Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Program management”

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 271 records · Page 15
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2016

Lessons Learned from FUSRAP

The US DOE Office of Legacy Management (LM) is the long-term steward for 90 sites remediated under numerous regulatory regimes including the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) sites. In addition, LM holds considerable historical information, gathered in the 1970s, to determine site eligibility for remediation under FUSRAP. To date, 29 FUSRAP sites are in LM’s inventory of sites for long-term surveillance and maintenance (LTS&M), and 25 are with the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for remediation or in the process of being transitioned to LM. It is forecasted that 13 FUSRAP sites will transfer from the USACE to LM over the next 10 years; however, the timing of the transfers is strongly dependent upon federal funding of the ongoing remedial actions. Historically, FUSRAP sites were generally cleaned up for “unrestricted” industrial use or remediated to the “cleanup standards” at that time, and their use remained unchanged. Today, these sites as well as the adjacent properties are now changing or envisioned to have changes in land use, typically from industrial to commercial or residential uses. The implication of land-use change affects DOE’s LTS&M responsibility for the sites under LM stewardship as well as the planning for the additional sites scheduled to transition in time. Coinciding with land-use changes at or near FUSRAP sites is an increased community awareness of these sites. As property development increases near FUSRAP sites, the general public and interested stakeholders regularly inquire about the sufficiency of cleanups that impact their neighborhoods and communities. LM has used this experience to address a series of lessons learned to improve our program management in light of the changing conditions of our sites. We describe these lessons learned as (1) improved stakeholder relations, (2) enhanced LTS&M requirements for the sites, and (3) greater involvement in the transition process.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

Lessons Learned from FUSRAP - 16200

The US DOE Office of Legacy Management (LM) is the long-term steward for 90 sites remediated under numerous regulatory regimes including the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) sites. In addition, LM holds considerable historical information, gathered in the 1970's, to determine site eligibility for remediation under FUSRAP. To date, 29 FUSRAP sites are in LM's inventory of sites for long-term surveillance and maintenance (LTS and M), and 25 are with the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for remediation or in the process of being transitioned to LM. It is forecasted that 13 FUSRAP sites will transfer from the USACE to LM over the next 10 years; however, the timing of the transfers is strongly dependent upon federal funding of the ongoing remedial actions. Historically, FUSRAP sites were generally cleaned up for unrestricted industrial use or remediated to the cleanup standards at that time, and their use remained unchanged. Today, these sites as well as the adjacent properties are now changing or envisioned to have changes in land use, typically from industrial to commercial or residential uses. The implication of land-use change affects DOE's LTS and M responsibility for the sites under LM stewardship as well as the planning for the additional sites scheduled to transition in time. Coinciding with land-use changes at or near FUSRAP sites is an increased community awareness of these sites. As property development increases near FUSRAP sites, the general public and interested stakeholders regularly inquire about the sufficiency of cleanups that impact their neighborhoods and communities. LM has used this experience to address a series of lessons learned to improve our program management in light of the changing conditions of our sites. We describe these lessons learned as (1) improved stakeholder relations, (2) enhanced LTS and M requirements for the sites, and (3) greater involvement in the transition process. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2024

Considerations for Managing DOE Standard Canisters within an Over-canister as Part of an Integrated Waste Management System PPT

To better enable informed decision making regarding the back-end of the nuclear fuel cycle, the Integrated Waste Management Program within the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE) has been sponsoring research into a comprehensive integrated waste management system (IWMS) that considers all major back-end aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle (i.e., transportation, storage, and disposal). An important aspect of the IWMS is DOE-managed Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF). DOE and its predecessor agencies have generated, transported, received, stored, and reprocessed SNF at DOE facilities nationwide, and DOE is responsible for managing the SNF currently in its possession. These fuels come from a wide range of reactor types that employ various cladding materials, fuel materials, and enrichments. To enable interim, road-ready dry storage (RRDS) of the wide variety of SNF types found in the DOE inventory, a standardized canister system (i.e., the DOE Standard Canister) was proposed for the packaging demonstration. This robust, welded canister system is designed to confine radionuclides, prevent criticality by precluding content moderation, and satisfy other requirements as part of a larger storage, transportation, and disposal system. While SNF has yet to be loaded into a DOE Standard Canister, DOE Standard Canister designs were included in past storage facility and disposal facility design licensing endeavors. In a renewed effort to evaluate packaging SNF at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) in a RRDS configuration, researchers are planning the RRDS Packaging Demonstration. This demonstration is supplemented by analytical structural, criticality, and material compatibility evaluations that support management of SNF in DOE Standard Canisters, taking advantage of past analysis work to the extent possible. One of the largest differences between the current Packaging Demonstration and past analytical evaluations is the inclusion of an over-canister containing multiple DOE Standard Canisters. For the Packaging Demonstration, DOE Standard Canisters loaded with SNF are planned to be placed in a larger diameter over-canister. The sealed over-canister could then be placed in a storage overpack for onsite storage, or in a transportation overpack for shipment to an offsite storage location or disposal site once one becomes available. This paper examines the relevant considerations and provides a preliminary evaluation of integrating the over-canister configuration into the storage, transportation, and disposal processes of the overall waste management system. For storage and transportation, the over-canister can be considered analogous to a multi-purpose canister (MPC) for commercial SNF. For disposal, the DOE Standard Canisters could be removed from the over-canister and placed in a co-disposal waste package with canisters containing vitrified high-level radioactive waste (HLW) similar to configurations examined previously, or the sealed over-canisters might be capable of direct disposal in a waste package.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Technology pathways for energy- and water-efficient controlled environment agriculture: A review of technologies, implementation pathways, and regional use cases

Controlled Environment Agriculture (CEA) offers high-yield, climate-resilient food production, but high energy and resource demands challenge its sustainability. This paper synthesizes technologies that can improve outcomes across six categories—energy, CO 2 utilization, building envelope, hardware, water, and process—plus colocation strategies. We evaluate 80 technologies and define ten implementation pathways bundling complementary technologies to reduce energy use, optimize water consumption, and minimize emissions. Regional application is demonstrated through five U.S. case studies spanning different climates. A logic framework guides pathway selection for case studies based on climate, infrastructure, and regulatory context, informing context-sensitive technology deployment. Results show energy intensity reductions of 3–55 %, ranging from energy management programs to comprehensive lighting retrofits; water savings of 20–40 % through closed-loop recirculation; and emissions reductions of 3–100 %, with strategic energy management achieving 3–5 % and renewable electricity paired with electrified heating achieving up to 100 %. Text mining revealed that energy, hardware, and process technologies account for 91 % of literature coverage. Water, building envelope, and CO 2 utilization remain underexplored, indicating priorities for future research. This integrative approach to technology assessment supports growers, developers, and policymakers in aligning CEA system design with local conditions, improving resource efficiency and addressing gaps in cross-domain technology coverage.

Controlled environment agriculture↗
DOE OSTI2019

Management and Disposal of U.S. Department of Energy Spent Nuclear Fuel - 19133

Congress created the U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (NWTRB) in the 1987 Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act (Public Law 100-203) to evaluate the technical and scientific validity of activities undertaken by the Secretary of Energy to implement the Nuclear Waste Policy Act. In accordance with this mandate, the NWTRB reviewed the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) efforts to manage the inventory of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) that is under its control (DOE SNF) at several facilities around the country: the Hanford Site in Washington, the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) in Idaho, the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina, and the Fort St. Vrain independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) in Colorado. While disposal of SNF and high-level radioactive waste (HLW) in a deep geologic repository remains the ultimate objective of the DOE nuclear waste management program, there is significant uncertainty about when such a repository will be constructed in the United States. Until disposal occurs, it is essential to manage DOE SNF in a way that will facilitate its eventual disposal, and it is also important to improve understanding of processes related to packaging and storage of the SNF that could affect its future transportation and disposal. The NWTRB's review, which was a multi-year effort, was documented in a report to Congress and the Secretary of Energy and is summarized here. The NWTRB reviewed the quantities and characteristics of DOE SNF at each of the four sites. It also examined DOE packaging and storage activities and plans at each of the sites. The NWTRB highlighted three main issue areas in its review. First, the review identified issues related to managing the aging of DOE SNF and the facilities used to store the DOE SNF. Second, the review addressed issues related to packaging of stored non-naval DOE SNF into a standard canister. Third, the NWTRB assessed issues that could affect disposal of DOE SNF if DOE continues to evaluate a range of repository settings. Based on the information and findings developed as part of its review, the NWTRB made six recommendations to Congress and the Secretary of Energy related to aging management, packaging, and disposal of DOE SNF. DOE has begun to address some of the NWTRB recommendations. (author)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2023

Considerations for Managing DOE Standard Canisters within an Over-canister as Part of an Integrated Waste Management System

To better enable informed decision making regarding the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle, the Integrated Waste Management Program within the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE) has been sponsoring the research into a comprehensive integrated waste management system (IWMS) that considers all major back-end aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle (i.e., transportation, storage, and disposal). An important aspect of the IWMS is DOE-managed SNF. DOE and its predecessor agencies have generated, transported, received, stored, and reprocessed SNF at DOE facilities nationwide, and DOE is responsible for managing the SNF currently in its possession. These fuels come from a wide range of reactor types that employ various cladding materials, fuel materials, and enrichments. To enable interim, road-ready dry storage (RRDS) of the wide variety of SNF types found in the DOE inventory, a standardized canister system (i.e., the DOE Standard Canister) was proposed. This robust, welded canister system is designed to confine radionuclides, prevent criticality by precluding content moderation, and satisfy other requirements as part of a larger storage, transportation, and disposal system. While SNF has yet to be loaded into a DOE Standard Canister, DOE Standard Canister designs were included in past storage facility and disposal facility design licensing endeavors. In a renewed effort to evaluate packaging SNF at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) in a RRDS configuration, researchers are planning the RRDS Packaging Demonstration. This demonstration is supplemented by analytical structural, criticality, and material compatibility evaluations that support management of SNF in DOE Standard Canisters, taking advantage of past analysis work to the extent possible. One of the largest differences between the current Packaging Demonstration and past analytical evaluations is the inclusion of an over-canister containing multiple DOE Standard Canisters. For the Packaging Demonstration, DOE Standard Canisters loaded with SNF are planned to be placed in a larger diameter over-canister. The sealed over-canister could then be placed in a storage overpack for onsite storage, or in a transportation overpack for shipment to an offsite storage location or disposal site once one becomes available. This paper examines the relevant considerations and provides a preliminary evaluation of integrating the over-canister configuration into the storage, transportation, and disposal processes of the overall waste management system. For storage and transportation, the over-canister can be considered analogous to a multi-purpose canister (MPC) for commercial SNF. For disposal, the DOE Standard Canisters could be removed from the over-canister and placed in a co-disposal waste package with canisters containing vitrified HLW similar to configurations examined previously, or the sealed over-canisters might be capable of direct disposal in a waste package.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2016

Inspection Technology Advancements for Hanford Double Shell Tank Integrity Verification - 16150

The Hanford double-shell tanks (DSTs) were constructed in southeastern Washington State between 1968 and 1986 to store nuclear waste. Most of the tank waste came from the Hanford nuclear weapons program, which has been stopped for more than 25 years. The tanks will be needed for many years to come until suitable vitrification and permanent storage solutions are developed. These tanks are nominally 45 ft. deep from the dome peak to the floor. The inner tank is nominally 75 ft. dia. and the outer tank is nominally 80 ft. dia., leaving a 2.5 ft. annulus between the two side tank walls. The waste management program (under direction of Washington River Protection Solutions, WRPS) manages inspections of these DSTs from the annulus to justify their continued safe service and to avoid the high cost of new replacement tanks. Over time, the Hanford Tank Farm contractors, currently WRPS, have increased their ultrasound inspections of these tanks. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory has worked with the Hanford Tank Farm contractors for more than 15 years to advance applicable tank nondestructive inspection technology for improved performance and cost reduction. Past, present, and planned technology advancements are addressed in this paper, including tank wall ultrasonic testing examination, extreme value statistical analysis, phased array for the tank wall, transmit/receive tandem synthetic aperture focusing technique knuckle examination, and electromagnetic acoustic transducer screening of the tank wall including mill-scale compensation. (authors)

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

Panel Session 1: WMS 2020 Plenary Session

The plenary panel focused on government and industry world leaders speaking on the pressing issues facing radioactive waste management in 2020 and beyond. Panelists included an OECD/ NEA representative for the international community, a Huntington Ingalls Industries representative for the commercial sector, and the US DOE Senior Advisor to the Under Secretary of Science representing DOE Environmental Management. Panelists with presentations: WM2020 Speech (Michael Lempke); Optimization: A Better Path toward Managing Nuclear Decommissioning and Legacies (William Magwood); Update On the DOE Environmental Management Program (William White)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2024

OSCAR-Mike: Why not ATAK?

The Office of Nuclear Smuggling Detection and Deterrence (NSDD) is evaluating methods to increase the probability that international partners will detect radioactive materials. One proposed method to accomplish this goal is to improve communications within teams operating in challenging environments. The goal of these improvements would be to enable remote monitoring of detection equipment, share data among end users in the field and subject matter experts, and integrate data from radiation detectors with other types of sensors and camera systems. Accomplishing this goal has the potential to improve the capabilities of currently deployed NSDD equipment. During FY 2021, Oak Ridge National Laboratory demonstrated some core and expanded capabilities of the Android Team Awareness Kit (ATAK), a situational awareness application developed by the US Department of Defense, to enable precision targeting, navigation, and data sharing. During FY 2022, Oak Ridge National Laboratory developed software requirements for an NSDD team awareness kit–based system. The requirements were developed by liaising with NSDD management and subject matter experts to determine NSDD’s needs and by reviewing available software and hardware solutions with US Department of Defense team awareness kit program managers and developers and radiation detection equipment vendors.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2025

Performance Assurance Planning Guide for Utility Energy Service Contracts: 2025 Edition

Administered by the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP), the Utility Program has fostered collaboration among federal agencies and their serving utilities for more than 25 years. The Utility Program supports agencies using Utility Energy Service Contracts (UESCs), a well-developed, effective contracting vehicle that enable the latest approaches to cost-effective energy management at federal sites. Federal agencies have successfully used UESCs to award over 2,000 energy and water efficiency and renewable energy projects, investing approximately $\$$2.8 billion in furthering the Federal Government's efforts to reduce energy intensity. Authorized by 42 U.S. Code section 8256 (10 U.S. Code section 2913 for the Department of Defense), a UESC is a limited-source acquisition between a federal agency and an eligible serving utility for energy management services that generate savings from the implementation of energy- and water -conservation measures (collectively referred to as ECMs), with 42 U.S. Code section 8287 (Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement, Part 241), providing the term of a UESC, which may extend up to 25 years. Through a UESC, the utility partner assesses designs, and implements the desired ECMs - which can range from lighting retrofits and renewable energy systems, to combined heat and power plants or other technologies and strategies, and may provide financing for the project. The agency may use any combination of appropriations and third-party financing to pay for the project, providing useful flexibility. There is no limit to the project size, big or small, that can be implemented using a UESC. To assist agencies implementing a UESC, FEMP has developed a Utility Energy Service Contract Guide and this companion guidance document to help agencies and their utility partners better understand the best practices for to ensure UESCs continue to perform and generate savings throughout their performance period. These best practices utilize a combination of effective project management, communication, documentation, and a detailed Performance Assurance Plan. This plan is a project specific set of actionable protocols that define important tasks and responsibilities throughout the contract term and reflects the site conditions, complexities, agency capabilities, and operating and maintaining planned ECMs.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2014

Environmental Management

Another key aspect of the NNSS mission is Environmental Management program, which addresses the environmental legacy from historic nuclear weapons related activities while also ensuring the health and safety of present day workers, the public, and the environment as current and future missions are completed. The Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management site receives low-level and mixed low-level waste from some 28 different generators from across the DOE complex in support of the legacy clean-up DOE Environmental Management project. Without this capability, the DOE would not be able to complete the clean up and proper disposition of these wastes. The program includes environmental protection, compliance, and monitoring of the air, water, plants, animals, and cultural resources at the NNSS. Investigation and implementation of appropriate corrective actions to address the contaminated ground water facilities and soils resulting from historic nuclear testing activities, the demolition of abandoned nuclear facilities, as well as installation of ground water wells to identify and monitor the extent of ground water contamination.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2017

Energy Data Management Manual for the Wastewater Treatment Sector

Energy efficiency has become a higher priority within the wastewater treatment sector, with facility operators and state and local governments ramping up efforts to reduce energy costs and improve environmental performance. Across the country, municipal wastewater treatment plants are estimated to consume more than 30 terawatt hours per year of electricity, which equates to about $2 billion in annual electric costs. Electricity alone can constitute 25% to 40% of a wastewater treatment plant’s annual operating budget and make up a significant portion of a given municipality’s total energy bill. These energy needs are expected to grow over time, driven by population growth and increasingly stringent water quality requirements. The purpose of this document is to describe the benefits of energy data management, explain how it can help drive savings when linked to a strong energy management program, and provide clear, step-by-step guidance to wastewater treatment plants on how to appropriately track energy performance. It covers the basics of energy data management and related concepts and describes different options for key steps, recognizing that a single approach may not work for all agencies. Wherever possible, the document calls out simpler, less time-intensive approaches to help smaller plants with more limited resources measure and track energy performance. Reviews of key, publicly available energy-tracking tools are provided to help organizations select a tool that makes the most sense for them. Finally, this document describes additional steps wastewater treatment plant operators can take to build on their energy data management systems and further accelerate energy savings.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2015

The transportation factor in site evaluations for spent nuclear fuel storage and disposal facilities - 15460

New facility siting studies will be necessary to fulfill the Blue Ribbon Commission (BRC) on America's Nuclear Future 2012 recommendation to develop consolidated interim storage (CIS) for spent nuclear fuel in the next decade. Future site evaluations for used nuclear fuel (UNF) storage and disposal facilities must address transportation requirements, especially access to mainline railroads, early in the site selection process. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) in 2013 proposed a strategy for managing spent nuclear fuel in accordance with the BRC recommendations by establishing a pilot interim storage facility by 2021 and a consolidated interim storage facility by 2025. The authors demonstrate that currently available geographic information systems and already adopted siting criteria (defining favorable and unfavorable conditions) allow the identification of the transportation portion of a storage facility siting process to begin without delay. Ready access to the mainline rail system is absolutely critical since existing rail access, or easily constructed access, is a highly favorable condition for successful siting. Despite widespread rail abandonments over the past three decades, vast areas of the United States retain mainline rail service or could connect to existing mainlines by building new rail spurs of less than 25-50 miles. This precondition for transportation planning is critical. Planners need to start with the beginning - availability of rail transportation to and from the interim storage facility/facilities. A second step in transportation screening would be to evaluate those potential site locations within 50 miles of existing mainline railroads using other appropriate variables. This effort could begin with the application of the 1984 repository siting guidelines for transportation (10 CFR 960.5-2-7)[1]. Repository surface facilities have essentially the same transportation requirements as storage facilities. The guidelines in 10 CFR 960 provide a readily available template for evaluating sites based on transportation risks, impacts and costs. Initial site screening, after considering proximity to mainline railroads as the precursory step, should evaluate: 1) proximity to highly populated areas; 2) proximity to interstate highways; 3) proximity to environmentally sensitive areas and lands protected by federal, state, or tribal governments; and 4) proximity to military installations, hazardous materials facilities, or other facilities that might impact transportation safety and security.Several challenges exist which prevent effective transportation planning. The diversity of canister and cask types and SNF characteristics and conditions, the increasingly limited rail access at the shipping sites and the ease with which public attention can be marshalled against a waste management program, all suggest that future efforts need to identify potential storage sites that reduce transportation impacts and costs by reducing near-site transportation construction and reduce total system transportation impacts. This can most easily be accomplished by reducing shipping distances in a process that is easily defined and implemented. The paper concludes that the DOE should develop a site screening and evaluation program with transportation as a central consideration. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Aluminum Clad SNF: Technical Considerations and Challenges for Extended (>50 years) Dry Storage - 1900y

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) manages a significant inventory (>13 MTHM) of aluminum clad spent nuclear fuel (ASNF) using a combination of wet and dry storage at three primary sites; Hanford, Idaho National Laboratory (INL), and Savannah River Site (SRS). The majority of this ASNF is generated from U.S. and international research test reactors (RTR), examples include Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) at INL and High-Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL). The Obama Administration suspension of the Yucca Mountain repository, issuance of the January 2013 DOE 'Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste,' delays in implementing the 'regionalization' SNF approach recommended in the 1995 'Department of Energy Programmatic Spent Nuclear Fuel Management and Idaho National Engineering Laboratory Environmental Restoration and Waste Management Programs Final Environmental Impact Statement,' and limited ASNF processing capability at SRS H-Canyon means that interim storage has become the de-facto strategy for managing ASNF. The 1995 Idaho Settlement Agreement requires the DOE to transfer all SNF stored at INL to interim dry storage prior to December 31, 2023 and wet storage capacity at the SRS is nearing capacity. This situation was recognized by the DOE Spent Nuclear Fuel Working Group (SNFWG) and at its June 2016 meeting formed a ASNF sub-working group comprised subject matter experts to evaluate this area and provide a report of findings. The ASNF sub-working group met many times over several month period to review the engineering and technical basis of existing and planned DOE ASNF dry storage facilities and additional studies on the behavior of ASNF under different conditions, including during reactor service. The ASNF sub-working group focused its review on RTR SNF. Based on these reviews, the ASNF sub-working group identified five knowledge gaps and technical data needs that should be addressed to ensure viability and safety of extended, greater than 50 years, sealed or vented interim dry storage of ASNF. These five areas include; behavior/chemistry of aluminum oxyhydroxide layer in dry storage, radiolytic gas generation properties of aluminum oxyhydroxide layers, effect of episodic breathing and radiolytic generation of corrosive gases during storage, performance of ASNF in existing dry storage systems, and effects of high temperature (>1000 C) drying on chemistry and behavior of aluminum oxyhydroxide layers. The ASNF sub-working group also recommended development of an action plan to identify technical and engineering activities needed to address the knowledge gaps and technical data needs. Results of the ASNF sub-working group are documented in 2017 report 'Aluminum Clad Spent Nuclear Fuel: Technical Considerations and Challenges for Extended (>50 years) Dry Storage,' DOE-ID/RPT-1575. The INL assembled a team comprised of twenty INL and Savannah River National Laboratory SNF management and subject matter experts to develop this action plan. Over the course of 2 months the team worked to develop the action plan. The plan identified and recommended six technical and engineering tasks needed to address the previously identified knowledge gaps and technical data needs. DOE Environmental Management Office of Technology Development is providing funding to the INL to execute these tasks. This paper will present and discuss the results of the ASNF sub-working group, tasks identified in the action plan, and experimental activities underway at INL and SRNL to address the action plan. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2016

Safeguarding Nuclear Waste - A Study in Risk Management and Overcoming Significant Challenges - 16439

Three years after what is commonly referred to as the 'Y-12 Incident', where three individuals trespassed and defaced a building at the Department of Energy's (DOE) Y-12 National Security Complex early on July 28, 2012, the DOE commissioned study after study to review security practices and internal risk management safeguarding protocols that preserves safety and a secure environment. These studies highlighted systemic organizational dysfunctions, critical leadership shortcomings, and communications failures. Much attention has been focused on risk management and security oversight practices. This analysis presents an update on the Department's Environmental Management (EM)-wide security leadership improvements designed to restore public confidence and explain how a deeper risk analysis has elevated security oversight into a common-core Department of Energy achievement. While EM is not the managing Program Office for Y-12, this event had a DOE-corporate wide impact. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2015

Processing and disposition of remote-handled transuranic liquid waste generated at Oak Ridge National Laboratory - 15113

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) produces transuranic (TRU) isotopes for the US Department of Energy's (US DoE's) heavy-element research program and other programs for medical and industrial applications. As a result, the research facilities generate remote-handled TRU liquid low-level waste (LLLW). This LLLW is presently collected and mixed with larger volumes of legacy and environmental management waste streams for future treatment. Once the legacy waste is disposed of as part of the US DOE Environmental Management program, the large-scale waste treatment processes will be decommissioned, and new capabilities will be needed to characterize, treat, package, and dispose of the newly generated LLLW at ORNL. Various approaches are being considered for addressing treatment and disposal of the future LLLW streams. A variety of processing methods and final waste forms is under consideration. The impacts of the chemical and radionuclide compositions of the waste stream are being evaluated. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Solarize Philly

Rigell presented all programs managed by the Philadelphia Energy Authority to promote the adoption of solar in Philadelphia. Bright Solar Futures, the SETO funded initiative was discussed, along with other Philadelphia Energy Authority programs.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗