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 73 records · Page 4

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2023

Assessing the National Off-Cycle Benefits of 2-Layer HVAC Technology Using Dynamometer Testing and a National Simulation Framework

Some CO2-reducing technologies have real-world benefits not captured by regulatory testing methods. This paper documents a two-layer heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) system that facilitates faster engine warmup through strategic increased air recirculation. The performance of this technology was assessed on a 2020 Hyundai Sonata. Empirical performance of the technology was obtained through dynamometer tests at Argonne National Laboratory. Performance of the vehicle across multiple cycles and cell ambient temperatures with the two-layer technology active and inactive indicated fuel consumption reduction in nearly all cases. A thermally sensitive powertrain model, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's FASTSim Hot, was calibrated and validated against vehicle testing data. The developed model included the engine, cabin, and HVAC system controls. Validation of component thermal models and engine efficiency ensured accurate thermal dynamics, fuel consumption, and two-layer benefit. The real-world benefit of the two-layer technology was calculated by simulating the validated powertrain model across a representative test matrix comparing performance with and without the two-layer system. Simulation across the test matrix revealed a real-world representative benefit of 0.0835%. Analysis of test matrix results at the regional level revealed the most benefit in cold climates and rural regions. Mean results across cycle length sensitivity simulations revealed a larger real-world benefit of 0.0872%. These benefit values can be considered a more accurate assessment of real-world technology performance. Future work is planned to explore the requisite number of drive cycles to ensure the full technology benefit is captured.

2-layer↗

DOE OSTI2023

Xe-100 Pebble Bed Small Modular Reactor: Solving Critical Challenges to Enable the Xe-100 Pebble Bed Advanced Reactor Concept (ARC) (Final Scientific and Technical Report)

This is the final progress report for the Department of Energy (DOE) – X Energy, LLC cooperative agreement DENE0008472. This report provides a high-level summary of the work performed during the entire period of performance, running from July 1, 2016 – June 30, 2022. This span of time covers the original 5-year award and a one year no-cost extension. There were four tasks within this project: (1) project management, (2) reactor design furtherance, (3) fuel development, and (4) Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) engagement. Detailed reporting during execution of the project was provided by a total of 23 quarterly reports, 42 X-energy technical reports, and voluntary monthly update presentations. Other technical work products include 2 white papers and 2 Topical Report submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 15 Potential Inventions documented, 4 patents issued, 3 patents pending, 8 peer reviewed journal articles, and 2 Oak Ridge National Laboratory Technical Manuscripts. All the X Energy milestones/deliverables were met early or on time and are archived in the DOE Office of Nuclear Energy’s Program Information Control System: Nuclear Energy under Fiscal Year 2016, Work Breakdown Structure 2.07 – X-Energy. All other work products are available to DOE upon request.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2026

Evaluation of AI-Enabled Digital Documented Safety Analysis: A Case Study

Safety basis documentation development and review under U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) authorization have emerged as critical constraint throttling deployment of advanced nuclear reactors, with traditional processes demanding extraordinary resource investment that delays the delivery of these technologies. Traditional Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) processes rely on static documents with limited traceability [U.S. DOE]. The regulatory review and engagement processes are similarly constrained, often requiring significant effort and extensive manual verification. The scale of this challenge is exemplified by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) review of the NuScale application, which required over 250,000 staff hours and the evaluation of approximately two million pages of documentation [Bergman 2021]. The volume and complexity of information within nuclear licensing applications or authorization reviews demands innovative approaches to document generation and data management.

22 - GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2025

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Facility Radionuclide Emission Points and Sampling Systems

Battelle–Pacific Northwest Division operates numerous research and development laboratories in Washington State. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) contracts to Battelle at Richland facilities on both the DOE Hanford Site and the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) Richland campus. These facilities have the potential for radionuclide air emissions. The PNNL contract with DOE also includes operations at the PNNL-Sequim campus in Sequim, where there is also the potential for radionuclide air emissions. This document is a periodic update that describes current PNNL facility emission units and sampling systems. The National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP [40 Code of Federal Regulations 61, Subpart H]) requires an assessment of all emission units that have the potential for radionuclide air emissions. Emission units are registered with the State of Washington. Potential emissions from emission units are assessed annually by PNNL staff. Sampling, monitoring, and other regulatory compliance requirements are designated based on the potential to-emit dose criteria, a graded approach to facility-identified potential impact categories, and regulatory requirements. The purpose of this document is to describe the facility radionuclide air emission sampling program and provide current and historical facility emission unit system performance, operation, and design information. For sampled emission units, the building, exhaust unit, control technologies, and sample extraction details are provided. Additionally, applicable configuration drawings, figures, and photographs are included. For non-sampled emission units, emission estimation and radionuclide source details are provided. Site-wide permits for the lowest potential impact category are described. Deregistered/transitioned emission unit details are also provided as necessary for at least 5 years post-closure/transition. Currently, five emission units are sampled continuously for particulate radionuclides at PNNL managed facilities on the PNNL-Richland campus (3 of the 5) and on the Hanford Site (2 of the 5). Four of these units have sampling systems that comply with the American National Standards Institute/Health Physics Society (ANSI/HPS) N13.1–2011 standard for sampling from stacks and ducts of nuclear facilities, and the fifth is grandfathered and compliant with the older ANSI N13.1–1969 standard. In addition, the PNNL-managed Hanford Site 325 Building EP 325-01-S stack is sampled continuously for emissions of tritium. No emissions sampling is required for the single licensed emission unit on the PNNL-Sequim campus.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2021

Regulatory Research Planning for Micro-Reactor Development

A limited-scope Regulatory Research Development Plan (RRDP) is being developed to link important advanced non light water nuclear microreactor technology research and development (R&D) activities sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE NE), Science, and Technology to regulatory requirements and critical licensing needs likely to impact the deployment of a domestic commercial microreactor fleet. This document is a precursor to that forthcoming limited scope microreactor RRDP. This report is being published to aid in the identification of key fiscal year (FY) 2022 topical research opportunities (as conveyed to the RRDP development team) by respondent microreactor developers and suppliers in consideration of micro-reactor regulatory needs and challenges noted by industry, DOE, and Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) stakeholders. Although this document does not contain the regulatory effects analysis and R&D recommendations that is expected in the final RRDP, this document is being released now to assist DOE researchers and investigators in FY22 research planning activities.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2025

AI for Interpreting Nuclear Power Plant Documents for Power Uprates

To reduce the cost and time needed for regulatory compliance, nuclear power plants (NPPs) can utilize artificial intelligence (AI) to assist in interpreting complex and voluminous documents that typically span thousands of pages. Usually, the process of interpreting a plant’s technical specifications (TSs) and associated documents is labor intensive. This study aims to understand what processes state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) can automate and to identify the pitfalls associated with using LLMs to reduce human labor costs and time. This research uses a recent AI technology called retrieval augmented generation (RAG), which retrieves pages of information from TSs and associated documents to assist with NPP power uprates (cleared to produce more power). LLMs are integral to RAG because they create human-like responses based on the retrieved information, aiding in the interpretation and application processes. A baseline case demonstrates how LLMs can operate successfully for a power uprate application. Then five use cases show five types of potential failures: (1) RAG retrieving the incorrect information, (2) RAG misinterpreting the retrieved information, (3) RAG relying on knowledge not contained in the retrieved information, (4) RAG hallucinating, and (5) RAG refusing to answer. The results of the five use cases suggest that automating the human interpretation of TSs and associated documents with AI should be approached with caution. A subject-matter expert reviewed the AI outputs from the five use cases and concluded that an LLM can produce technical information that is needed to produce power uprate applications in certain instances.

21 - SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLAN↗

DOE OSTI2023

Cost of Fish Exclusion Technologies for Hydropower

This dataset compiles data on the costs of environmental mitigations related to fish exclusion for 35 hydropower projects based on documents obtained from the U.S Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Data for all measures and their associated project-specific information, including installed and hydraulic capacities, were manually extracted from environmental impact statements and/or environmental assessment (EIS/EA) documents. All data were consolidated in a comma-separated (.csv) file, referred to as the Cost of Fish Exclusion Technologies for Hydropower Database.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2021

An Examination of the Hydropower Licensing and Federal Authorization Process

Site-permitting and regulation are necessary to ensure hydropower projects (both original and relicensed) comply with statutory requirements and address multiple stakeholder priorities that consider a range of factors, including water quality, species protection, cultural resource impacts, and recreation. However, the time involved in acquiring a license for an individual hydropower project can be highly variable by project, leading to increased project costs, financial risks, and uncertainties. In part, this variability is the result of a regulatory structure that has evolved over time to include multiple approvals and compliance requirements administered by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (USACE), federal land management agencies, federal and state resource agencies, and Indian Tribes. Ultimately, the time, benefits, costs, and risks to developers associated with hydropower regulatory processes and/or the preparation (e.g., studies) required for regulatory agency review are not well documented or synthesized in the public domain, which may increase uncertainty and variability within the process. This report addresses these needs by presenting results of a comprehensive examination of hydropower licensing including quantitative and qualitative analyses of timelines, causal factors, and their combined effect on risk and costs to developers.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2025

Siting Analyses for Elementl Power (Final CRADA Report)

This report summarizes siting evaluation assistance provided to Elementl Power under CRADA/NFE-23-09638 for suitability of advanced nuclear technologies to meet siting criteria from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and associated guidance documents including the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) siting guide and other proprietary datasets. Elementl Power provided sites for reactor siting evaluations using the Oak Ridge – Siting Analysis for power Generation Expansion (OR-SAGE) tool. Individual data packages for each site are provided separately.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2026

Siting Analyses for Advanced Nuclear Advisors (Final CRADA Report)

This report summarizes siting evaluation assistance provided to Advanced Nuclear Advisors (ANA) under CRADA/NFE-25-10693 for suitability of advanced nuclear technologies to meet siting criteria from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and associated guidance documents including the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) siting guide and other proprietary datasets. Advanced Nuclear Advisors provided sites for reactor siting evaluations using the Oak Ridge – Siting Analysis for power Generation Expansion (OR-SAGE) tool. Individual data packages for each site are provided separately.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2020

Multi-Mechanism Flood Hazard Assessment: Critical Review of Current Practice and Approaches

This report documents the initial findings from the Nuclear Regulatory commission (NRC)-sponsored research project Methods for Estimating Joint Probabilities of Coincident and Correlated Flooding Mechanisms for Nuclear Power Plant Flood Hazard Assessments.1 This research project is a part of NRC’s Probabilistic Flood Hazard Assessment (PFHA) Research Program and will aid the development of guidance on the use of PFHA methods to evaluate infrastructure safety for existing and proposed US nuclear power plants (NPPs). More specifically, this project intends to provide technical background for the development of flood hazard curves for multi-mechanism floods (MMFs). MMFs are flood events caused by more than one flooding mechanism (e.g., flood events due to the simultaneous occurrence of precipitation-induced river flooding and storm surge). Project activities include three main tasks: Task 1—Survey of current concepts and methods in assessing MMF hazards; Task 2—Critical assessment of selected methods and approaches for quantifying probabilistic MMF hazard risk; Task 3—Development of example case studies to illustrate best practices for quantifying probabilistic MMF hazard risk The initial findings from Tasks 1 and 2 are documented in this report. Task 1 comprised a survey of approaches and methods that have been applied to understand and assess flood hazards due to MMFs. Task 2 involved a critical review of the selected approaches and methods. To that end, the scope of this report includes documentation of (1) a reconnaissance-level survey of the current state of concepts and practice for MMF hazard assessment; (2) a generalized MMF assessment framework to address the distinctions among various types of flood-forcing phenomena, flood mechanisms (grouped into three mechanism types), and flood severity metrics; (3) a wide-ranging survey of approaches and methods that have been applied to various flooding phenomena and settings; and (4) a critical assessment of MMF hazard assessment methods. Studies were identified involving MMFs related to coastal flooding mechanisms, fluvial (rivers/streams) flooding mechanisms, and associated combinations of coastal and fluvial flooding mechanisms. Studies were also identified that address MMFs involving coastal and fluvial flooding mechanisms as well as coastal flooding mechanisms along with extreme precipitation (without specific attribution to fluvial or pluvial mechanisms). The studies identified for review in this report included assessments at varying spatial scales (from local to global) with differing geographic regions of focus using both observed and synthetic data. The majority of studies identified and reviewed were site-specific assessments focusing on relatively short return periods. Studies considered a range of flood severity metrics, made differing assumptions regarding the occurrence of extrema, and used multiple statistical techniques; the use of copulas for the development of joint distributions was a particularly popular analysis technique. The literature review highlighted the differences among existing studies relative to terminology used, means of presenting results, framework and techniques employed, and level of sophistication regarding the number and types of variables considered. Despite the significant diversity in existing studies, the review identified several promising techniques that will be considered in future work under this project, including the development of joint distributions for MMFs using copula and Bayesian-motivated approaches.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗

DOE OSTI2021

Application of Point Precipitation Frequency Estimates to Watersheds

This report documents work sponsored by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) as part of the RES project, “Application of Point Precipitation Frequency Estimates to Watersheds.” This project was implemented as part of the Probabilistic Flood Hazard Assessment (PFHA) Research Program. The objective of the PFHA Research Program is to develop tools and guidance on the use of PFHA methods to risk-inform NRC’s licensing of new facilities as well as licensing and oversight of currently operating facilities as they relate to flooding hazards. Many nuclear power plants (NPPs) are located on or near rivers so riverine flooding hazards need to be considered in their design and operation. Probabilistic riverine flood models are important tools for realistic assessment of flooding risks. However, these models require areal estimates of the depth, duration, and frequency of rainfall distributed over the watershed, which are not often available. Point precipitation frequency estimates are more widely available. For example, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has published NOAA Atlas 14, which provides point precipitation frequency estimates for 5-minute through 60-day durations at average recurrence intervals of 1-year through 1,000-year. The research documented in this report addresses areal reduction factors (ARFs), which can be used to convert the widely available point precipitation frequency estimates, to estimates of areal precipitation frequency over a watershed. The most widely used ARF source is Technical Paper 29 (TP-29) published by the then U.S. Weather Bureau in 1958. However, both the methods and the underlying precipitation data used to produce TP-29 are seriously out of date. For example, due to the small gauge network available at the time of TP-29’s compilation, ARF estimates developed are only for watersheds smaller than about 400 square miles. Due to the relatively short record lengths of precipitation data available, frequency considerations could not be accurately determined. Other factors such as regional climate and seasonality were not addressed. Several newer methods have been published since TP-29 was developed and both the type and quantity of precipitation data have increased significantly, along with computational resources and analytical tools such as geographic information systems. This report reviewed and assessed the available precipitation products and methods for conducting ARF analysis. The work applied up-to-date precipitation data products and analysis methods with a novel watershed-based approach to investigate how ARF estimates vary across different methods, data sources, geographical locations, return periods, and seasons. The overall findings reported here regarding basic ARF trends are in line with other recent studies showing that ARFs decrease with increasing area, increase with increasing duration, and decrease with increasing return period. This study found significant differences among the available ARF methods. This work also found a strong geographical variability across different US hydrologic regions, suggesting that the ARF are specific to regional climate patterns and geographical characteristics and should not be applied arbitrarily to other locations. The results also reveal the importance of data record length, especially for high return level ARFs. The work reported in NUREG/CR-7271 will assist NRC staff in assessing different classes of ARF methods in conjunction with available rainfall data sets. It will also support the development of guidance for application of point precipitation data in PFHAs. It should be noted that the ARF values presented in this report for any location or region were developed for the purposes of comparing methods and investigating the factors that influence ARFs. They should not be considered official and should not be used in leu of a site-specific analysis.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2021

TCR Input to NUREG-1537 Process for Advanced Nuclear Technologies Derived from Additive Manufacturing

There has been a renewed interest by several advanced reactor developers to use NUREG-1537 “Guidelines for Preparing and Reviewing Applications for the Licensing of Non-Power Reactors” as a basis for their safety analysis report content and organization. Recently, SHINE Medical Technologies, LLC (SHINE), which is a non-power, Aqueous Homogenous Reactor design radioisotope production facility, received a construction permit based around their NUREG-1537 safety evaluation report (ADAMS No. ML16229A140). Advanced reactor developers are interested in using NUREG-1537 as a basis for their safety analysis report content and organization because of its successful application towards research reactors, graded approach, and simplicity in structure and requirements. However, NUREG-1537 is still largely geared toward light water reactors (LWRs) and many improvements could be made or supported through guidance documents for advanced reactors. For nuclear power to play a role in the future zero-carbon energy portfolio, a supportive regulatory structure is needed to lower regulatory uncertainty and barriers to deployment. At the time of this report, no such document or pathway exists for advanced nuclear technologies, including those derived from nontraditional technology such as advanced manufacturing technology (AMT) and, specifically, additive manufacturing. This report will explore and provide recommendations as to how advanced nuclear technologies derived from additive manufacturing technologies could employ the use of an ISG, other guidance document, or revisions to NUREG-1537 to lower the regulatory uncertainty and barriers for adoption.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2020

Costs of mitigating the environmental impacts of hydropower projects in the United States

Developers are required to mitigate the environmental impacts of hydropower projects in the United States (U.S.) but there is very little accessible information on the associated costs. This work compiles and analyses a dataset of environmental impacts mitigation costs for 182 hydropower projects based on documents obtained from the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The analysis shows that environmental costs vary wildly across hydropower project classes and mitigation measures, even when normalized by plant capacity. Capital costs per kilowatt are generally higher for relicensed conventional hydropower plants, and lower for new and relicensed pumped storage hydropower plants, relative to other project classes. Smaller plants tend to spend a higher share of total project costs on mitigating environmental impacts than larger plants, and measures related to Aquatic Species, Project Operations, and Recreation have the highest capital cost per kilowatt. These findings mean that environmental costs could become a key decision variable for new hydropower developments in the U.S. due to the small scale of most of the remaining potential and the increasing stringency of environmental requirements. Therefore, technologies to reduce the environmental impacts and costs of hydropower would be important for future project developments.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

Multi-Mechanism Flood Hazard Assessment: Critical Review of Current Practice and Approaches

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2020

Cost of Mitigating the Environmental Impacts of Hydropower Projects

The "Cost of Mitigating the Environmental Impacts of Hydropower Projects Database" compiles data on environmental impacts mitigation costs for 182 hydropower projects based on documents obtained from the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2020

Review of the Safety Analyses of the Konrad Repository - 20530

The Bundesgesellschaft fuer Endlagerung (BGE) is the license holder of all geological repository sites in Germany since 2017. Besides the construction of the Konrad repository for the emplacement of low- and intermediate-level waste (LILW), the operation of the Asse II mine including the retrieval of the emplaced waste, and the preparation for the closure of the Morsleben repository, BGE is responsible to carry out the operative tasks of selecting a site for a high-level waste (HLW) repository. The Konrad repository is Germany's first repository for radioactive waste with negligible heat generation, which was fully licensed under atomic law within the scope of a plan approval procedure from the original application in 1982 until the license was granted in 2002 and finally confirmed by the Federal Administrative Court in 2007. The emplacement of LILW was licensed up to a volume of 303,000 m{sup 3} with a total β/γ-activity of 5 x 10{sup 18} Bq and a total α-activity of 1.5 x 10{sup 17} Bq. Currently, the former iron ore mine Konrad is being converted to a repository and is expected to come into operation in 2027. But what if there is no safety case in place nor a regulatory framework tailored for a change of documents in order to ensure the safety according to the state-of-the-art of science and technology during the evolution of a long-term project such as a geological repository? In this presentation, a review procedure of the safety analyses, that have been the basis of the plan approval decision for the Konrad repository at that time, will be described. Furthermore, the first results of this graduated review procedure for updating the safety analyses will be presented. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2024

Criticality Safety Support for Deactivated Facilities at Savannah River Site

The Savannah River Site (SRS) has a number of nuclear facilities. Some date back to the mid-1950s while others are actively being built today. As facilities have aged and missions changed, a number of the older nuclear facilities have gone through various stages of deactivation, decontamination, decommissioning, and dismantlement (D4). Due to the nature of the site’s historic missions a number of these facilities processed and utilized significant quantities of fissionable materials. D4 activities have now spanned multiple decades and as such have spanned multiple regulatory and industry standards have variety of documentation levels associated with them.

Stover, Tracy E.↗