making by DOE. No inferences should be drawn from this paper regarding future actions by DOE, which are limited both by the terms of the Standard Contract and Congressional appropriations for the Department to fulfill its obligations under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act including licensing and construction of a spent nuclear fuel repository.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Towards provision of regularly updated climate data from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project

The Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP) is a flagship of the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP). CMIP has become a recognised ‘brand’ in climate circles evolving over the last thirty years from a targeted research activity by a small number of climate modelling centres intercomparing their Earth System Model (ESM) simulations to a broad international coordinated research effort (Durack et al, 2025). CMIP is organized as a research activity leveraging funded and in-kind contributions from experts within modelling centres and the broader scientific community supported more recently by a fully-funded International Project Office. Within CMIP, Model Intercomparison Projects (MIPs) are community-designed to understand past, present and future climate. CMIP data provides a valuable resource for climate research and is routinely used to assess model representation of climate processes and test scientific hypotheses in the context of model uncertainty and (forced and internal) variability as evident from its prolific use in scientific publications1 . The impact relies on enabling infrastructure (most prominently via the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF)), which allows sharing of simulation output, provision of the boundary conditions used in each simulation, and definition of the data standards that are essential to facilitating wide use of the data. The impact is supplemented by the wide-ranging scrutiny to which model simulations are subjected. Beyond its use in research, CMIP data is a key resource for communities producing derived climate information from downscaling and impact studies, such as the Coordinated Regional Downscaling Experiment (CORDEX; Gutowski et al., 2016) and the Intersectoral Impacts MIP (ISIMIP; Frieler et al., 2024). Government, academic and commercial entities also increasingly rely on CMIP and its downstream data for climate risk assessments and climate services (for example, Copernicus Climate Change Service and World Bank portal). This means that, although CMIP is a research activity, it increasingly serves a secondary and very relevant role as a provider of climate data – a long-recognised dichotomy (Stevens, 2024). Research and applications have distinct needs, with the former requiring flexibility and generality and the latter consistency. Here we explain how the design of the research activity has been adapted to reduce the burdens imposed by applications and how the research infrastructure might evolve to further enable scientific inquiry. We propose one possible approach to consistently providing model information and projections for applications in the future.

Environmental sciences↗
DOE OSTI2024

Oak Ridge National Laboratory 2025 Site Sustainability Plan With FY 2024 Performance Data

At the close of each fiscal year, the US Department of Energy (DOE) Sustainability Performance Office (SPO) issues instruction documents and technical resource aids/tools necessary for DOE sites and national laboratories to complete sustainability reporting requirements. SPO is part of the DOE Office of Asset Management. As required by DOE Order 436.1A, Departmental Sustainability, each site develops and commits to an annual site sustainability plan (SSP) that identifies its respective contribution toward meeting DOE’s sustainability goals. SPO collects and compiles information reported by each site to develop an agency-wide sustainability report and implementation plan, which are used to report DOE sustainability progress to the federal government as required by all major federal agencies.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2024

Wetlands Delineation Report and Classification: PNNL – Sequim (formerly MSL) Estuary Wetland Delineation

The Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) – Sequim, historically known as the Marine Sciences Laboratory (MSL) in Sequim, Washington, is managed and operated by Battelle on behalf of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Pacific Northwest Site Office (PNSO). The site provides capabilities for future energy research, climate change effects analyses, wetland and coastal ecosystem restoration, other environmental research involving marine resources and hosts the only marine research facilities in the Department of Energy National Laboratory Complex. In order to support campus development, maintenance, and potential research activities, a wetland delineation was conducted on the northern portion of campus in accordance with state and federal wetland regulations. This technical report details out the delineation.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Summary Report for the NEPA Impact Analysis. Revision 1

The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), located in southeastern New Mexico, has been developed by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for the geologic (deep underground) disposal of defense-related transuranic (TRU) waste. Containment of TRU waste at the WIPP facility is derived from standards set forth in Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 191. The DOE assesses compliance with the containment standards according to the Certification Criteria in Title 40 CFR Part 194 by means of Performance Assessment (PA) calculations performed by Sandia National Laboratories (SNL). WIPP PA calculations estimate the probability of radionuclide releases from the repository to the accessible environment for a regulatory period of 10,000 years after facility closure. The DOE Carlsbad Field Office (CBFO) has initiated a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) action for a proposal to excavate and use additional transuranic (TRU) waste disposal panels at the WIPP facility. This report documents an analysis undertaken as part of an effort to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of the proposed action. Although not explicitly required for a NEPA analysis, evaluations of a dose indicator to hypothetical members of the public after final facility closure are presented in this report. The analysis is carried out in two stages: first, Performance Assessment (PA) calculations quantify the potential releases to the accessible environment over a 10,000-year post-closure period. Second, dose was evaluated for three hypothetical exposure pathways using the conservative radionuclide concentrations assumed to be released to the accessible environment.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2022

Fusion Energy Sciences Network Requirements Review. Final Report, April - October 2021

The Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) is the high-performance network user facility for the US Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science (SC) and delivers highly reliable data transport capabilities optimized for the requirements of data-intensive science. In essence, ESnet is the circulatory system that enables the DOE science mission by connecting all of its laboratories and facilities in the US and abroad. ESnet is funded and stewarded by the Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) program and managed and operated by the Scientific Networking Division at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL). ESnet is widely regarded as a global leader in the research and education networking community. Throughout 2021, ESnet and the Office of Fusion Energy Sciences (FES) of the DOE SC organized an ESnet requirements review of FES-supported activities. Preparation for these events included identification of key stakeholders: program and facility management, research groups, and technology providers. Each stakeholder group was asked to prepare formal case study documents about their relationship to the FES program to build a complete understanding of the current, near-term, and long-term status, expectations, and processes that will support the science going forward.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

PCAST: Report to the President on Improving Groundwater Security in the United States

The President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) is the sole body of advisors from outside the federal government charged with making science, technology, and innovation policy recommendations to the President and the White House. Established by Executive Order, it is an independent Federal Advisory Committee comprised of distinguished individuals from industry, academia, and non-profit organizations with a range of perspectives and expertise. On December 14, 2024, PCAST sent a report to the President with recommendations to enhance groundwater stewardship and resilience.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Bioenergy’s Role in Soil Carbon Storage Decarbonizing Transportation, Agriculture, and Industrial Sectors Workshop Summary Report

On March 28–29, 2022, the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO) hosted the public virtual workshop “Bioenergy’s Role in Soil Carbon Storage.” Given the recent emphasis of the Biden administration on decarbonizing transportation, agriculture, and industrial sectors of the U.S. economy, this workshop examined how decarbonization through enhanced soil carbon storage while growing bioenergy crops is possible by discussing challenges and opportunities that affect soil carbon levels. Stakeholders representing academia, industry, the farming community, agricultural and forestry sectors, municipalities, and federal agencies involved in soil carbon storage participated in this workshop. A series of keynote presentations, plenary presentations, and stakeholder input sessions provided opportunities for sharing knowledge and identifying research and development (R&D) needs for future advances in soil carbon storage in relation to bioenergy crops. This document provides an overview of the content discussed in the presentations, as well as a summary of the stakeholder input received during the session discussions.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2022

4.2.1.31 Integrated Life Cycle Sustainability Analysis

This project provides the Department of Energy's Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO) with strategic decision-support for the evaluation of its R&D portfolio by developing, validating, and applying a coherent methodology and consistent model framework to quantify the net effects of an expanding US bioeconomy. The framework fills an analysis gap previously identified by Peer Review and supports a related milestone in BETO's Multi-Year Program Plan. The framework was scoped with inputs from practitioners in academia, national laboratories, and federal agencies. The model is a top-down, economy-wide framework using a coherent methodology to compute environmental and socio-economic metrics. It is purposefully complementary to existing bottom-up, process-based techno-economic and life cycle assessment BETO tools and uses their data as inputs. Presently, the model covers several commercial and near-commercial biofuel routes and an emerging pathway for plastics upcycling. It covers temporal detail across four time-steps and is currently being expanded with a prospective modeling capability. The model has provided analyses for the Third Triennial Report to Congress (RtC3) on the environmental impacts of the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS2), among others. As part of this project, NREL also provides scientific support to BETO in the International Energy Agency's Technology Collaboration Program on Bioenergy (IEA Bioenergy) Task 45 on Sustainability. Here, NREL evaluates and synthesizes activities that develop, compare, or apply metrics, methods, and tools to quantify sustainability effects of bioeconomy products. NREL also coordinates related national lab involvement and a BETO Working Group on Sustainable Land Management.

bioeconomy↗
DOE OSTI2019

2018 Annual Site Environmental Report

Los Alamos National Laboratory’s (the Laboratory’s) annual site environmental reports are prepared annually 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 3, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment. The following chapters in this report discuss our success in complying with environmental laws, regulations, and orders (Chapter 2, Compliance Summary); how we manage the Laboratory’s environmental performance (Chapter 3, Environmental Programs); how we monitor for air emissions of radioactive materials and climate conditions (Chapter 4, Air Quality); how we monitor for effects of Laboratory operations on groundwater quality (Chapter 5, Groundwater Monitoring); how we monitor the movement of chemicals and radionuclides by storm water runoff and the levels of chemicals and radionuclides in deposited sediment (Chapter 6, Watershed Quality); how we monitor for the presence, levels, and effects of chemicals and radionuclides in plants, animals, soil, and vegetation (Chapter 7, Ecosystem Health); and finally, what radionuclide dose or risk from chemical exposure members of the public may experience as a result of Laboratory operations (Chapter 8, Public Dose and Risk Assessment). This report follows plain language guidelines, as required for federal agencies by the Plain Language Act of 2010. More information about plain language can be found at http://www.plainlanguage.gov/index.cfm. You will notice we have substantially reduced the use of acronyms and abbreviations and are using active voice and personal pronouns. We hope you find this report useful. If you have suggestions for improving this report, additional questions, or want a copy of this report, please contact us at envoutreach@lanl.gov, or call the Communications Office at 505-665-7000. This report, its supplemental tables, and the 2018 Annual Site Environmental Report Summary are available at http://www.lanl.gov/environment/environmental-report.php. Note: This document has been revised since it was initially published on September 23, 2019. The revisions included corrections to figure and table references, changes in heading levels, adding blank pages where appropriate, and changes of an editorial nature.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

An Architectural Survey of the U12G Tunnel Historic District, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), in conjunction with the National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO), proposes to demolish six buildings and three storage areas located at the U12g Tunnel portal area in Area 12 of the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). The buildings are 12-358 (Signal Vault); 12-201800 (Storage Quonset Hut); 12-202555 (Walker Shack); 12-868 (Pipe Assembly); 12-B100933 (Electrical Shop); 12-B100944 (Conference Room); and Storage Area 1; Storage Area 2; and Storage Area 3. The buildings and storage areas were selected for demolition as part of the DOE’s Real Property Efficiency Plan to reduce the footprint of unused and non-operational facilities on the NNSS. They are all vacant and have no proposed uses for current or upcoming NNSS missions. Demolition activities constitute an undertaking subject to review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) (54 United States Code [USC] § 306101) and its implementing regulations, 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 800. Identification efforts began with resources proposed for demolition in federal Fiscal Year (FY) 23. Four buildings were proposed to be demolished in FY23 (12-358, 12-868, 12-201800, and 12-202555). These buildings and the U12g Tunnel Historic District (SHPO No. D444) were recorded in Identification, Evaluation, and Finding of Adverse Effect for the Proposed Demolition of Five Buildings in Area 12, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada (Menocal et al. 2023). Identification efforts indicated three buildings (12-358, 12-201800, and 12-868) supported nuclear testing in the U12g Tunnel. The fourth building post-dated the use of U12g Tunnel for nuclear testing activities. The report recommended that three of the four buildings (12-358, 12-201800, 12-868) and the U12g Tunnel Historic District may be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The report also found that the undertaking would have an adverse effect on the three buildings and on the historic district. The Nevada State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) concurred with the report’s findings (Reed 2023). The U12g Tunnel was determined eligible as a historic district under the Secretary of the Interior’s (SOI) Significance Criterion A, at the local level, in the context of the Cold War as an underground testing environment for the development of nuclear weapons and to assess the effects of a nuclear explosion on materials and equipment with a period of significance from 1959 to 1971. It was also determined eligible under Significance Criterion C for embodying the distinctive characters of a horizontal tunnel complex used for nuclear testing and as a significant and distinguishable entity. The three buildings were determined to be contributing elements of the district. The undertaking was expanded with the addition of two buildings and three storage areas proposed to be demolished and located within U12g Tunnel Historic District in FY24. These five resources (12-B100933, 12-B100944, and Storage Areas 1, 2, and 3) were recorded in Supplemental Identification, Evaluation, and Finding of Effect for Additional Proposed Demolition at U12g Tunnel, Area 12, Nevada national Security Site, Nye County, Nevada (Brannan et al. 2024). Identification efforts indicated that the two buildings and Storage Area 1 supported nuclear testing in the U12g Tunnel. Storage Area 1 and Storage Area 2 post-dated the nuclear testing activities at U12g Tunnel and were not recommended as contributing elements to the district. The report also found that the undertaking would have an adverse effect on the newly identified buildings and one storage area and on the historic district. The SHPO concurred that the expanded undertaking would result in adverse effects to historic properties (Reed 2025). To resolve these adverse effects, NNSA/NFO, in consultation with the SHPO, is following standard mitigation as stipulated in the 2024 Programmatic Agreement DE-GM58-22NA25554 Among the U.S. Department of Energy and the Nevada State Historic Preservation Officer and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Concerning the Protection of Historic Properties on the Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada (hereafter referred to as the NNSS PA). The standard mitigation measures are outlined in Appendix D of the NNSS PA. As such, this architectural survey has been prepared in accordance with Appendix D of the NNSS PA and follows the report format outlined in Appendix F. It includes a historic context that describes the district’s origin, history, and support functions, its significance in the context of nuclear testing on the NNSS, and identifies contributing and non-contributing elements within the district. The report is accompanied by Architectural Resource Assessment (ARA) forms for individual resources and a Historic District Resource Assessment (HDRA) for the U12g Tunnel Historic District. In total, this architectural report identified 32 primary resources within the district boundary. Six of the primary resources were previously identified as contributing elements. An additional 17 resources are recommended as contributing elements to the district for a total of 23 contributing elements. The other nine resources identified are recommended as non-contributing elements to the district.

12-201800↗
DOE OSTI2024

Feedback on the Electric Emergency Incident and Disturbance Report, OE-417

The US Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Electricity (OE) mandates requirements for reporting electric emergencies and disruptions in the United States. Specific electric power industry organizations (such as balancing authorities, reliability coordinators, some generating entities, and electric utilities) report this information through the OE-417 Electric Emergency Incident and Disturbance Report via Form OE-417. Entities are required to submit Form OE-417 when at least one of the qualifying 26 criteria is met pursuant to Section 13(b) of the Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-275). Entities are required to report, within 6 hours of the incident, loss of electric service to 50,000 customers or more for 1 hour or longer. The deadline for submitting Form OE-417 depends on the nature of the incident. An updated Form OE-417 Schedule 1 and all of Schedule 2 are both due within 72 hours of the incident to provide complete disruption information. Additionally, a Final Report must be filed within 72 hours of the incident, unless an interim update has been provided. If the incident meets specific criteria, the form must be filed within one hour, six hours, or by the later of 24 hours after the recognition of the incident or by the end of the next business day.1 The ability of DOE to respond quickly to energy emergencies that could affect the nation’s infrastructure and help alleviate or prevent further disruptions depends on the industry’s prompt and complete submission of information. This report summarizes current issues with Form OE-417 and the reporting process and presents recommendations for improvements.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
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 OSTI2020

Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, UMTRCA Title I Disposal Site 35 Years Postclosure (1985-2020) - 20288

The DOE Office of Legacy Management (LM) Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, Disposal Site is a former uranium ore-processing site located in the borough of Canonsburg and an important part of US history. For 46 years (1911-1957), the site processed ore, for vanadium, radium and then uranium. Soils and groundwater beneath the site were contaminated by the milling operations. The 15-hectare (37-acre) site is owned by the US government and managed by LM, which serves as the federal land manager and steward of cultural, historical, and natural resources at Cold War legacy sites that have been successfully cleaned up to remedial standards. In 1978 Congress directed DOE to remediate 22 inactive uranium-ore processing sites under the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA), in accordance with standards promulgated by the US Environmental Protection Agency in Title 40 CFR Part 192 (40 (CFR 192). Subpart B of 40 CFR 192 regulates the cleanup of contaminated groundwater at the processing sites. The radioactive materials were encapsulated in US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)-approved disposal cells, and the NRC general license for UMTRCA Title I sites is established in 10 CFR 40.27. Canonsburg was the first site to be remediated under UMTRCA. From 1983 to 1985, the Canonsburg site underwent cleanup under this US law that provides for the safe and environmentally sound disposal, long-term stabilization, and control of uranium mill tailings in a manner that minimizes or eliminates radiation health hazards to the public. The site is unique in that it is one of only two UMTRCA Title I sites in the eastern half of the United States, the other site being the Burrell, Pennsylvania, Title I Disposal Site, a vicinity property to the Canonsburg site. It has been 35 years since the disposal cell at the Canonsburg site was completed. This paper discusses the many efforts that have been taken to maintain the site and presents some of the lessons learned concerning the long-term care of the site. The discussion includes but is not limited to the following: (1) Preserving site history so the community can better appreciate and understand the site. (2) Community outreach efforts, and the importance of maintaining transparency of environmental monitoring results with the community. (3) Pursuing reuse opportunities that offer the potential for improving the community. (4) Remaining engaged with the local community. (5) Remaining proactive in the long-term care of the site. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2022

Evaluation of Building 23-117, Administration Building, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) plans to update the façade of Building 23-117, Administration Building (Nevada State Historic Preservation Office [SHPO] Resource No. B15256), at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) in Nye County, Nevada. The NNSA/NFO is implementing a long-term project to modernize the town of Mercury for future mission needs. The project is considered an undertaking subject to review under Title 54 of United States Code (USC) § 306108, commonly known as Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, Title 54 USC § 300101, et seq., and its implementing regulations, Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations (36 CFR) Part 800.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗