SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Health and Safety”

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

Equitable Strategies for Residential Building Energy Efficiency and Electrification in San José, California

Hotter summers, heat waves, wildfires, and droughts are already affecting San Jose residents, with historically marginalized communities impacted first and worst. The City of San Jose has ambitious goals to make the city climate-neutral by 2030 and serve as an example for cities to accelerate climate action around the world. Electrifying and decarbonizing residential buildings are important priorities to achieve San Jose's plans to reach carbon neutrality while enabling residents to live the "Good Life 2.0" - a vision that aligns with community-identified priorities of safety, health, freedom, community, and positive experiences. This technical assistance built upon the Electrify San Jose: Framework for Existing Building Electrification to identify actionable strategies to make single- and multi-family buildings both energy-efficient and all-electric. This report is intended to provide the San Jose Climate Smart team and their partners with relevant data, insights, and actionable analysis to aid in-depth and nuanced engagements with key stakeholders. In particular, the findings in this report highlight opportunities and challenges for San Jose City Council, residents, building owners, developers, financial institutions, and utility partners instrumental in building support and earning buy-in for energy efficiency and electrification upgrades in existing buildings.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2024

Equitable Strategies for Residential Building Energy Efficiency and Electrification in San José, California [Slides]

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2024

Environmental Performance Report 2023: Annual Site Environmental Report per the U.S. Department of Energy Order 231.1B Chg 1

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory's (NREL's) Environmental Performance Report provides a description of the laboratory's environmental management activities in calendar year 2023, including information on environmental and sustainability performance, environmental compliance activities and status, and environmental protection programs, highlights, and successes. The purpose of this report is to ensure that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the public receive timely, accurate information about events that have positively affected or could adversely affect the health and safety of the public or workers, the environment, or the operations of DOE facilities. This report meets the DOE requirements of the Annual Site Environmental Report (ASER) and has been prepared in accordance with DOE Order 231.1B Chg 1, Environment, Safety and Health Reporting.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2024

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Annual Site Environmental Report for Calendar Year 2023

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), one of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science’s 10 national laboratories, provides innovative science and technology development in the areas of energy and the environment, fundamental and computational science, and national security. There are three DOE offices within the Richland area. Two are responsible for the Hanford Site, whereas the Pacific Northwest Site Office oversees PNNL. PNNL prepares an Annual Site Environmental Report to meet the requirements of DOE Order 231.1B, Environment, Safety and Health Reporting, and DOE Order 458.1, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment, thus assuring that the public is informed of any PNNL-Richland campus or PNNL-Sequim campus event that could adversely affect the health and safety of the public, site staff, or the environment. The report provides a synopsis of ongoing environmental management performance and compliance activities for operations that occur at the PNNL-Richland campus in Richland, Washington, and at the PNNL-Sequim campus near Sequim, Washington. It describes the location of and background for each facility; addresses compliance with applicable DOE, federal, state, and local regulations, and site-specific permits; documents environmental monitoring efforts and their status; presents potential radiation doses to staff and the public in the surrounding areas; and describes DOE-required data quality assurance methods used for data verification. The ASER report describes Compliance with Federal, State, and Local Laws and Regulations in 2023, Environmental Sustainability, Environmental monitoring and dose assessment, Natural and Cultural Resource Management, and Quality Assurance activities that took place during Calendar Year 2023.

40 CFR 61 Subpart H↗

DOE OSTI2025

Environmental Performance Report 2024: Annual Site Environmental Report per the U.S. Department of Energy Order 231.1B Chg 1

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory's (NREL's) Environmental Performance Report provides a description of the laboratory's environmental management activities in calendar year 2024, including information on environmental and sustainability performance, environmental compliance activities and status, and environmental protection programs, highlights, and successes. The purpose of this report is to ensure that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the public receive timely, accurate information about events that have positively affected or could adversely affect the health and safety of the public or workers, the environment, or the operations of DOE facilities. This report meets the DOE requirements of the Annual Site Environmental Report (ASER) and has been prepared in accordance with DOE Order 231.1B Chg 1, Environment, Safety and Health Reporting.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2025

Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order Nevada National Security Site Use Restriction Management Plan, Revision 2

This Use Restriction Management Plan (URMP) provides the information needed to create, modify, and manage use restrictions (URs) for sites on the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS), and sites accessed through the NNSS main gate, that were closed using the corrective action alternative (CAA) of closure in place under the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO). It addresses URs established under the FFACO for releases related to the development, testing, and production of nuclear weapons that are located on the NNSS and that are accessed through the NNSS main gate. FFACO URs are established at sites where contamination remains at levels exceeding final action levels (FALs) or is forecasted to exceed Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) maximum contaminant levels (CFR, 2025a) over the next 1,000 years following completion of corrective actions. Administrative URs are established at Industrial Sites and Soils sites where contamination remains at levels exceeding industrial action levels as defined in the Soils RBCA document. All URs stipulate restrictions sufficient to ensure the protection of human health, safety, and the environment.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2025

LANL Meteorology Program Self-Assessment 2025 Update

The LANL Meteorological (Met) Program has been subject to several external reviews over the past 19 years. The DOE Meteorological Coordinating Council (DMCC) conducted an initial Met Program Site Assist Visit (SAV) in August 2006 (DMCC 2006). A follow-up SAV in August 2015 assessed progress (DMCC 2015), and in June 2023, the DOE Meteorological Subcommittee (DMSC), successor to the DMCC, conducted a second follow-up SAV (DMSC 2023), in which the Met Program was evaluated relative to the following 8 high-level questions: • What is the state of the meteorological services provided to its customers? • What is the quality of meteorological data provided to its customers and is it adequate and available to meet all customer needs? • What is the quality of atmospheric transport and diffusion modeling provided to its customers and is it applicable to complex wind flow patterns at LANL? • Are the current and future meteorological service customers being serviced appropriately? • Are there adequate human resources to meet present and future program customer needs and are they being appropriately leveraged? • Are existing instrumentation, facilities, and systems adequate to meet present and future customer needs? • Are LANL meteorological services conducted in an efficient, cost-effective manner? • Is meteorological data used to ensure safety & health of LANL personnel? More specific evaluations were performed relative to 23 performance objectives extracted from the ANSI/ANS-3.11- 2024 national standard and 14 separate performance objectives associated with consequence assessment and atmospheric transport and diffusion modeling in the consequence assessment element of DOE G 151.1-1B. In 2023, the DMSC SAV Team also reviewed the status of each of the 18 remaining recommendations from its 2015 SAV. Based on this review, DMSC stated in its Exit Briefing that the LANL meteorological program has gotten much stronger and more robust since 2015 and now represents one of the better managed programs within the DOE complex.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2026

Best Practices for Resilience Hub Development and Management

The Carbon League and its community partners in East St. Louis, Illinois, have identified five facilities to serve as resilience hubs. These hubs are intended to support the local community through a range of services and resources during blue-sky (everyday), gray-sky (pre-event), and black-sky (emergency) conditions. Transforming these facilities into fully functional resilience hubs requires a broad operational improvement and programmatic planning roadmap. This memo outlines best practices to guide the development of these resilience hubs in East St. Louis, including recommendations for infrastructure services; safety and physical protection; community services; operational protocols; and a phased implementation strategy aligned with realistic funding and capacity constraints. Infrastructure recommendations include strengthening electric power, communications, water, sanitation, and transportation/logistics capabilities, all of which are essential for hubs that may serve as cooling and warming centers, distribution points, and information hubs during emergencies. Safety recommendations focus on accessibility, emergency action planning, indoor air quality, and secure storage of critical equipment. A phased roadmap provides guidance from immediate, low-cost readiness actions to long-term optimization and community integration. Performance metrics and maintenance protocols ensure continuous improvement and operational readiness. This guidance draws on best practices that can be used to support the development of resilient, community-centered hubs capable of enhancing public safety, health, and well-being during everyday operations and emergencies alike.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2026

Environmental Performance Report 2025: Annual Site Environmental Report per the U.S. Department of Energy Order 231.1B Chg 1

The National Laboratory of the Rockies (NLR) Environmental Performance Report provides a description of the laboratory's environmental management activities in calendar year 2025, including information on environmental performance, environmental compliance activities and status, and environmental protection programs, highlights, and successes. The purpose of this report is to ensure that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the public receive timely, accurate information about events that have positively affected or could adversely affect the health and safety of the public or workers, the environment, or the operations of DOE facilities. This report meets the DOE requirements of the Annual Site Environmental Report (ASER) and has been prepared in accordance with DOE Order 231.1B Chg 1, Environment, Safety and Health Reporting.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2023

Is Clean Hydrogen Production a Good Fit for Questa? Intermediate Feasibility Study Results

NREL conducted a feasibility study for a clean hydrogen production facility that would be located in Questa, New Mexico. This slide deck presents the history of the coalition of stakeholders that received NREL technical assistance through the Department of Energy's Communities Leading Energy Action Program. It describes how hydrogen is generated and its end uses. It describes two conceptual applications explored in the feasibility analysis, a grid-tied power generation and long-term storage application and a heavy-duty vehicle fueling application. The presentation details the configuration of these to applications in the Questa pilot facility, including system components, required inputs (water, electricity, and land for pv generation), and outputs in kilograms of hydrogen, megawatt hours of power delivered, and hours of vehicle hours of operation. The presentation addresses key concerns raised by groups engaged through a public outreach process, including safety, health, and environmental issues; water use; visual impacts; and costs and alternatives.

heavy-duty vehicle fueling↗

DOE OSTI2023

Environmental Performance Report 2022: Annual Site Environmental Report per the U.S. Department of Energy Order 231.1B Chg 1

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory's (NREL's) Environmental Performance Report provides a description of the laboratory's environmental management activities in calendar year 2022, including information on environmental and sustainability performance, environmental compliance activities and status, and environmental protection programs, highlights, and successes. The purpose of this report is to ensure that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the public receive timely, accurate information about events that have positively affected or could adversely affect the health and safety of the public or workers, the environment, or the operations of DOE facilities. This report meets the DOE requirements of the Annual Site Environmental Report (ASER) and has been prepared in accordance with DOE Order 231.1B Chg 1, Environment, Safety and Health Reporting.

air quality↗

DOE OSTI2021

Annual Site Environmental Report: 2020 (ASER) for the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory

To satisfy the requirements of the United States Department of Energy (DOE) SLAC Site Office approved Site Compliance Plan for DOE Order 231.1B (Change 1, 2012, “Environment, Safety and Health Reporting,” the Environment, Safety and Health Division (ES&H) of the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory prepares an annual report describing its environmental programs and activities. This Annual Site Environmental Report: 2020 summarizes the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory compliance with standards and requirements, describes the management and monitoring systems in place, and highlights significant accomplishments for the year.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

Annual Site Environmental Report: 2019 (ASER) for the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory

To satisfy the requirements of the United States Department of Energy (DOE) SLAC Site Office approved Site Compliance Plan for DOE Order 231.1B, “Environment, Safety and Health Reporting,” the Environment, Safety and Health Division (ES&H) of the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory prepares an annual report describing its environmental programs and activities. This Annual Site Environmental Report: 2019 summarizes the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory compliance with standards and requirements, describes the management and monitoring systems in place, and highlights significant accomplishments for the year.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

Million Worker Study

Radiation health issues have been an important aspect of DOE's Worker Safety and Health programs. The goal is to ensure that workers are adequately protected from the various radiological hazards associated with DOE sites and operations. Since the early 1940’s DOE has supported the conduct of epidemiologic studies of practically every DOE (AEC) facility and collected these data, now managed by the Oak Ridge Associated Universities (ORAU), in remarkable detail. In the early 2000s, the Office of Health, Safety and Security authorized access to specific DOE worker datasets. Shortly thereafter, the DOE Office of Science provided funds for a pilot study that confirmed the feasibility of the Million Worker Study (MWS), and then additional resources were provided (with other agencies) to extend the follow-up of many populations, not just DOE workers, but also atomic veterans, industrial radiographers, nuclear power plant workers and medical radiation workers (the Million Persons Study (MPS)). This proposal was a continuation of support provided by DOE, specifically to extend the follow-up of the worker populations at the Mallinckrodt Chemical Works (MCW) and Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). The work addresses DOE’s interest in clarifying the health risks of their workers as well as contributing knowledge on radiation risks that is relevant today with regard to compensation schemes. The findings are also important for the US public in light of the increased population exposure to medical imaging, environmental circumstances such as hydraulic fracturing, increased exposures during high altitude flights, and with regard to nuclear accidents such as Fukushima and possible terrorist events. Furthermore, it is important to consider reducing the uncertainty in current risk estimates by developing risk coefficients based on healthy American workers who are more representative of U.S. workers and the general public than 1945 Japanese survivors of the atomic bombs living in a war-torn country which experienced deprivation, malnourishment, and increased rates of infections and other diseases. But more importantly, it is important to learn whether radiation exposures received gradually over time (e.g., years) are more or less effective in causing health effects, cancer in particular, than if the radiation dose is received all at once in a fraction of a second as experienced by the Japanese atomic bomb survivors. Finally, the ability to evaluate and combine large populations with intakes of radionuclides such as uranium, radium, plutonium, americium and polonium will provide new quantitative knowledge on human health effects that hitherto has not been possible. This cost-efficient study has built on the investments made and foundations laid by investigators and government agencies, including DOE, over the past 30-40 years, which have established early worker cohorts that can now provide answers to questions on the lifetime human health risks associated with low-level radiation exposures. Collaborating institutions included: International Epidemiology Institute, Oak Ridge Associated Universities, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Landauer, Inc., and Vanderbilt University. Follow-up of these two populations and the integration of them with the many other cohorts (now a total of 31) in the MPS continues under a separate DOE grant (DE-AU0000046).

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

DOE OSTI2021

Design of COVID-19 staged alert systems to ensure healthcare capacity with minimal closures

Community mitigation strategies to combat COVID-19, ranging from healthy hygiene to shelter-in-place orders, exact substantial socioeconomic costs. Judicious implementation and relaxation of restrictions amplify their public health benefits while reducing costs. We derive optimal strategies for toggling between mitigation stages using daily COVID-19 hospital admissions. With public compliance, the policy triggers ensure adequate intensive care unit capacity with high probability while minimizing the duration of strict mitigation measures. In comparison, we show that other sensible COVID-19 staging policies, including France’s ICU-based thresholds and a widely adopted indicator for reopening schools and businesses, require overly restrictive measures or trigger strict stages too late to avert catastrophic surges. As proof-of-concept, we describe the optimization and maintenance of the staged alert system that has guided COVID-19 policy in a large US city (Austin, Texas) since May 2020. As cities worldwide face future pandemic waves, our findings provide a robust strategy for tracking COVID-19 hospital admissions as an early indicator of hospital surges and enacting staged measures to ensure integrity of the health system, safety of the health workforce, and public confidence.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

LLNS Request for Variance From 10 CFR 851 for Construction of LLNL Emergency Operations Center

Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS) is submitting the following variance application requesting the use of the State of California’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) Regulations in lieu of Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 851 (10 CFR 851, the Rule), Worker Safety and Health Program, Subpart B (Program Requirements), Subpart C (Specific Program Requirements), and Appendix A (Worker Safety and Health Functional Areas), solely with respect to the construction of the new Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) Emergency Operations Center (EOC) facility. The request is in support of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) “pilot” to streamline the delivery of commercial-like line item construction projects under $50 million. This pilot is aligned with the approved NA-50 safety approach for the projects in the pilot. This pilot is to test and demonstrate innovation leading to a reduced cost of construction for building commercial type structures at Department of Energy (DOE)/NNSA facilities. The variance proposes to permit local/regional construction businesses contracted to Management & Operation contractor operated facilities to bid, operate, execute, and comply with safety and health standards they utilize in their business outside of the DOE Complex. This will permit compliance to standards that are as safe and healthful as those in 10 CFR 851 without confusion, additional cost, and inefficiencies associated with the burden of compliance to an unfamiliar regulatory spectrum.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2022

Ames National Laboratory Annual Site Environmental Report for CY2021

The primary purpose of this report is to summarize the performance of Ames National Laboratory’s environmental programs, present highlights of significant environmental activities, and confirm compliance with environmental regulations and requirements for calendar year 2021. This report is a working requirement of Department of Energy Order 231.1B, Environment, Safety and Health Reporting. It includes descriptions of the Laboratory’s site, mission, the status of its compliance with applicable environmental regulations, its planning and activities to maintain compliance, and a comprehensive review of its environmental protection, surveillance and monitoring activities. Ames National Laboratory is located on the campus of Iowa State University (ISU) and occupies 13 buildings owned by the Department of Energy (DOE). See the Laboratory’s Web page for location and Laboratory overview. The Laboratory also leases space in ISU owned buildings. In 2021, the Laboratory accumulated and disposed of hazardous waste under a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued generator number. All waste was handled according to applicable EPA, State, and local regulations and DOE Orders. The Laboratory operates as a Small Quantity Generator (SQG) of hazardous waste. There were no radiological air emissions or exposures to the general public due to Laboratory activities in 2021 (See U.S. Department of Energy Air Emissions Annual Report in Appendix A.) The Laboratory has an established Environmental Radiological Protection Program (Plan 10200.041) per DOE Order 458.1 requirements. Plans, policies, and procedures are in place to protect the public and the environment against undue risk from radiation associated with DOE radiological activities. As indicated in prior Site Environmental Reports, formal pollution prevention awareness, waste minimization and recycling programs have been in practice since 1990, with improvements implemented most recently in 2017 with Iowa State University’s shift toward single-stream recycling. Included in recycling efforts are items such as batteries, monitors, corrugated cardboard, lamps, miscellaneous electronic office equipment, mixed paper, newsprint, food/beverage containers, and laboratory glassware. Ames National Laboratory also recycles/reuses salvageable metal, used oil, and foamed polystyrene peanuts, and encourages chemical redistribution and sharing among research groups. Ames National Laboratory reported its contractual performance to DOE-Ames Site Office (AMSO) through the Laboratory’s Performance Evaluation Measurement Plan (PEMP), and a performance level of “B+” was achieved in 2021 for Sustain Excellence and Enhance Effectiveness of Integrated Safety, Health, and Environmental Protection As reported in Site Environmental Reports for prior years, the Laboratory’s Environmental Management System (EMS) has been integrated into the Laboratory’s Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS) since 2005. The integration of EMS into Laboratory business practices allows the Laboratory to systematically review, address and respond to environmental impacts. In addition to DOE-identified objectives and targets, the EMS Steering Committee recommends annual environmental goals for the Laboratory. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and limited onsite work staff, goals of reducing water usage and travel/commuting to promote the reduction of scope 3 greenhouse gases were achieved. All contract deliverables and environmental compliance activities were still met during this time.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2021

Treatment of uncertainties for security-related design aspects of advanced reactors when using a risk-informed licensing approach

Sabotage of nuclear plants and theft of special nuclear material are different from many other issues potentially affecting public health and safety, and some of those differences drive the content of the present report. A high-level indication of these differences is provided in the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Safety Goal Policy. Promulgated in the mid-1980’s, when it had become reasonably clear that risk analysis had improved to the point where it was possible to understand the risks associated with plant operation, the Safety Goal Policy articulates qualitative safety goals and quantitative health objectives that are meant to guide regulatory and risk management activities, with the following key exceptions noted in the original policy statement: The possible effects of sabotage or diversion of nuclear material are also not presently included in the safety goals. At present there is no basis on which to provide a measure of risk on these matters. It is the Commission’s intention that everything that is needed will be done to keep these types of risks at their present very low level; and it is the Commission’s expectation that efforts on this point will continue to be successful. With these exceptions, it is the Commission’s intent that the risks from all the various initiating mechanisms be considered to the best of the capability of current evaluation techniques. The present report discusses extensions of classical risk management to address some of the special issues that arise in the context of security. Although the present emphasis is on physical security, some attention will be paid to cyber security. A particular focus of the report is on quantitative framework to manage and address uncertainties. This framework is demonstrated via a couple of hypothetical examples.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗