SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Regulatory documents”

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 OSTI2023

Addressing Regulatory Challenges to Tribal Solar Deployment: Key Findings

Tribal land in the United States represents approximately 2% of the country's total landmass and holds more than 5% of solar photovoltaic potential (Doris, Lopez, and Beckley 2013). This resource is largely untapped. Many Tribes note that regulatory challenges often are roadblocks to taking advantage of solar potential. This report serves as a summary of a larger project, Addressing Regulatory Challenges to Tribal Solar Deployment. The project seeks to unlock some of this potential by bringing Tribal, regulatory, utility, and other stakeholders together to articulate key barriers to Tribal solar adoption and develop replicable solutions. By increasing institutional capacity and developing frameworks, trainings, and a technical document repository for regulatory bodies, utilities, and Tribes, this project can help expand an emerging market.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2025

Digital Safety Analysis for Small Modular Nuclear Reactors (SMRs)

The licensing process for any nuclear installation generally requires the review and approval of numerous documents by a regulatory body. Alternate approaches are needed where similar nuclear installations are planned to be built and operated at multiple sites around the world. Such is the case for the deployment of small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) under development by multiple enterprises in multiple countries. As a use case for this paper, the authors propose an alternative to the Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) required by the United States Department of Energy (DOE) for the licensing of its nuclear installations. The DSA is a DOE construct that requires the review and approval of numerous documents. It includes an in-depth description of hazards, safe boundaries, and hazard controls.

Microreactors↗

DOE OSTI2024

Idaho National Laboratory Integrated Multisite SSHAC Level 3: Probabilistic Volcanic Hazards Assessment

The Idaho National Laboratory (INL) resides on the eastern Snake River Plain (ESRP), part of the Snake River Plain (SRP) with a complex origin and geologic history of volcanism. Much of the Quaternary (last 2.58 million years) volcanism within 400 km of INL is genetically associated with a major thermal anomaly referred to as the Yellowstone hotspot, which is currently located more than 180 km northeast of INL. Near INL, local volcanic sources include silicic domes near its southern border, and numerous dike-fed basaltic vents of the ESRP, some of which are near or within the INL boundaries. Quantitative probabilistic assessments of screened-in volcanic hazardous phenomena for nine different facility complexes at the INL are presented for a Senior Seismic Hazard Analysis Committee (SSHAC) Level 3 (SL3) study. The comprehensive, integrated multisite SSHAC study consists of a single regional Probabilistic Volcanic Hazards Assessment (PVHA) that pertains to all nine INL facility complexes, with site-specific information developed at each respective area of interest (AOI), referred to as the "INL facility AOI" (Figure ES-1). Hazard products are generated for specified INL facility AOIs for use by multiple stakeholders from different agencies in risk-informed decision-making regarding site selection, operations, and design of nuclear facilities at INL, consistent with U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulatory guidance. The study also serves as the basis for future periodic safety assessments required for existing DOE facilities, such as 10-year evaluations of natural-phenomena hazards. Elements of the INL PVHA including initial characterization, screening, quantitative assessments of eruption and hazard potential, and consideration of facility needs are conducted using the three phases of the SSHAC process: evaluation, integration, and documentation. As per regulatory guidance, the SSHAC framework provided the necessary processes and procedures for the PVHA Technical Integration (TI) team, at three workshops, five formal working meetings and many TI team remote meetings, to conduct initial characterization, screen the volcanic hazards, create PVHA model inputs, exercise those models in the PVHA, consider facility-specific volcanic hazard needs, and perform final hazard calculations. The Participatory Peer Review Panel (PPRP) provided independent oversight and performed process and technical reviews of the PVHA throughout its duration. The study included an extensive New Data Collection and Analyses (NDCA) program developed by the PVHA TI team to reduce uncertainties in hazard-significant elements in the PVHA model. NDCA activities generated 20 reports providing important contributory datasets and results to the project database for characterizing the ESRP. For example, a report compiling the dimensions of ESRP shield volcanoes and lava fields was used to construct volcanic footprints (areas of impact), was compared with data from INL subsurface cores, and was used to validate the results of lava-flow inundation modeling on the contemporary terrain. Another example is the acquisition of aeromagnetic data over INL and its surrounding area, with maps of buried magmatic features (e.g., subsurface volcanoes and swarms of feeder dikes) that informed the PVHA conceptual model of volcanism. The SSHAC evaluation process was used to conduct all elements of the PVHA including initial characterization and screening. Existing data and NDCA activities provided the foundation to develop the tectonomagmatic conceptual model of volcanism for the region of geographical interest in the SRP and Yellowstone hotspot volcanic system, and for considering volcanoes in the western US. Considering Quaternary volcanic sources active during this period, the screening approach identified and evaluated magma compositions, types of eruptive and intrusive phenomena, types of hazardous phenomena, and proximity of sources to INL. The PVHA TI team evaluated 18 types of magmatic sources in terms of 20 potentially hazardous phenomena, resulting in 360 screening decisions. The screening process resulted in 140 screened-in hazardous volcanic phenomena for Quaternary volcanic sources 1) proximal to INL facility complexes in the ESRP (64 basaltic and 54 silicic), 2) regional sources associated with the Yellowstone caldera system and Blackfoot Reservoir volcanic field (7), and 3) more distal sources from thirteen Cascade volcanoes and two volcanoes at Long Valley caldera (CA).

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

In-situ Detection of Glovebox Glove Degradation Prior to Glove Failure; Effects on Safety, Waste, and Operational Costs - 20402

Glovebox glove pressure decay leak testing and analysis of the data can greatly improve glovebox safety, minimize Transuranic (TRU) glove waste, and minimize operational cost. It is well known, the weakest point of containment on a glovebox is the glove. Mitigating unplanned openings in gloves is critical to minimizing operational and safety costs in glovebox operations. Mitigating unplanned glove openings due to glove failures will be discussed in this paper. The lack of an engineered solution to determine a gloves operational life in nuclear operations, has lead to use of theoretical and manual subjective methods to determine the life and safety of a glovebox glove. Whether the glove is inspected visually prior to use, or gloves are changed regularly to theoretically avoid failure, both the operators PPE and the room are being exposed to contamination, or un-necessary amounts of TRU glove waste are being generated. Millions of dollars yearly in operational costs are spent on glove failures due to loss of production, incident analysis, regulatory audits, clean up, and paperwork. In a nuclear application, a glove failure could contaminate an operator and laboratory, shut down the operation for weeks, potentially create a regulatory audit, and potentially create a media frenzy; the damages to the organization can be astronomical. Elimination of glove failures is possible by tracking glove material degradation and setting limits to allow glove change when it becomes necessary, prior to glove failure. Analytical pressure decay leak testing allows the detection of material degradation, and in turn the ability to limit operational glove failures. A German based company called MK Versuchsanlagen, e.K., has developed an advanced Glove Integrity Testing System. The system, with its use of proprietary RFID and special software technology, is unique in its capabilities. The system is capable to perform highly accurate regular glove testing on any size glovebox line in minimal time. The system records and can analyze a tremendous amount of system data that in turn can determine, for example, a safe glove change time prior to a glove material failure. This paper will show how an advanced Glove Integrity Testing System can detect glove material degradation and help determine a safe change point prior to glove failure. Pressure decay curves of new gloves and recorded effects of accelerated aging on the glove over time will be shown. The use of this technology in nuclear facilities can greatly improve glovebox operational safety, minimize glovebox glove TRU waste, and save organizations tremendous costs in downtime, clean up, documentation, and potential regulatory review. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2021

Understanding the Environmental Study Life Cycle in the United States Hydropower Licensing and Federal Authorization Process

We analyzed United States Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) documents prepared for 29 recently licensed hydropower projects and created two novel datasets to improve understanding of the environmental study life cycle, defined here as the process that begins with an environmental study being requested by a hydropower stakeholder or regulator, and ends with the study either being rejected or approved/conducted. Our two datasets consisted of summaries of information taken from (1), study determination letters prepared by FERC for 23 projects that were using the integrated licensing process, and (2), environmental study submittals and issuances tracked and attributed to seven projects using the FERC record. Our objective was to use the two resulting environmental life cycle datasets to understand which types of environmental studies are approved, rejected, and implemented during FERC licensing, and how consistently those types of studies are required across multiple hydropower projects. We matched the requested studies to a set of 61 river function indicators in eight categories and found that studies related to the category of biota and biodiversity were requested most often across all 29 projects. Within that category, studies related to river function indicators of presence, absence, detection of species and habitat/critical habitat were the most important to stakeholders, based on the relative number of studies requested. The study approval, rejection, and request rates were similar within each dataset, although the 23 projects with study determination letters had many rejected studies, whereas the dataset created from the seven projects had very few rejected studies.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

NASA NTRS2018

Automated Collision Avoidance (ACA) and Automated Return to Course (ARTC) Requirement and Guidance Review: Final

This report's objectives were to review regulatory and guidance documents to identify requirements and considerations for the design and operation of automated systems that perform the functions of automated collision avoidance (ACA) and/or automated return to course (ARTC). The importance of this work is twofold: 1) to help focus efforts addressing new automated collision avoidance and return to course systems requirements and considerations, and 2) in pulling together available requirements from multiple sources, generate a master resource for these automated system requirements and considerations. Reviewed documents include regulations, industry standards and research papers that specifically address ACA and ARTC systems, other automatedl control and guidance systems, ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) and Eurocontrol documents.

Automation↗

DOE OSTI2024

Proactive Regulatory Approaches to Electrification and Load Growth: Pre-read Document to Support the July 10-11 th Workshop

This document summarizes objectives and context related to a DOE-funded workshop on proactive regulatory approaches to electrification and load growth. It briefly summarizes some of the regulatory barriers to pursuing a proactive approach and some of the risks associated with such an approach. It then summarizes a selection of recent utility proposals and public utility commission actions related to proactive approaches.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2020

Vendor-Independent Design Requirements for a Boiling Water Reactor Safety System Upgrade

This Vendor-Independent License Amendment Request (LAR) Framework Document is a research product developed for the Idaho National Laboratory Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) Program. It was developed by MPR Associates, Inc. with technical input from LWRS and Exelon Generation personnel. To accomplish the purpose of this research, an operating plant (Limerick Generating Station [LGS]) was used as a reference to provide a concrete example and to present a "top-down" view of design concepts consistent with functional requirements baseline documents (references X and Y) also developed for this research. While this document is written in a framework to support a complete LAR submittal, its purpose is to communicate research concepts and provide an example of how to present digital information necessary to address expectations with regard to leveraging the Alternate Review Process as provided in Digital Instrumentation and Controls Interim Staff Guidance #06, Revision 2, Licensing Process. To leverage that process, this research document presupposes that a utility would select a vendor platform which has been prequalified for safety-related by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. While this document is written using the Exelon Generation Limerick Generating Station (LGS) Units 1 and 2 as a baseline, this document is a research product. This document contains no commitments and makes no binding design decisions for Exelon Generation. Exelon Generation is leveraging this research to support their in-progress LGS Plant Protection System (PPS) upgrade efforts and plans to leverage it for their Redundant Reactor Control System (RRCS) replacement. The LWRS Program appreciates the research support provided by Exelon Generation in the generation of this document.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗

DOE OSTI2024

Definition and Execution of Regulatory requirements for acceptance of the Whooshh Fish Transport System (Abstract)

The purpose of this project is to assist in the definition, summarization, and execution of the regulatory requirements that validate the Whooshh Fish Transport System (WFTS) as an accepted method of fish passage transport for Endangered Species Act- (ESA) listed species; moving these fish past in-stream barriers, such as hydropower facilities. Validation of this technology, through testing by PNNL, means that regulatory agencies will have documented evidence from which to support an approval decision enabling Whooshh to quickly commercialize their product for use in waterways with ESA listed species and provide the hydropower relicense/development marketplace a viable solution to the fish passage problem that threatens the hydropower industry. Given the definition of “take” in the ESA, without validation, commercialization in this space in the U.S. will not happen because the regulatory agencies will not have the determinative study results they require to authorize the use of this new technology that interact with ESA-listed species.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2021

Impact of Extreme Weather Events on Physical Protection System Effectiveness for a Hypothetical Small Modular Reactor Facility: Systems Analysis and Considerations

This report will summarize the group's work to provide recommendations to secure nuclear facilities before, during and after an extreme weather event. Extreme weather events can have drastic impacts to nuclear facilities as seen by the earthquake and subsequent tsunami at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in 2011. Recent hurricanes in the United States including Hurricane Harvey demonstrate the devastating effects these storms can have on infrastructure and the surrounding communities. The group is attempting to identify the gaps that potential small modular reactor (SMR) facilities will need to address in order to provide adequate site security before, during and after extreme weather events. This effort proceeded in three parts to provide insights and recommendations to secure Small Modular Reactor facilities for extreme weather events:(1) a literature review of academic articles as well as relevant documents including the existing regulatory framework and recommendations from the IAEA, NRC, and DOE, (2) subject matter expert interviews from a wide variety of security backgrounds, and (3) modeling and simulation on a hypothetical SMR facility. Special attention was paid to the interactions between stakeholders and nuclear facility design considerations, particularly the topics of safety and security. Engineering design issues from safety and security perspectives were discussed and included in simulation. Each step informed the proceeding, with the result including full tabletop scenarios of EWE impacts to security system effectiveness on the hypothetical model. This systems-level analysis provides results to inform recommendations to secure SMR facilities.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2022

Results of Re-evaluation of FEPs Related to Implementing the ABD Glass Program

The Savannah River Site plans to reprocess defense spent nuclear fuel currently stored in their L-Basin via the Accelerated Basin Deinventory (ABD) Program. The previous plan for the L-Basin spent nuclear fuel was to dispose of it directly in the federal repository without reprocessing. Implementing the ABD Program will result in final disposal of approximately 900 fewer canisters of defense spent nuclear fuel and the production of approximately 521 more canisters of vitrified high-level waste glass with some specific differences from the planned high-level waste glass. Because the 235U in the L-Basin spent nuclear fuel is not intended to be recovered, the fissile mass loading of the vitrified high-level glass waste form to be produced must be increased above the current value of 897 g/m 3 to a maximum of 2,500 g/m 3 . Therefore, implementing the ABD Program would produce a variant of high-level waste glass—the ABD glass—that needs to be evaluated for future repository licensing, which includes both preclosure safety and postclosure performance. This report describes the approach to and summarizes the results of an evaluation of the potential effects of implementing the ABD Program at the Savannah River Site on the technical basis for future repository licensing for a generic repository that is similar to Yucca Mountain and for one that is fully generic. This evaluation includes the effects on preclosure safety analyses and postclosure performance assessment for both repository settings. The license application for the proposed Yucca Mountain repository (DOE 2008), which is serving as a framework for this evaluation, concluded that the proposed Yucca Mountain repository would meet all applicable regulatory requirements. The evaluation documented in this report found that implementing the ABD Program is not expected to change that conclusion for a generic repository similar to Yucca Mountain or for a generic repository with respect to the preclosure safety analyses. With respect to the postclosure performance of a generic repository, no concerns were identified.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2024

MARVEL Reactor Fuel Performance Report (Rev.2)

The Microreactor Applications Research Validation and EvaLuation (MARVEL) project is producing a high temperature liquid metal-cooled nuclear test bed at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) to ultimately improve the integration of microreactors to end-user applications. This ambitious effort seeks to design, authorize, construct, test, and operate the reactor within five years. In order to construct and operate the MARVEL reactor in a timely manner, the system will utilize materials and component designs which have already been used, qualified, or licensed from previous reactors. The MARVEL reactor will be located at the INL Transient Reactor Test (TREAT) facility in the north high-bay equipment pit and will use the existing 304 stainless steel-clad U-ZrH1.6 pin-type fuel system developed by General Atomics and purchased from TRIGA International. This fuel has been previously qualified under the United States Department of Energy’s (US DOE) Reduced Enrichment for Research and Test Reactors (RERTR) Program. Even though the regulator of the MARVEL reactor is the US DOE, the standards and overall approach recommended by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is well-defined and utilized here. Following NUREG-1537 regulatory guidance, this report documents the authorization case for the MARVEL fuel system’s application to MARVEL and establishes stable and predictable fuel performance during the most thermophysically unfavorable conditions achievable in the MARVEL reactor. To that end, this report provides a comprehensive survey of the known thermophysical properties, performance, and quantitative relationships associated with the MARVEL reactor fuel element and uses this information to determine its mechanical integrity and risk of reaching unacceptable conditions during the most extreme accident scenarios predicted for the reactor using the most conservative assumptions available. The information contained herein is compiled from a combination of historical reports and peer reviewed scientific publication manuscripts. Known mechanisms under which the fuel is susceptible to failure are highlighted and compared to conditions that could exist in the MARVEL reactor during an unanticipated transient or accident scenario. The two scenarios considered for analysis in this report are (1) an unprotected loss of flow accident and (2) a hypothetical unprotected loss of coolant accident during the loss of flow accident. Preliminary 2D steady-state analyses herein indicate that both fuel-cladding chemical interactions and fuel-cladding mechanical interactions are negligible throughout the fuel’s operational cycle under both normal and high temperature accident scenario conditions. Although higher fidelity 3D time-dependent modeling and simulations are planned, the following may be concluded presently. The MARVEL fuel element maintains its geometric stability and structural integrity during the most extreme accident scenarios predicted for the MARVEL reactor. The hoop stress during the unprotected loss of flow accident reaches about -1.27 MPa; this negative stress indicates that it is compressive rather than tensile. The compressive stress is a result of the NaK pressure on the outside of the fuel element, caused by the restricted thermal expansion of the NaK coolant, exceeding the internal pressures generated inside of the fuel element. The hoop stress generated in the cladding during the unprotected loss of coolant accident reaches a maximum of about approximately 10 MPa, which is nearly an order of magnitude less than the predicted yield strength of the cladding under high-temperature accident scenario conditions. Calculations were compared with results from high performance computational simulations using BISON and are in very close agreement. A conservative MARVEL fuel meat peak temperature limit of 900 °C is recommended presently, which is about 180 °C higher than the peak fuel temperature predicted to occur during the most extreme accident. Based on the known properties and behavior of the MARVEL fuel element, the fuel successfully meets its design and safety requirements under normal and most extreme accident conditions with a large safety margin.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2024

Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Support for Probabilistic Fracture Mechanics

In this research, artificial intelligence and machine learning (ML) methods are used to search an uncertain parameter space more efficiently for the most important inputs with respect to response sensitivities. These methods are applied to the Extremely Low Probability of Rupture (xLPR) probabilistic fracture mechanics code used at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in support of nuclear regulatory research. This report documents two separate but related sub-tasks: (1) ranking important uncertain input features with respect to target outputs, determined by convergence in confidence intervals for increasing sample sizes using simple random sampling; and (2) implementation of a reduced-order surrogate model for fast, approximate sample generation. Unoptimized readily available off-the-shelf ML models were used in both sub-tasks.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2026

MARVEL Reactor Fuel Performance Report

11 - NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2025

Application of Electrochemical Methods to Molten Salt Reactors: Draft TLR Documenting Assessment of Electrochemical Monitoring

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is developing the regulatory framework and technical expertise to support regulatory review of advanced non-water reactors, including molten salt reactors (MSRs). In an MSR, it is essential that the salt chemistry be maintained in a desired range in terms of redox potential for reliable operation and mitigation of corrosion to structural materials in the reactor, particularly the reactor vessel and heater exchanger. Measuring the redox potential of the salt in the reactor would also allow for the material lifetimes to be predicted more accurately, and chemical issues to be diagnosed more quickly. In addition to the chemical composition analysis by ICP-MS, electrochemical methods including potentiometry and linear wave scanning (LSC) were also used in molten salt reactor experiment (MSRE) for redox potential monitoring purposes. Electrochemcial methods offers unique advantages such as quick turnaround in results and unique capability of in-line monitoring of redox potential, and are considered popular electroanalytical techniques that can be used to monitor redox potentials and salt chemistry including impurities. The last two decades have seen significant advances in science and engineering of electrochemical methods for potential application to molten salts. The primary goal of this report is to assist NRC in understanding the monitoring of the salt chemistry by electrochemical methods and provide NRC reviewers with necessary information and tools to support regulatory review of MSR designs. This reports consists of two majors parts—Part 1, chemical potential of molten salts and effects by fission process in MSR; Part 2, assessment of electrochemical methods for application to MSRs. The TRLs of the typical relevant electrochemical methods for molten salts were evaluated based on the DOE TRL guidelines and upon a review of the current status of the electrochemical methods for two typical salt systems, fluoride and chloride, for MSRs.

11 - NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2023

HarDWR - Raw Water Rights Records

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. In order to hold a water right in the western United States, an entity, (e.g., an individual, corporation, municipality, sovereign government, or non-profit) must register a physical document with the state's water regulatory agency. State water agencies each maintain their own database containing all registered water right documents within the state, along with relevant metadata such as the point of diversion and place of use of the water. All western U.S. states have digitized their individual water rights databases, along with the geospatial data describing the spatial units where water rights are managed. Each state maintains and provides their own water rights data in accordance with individual state regulations and standards. We collected water rights databases from 11 western United States states either by downloading them from publicly accessible web portals, or by contacting state water management representatives; detailed descriptions of where and when the data was collected is provided in the README.txt, as well as Lisk et al.(in review). This collection of data are those raw water rights. Each state formats their data differently, meaning that file types, field availability, and names vary from state to state. Note, the data provided here reflects the state of the water rights databases at the time we collected the data; updates have likely occurred in many states. Some pieces of information are common among all states. These are: priority date, volume or flow of water allowed by the right, stated water use of the right, and some means of identifying the geography and source of the water pertaining to the right - typically the coordinates of the Point of Diversion (PoD) of a waterbody or well. Arizona regulates water in a different way than the other 10 states. Outside of some relatively small critical agricultural areas called Active Management Areas (AMAs), Arizona does not maintain any water rights. However, the state does require registration of surface and groundwater pumping devices, which includes disclosing the mechanical specifics of the devices. We used these records as a proxy for water rights. Each state, and their respective water right authorities, have made their water right records available for non-commercial reference uses. In addition, the states make no guarantees as to the completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of their respective databases, let alone the modifications which we, the authors of this paper, have made to the collected records. None of the states should be held liable for using this data outside of its intended use. In addition, the following states have requested specifically worded disclaimers to be included with their data. Colorado: "The data made available here has been modified for use from its original source, which is the State of Colorado. THE STATE OF COLORADO MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTY AS TO THE COMPLETENESS, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, OR CONTENT OF ANY DATA MADE AVAILABLE THROUGH THIS SITE. THE STATE OF COLORADO EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. The data is subject to change as modifications and updates are complete. It is understood that the information contained in the Web feed is being used at one's own risk." Montana: "The Montana State Library provides this product/service for informational purposes only. The Library did not produce it for, nor is it suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Consumers of this information should review or consult the primary data and information sources to ascertain the viability of the information for their purposes. The Library provides these data in good faith but does not represent or warrant its accuracy, adequacy, or completeness. In no event shall the Library be liable for any incorrect results or analysis; any direct, indirect, special, or consequential damages to any party; or any lost profits arising out of or in connection with the use or the inability to use the data or the services provided. The Library makes these data and services available as a convenience to the public, and for no other purpose. The Library reserves the right to change or revise published data and/or services at any time." Oregon: "This product is for informational purposes and may not have been prepared for, or be suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Users of this information should review or consult the primary data and information sources to ascertain the usability of the information." The available data is provided as a series of compressed files, which each containing the full data collected from each state. Some of the files have been renamed, to more easily know which state the data belongs to. The file renaming was also required as some files from different states had the same name. In other cases, the data for a state has been placed in a folder indicating which state it belongs to - as the state organized its data by selected subregions. Below is a brief description of the format of the collected data from each state. ArizonaRights_StatementOfClaimants: A folder containing a database of interconnected CSV files. The soc_erd.pdf file contains a visual flowchart of how the various files are connected, beginning with SOC_MAIN.csv in the center of the page. ArizonaRights_SurfaceWaterRightsData: A folder containing a database of a single Shapefile and 10 associated CSVs. SurfaceWater.pdf contains a visual flowchart of how the various files are connected, beginning with ADWR_SW_APPL_REGRY.csv. ArizonaRights_Well55Registry: A folder containing a database of a single Shapefile and 59 associated CSVs. Wells55.pdf contains a visual flowchart of how the various files are connected, beginning with WellRegistry.shp. CaliforniaRights_eWRIMS_directDatabase: A folder containing a collection of four "series" Microsoft Excel files, as either XLS or XLSX. The four "series": byCounty, byEntity (what type of legal entity holds the right), byUse (stated water use), and byWatershed, are various methods by which the California water rights are organized within the state's database. However, it was observed that by only collecting a single series, not all water rights were being provided. So, essentially, the majority of records within each "series" are copies of each other, with each "series" containing some unique records. ColoradoRights_NetAmounts: A folder containing 78 CSV files, with one file per Colorado Water District. IdahoRights_PointOfDiversion: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Idaho. IdahoRights_PlaceOfUse: A Shapefile containing the Place of Use polygons for the entire state of Idaho. MontanaRights_WaterRights: A Geodatabase file containing the Points of Diversion and Places of Use for the entire state of Montana. The name of the Points of Diversion Feature Layer within the Geodatabase is "WRDIV", and the name of the Places of Use Feature Layer is "WRPOU". NevadaRights_POD_Sites: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Nevada. NewMexicoRights_Points_of_Diversion: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of New Mexico. OregonRights_state_shp: A folder containing 36 Shapefiles and are split between "pod" (Point of Diversion) and "pou" (Place of Use) for each water management basin within Oregon. In other words, each basin has one "pod" file and one "pou" file. The "pod" files are point shapes, and the "pou" files are polygons. UtahRights_Points_of_Diversion: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Utah. WashingtonRights_WaterDiversions_ECY_NHD: A Geodatabase file containing both the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Washington. The name of the Feature Layer within the Geodatabase is "WaterDiversions_ECY_NHD". WyomingRights: A folder containing four subdirectories, one for each Wyoming Water Division. Each Division directory includes a varying number of subdirectories for each Wyoming Water District. Each District folder contains two copies of the Point of Diversion records for that area, with one copying being in CSV and one copy in Microsoft Excel XLS format.

Lisk, Matthew↗

DOE OSTI2020

HarDWR - Raw Water Rights Records

A dataset within the Harmonized Database of Western U.S. Water Rights (HarDWR). For a detailed description of the database, please see the meta-record v2.0. Changelog v2.0 - Switched source data from collecting records from each state independently to using the WestDAAT dataset v1.0 - Initial public release Description In order to hold a water right in the western United States, an entity, (e.g., an individual, corporation, municipality, sovereign government, or non-profit) must register a physical document with the state's water regulatory agency. State water agencies each maintain their own database containing all registered water right documents within the state, along with relevant metadata such as the point of diversion and place of use of the water. All western U.S. states have digitized their individual water rights databases, as well as geospatial data defining the areas in which water rights are managed. Each state maintains and provides their own water rights data in accordance with individual state regulations and standards. In addition, while all states make their water rights publicly available, each provides their records in unique formats, meaning that file types, field availability, and terms vary from state to state. This leads to additional challenges to managing resources which cross state lines, or conducting consistent multi-state water analyses. For the first version of HarDWR, we collected the water rights databases from 11 Western States of the United States. In order to preform regional analyses with the collected data, the raw records had to be harmonized into one single format. The Water Data Exchange (WaDE) is a program dedicated to the sharing of water-related data for the Western U.S. in a singular consistent format. Created by the Western States Water Council (WSWC) to facilitate the collection and dissemination of water data among WSWC's member states and the public, WaDE provides an important service for those interested in water resource planning and management in their focus region. Of the services which WaDE provides, the one of the most interesting is the WestDAAT dataset, which is a collection of water rights data provided by the 18 WSWC member states that have been standardized into a single format, much like we had done on a more limited scale with HarDWR v1. For this version of HarDWR we decided to use WestDAAT, specifically a snapshot created in Feburary 2024, as our water rights source data. A full explanation of the benefits gained from this switch can be found in the description of the updated Harmonized Water Rights Records v2.0, but in short it has allowed us to focus more of our efforts on answering research questions and gaining a more realistic understanding of how water rights are allocated. For more information on how the data for WestDAAT was collected, please see the WaDE data summary. Terms of Use While WaDE works directly with the state agencies to collect and standardize the water rights records, the ultimate authority for the water rights data remains the individual states. Each state, and their respective water right authorities, have made their water right records available for non-commercial reference uses. In addition, the states make no guarantees as to the completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of their respective databases, let alone the modifications which we, the authors of this paper, have made to the collected records. None of the states should be held liable for using this data outside of its intended use. As several of the states update their water rights databases daily, the information provided here is not the latest possible, and should not be used for legal purposes. WestDAAT itself has irregular updates. Additional questions about the data the source states provided should be directed to the respective state agencies (see methods.csv and organization.csv files described below). In addition, although data was presented here was not collected directly from the states, several states requested specifically worked disclaimers when sharing their data. These disclaimers are included here as an acknowledgement from where the water rights data is primarily sourced. Colorado: "The data made available here has been modified for use from its original source, which is the State of Colorado. THE STATE OF COLORADO MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTY AS TO THE COMPLETENESS, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, OR CONTENT OF ANY DATA MADE AVAILABLE THROUGH THIS SITE. THE STATE OF COLORADO EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. The data is subject to change as modifications and updates are complete. It is understood that the information contained in the Web feed is being used at one's own risk." Montana: "The Montana State Library provides this product/service for informational purposes only. The Library did not produce it for, nor is it suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Consumers of this information should review or consult the primary data and information sources to ascertain the viability of the information for their purposes. The Library provides these data in good faith but does not represent or warrant its accuracy, adequacy, or completeness. In no event shall the Library be liable for any incorrect results or analysis; any direct, indirect, special, or consequential damages to any party; or any lost profits arising out of or in connection with the use or the inability to use the data or the services provided. The Library makes these data and services available as a convenience to the public, and for no other purpose. The Library reserves the right to change or revise published data and/or services at any time." Oregon: "This product is for informational purposes and may not have been prepared for, or be suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Users of this information should review or consult the primary data and information sources to ascertain the usability of the information." File Descriptions The unmodified February, 2024 WestDAAT snapshot is composed of nine files. Below is a brief description of each file, as well as how they were utilized for HarDWR. WaDEDataDictionaryTerms.xlsx: As the file's name implies, this is a data dictionary for all of the below named files. This file describes the column names for each of the following files, with the exception of citation.txt which does not have any columns. The descriptions for each file are divided by tab,with the same name as their associated file, within this document. allocationamount.csv: The "main" file of the group, it contains the water right records for each state. Of particular note, each water right is broken down into one or more water allocations. Allocations may be withdrawn from one or more locations, or even multiple allocations associated with a particular location. This is a more subtle and realistic representation of how water is used than what was available in the first version of HarDWR. For the records from some states, this can mean that multiple allocations listed under a single right will appear as rows within this file. citation.txt: A combination of contact information for WaDE personnel, disclaimer about how the data should be used, and guidelines for citing WestDAAT. methods.csv: A file describing the source and method by which WaDE collected water rights data from each state. organization.csv: A file listing the water rights authoritative agencies for each state. sites.csv: This file provides the geographic, and other descriptors, of the physical location of allocations, called 'sites'. To reiterate, it is possible for one allocation to be associated with multiple sites, as well as one site to be associated with multiple allocations. The two descriptors which we were most interested in where the site's coordinates, as well as whether the site was classified as a Point of Diversion (POD) or a Place of Use (POU). As a general rule, PODs are geographic points, while POUs are areas typically represented as property boundaries or irregularly shaped polygons. sites_pouGeometry.csv: For those allocations with a POU site, this file contains the defining points for the associated polygons. variables.csv: A file describing the units in which an allocation's water amount is reported within WestDAAT. This information is essentially a repeat of the 'AllocationFlow_CFS' and 'AllocationVolume_AF' columns within allocationamount.csv, at least for our purposes. watersources: This file describes the source of water from which each site extracts from. For our purposes, this table was used to determine whether the water came from Surface Water, Groundwater, or Unspecified Water.

Lisk, Matthew↗

DOE OSTI2026

Evaluation of AI-enabled Digital Documented Safety Analysis

The National Reactor Innovation Center (NRIC) is leading a transformative initiative to accelerate advanced reactor deployment by fundamentally reimagining how nuclear safety basis documentation is developed, reviewed, and maintained. Traditional Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) processes for DOE-authorized facilities rely on static, document-centric workflows that consume significant time and resources, exemplified by recent major licensing efforts requiring hundreds of thousands of staff hours and millions of pages of documentation review. These conventional approaches create barriers to the rapid, cost-effective deployment of advanced reactors that America's future energy needs demand. NRIC's DOE Authorization Digital Transformation Project addresses these challenges through an innovative framework that integrates artificial intelligence (AI), digital engineering, and systems-based data management into a cohesive digital ecosystem. This white paper presents NRIC's methodology for evaluating AI-enabled document generation capabilities within this broader digital infrastructure, using the Demonstration of Microreactor Experiments (DOME) facility as a pilot case study. The evaluation will assess an AI tool's ability to generate a Preliminary Documented Safety Analysis (PDSA) through progressive integration stages—from standalone document processing to full digital thread connectivity—while maintaining rigorous verification, validation, and regulatory acceptance standards. By establishing dynamic, traceable connections between design data and safety documentation, NRIC's approach has the potential to reduce both document development time and regulatory review cycles by as much as 50%, while simultaneously improving accuracy, consistency, and traceability. This initiative represents a critical step toward establishing reusable digital infrastructure that reactor developers can leverage to accelerate their path from concept to commercial operation, directly supporting NRIC's mission to demonstrate and deploy advanced nuclear energy technologies.

22 - GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗