SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “CFR engine”

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.

At least 55 records · Page 3

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2024

INL High-Performance and Sustainable Building Strategy

High-performance buildings are reliable, cost effective, and sustainable structures that minimize energy and water use, reduce solid waste and pollutant emissions, and limit the depletion of natural resources. High-performance buildings also provide a thermally and visually comfortable working environment that increases productivity for building occupants. As Idaho National Laboratory (INL) is the nation’s premier nuclear energy research laboratory, the physical infrastructure requires continual updating and repurposing to help accomplish that mission. INL’s infrastructure must incorporate high-performance sustainable design features to be fiscally responsible and reflect an image of innovation to the public and prospective employees. INL is a large consumer of energy with annual energy costs exceeding $16M. This High-Performance and Sustainable Building Strategy will help engineering and construction project teams design sustainable facilities, reduce life cycle operating costs, and support the INL net-zero plan while providing INL employees with a safe and healthy working environment. With these goals in mind, the recommendations described in this document are intended to form INL’s foundation for sustainable and high-performance building standards. This strategy incorporates the latest federal and Department of Energy (DOE) orders and directives, including DOE Order 436.1A, “Departmental Sustainability,” the DOE Sustainability Plan (SP), the INL Site Sustainability Plan (SSP), and Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). This document identifies the requirements of the “Guiding Principles for Sustainable Federal Buildings” (Guiding Principles) and briefly highlights the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Gold certification. LEED Gold certification can be used to meet many of the requirements of the Guiding Principles.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Geothermal Hydraulic Stimulation: Overview of Methods and Best Practices

This paper outlines important information related to the hydraulic stimulation of geothermal wells and considerations for regulators responsible for evaluating applications to conduct these operations. Hydraulic stimulation applied to geothermal wells is an evolving technology that is different from the hydraulic fracturing process widely used to complete unconventional oil and gas wells. Important differences relate to operating pressures, variations in rock and fracture processes, and characteristics and disposal of hydraulic fracture fluids. Hydraulic stimulation is not widely used in the geothermal industry; however, future development of enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) will require hydraulic stimulation in order to enhance and create fracture permeability to allow wells to deliver sufficient heat and fluid to power plants. Gigawatts of EGS potential have been identified (U.S. Department of Energy 2019), so it is expected that the use of hydraulic stimulation of geothermal wells will be more common in the future. At present, there are no formal regulations guiding drilling programs or sundry notices that propose hydraulic stimulation of geothermal wells. On federal lands, important constraints and oversight are embedded in the process for obtaining Geothermal Drilling Permits outlined in the Code of Federal Regulations (43 CFR Section 3262.11); in Geothermal Resource Order 2 (GRO 2) guidance for assessment and mitigation of impacts of geothermal operations as well as construction and testing of geothermal wells; and in a Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Induced Seismicity Instruction Memorandum (BLM 2018). Additionally, local knowledge from BLM field offices and expertise of BLM engineers, or that of state regulators for operations on private and state lands, will be applied to fully assess operator applications to conduct geothermal hydraulic stimulation activities. Significant research effort has been directed toward EGS, so geothermal hydraulic stimulation techniques, impacts, and results are evolving and becoming better understood, including adaptation of decades of oil and gas industry experience with hydraulic fracturing of unconventional reservoirs. Recent EGS activities in the United States provide details about hydraulic stimulation with respect to oversight, stimulation design, execution, and results. Based on experience to date, the important issues to address when hydraulically stimulating a geothermal well include the following: 1. Wellbore construction and integrity must be appropriate to protect groundwater and manage stimulation pressures. 2. Understanding of lithology, faults, fractures, and subsurface stress state is necessary to design stimulation plans and predict results. 3. Seismic monitoring allows for observation and mitigation of induced seismicity.

geothermal↗

DOE OSTI2024

Routine & Nonredundant Steel Tension Member (NSTM) Inspection Report (Final): Property ID No. 43-0434 - Los Alamos Canyon Bridge

This report covers the inspection findings for the Routine and Nonredundant Steel Tension Member (NSTM) Inspection of the Los Alamos Canyon Bridge over Omega Rd conducted on June 7-9, 2024. The inspections were completed according to the standards referenced in DOE O 437.1 Bridge and Tunnel Management including the National Bridge Inspection Standards (23 CFR Part 650, dated 12/14/2004) and other Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), New Mexico Department of Transportation (NMDOT), and American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) codes and standards.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2020

Structural Analysis Approach for the Defense Programs Package 3 (DPP-3)

The Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) is the design authority for a new Type B hazardous materials transportation package designated as the Defense Programs Package 3 (DPP-3) for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). The DPP-3 has been developed using similar materials and fabrication methods employed in previous U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), DOE, and NNSA certified packages. The DPP-3 design criteria are derived from the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (BPVC), NNSA guidance and NRC regulatory guides in order to safely and securely transport a variety of payloads. Final regulatory approval by the NNSA will require physical testing to demonstrate that the containment vessel (CV) remains leaktight after enduring the entire regulatory testing sequence prescribed in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 71 (10 CFR 71). In order to gain confidence that the DPP-3 will remain leaktight after testing, the DPP-3 has been structurally analyzed using the Finite Element Analysis (FEA) software LS-DYNA. The FEA analyses serve two general purposes: first, they aid in design and development of the package, and second, they advise as to which drop orientations are expected to cause the most damage during regulatory testing. This paper will discuss how the design criteria are incorporated into analytical techniques needed to evaluate the FEA structural simulation results for 10 CFR 71 conditions to give confidence the DPP-3 testing campaign will be successful.

Sakalaukus Jr., Peter J.↗

DOE OSTI2023

Expansion of Hazards and Probabilistic Risk Assessments of a Light-Water Reactor Coupled with Electrolysis Hydrogen Production Plants

This report builds upon the body of work sponsored by the Department of Energy (DOE) Light-Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) Flexible Power Operation and Generation (FPOG) program that presented generic probabilistic risk assessments (PRAs) for the addition of a heat extraction system (HES) to light-water reactors to support the co-location of a high temperature hydrogen electrolysis facility (HTEF). Probabilistic and deterministic hazards assessments and risk analyses are leveraged throughout this report. Several improvements and new analyses are included in this report. First, higher amounts of detail in the specifications of the generic HTEFs are used to produce scaled results for a 100, 500, and 1000 MW nominal hydrogen production facility. An additional hazard assessment of 1000 kg of hydrogen storage is performed. The facility hazards and footprint are assessed to determine the safe distance required for placement near the nuclear power plant (NPP). Second, specific designs for corresponding HESs for the different levels of support required by the HTEFs are analyzed in the PRA model. Third, a hazards analysis of the specified HTEFs leads not only to effects of the quantified risk assessment for the NPP, but also qualitative hazards assessment for the community. Finally, a seismic analysis and a high winds analysis have each been added to the PRA. The results investigate the applicability of the potential licensing approaches which do not require a full United States (U.S.) Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licensing review. The PRAs are generic and include listed assumptions. The HTEF design built for this project has further eliminated many conservative assumptions from the prior PRAs in this series. The PRA results indicate that the 10 CFR 50.59 licensing approach is justified due to the minimal increase in initiating event frequencies for all design basis accidents, with none exceeding 7.7%. The PRA results for core damage frequency and large early release frequency support the use of NRC Regulation Guide 1.174 as further risk information that supports a change without a full licensing amendment review. The hazard analyses and PRA confirm the need for engineered blast barriers of storage tanks and the common production header leaving the HTEF. The hazards analyses and PRA also confirm with high confidence that using the assumptions of design in this report that the safety case for licensing an HES addition and an HTEF sited with its unprotected high-pressure stage components 187 meters from the NPP’s transmission towers (the most fragile structure, system, and component) is strong.

08 HYDROGEN↗

DOE OSTI2024

Regulatory Spike Testing of RPP-WTP LAW and HLW Glasses for Compliance with Land Disposal Restrictions, VSL-03R3760-1, Rev. 1

The United States Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Hanford site is the current location of storage of about 50 million gallons of mixed waste. This waste is stored in underground tanks at the Hanford site and is both a listed and characteristic waste, as defined in 40 CFR Part 261, and a dangerous waste according to Chapter 173-303 of the Washington Administrative Code (WAC). The waste is also subject to the Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) (40 CFR Part 268 and WAC 173-303-140). The River Protection Project - Waste Treatment Plant (RPP-WTP) will provide DOE with a means for treating this waste by vitrification (for subsequent disposal). The tank waste will be partitioned into low and high activity fractions, which will then be vitrified respectively into Immobilized Low Activity Waste (ILAW) and Immobilized High Level Waste (IHLW) products. The ILAW product will be disposed of in an engineered facility on the Hanford site while the IHLW product will be directed to the national deep geological disposal facility for high level nuclear waste. The ILAW and IHLW products must meet a variety of requirements with respect to protection of the environment.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2022

Test Report for DPP-1 Regulatory Compliance Testing. Volume 1 - Main Report

Consolidated Nuclear Security, LLC (CNS), the management and operating contractor for the Y-12 National Security Complex (Y-12) for the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), is currently responsible for the regulatory testing of a new Type B fissile material shipping package called the Defense Programs Package (DPP)-1. The DPP-1 is a drum packaging with an inner liner and a removable lid. Both the drum body and the lid are filled with an impact-limiting, thermal-insulating material that protects the inner containment vessel (CV) during normal conditions of transport (NCT) and hypothetical accident conditions (HAC) as defined by 10 US code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 71. In fiscal year 2021, the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Package Testing Program (PTP), located at the National Transportation Research Center (NTRC), conducted Type B performance tests as prescribed in Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 71 (10 CFR 71) on seven DPP-1 prototype units. This test report documents test unit (TU) preparation, pretest condition, conditioning of each TU, NCT and HAC testing, and posttest measurements and observations made of the damage resulting from these tests.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2023

TRANSPORTATION CONSIDERATIONS FOR USED FUEL AND ADVANCED NUCLEAR ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES

This study focuses on requirements and challenges pertaining to advanced transportable nuclear energy systems, which are currently in development and feature varying degrees of mobility. These reactors mostly use high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) fuel, and only limited refueling is required during their lifecycles. Due to the smaller source terms, higher burnup fuel, and potentially higher thermal efficiency involved, the waste inventory will be less than that generated by conventional light-water reactors. However, the relevant regulatory requirements must be met when transporting HALEU fuel (whether fresh or used) inside the reactor vessel—mainly the fuel material transportation, siting, and physical protection requirements outlined in US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations 10 CFR 71 and 73. Spent nuclear fuel (SNF), as well as irradiated fuel (used during any interval of reactor operation), contains highly radioactive materials that generate heat and necessitate special precautions during transportation. This study addresses the challenges that this incurs, and outlines potential solutions.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2022

System Analysis Modeling and Intermodal Transportation for Commercial Spent Nuclear Fuel

This is a technical presentation that does not take into account contractual limitations or obligations under the Standard Contract for Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and/or High-Level Radioactive Waste (Standard Contract) (10 CFR Part 961). For example, under the provisions of the Standard Contract, spent nuclear fuel in multi-assembly canisters is not an acceptable waste form, absent a mutually agreed to contract amendment.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2023

TRANSPORTATION CONSIDERATIONS FOR USED FUEL AND ADVANCED NUCLEAR ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2022

Equivalent Safety Evaluation of the 2021 Edition of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code to Editions Incorporated by Reference in 49 CFR 192, 193, and 195

Federal safety standards for natural gas and hazardous liquid pipelines and liquid natural gas facilities incorporate rules and requirements for boiler and pressure vessel design and fabrication into 49 CFR Parts 192, 193, and 195 through the IBR process. The equivalent safety evaluations documented in this report demonstrate that boilers and pressure vessels in pipeline facilities that are designed and fabricated in accordance with rules and requirements specified in the 2021 edition do not violate the fundamental safety assumptions stated or implied in the 2007 edition of the ASME BPVC and therefore provide equivalent safety.

03 NATURAL GAS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Semiannual Categorical Process Report - January Through June 2023

The Sandia National Laboratories, in California (SNL/CA) is a research and development facility, owned by the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration agency (DOE/NNSA). The laboratory is located in the City of Livermore (the City) and is comprised of approximately 410 acres. The SNL/CA facility is operated by National Technology and Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC (NTESS) under a contract with the DOE/NNSA. The DOE/ NNSA’s Sandia Field Office (SFO) oversees the operations of the site. North of the SNL/CA facility is the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), in which SNL/CA’s sewer system combines with before discharging to the City’s Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW) for final treatment and processing. The City’s POTW authorizes the wastewater discharge from SNL/CA via the assigned Wastewater Discharge Permit #1251 (the Permit), which is issued to the DOE/NNSA’s main office for Sandia National Laboratories, located in New Mexico (SNL/NM). The Monitoring and Reporting Condition 2.B of the Permit requires compliance with the semiannual reporting requirements contained in federal categorical pretreatment standards regulations (40 CFR 403.12). These regulations set numerical limits on the concentration of pollutants allowed to discharge from certain categories of industrial processes. This report is submitted to the City to satisfy this reporting requirement.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2026

Idaho National Laboratory CY 2025 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Analysis, Methodology, and Results for Radionuclides

This report details calculations of potential dose—at public receptor locations surrounding the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Site boundary and INL in-town facilities—from radionuclides reported to be in use and potentially emitted from INL facilities during calendar year (CY) 2025. All calculations were performed in accordance with the requirements of Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 40, “Protection of the Environment,” Part 61, “National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs),” Subpart H, “National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities” (40 CFR 61, Subpart H). Modeling methodology, model-input parameters, and contribution to dose by facility, source, and radionuclide at the maximally exposed individual (MEI) location are also discussed. The information in this report supports the “National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants—Calendar Year 2025 INL Report for Radionuclides” (DOE-ID 2026). During CY 2025, the estimated annual potential dose at the INL Site MEI location was 2.45E-02 mrem/yr, up from the previous year, but remaining far less than the regulatory standard of 10 mrem/yr (CFR 40 Part 61, Subpart H). Approximately 92% of the total dose to the INL Site MEI originated from Materials and Fuels Complex sources. Emissions from INL in-town facilities resulted in an estimated annual potential dose of 4.50E-03 mrem/yr to the MEI, down slightly from the CY 2024 estimated dose. Year-to-year variations in estimated annual dose can be attributed to adjustments in laboratory operations, changes to facility infrastructure, and variation in meteorological conditions.

42 - ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2024

Drop Analysis of Department of Energy Standard Canister with Fort Saint Vrain SNF

DOE manages over 300 types of SNF, most of which are located at the INL site. The Idaho Cleanup Project and INL are collaborating on the Road-Ready Capability Demonstration Project, which will develop and demonstrate the designs, technology, processes, and regulatory framework for packaging DOE-managed SNF at the INL site for ?road-ready dry storage?. ?Road-ready dry storage? is a SNF management concept where SNF is packaged into dry and sealed canisters, which are then placed in on-site storage in anticipation of later transportation. The forward-looking goal of the Demonstration is establishing the foundation for a large-scale road-ready dry storage program at the INL site. The Demonstration will first package Fort Saint Vrain SNF currently stored at INL into several DOE Standard Canisters. These Standard Canisters will then be loaded into another commercial transportation or storage containment system (e.g., storage cask or transportation package). The Standard Canister is a class of standardized canisters designed for containing the large variety of DOE-managed SNF during interim storage, transportation and/or disposal at a geological repository. One critical aspect of road-ready dry storage is the ability to license the DOE Standard Canisters and its associated transportation package to 10 CFR 71. Depending on the SNF and transportation strategy, the Standard Canisters may have to maintain structural integrity under normal conditions of transport and hypothetical accident scenarios (i.e., drop events). The Standard Canisters have been tested and analyzed under various SNF loading configurations and accident drop events in support of the Idaho Spent Fuel Facility and other DOE programs. However, no analysis has been completed to support the recent Demonstration. This analysis will consider the Ø0.5 m × 5.1 m Standard Canister under drop scenario(s) considered in previous INL tests and analyses, including the 9 m drop at 80 degree off vertical. However, this analysis will consider the more recent Fort Saint Vrain loading configurations proposed for the Demonstration. This analysis will performed using strain-based acceptance criteria established by the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section III, Division 3. It will be compared to previous analyses and form the foundation of further formal calculations that will be used to support licensing efforts of the road-ready dry storage system at INL.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2022

AERMOD Screening Dispersion Factors for INL Facilities

This engineering calculations and analysis report (ECAR) documents the calculation of screening level air dispersion factors (DFs) for use in identifying Idaho National Laboratory (INL) air pollutant sources that would not be of concern relative to state of Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) significant impact levels for toxic air pollutants (IDAPA 2020). A DF (in units of s/m 3 ) is the maximum time-averaged model-predicted air concentration (g/m 3 ) at an ambient-air receptor location divided by a unit source release or emission rate (1 g/s). DFs were calculated for a generic pollutant released from facilities at the INL Site and the Idaho Falls Research Education Campus (REC) using the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-recommended AERMOD air-dispersion model (EPA 2019a) and site-specific meteorological data. The use of AERMOD for air quality analyses is specified by EPA in Appendix W of 40 CFR Part 51, Guideline on Air Quality Models, and by DEQ in their air modeling guidance (DEQ 2013). DFs were calculated for 1-hour, 3 hour, 8-hour, 24-hour, monthly, and annual averaging times.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2020

Test Report for the Qualification Testing of the ORNL-SFC-W-1 Special Form Capsule

Three prototypes the ORNL-SFC-W-1 special form capsules (SFCs) of the same design were evaluated to determine if the requirements of Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 173.469, Tests for Special Form Class 7 (Radioactive) Materials, were met. The results of the special form tests are documented in this test report. This report describes the special form testing activities performed on the three ORNL-SFC-W-1 capsules. The test units were designated as TU-1, TU-2 and TU-3. TU-1 was subjected to leak testing, impact testing and percussion testing. TU-1 was leak tested using the leak rate test specified in 49 CFR 173.469(a)(4)(i). The impact test was conducted according to the requirements in 49 CFR 173.469 (b)(1). The percussion test that was carried out on TU-1 was conducted in accordance with 49 CFR 173.469 (b)(2). Both TU-2 and TU-3 were subjected to a leak rate test as specified in 173.469(a)(4)(i) and a heat test as specified in 49 CFR 173.469(b)(4). Each test unit was leak tested before and after these respective tests. The leak rate tests performed were helium back-pressure tests and bubble tests as specified in American National Standards Institute (ANSI) N14.5-2014.The measured leak rates were converted to standard condition leak rates as specified in American Society for Testing and Measurement (ASTM) E 493. The determined standardized leak rates obtained from the test and the calculations for all the test units met the requirements for special form certification. The testing was performed under the direction of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Package Testing Program (PTP).

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2026

Data for Greenhouse Gas Accounting Procedures in Low Carbon Fuel Policies Overlook the Spatial Variability of Miscanthus-Derived Sustainable Aviation Fuel

Low carbon fuel policies such as the U.S. Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), Canada Clean Fuel Regulations (CFR), and California Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) as well as the 45Z tax credit are intended to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from transportation. Cellulosic feedstocks, optimized biorefineries, and favorable farming locations can significantly reduce biofuel carbon intensity (CI). Despite advances in field-to-fuel GHG monitoring and flexibility in resource allocation within biorefineries (e.g., governing net electricity production), rigid CI accounting procedures in current policies may limit CI responsiveness across candidate sites and processing facilities. This work examines a hypothetical biomass-to-sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) pathway using miscanthus and alcohol-to-jet (i) to demonstrate how GHG accounting requirements drive estimates of biofuel CIs and (ii) to explore potential CI and financial implications of scenario-specific life cycle assessment (LCA). Results demonstrate that GHG accounting using the CFR/LCFS can reasonably account for distinct levels of net electricity production by a biorefinery, but only the CFR yields similar CI sensitivity to spatially explicit factors (feedstock CI, grid electricity CI) as scenario-specific LCA: most GHG accounting frameworks do not capture CI variation across candidate sites in the United States. Ultimately, this work demonstrates the importance of LCA methodological specifications in low carbon fuel policies and tax credits.

Miscanthus↗

DOE OSTI2020

Probabilistic Risk Assessment of a Light Water Reactor Coupled with a High Temperature Electrolysis Hydrogen Production Plant

Two generic probabilistic risk assessments (PRA) for the addition of a heat extraction system (HES) addition to a light water reactor (LWR) are performed, one for a pressurized water reactor (PWR) and one for a boiling water reactor (BWR). The results investigate the applicability of the potential licensing approaches which do not require a full U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licensing review. The PRAs are generic, and some assumptions are made. Many conservative assumptions from a the preliminary PWR PRA report were eliminated using design data for both the HES and the high temperature electrolysis facility (HTEF). The results of the PRA indicate that the 10 CFR 50.59 licensing approach is justified due to the minimal increase in initiating event frequencies for all DBAs, none exceeding 5.6%. The PRA results for CDF and LERF support the use of RG 1.174 as further risk information that supports a change without a full LAR. Further insights provided through hazard analysis and sensitivity studies confirm with high confidence that the safety case for licensing an HES addition and a HTEF sited at 1.0 km from the NPP is strong and that the placement of a HTEF at 0.5 km is a viable case. Site specific information can alter these conclusions.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗