Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “alternative compliance annual reporting”

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.

22 records · Page 2

Primer on the Cost of Marine Fuels Compliant with IMO 2020 Rule

This report aims to provide information for owners and operators of U.S. ocean-going marine cargo vessels on the cost of different approaches to compliance with the IMO mandate to reduce the sulfur content of marine fuels (outside emission control areas) to no more than 0.5%. The IMO 2020 rule came into effect on January 1, 2020. The report discusses a suite of options for compliance including low-sulfur petroleum-based fuels and alternative fuels. Since fuel prices are a primary factor in determining the cost of the various alternatives, the document also includes a discussion of the main drivers of marine fuel prices. The cost analysis compares the average annual costs (capital and fuel) out to 2050 of each compliance approach under alternative scenarios regarding fuel prices, policy, and technology innovation. The cost calculations focus on representative U.S. fleet vessels for containership and tanker types. Even though the analysis focuses on average cost of approaches to comply with IMO 2020, the comparison of approaches also acknowledges other benefits or risks including fuel price risk and the contribution of the approach to achieving other potential environmental performance objectives or regulations.

02 PETROLEUM↗

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants – Radionuclide Emissions Calendar Year 2020

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) operates the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) and the North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF). From 1951 through 1992, the NNSS was the continental testing location for U.S. nuclear weapons. Radionuclides in air from NNSS activities have been monitored since the initiation of atmospheric testing. After 1962, testing was limited to underground detonations, which greatly reduced radiation exposure to the public. Since the end of nuclear testing in 1992, radiation monitoring has focused on detecting airborne radionuclides from historically contaminated soils because this sources dominates the potential offsite dose. These radionuclides are derived from re-suspension of soil (primarily by wind) and emission of tritium-contaminated soil moisture through evapotranspiration. Low amounts of legacy-related tritium are also emitted to air at the NLVF, an NNSS support complex in North Las Vegas. To protect the public from harmful levels of manmade radiation, the Clean Air Act, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), specifically the National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other Than Radon From Department of Energy Facilities (40 CFR 61, Subpart H, 2020) limits the release of radioactivity from a DOE facility to that which would cause 10 millirem per year (mrem/y) effective dose equivalent (EDE) to any member of the public. This limit does not include radiation unrelated to NNSS activities. Unrelated doses could come from naturally occurring radioactive elements, from sources such as medically or commercially used radionuclides, or from sources outside of the United States, such as Japan’s Fukushima nuclear power plant, which was damaged in 2011. NNSA/NFO demonstrates compliance with the NESHAP limit by reporting environmental measurements of radionuclide air concentrations at critical receptor locations on the NNSS. This alternative was proposed and formerly submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 2001 (EPA 2001a) and has been the method used to demonstrate compliance with the 40 CFR 61.92 dose standard since 2005. Six locations on the NNSS have been established to act as critical receptor locations to demonstrate compliance with the NESHAP limit. These locations are closer to radionuclide releases than where the public resides so they act as protective substitutes for public receptor locations. Compliance is demonstrated if the measured annual average concentration is less than the NESHAP Concentration Level (CL) for Environmental Compliance listed in Table 2 of 40 CFR 61, Appendix E. For multiple radionuclides, compliance is demonstrated when the sum of the fractions (determined by dividing each radionuclide’s concentration by its CL and then adding the fractions together) is less than 1.0. The EPAapproved air transport model, called the Clean Air Package 1988 (CAP88-PC) is also used to calculate the effective dose equivalent to the maximally exposed individual from NNSS air emissions. CAP88-PC was also used to calculate the population dose, or the collective EDE (expressed as person-rem [roentgen equivalent man] per year [person-rem/y]) for all individuals combined who reside within 80 kilometers (km) of NNSS emission sources. In 2020, the potential dose from radiological emissions to air from both current and past NNSS activities was well below the 10 mrem/y dose limit. This is demonstrated by both the air sampling data collected at critical receptor air monitoring stations and CAP88-PC modeling. The average concentrations of radioactivity at air critical receptor stations ranged from 0.2% to a maximum of 4.2% of the allowed NESHAP limit. CAP88-PC modeling of all 2020 NNSS radionuclide emissions showed the maximally exposed individual to be in Amargosa Valley and this individual received a potential dose of 0.063 mrem/y. The collective dose was calculated to be 0.29 person-rem/year for the 521,300 people who lived within 80 km of NNSS emission sources.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Framework for Water Efficiency Measures

Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Framework for Water Efficiency Measures: Guidance Designed for Federal Agencies (hereafter referred to as “this report”) provides a technical framework for federal agencies to conduct a life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA) for water efficiency projects in accordance with 42 U.S.C. § 8253. This report leverages insights from the 2023 report, PNNL-34006, Water and Wastewater Annual Price Escalation Rates for Selected Cities Across the United States: 2023 Edition (Unger et al. 2023). The primary objective of this report is to provide a framework to assist federal agencies with evaluating the full economic impact of water efficiency projects by assessing both initial investments and long-term operational benefits. An LCCA can provide a comprehensive view of all costs associated with a water efficiency project, including initial investment, ongoing operations and maintenance (O&M), and eventual disposal or replacement, ensuring the most cost-effective solution is selected. The LCCA methodology outlined in this report enables users to compare base case scenarios with potential alternatives using a standardized present value approach. It incorporates key cost components such as energy, water and wastewater, installation, O&M, and equipment replacement. Additionally, the framework introduces relevant evaluation metrics, such as the net savings and the savings-to-investment ratio, to ensure that water efficiency measures are economically justified over the lifespan of the project. To support practical application, this report also describes various water efficiency strategies that may be analyzed using an LCCA, including plumbing retrofits, irrigation upgrades, alternative water use, and cooling system improvements. By applying this framework, federal agencies can ensure compliance with regulatory mandates while maximizing the return on investment and contributing to resilient water management practices. The information provided in this report is aligned with the Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) life-cycle cost (LCC) methodology, as conveyed in National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Handbook 135 (Kneifel and Webb 2022). This report is intended to provide relatively high-level guidance, acting as a complement to, rather than a substitute for, that resource.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

2021 Annual Site Environmental Report

This report provides the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the public with information on the level of radioactive and non-radioactive pollutants (if any) that are added to the environment as a result of Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory’s (PPPL) operations. The results of PPPL’s 2021 environmental surveillance and monitoring program are presented and discussed. The report also summarizes environmental initiatives, assessments, and community involvement programs that were undertaken in 2021. PPPL’s on-site operations were significantly curtailed in 2021 due to the global coronavirus pandemic. PPPL has engaged in fusion energy research since 1951. The Laboratory’s mission is to develop the scientific knowledge and advanced engineering to enable fusion to power the U.S. and the world, and to developing the understanding of plasmas from the nano- to the astrophysical scale. PPPL’s primary experiment, the National Spherical Torus Experiment-Upgrade (NSTX-U) is a collaboration among national laboratories, universities, and national and international research institutions and is a major element in the US Fusion Energy Sciences Program. Its design tests the physics principles of spherical torus (ST) plasmas, playing an important role in the development of smaller, more economical fusion reactors. Due to previous operational issues, NSTX-U did not operate in 2021. PPPL is engaged in a project to replace key NSTX-U components and systems to enable operation of this international fusion user facility. In 2021, PPPL’s radiological environmental monitoring program measured tritium in the air at the NSTX-U Stack and at onsite sampling stations. Using highly sensitive air monitors, PPPL is capable of detecting small changes in the ambient levels of tritium. The operation of an in-stack monitor located on D-site is used to demonstrate compliance with the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) regulations. Also included in PPPL’s radiological environmental monitoring program, are water monitoring – ground, surface, and waste waters. PPPL’s radiological monitoring program characterized the background levels of tritium in the environment and those data are presented in this report. Ground water monitoring continued under New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection’s (NJDEP) Site Remediation Program regulations. PPPL monitored for non-radiological contaminants, mainly volatile organic compounds (components of common degreasing solvents). In 2021, PPPL complied with permit limits for surface and sanitary discharges. PPPL was honored with awards for EPEAT-certified electronics purchasing and use of peracetic acid as an alternative water treatment chemical in its non-potable process water systems an NJDEP recycling award.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗