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 253 records · Page 14
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2026

Exploring Wildfire & Energy data toward State Prioritization Index (WESPI)

Energy infrastructure can both induce and suffer risks from wildfires ranging from direct damage to energy assets such as substations and power lines to Public Safety Power Shutoffs. Recent wildfire events underscore the need for data-driven approaches that help states and utilities proactively plan for wildfire risk. Existing national tools such as Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)’s National Risk Index (NRI) are valuable for community hazard planning. However, they are less suited for energy infrastructure, as they emphasize population and building exposure rather than system vulnerabilities. In this paper, we explore relationships between energy and wildfire data and present a Wildfire-Energy State Prioritization Index (WESPI). Our methodology combines data from the US Forest Service’s Fire Simulation (FSIM) dataset with energy resilience metrics, historical fire incidents, and geospatial data on transmission lines and fire stations. Correlation analyses suggest that FSIM burn probability is more strongly associated with power outage metrics (ρ = 0.32) than NRI wildfire frequency, and counties with a greater density of fire stations experience more frequent, but less intense wildfires. We further leverage data for burn probability, transmission line density, and fire station density to develop a Wildfire-Energy State Prioritization Index (WESPI) to highlight counties where wildfire hazard, infrastructure exposure, and limited suppression capacity converge. The index provides a consistent, scalable framework for state energy offices and utilities to screen counties for vegetation management, optimization of outage management system deployment, and to inform wildfire mitigation plans.

Critical infrastructure↗
DOE OSTI2025

2020 Budget Request for the DOE Computational Science Graduate Fellowship (CSGF) Grant

The Department of Energy Computational Science Graduate Fellowship (DOE CSGF) is essential for addressing the increasingly complex national workforce demands stemming from the growth of computational science and engineering challenges. Computational science and engineering (CSE) takes a multidisciplinary approach that utilizes scientific computing to tackle practical problems and provide technical tools across the spectrum of scientific discovery. The DOE CSGF specifically highlights high-performance computing (HPC) as a critical enabling technology in CSE, driving advancements in science and engineering that are vital to both the DOE and the broader economy. Over the past half-century, HPC has been an essential tool for DOE’s success. During this period, important missions, such as nuclear stockpile stewardship, have turned to HPC as an essential technology. Entire science disciplines have been transformed through the augmentation of scientific observation via HPC. At government laboratories, academic institutions, and in industry, DOE CSGF alumni are helping push traditional HPC boundaries while contributing to discoveries in high-energy physics, quantum information systems, fusion-reactor design, machine learning, additive manufacturing, nano materials for next-generation batteries and transistors, and advanced nuclear reactor modeling. In addition, HPC is used to address national health needs that will eventually point to cures both by helping cancer researchers manage and analyze huge troves of data, by simulating biological mechanisms, and by accelerating drug development. A 2023 report from the ASCAC Subcommittee on American Competitiveness and Innovation to the ASCR office, “Can the United States Maintain Its Leadership in High-Performance Computing?” says of the Program, “The CSGF program provides a barometer for disciplines that will be of interest to future DOE computing. Computational biology, machine learning, and quantum computing are among the subjects that began to swell in the ranks of CSGF applicants before the labs were hiring as high a percentage of employees in these categories.” The explosion of scientific and technological data has heightened the demand for advanced high-performance computing (HPC) to transform these data into meaningful scientific insights. As access to vast amounts of data increases, the fields of Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence are experiencing a resurgence, enhancing the established practices of computational modeling and simulation. In its September 2020 subcommittee report on "AI/ML, Data Intensive Science, and High-Performance Computing," the DOE Advanced Scientific Computing Advisory Committee (ASCAC) specifically called for a fellowship program to train computational and data scientists to address exascale and data-intensive computing challenges. This integration of empirical and theoretical modeling will increasingly guide federal policymakers in making decisions that impact American society and future generations. It demands a workforce of highly skilled and intellectually agile computational scientists capable of navigating the rapid advancements in scientific computing within the DOE National Laboratory research environment. The DOE CSGF program has consistently addressed this critical need.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2022

Earned Value Management Systems for Operations Activities

An earned value management system (EVMS), which monitors contractor performance, is a requirement for program and project management for all major acquisitions by the United States Federal Government with development effort: (i.e., an asset requiring management attention because of its importance to an agency’s mission; high development, operating, or maintenance costs; high risk and/or high return). As an area less explored in earned value management (EVM) practices, this paper will survey the application of an EVMS for operations activities defined as: (1) Non-capital asset activities that are projects (or project - like) with definable start and end dates, with discrete scopes of work, and measurable accomplishments; as well as (2) Routine or recurring facility or environmental operations. This paper will examine the use of an EVMS to evaluate performance of operations and maintenance activities required once construction of a capital asset is complete and being used as intended. Such activities include upgrades and maintenance in order for capital assets to meet their mission function over a life-cycle (through repair, replacement, etc.). This paper will provide background on this topic from the perspective of the Department of Energy (DOE) Environmental Management (EM) Program. In addition, it will provide material from a panel discussion provided by a group of experts from the October 2019 Office of Environmental Management Project Management Workshop, as well as material from subsequent research on this topic.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2024

An Analysis of High Opportunity Geothermal Leasing Areas on BLM and USFS Lands

This analysis, conducted by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) with support from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Geothermal Technologies Office (GTO), models potential geothermal deployment on BLM and USFS land for the years 2025, 2030, 2035, and 2050 under various scenarios using the Renewable Energy Potential (reV) model and the Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) model. This report identifies potential future high opportunity geothermal leasing areas (i.e., Best, Middle, and Least identified opportunities) based on available data for geothermal resource potential, natural resource conflicts, and transmission access. In addition, this analysis considers the impacts of the Energy Policy Act of 2005's (EPAct 2005's) default competitive leasing provisions, specifically the impact this may have had on geothermal resource discovery outside of known geothermal resource areas.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Distributed Resources for the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF) Advanced Management (DREAM). Final Report

Distributed Resources for the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF) Advanced Management (DREAM) is a proposed system that will enable data from an infinite number of diverse sources to be organized and accessed from anywhere using any handheld or other computer device. The approach offers a powerful roadmap for the creation and integration of a unified knowledge base of an entire ecosystem, including its many geophysical, geographical, social, political, agricultural, energy, transportation, and cyber aspects. The resulting aggregation of data has the potential to generate an informational universe of unprecedented size that has never before been possible due to the prohibitive costs, managerial complexity, and technical barriers associated with ever-changing exponential-growth data flows. We envision that DREAM will accelerate discovery by enabling climate researchers, among other types of researchers, to manage, analyze, and visualize data from earth-scale measurements and simulations. DREAM’s success will be built on proven components that leverage existing services and resources. A key building block for DREAM will be the ESGF, chaired by Dean N. Williams. Expanding on the existing ESGF, the project will ensure that the access, storage, movement, and analysis of the large quantities of data that are processed and produced by diverse science projects can be dynamically distributed with proper resource management. Much of the Office of Science data is currently generated by multiple stand-alone facilities. DREAM can collect data accumulated from these facilities and incorporate it into a fully integrated network accessible from anywhere in the world. The result is a completely new paradigm shift for data management, analysis, and visualization enabling researchers to: Manage their calculations, data, tools, and research results; Ensure that all data are sharable, reproducible and (re)usable—accompanied by appropriate metadata describing its provenance, syntax, and semantics at creation; Advance application performance by selectively adapting APIs and services in response to scientific requirements and architectural complexities; and Provide scalable interactive resource management—navigate data and metadata at multiple levels, provide architecture-aware data integration, analysis and visualization tools. We will engage closely with DOE, NASA, and NOAA science groups working at the leading edge of computing. These engagements—in domains such as biology, climate, and hydrology—will allow us to advance disciplinary science goals and inform our development of technologies that can accelerate discovery across DOE more broadly. We will advertise and promote our technologies via dedicated workshops, tutorials, and sessions at conferences, stand-alone events with broad inter-disciplinary invitation, and engagements with leadership facilities.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Williston Basin Carbon Ore, Rare Earth, and Critical Minerals (CORE-CM) Program

The U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Fossil Energy awarded 13 CORE-CM programs as part of the CORE-CM Initiative, designed to develop the technology and upstream and midstream supply chains to extract rare-earth elements (REEs) and critical minerals (CMs) from the nation’s coal supplies. The intent is to catalyze regional economic growth and job creation while strengthening the use of domestic resources. The Williston Basin CORE-CM Program aims to drive the expansion and transformation of coal and coal-based resource usage within the Williston Basin to produce REEs, CMs, and nonfuel carbon-based products (CBPs). The work constitutes Phase 1 of a long-term program. The objectives of Phase 1 are to identify the existing knowledge base and gaps and to develop a series of assessments/plans, including an initial basinal assessment; a characterization and data acquisition plan; a waste stream reuse plan; a basinal strategies assessment for infrastructure, industries, and business; a technology assessment, development, and field testing plan; a technology innovation center plan(s); and a stakeholder outreach and education plan. The goal of this project is to initiate the development of a new industry in the resource-rich Williston Basin that will catalyze economic growth and job creation through a coalition team of private industry, university, and state, local, and federal government entities. A coalition team of nearly 30 private industry, university, and state, local, and federal government partners was formed for this program. Partners include the University of North Dakota Energy & Environmental Research Center, Institute for Energy Studies, and Nistler College; North Dakota State University; Montana Tech University; Pacific Northwest National Laboratory; Critical Materials Institute; North Dakota Geological Survey; South Dakota Geological Survey; U.S. Geological Survey; North American Coal Corporation; BNI Energy; Basin Electric Power Cooperative; Minnkota Power Cooperative; and many more.

Kay, John P.↗
DOE OSTI2022

Calista Energy Management Assistance Initiative

The Calista Energy Management Assistance Initiative (CEMAI) provided technical assistance and capacity building for 56 Tribal communities in the Calista Region of Alaska as an effort to reduce costs, improve operational efficiency, enhance human capacity, and job opportunities. CEMAI catalyzed and guided numerous efforts into a consolidated and effective initiative that brought rural energy best practices, economies of scale, operational efficiencies, human capacity, and economic development to the forefront. Calista Corporation (Calista) is one of thirteen Alaska Native Regional Corporations created under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 (ANCSA) in the settlement of aboriginal land claims. Calista was incorporated in Alaska on June 12, 1972. The Calista Region covers Alaska’s Bethel and Kusilvak (formerly Wade Hampton) Census areas and includes 56 communities. Calista partnered with Nuvista Light and Electric Cooperative (Nuvista) on the Department of Energy, Office of Indian Energy (DOE-OIE), CEMAI project. Nuvista is a non-profit that seeks to reduce energy costs and provide renewable sources of energy to the people of western Alaska. It is founded and led by a non-profit, Tribe, Native Corporations (including Calista), energy organizations, and Alaska Native stakeholders in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta (YK-D) Region; covering the same service boundaries and communities served by Calista. This partnership allowed Calista to direct the project work with local energy experts to respond to community needs. In this arrangement, Calista added credibility and regional accountability while Nuvista added energy-specific expertise and skill set in project management. The delivery of the CEMAI Workplan included short-term or on-demand responses to specific technical assistance requests from communities in addition to longer-term strategically directed activities such as workshops, coordinated training, and capacity development efforts across the region. CEMAI’s Workplan aimed to enhance communities’ readiness for establishing renewable energy projects and implementing energy efficiency initiatives. The CEMAI objectives included: (1) Identifying common operational needs and improvement opportunities for entities with an energy interest or responsibility. (2) Providing access to multi-level expertise to address existing challenges. (3) Developing specialized training programs to build local capacity and community readiness. (4) Nurturing the creation of regional support networks. (5) Increasing access to regional, state, and federal energy initiatives, funding, and expertise. (6) Improving technical skills, provide livable wages, and job opportunities.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Can the United States Maintain Its Leadership in High-Performance Computing? - A report from the ASCAC Subcommittee on American Competitiveness and Innovation to the ASCR Office

The United States (U.S.) is no longer the unambiguous leader in the vitally important field of high performance computing (HPC). Japan, the European Union (EU), and China have fielded systems that are on par with our fastest supercomputers. The supply chain for everything from semiconductors to scientific software is globally distributed. Yet our economic future and security depend critically on our ability to innovate faster than our competitors, and the speed of innovation depends increasingly on large-scale computational science and engineering and thus HPC. How should the United States respond to this challenge? This report seeks to initiate a new and potentially transformative national discussion on this vital question. The Department of Energy’s (DOE) Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) program is well-positioned to make informed, targeted decisions about where the United States should cooperate and where it should compete in the global market for scientific exploration and discovery. By setting its sights on problems critical to our nation and the world, by establishing productive new collaborations, and by making strategic investments, ASCR can restore and maintain U.S. scientific leadership in the critical areas described in this report while strengthening our research infrastructure and training a large, diverse cohort of scientists. In doing so, ASCR and its scientists will pave the way for a secure and prosperous future for America. For more than 30 years, the ASCR program has provided the HPC and networking capabilities and expertise needed to support DOE’s mission to advance the national, economic, and energy security of the United States. The program now faces the challenge of developing and deploying the next generation of HPC systems and technologies, as well as supporting the application of HPC and artificial intelligence (AI) technologies to a wide range of scientific and engineering research problems. Through its research and development efforts, the ASCR program must also advance the state of the art in HPC and accelerate the pace of scientific discovery and technological innovation. Fulfilling this promise will require significantly increased investments, as well as innovative policies and programs. This subcommittee is aware that we are making recommendations and calls for action at a time when federal resources are limited. We understand that a wide range of competing priorities must be balanced by the nation’s leaders and that there is a need to leverage resources in new ways and seek efficiencies in facilities and operations. However, we must not let these realities limit our imagination or silence our advocacy. The ASCR program is a key part of the U.S. research infrastructure and an important component of economic growth and U.S. competitiveness. ASCR has a responsibility to pursue its mission, including advanced scientific computing, applications of AI technologies, and the required advanced research facilities, with determination and enthusiasm. To fulfill the scientific enterprise’s responsibility to the nation, the ASCR program must not only develop and publish a clear vision with an associated list of goals, priorities, and recommendations but also demonstrate scientific leadership by consistently securing long-term funding. This will allow the program to build on its achievements to date, to realize its ambitious vision, and to make lasting contributions to the field.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2023

The 2030 National Charging Network: Estimating U.S. Light-Duty Demand for Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure; A Nationwide Assessment

Ambitious federal clean goals, along with historic investment in American manufacturing, have put the United States on track to see 30-42 million light-duty electric vehicles (EVs) on the road by 2030. Now, a groundbreaking study from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) has estimated the EV charging infrastructure needed nationwide to support a sweeping transition to electrified transportation. The study, titled "The 2030 National Charging Network: Estimating U.S. Light-Duty Demand for Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure," estimates the number, type, and location of the chargers needed to create a comprehensive network of EV charging infrastructure. Its use of proprietary NREL software tools and sophisticated analysis have resulted in a nationwide infrastructure needs assessment with a never-before-seen level of detail - one that takes into account the different ways Americans travel, from running errands to taking road trips, and can adjust to changing circumstances as EV adoption rates change over time.

ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS,ENERGY PLANNING, POLIC↗
DOE OSTI2025

DOE Repository Metadata Profile (DRMP): A Metadata Framework for Advancing Interoperability and AI Readiness Across Scientific Repositories

The Department of Energy (DOE) funds a diverse and distributed ecosystem of repositories that steward scientific data, publications, and software across its research programs, user facilities, and national laboratories. While significant progress has been made in standardizing dataset-level metadata, the metadata describing repositories themselves (their identity, governance, access interfaces, policies, and technical capabilities) remains inconsistent and fragmented across DOE-funded systems. This variability limits discoverability, interoperability, automated validation, and AI-driven analysis, all of which are increasingly essential for modern scientific workflows. To address this gap, the DOE Data Curation Working Group (DCWG) developed the DOE Repository Metadata Profile (DRMP). The DRMP is a practical, community-driven framework that defines how repositories can describe themselves in a consistent, machine-actionable, and scalable manner. The DRMP is not a new metadata schema. Instead, it is a mapping profile and structured element set capturing the essential characteristics of DOE repositories. It harmonizes repository-level metadata across six widely adopted community schemas: RE3Data; DCAT-US v3; Schema.org; Dublin Core; DataCite 4.6; and PREMIS 3.0. This harmonization eliminates reinvention and enables interoperability within DOE and across the broader scientific ecosystem. A core objective of the DRMP is to reduce burden on repositories by allowing them to reuse their existing metadata through a Rosetta-style crosswalk rather than redesigning local implementations. The profile introduces a three-level conformance model that supports incremental adoption: • Level 1 – Minimum Viable Record (MVR): foundational identification elements required for workflows, project registration, and basic repository presence. • Level 2 – Interoperable: structured metadata enabling alignment with national and international discovery systems. • Level 3 – AI-Ready: enhanced provenance, policy transparency, fixity, semantic context, and capabilities that support automated reasoning, model training governance, and machine-assisted curation. To support implementation, the DRMP includes JSON Schema definitions, OpenAPI patterns, and MCP templates that allow repositories to publish machine-readable metadata directly within existing platforms. These resources are modular and lightweight, enabling adoption without major architectural change. Adopting the DRMP enables repositories to: • Enhance discoverability and interoperability by aligning identifiers, classifications, and descriptive elements across widely used schema standards. • Support federated discovery and cross-registration across DOE systems, Data.gov, and international catalogs. • Enable AI agents and workflow orchestration systems to interpret repository-level metadata within the American Science Cloud (AmSC) through Model Context Protocol (MCP)-based context publication. • Demonstrate alignment with DOE’s open science, stewardship, and FAIR data priorities. This guidance represents a community-driven step forward. Through voluntary adoption and continued feedback, the DRMP advances a cohesive, machine-actionable description of DOE repositories that supports FAIR data practices, preparing the infrastructure for AI-enabled research, and strengthening the discoverability and reuse of DOE’s scientific outputs.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
DOE OSTI2026

SuperLab 2.0 Showcase: Connecting Five Labs to Tackle Grid Complexity and Unlock Unique Grid Asset Potential

SuperLab 2.0 (5-Lab Demo) is a collaborative, national-scale experiment showcasing the coordination of geographically distributed energy assets in real time. The demonstration integrates 25 physical and digital assets, spanning wind, PV, batteries, electrolyzers, DC fast chargers, microgrid controllers, building automation systems, small modular reactor (SMR), control centers, and gas turbines, across five DOE national laboratories-NLR, INL, NETL, LBNL, and SNL. These assets are unified using Energy Sciences Network (ESnet), a low-latency, high-performance U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) network, and controlled via a centralized energy controller hosted at NLR's ARIES facility. The demonstration validates the ability to stress-test hybrid energy systems under dynamic scenarios to de-risk advanced control strategies for greater resilience and flexibility. SuperLab 2.0 (5-Lab Demo) showcased a major advancement in federated national laboratory collaboration, enabling real-time, cross-laboratory experimentation to coordinate geographically dispersed distributed energy resources (DERs) using various communication protocols and networks. SuperLab 2.0 (5-Lab Demo) built on previous demonstrations conducted between NLR-PNNL and NLR-INL connecting diverse assets including distant protection devices, a SMR simulator, and a high temperature electrolyzer (HTE). Previous demos were based on a single connection between two labs with minimal coordination challenges. The 5-Lab demo with a centralized controller, distributed testbeds across different geographical locations, and use of protocols-based communication represents a scenario closer to real-world grid operations that coordinate resources across a region to meet system needs. This experiment studied how local DER controllers interact with a centralized energy controller during normal and abnormal events to maintain reliability. The SuperLab team across the five labs implemented a notional power system model equivalent of transmission and distribution lines, represented by the data networks interconnecting the labs. Each lab continuously exchanged local parameters (such as P and Q) from its Hardware-In-Loop (CHIL) and Power Hardware-In-Loop (PHIL) assets through centralized energy controller at NLR, enabling real-time interaction and coordination across sites. By leveraging ESnet as the communication backbone, the team successfully operated the distributed assets as a unified power system, with each bus represented by a different laboratory. This setup mirrors how assets interact in real-world power systems across dispersed locations with various protocols and latencies. At each lab site, assets were operated using their own local controllers which were coordinated through an overarching operation and control layer of centralized energy controller, equivalent to how an energy management system (EMS) orchestrates assets across a regional or national grid. SuperLab's federated connectivity utilized a Digital Real-Time Simulators (DRTS)-type gateway to connect Controller Hardware-In-Loop (CHIL) and PHIL assets between labs. To enable this federated connection through ESnet, a deterministic network was established where latency variations were consistent. This consistency allowed the development of digital filters for the power system assets across CHIL and PHIL interfaces to avoid unstable and unreliable grid conditions. This report provides an overview of the cross-laboratory configuration and offers insights into interconnecting geographically distributed research assets to test them as if they were co-located. This experiment represents a step toward linking nine DOE national laboratories, enabling nation-wide simulations that can address utility-driven challenges with grid resilience, flexibility, and modernization.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2023

Williston Basin Carbon Ore, Rare Earth, and Critical Minerals (CORE-CM) Program

The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Office of Fossil Energy awarded 13 Carbon Ore, Rare-Earth and Critical Minerals (CORE-CM) programs as part of the CORE-CM Initiative, designed to develop the technology and upstream and midstream supply chains to extract rare-earth elements (REEs) and CMs from the nation’s coal supplies. The intent is to catalyze regional economic growth and job creation while strengthening the use of domestic resources. The Williston Basin CORE-CM Program aims to drive the expansion and transformation of coal and coal-based resource usage within the Williston Basin to produce REEs, CMs, and nonfuel carbon-based products (CBPs). The work constitutes Phase 1 of a long-term program. The objectives of Phase 1 are to identify the existing knowledge base and gaps and to develop a series of assessments/plans, including an initial basinal assessment; a characterization and data acquisition plan; a waste stream reuse plan; a basinal strategies assessment for infrastructure, industries, and business; a technology assessment, development, and field-testing plan; a technology innovation center plan(s); and a stakeholder outreach and education plan. Originally, the CORE-CM programs were to do little if any sample collection as part of the Phase 1 program. As part of the ongoing interactions with DOE regarding the progress of the 13 CORE-CM programs, DOE has decided to extend Phase 1 with additional funding to allow all of the Phase 1 CORE-CM programs to collect and characterize more samples that have potential to be sources of REEs and CMs. The goal of this project is to initiate the development of a new industry in the resource-rich Williston Basin that will generate economic growth and job creation through a coalition team of private industry; university; and state, local, and federal government entities. A coalition team of nearly 30 private industry; university; and state, local, and federal government partners was formed for this program. Partners include the University of North Dakota Energy & Environmental Research Center, Institute for Energy Studies, and Nistler College; North Dakota State University; Montana Tech University; Pacific Northwest National Laboratory; Critical Materials Institute; North Dakota Geological Survey; South Dakota Geological Survey; U.S. Geological Survey; North American Coal Corporation; BNI Energy; Basin Electric Power Cooperative; Minnkota Power Cooperative; and many more.

Kay, John P.↗
DOE OSTI2023

System Analysis Support of Consent-Based Siting Efforts - 23400

To better enable informed decision-making regarding the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle, the Integrated Waste Management (IWM) program within the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE) has been sponsoring the development and application of system analysis tools capable of analyzing various system options for the management of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste. With these tools, integrated waste management system (IWMS) architecture analyses are being conducted to support the future deployment of a comprehensive nuclear waste management system that considers all major back-end aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle (i.e., transportation, storage, and disposal). System analyses and assessments typically use these modeling and simulation tools to investigate things like the implications of changes in various assumptions and parameters such as acceptance rates, receipt logic, facility capacities and capabilities, use of standardized canisters, and different assumed system operation start dates. Some example system analysis results have been published previously. With the passage of the consolidated appropriations acts for fiscal years 2021 and 2022, Congress provided funding and direction for the DOE to move forward with interim storage to support near-term action in managing the nation’s SNF as an important component of an IWMS. Consent-based siting is a phased, adaptive, and collaborative approach to siting facilities that focuses on the needs and concerns of people and communities. Communities participate in the siting process by working carefully through a series of phases and steps with the DOE (as the implementing organization). Each step and phase helps a community determine whether and how hosting a facility to manage SNF is aligned to the community’s goals. By its nature, a consent-based siting process must be transparent, flexible, adaptive, and responsive to community concerns. Thus, the phases and steps are intended to serve as a guide, not a prescriptive set of instructions. System analysis research analysts interface with DOE’s consent-based siting for a federal interim storage program and can perform preliminary system analyses as requested to support various aspects of the consent-based siting team’s work. This paper provides an overview of IWM program’s system analysis activities that support the ongoing consent-based siting process. The questions that decision-makers, planners, communities, and stakeholders might have during the consent-based siting process are similar to questions that have been explored by system analysts previously. Specifically, this paper discusses work that will inform consent-based siting efforts in the areas of community impacts, cost estimates, various SNF acceptance rates by potential facilities, potential consolidated interim storage facility (CISF) capacities and configurations, and the implications of a CISF on the overall waste management system. It is expected that system analysis will continue to be performed to support the consent-based siting process in the future.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Middlesex South FUSRAP Site: Collaboration Towards Beneficial Reuse - 20338

The US Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Legacy Management (LM) manages DoE's post-closure responsibilities and ensures the future protection of human health and the environment with respect to sites that have no continuing DOE mission after undergoing remediation. LM's beneficial reuse program promotes the LM strategic goal to sustainably manage and optimize use of public lands. The beneficial reuse program aims to repurpose former contaminated sites to restore the environment, protect the public health, revitalize communities, and spur economic growth. Benefits from the reuse of a site may increase the local tax base, facilitate job growth, utilize existing infrastructure, and enhance or protect natural resources. Beneficial reuse also promotes protectiveness by ensuring activities are compatible with long-term maintenance and protection of public health and the environment, as well as by retaining good stewardship of natural resources. LM actively participates in promoting the economic development vision of the surrounding communities by collaborating with local communities to promote regional or municipal initiatives. The Borough of Middlesex, New Jersey, has prepared the Lincoln Boulevard Redevelopment Plan, which will reinvent a once-viable downtown and enhance the quality of life for the community. The Middlesex South, New Jersey, Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) site lies within the boundaries of this redevelopment area. In support of this development plan, the Borough is interested in acquiring the site for its Department of Public Works and to increase street access in the future commercial district to be built near adjacent properties. The opportunity to put the FUSRAP site into productive use aligns with LM's mission and strategic goals. In support of beneficial reuse activities, DOE can dispose of excess real property using several mechanisms. The two disposal options applicable to the Middlesex south site include (1) utilizing the US General Services Administration (GSA) or (2) using the Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations Section 770, 'Transfer of Real Property at Defense Nuclear Facilities for Economic Development' (known as a '770 transfer') process. Using the 770 transfer requires economic development as the primary driver, and a specific redevelopment proposal must be submitted. If there is no interest in specific economic development, the GSA option becomes the default mechanism for disposal of the property. In the case of the Middlesex south site, the 770 transfer process is being utilized and the Borough has submitted its economic development proposal to LM. Although LM is encouraged by the opportunity to put the site into productive use, the Middlesex south site is currently on the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Priorities List and remediation is being performed by the US Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). Consequently, any property transfer must meet the requirements under CERCLA Section 120(h), 'Property Transferred by Federal Agencies.' As the groundwater remedy will not be in place for several years, approval would be required from the US EPA administrator and the governor of the state of New Jersey to perform an early transfer of the site (before all response actions have been completed). The time frame for these approvals to occur under the normal process conflicts with the proposed redevelopment schedule; therefore, various options for expedited sale, transfer, or lease of portions of the site to the Borough were evaluated. The subsequent decision on a mutually beneficial path forward was the result of a collaborative effort between LM, USACE, the Borough and its redevelopment team, EPA, and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. (authors)

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

USACE FUSRAP Records Management Challenges in the Digital Age - 20242

In late 2016, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) implemented a Headquarters-supported nationwide records management initiative managed by the USACE-New England District to address the digitization and organization of Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) project files. This initiative will prepare USACE FUSRAP for moving toward a fully electronic system of records management. Additionally, the records management initiative streamlines the process and prepares the Administrative Record (AR) and Permanent Record (PR) file for transfer from USACE to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)-Office of Legacy Management (LM) following project closeout. Over the past couple of years, USACE and DOE-LM have been working to finalize a joint guidance document to assist in the FUSRAP records transition process. However, there remain key records management topics that require further discussion and development. Specifically, these topics include the implementation, process, and procedure for the capture of social media records and compliance with Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 USC 794d), as amended. Due to advances in technology and the ease of communication it provides, USACE is using social media more often to interface with the public than 5, 10 or 15 years ago. The identification and capture of these records are challenging because it requires each USACE district or producer of a record to track what has been released through social media so that it can be captured as part of the AR or PR. USACE is currently evaluating processes and procedures for social media records capture. This paper explores how social media is being used by USACE across FUSRAP projects and best practices for the capture of social media records. Public accessibility to the project AR is required under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, which USACE FUSRAP must follow. As USACE FUSRAP ARs are converted to a digital format, greater accessibility to the files can be provided through web sites or other electronic media. However, Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act must be considered when releasing electronic files to the public. Under Section 508, government agencies must ensure that information is made available to the public in a format that provides equal access to persons with disabilities. This paper discusses the electronic records requirements under Section 508 and addresses broad implementation of compliance across large digital records sets. Records management challenges are presented in the context of the FUSRAP records management program; however, these records management considerations and best practices are applicable across all Federal agency records management programs. Examples presented will further aid in understanding electronic records requirements that may be included on new USACE FUSRAP contracts as well as upcoming National Archives Records Administration requirements that will move us toward an electronic government. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
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 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 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↗