SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “EPA”

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 73 records · Page 4

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2024

Carbon Management Projects (CONNECT) Database and Explorer

Overview The Carbon Management Projects (CONNECT) Toolkit is an online exploratory visualization tool developed by the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management (FECM) with support from other federal agencies such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). It provides a single point of access to authoritative information on federal agency investment in a portfolio of research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) projects that have been publicly announced to advance technologies for point source carbon capture, carbon dioxide removal, transport, storage, and conversion, collectively referred to as carbon management. The RD&D programs covered in this tool are authorized by annual congressional appropriations ("Base Program") and the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). The tool also incorporates public information on other federal initiatives, such as the Regional Clean Hydrogen Hubs, and public information released by other government agencies, such as the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) and Primacy States’ Underground Injection Control Class VI permits and EPA’s facility level greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Developed in a geographic information system, the tool organizes carbon management projects into five groups based on the primary technology that a project aims to advance, each visually represented as a digital layer ("carbon management project layer"). Only federally funded projects are included, which can be awarded projects that are completed or ongoing, or projects that have been selected but are currently under negotiation. Project information can be viewed in the map or in the attribute table below it when turned on. In the map view, each project is displayed at either its host site (for field work), where available, or its performer site (project lead's location, further explained in the table below). Host sites and performer sites are represented in distinct icons. Several reference layers offer additional public information on infrastructural and natural resource environment for carbon management. These reference layers, combined with multiple geographical basemaps, enable users to visualize the carbon management project layers in context. Carbon management project information will be updated monthly based on feedback and information availability. Carbon management project layers Point Source Carbon Capture (PSC) This layer contains DOE-funded projects focused on capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) from power plants or industrial facilities. Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) This layer contains DOE-funded projects focused on capturing CO2 from the atmosphere, including direct air capture (DAC) and DAC hubs, direct ocean capture, enhanced mineralization, and biomass carbon removal and storage. For projects with multiple host sites, each of the sites are displayed individually with the project cost and cost sharing information representing the total for the entire project. Carbon Transport This layer contains DOE- and DOT-funded projects focused on CO2 transport. The Transport Research and Development sublayer contains projects that do not involve physical infrastructure; the Proposed Transport Corridor sublayer contains projects for which either a route for the transport infrastructure has been proposed or a general area for the transport infrastructure has been identified. Carbon Storage This layer contains DOE-funded key projects focused on CO2 storage. For projects with multiple field-work sites, each of the sites are displayed individually on the map with the project cost and cost sharing information representing the overall total for the entire project. Carbon Conversion This layer contains DOE-funded projects focused on converting CO2 into economically valuable products. Reference layers The following layers provide additional information in the geographic proximity of carbon management projects. Users should reference the original sources for more details (weblinks provided below and in pop-up windows on the map). Regional Clean Hydrogen Hub and Facility These layers illustrate the approximate areas of the Regional Clean Hydrogen Hubs announced by DOE's Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations (OCED) and the approximate locations of individual facilities that constitute the hubs (see "Where are the H2Hubs located?" on the webpage linked above). EPA Facility Level GHG Emissions (direct emitter) This layer shows direct CO2 emissions from stationary sources in 2022, using data extracted from EPA's Facility Level Information on GreenHouse gases Tool (FLIGHT). Captured and injected CO2 are not deducted from direct emitters’ total emissions. Contact EPA for additional details. Underground Injection Control Class VI permit/permit application This layer shows the locations of CO2 injection wells that are granted or in the process of applying for an Underground Injection Control Class VI permit by EPA or a Primacy State (currently Louisiana, North Dakota, and Wyoming). The URLs for the permits or permit applications are provided in the pop-up windows associated with the well locations. Contact EPA for additional details. Carbon Storage Resource This layer contains information on prospective CO2 storage resources in saline formations and oil and gas reservoirs provided by the National Carbon Sequestration Database and Geographic Information System (NATCARB) spatial database. Contact NETL for additional details. Existing CO2 pipeline This layer shows active CO2 pipelines based on information digitized from the map issued by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA). Contact PHMSA for additional details.

Carbon Conversion↗

DOE OSTI2025

SMR Containment Cable and Electrical Penetration Assembly System

GAIN Project CRADA Number NFE-21-08839, entitled “SMR Containment Cable and EPA System” was initiated by the partnership of Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and Engineered Solutions Group (ESG) to test an ESG-designed Electrical Penetration Assembly and Containment Cabling System Qualified for not only SMR technologies, but also Advanced Reactors design. An Electrical Penetration Assembly (EPA) is a component used to allow electrical power and signal conductors as well as optical fiber through the nuclear reactor’s containment structure while maintaining a pressure barrier. The EPA ensures the containment's integrity both during the normal operation and also accident conditions by providing a sealed passage for power and signals. This project was undertaken to fill the equipment gap of EPA and Cabling Systems that require much more severe environmental requirements than legacy plant applications present due to their smaller containment volumes that result in high energy densities compared to legacy designs. This high energy density results in severe accident environments and also more severe normal operating conditions.This document describes cost effective approaches to qualify a unique EPA for Small Modular Reactor (SMR) technologies as legacy LWR EPA technologies will likely have inherent material performance insufficiencies. The DBA profiles for SMRs (and some Advanced Reactor Technologies) are more severe than the legacy qualification requirements making the design of the qualification testing system challenging as the temperatures and pressures can approach the limits permitted by ASME Pressure Vessel Code, as well as accident temperatures exceeding the capability of polymeric gaskets and dielectrics. Small Modular Reactors are designed to have, as the name suggests, modularity which implies sized for factory fabrication and subsequent assembly at the power plant site. SMR containment is much smaller than a legacy Light Water Reactor containment. The containment walls are likely to be comprised of stainless steel. Qualifying Electrical Penetration Assemblies (EPAs) through these steel vessels are of interest in this work. Methods are presented here that discuss critical safety and cost effectiveness for these SMR EPA’s test systems.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

NASA NTRS2002

Regulatory and Technical Issues Concerning the Detection and Treatment of NDMA-Contaminated Groundwater at NASA WSTF

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) White Sands Test Facility (WSTF) was established in 1963 primarily to provide rocket engine testing services for several NASA programs. The groundwater underlying the site has been contaminated as a result of historical operations. Groundwater contaminants include several volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and two semi-volatile compounds: N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) and N-nitrodimethylamine (DMN). This paper discusses some of the technical, analytical, regulatory, and health risk issues associated with the contaminant plume. The plume has moved approximately 2.5 miles downgradient of the facility industrial boundary, with evidence of continued migration. As a result, NASA has proposed a pump and treat system using air strippers and ultraviolet (UV) oxidation to stabilize future movement of the contaminant plume. The system has been designed to treat 1,076 gallons (4,073 liters) per minute, with provisions for future expansion. The UV oxidation process was selected to treat NDMA-contaminated groundwater based on successes at other NDMA-contaminated sites. Bench- and pilot-scale testing of WSTF groundwater confirmed the ability of UV oxidation to destroy NDMA and generated sufficient data to design the proposed full-scale treatment system. NDMA is acutely toxic and is a probable human carcinogen. EPA-recommended health risk criteria for the residential consumption of NDMA/DMN-contaminated groundwater was used to determine that a 1.0 x 10(exp -6) excess cancer risk corresponds to 1.7 parts per trillion (ppt). EPA analytical methods are unable to detect NDMA and DMN in the low ppt range. EPA's current Appendix IX analytical method used to screen for NDMA, Method 8270, can detect NDMA only at levels that are orders of magnitude greater than the recommended health risk level. Additionally, EPA Method 607, the most sensitive EPA approved method, has a detection limit of 150 ppt. This corresponds to an excess cancer risk of 9.0 x 10(exp -5), which exceeds the State of New Mexico's water quality standard of a cancer risk less than 1 x 10(exp -5). The treatment system has been engineered to treat contaminated groundwater to levels significantly below the New Mexico standard. However, the inability of EPA-approved analytical methods to detect NDMA and DMN at low ppt levels, and to provide verification of compliance with the 1 x 10(exp -5) cancer risk, introduces a notable risk to the long-term operation of the system. WSTF has been working with Southwest Research Institute to develop a non-EPA analytical method that can achieve a reporting limit of 1 ppt, which corresponds to an excess cancer risk of 7.6 x 10(exp -7). WSTF is currently developing a proposal to obtain approval from the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) of this non-EPA method.

Wiebe, D. T.↗

DOE OSTI2023

2022 LANL Radionuclide Air Emissions Report (Rev. 2)

This report describes the emissions of airborne radionuclides from operations at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) for calendar year 2022 and the resulting off-site dose from these emissions. This document fulfills the requirements established by the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants in 40 CFR 61, Subpart H – Emissions of Radionuclides other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities, commonly referred to as the Radionuclide NESHAP or Rad-NESHAP. Compliance with this regulation and preparation of this document is the responsibility of LANL’s Rad NESHAP compliance program, which is part of the Environmental Protection and Compliance (EPC) Division. The information in this report is required under the Clean Air Act and is being submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Headquarters and EPA Region 6. The highest effective dose equivalent (EDE) to an off-site member of the public was calculated using procedures specified by the EPA and described in this report. LANL’s EDE was 0.45 for 2022. The annual limit is 10 millirem per year, established by the EPA in 40 CFR 61 Subpart H. All measured air emissions are modeled to a single location, known as the Maximally Exposed Individual (MEI). During calendar year 2022, LANL continuously monitored radionuclide emissions at 27 “major” release points, or stacks. The Laboratory estimates emissions from an additional 34 “minor” release points using radionuclide usage source terms in lieu of stack monitoring. Also, LANL uses an EPA approved network of air samplers around the Laboratory perimeter to monitor ambient airborne levels of radionuclides. To provide data for dispersion modeling and dose assessment, LANL maintains and operates several meteorological monitoring towers. From these various systems, a comprehensive evaluation is conducted to calculate the MEI dose for the Laboratory. The MEI can be any member of the public at any off-site location where there is a residence, school, business, or office. In 2022, this MEI location was a business at 95 Entrada Drive, located in the eastern end of Los Alamos town site. The primary contributors to the off-site dose at this location are the ambient air data at that location combined with radioactive gas emissions from the LANSCE facility and the collected potential emissions from unmonitored (minor) sources. Overall, the MEI dose in 2022 is similar to that which has been observed in recent years, and it remains well below the EPA’s 10 millirem per year limit. Doses reported to the EPA for the past 10 years are shown in Table E1.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2024

Notice of Submittal – 2023 Radionuclide Air Emissions Report for Los Alamos National Laboratory

This report describes the emissions of airborne radionuclides from operations at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) for calendar year 2023 and the resulting off-site dose from these emissions. This document fulfills the requirements established by the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants in 40 CFR 61, Subpart H – Emissions of Radionuclides other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities, commonly referred to as the Radionuclide NESHAP or Rad-NESHAP. Compliance with this regulation and preparation of this document is the responsibility of LANL’s Rad NESHAP compliance program, which is part of the Environmental Protection and Compliance (EPC) Division. The information in this report is required under the Clean Air Act and is being submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Headquarters and EPA Region 6. The highest effective dose equivalent (EDE) to an off-site member of the public was calculated using procedures specified by the EPA and described in this report. LANL’s EDE was 0.43 for 2023. The annual limit is 10 millirem per year, established by the EPA in 40 CFR 61 Subpart H. All measured air emissions are modeled to a single location, known as the Maximally Exposed Individual (MEI). During calendar year 2023, LANL continuously monitored radionuclide emissions at 28 “major” release points, or stacks. The Laboratory estimates emissions from an additional 59 “minor” release points using radionuclide usage source terms in lieu of stack monitoring. Also, LANL uses an EPA approved network of air samplers around the Laboratory perimeter to monitor ambient airborne levels of radionuclides. To provide data for dispersion modeling and dose assessment, LANL maintains and operates several meteorological monitoring towers. From these various systems, a comprehensive evaluation is conducted to calculate the MEI dose for the Laboratory. The MEI can be any member of the public at any off-site location where there is a residence, school, business, or office. In 2023, this MEI location was a business at 129 New Mexico State Road 4 (NM-4), located in the northern end of White Rock. The primary contributors to the off-site dose at this location are the ambient air data at that location combined with the collected potential emissions from unmonitored (minor) sources. Overall, the MEI dose in 2023 is similar to that which has been observed in recent years, and it remains well below the EPA’s 10 millirem per year limit. Doses reported to the EPA for the past 10 years are shown in Table E1.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS1999

Industrial Hygiene Issues

This breakout session is a traditional conference instrument used by the NASA industrial hygiene personnel as a method to convene personnel across the Agency with common interests. This particular session focused on two key topics, training systems and automation of industrial hygiene data. During the FY 98 NASA Occupational Health Benchmarking study, the training system under development by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was deemed to represent a "best business practice." The EPA has invested extensively in the development of computer based training covering a broad range of safety, health and environmental topics. Currently, five compact disks have been developed covering the topics listed: Safety, Health and Environmental Management Training for Field Inspection Activities; EPA Basic Radiation Training Safety Course; The OSHA 600 Collateral Duty Safety and Health Course; and Key program topics in environmental compliance, health and safety. Mr. Chris Johnson presented an overview of the EPA compact disk-based training system and answered questions on its deployment and use across the EPA. This training system has also recently been broadly distributed across other Federal Agencies. The EPA training system is considered "public domain" and, as such, is available to NASA at no cost in its current form. Copies of the five CD set of training programs were distributed to each NASA Center represented in the breakout session. Mr. Brisbin requested that each NASA Center review the training materials and determine whether there is interest in using the materials as it is or requesting that EPA tailor the training modules to suit NASA's training program needs. The Safety, Health and Medical Services organization at Ames Research Center has completed automation of several key program areas. Mr. Patrick Hogan, Safety Program Manager for Ames Research Center, presented a demonstration of the automated systems, which are described by the following: (1) Safety, Health and Environmental Training. This system includes an assessment of training needs for every NASA Center organization, course descriptions, schedules and automated course scheduling, and presentation of training program metrics; (2) Safety and Health Inspection Information. This system documents the findings from each facility inspection, tracks abatement status on those findings and presents metrics on each department for senior management review; (3) Safety Performance Evaluation Profile. The survey system used by NASA to evaluate employee and supervisory perceptions of safety programs is automated in this system; and (4) Documentation Tracking System. Electronic archive and retrieval of all correspondence and technical reports generated by the Safety, Health and Medical Services Office are provided by this system.

Brisbin, Steven G.↗

DOE OSTI2020

2019 LANL Radionuclide Air Emissions Report

In June 2020, Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) submitted letter ESHQSS: 20-025 to Region 6 of the Unites States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This letter transmitted the 2019 LANL Radionuclide Air Emissions Report to the EPA. This report summarizes LANL operations, air emissions of radionuclides, and subsequent off-site dose consequence from these emissions for calendar year 2019. This report is issued to meet requirements of 40 CFR 61 Subpart H, National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities. This regulation, called the Radionuclide NESHAP, establishes a limit of 10 millirem per year to the maximally exposed member of the public and requires an annual report to be submitted to the appropriate EPA Region by June 30th of each year. LANL’s off-site dose from airborne emissions of radionuclides in 2019 was 0.43 millirem. The normal practice is to issue this report directly to EPA Region 6 in June of each year, and then after the report is accepted by the EPA, re-issue the report for inclusion in the LANL Electronic Public Reading Room (EPRR). This second part is usually done in July of each year, but this step was overlooked in July 2020 due to other commitments. We regret this error. This omission was noted in late 2020; we are submitting the 2019 LANL Radionuclide Air Emissions Report to the EPRR now in December 2020. Aside from the addition of this cover sheet explaining the delay, the report is unchanged from the version submitted to EPA Region 6 in June.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS2004

NASA Data for Water Resources Applications

Water Management Applications is one of twelve elements in the Earth Science Enterprise National Applications Program. NASA Goddard Space Flight Center is supporting the Applications Program through partnering with other organizations to use NASA project results, such as from satellite instruments and Earth system models to enhance the organizations critical needs. The focus thus far has been: 1) estimating water storage including snowpack and soil moisture, 2) modeling and predicting water fluxes such as evapotranspiration (ET), precipitation and river runoff, and 3) remote sensing of water quality, including both point source (e.g., turbidity and productivity) and non-point source (e.g., land cover conversion such as forest to agriculture yielding higher nutrient runoff). The objectives of the partnering cover three steps of: 1) Evaluation, 2) Verification and Validation, and 3) Benchmark Report. We are working with the U.S. federal agencies including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) and the Department of Agriculture (USDA). We are using several of their Decision Support Systems (DSS) tools. This includes the DSS support tools BASINS used by EPA, Riverware and AWARDS ET ToolBox by USBR and SWAT by USDA and EPA. Regional application sites using NASA data across the US. are currently being eliminated for the DSS tools. The current NASA data emphasized thus far are from the Land Data Assimilation Systems WAS) and MODIS satellite products. We are currently in the first two steps of evaluation and verification validation. Water Management Applications is one of twelve elements in the Earth Science Enterprise s National Applications Program. NASA Goddard Space Flight Center is supporting the Applications Program through partnering with other organizations to use NASA project results, such as from satellite instruments and Earth system models to enhance the organizations critical needs. The focus thus far has been: 1) estimating water storage including snowpack and soil moisture, 2) modeling and predicting water fluxes such as evapotranspiration (ET), precipitation and river runoff, and 3) remote sensing of water quality, including both point source (e.g., turbidity and productivity) and non-point source (e.g., land cover conversion such as forest to agriculture yielding higher nutrient runoff). The objectives of the partnering cover three steps of 1) Evaluation, 2) Verification and Validation, and 3) Benchmark Report. We are working with the U.S. federal agencies the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) and the Department of Agriculture (USDA). We are using several of their Decision Support Systems (DSS) tools. T us includes the DSS support tools BASINS used by EPA, Riverware and AWARDS ET ToolBox by USBR and SWAT by USDA and EPA. Regional application sites using NASA data across the US. are currently being evaluated for the DSS tools. The current NASA data emphasized thus far are from the Land Data Assimilation Systems (LDAS) and MODIS satellite products. We are currently in the first two steps of evaluation and verification and validation.

Toll, David↗

DOE OSTI2025

Application of pH-dependent environmental protection agency test method 1313 to low-activity nuclear waste glass

Here, in this study, we present results of a room temperature, pH-dependent leach test established by United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Leaching Environmental Assessment Framework (LEAF) (EPA Method 1313 and further abbreviated EPA 1313) to study the alteration behavior of low-activity nuclear waste (LAW) glasses. Implementation of EPA 1313, which is closer to LAW disposal temperatures, could allow for more flexibility in the formulation of Hanford LAW glasses, specifically in terms of increased waste loading. A set of 48 LAW glasses were selected to test with EPA 1313. Briefly, the test method consists of adding glass to a number of solutions at different initial pH values and at a fixed mass-to-solution-volume ratio. The glass is then allowed to corrode for two days and the final solution pH and concentration of different glass elements in solution is measured. The test was modified from the published procedure to constrain particle size to provide more reproducible results, reduce the studied pH range to a more applicable range, and to reduce solution volume to reduce costs associated with material preparation. Compositional modeling was used to predict the measured elemental releases at various pH. The model predictions improved in tests where there was a relatively small difference between initial and final solution pH indicating that pH controls would result in better predictive models.

Accelerated aging↗

DOE OSTI2021

National and regional waste stream in the United States: conformance and disparity

Accurate estimation of municipal solid waste (MSW) composition is critical for efficient waste management. In the United States, site-specific and material flow approaches determine the MSW composition at regional and national levels. The material flow-based national estimates are determined by the US EPA; the US EPA’s estimates are known to differ substantially from the aggregated tonnage of MSW managed by waste handling facilities in the United States. However, the material class-specific discrepancies of the US EPA’s material flow approach resulting in these differences are unknown. To find the basis of these discrepancies, we analyze the discarded MSW stream of 27 US states, which roughly accounts for 73 percent of the US population. Our analysis indicates that the material flow-based national estimates are accurate for the food, plastic, and glass material classes. In contrast, we find that the US EPA’s material flow-based predictions underestimate paper waste disposal by at least 15 million tons annually. These differences likely stem from incorrect assumptions of residence time. These results highlight the material class-specific strengths and drawbacks of the US EPA’s material flow-based MSW estimates.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2024

Multi-State Transportation Electrification Impact Study: Preparing the Grid for Light-, Medium-, and Heavy-Duty Electric Vehicles

Recent U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) notices of proposed rulemakings for GHG emissions standards for light-, medium-, and heavy-duty on-road vehicles would accelerate ongoing advancements already happening in the industry because of private investment, consumer demand, state-level policies, and federal incentives. As the EPA finalizes these regulations, questions persist regarding the cost of the requisite charging infrastructure and associated upgrades to the nation's electric grid. With support from the U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Joint Office of Energy and Transportation, and the EPA, a multidisciplinary team conducted a Multi-State Transportation Electrification Impact Study that quantitatively assesses the incremental investment necessary to enable the levels of vehicle electrification expected to be induced by pending EPA regulations and to estimate the potential value of deferred investments in electric distribution infrastructure stemming from proactive vehicle-grid integration planning and deployment. This study finds the simulated incremental capital cost of charging infrastructure (including grid upgrades) to be at least 2.5 times smaller than the lifetime net benefits of vehicle electrification (including fuel savings but excluding the value of avoided emissions). Additionally, the incremental distribution grid upgrade cost of the EPA Action-Unmanaged scenario was found to be approximately 3% of existing utility distribution system investments (on an annual basis). Finally, the potential for managed charging to defer distribution grid upgrades was found to be significant with costs found to decrease from $2.3 billion to an incremental cost of $1 billion across five states in the Action-Managed scenario (relative to the No Action-Unmanaged scenario).

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

NASA NTRS1998

Joint NASA/EPA AVIRIS Analysis in the Chesapeake Bay Region: Plans and Initial Results

NASA's Ames Research Center is performing an AVIRIS demonstration project in conjunction with the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (Region 3). NASA and EPA scientists have jointly defined a Study Area in eastern Virginia to include portions of the Chesapeake Bay, southern Delmarva Peninsula, and the mouths of the York and James Rivers. Several environmental issues have been identified for study. These include, by priority: 1) water constituent analysis in the Chesapeake Bay, 2) mapping of submerged aquatic vegetation in the Bay, 3) detection of vegetation stress related to Superfund sites at the Yorktown Naval Weapons Station, and 4) wetland species analysis in the York River vicinity. In support of this project, three lines of AVIRIS data were collected during the Wallops Island deployment on 17 August 1997. The remote sensing payload included AVIRIS, MODIS Airborne Simulator and an RC-10 color infrared film camera. The AVIRIS data were delivered to Ames from the JPL AVIRIS Data Facility, on 29 September 1997. Quicklook images indicate nominal data acquisition, and at the current time an atmospheric correction is being applied. Water constituent analysis of the Bay is our highest priority based on EPA interest and available collateral data, both from the surface and from other remote sensing instruments. Constituents of interest include suspended sediments, chlorophyll-a and accessory pigments, Analysis steps will include: verification of data quality, location of study sites in imagery, incorporation of relevant field data from EPA and other Chesapeake Bay cooperators, processing of imagery to show phenomenon of interest, verification of results with cooperators. By 1st quarter CY98 we plan to circulate initial results to NASA and EPA management for review. In the longer term we will finalize documentation, prepare results for publication, and complete any needed technology transfer to EPA remote sensing personnel.

Johnson, Lee↗

DOE OSTI2024

Transportation Electrification Impact Study (TEIS)

ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS,POWER TRANSMISSION AND↗

DOE OSTI2020

Hybrid Sorbents for 129 I Capture from Contaminated Groundwater

Radioiodine ( 129 I) poses a risk to the environment due to its long half-life, toxicity, and mobility. It is found at the U.S. Department of Energy Hanford Site due to legacy releases of nuclear wastes to the subsurface where 129 I is predominantly present as iodate (IO 3 – ). To date, a cost-effective and scalable cleanup technology for 129 I has not been identified, with hydraulic containment implemented as the remedial approach. Here, novel high-performing sorbents for 129 I remediation with the capacity to reduce 129 I concentrations to or below the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) drinking water standard and procedures to deploy them in an ex-situ pump and treat (P&T) system are introduced. Furthermore, this includes implementation of hybridized polyacrylonitrile (PAN) beads for ex-situ remediation of IO 3 – -contaminated groundwater for the first time. Iron (Fe) oxyhydroxide and bismuth (Bi) oxyhydroxide sorbents were deployed on silica substrates or encapsulated in porous PAN beads. In addition, Fe–, cerium (Ce)–, and Bi–oxyhydroxides were encapsulated with anion-exchange resins. The PAN–bismuth oxyhydroxide and PAN–ferrihydrite composites along with Fe- and Ce-based hybrid anion-exchange resins performed well in batch sorption experiments with distribution coefficients for IO 3 – of >1000 mL/g and rapid removal kinetics. Of the tested materials, the Ce-based hybrid anion-exchange resin was the most efficient for removal of IO 3 – from Hanford groundwater in a column system, with 50% breakthrough occurring at 324 pore volumes. The functional amine groups on the parent resin and amount of active sorbent in the resin can be customized to improve the iodine loading capacity. These results highlight the potential for IO 3 – remediation by hybrid sorbents and represent a benchmark for the implementation of commercially available materials to meet EPA standards for cleanup of 129 I in a large-scale P&T system.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗

DOE OSTI2022

Trimethyloxonium-mediated methylation strategies for the rapid and simultaneous analysis of chlorinated phenols in various soils by electron impact gas chromatography–mass spectrometry

Abstract The efficient methylation of a panel of five industrial and environmentally-relevant chlorophenols (CPs) employing trimethyloxonium tetrafluoroborate (TMO) for their qualitative detection and identification by electron impact gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (EI-GC–MS) is presented. The protocol’s execution is simple and smoothly converts the phenols into their O-methylated counterparts conveniently at ambient temperature. The efficiency of two versions of the protocol was successfully tested in their ability to simultaneously derivatize five CPs (2-chlorophenol, 2,4-dichlorophenol, 2,4,6-trichlorophenol, pentachlorophenol and triclosan) in six distinct, separate soil matrices (Nebraska EPA standard soil, Virginia Type A soil, Ottawa sand, Baker sand, Silt and Georgia EPA standard soil) when present at low levels (~ 10 μgg −1 ). The first version involves the direct derivatization of the spiked soils with the methylating salt while the second one involves an initial soil extraction step of the CPs followed by methylation. The MDL values for each methylated CP were determined and lower values were found (4.1–13.2 ng . mL −1 ) for both sand matrices (Ottawa and Baker) as well as for the Georgia EPA standard soil, while larger values (8.2–21.8 ng . mL −1 ) were found for the Virginia Type soil, Nebraska EPA standard soil and Silt. The presented protocol offers a safer and more practical alternative to the universally employed diazomethane method and can be readily applicable to matrices other than soils. Furthermore, the protocols described herein may find applicability to the methylation of other analytes bearing acidic protons.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗

DOE OSTI2020

Updated External Exposure Dose Coefficients

In 2018, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) updated and expanded the Federal Guidance Report (FGR) No. 12 to No. 15; tabulating age-specific external exposure effective dose rate coefficients for 1,252 radionuclides in the air, water, and soil (EPA 2018). However, the EPA discovered errors in the tables of dose coefficients for soil which led to the report being retracted for correction. This led to the adoption of “a uniform method of data-smoothing and extrapolation of monoenergetic organ doses at low energies across all exposure pathways; the originally-published dose coefficients utilized different methods for each media type” (EPA 2019). This resulted in all the external exposure dose coefficients being updated and FGR 15 being republished in August 2019 with corrected tables.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2024

Joint Comments from the Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration (DOE NNSA) Los Alamos Field Office and Triad National Security, LLC on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s New Mexico State-Wide Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Strawman General Permit

In December 2020 and March 2021, EPA issued two MS4 strawman permit drafts specific to the Los Alamos area. EPA made text changes in the 2 nd strawman permit based on stakeholder comments related to the initial draft. During the public meeting on the Los Alamos area designation decision held on February 13, 2024, EPA staff stated that comments from the past strawman permits would be incorporated into the new MS4 permit to be issued state-wide. However, it does not appear that any of the text changes from the 2 nd Los Alamos area strawman permit were included in this state-wide general MS4 strawman permit. For reference, the 2 nd Los Alamos area revised strawman permit is included with these comments as Attachment 2. Many of the following comments refer to or state EPA’s updated text included in the 2 nd Los Alamos area strawman permit. The updated text from this 2 nd strawman permit that are referenced in the following comments should be applicable state-wide and it is suggested that this past work be reconsidered and incorporated.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2025

Engineered Solutions Group's SMR Containment Cable and Electrical Penetration Assembly System

GAIN Project CRADA Number NFE-21-08839, entitled “SMR Containment Cable and EPA System” was initiated by the partnership of Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and Engineered Solutions Group (ESG) to test an ESG-designed Electrical Penetration Assembly and Containment Cabling System Qualified for not only legacy LWR designs, but also Small Modular Reactors designs currently being designed by several different suppliers. This project was undertaken to fill the equipment gap of EPA and Cabling Systems that require much more severe environmental requirements than legacy plant applications present due to their smaller containment volumes that result in high energy densities compared to legacy designs. This high energy density results in severe accident environments and more severe normal operating conditions as well. We developed two approaches to qualify Electrical Penetration Assembly (EPA) and Containment Cabling Systems for SMRs and Advanced Reactors. We take into consideration the more severe environmental parameters found with SMR designs. The system will need to meet a qualification test program addressing wear/cyclic aging, potential radiation exposure, thermal aging, vibration aging, thermal cycling, seismic qualification, electrical fault testing (per IEEE 317) and accident simulation. The equipment must meet the requirements of 10CFR50.49, GDC 50 in 10CFR50 Appendix A, and 10CFR50 Appendix J. NRC Regulatory Guides (RGs) identify an acceptable way of meeting regulatory requirements. RGs frequently endorse a standard for meeting these requirements. Specific to this review, equipment would be qualified in accordance with the following IEEE Standards. • IEEE 317-2013 (Electrical Penetration Assemblies), which is endorsed by RG 1.63, Rev. 3, • IEEE 323-2003 and the more current IEC/IEEE 60780-323 (Environmental Qualification of 1E Equipment) which is endorsed by RG 1.89. IEEE 323-2003 is endorsed by RG 1.209, • IEEE 344-2020 (Seismic Qualification. The 2013 version endorsed by RG 1.100, Rev. 4, with exceptions), • IEEE 383-2015 (Electrical Cables) (which is endorsed by RG 1.189 Rev. 4 and the -2003 version endorsed by RG 1.211 rev. 0), • IEEE 572-2019 (Electrical Connectors and Assemblies), which is endorsed by 1.156 Rev 1, and • [IEEE 1202 (endorsed by RG 1.189) would normally be applicable but the advanced cable designs are impervious to this cable flame test.] The primary goal of such a program is to provide an EPA design that can meet the qualification requirements for all legacy light water reactor plants currently operating as well as new plant designs including light water Small Modular Reactors. Thus, these requirements are applicable to plants licensed under 10CFR50 and 10CFR52. Other reactor designs may be evaluated, and this test system and qualification method applied to those applications if the requirements would satisfy the requirements of the intended plant. A secondary benefit of this work is to document some of the history and background in these requirements as there have been recent delays in an SMR licensing process due to NRC Requests for Additional Information in this subject matter area.

42 ENGINEERING↗