Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “federal office”

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.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 73 records · Page 4

WPTO Peer Review 2019 Report

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Water Power Technologies Office (WPTO) hosted the 2019 Project Peer Review on October 8-10, 2019 in Alexandria, Virginia. The majority of projects in WPTO's Fiscal Year 2017‒2018 research and development (R&D) portfolio were presented to the public and systematically reviewed by external subject-matter experts from industry, academia, and federal agencies.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗

Enabling Solar Cybersecurity Solutions Through State Energy Office and Public Utility Commission Engagement with Private Sector Partners (Final Technical Report)

Between 2020 and 2025, the National Association of State Energy Officials (NASEO), together with the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC) established and managed the Enabling Solar Cybersecurity Solutions Through State Energy Office and Public Utility Commission Engagement with Private Sector Partners project, later informally retitled and recognized as the Cybersecurity Advisory Team for State Solar (CATSS). This effort convened State Energy Offices, Public Utility Commissions, and critical private sector and federal partners to inform the development of solar cybersecurity education and action-oriented resources for states. This is the final report.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

The Third Assessment of the Effects of Climate Change on Federal Hydropower

Understanding the future changes in projected water supplies is a vital objective for federal hydropower facilities tasked with providing low-cost, reliable electricity across a large regional footprint that encompasses a growing customer base, alternative market structures for marketing the electricity, and a more diverse generation asset mix than was historically present when a majority of federal hydropower facilities were built. This study, The Third Assessment of the Effects of Climate Change on Federal Hydropower, directed by Section 9505 of the SECURE Water Act of 2009 (SWA), is the third quinquennial report on evaluating the effects of climate change on hydroelectric energy generated from 132 US federal hydropower plants marketed by four US Department of Energy (DOE) Power Marketing Administrations (PMAs). The technical assessment is conducted by DOE’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, and Texas A&M University under the guidance of DOE’s Water Power Technologies Office. This study is the result of extensive consultation with the four federal PMAs (Bonneville Power Administration [BPA], Western Area Power Administration [WAPA], Southwestern Power Administration [SWPA], and Southeastern Power Administration [SEPA]), as well as other agencies, including federal hydropower owners/operators (the US Army Corps of Engineers, US Bureau of Reclamation [Reclamation]), US Geological Survey, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). The main findings of this assessment, along with the PMA administrators’ recommendations, will be included in a subsequent DOE report to Congress. The assessment method and the technical findings are described in this report.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

PR100: Puerto Rico Grid Resilience and Transition to 100% Renewable Energy [Slides]

Puerto Rico has committed to meeting its electricity needs with 100% renewable energy by 2050. The PR100: Puerto Rico Grid Resilience and Transition to 100% Renewable Energy study, led by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), will leverage world-class expertise, cross-sector modeling capabilities, and community engagement to generate feasible pathways to affordable and reliable electricity across the archipelago. PR100 is being funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency through an interagency agreement with DOE's Office of Electricity to support recovery efforts in the island's energy sector leveraging the expertise and capabilities of the National Laboratories including Argonne, Lawrence Berkeley, NREL, Oak Ridge, Pacific Northwest, and Sandia. The public is invited to this virtual launch event to learn more about the scope and benefits of the study and opportunities for engagement. Welcoming remarks will be provided by Jennifer M. Granholm, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Energy; Martin Keller, Director of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory; and Deanne Criswell, Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

100% renewable energy↗

Partnership and Pipeline Office Overview [Slides]

Partnerships ensure a strong Laboratory and support our missions. Partnerships are critical to our success as a Laboratory: community relations, colleges and universities and technical communities, regional and national economic development through industrial partners, DOE Laboratories, and other federal agencies. The Laboratory has many tools to build and enhance partnerships. The Community Programs Office in our Northern New Mexico Region has K-12 educational programs, supports teacher professional development and retention in regional elementary, middle and high schools, and provides community college engagement. The Partnerships and Pipeline Office works with the National Security Education Center (NSEC) which has broad university engagement including New Mexico universities. The Feynman Center for Innovation is involved in 'tech transfer' to innovation asset stewardship. The External Assignments Office shares LANL's technical expertise. The Student and Postdoc Program Offices build our workforce of the future.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗

National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program Annual Report: Plan Year 2022-2023

The National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula Program provides nearly $5 billion over 5 years to help states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico (hereafter referred to as “states”) create a network of fast EV charging stations along designated Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Alternative Fuel Corridors (AFCs), with emphasis along the Interstate Highway System. The first-year deployment plans were submitted to and reviewed by the Joint Office and FHWA and certified by FHWA in September 2022. To support the rollout of the NEVI Formula Program, the Joint Office has been providing technical assistance to the states since February 2022 and has developed DriveElectric.gov to serve as the front door for federal efforts to build out a national charging network. This report summarizes the key activities of the Joint Office in relation to the NEVI program and provides an individual and collective overview of the first-year deployment plans. The Joint Office will utilize the summary of these plans to inform program improvement and future technical assistance activities to support the states as they begin to implement their EV charging infrastructure.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗

Radon Survey of Los Alamos National Laboratory Buildings and Los Alamos County Residential Buildings

A radon survey of office spaces was of interest to LANL for several reasons. First, exposure to natural radon in LANL office spaces has been considered to be outside the regulatory reach of the federal regulations and the U.S. Department of Energy (U.S. DOE) orders, and thus has not been studied as extensively as occupational exposure to other radionuclides and is not subject to the same rigorous radiological controls. Second, a general survey of radon concentrations in LANL workspaces was of interest to management to ensure safe environments for workers and is in keeping with the intent of OSHA requirements. Though radon in LANL offices would not be derived from enhanced radioactive sources, radon exposure in general office spaces has the potential to significantly impact worker risk. The purpose of the 2009 radon survey was to measure and document indoor radon levels across a broad spectrum of office-type workspaces and neighboring homes. The measured concentrations were compared against those measured across the United States and across the world. The results were also compared against a wide variety of radiation protection thresholds such as (1) the action levels of 148 Bq m -3 (the U.S. EPA action level for public housing), (2) ≈1,200 Bq m -3 OSHA threshold for office spaces, (3) effective dose threshold of 1 mSv threshold for defining a radiological worker, (4) 50 mSv occupational effective dose limit, and (5) 0.1 mSv and 1 mSv limits for public exposures from the air pathway and all pathways, respectively.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗

PR100 Final Results

This presentation includes a summary of the final results from the Puerto Rico Grid Resilience and Transition to 100% Renewable Energy Study (PR100). Led by the U.S. Department of Energy's Grid Deployment Office and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, and funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the PR100 Study was a two-year effort resulting in stakeholder-driven pathways for Puerto Rico to meet its clean energy goals. For Spanish version see https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy24osti/88975.pdf.

100% renewable energy target↗

University Data Management Pilot Utilizing the Nuclear Research Data System

Background In 2022, the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) issued a memo that significantly reshaped the landscape of access to federally funded research. The memo mandated that all taxpayer-funded research be made available to the public without delay upon publication, without an embargo period, superseding the 2013 OSTP public access policy. This public access policy promotes transparency and the democratization of knowledge, ensuring that the fruits of scientific endeavors funded by federal agencies could be immediately accessed and built upon by scientists, educators, students, and the public at large. To implement the requirements of the OSTP guidance and DOE Public Access Plan, the Office of Nuclear Energy (NE) has implemented public access plan guidance and has identified several areas where better data management practices would further expand public access to important nuclear energy related scientific data, reports, and other technical products. Significant NE supported efforts are already underway for data management and public access to important nuclear energy related data.1 2 To address gaps in data management practices, and improve retention and accessibility of data, NE is actively exploring enhanced data management options utilizing its high-performance computing resources administered by its Nuclear Scientific User Facility Program. A newly piloted system, the Nuclear Research Data System (NRDS) acts as a portal for data collection and dissemination. Nuclear Energy University Program Research and Development Portfolio According to Web of Science, NEUP has produced 2,345 journal publication that have been cited more than 61,000 times3 and countless conference proceedings. These publications are publicly available through OSTI.gov and in the open literature. Additional scientific and technical products including project milestones that are not publications and NEUP project final reports are vetted through OSTI.gov and released once reviewed and approved by DOE. Since 2009, NEUP has awarded close to 1,000 different R&D projects in technical areas across the NE research programs. As of June 2023, 512 NEUP reports are publicly available on OSTI. The underlying data for projects is still held at universities, and data transfer, co-location, and dissemination has not occurred in a systematic way. NEUP data is currently accessible through myriad university-based data repositories, or through direct requests to PIs. The program identified this patchwork of repositories, or often lack of publicly available data, as a significant barrier to an organized, accessible, and comprehensive solution to sharing data with the larger nuclear energy community. Approach The goal of this pilot project is to establish a pathway to a consolidated long-term repository for NEUP project data. To accomplish this goal, the pilot strives to accomplish the following objectives: Establish data collection standards, including a standard set of required supplementary information to contextualize and support raw data files. Work with the HPC group collect and upload information and to modify the NRDS system, as needed, to support a standardized approach. Resolve potential barriers to successful roll out of an expanded data collection strategy, including modifying data management plan guidelines and establishing a document and data release process that accounts for potential intellectual property and/or export control concerns. Results Overall, the pilot was successful in collecting 8,982 raw and processes data files, 220 reports, 56 calibration files, and 5,931 other supplementary documents. Supplementary documents included experimental plans, methods, journal publications and conference proceedings, milestone reports, and final reports. Figure 2 shows the number of data sets and supplementary project information provided by each project. Projects has significantly different input, depending on experimental data produced and completeness of the datasets provided.

Data collection↗

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↗

Resumen del Informe de Progreso del PR100: Resultados Preliminares del Modelo y Conjuntos de Datos Solares y Eólica de Alta Resolución

El estudio de Resiliencia y Transiciones a 100% Energia Renovable de Puerto Rico (PR100) es un estudio de 2 anos de la Oficina de Movilizacion de la Red del Departamento de Energia y seis laboratorios nacionales para analizar exhaustivamente las rutas dirigidas por las personas interesadas hacia un futuro de energia limpia en Puerto Rico. En el Ano 1 del estudio, el equipo PR100, creo y analizo los modelos que alcanzan las metas de energia renovable para Puerto Rico y los objetivos de resiliencia energetica a corto y largo plazo. Este informe, que resume el progreso en el Ano 1, proporciona las consideraciones que pueden informar posibles decisiones de fondos e implementacion potenciales por parte de las agencias federales y locales clave y partes interesadas. El resumen de este informe sigue a la publicacion en julio 2022 de un Informe de Seis Meses de Progreso de PR100. (en ingles y espanol), asi como webinarios publicos en febrero 2022 para lanzar el estudio y julio 2022 para presentar la actualizacion a 6 meses. Un informe final por escrito y visuales por la web seran publicados a finales del 2023. Todas las publicaciones y eventos publicos asociados con el estudio estaran disponibles en ingles y espanol. This report is also available in English https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy23osti/85018.pdf.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

Transportation and Systems Analysis Collaborations in Support of a Federal Consolidated Interim Storage Facility

The U.S. Department of Energy’s Integrated Waste Management (IWM) program under the Office of Nuclear Energy is planning for the future transportation, storage, and eventual disposal of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste (HLW) from nuclear power plant sites across the United States. To better enable informed decision-making regarding the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle, the IWM program has been sponsoring the development and application of system analysis tools capable of analyzing various options for managing SNF and HLW. With these tools, integrated waste management system (IWMS) architecture analyses are being conducted to support the future deployment of a comprehensive nuclear waste management system that considers all major back-end aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle (i.e., transportation, storage, and disposal). System analyses and assessments typically use these modeling and simulation tools to investigate implications of changes in various assumptions and parameters such as acceptance rates, receipt logic, facility capacities and capabilities, use of standardized canisters, start and stop dates of facilities, etc. The Next Generation System Analysis Model (NGSAM) is an agent-based simulation toolkit that is used for a system-level simulation and analysis focused on SNF management in the United States. An analyst using NGSAM has the ability to define several factors like the number of storage facilities, capacity at each facility, transportation schedules, shipment rates, and other conditions. NGSAM’s primary purpose is to provide a system analyst with capabilities to model the IWMS and gain insights into SNF and HLW management alternatives including the impact of system choices, associated cost estimates, and development of integrated yet flexible approaches. IWM is also developing the Stakeholder Tool for Assessing Radioactive Transportation (START). START is a web-based geospatial tool developed to provide visualization and initial evaluation of transportation options associated with future SNF and HLW shipment planning and operations. This includes characterizing safety, economic, and environmental conditions on and in proximity to shipment origins as well as along prospective transportation routes. Information from the START tool can be presented/shared as maps, graphics, geospatial files, and tabular form to enable easy data representation and export functionality. The system analysis, NGSAM, and START teams had been working closely for several years before formalizing this collaboration. START provides the SNF routing information for use in NGSAM. System analysts use the NGSAM tool to generate results (schedule, costs, infrastructure acquisitions, shipment rates, etc.). Subject-matter experts and system analysts work together to inform how NGSAM should model the waste management system. Specifically, this paper discusses the collaborations between the system analysis, NGSAM, and START teams and their accomplishments over the past year. Some examples of these efforts include calibrating and adding data to the START output files to meet NGSAM needs, gaining a better understanding of START data used in NGSAM, as well as how updates in START data could result in an improved NGSAM analysis. Detailed examples of various tasks that have been performed by the team will be discussed in the full paper. Continued efforts in this direction are expected in the coming years.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

Transportation and System Analysis Collaborations in Support of a Federal Consolidated Interim Storage Facility

The U.S. Department of Energy’s Integrated Waste Management (IWM) program under the Office of Nuclear Energy is planning for the future transportation, storage, and eventual disposal of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste (HLW) from nuclear power plant and waste custodian sites across the United States. To better enable informed decision-making regarding the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle, the IWM program has been sponsoring the development and application of system analysis tools capable of analyzing various options for managing SNF and HLW. With these tools, integrated waste management system (IWMS) architecture analyses are being conducted to support the future deployment of a comprehensive nuclear waste management system that considers all major back-end aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle (i.e., transportation, storage, and disposal). System analyses and assessments typically use these modeling and simulation tools to investigate implications of changes in various assumptions and parameters such as acceptance rates, receipt logic, facility capacities and capabilities, use of standardized canisters, start and stop dates of facilities, etc. The Next Generation System Analysis Model (NGSAM) is an agent-based simulation toolkit that is used for a system-level simulation and analysis focused on SNF management in the United States. NGSAM’s primary purpose is to provide a system analyst with capabilities to model the IWMS and gain insights into SNF and HLW management alternatives including the impact of system choices, associated cost estimates, and development of integrated yet flexible approaches. An analyst using NGSAM can define several factors like the number of storage facilities, capacity at each facility, transportation schedules, shipment rates, and other conditions. IWM is also developing the Stakeholder Tool for Assessing Radioactive Transportation (START). START is a web-based geospatial tool developed to provide the visualization and initial evaluation of transportation options associated with future SNF and HLW shipment planning and operations. This includes characterizing safety, economic, and environmental conditions at and in proximity to shipment origins as well as along prospective transportation routes. Information from the START tool can be presented/shared as maps, graphics, geospatial files, and tabular form to enable easy data representation and export functionality. The system analysis, NGSAM, and START teams have been working closely for several years before formalizing this collaboration. START provides the SNF transportation routing information for use in NGSAM. System analysts use the NGSAM tool to generate results (schedule, costs, infrastructure acquisitions, shipment rates, etc.). Subject-matter experts and system analysts work together to inform how NGSAM should model the waste management system. Specifically, this paper discusses the collaborations between the system analysis, NGSAM, and START teams and their accomplishments over the past year. Some examples of these efforts include calibrating and adding data to the START output files to meet NGSAM needs, gaining a better understanding of START data used in NGSAM as well as how updates in START data could result in an improved NGSAM analysis. Detailed examples of various tasks that have been performed by the team will be discussed in the full paper. Continued efforts in this direction are expected in the coming years.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

2026 Annual Molten Salt Reactor Campaign Review

This report documents the 2026 Annual Molten Salt Reactor (MSR) Campaign Review held in Albuquerque, New Mexico, from April 21–24, 2026. The review was organized by Dr. Patricia Paviet, National Technical Director of the Advanced Reactor Technology (ART) MSR program for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE), and included participation from principal investigators, federal managers, developers, regulators, and members of the broader MSR community. The 2026 review expanded beyond the ART-MSR campaign to include related DOE-NE programs supporting molten salt reactor advancement, including the Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation (NEAMS) program, the Advanced Materials and Manufacturing Technologies (AMMT) program, Advanced Reactor Safeguards and Security (ARSS), Material Protection, Accounting and Control Technologies (MPACT), and relevant advanced fuels activities. Three days were dedicated to technical presentations and panel discussions covering thermal properties, off-gas management, modeling and simulation, safety and licensing, safeguards and security, materials and corrosion, and irradiation activities. A fourth day was dedicated to technical tours of Sandia National Laboratories and Kairos Power facilities. Attendance was strong and comparable to the prior annual review, with approximately 75 in-person participants per day, 75–80 virtual attendees per day, and approximately 30 participants in the tour day. The review fostered significant technical exchange across national laboratories, universities, industry, regulators, and international participants. This report summarizes the review structure, technical themes, participation, tours, feedback, and conclusions relevant to future planning for the MSR campaign.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

Life-Cycle Baseline Customization for the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program - 20304

One of the responsibilities of the federal government is to estimate sound and defensible life-cycle baseline costs for use in federal budget estimates and to meet federal financial reporting requirements. To accomplish this, the US Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Legacy Management (LM) and the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) have partnered together to ensure that the liabilities documented in each Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) site's life-cycle baseline are specifically tailored. FUSRAP was created in the mid-1970's to clean up radiological contamination resulting from the early development of nuclear weapons. DOE was responsible for FUSRAP until October 1997, when Congress transferred the administration and execution of FUSRAP site cleanups to USACE. By 1997, DOE had completed the cleanup of 25 of the 46 sites that were active within the program and had begun cleanup at 13 additional sites. USACE was assigned responsibility for the cleanup of the 21 remaining FUSRAP sites, and at 8 additional sites that had since been referred for cleanup. The LM mission for the FUSRAP sites is to perform long-term surveillance and maintenance (LTS and M). Currently, LM provides long-term stewardship for 34 completed FUSRAP sites. Another 20 sites are under active remediation by USACE. Within the last 5 years, USACE has completed the cleanup at five FUSRAP sites and the LTS and M responsibility has been transferred to LM. By 2029, USACE will compete remediation at eight additional sites and LTS and M for those sites will transfer to LM. Because responsibilities for the FUSRAP sites transfer between USACE and LM upon completion of remedial actions, both agencies maintain life-cycle baselines for different stages of the project and both must have a strong understanding of the needs and requirements for each site. This understanding ensures that the life-cycle baselines form a complete and accurate picture of what is required for the site and for the FUSRAP program. LM focuses on several things when customizing the life-cycle baseline estimates for the FUSRAP sites, including (1) Understanding the unique requirements for each site. By reviewing site-specific documents prepared by USACE, such as Feasibility Studies and Records of Decision, and partnering with USACE to gain additional insight about site conditions and requirements for stewardship, as well as potential risks, LM can better develop the life-cycle baselines. (2) Developing site-specific labor breakdowns. This ensures the required labor mix is baselined for specific activities by comparing the labor mix required to perform activities at (a) other LM-managed FUSRAP sites and (b) non-FUSRAP LM sites and (c) by USACE at active FUSRAP sites. (3) Taking a tiered approach to life-cycle baseline planning. Estimates for sites transferring to LM in the near term (5 years) are more definitive than for sites transferring in the out-year period. Remedial actions at the near-term sites are at or near completion, providing LM a strong understanding of the LTS and M requirements and remaining liabilities. This in turn allows for site-specific customization of the baseline. (4) Using a robust risk management approach to ensure that liabilities specific to each site are identified, evaluated by probability and severity, and documented in relation to the impact to cost or schedule. To ensure the most accuracy within all the baselines, the FUSRAP life-cycle baselines are updated as needed to support program, project, and contract management needs. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Impact of Glen Canyon Generation Loss

Colorado River Basin hydropower generation has faced challenges due to droughts and ecological and social water requirements. Specifically, Glen Canyon hydropower generation fluctuates substantially with recent extreme weather trends. Further, the western grid evolves with higher wind and solar share, and Glen Canyon hydropower's contribution to grid flexibility services is essential. The Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) markets and schedules electricity production at GCD, and the loss of this power could have significant financial consequences for the WAPA Colorado River Storage Project's (CRSP) Office because it may need to purchase relatively large amounts of energy to serve its firm electrical obligations. In addition, GCD provides grid reliability services for the WAPA Colorado-Missouri (WACM) balancing authority (BA). Both WAPA and DOE's Water & Power Technology Office (WPTO) are interested in researching how these drier hydrological conditions will impact federal electrical energy production, the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) power grid, and the value of hydropower in the face of lower production. We study multiple hydrologic and power grid scenarios to understand the grid impacts of the loss of Glen Canyon generation. The study uses a production cost model, water resources planning models, water-centric grid models, and various data analytic techniques. The study progress presentation discusses the selection of probable CRSP' hydropower scenarios and power grid scenarios to understand the impacts of Glen Canyon generation, which includes technologies that compensate the Glen Canyon energy and ancillary services contributions, transmission availability, and energy local marginal prices at interested grid locations of WAPA operation.

droughts↗

Developing a Process for Collaboration-Based Siting of a Federal Consolidated Interim Storage Facility in the United States: Learning from Communities Living with Legacy Waste

In June of 2023, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Nuclear Energy (NE) announced the selection of its Collaboration-Based Siting (CBS) Consortia, a group of 12 awardees, including the Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP) (led by Vanderbilt University) to assist DOE-NE with the development of its process for siting a federal consolidated interim storage facility (FCISF) for spent nuclear fuel (SNF) storage. At this time, DOE NE is not soliciting interested host communities, rather the CBS Consortia are tasked with in-depth engagement, mutual learning, and capacity building to provide DOE NE with feedback on the CBS process. CRESP’s objective is to engage communities in two regions (the Pacific Northwest and the Southeast) with sites currently storing defense- and research-related SNF to foster learning concerning the best and worst practices in community participation in risk-informed decision making. This includes learning from existing structures for public input in radioactive waste management decision making [e.g. citizen advisory boards (CABs)] and other local parties about how to build and sustain trust among the parties. CRESP has been working to engage stakeholders and Tribes surrounding two DOE sites historically differing in receptiveness to engaging with DOE and trusting in DOE to accomplish its missions. CRESP’s approach to date has consisted of (1) engaging voluntarily members and former members of the DOE Office of Environmental Management’s CABs to develop a mutual understanding of their perspectives, values, and experiences related to risk and participatory decision making; (2) engaging members of those communities that would likely be part of any radioactive waste management discussions and who may provide valuable feedback for the development of the CBS process; and in the longer term, (3) engaging communities to foster knowledge sharing on understanding and definitions of risk and how risk is factored into community decision making. Our emphasis is to identify opportunities for improving risk communication frameworks, strategies, and decision making. The selection of a future FCISF site is likely to result in the creation of a structure similar to a CAB composed of members of the local community. We anticipate that these insights can help DOE NE learn from existing participatory risk communication structures in place at sites storing defenseor research-related SNF to understand best practices for fostering enduring and participatory relationships with future CABs. Within this paper, we (1) describe CRESP’s overall approach to assisting DOE NE with maturing the CBS process; (2) present a summary of preliminary phase 1 project results, including the development of a body of knowledge (describing available resources to support community engagement, risk communica tion, and participatory decision making) and community ecosystem information (leveraging demographic, social, economic, and environmental attribute mapping and advanced sentiment analysis of social media data); and (3) based on these results, provide observations for future research opportunities to support the development of CBS processes for radioactive waste management facilities, generally.

collaboration-based siting↗

PNNL Review of Federal and State Agency Regulatory Streamlining Practices

All major federal actions that have the potential to significantly affect the environment (e.g., land purchases and/or issuing grants, permits, leases, or licenses) are subject to multiple statutes including the following: • an environmental analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) • potential consultations with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA) • potential consultations with State Historical Preservation Officers (SHPOs) and/or tribal nations [often Tribal Historic Preservation Officers (THPOs)] under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA). Given the size of the federal government and the corresponding variability and complexity in its missions, different branches within the federal government have a fairly wide range of approaches to fulfill their NEPA and consultation requitements. Many of these approaches are founded on the desire to streamline their NEPA and consultation processes while meeting the spirit and letter of the regulations. Some federal and state environmental/engineering agencies have developed web-based dashboards that provide a single web location for permit application submittals. They also use general permits in their various permitting processes. General permits can streamline the permitting process by establishing identical requirements for all eligible applicants. This reduces the time these agencies need to spend reviewing individual permits and setting specific requirements. In addition, general permits do not require a case-specific permit application. This paper presents a sampling of effective agency examples of streamlining the NEPA process and associated agency consultations. It also includes several examples of federal and state agency web portals, online application systems, and general permits that make application processes more efficient and accessible.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗