Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “LICENSES”

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 253 records · Page 14
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2026

FY26 Mid-Year Report Self-Diagnostic Capabilities for Neutron Instruments

This year we will transfer the latest version of INCC6 with last year’s self-diagnostic features to the IAEA. In FY25 we completed the development of three automated self diagnostic features into INNC6. The completion of these features marked the final stable version of INCC 6.0 ready for release to the IAEA and other users. In the first half of the Fiscal Year 2026 we have worked with LANL’s Feynman Center and Export Control office to attain a license for exporting INCC6 to the IAEA. We have successfully attained the export license for INCC6, and contacts at the IAEA have been granted permission to receive INCC6. We are in the final stage of writing the version 6 user manual. Once this is complete, we will deliver INCC6 to the IAEA for testing.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
DOE OSTI2026

Flow Forecasting on New England’s Great River Hydro (CRADA 549) (Final Report)

Great River Hydro (GRH) is New England's largest conventional hydropower generator and operates sustainable hydropower systems in Vermont, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts. Several of GRH’s hydropower projects on the Connecticut River are largely constrained to operate as run-of-river; however, though a new FERC license they have opportunity in the form of flex hours where they are allowed to deviate operations to capture favorable market conditions or emergency operations. To maximize value from these new operations, GRH is considering new sources of forecasted inflow. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) is evaluating the quality of two commercial inflow forecasts for GRH under DOE Water Power Technology Office’s Notice of Opportunity for Technical Assistance: Improving Hydropower’s Value through Informed Decision Making. This project will provide an unbiased evaluation of the accuracy of inflow forecasts available through commercial vendors. GRH will use this information to support their decision on which inflow forecast to use under their new FERC license and to assess the overall value of the available inflow forecasting tools and practices. In this talk we will discuss details of the near real-time forecast evaluation process, the metrics involved in the evaluation, and some preliminary results. In addition, we’ll touch on the second phase of the project which involves evaluating scheduling strategies that identify windows of opportunity to change operations in ways that increase profit through participation in day ahead and real time markets.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2026

Analysis of the Effects of Postclosure Criticality on Repository Performance

The United States Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Nuclear Energy’s Disposal Research & Development Campaign seeks to better understand the technical basis, risks, and uncertainty associated with the safe and secure disposition of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste (HLW). Commercial nuclear power generation in the United States has resulted in thousands of metric tons of SNF, the disposal of which is the responsibility of DOE (Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended). Any repository licensed to dispose of SNF will be subject to requirements regarding the long-term performance of that repository. Evaluating the long-term performance of the repository may consider the consequences of the SNF achieving a critical configuration during the postclosure period. Of particular interest is the potential for this to occur in dual-purpose canisters (DPCs), which are currently licensed and being used to store and transport SNF but were not designed for permanent geologic disposal. DOE has been considering disposing of SNF in DPCs to avoid the costs and worker dose associated with repackaging the SNF currently stored in DPCs into repository-specific canisters. This report examines the consequences of postclosure criticality to provide technical support to DOE in developing a disposal plan.

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

Understanding the Reaction of Nuclear Graphite with Molecular Oxygen

A thorough understanding of oxidation is important when considering the health and integrity of graphite components in graphite reactors. For the next generation of graphite reactors, HTGRs specifically, an unlikely air ingress has been deemed significant enough to have made its way into the licensing applications of many international licensing bodies. While a substantial body of literature exists on nuclear graphite oxidation in the presence of molecular oxygen and significant efforts have been made to characterize oxidation kinetics of various grades, the value of existing information is somewhat limited. Often, multiple competing processes, including reaction kinetics, mass transfer, and microstructural evolution, are lumped together into a single rate expression that limits the ability to translate this information to different conditions. This article reviews the reaction of graphite with molecular oxygen in terms of the reaction kinetics, gas transport, and microstructural evolution of graphite. It also presents the foundations of a model for the graphite-molecular oxygen reaction system that is kinetically independent of graphite grade, and is capable of describing both the bulk and local oxidation rates under a wide range of conditions applicable to air-ingress.

J. Kane, Joshua↗
DOE OSTI2025

scons-novice

scons-novice is a re-write of the Software Carpentry https://software-carpentry.org/ "make-novice" source material https://github.com/swcarpentry/make-novice used to create the webpage lesson plan "Automation and Make" http://swcarpentry.github.io/make-novice/ which is licensed as under the Creative Commons Attribution license (CC BY 4.0) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. scons-novice changes the lesson to teach SCons instead of Make.

Brindley, Kyle [Los Alamos National Laboratory]↗
DOE OSTI2023

Human Factors for Advanced Reactors

Existing light water reactors in the U.S. are primarily large baseload electricity generating facilities. The concept of operations for these plants remains largely unchanged since the advent of commercial nuclear power—the main control room serves as the hub of plant activities and is staffed with multiple licensed operators who work in tandem under the shift supervisor, and staff such as field workers support the control room remotely. While newer plants have brought the advent of digital human-machine interfaces to replace earlier analog and mechanical instrumentation and controls, much of the control process remains unchanged and manual. It is simply a newer version of legacy concepts. Advanced reactors potentially bring considerable changes to the size, fuel type, automation, and staffing of nuclear power plants, necessitating a fundamental shift not just from analog to digital, but further from human to automation, from onsite to remote, from control to monitoring, and from many to few operators. Despite this multitude of parallel evolutions in reactor designs, many of the vendors developing the next generation of reactors represent smaller research and development enterprises. It is therefore not feasible to address all aspects of plant design at the same time. In particular, the competing design aspects of new reactors present a significant challenge to the development of robust and human factored systems at the plant. As vendors develop new reactor designs, much of the early focus is naturally on the fuel and reactor system technology. Looming behind these early advances is the daunting prospect of first-of-a-kind control concepts that have not yet been developed or validated. A failure to address the human element of reactor design early will lead to missed opportunities. The quickest development process is the replication of existing concepts of operations at legacy plants, even when such systems were long ago surpassed by better human-machine technologies outside the nuclear industry. Conversely, attempting to undertake novel concepts of operations late in the design life cycle of a plant could result in protracted development efforts and delays in licensing and deployment. This does not have to happen, and it is imperative that human factors be considered now, early in the design of new reactors.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2025

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations This dataset contains model projections of new data center facilities in the contiguous United States (CONUS) through 2035 using the CERF – Data Centers model. Data center locations are modeled across four data center electricity demand growth scenarios (low, moderate, high, higher) and five market gravity scenarios (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%). Projected locations are intended to be regional representations of feasible siting locations in the future to assess potential grid and water stress impacts. The data center load growth scenarios correspond with the rates outlined in EPRI (2024) and include 3.71%, 5%, 10%, and 15% annual growth of electricity demand for data centers from 2023 values in 37 states across the CONUS. Market gravity scenarios correspond to the relative importance of proximity to data center markets or high population areas compared to locational cost in the siting algorithm. 0% market gravity means that siting decisions were entirely determined by the locational cost in each feasible location. 100% market gravity means that only market proximity was considered when siting. Other scenarios have weight placed on both components where total weight always equals 100%. Locational cost is dependent on facility cooling type and corresponding electricity cost, taxes, and other factors. Facility cooling type is spatially determined where high water stress and/or areas with high summer wet bulb temperatures are assumed to operate with mechanical cooling for a higher fraction of the year rather than evaporative cooling. Feasible data center siting areas are based on geospatial suitability raster data developed with open-source information. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300 m of a federal airport runway Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds NLCD developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from NLCD developed lands Because we use open-source information, proprietary information that can influence siting decisions such as individual tax agreements with cities, detailed fiber line connectivity, electric grid power capacity agreements, and others, are not currently accounted for in the modeling process. Using specific building locations and footprints in the dataset for local planning purposes is not advised. Technical Information Geospatial data is provided in geojson format using the Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) coordinate reference system. The datasets contain the following parameters: id - unique identification number within given scenario file growth_scenario – data center demand growth scenario market_gravity_weight – market gravity weight scenario (%) region – name of region (i.e., US State) total_cost_million_usd – locational siting cost ($million) campus_size_square_ft – total land acquired for data center facility (square ft) data_center_it_power_mw – IT power of data center facility (MW) mechanical_cooling_frac – fraction of year when data center uses mechanical cooling system water_cooling_frac– fraction of year when data center uses evaporative cooling system cooling_energy_demand_mwh – total annual facility energy demand for cooling (MWh) cooling_water_demand_mgy – total annual facility water demand for cooling (MG) cooling_water_consumption_mgy – total annual facility water consumed (MG) normalized_locational_cost – normalized total locational cost score for location normalized_gravity_score – normalized market gravity score for location weighted_siting_score – total weighted siting score of locational cost and gravity score geometry – polygon geometry of facility Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall (ORCID:0000000328077088)↗
DOE OSTI2025

Energy Infrastructure Futures: A Multiscale Evaluation of Projected Power Plant Siting Across the Western Interconnection

Energy Infrastructure Futures: A Multiscale Evaluation of Projected Power Plant Siting Across the Western Interconnection Description This dataset contains input and output data for the manuscript Mongird, K. et al. (under review) titled "Energy Infrastructure Futures: A Multiscale Evaluation of Projected Power Plant Siting Across the Western Interconnection". Input data corresponds to gridded spatial siting attributes that are necessary to conduct a random forest machine learning analysis of siting feature importance. Output data includes SHAP feature analysis outputs, and classification report values. For data on power plant siting results referred to in the manuscript, please refer to the CERF: IM3 Projected Western US Power Plant Locations data download page. The downloadable data includes values for eight different future scenarios for the Western US. The scenarios include combinations of two Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP3 and SSP5) with four high-resolution climate projections specific to the United States (see, https://tgw-data.msdlive.org/). These climate projections include "hotter" and "cooler" variants for two Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5). The resulting eight simulations are: rcp45cooler_ssp3 rcp45cooler_ssp5 rcp45hotter_ssp3 rcp45hotter_ssp5 rcp85cooler_ssp3 rcp85cooler_ssp5 rcp85hotter_ssp3 rcp85hotter_ssp5 Technical Information The dataset includes two sets of data files: (1) CERF gridded siting parameters and (2) Feature analysis outputs and classification reports. All downloadable data is in csv file format. Files with x/y coordinate information use the Albers Equal Area Conic projection (ESRI:102003). 1. CERF Gridded Siting Parameters This directory provides a balanced sample of gridded CERF siting parameters data for eight different scenarios for the Western US through 2055, seven different technologies, and eight timesteps. This data serves as input to the feature analysis. It contains the following parameters. region_name - name of region (i.e., state) sited - binary value representing whether the grid cell received a siting of that technology type (1=True) rcp - binary value representing scenario resource concentration pathway (0 = RCP4.5, 1 = RCP8.5) ssp - binary value representing scenario shared socioeconomic pathway (0 = SSP3, 1 = SSP5) climate - binary value representing cooler (0) or hotter (1) GCM forcing tech_name - generation technology name sited_year - year that values correspond to transmission_cost - cost of transmission interconnection pipeline_cost - cost of natural gas pipeline interconnection interconnection_cost - total interconnection cost (sum of transmission cost and gas pipeline cost) lmp - associated locational marginal value ($/MWh) associated with the grid cell, timestep, scenario, and technology xcoord - x-coordinate of location ycoord - y-coordinate of location 2a. Feature Analysis Output The dataset includes the feature analysis shap output for locational marginal price and interconnection cost. It contains the following parameters. technology - generator technology name scenario - name of scenario feature - name of feature, either locational_marginal_price or interconnection_cost value - the mean of absolute value of SHAP values for given feature 2b. Feature Analysis Classification Report This download includes the classification report associated with each random forest model. The dataset contains the following parameters. technology - generation technology name scenario - name of scenario test - one of precision (the proportion of predicted positives that are actually correct), recall (the proportion of actual positives that were correctly identified), f1-score (the harmonic mean of precision and recall) 0.0 - value of test for classification of 0 (grid cell not chosen for siting) 1.0 - value of test for classification of 1 (grid cell chosen for siting) accuracy - accuracy of model (i.e., fraction of all predictions that were right) macro avg - Simple average of test values for all classes weighted avg - Weighted average of test values for all classes, weighted based on Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License This data is made available under a CCBY4 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗
DOE OSTI2025

Package Data for CERF-Data Centers

This dataset contains sample input 100m resolution raster files for running the CERF-DC python package (see https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/cerf_data_centers) at the state level across the CONUS. Due to data availability constraints, some of the items included in this dataset are proxies or assumptions for siting factors used in the model. These are individually noted in the item descriptions and can be exchanged with more detailed information upon availability. Data Descriptions The following raster files are included in the data download: state_siting_region.tif — State areas identified by state FIPS code composite_siting_suitability.tif — Value of 1 indicates suitable siting location, 0 otherwise. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300m of a federal airport runway Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds Developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from developed lands land_value_dollar_per_sqft.tif — USD per square foot (sqft) derived from USDA $/acre land cost personal_property_tax_rate.tif — Personal property tax rate by state. Uses an assumed 0.0125 personal property tax rate for states with personal property tax, 0 for states without personal property tax. real_property_tax_rate.tif — Real property tax rate. Based on county level residential real estate property tax rates. sales_tax_rate.tif — Sales tax rate by state. mechanical_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through mechanical processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. water_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through evaporative (water cooled) processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. distance_to_substation.tif — Distance to nearest substation in hundreds of meters (i.e., value of 1 equals a distance of 100m). Offshore areas have a value of 0. industrial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh industrial electricity rates. Represents the average industrial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. commercial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh commercial electricity rates. Represents the average commercial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. data_center_market_locations.tif — Grid cells with positive values represent the centroid of existing data center market clusters. The value of non-zero grid cells represents the number of data centers in the market cluster. All other grid cells have a value of 0. Geospatial Metadata CRS: Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) Extent: -2415585.0000000023283064,-1441981.2605773280374706 : 2384414.9999999976716936,1708018.7394226719625294 Dimensions: X: 48000 Y: 31500 Bands: 1 Origin: -2415585.0000000023283064,1708018.7394226719625294 Pixel Size: 100,-100 Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall↗
DOE OSTI2026

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations This dataset contains model projections of new data center facilities in the contiguous United States (CONUS) through 2035 using the CERF – Data Centers model. Data center locations are modeled across four data center electricity demand growth scenarios (low, moderate, high, higher) and five market gravity scenarios (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%). Projected locations are intended to be regional representations of feasible siting locations in the future to assess potential grid and water stress impacts. The data center load growth scenarios correspond with the rates outlined in EPRI (2024) and include 3.71%, 5%, 10%, and 15% annual growth of electricity demand for data centers from 2023 values in 37 states across the CONUS. Market gravity scenarios correspond to the relative importance of proximity to data center markets or high population areas compared to locational cost in the siting algorithm. 0% market gravity means that siting decisions were entirely determined by the locational cost in each feasible location. 100% market gravity means that only market proximity was considered when siting. Other scenarios have weight placed on both components where total weight always equals 100%. Locational cost is dependent on facility cooling type and corresponding electricity cost, taxes, and other factors. Facility cooling type is spatially determined where high water stress and/or areas with high summer wet bulb temperatures are assumed to operate with mechanical cooling for a higher fraction of the year rather than evaporative cooling. Feasible data center siting areas are based on geospatial suitability raster data developed with open-source information. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300 m of a federal airport runway or within an airport area boundary Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory USGS Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) GAP status 1, 2, or 3 areas US National Parks Wetlands USFWS critical habitats BIA land areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds NLCD developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from NLCD developed lands Because we use open-source information, proprietary information that can influence siting decisions such as individual tax agreements with cities, detailed fiber line connectivity, electric grid power capacity agreements, and others, are not currently accounted for in the modeling process. Using specific building locations and footprints in the dataset for local planning purposes is not advised. Technical Information Geospatial data is provided in geojson format using the Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) coordinate reference system. The datasets contain the following parameters: id - unique identification number within given scenario file growth_scenario – data center demand growth scenario market_gravity_weight – market gravity weight scenario (%) region – name of region (i.e., US State) total_cost_million_usd – locational siting cost ($million) campus_size_square_ft – total land acquired for data center facility (square ft) data_center_it_power_mw – IT power of data center facility (MW) mechanical_cooling_frac – fraction of year when data center uses mechanical cooling system water_cooling_frac– fraction of year when data center uses evaporative cooling system cooling_energy_demand_mwh – total annual facility energy demand for cooling (MWh) cooling_water_demand_mgy – total annual facility water demand for cooling (MG) cooling_water_consumption_mgy – total annual facility water consumed (MG) normalized_locational_cost – normalized total locational cost score for location normalized_gravity_score – normalized market gravity score for location weighted_siting_score – total weighted siting score of locational cost and gravity score geometry – polygon geometry of facility Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall (ORCID:0000000328077088)↗
DOE OSTI2026

Package Data for CERF-Data Centers

This dataset contains sample input 100m resolution raster files for running the CERF-DC python package (see https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/cerf_data_centers) at the state level across the CONUS. Due to data availability constraints, some of the items included in this dataset are proxies or assumptions for siting factors used in the model. These are individually noted in the item descriptions and can be exchanged with more detailed information upon availability. Data Descriptions The following raster files are included in the data download: state_siting_region.tif — State areas identified by state FIPS code composite_siting_suitability.tif — Value of 1 indicates suitable siting location, 0 otherwise. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300 m of a federal airport runway or within an airport area boundary Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory USGS Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) GAP status 1, 2, or 3 areas US National Parks Wetlands USFWS critical habitats BIA land areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds NLCD developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from NLCD developed lands land_value_dollar_per_sqft.tif — USD per square foot (sqft) derived from USDA $/acre land cost personal_property_tax_rate.tif — Personal property tax rate by state. Uses an assumed 0.0125 personal property tax rate for states with personal property tax, 0 for states without personal property tax. real_property_tax_rate.tif — Real property tax rate. Based on county level residential real estate property tax rates. sales_tax_rate.tif — Sales tax rate by state. mechanical_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through mechanical processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. water_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through evaporative (water cooled) processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. distance_to_substation.tif — Distance to nearest substation in hundreds of meters (i.e., value of 1 equals a distance of 100m). Offshore areas have a value of 0. industrial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh industrial electricity rates. Represents the average industrial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. commercial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh commercial electricity rates. Represents the average commercial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. data_center_market_locations.tif — Grid cells with positive values represent the centroid of existing data center market clusters. The value of non-zero grid cells represents the number of data centers in the market cluster. All other grid cells have a value of 0. Geospatial Metadata CRS: Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) Extent: -2415585.0000000023283064,-1441981.2605773280374706 : 2384414.9999999976716936,1708018.7394226719625294 Dimensions: X: 48000 Y: 31500 Bands: 1 Origin: -2415585.0000000023283064,1708018.7394226719625294 Pixel Size: 100,-100 Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall↗
DOE OSTI2020

Assessment of Survey Results from Advanced Reactor Industry Domain Experts on Nonlinear Soil-Structure Interaction Analysis Software Verification and Validation

The seismic load case has a significant impact on the design and cost of nuclear power plants. Given the need to substantially reduce cost, advanced reactor designers are looking to leverage numerical tools that enable seismic analysis of an integrated vessel/support/structure/soil system. Modern nonlinear analysis tools provide a solution, capturing dynamic coupling between components (including soil-structure interaction (SSI)) concurrent with nonlinear behavior in one or more parts of the system. Although these methods have a rich history of technical development and implementation, software quality assurance (SQA) following nuclear industry standards remains a significant burden for those wishing to adopt such methods for advanced reactor design and licensing. To reduce the SQA burden, this project will develop the guidance for SQA verification and validation (V&V) of coupled nonlinear SSI analysis tools, to include a test matrix of software features and test problems to support commercial grade dedication (CGD). The guidance is intended to be technology-neutral: supporting designers of all advanced reactors. To maximize the value of the project to reactor designers, the project team performed focused surveys of and interviews with advanced reactor designers. Additionally, the project surveyed members of the broader industry involved in reactor design and licensing. The aggregated industry feedback consists of written survey responses, live polling responses, focused interviews, and informal feedback provided after outreach presentations, collectively referred to as “survey results”. Herein, the survey results are reported, reviewed, and assessed to inform follow-on project activities. The survey results confirmed the familiarity of the industry with the coupled nonlinear SSI analysis. They also affirm the project need based upon the expressed intent to (1) incorporate nonlinear features and (2) pursue the coupled nonlinear SSI analysis to reduce seismic demands and construction costs. All reactor designers indicated their intent to incorporate two or more nonlinear features, and all reactor designer respondents opined that the coupled nonlinear SSI analysis would allow for the optimization of the reactor design and construction. However, the programmatic challenges, whether real or perceived, present a significant barrier to reactor designers. The barrier most commonly identified by the reactor designer population was regulatory risk, with 70% citing this as a reason not to pursue the approach. The perceived regulatory risk identified by the reactor designers underscores the importance of regulator engagement and dialogue in this project. Additionally, half of the reactor designers identified cost and lack of guidance as a deterrent. The survey results also provide insights to tailor specific aspects of the guidance document and test matrix. The project plans to prepare both a formal referenceable guidance document and a collaborative, web-based test matrix and problem set. The project will focus on more complete test problem definitions for the prioritized nonlinear features over shallower problem descriptions for a larger set of features. The nonlinearities prioritized as high based upon survey feedback include fluid-structure interaction and seismic isolation and energy dissipation devices. The nonlinearities prioritized as intermediate include nonlinear geomaterials, nonlinear concrete, nonlinear steel, and interface/contact nonlinearity. Deep embedment and the associated nonlinear phenomena are assigned the lowest priority based upon survey feedback.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2021

U-10Mo Monolithic Fuel Qualification Plan

The Material Management and Minimization (M3) Program’s primary objective within the U.S. Department of Energy/National Nuclear Security Administration is to achieve permanent threat reduction by minimizing and when possible, eliminating weapon-usable nuclear material around the world. Under M3’s Office of Conversion, the U.S. High Performance Research Reactor (USHPRR) Project, is pursuing a fuel qualification and licensing effort focused on converting high-performance research reactors in the United States from using highly enriched uranium (HEU) fuel to using low-enriched uranium (LEU) fuel. The body of this document is focused on defining the activities required for generic qualification of high density, LEU fuel that then allows reactor conversions to proceed for the four high-performance research reactors and the critical assembly that will operate using the U-10Mo monolithic fuel design (see Subsection 1.3): MITR, MURR, NBSR, ATR, and ATRC. Fuel qualification in this report means generic fuel acceptance of the U-10Mo monolithic fuel form by the NRC for use in reactor conversions in the United States, which allows the fuel to be used in subsequent reactor specific licensing requests. The U 10Mo Monolithic Fuel Research, Development, and Qualification Plan utilizes the functions and requirements of the USHPRR Project that was established in the Functions and Requirements Document (F&RD) [1] and expands on these requirements to ensure that planned tests have traceable results that will ensure the requirement has been met. The methods by which data will be collected to show that these requirements have been met are described in this document.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2021

NREL Helps Hydropower Projects Navigate Complex Regulatory Currents

Hydropower accounts for about 37% of U.S. renewable electricity generation. But before industry members can license and construct new projects or relicense existing projects, they must navigate complex approvals from federal, state, and tribal authorities. These regulations provide critical protections for water quality, species, cultural resources, and recreation, but they can also increase the costs, risks, and uncertainties to license or relicense projects.

HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Multiscale Experiments and Multiphysics Simulation of Multiphase Flow for Transportable Small Modular Reactors

A new type of safe, small, transportable nuclear reactor would address the intense and ever-growing global demand for energy produced via a resilient, carbon-free energy source. In this regard, transportable small modular reactors (SMRs) are being designed and developed for electricity generation within small/micro-grid/off-grid isolated systems, as well as for heat generation in industrial/residential applications. These reactors feature the capability to be fully factory fabricated and then directly transported to utilities’ sites as “plug-and-play” systems. Research and development (R&D) programs are underway at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) to successfully design, develop, and demonstrate such safe-by-design mobile reactor technologies, in collaboration with partner organizations. Multiscale experimental facilities and multiphysics simulation tools are required for reactor design verification and validation (V&V), and licensing. These advanced reactors are intended to feature passive safety systems such as passive containment cooling systems (PCCS), which consist of multiphase flows and multispecies distributions. This seminar talk will focus on designing and analyzing transportable SMR PCCS by using multiscale experiments and multiphysics computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations to support reactor licensing and safety. The corresponding research challenges are addressed via supportive verification and validation results generated by the models and simulation tools in combination with selective parametric and uncertainty analysis. This solution approach could blaze the trail for commercial adoption of such technologies. The facilities, simulation capabilities, and research opportunities available at INL in regard to such reactors and the integrated energy systems with which they go hand in hand are also discussed briefly, and may spark interest in deeper research as well as new collaborative projects.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Flexible Plant Operation and Generation Technical Program Plan for FY2023

This report presents the Technical Program Plan for Fiscal Years 2023-2027 (FY2023 to FY2027) for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Light Water Reactor Sustainability Program—Flexible Plant Operation and Generation Research Pathway. The objective of this pathway is to carry out the research needed to help nuclear power plants diversify revenue generation for the life of these plants. The purpose of these research and development activities is two fold: (1) to reduce the technical and economic risks of implementing FPOG applications and (2) to provide guidance on relevant safety and environmental operating license reviews, amendments, and renewals. This pathway provides a clear understanding of the benefits of nuclear energy beyond electricity markets. A detailed description of the research and development activities that have been completed and that are planned for FY2023—FY2027 are presented in this report. These activities include completing the development of analysis tools to perform technical and economic assessments of realistic market opportunities for producing secondary energy products near nuclear power plants. They also include developing and demonstrating engineering systems and control concepts to dispatch thermal and electrical power to an industrial user. Additionally, this plan includes developing guidance for addressing potential regulatory and licensing requirements. In addition, the formation, purpose, and activities of a group referred to as the Hydrogen Regulatory Research and Review Group is discussed. An overview is also provided on the potential benefits of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) Bill that will support the commencement of Regional Clean Hydrogen Hubs, and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) that provides compelling production tax credits for nuclear electricity and clean hydrogen using nuclear energy.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2022

Phase II Development of the Surveillance Test Articles to Improve the Design, Fabrication, and Testing

Advanced reactors, such as the molten salt reactor (MSR), require materials that will withstand harsher environments than the materials used for lower temperature water reactors. Materials used in MSR construction need not only withstand elevated temperature, temperature cycling, and neutron radiation, but must be able to withstand the corrosive molten salt environment. Significant materials research has been driven by the materials needs of the MSR due to the harsh environment and the material data requirements to support licensing. Limited operation experience with MSRs has made this challenging work. Information is very limited on materials degradation due to irradiation, molten salt corrosion, elevated temperature, and the resulting fatigue, creep, and creep-fatigue loading during operation. While efforts are underway to better understand the effects of this harsh environment on construction materials, the Advanced Reactors Technologies (ART) Program has been working to develop materials surveillance test articles that could be used in a materials surveillance program and allow for the collection of information on the materials degradation during plant operation and could support timely licensing of these advanced reactors.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2021

A Comparison of Human Error Probabilities Collected from HuREX and SHEEP Frameworks

This paper discusses how different are the HEPs collected from HuREX and SHEEP frameworks. This study is a preceding research to infer full-scope HRA data based on the data collected from the SHEEP framework. For the comparison, we used HEPs in the HuREX database published in KAERI-TR-6649 [6]. The HEPs have been collected from actual licensed operators when manipulating MCR simulators of Westinghouse type and Optimized Power Reactor (OPR1000) type in South Korea. For the HEPs based on the SHEEP framework, these have been collected from actual licensed operators and students when using a simplified simulator, i.e., Rancor Microworld.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗