Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “spreadsheet”

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 235 records · Page 13

NETL CO2U openLCA LCI Database Version 2.1

The NETL CO2U openLCA LCI Database Version 2 is part of the NETL CO2U LCA Guidance Toolkit for Carbon Utilization funding recipients to meet their LCA requirements. The toolkit includes the following files: NETL CO2U LCA Guidance Document, NETL CO2U openLCA LCI Database, NETL CO2U openLCA Results Contribution Tool, NETL CO2U LCA Documentation Spreadsheet, and NETL CO2U LCA Report Template. The NETL CO2U openLCA LCI Database is an openLCA software files that contains data and an example system for funding recipients using openLCA to complete their LCA requirements.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

NETL CO2U LCA Guidance Toolkit - Version 2.1

The NETL CO2U LCA Guidance Toolkit is part of the NETL CO2U LCA Guidance Toolkit for Carbon Utilization funding recipients to meet their LCA requirements. The toolkit includes the following files: NETL CO2U LCA Guidance Document, NETL CO2U openLCA LCI Database, NETL CO2U openLCA Results Contribution Tool, NETL CO2U LCA Documentation Spreadsheet, and NETL CO2U LCA Report Template. Note: This zip file may take a few minutes to download.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Mass Property Calculator

A mass property calculator has been developed to compute the moment of inertia properties of an assemblage of parts that make up a system. The calculator can take input from spreadsheets or Creo mass property files or it can be interfaced with Phoenix Integration Model Center. The input must include the centroidal moments of inertia of each part with respect to its local coordinates, the location of the centroid of each part in the system coordinates and the Euler angles needed to rotate from the part coordinates to the system coordinates. The output includes the system total mass, centroid and mass moment of inertia properties. The input/output capabilities allow the calculator to interface with external optimizers. In addition to describing the calculator, this document serves as its user's manual. The up-to-date version of the calculator can be found in the Git repository https://cee-gitlab.sandia.gov/cj?ete/mass-properties-calculator.

71 CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM MECHANICS, GENERAL PHYSIC↗

Hydrogen Life-Cycle Analysis in Support of Clean Hydrogen Production

Hydrogen is a basic molecule which is commonly used in the production of chemicals or as an energy carrier or a fuel. Its zero-carbon content means that it does not produce carbon dioxide upon its use. However, depending on the energy source and technology for hydrogen production and delivery, there can be greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with the hydrogen for various end use applications. To provide the largest reduction in GHG emissions, hydrogen produced from clean energy sources should be used. As concerns regarding climate change grows, there is an increasing focus on economic production of clean hydrogen to displace less climate neutral sources of hydrogen. However, there are many different methods of hydrogen production with unique processes that result in different levels of life cycle GHG emissions of hydrogen production and its end use applications. Therefore, a comprehensive life cycle accounting methodology that takes all these factors into account is required. he GREET ® (Greenhouse gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy use in Technologies) model was first developed in 1995 by Argonne National Laboratory with the support from the various offices of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). GREET provides in-depth Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) simulations for a variety of products and is available as an Excel spreadsheet (GREET Excel), or as an application (GREET .Net). Both versions are available for public download at no cost. This report accompanies GREET 2022 release to describe the major updates and expansions to the hydrogen technology pathways, and to provide data sources and sample carbon intensity results for each of the pathways.

08 HYDROGEN↗

Intermountain West Energy Sustainability & Transitions Initiative: CO 2 Transport and Geologic Storage Modeling Results

This report and its associated Excel spreadsheet file provide the results of technoeconomic modeling of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) pipeline transport modeling, CO 2 storage in deep saline subsurface formations, and CO 2 enhanced oil recovery (EOR). This report provides the methodology, describes the models and summarizes results for the three aspects of the analysis done for the Intermountain West Energy Sustainability and Transition (I-WEST) Initiative.

42 ENGINEERING↗

Operational Energy Life Cycle Data Development for the National Institute of Standards And Technology (NIST) Building Industry Reporting and Design for Sustainability (BIRDS) Neutral Environmental Software Tool (NEST)

For this analysis, regionalized life cycle assessment (LCA) results for environmental impacts (using the Tool for Reduction and Assessment of Chemicals and Other Environmental Impacts [TRACI] 2.1) and cumulative energy demand (using the Federal Life Cycle Analysis Commons Elementary Flow List [FEDEFL] Inventory Methods v1.0.0) were evaluated for the production and utilization of electricity, natural gas, fuel oil, and propane as commodities within residential and commercial buildings. These results can used as a framework for future research into net zero, high-performance buildings, such as done here for the Building Industry Reporting and Design for Sustainability (BIRDS) database by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Engineering Laboratory. The geographical results were assigned to each United States (U.S.) Zone Improvement Plan (ZIP) code based on the ZIP code location and corresponding Balancing Authority Area, natural gas basin, and Petroleum Administration for Defense Districts (PADDs). Additionally, previously developed models were utilized to develop future life cycle profiles. Projections were based on data available from the U.S. Energy Information Administration Annual Energy Outlook 2022 through 2050 (AEO 2022). Electricity LCA models were updated based on AEO 2022 projected annual generation mixes, while the natural gas baseline model was updated based on projected shares of natural gas types (conventional, shale, tight, and coalbed methane). Projections of crude oil production rates and export rates were applied to the petroleum baseline model in five-year increments to investigate their effects on the life cycle profile of fuel oil and propane. While only 100-year Global Warming Potential (GWP-100) with climate carbon feedback (CC-FB) and Cumulative Energy Demand are shown in Section 4: Results, the complete results, including Acidification Potential, Eutrophication Potential, Freshwater Ecotoxicity Potential, GWP-100 without inclusion of CC-FB, Human Health Impacts Potentials (Cancer, Non-Cancer), Ozone Depletion Potential, Particulate Matter Formation Potential, and Photochemical Smog Formation Potential, are tabulated for each ZIP code in the Excel worksheets that accompany this analysis. For the Excel spreadsheet tools associated with this report, please go to https://www.netl.doe.gov/energy-analysis/details?id=f8890fac-be55-44ac-aaa9-e2888bfabe93

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

Pulverized Coal CO2 Capture Retrofit Database

This tool provides high-level analysis on the incremental costs for retrofitting pulverized coal plants with carbon dioxide capture and/or compression systems. Options are available to include costs of other technological improvements that would be required to comply with various environmental regulations when installing carbon capture technology. This model is based on the NETL report "Eliminating the Derate of Carbon Capture Retrofits." (2023). For the Excel spreadsheet tools associated with this report, please go to https://www.netl.doe.gov/energy-analysis/details?id=e7e822ff-18ac-4bc6-a052-0be3521b8789

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

Developing the Proof of Concept for the SERI QC Flag Translation

SERI QC is a robust solar data quality assessment software tool that has been in continuous use for more than three decades. This report, the second of six in the Data Quality and Uncertainty Integration project, develops the proof of concept, including programming in C and a collection of spreadsheet tools, for estimating the operational uncertainty from three-component solar irradiance measurements using information available from SERI QC. The report establishes a field reference for determining the operational uncertainty for each irradiance component based on the SERI QC coupling. Results demonstrate that the operational uncertainty estimates based on global irradiance best represent the collective results for all sky conditions.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

Assessment of Potential Dose and Environmental Impacts from Proposed Testing at the INL Radiological Response Training Range

This assessment uses screening-level models to calculate potential environmental impacts from proposed tests at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Radiological Response Training Range (RRTR) site. Proposed tests could be conducted using 11 different radioactive material types that include K2O, LaBr3, KBr, Cu, Zr, F, Ga, Ga2O3, NaNO2, Ga-68, and Tc-99m. The tests could potentially release radioactive material to the atmosphere and radionuclides and other contaminants to the soil, which could leach into the unsaturated zone and migrate to the aquifer. Atmospheric transport of radionuclides to potential human receptors and time-integrated air concentrations were calculated with a Gaussian plume model and three years of hourly meteorological data. Potential surface-soil impacts were calculated with the computer program mixing-cell model (MCM). Groundwater impacts were calculated with the computer programs MCM and GWSCREEN. Radiological doses from potential atmospheric releases were calculated for public receptors off the INL Site and for workers at nearby INL facilities. Results were compared to regulatory dose limits. Maximum potential groundwater concentrations were estimated in the aquifer below the NSTR site and compared to drinking water standards or risk-based screening levels for resident tap water. Soil concentrations were calculated and compared to risk-based screening levels for workers and potential future residents. All impacts were estimated assuming 12 tests are conducted annually using all 11 material types for a period of 15 years. This document provides the resources to enable a subject matter expert in the field of environmental assessments to replicate the modeling and calculations. The methodology and parameters are presented in the text. All electronic files, including computer-code input, output, executable files, batch files, scripts, and spreadsheet files are contained in a zip file that can be accessed by selecting “Additional Information” (select Native File) in the INL Electronic Document Management System (EDMS). It is highly unlikely the test scenarios evaluated in this ECAR will adversely impact human health based on comparisons of calculated dose and concentration against regulatory standards and risk-based screening levels. Conservative estimates of dose to workers and the public from atmospheric transport of possible radionuclide releases are far below federal radiation protection standards. Conservative estimates of potential contaminant concentrations in groundwater are less than federal drinking water standards or screening levels. Predicted radionuclide concentrations in surface soils are below risk-based screening levels, except for Ge-68 (material Ga-68) for the worker. The Ge-68 soil concentration can be made less than the worker PRG, if the number of annual tests using Ga-68 is reduced from 12 to 6. However, the sum of ratios still exceeds one because of the high K-40 ratio. If the EF of the worker (number of days the worker is in the contaminated testing area) is reduced from 225 days/yr (default value for full time worker) to 112 days/yr, the Ge-68 ratio is less than one and the sum of ratios is less than one. Actual radiation doses and groundwater and surface-soil concentrations are likely to be much less than those calculated because of the conservative assumptions and parameters employed in the modeling. For example, atmospheric-transport calculations assume the entire inventory of each material type is readily released to the atmosphere and no plume deposition, depletion, or radioactive decay occurs during transport. The calculations also assume the same meteorological conditions (e.g., wind velocity, wind direction, stability class) that produce the maximum 95th percentile concentration (i.e., concentration representing the 95th percentile of a distribution of concentrations derived from 3 years of hourly meteorological data) at each receptor location are the same for all 12 tests during the year, and each receptor is assumed to be present during all 12 tests. The surface-soil assessment assumes the entire inventory of each test is deposited in the top 5 cm of soil. No atmospheric dispersal is assumed, and the radionuclides are subject only to leaching and radioactive decay. The groundwater-pathway modeling is conservative in that it is one-dimensional in the unsaturated zone (no lateral spreading/dilution) and assumes the entire inventory of contaminants infiltrates into the ground at the same location for every test. This is especially conservative for particulate radionuclides because they would have to dissolve or corrode first and some would be dispersed into the atmosphere. The groundwater receptor is also assumed to consume water directly from a hypothetical well positioned in the location of maximum concentration. In addition, conservative degradation rates were used, and volatilization was not considered for the nonradioactive chemical

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Assessment of Potential Dose and Environmental Impacts from Proposed Testing at the INL National Security Test Range

This assessment uses screening-level models to calculate potential environmental impacts from proposed tests at two locations at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) National Security Test Range (NSTR) site. Proposed tests could be conducted using 11 different radioactive material types that include K 2 O, LaBr 3 , KBr, Cu, Zr, F, Ga, Ga 2 O 3 , NaNO 2 , Ga-68, and Tc-99m. The tests could potentially release radioactive material to the atmosphere and radionuclides and other contaminants to the soil, which could leach into the unsaturated zone and migrate to the aquifer. Atmospheric transport of radionuclides to potential human receptors and time-integrated air concentrations were calculated with a Gaussian plume model and three years of hourly meteorological data. Potential surface-soil impacts were calculated with the computer program mixing-cell model (MCM). Groundwater impacts were calculated with the computer programs MCM and GWSCREEN. Radiological doses from potential atmospheric releases were calculated for public receptors off the INL Site and for workers at nearby INL facilities. Results were compared to regulatory dose limits. Maximum potential groundwater concentrations were estimated in the aquifer below the NSTR site and compared to drinking water standards or risk-based screening levels for resident tap water. Soil concentrations were calculated and compared to risk-based screening levels for workers and potential future residents. All impacts were estimated based on the assumption that 12 tests are conducted annually using all 11 material types for 15 years. This document provides the resources to enable a subject matter expert in the field of environmental assessments to replicate the modeling and calculations. The methodology and parameters are presented in the text. All electronic files, including computer-code input, output, executable files, batch files, scripts, and spreadsheet files, are contained in a zip file that can be accessed by selecting “Additional Information” (select Native File) in the INL Electronic Document Management System (EDMS). It is highly unlikely the test scenarios evaluated in this ECAR will adversely impact human health based on comparisons of calculated dose and concentration against regulatory standards and risk-based screening levels. Conservative estimates of dose to workers and the public from atmospheric transport of possible radionuclide releases are far below federal radiation protection standards. Conservative estimates of potential contaminant concentrations in groundwater are less than federal drinking water standards or screening levels. Predicted radionuclide concentrations in surface soils are below risk-based screening levels, except for Ge-68 (material Ga-68) for the worker. The Ge-68 soil concentration can be made less than the worker PRG, if the number of annual tests using Ga-68 is reduced from 12 to 6. However, the sum of ratios still exceeds one because of the high K-40 ratio. If the EF of the worker (number of days the worker is in the contaminated testing area) is reduced from 225 days/yr (default value for full time worker) to 112 days/yr, the Ge-68 ratio is less than one and the sum of ratios is less than one. Actual radiation doses and groundwater and surface-soil concentrations are likely to be much less than those calculated because of the conservative assumptions and parameters employed in the modeling. For example, atmospheric-transport calculations assume the entire inventory of each material type is readily released to the atmosphere and no plume deposition, depletion, or radioactive decay occurs during transport. The calculations also assume the same meteorological conditions (e.g., wind velocity, wind direction, stability class) that produce the maximum 95th percentile concentration (i.e., concentration representing the 95th percentile of a distribution of concentrations derived from 3 years of hourly meteorological data) at each receptor location are the same for all 12 tests during the year, and each receptor is assumed to be present during all 12 tests. The surface-soil assessment assumes the entire inventory of each test is deposited in the top 5 cm of soil. No atmospheric dispersal is assumed, and the radionuclides are subject only to leaching and radioactive decay. The groundwater-pathway modeling is conservative in that it is one-dimensional in the unsaturated zone (no lateral spreading/dilution) and assumes the entire inventory of contaminants infiltrates into the ground at the same location for every test. This is especially conservative for particulate radionuclides because they would have to dissolve or corrode first and some would be dispersed into the atmosphere. The groundwater receptor is also assumed to consume water directly from a hypothetical well positioned in the location of maximum concentration. In addition, conservative degradation rates were used, and volatilization was not considered for the nonradradioactive chemicals modeled. And finally, the calculations assume all 12 tests will be performed at the same place at both locations, and all 11 radioactive material types will be used for each test. This is conservative because it is anticipated that no more than two material types will be used per test.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

FECM/NETL CO 2 Transport Cost Model (2023): Description and User’s Manual

The FECM/NETL CO 2 Transport Cost Model (CO 2 _T_COM) is an Excel spreadsheet model that calculates the cost of transporting CO 2 from the beginning to the end of a pipeline. This document provides two main functions. First, the document describes the equations and algorithms that are used by the model to calculate technical quantities (such as the minimum inner pipe diameter needed to transport a user-specified CO 2 mass flow rate a specified distance) and engineering-economic quantities (such as capital costs, operating costs and cash flows). Second, the document is a user’s manual for the model that describes the procedures the user must follow to run the model. The document also describes input variables and output variables (i.e., results) for the model. The model can be accessed at this URL: https://www.netl.doe.gov/energy-analysis/details?id=d3086f60-278d-4e97-a649-8e4d5ce5e93c

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

A Component-Level Bottom-Up Cost Model for Pumped Storage Hydropower

Pumped Storage Hydropower (PSH) is currently the largest source of utility-scale electricity storage in the U.S. and worldwide. As the accelerating deployment of variable renewable technologies creates opportunity and value for energy storage, it has become increasingly important to characterize PSH costs to understand how it competes. Site-specific considerations and limited cost data in the public domain make it difficult to estimate capital costs for potential new PSH sites. This report documents a spreadsheet-based tool that addresses this challenge and creates a component-level bottom-up cost model for PSH that can be made publicly available for widespread use. It uses detailed site-level physical characteristics and design specifications to calculate key performance and cost parameters for individual components and the project as a whole. The model was developed in consultation with HDR, Inc. and Small Hydro Consulting to ensure it aligns with industry expectations. It enables PSH cost exploration across a wide range of system assumptions and could be customized or extended for the needs of a variety of users.

cost model↗

Basin-Scale Relicensing Opportunity Product User Guide

The Basin-Scale Relicensing Opportunity products provide a platform for identifying favorable areas for basin-wide collaboration using metrics derived from anticipated Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) relicensing dates. The hydropower relicensing process requires long-term resource allocation by agencies, hydropower owner/operators, non-governmental organizations, and tribal, state, and federal governments. Basin-scale hydropower relicensing has begun to receive attention as a potential solution for reducing licensing timelines, costs, and uncertainty which can provide benefits to a broad spectrum of participants in the licensing process. Two products were developed: (1) an interactive web map that allows users to browse facilities and rivers of interest and uncover locations for potential collaboration based on FERC relicensing metrics summarized along river reaches and (2) a spreadsheet that contains 1,261 facilities with associated FERC relicensing metrics and that allows users to join these data to others and develop and conduct their own analyses.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

A Comprehensive Simulation Study to Evaluate Future Vehicle Energy and Cost Reduction Potential

Under the umbrella of EERE’s Office of Sustainable Transportation, the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Vehicle Technologies Office (VTO) and Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies Office (HFTO) seek to develop sustainable, affordable, and efficient technologies for transportation of goods and people. Translating investments in advanced transportation component technologies and powertrains to estimate the potential for vehicle-level fuel savings is critical to understanding DOE’s impact and success in this mission For this study, Argonne National Laboratory (Argonne) simulated technologies funded by VTO and HFTO for light-duty vehicles across the following: Powertrain configurations (conventional, power-split hybrid electric vehicle, extended-range electric vehicle, battery electric drive, and fuel-cell vehicles); Vehicle classes (compact car, mid-size car, small sport utility vehicle [SUV], mid-size SUV, and pickup truck); Fuels (gasoline, diesel, natural gas, hydrogen, and battery electricity). We assessed each technology for five different timeframes: laboratory years 2015 (reference), 2020, 2025, 2030, and 2045. We assumed a delay of 5 years between laboratory year and model year (i.e., the year the technology is introduced into production). Finally, we included uncertainties for both technology performance and cost by considering two cases (note that these cases are not intended as predictions of future performance): Low case , aligned with DOE technology manager estimates of expected original equipment manufacturer (OEM) improvements based on business as usual regulatory and market environments; High case , aligned with aggressive technology advancements based on research and development (R&D) targets developed through support by VTO and HFTO. We estimated the energy and cost impact of different technologies using Autonomie (Argonne undated), a state-of-the-art vehicle system simulation tool developed by Argonne and used to assess the energy consumption, performance, and cost of multiple advanced vehicle technologies. The tool comprises a complete set of vehicle models to assess impacts across a wide range of classes (from light- to heavy-duty), powertrain configurations (from conventional to hybrid electric vehicles [HEVs], fuel cell electric vehicles [FCEVs], plug-in hybrid electric vehicles [PHEVs], and battery electric vehicles [BEVs]), components, and control strategies, including vehicle-level and component-level controls developed and calibrated using dynamometer test data. Autonomie has been used to support a wide range of studies: analyzing various component technologies, sizing powertrain components to meet different vehicle requirements, comparing the benefits of powertrain configurations, optimizing both heuristic and route-based vehicle energy control, and predicting transportation energy use when paired with a traffic modeling tool such as POLARIS. This report documents the assumptions made and the vehicle-level energy consumption benefits and associated technology costs estimated for various types of light-duty vehicles. Details regarding vehicle assumptions and simulation results are available in the spreadsheets accompanying this report.

08 HYDROGEN↗

Verification and Validation of the PLTEMP/ANL Code for Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis of Experimental and Test Reactors, Volume 1

This is Volume 1 of a two-volume document that collects the verification and validation (V&V) works done for the PLTEMP/ANL code during the years of its development and improvement. Volume 1 describes the V&V of sixteen capabilities of the PLTEMP/ANL code that were identified by research reactor analysts as frequently used in their thermal-hydraulic analysis. Volume 2 describes the V&V of developments and improvements since the release of PLTEMP/ANL Version 4.3. Each chapter of the document focuses on verifying or validating a specific part of the software that calculates a specific phenomenon, e.g., channel flow calculation, coolant property calculation, heat transfer calculation, and flow instability calculation. Software verification is performed by comparing the code with hand calculation, Microsoft spreadsheet calculation, Mathematica calculation, or MATLAB calculation. The software validation is done by comparing the code with experimental data or a widely tested code like the RELAP5 code. In addition, some PLTEMP/ANL V&V works that are available in the open literature are simply cited in Volume 1 of the document. PLTEMP/ANL has been used in the safety analysis reports of several US and foreign research reactors licensed and converted from highly enriched uranium fuel to low-enriched uranium fuel. A list of such reactors is given in Volume 1 of the document.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

Verification and Validation of the PLTEMP/ANL Code for Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis of Experimental and Test Reactors, Volume 2

This is Volume 2 of a two-volume document that collects the verification and validation (V&V) works done for the PLTEMP/ANL code during the years of its development and improvement. Volume 1 describes the V&V of sixteen capabilities of the PLTEMP/ANL code that were identified by research reactor analysts as frequently used in their thermal-hydraulic analysis. Volume 2 describes the V&V of developments and improvements since the release of PLTEMP/ANL Version 4.3. Each chapter of the document focuses on verifying or validating a specific part of the software that calculates a particular phenomenon, e.g., channel flow calculation, coolant property calculation, heat transfer calculation, and flow instability calculation. Software verification is performed by comparing the code with a hand calculation, Microsoft spreadsheet calculation, Mathematica calculation, or MATLAB calculation. The software validation is achieved by comparing the code with experimental data or a widely tested code like the RELAP5 code. In addition, some PLTEMP/ANL V&V works that are available in the open literature are simply referenced in Volume 1 of the document. PLTEMP/ANL has been used in safety analysis reports of several US and foreign research reactors licensed and converted from highly enriched uranium fuel to low-enriched uranium fuel. A list of such reactors is given in Volume 1 of the document.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

Tank Waste LDR Organics Data Summary for Sample-and-Send (Rev.1A)

The presence of organic chemicals regulated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) adds complexity to treating and disposing of the low activity fraction of Hanford tank waste if a low temperature treatment method such as grouting is used (SRNL-STI-2020-00228). The complexity arises from the fact that the baseline vitrification method is considered by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) as providing adequate thermal treatment for organics; a status not automatically extended to a lowtemperature process, such as solidifying the waste in a cementitious waste form. In addition, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) LDR program is intended to ensure that wastes are properly treated prior to disposal. Proper treatment makes hazardous waste less harmful to groundwater by reducing the mobility and/or toxicity of the hazardous constituents in the waste. EPA guidance indicates that stabilization/solidification of waste for organics could be considered impermissible dilution under the LDR dilution prohibition. In addition, waste storage activities at Hanford have required transferring and blending waste within the tank system and these activities have potentially altered the concentrations of the hazardous constituents. The LDR dilution prohibition found in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 268.3 states that “… no generator, transporter, handler, or owner or operator of a treatment, storage, or disposal facility shall in any way dilute a restricted waste or the residual from treatment of a restricted waste as a substitute for adequate treatment …”. Hence, if LAW is to be treated using low temperature stabilization (such as cementation), then it is important to demonstrate both how past storage activities have contributed to the removal (by vacuum evaporation), or destruction (by in situ decomposition) of the LDR organics and how future retrieval and waste feed preparation will contribute to their removal (by filtration and ion exchange). Demonstrating these processes helps validate that cementation without additional organic treatment does not necessarily represent impermissible dilution. To aid in implementing cementitious solidification of Low Activity Waste (LAW), WRPS has been developing a regulatory and processing LDR treatment variance strategy termed “Sampleand-Send” that relies, in part, on demonstrating that in situ decomposition reactions along with historic evaporation of tank waste has destroyed or removed most of the LDR organics possibly associated with Hanford Tank Waste (SRNL-STI-2020-00582, SRNL-STI-2021-00453, SRNL-STI-2022-00391). Under the Sample-and-Send concept, Hanford tank waste would be retrieved, processed through a Tank-Side Cesium Removal-like system, and staged as a candidate feed that would then be sampled to confirm the waste acceptance criteria is met for solidification in an LAW cementitious treatment facility. If it can be shown that LDR organics are at concentrations below the waste acceptance criteria (WAC) for cementitious stabilization and have been sufficiently removed (by historic evaporation or by filtration and ion exchange during Cs removal), destroyed (by historic in situ decomposition), or are not soluble in LAW above the WAC then additional organic treatment is not needed prior to creating a cementitious final waste form and the concept of Sample-and-Send would be proposed to establish a non-rulemaking site-specific treatment variance using the specified method of treatment “STABL” to remove sampling requirements of the waste form after treatment. Waste not meeting the WAC could either be routed to the Hanford Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant for LAW vitrification, or further processed by evaporation or chemical oxidation before solidifying in a cementitious waste form. A key component in implementing the Sample-and-Send strategy is identifying which of the 207 LDR organic compounds associated with the RCRA Part A permit application waste codes for the Double Shell Tanks (DSTs) and Single Shell Tanks (SSTs) and any applicable Underlying Hazardous Constituents (UHCs) from 40 CFR 268.48 should be considered as potentially present and thus subject to regulation. In addition, it is also necessary to understand the solubility volatility, and reactivity of these compounds in LAW to identify which of the potentially present LDR organic compounds are not soluble above regulatory levels or are likely to have been removed by historic evaporation or destroyed by in situ decomposition reactions. If there are potentially present LDR organic compounds that have not been removed or destroyed and are soluble above regulatorily significant concentrations then a treatability variance may be needed for these species to eliminate any concerns pertaining to impermissible dilution. The spreadsheet accompanying this calculation report contains the data and logic computations needed to screen the list of 207 LDR organics associated with Hanford tank waste to identify those potentially present and to indicate which compounds may need to be included in a treatability variance.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Assessment of Potential Dose and Environmental Impacts from Proposed Testing at the INL Radiological Response Training Range

This assessment uses screening level models to calculate potential environmental impacts from proposed tests at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Radiological Response Training Range (RRTR) site. Proposed tests could be conducted using 11 different radioactive material types that include K 2 O, LaBr 3 , KBr, Cu, Zr, F, Ga, Ga 2 O 3 , NaNO 2 , Ga-68, and Tc-99m. The tests could potentially release radioactive material to the atmosphere and radionuclides and other contaminants to the soil, which could leach into the unsaturated zone and migrate to the aquifer. Atmospheric transport of radionuclides to potential human receptors and time-integrated air concentrations were calculated with a Gaussian plume model and three years of hourly meteorological data. Potential surface-soil impacts were calculated with the computer program Mixing-Cell Model (MCM). Groundwater impacts were calculated with the computer programs MCM and GWSCREEN. Radiological doses from potential atmospheric releases were calculated for public receptors off the INL Site and for workers at nearby INL facilities. Results were compared to regulatory dose limits. Maximum potential groundwater concentrations were estimated in the aquifer below the NSTR site and compared to drinking water standards or risk-based screening levels for resident tap water. Soil concentrations were calculated and compared to risk-based screening levels for workers and potential future residents. All impacts were estimated based on the assumption that 12 tests are conducted annually using all 11 material types for a period of 15 years. This document provides the resources to enable a subject matter expert in the field of environmental assessments to replicate the modeling and calculations. The methodology and parameters are presented in the text. All electronic files, including computer code input, output, executable files, batch files, scripts, and spreadsheet files are contained in a zip file that can be accessed by selecting “Additional Information” (select Native File) in the INL Electronic Document Management System (EDMS).

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗