SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Department of Defense”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

259 records · Page 15

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2025

Cyber-Physical Tabletop Exercise for Small Modular Reactor Facilities

U.S. nuclear power facilities face increasing challenges in meeting dynamic security requirements caused by evolving and expanding threats while keeping costs reasonable to make nuclear energy competitive. This evolving threat landscape includes adversaries having offensive cyber capabilities to attack information technology (IT) systems and operation technology (OT) systems. These adversaries may have the ability to attack the physical protection system (PPS) networks with potential consequential impacts that could degrade the effectiveness of the PPS. These cyber attacks may also be used to attack the safety and operational systems used to operate and ensure the safety of the reactor. Additionally, adversaries may gain access to unmanned aerial systems (UAS) that may be used to provide reconnaissance and surveillance of the facility, provide information to the adversaries, and be equipped with kinetic capabilities such as explosives or weapons that can be used to directly attack the facility. The Department of Energy’s Office of Nuclear Energy’s Advanced Reactor Safeguards and Security (ARSS) program funded Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) and Idaho National Laboratory (INL) to develop a cyber-physical tabletop exercise (TTX). This exercise was conducted on a hypothetical small modular reactor (SMR) facility, and only considered a potential adversary cyber attack on the PPS to a physical attack on the hypothetical facility to achieve a radiological release. This cyber-physical TTX is meant to provide lessons learned to integrate the cyber security system design and the physical protection system (PPS) design to decrease design, operation, and maintenance costs as well as increase effectiveness for defending against design basis threat attacks at the facility. This TTX will also provide a framework and method for SMR and microreactor vendors to conduct their own cyber-physical TTX and gain impactful insights to improving the cyber and physical protection system design for their SMR or microreactor facility design.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2020

Collaborative Research and Development Program on Explosive Detection Technology

In September 2013, at the 6th Permanent Coordinating Group Meeting between the U.S Department of Energy (DOE) and the French Institut de Radioprotection et de Sureté Nucléaire (IRSN), France expressed an interest in bilateral cooperation with the United States because its newly revised regulations that require enhanced explosives detection capabilities at nuclear and radiological facilities. In the ensuing years, PNNL (DOE/NNSA) and IRSN sought to identify an area of collaboration within explosives detection that would leverage the specific technical strengths of each organization. Based upon awareness of each other’s technical acumen gleaned from the scientific literature on explosives detection, it was clear that specific organizations within each nation could provide the needed expertise to enable enhancement of explosives detection through a collaborative development effort. The French lnstitut Saint-Louis was determined to be an optimal partner for IRSN to develop a collaboration with DOE/NNSA using PNNL’s detection team in this effort. Thus, the dialog was started between the technical experts at each organization to define where complementary expertise in explosives detection could be best leveraged. The technical plans and objectives of this project were sound with promising results. In the end, the joint action sheet was not implemented. The challenge with executing the project was in the complexity of getting a signed agreement between DOE, IRSN and ISL. Most of the obstacles surrounded the ability to protect intellectual property and obtain an agreement which included all of the parties. At a high level, this report documents the interactions and attempt to develop a cooperative framework for explosives detection development from FY 2014 through FY 2020.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗

DOE OSTI2024

Long-term Moisture Adsorption in Packaged Plutonium Oxide

In 2018, the Department of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration (DOE-NNSA) began implementing dilute and dispose to remove 34 metric tons (MT) of surplus weapons grade plutonium from the US stockpile. Under this plan, surplus plutonium material is converted into plutonium oxide (PuO 2 ) before being stored in metal containers and sent to the DOE Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). The dilute and dispose project was implemented as a more cost-effective method for abiding by the Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement (PMDA) between the USA and Russia, as compared to producing mixed oxide fuel (MOX). The PMDA was originally signed in 2000 and amended in 2010.2 The disassembly of pits and conversion to PuO 2 as part of dilute and dispose is carried out through the Advanced Recovery and Integrated Extraction System (ARIES) developed at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). The dilute portion of dilute and dispose is carried out at Savannah River Site (SRS). With this program in place, it is necessary to ensure the safe, long-term storage of the PuO 2 generated during this process until final disposal at WIPP is accomplished.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2021

Soil Sample Workplan in Support of the Site 300 Explosives Waste Treatment Facility Ecological Risk Assessment Pursuant to the Hazardous Waste Facility Permit (Part V, Special Condition #14 a-f)

The Department of Toxic Substances Control issued the Final Hazardous Waste Facility Permit to Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Site 300 in 2017. As part of the continual process to ensure waste treatment emissions are not impacting ecological receptors, LLNL analyzed soil samples in the vicinity of the Explosive Waste Treatment Facility (EWTF) Burn Units (i.e., Burn Cage and Burn Pan) and the Detonation Pad. Soil samples were analyzed by EPA Solid Waste 846 Methods for furans, explosives, metals, and semi-volatile compounds. In all samples, furans, explosives, and semi-volatile organic compounds were not detected. Metals were detected at concentrations below background levels. This soil sample plan will sample the same four downwind areas of the Burn Units and the same downwind areas of the Detonation, as well as including four new sample locations. The four new locations will be located to the northeast and southwest of the Burn Units and Detonation (as shown in Figure 3). The constituents to be analyzed are in Tables 7 and 8. Perchlorate was not identified as a constituent of concern in the 2007 Soil Sampling Plan. However, for this plan, all soil samples will be analyzed for perchlorate. Nitrate and all CAM17 metals have been added to the sampling plan to comply with DTSC comments received in correspondence dated June 4, 2021. After completion of the sampling event, a soil sample report will be submitted to DTSC in accordance with requirements specified in the Hazardous Waste Facility Permit, Part V, Special Conditions 16 a-f. This proposed soil sampling plan will be fully implemented no later than one year after receiving DTSC approval, in accordance with the Hazardous Waste Facility Permit, Part V, Special Condition 15.

45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEF↗

DOE OSTI2020

A Preliminary Radiological Risk Assessment Model for Disposition of Remote-Handled Transuranic Wastes at Los Alamos National Laboratory Area G - 20116

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) operates a low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal site at Material Disposal Area G, in Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA. Area G has been the primary LLW disposal site for Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) since the 1960's. In addition to LLW, Area G is host to a variety of other wastes, the disposition of which must be determined before closure of the site. A probabilistic Radiological Risk Assessment (RRA) for Area G is used in order to support decision making regarding some wastes that are not addressed in the extant Area G Performance Assessment (PA) and Composite Analysis (CA). Between 1979 and 1987, 33 special shafts were augered into the Bandelier Tuff at Area G. This volcanic tuff is present across Pajarito Plateau on the eastern slopes of the Jemez Mountains, and varies widely in its consistency, from weakly indurated non-welded layers to welded layers that uphold the mesa cliffs of the Plateau. These mesas are home to LANL, Area G, and the townsites of Los Alamos and White Rock, with residences about 1400 m from Area G. The 33 Shafts were lined with steel casing, and contain remote-handled (RH) transuranic wastes (TRU) resulting from experiments and analysis performed in special glove boxes at the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research (CMR) facility at LANL. Some of these wastes originated as used nuclear fuel. The purpose of the Area G RRA is to evaluate the potential future risk to humans and the environment from the RH TRU in the 33 Shafts in the context of the risk associated with the surrounding wastes at Area G. The analysis is responsive to expectations outlined in DOE Order 458.1, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment, and is informed by the Manual and Guidance accompanying DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management. Because the waste meets the definition of TRU, the regulatory context necessarily takes into consideration the regulation governing the disposal of TRU from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): 40 CFR 191, Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes. Given the broader regulatory context for the RRA, the analysis is subject to different assumptions from those made in the existing DOE O 435.1 PA and CA, such as allowing for future occupation of the site. The analysis begins with a comprehensive evaluation of features, events, processes, and exposure scenarios (FEPS) for Area G and the wastes it contains. These FEPSs are screened to eliminate from further consideration those of extremely low probability and/or consequence, and a conceptual site model (CSM) is subsequently developed. The scope and structure of the Area G RRA Model is informed by this CSM, and the Area G RRA Model is developed using the GoldSim systems analysis modeling platform. This paper presents the initial version of a defensible, transparent, and reasonably realistic model, which is based on the state of knowledge of the wastes, the site, and the FEPSs that govern contaminant transport from wastes into the environment and subsequent exposures to humans and other biota. Probabilistic model input distributions represent uncertainties inherent in the real and modeled systems. The results of the Area G RRA Model inform decisions regarding the disposition of the RH TRU in the 33 Shafts. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2022

Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction (CWMD) Device Cybersecurity Characterization Process and Profile

Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction (CWMD) recognizes that threats in the cyberspace domain continue to grow, which requires CWMD devices and supporting systems to be both cybersecure (ability to protect or defend from cyber-attacks) and resilient (ability to maintain required capability in the face of adversity) to cyber threats. The CWMD cybersecurity characterization approach in this document supports existing cyber resilience activities within the Acquisition Lifecycle Framework. Similarly, this process supports existing Department of Homeland Security Cyber Resilience Test and Evaluation activities, which consist of iterative processes, starting at the initiation of system acquisition and continuing throughout the entire device and system life cycle. Cyber resilience is the ability of an information system to continue to operate while under attack, even if in a degraded or debilitated state, and to rapidly recover operational capabilities for essential functions after a successful attack. The goal of the security characterization task for CWMD is to support the development of a CBRN device-dependent profile that aligns with device network capabilities and maps to recommended security controls to create a characterization security profile impact levels. The impact levels for CWMD devices should be characterized as Low (L), Moderate (M), High (H) to align with the low, moderate, high control baselines. To estimate the impact levels, the device’s security-related attributes are translated into the security objectives: Confidentiality (C), Integrity (I), and Availability (A), known as the CIA triad. The potential impact for each device can be L, M, H, for devices that connect and transmit different types of data and may have different impact levels. National Institute of Standards and Technology Federal Information Processing Standards Publication 199 states, “the potential impact values assigned to the respective security objectives shall be the highest value from among those security categories that have been determined for each type of information resident on the information system.” As CWMD is determining the cybersecurity impact levels of CBRN devices based on network connections and data transfers, the impact levels are aligned with the associated attributes of network connections and communications. For example, if the device system is connected to a wireless network and transmits different data types based on the confidentiality of the data, the highest impact value for each security objective should represent the device’s CIA impact level. This document is intended to be used by test managers, test team, and program managers.

45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEF↗

DOE OSTI2024

Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction (CWMD) Device Cybersecurity Characterization Process and Profile

Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction (CWMD) recognizes that threats in the cyberspace domain continue to grow, which requires CWMD devices and supporting systems to be both cybersecure (ability to protect or defend from cyber-attacks) and resilient (ability to maintain required capability in the face of adversity) to cyber threats. The CWMD cybersecurity characterization approach in this document supports existing cyber resilience activities within the Acquisition Lifecycle Framework. Similarly, this process supports existing Department of Homeland Security Cyber Resilience Test and Evaluation activities, which consist of iterative processes, starting at the initiation of system acquisition and continuing throughout the entire device and system life cycle. Cyber resilience is the ability of an information system to continue to operate while under attack, even if in a degraded or debilitated state,1 and to rapidly recover operational capabilities for essential functions after a successful attack.2 The goal of the security characterization task for CWMD is to support the development of a CBRN device-dependent profile that aligns with device network capabilities and maps to recommended security controls to create a characterization security profile impact levels. The impact levels for CWMD devices should be characterized as Low (L), Moderate (M), High (H) to align with the low, moderate, high control baselines. To estimate the impact levels, the device’s security-related attributes are translated into the security objectives: Confidentiality (C), Integrity (I), and Availability (A), known as the CIA triad. The potential impact for each device can be L, M, H, for devices that connect and transmit different types of data and may have different impact levels. National Institute of Standards and Technology Federal Information Processing Standards Publication 199 states, “the potential impact values assigned to the respective security objectives shall be the highest value from among those security categories that have been determined for each type of information resident on the information system.”3 As CWMD is determining the cybersecurity impact levels of CBRN devices based on network connections and data transfers, the impact levels are aligned with the associated attributes of network connections and communications. For example, if the device system is connected to a wireless network and transmits different data types based on the confidentiality of the data, the highest impact value for each security objective should represent the device’s CIA impact level. This document is intended to be used by test managers, test team, and program managers.

45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEF↗