Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Technical Scope”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2026

Lahaina Energy Partnership: Technical Assistance Task Updates and Discussion Part 2

The Lahaina Energy Partnership (LEP) is an initiative funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) to support energy planning and rebuilding efforts in Hawaii's historic town of Lahaina on Maui as the community recovers from a devastating fire on August 8, 2023, with technical assistance provided by the National Laboratory of the Rockies. NLR has partnered with Hawaii-based community organizations to engage with Lahaina the community on energy priorities and inform the technical assistance scope. This virtual workshop presentation is the second in a two-part series to provide progress updates and request community input to guide next steps. Workshop 1 on November 18 focused on hydropower resource potential, building energy modeling, and workforce development. Workshop 2 on December 11 (this presentation) will focus on microgrids, electric grid hardening, policy and regulation.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2026

Lahaina Energy Partnership: Technical Assistance Task Updates and Discussion Part 1 [Slides]

The Lahaina Energy Partnership (LEP) is an initiative funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) to support energy planning and rebuilding efforts in Hawaii's historic town of Lahaina on Maui as the community recovers from a devastating fire on August 8, 2023, with technical assistance provided by the National Laboratory of the Rockies. NLR has partnered with Hawaii-based community organizations to engage with Lahaina the community on energy priorities and inform the technical assistance scope. This virtual workshop presentation is the first in a two-part series to provide progress updates and request community input to guide next steps. Workshop 1 on November 18 (this presentation) will focus on Hydropower resource potential, building energy modeling, workforce development. Workshop 2 on December 11 (presentation forthcoming) will focus on microgrids, electric grid hardening, policy and regulation.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2024

MARVEL Technical Overview: Breakdown of cost and scope growth through 90% Final Design

This report presents a breakdown of cost and scope growth for the Microreactor Applications Research Validation and Evaluation (MARVEL) project through the design phase, and includes observations, lessons learned, and the results from an independent project assessment. It presents the status and history of the project. Technology maturity is considered in high-level, qualitative comparison to other microreactor design efforts. Its purpose is to record MARVEL’s evolution and lessons learned from the planning and design phases through completion of 90% final design. Analyses included a detailed review of project cost, schedule, and periodic project reports and management documents. The Primary Coolant Apparatus Test (PCAT) is specifically highlighted. It was concluded that MARVEL would have benefited from more extensive planning early in the project to better define cost and schedule to provide more certainty in the total project cost and delivery date. Modest cost and schedule improvements may have been possible, but compared qualitatively, MARVEL’s total cost and schedule performance are consistent with that of other efforts currently underway. Better planning would have provided more certainty, improved risk mitigations, and potentially eliminated delays due to funding shortfalls. A recommended path forward is presented that addresses recommendations in the independent project assessment.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Survey and Gap Prioritization of U.S. Electric Vehicle Charge Management Deployments

The goal of this study was to survey and characterize the scope of current technical and programmatic knowledge pertaining to EV charge management technologies and practices in the US and relevant international jurisdictions. This characterization of existing field demonstrations and knowledge derived were used to determine gaps in the SCM demonstration landscape. Addressing these gaps through research and demonstration could increase confidence in the U.S. that load management and EV charge control could achieve overarching societal benefits. A survey of charge management deployments and input from stakeholders was completed to determine the state-of-the-art of smart charge management (SCM) where SCM is defined as controlling the amount of power exchanged between chargers and EVs to meet customers' charging needs while also responding to external power demand or pricing signals to provide load management, resilience, or other benefits to the customer and electric grid. The survey was the basis of the gap analysis in this report and determines which areas are well understood, with high confidence, and which areas need further investigation. Existing examples of EV charge management are characterized here to determine aspects that are ready for widespread deployment and have been demonstrated in the field. These include demonstration studies, pilots, programs, and EV-specific tariffs. In all, 110 examples of charge management were characterized. The data sources were public literature and utility filings as well as targeted interviews. In addition, 43 interviews with stakeholders were conducted with a consistent set of questions used in each interview. This study prioritized gaps in demonstrated SCM capabilities based on 1) Urgency of the particular use-case to offset traditional grid assets, 2) Impact, extensibility, and scaling of results across the entire spectrum of 3000+ utility service territories including projected technical and market potential for a given grid service, and 3) Value of federal funding in addressing the gap, including potential to leverage and/or add scope to existing field demonstrations funded by other non-federal funding mechanisms.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Conference Travel Fellowships: The 10th Annual International Conference on Multiscale Materials Modeling, Baltimore, Maryland, October 19-22, 2020 (Final Technical Report)

The original scope aimed to broaden participation in the 10th International Conference on Multiscale Materials Modeling (MMM 10) by supporting travel and accommodation for 10 junior scientists from U.S. Institutions. A funding request of $\$$10,000 was submitted to partially offset the cost of registration and local accommodation for these early-career participants. Since the award was made close to the date MMM 10 was to be held, we requested a no-cost extension to defer this travel support to the 11th International Conference on Multiscale Materials Modeling (MMM 11), which was held in Prague Congress Center in the Czech Republic. The scope of the travel award remained the same: supporting travel and accommodation for 10 junior scientists from U.S. Institutions.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2025

Demand Response in Residential Energy Code: Technical Brief

As buildings account for over 75% of U.S. electricity use, effectively managing their loads can greatly facilitate the transition towards a clean, reliable grid. Grid-interactive efficient buildings (GEBs) combine efficiency and demand flexibility with smart technologies and communication to provide occupant comfort and productivity while serving the grid as a distributed energy resource (DER). In turn, GEBs can play a key role in ensuring access to an affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern U.S. electric power system. Their national adoption could provide $\$$100-200 billion in U.S. electric power system cost savings over the next two decades. The associated reduction in CO 2 emissions is estimated at 6% per year by 2030 (DOE 2021). Building codes represent standard design practice in the construction industry and continually evolve to include advanced technologies and innovative practices. Historically, national model energy codes establish minimum efficiency requirements for new construction (ICC 2020). Expanding codes to support GEB capabilities is a pivotal step towards realizing demand flexibility in support of a clean grid by addressing capabilities to improve interoperability between smart building systems, the grid, and renewable energy resources. Realizing GEBs requires buildings with automated demand response (DR) capabilities that enable standardized communication with or control of, subject to explicit consumer consent, energy smart appliances or home energy management systems. This is achieved through direct or indirect (i.e., via an aggregator) communication between appliances and the electric grid. Energy codes can also support DR communication standardization and advance the deployment of building-integrated DERs such as energy storage, generation, and electric vehicles (EVs). Incorporating automated DR capabilities in energy codes provides many benefits to the consumers. Specifically, it aligns building electric load demand with intermittent renewable energy source availability, decreases peak load on the electric grid, allows buildings to respond to utility price signals, supports electrical network reliability and market growth of products and processes aligned with clean economic growth. The incorporation of DR into the model residential energy codes was considered for both the 2021 and 2024 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) code development cycles. The approved DR measures in the 2021 cycle were removed in response to appeals (ICC 2020). Updated language was presented for consideration again for the 2024 IECC, where it was negotiated and again approved, and again removed in response to appeals (ICC 2024). This resulted in many sections, including sections on demand responsive controls, being moved to the credits options or an appendix as a voluntary application. This technical brief updates the proposed DR components such that they can be considered by states and local governments for direct incorporation into their codes, as well as for future IECC energy code development. The proposal refinements are intended to support consistency in approach and provide a degree of certainty for building owners, designers, contractors, manufacturers, and building and fire safety professionals. The scope of this technical brief includes three strategies for DR in residential buildings: 1) smart thermostats with demand-responsive control, 2) electric water heating incorporating demand-responsive controls and communication and 3) grid Integrated solar and energy storage systems.

2021 IECC↗
DOE OSTI2025

A Microreactor Program Plan for The Department of Energy

The DOE Microreactor Program was established in FY 2019 to support research and development (R&D) of technologies related to the development, demonstration, and deployment of low-power, transportable reactors to provide power and heat for decentralized generation in civilian, industrial, and defense energy sectors. The program conducts both fundamental and applied R&D to de-risk technology performance and manufacturability readiness of microreactors. R&D projects and work packages are selected to support concept-neutral technology maturation. The intent is to ensure those concepts can be licensed and deployed by commercial entities to meet specific use case requirements. At the same time, the program will also support R&D specific to certain reactor technology groups (e.g., heat pipe reactors and gas-cooled reactors) to ensure relevancy and address the technology needs of commercial developers. The program will ensure coordination of work and activities across participating laboratories and universities, establish, and manage stakeholder interactions, and support program meetings. These stakeholders include, but are not limited to, industry developers, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Department of Energy, policymakers, and end users. This document provides an overview of the overall Microreactor Program, including its vision, key technical objectives, and scope of the current and proposed R&D portfolio. It covers a 5-year rolling currently from Fiscal year 2025 through Fiscal year 2030. This document will be revised at least biennially to reflect changing priorities.

99 - GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Enhancing the Useability of the IAEA's Physical Model: An Analysis of User Feedback

This study presents the results of Physical Model user interviews conducted with 12 people who have International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards experience. The goal of this report is to provide additional context for policy makers when prioritizing the needs of the IAEA regarding support for enhancements to the Physical Model. The interviews covered the general usability of the Physical Model, its effectiveness as a technical reference, and the scope and utility of the Physical Model's indicators and content. The key conclusions from these interviews are as follows: 1) The Physical Model is difficult to find and not well advertised. 2) The Physical Model can be difficult to use due to its format, which makes searching for information difficult, and lack of visual content. Therefore, the Physical Model should be supported in multiple formats (print, PDF, web) to maximize its usability for different stakeholders. 3) The scope of the Physical Model's content and indicators is likely sufficient, and translating indicators into other languages is unlikely to be worth the effort. 4) Despite its inefficiencies and other issues, the Physical Model in its current form is a vital (albeit under-utilized) resource for key stakeholders. 5) Despite its broad use case the Physical Model is not a catch-all tool and force-fitting the Physical Model into functions for which it has not been designed for would likely diminish its value. 6) It can be difficult to disentangle challenges related to the Physical Model and its usability from broader challenges at the Agency, such as general issues with communication and coordination. Based on these conclusions and considering the results of past studies on the Physical Model funded by NA-241, the analysis team developed a list of recommendations and associated actions for IAEA consideration. These recommendations are prioritized based on the assessed level of difficulty for the IAEA to implement a recommendation, emphasizing low hanging fruit then building to more ambitious changes to the Physical Model's format and content.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
DOE OSTI2023

43-0434 Bridge Inspection Report 2022

This report covers the inspection findings for the Routine Inspection of the Omega Bridge conducted on September 23-25, 2022 and the Fracture Critical Member (FCM) Inspection conducted on June 26-27, 2021. Note that due to complications with the under-bridge access unit, portions of the Routine Inspection and the entire FCM Inspection could not be completed in 2022. As a result, the superstructure condition reported herein is based on the 2021 inspection whereas the deck and substructure conditions are based on the 2022 inspection. The superstructure condition will be updated when the inspection is completed in 2023. The inspections were completed according to the standards referenced in EXHIBIT “D” SCOPE OF WORK AND TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS including the National Bridge Inspection Standards (23 CFR Part 650, dated 12/14/2004) and other FHWA, NMDOT, and AASHTO codes and standards.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2026

Optimizing Energy Use in Pulp & Paper with DOE’s Energy Intensive Industries Resources

The U.S. pulp and paper industry is the third-largest energy consumer in manufacturing, accounting for roughly 10% of sector energy use. Improving energy efficiency reduces operating costs and strengthens competitiveness. To support this effort, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), through Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), launched the Energy Intensive Industries (EII) Initiative. A two-year pilot across 45 industrial sites identified more than 4 trillion Btu/year in potential energy savings. This presentation outlines plans for a follow-up technical assistance program tailored to pulp and paper mills. Available resources include a cost-savings scoping tool, implementation planning guidance, and technical support for applying advanced methods such as Pinch Analysis for integrated process-utilities optimization. The session introduces key Pinch Analysis principles and highlights case studies demonstrating measurable improvements. ORNL also seeks industry feedback on barriers to efficiency improvements, including technology gaps and resource needs. DOE’s broader objective is to accelerate productivity and economic competitiveness across U.S. energy-intensive industries.

Kamath, Dipti [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000278739994)↗
DOE OSTI2020

Technical Issues in the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) Ratification Debate: A 20 Year Retrospective

Two decades after the U.S. Senate declined in 1999 to give its consent to ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), the treaty remains in legal and political limbo. Legally, the treaty cannot enter into force without U.S. ratification. However, the Senate’s rejection does not strip the treaty of its force as an element of customary international law or alter the will of other signatories to see it enter into force. Politically, the debate over the virtues and flaws of the treaty remains as strong as ever, with some CTBT advocates pushing energetically for U.S. re-review while some opponents seek ways to “un-sign” the treaty. Meanwhile, despite the Senate’s rejection of the treaty, the United States acts in a manner consistent with its main obligations by maintaining a moratorium on explosive nuclear testing and providing financial support (as well as technical expertise) to the CTBT Organization (CTBTO)—in particular the CTBTO’s International Monitoring System (IMS). The CTBT may well remain in such limbo for a long time to come, unless some catalytic event comes along to re-shape national perceptions and priorities, one way or the other. The treaty’s future, whatever it might be, will be determined in part by how much perspectives might have changed in light of interim developments. Our purpose is to shed light on some of those developments and to assess their relevance. The 1999 ratification debate addressed a large number of issues. Rejection was driven by various policy and technical judgments. The purpose of this paper is to re-examine those technical judgments in light of what has been learned over the following two decades. On some technical matters, there was explicit recognition of extant uncertainties, as well as a conviction and hope that time would dispel them. To be doubly clear, our purpose is not to recommend a way forward on CTBT ratification. The policy judgments of 1999 and 2020 are beyond the scope of this paper. This technical re-examination proceeds as follows. It begins with a short background section to introduce the key technical matters in discussion in the U.S. ratification process. Then it moves systematically through each of those topics with a review of relevant background information, a discussion of key points in debate, an analysis of subsequent experience, and a current assessment. The historical analysis draws on many sources including the primary documents of the Congressional debate, the official article-by-article interpretation by the Department of State, and the statements of key players in the process. We also relied on key technical reports and publications by subject matter experts that have addressed in more detail many of the issues in our focus. These sources include the 2002 and 2012 reports of the National Academy of Sciences as well as publications by senior technical staff of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) who were actively involved in the ratification debate, including then-Laboratory Director Bruce Tarter. We also conducted several interviews with government officials from the 1990s, past laboratory directors, and other members of the scientific community. But, except where individuals are specifically cited by name, the judgments offered here are our own and should not be attributed to any other individual or to LLNL as such.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
DOE OSTI2023

LAMP Technical Readiness Evaluation Report (Rev. 1)

An internal preliminary evaluation of Critical Technology Elements (CTEs) for the LANSCE Modernization Project (LAMP) was completed. Corresponding Technical Readiness Levels (TRLs) were also determined for all subsystems using the criteria of DOE G 413.3-4A, Technical Readiness Assessment Guide. The scope of the evaluation was limited to the project Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) elements as defined for the RFQ Injector and Drift Tube Linac (DTL) systems only. Integration of Instrumentation and Controls (I&C) and Safety Systems was not considered, although specific technologies as related to the RFQ and DTL systems were included. Other elements of the project such as Shielding, System Design, Technical Management, and additional facility integration needed to enable off-line testing and pre-installation commissioning were also not evaluated. Each technical subsystem element was evaluated for technical readiness, however, not all were found to meet the criteria for a CTE. Only two subsystem elements were determined to meet the CTE criteria. Their associated TRLs are summarized in the table below. These subsystem elements of the project have the lowest technical readiness due to either being new, novel or modified, requiring additional R&D before being capable of meeting the project Key Performance Parameters (KPPs) and subsystem requirements, or present technology exists but has not yet been demonstrated in a relevant environment. All other subsystems were determined to have a TRL of 8, indicating that actual operating systems exist having similar performance requirements as needed for LAMP. Details of the technical readiness evaluation for each subsystem is given in the following sections of this report.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Module D-PR Fuel Fabrication Preface to the D-Modules

Generic Technical Factors Affecting Fuel Fabrication. Many in-reactor physical, chemical, metallurgical, mechanical, thermodynamic, and nucleonic factors influence the design and functionality of nuclear fuel. Detailed discussion of these technical factors is beyond the scope of this cost-oriented preface document; however, the following three references are suggested for a more comprehensive discussion of fuel design requirements for both commercial and special use (military and remote location) reactors: IAEA-TECDOC-1686 (IAEA 2012), the World Nuclear Association webpage “Nuclear Fuel and its Fabrication (WNA 2020a), and INL/EXT-20-54641 (Mariani 2020). To aid the reader’s understanding of how design affects life cycle costs, a few technical factors are also briefly discussed in the sections below.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Technical and Licensing Considerations for Micro-Reactors

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has interacted with vendors pursuing the commercialization of micro-reactors (i.e., reactors capable of producing about 1 MW(th) to 20 MW(th) of energy from nuclear fission). It is envisioned that micro-reactors could be assembled and fueled in a factory and shipped to a site. Many of the sites are expected to be remote locations requiring off-grid power or in some cases military bases. The objective of this effort is to explore the technical issues and the approach required to reach a finding of "reasonable assurance of public health and safety" for this new and different class of reactors. The analysis performed here leverages available micro-reactor design and testing data available from national laboratory experience as well as commercial design information to explore technical issues. Some factors considered include source term, accidents that would need to be analyzed, and the extent of the probabilistic risk assessment (PRA). The technical evaluation was performed within the framework of the Licensing Modernization Project (LMP) to identify licensing basis events, classification of structures, systems and components, and defense-in-depth needed to provide regulatory certainty. With this framework and technical evaluation in mind, the scope and content of a micro-reactor licensing application is discussed.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Techno-Economic Analysis of Photovoltaics and Battery Storage for Maine [Slides]

Maine GEO was interested in a small-scale pilot using REopt to expand on previous resilience efforts and better understand the most useful information to gather from facilities to maximize the efficacy of the analysis. The pilot began with identification of three pilot facilities from the existing Maine Community Resilience Partnership (MCRP) cohort, selection of the facilities prioritizing: social vulnerability, community led planning work and commitment to ongoing work. The technical assistance focused on working with identified facilities to help scope the project and identify their goals and then provide technical specifications on optimal energy generation and storage strategies for each community. At the conclusion of the project, participating facilities received a REopt analysis report, including optimal generation and storage strategies to address identified goals and next steps and considerations for implementation.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2026

Phenomena Identification and Ranking Tables (PIRT) analysis of wind turbine blade leading edge erosion

Leading edge erosion (LEE) of wind turbine blades has been identified as a major factor in decreased wind turbine blade lifetimes and energy output over time. Accordingly, the International Energy Agency Wind Technology Collaboration Programme (IEA Wind TCP) has created the Task 46 Phase 2 to undertake cooperative research in the key topic of blade erosion. The purpose of Task 46 Erosion Phase 2 is to further improve understanding of erosion driving factors, develop datasets and model tools to enhance prediction of leading-edge erosion likelihood, identify damage at the earliest possible stage and advance potential solutions. The scope of work covers several technical areas, reflecting the multidisciplinary nature of the challenge. Participants in the task are given in Table 1.

17 WIND ENERGY↗