SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “RESOURCE CONSERVATION”

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 91 records · Page 5

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2025

Circularity Futures Workshop Series: Summary Report

The aim of this report is to synthesize key feedback received from the three-part Circularity Futures workshop series held in Spring 2024. The workshop series was conducted by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) on behalf of U.S. Department of Energy, Office Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), and was broken into three workshops: Workshop 1 - Circularity Analysis Needs and Priorities; Workshop 2 - Circularity Metrics and Indicators; and Workshop 3 - Circularity Data. Together, the workshops focused on identifying the existing priorities and gaps in the circularity modeling space, understanding different stakeholders' use and interpretation of circularity metrics and indicators, identifying common data gaps and data quality challenges, and assessing the robustness of available solutions. The workshop series brought a diverse group of stakeholders - including representatives from U.S. government offices, national labs, nonprofit organizations, industry, and academia - to collect first-hand feedback on needs, priorities, challenges and opportunities in the circularity modeling and analysis space. The workshop discussions highlighted numerous common needs, priorities and challenges among the interviewed groups. Several topics were frequently discussed, including: 1) Circularity as a pathway for sustainable economic growth: While circularity is generally defined in terms of resource conservation and reducing wasteful disposal of materials, participants agreed that circular strategies should serve broader economic, environmental, and social goals. It is therefore crucial for circularity analysis to look beyond waste reduction and instead evaluate a variety of impact metrics such as cost savings, job creation, air quality, and pollutant emissions. Mutli-criteria decision-making frameworks may be useful for making sense of disparate metrics and evaluating tradeoffs between impact categories.; 2) Economic and social factors are not well understood: Underdevelopment of existing end-of-life (EOL) management infrastructure, inconsistent standardization codes and policy space in reusing recycled content, and suboptimal collection and sorting strategies collectively contribute to uncertainty about the economic potential of circular pathways. The latter observation is consistent among all technologies but more emphasized for renewable energy systems. Social impacts of circularity practices are less understood and less researched than other sustainability aspects.; 3) Inconsistent methods for assessing emerging technologies: LCA and TEA results vary widely depending on the assumptions made with regards to market adoption of new technologies. Emerging technologies suffer limited availability of data needed to conduct a robust circularity analysis. Yet, understanding projected impacts of proposed nascent technology is a key need for different stakeholder groups.; and 4) Lack of temporally and geospatially explicit data: There is a need for open data that represents variations in circularity technologies over time and location. The lack thereof leads to aggregated and potentially misrepresented results in circularity analysis. Sensitivity analyses should be included to verify whether options perceived as more sustainable align with real-world practices.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2025

Pantex Plant Ogallala Aquifer and Perched Groundwater Contingency Plan

The Pantex Plant Ogallala Aquifer and Perched Groundwater Contingency Plan has been developed in accordance with the requirements identified in the: • Interagency Agreement for the Pantex Superfund Site, Article 8.5 Work to be Performed, • Compliance Plan Provision of Hazardous Waste Permit No. 50284, and • Record of Decision for Groundwater, Soil, and Associated Media, Pantex Plant. A Long‐Term Monitoring System Design has been designed to monitor conditions in the perched groundwater including changes in the perched aquifer as a result of implementing the response actions. Monitoring is required for verifying the effectiveness of perched groundwater response actions (i.e., conditions in the perched aquifer are being affected as intended) and for confirming that the perched aquifer and Ogallala Aquifer characterization as defined in the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Facility Investigation Report and the Corrective Measure Studies/Feasibility Study remains accurate. If monitoring results obtained through the monitoring network identify an unexpected condition or deviation, contingent actions will be considered and implemented as necessary to ensure continued protection of the Ogallala Aquifer and human health and the environment. Potential deviations to expected technology performance may be encountered for each of the four primary response actions that compose the selected remedy for perched groundwater; Playa 1 Pump and Treat System, Southeast Area Pump and Treat System, Southeast Area In‐Situ Bioremediation System (comprised of the Southeast In‐Situ Bioremediation System Original System, Southeast Area In‐Situ Bioremediation System Extension System, Offsite In‐Situ Bioremediation System, Perchlorate/Chromium ISB, Northeast ISB and County Road 8 ISB), and Zone 11 In‐Situ Bioremediation System. Monitoring will also be conducted to determine if there are deviations to the expected characterization, e.g., contaminants not expected as a result of the RCRA Facility Investigation characterization. Deviations to expected conditions in the Ogallala Aquifer could also be encountered if the response actions in the perched groundwater are not performing as expected, i.e., preventing contaminants from migrating to the Ogallala Aquifer. Currently, Pantex has begun investigation of detections of high explosives above groundwater protection standards in wells on the Texas Tech University property and a plume that is moving to the northeast from that area. Due to those detections, this Plan recognizes the fact that future detections in the Ogallala will be focused on first‐ time detections of analytes. After a remedy is determined, this Plan will require modification to address-deviations and contingent actions. This Plan was developed to identify the contingent actions necessary to mitigate impacts resulting from deviations to site conditions or response action performance. The Plan defines the environmental problem being addressed by the response actions, clarifies the expected conditions and objectives of the response actions, and identifies the potential deviations to the response actions (due to site conditions or technology performance) that could be encountered. The deviations were evaluated to determine the likelihood of occurrence, potential impact, and time to respond to avoid impact. The Plan also identifies the monitoring outlined in the Long‐Term Monitoring System Design Report (Consolidated Nuclear Security, 2024) and Sampling Analysis Plan (PanTeXas Deterrence, 2024) that will be used to detect the deviations. Lastly, the Plan specifies the contingent actions that could be implemented in response to the deviations. Because each response focuses on a discrete portion of the perched aquifer and contaminant plume, each response action has a different set of expected conditions, and therefore differing impacts from deviations to the site and technology expectations. As a result, the contingent actions are identified for each response action and potential deviation including specific constituents, location, and conditions. If deviations are encountered that impact the ability of the response action to meet performance objectives, the contingent actions will be focused on ensuring the response action can meet the performance objective. Contingent actions may be implemented as interim actions (ISMs/removal actions) in accordance with the Record of Decision, Interagency Agreement, and Hazardous Waste Permit‐50284, if warranted by the specific circumstances. For deviations to site characterization expected conditions, the contingent action will focus on determination of the source of the deviation, determination of the appropriate response, and evaluation of additional work to be completed. However, if the deviation to characterization impacts the performance of the response action, the contingent action will again focus on ensuring performance objectives can be met. Early source term removals and cleanup actions have been implemented to protect the Ogallala Aquifer. Because of these actions and based on modeling results, the expected conditions in the Ogallala Aquifer are that constituents of concern will not be detected above the Groundwater Protection Standards (GWPSs) nor will they reach potential points of exposure above the GWPS. The primary deviation of concern for the Ogallala is if constituents are detected in the Ogallala Aquifer near or above GWPSs. If it occurs, this change in expected conditions would require further evaluation of site and contaminant characteristics to determine an appropriate course of action. The evaluation would include additional monitoring, source identification, implementation of interim protective measures (if necessary), and delineation of extent. These evaluations are necessary to determine an appropriate response action for the Ogallala. The primary goal of the Plan is to provide for the continued protection of the Ogallala Aquifer and the health of its consumers. In recognition, this Plan presents a flexible and rational approach for making future decisions associated with confirming the change in perched and Ogallala aquifer conditions and identifying a response (technical activities, changes to response actions, regulatory oversight, and public involvement).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2025

Replacement of Fly Ash with Natural Pozzolans in Cementitious Waste Forms: Progress Report

The Department of Energy Environmental Management (DOE EM) Office is currently responsible for treating radioactive and mixed waste, environmental restoration, and closing contaminated tanks and facilities resulting from radioactive isotope production for defense applications during the Cold War. Cementitious reagents are the most widely used materials for (1) chemically stabilizing and encapsulating radionuclides and hazardous metals contaminated with radionuclides and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous metals and (2) solidifying radioactive and mixed wastewater for final disposal. Cementitious grouts and flowable concretes are also the most widely used materials for DOE waste tank and facility closures.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2025

Physical and Hydraulic Properties of RCRA Borehole Samples from the Hanford Site : Final Report, Fiscal Years 2023-2024

Sediment from 44 core samples collected from Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) boreholes drilled in the 200 East and 200 West areas of the Hanford Site were characterized for physical and hydraulic properties (Table S.1). Characterization data included gravimetric water contents and matric potentials, grain-size distributions, saturated hydraulic conductivity, water retention characteristics, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity. These properties provide site-specific data and parameters that can be used in subsurface flow and contaminant transport models to assess the transport and fate of contaminants in the vadose zone and underlying aquifer systems. The analyzed core samples come from specific areas and depth intervals at the Hanford Site that were targeted for sampling to address data gaps identified by site contractors (Khaleel 2020). X-ray computed tomography (XCT) was used to evaluate the general textural characteristics of the samples and to determine which samples to use for further physical and hydraulic property characterization. Subsequent sample selection was determined by consensus after review of the XCT images by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Central Plateau Cleanup Company, and INTERA staff.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2025

October 2024 Semiannual Composite Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF) Decontaminated Salt Solution (DSS) Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) Results

The aqueous waste from the Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF) is sampled semiannually for transfers to the Saltstone Production Facility (SPF). Salt solution is treated at SPF and disposed of in the Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF). Per request of customer, X-TTR-Z-00027, Revision 0, one SDF waste form (saltstone) sample was prepared in the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) from the SWPF Decontaminated Salt Solution (DSS) Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) sample and Z-area premix material for the October 2024 semiannual Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) sample. The sample contained 60:40 (by weight) of slag and fly ash (referred to as the “Cement-Free grout sample”). Results from the technical report support Task 2: ‘Grout Leaching Analyses’ of the Task Technical Request (TTR) prepared by Savannah River Mission Completion (SRMC). At 64 days cured, a sample of the SDF waste form was collected and shipped to a certified laboratory for analysis using the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP). The October 2024 semiannual Cement-Free grout sample met the South Carolina (SC) Code of Regulations for Hazardous Waste Management Regulations (HWMR) 61-79.261.24 and 61-79.268.48 requirements for a non-hazardous waste form with respect to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) metals and Underlying Hazardous Constituents (UHCs), and met the SPF WAC that was in effect at the time of the sample collection at SWPF.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2025

Benchmark Tracking System for Performance Monitoring

Benchmarking is essential for high-performance software development, particularly for monitoring performance across code iterations. This project focused on enhancing the benchmarking process for Lamellar, an asynchronous runtime for High-Performance Computing (HPC) systems developed at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. Prior to this work, benchmark results were difficult to track and compare across code versions, presenting significant challenges in identifying performance regressions and long-term trends. The primary objective was to establish a systematic, reproducible approach for measuring performance and detecting regressions following code commits. Our methodology involved three key components: standardizing benchmark outputs, implementing data versioning, and developing analysis tools. We standardized the benchmark output format to JSON Line records containing specific fields (execution time, hardware specifications, and environmental variables). To address data management challenges, we evaluated several options and eventually chose a git repository dedicated to benchmark data. We developed a suite of Python tools that processed benchmark results, enriched them with metadata, and facilitated search in the repository. The resulting system enables more efficient filtering and comparison of performance metrics across commit histories, hardware configurations, and benchmark variants through a unified query interface. Our implementation reduces computational overhead by first checking for existing results through configuration matching before initiating new benchmark runs, thereby conserving resources. The system has been validated by Lamellar developers. It organizes results by benchmark type and build configurations for efficient retrieval. Future developments include a planned Large Language Model interface for predicting benchmark performance, incorporating the criterion package for statistical analysis, which will enable automated detection of statistically significant performance changes, and integration with continuous integration pipelines. Despite these enhancements being reserved for future work, this project has successfully provided the Lamellar development team with a framework for maintaining consistent performance standards and identifying optimization opportunities across workloads and hardware environments.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2023

200-DV-1 Laboratory Treatability Study: Proof-of-Principle Results

This document presents the Phase 1 technical approach and results of laboratory-scale treatability testing of nine in situ remedial technologies for their consideration in a future Feasibility Study (FS) for the 200-DV-1 OU. The primary objective of this initial assessment was a proof-of-principle testing evaluation primarily via batch experiments to determine the potential reduction and sequestration of primary contaminants of interest with and without potential co-contaminants of interest. An effectiveness rate of 35% transformation to immobile or nontoxic end products, along with other experimental indicators, was used by the project team to determine the technologies that advanced to Phase 2 for further evaluations. For most technologies, the performance was evaluated based on a series of sequential extractions designed to evaluate the mobility of contaminants before and after treatment, with each subsequent extraction representing a relative decrease in mobility. The results of this study will be used to inform testing for Phase 2 of the treatability study for further evaluation of selected technologies. The final results from the treatability study, following the completion of remaining experimental phases, will be used to determine whether the technologies tested can be appropriately evaluated in a FS to expand on the limited number of viable DVZ remediation technologies. After completion of the laboratory treatability study and the 200-DV-1 OU Remedial Investigation (RI) and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Facility Investigation (RFI) of the waste sites, results will be evaluated to determine whether field studies are needed to provide additional information on effectiveness, implementability, or costs for evaluating these technologies in the FS for their site-specific application.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2025

April 2025 Semiannual Composite Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF) Decontaminated Salt Solution (DSS) Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) Results

The aqueous waste from the Salt Waste Processing Facility is sampled semiannually for transfers to the Saltstone Production Facility. Salt solution is treated at the Saltstone Production Facility and disposed of in the Saltstone Disposal Facility. Per request of customer, X-TTR-Z-00027, Revision 0, one Saltstone Disposal Facility waste form was prepared at Savannah River National Laboratory using the Salt Waste Processing Facility Decontaminated Salt Solution and Z-area premix material for the April 2025 semiannual Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure sample. The sample contained 60:40 (by weight) of slag and fly ash (referred to as the “Cement-Free grout sample”). Results from the technical report support Task 2: ‘Grout Leaching Analyses’ of the Task Technical Request prepared by Savannah River Mission Completion. At 43 days cured, the Saltstone sample was collected and shipped to a certified laboratory for analysis using the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure. The April 2025 semiannual Cement-Free grout sample met the South Carolina Code of Regulations for Hazardous Waste Management Regulations 61-79.261.24 and 61-79.268.48 requirements for a non-hazardous waste form with respect to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act metals and Underlying Hazardous Constituents, and met the Saltstone Production Facility Waste Acceptance Criteria that was in effect at the time of the sample collection at the Salt Waste Processing Facility.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2026

Volume Change from Solidification Correlation for Hanford Tank Waste.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Hanford Field Office’s primary mission is to safely and effectively treat Hanford’s tank waste and deliver environmental remediation. Mixed radioactive waste is stored in the underground tanks at the Hanford Site. It was recently estimated that retrieval of the waste in the 200 West Area underground tanks in the SY, S, SX, and U Tank Farms will result in about 41 million gallons of mixed low-level waste (MLLW) (RPP-RPT-65147, Rev. 1). The current plan is to retrieve at least 22 S, SX, and U Farm tanks and pretreat1 to produce pretreated tank waste (PTW) which will be further treated (including solidification /immobilization) for Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Land Disposal Restriction (LDR) organics and inorganics before being transferred to an offsite out-of-state facility for disposal (RPP-PLAN-66135, Rev. 2). In addition, solidified PTW from the 200 East Area may also be transferred to an offsite out-of-state facility for disposal to ensure availability of critical Double-Shell Tank space, meet retrieval obligations, and optimize 200 East Area operations.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2026

October 2025 Semiannual Composite Salt Waste Processing Facility Decontaminated Salt Solution Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure Results

The aqueous waste from the Salt Waste Processing Facility is sampled semiannually for transfers to the Saltstone Disposal Facility. Salt solution is treated at the Saltstone Production Facility and disposed of in the Saltstone Disposal Facility. Per request of customer, X-TTR-Z-00027, Revision 0, one Saltstone Processing Facility Decontaminated Salt Solution and Z area premix material for the October 2025 semiannual Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure sample. The sample contained 60:40 (by weight) of slag and fly ash (referred to as the “Cement-Free grout sample”). Results from the technical report support Task 2: ‘Grout Leaching Analyses’ of the Task Technical Request prepared by Savannah River Mission Completion. At 51 days cured, the Saltstone sample was collected and shipped to a certified laboratory for analysis using the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure. The October 2025 Semiannual Cement-Free grout sample met 61 79.268.48 requirements for a non-hazardous waste form with respect to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act metals and Underlying Hazardous Constituents and met the Saltstone Production Facility Waste Acceptance Criteria that was in effect at the time of the sample collection at the Salt Waste Processing Facility.

Hsieh, Madison [Savannah River National Laboratory↗

DOE OSTI2024

Improving the Concrete Crack Detection Process via a Hybrid Visual Transformer Algorithm

Inspections of concrete bridges across the United States represent a significant commitment of resources, given their biannual mandate for many structures. With a notable number of aging bridges, there is an imperative need to enhance the efficiency of these inspections. This study harnessed the power of computer vision to streamline the inspection process. Our experiment examined the efficacy of a state-of-the-art Visual Transformer (ViT) model combined with distinct image enhancement detector algorithms. We benchmarked against a deep learning Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) model. These models were applied to over 20,000 high-quality images from the Concrete Images for Classification dataset. Traditional crack detection methods often fall short due to their heavy reliance on time and resources. This research pioneers bridge inspection by integrating ViT with diverse image enhancement detectors, significantly improving concrete crack detection accuracy. Notably, a custom-built CNN achieves over 99% accuracy with substantially lower training time than ViT, making it an efficient solution for enhancing safety and resource conservation in infrastructure management. These advancements enhance safety by enabling reliable detection and timely maintenance, but they also align with Industry 4.0 objectives, automating manual inspections, reducing costs, and advancing technological integration in public infrastructure management.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2020

Treatment of Problematic Reactive Metal Wastes Using GeoMelt ICV - WM2020 Conference Paper

Decommissioning of sodium-cooled reactors and fast reactor technologies has generated a number of reactive metal waste configurations that are problematic to treat and typically lack cost effective treatment methods and disposition options. As a result, Veolia Nuclear Solutions, under contract with Idaho National Laboratory (owned by the U.S. Department of Energy and managed and operated by Battelle Energy Alliance, LLC) demonstrated its GeoMelt® In-Container Vitrification (ICV)™ technology to safely convert sodium metal to a non-reactive vitrified oxide form. The demonstration project, supported by glass formulation and crucible testing, consisted of a series of ICV™ melts that processed elemental sodium into stable non-reactive glass. INL is currently implementing GeoMelt® technology as a means to safely and reliably convert radioactive reactive metal residues that contaminate sodium cooled reactor components into waste forms that comply with existing disposition pathways. Reactive metal wastes require treatment in order to remove the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) reactivity and ignitability characteristics to comply with land disposal restrictions. GeoMelt®, which is an alternative to other potential treatment approaches, provides a robust approach that chemically converts the reactive metals to an inert oxide while also immobilizing radionuclides in a vitrified waste form with durability equal to or better than vitrified nuclear fuel reprocessing wastes (very robust and inert waste forms). Most other treatment approaches generate hydrogen gas which is problematic. In 2016, Veolia Nuclear Solutions first demonstrated the effectiveness of the GeoMelt® ICV™ process in deactivating reactive sodium metal. Crucible, bench-scale, and engineering-scale demonstrations were conducted on several surrogate waste configurations with various ratios of sodium metal and glass-formers. Each ratio and configuration demonstrated complete deactivation of the surrogate sodium metal. Follow-on work in 2017 demonstrated the deactivation of reactive sodium by GeoMelt® ICV™ at a higher waste loading relative to previously demonstrated work performed in 2016; the higher waste loading optimized glass chemistry while enhancing the economical full-scale treatment of reactive metals. Additionally, follow-on demonstration testing in 2018 and 2019 focused on more complex shapes and other reactive-metals (mocked up Experimental Breeder Reactor II [EBR-II] subassembly, sodium filled heat exchanger, and a can containing sodium potassium alloy) which were all performed at engineering-scale. Since 2018, a 10-metric ton full-scale GeoMelt unit (GeoMelt® Richland) was designed, installed, and commissioned at Perma-Fix Northwest in Richland, Washington for the treatment of reactive metal wastes. As of September 2019, over 900 55-gallon drums containing a total of around 3,500 lb of sodium with low levels of radioactivity have been treated at GeoMelt ® Richland, with resulting glass monoliths disposed at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). A full-scale radiological demonstration melt on an actual EBR-II subassembly has also been performed using the full-scale melter in 2019. The GeoMelt® technology is a proven radioactive waste treatment technology capable of immobilizing radioactive wastes, including bulk rubble such as drums and other steel vessels usually without pretreatment. Utilizing the GeoMelt® technology to treat reactive metals eliminates pretreatment steps resulting from having to separate the reactive metal from steel containers or jackets as GeoMelt® can easily operate at temperatures sufficient to melt the steel and expose the reactive metal for treatment. Eliminating handling steps of reactive metals is a significant safety advantage since reactive metals are pyrophoric. The results generated as a part of the 2018-2019 demonstration program are presented in the paper.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2021

A Circularity Assessment for Silicon Solar Panels Based on Dynamic Material Flow Analysis

Solar photovoltaics (PV) are the fastest growing renewable energy technology for clean, inexpensive, and sustainable electricity generation. Along with numerous technical roadmaps to improve system cost, performance and reliability, the PV industry should also plan to handle large volumes of silicon panel waste, which is initially estimated to be ~13 million metric tons (MT) by 2050 in the U.S. alone. Understanding the magnitude of material needs and how material flows throughout the PV panel life cycle could respond to design, operational and different end-of-life (EOL) circular pathways will help transition into a circular, resource-conserving economy. Herein, we introduce a dynamic material flow analysis (DMFA) framework based on electricity generation to quantify time-series stocks and flows of bulk PV materials (e.g., solar glass and aluminum frames) throughout the life cycles of utility-scale silicon PV systems in the U.S. in the period 2000-2100. We apply the model to a range of scenarios to understand how material demands depend on selected PV-related parameters, different material circularity strategies, and recent module design trends (e.g., bifacial, frameless). We found that float glass and aluminum in PV installations would likely reach 100 million MT and 12 million MT by 2100, respectively, in the baseline scenario. The most influential parameters for PV installation and subsequent waste reduction are found to be module lifetime, module efficiency, annual degradation, and material reduction. Module recycling and component remanufacturing were found to be the most effective material circularity strategies for waste minimization. Panel reuse has negligible savings on waste under current module efficiencies compared to replacements with newer generations with higher efficiency. Ongoing trends to produce larger power frameless modules could save 10 million MT of glass and ~9 million MT of aluminum. Our results enable advanced planning for future materials needs and provide insight into potential opportunities to minimize waste.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗

DOE OSTI2021

A Circularity Assessment for Silicon Solar Panels Based on Dynamic Material Flow Analysis: Preprint

circular economy↗

DOE OSTI2023

Addendum 2 to the Closure Report for CAU 577 Area 5 Chromium Containing Waste Disposal Cells, NNSS, Nevada

Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 577, “Area 5 Chromium Containing Waste Disposal Cells,” includes five low-level waste cells at the Nevada National Security Site Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site where buried waste received from Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., was subsequently determined to contain chromium that exceeded the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure regulatory limit, which would require the waste to carry hazardous waste code D007. CAU 577 was created to satisfy the requirements of the Settlement Agreement (SA) executed between the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) and the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) on April 25, 2019 (NDEP 2019). The SA required that the chromium-containing waste received from NFS would be addressed following the closure process laid out in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO). The FFACO process ensures proper closure of the chromium-containing waste and documentation of that closure through FFACO-type documents. The following three Corrective Action Sites (CASs) were closed, and their closure was documented in the Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 577: Area 5 Chromium Containing Waste Disposal Cells, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, DOE/EMNV--0030, dated September 2021 (U.S. Department of Energy [DOE] Environmental Management [EM] Nevada Program 2021a): • CAS 05-21-02, Waste Disposal Cell 12 • CAS 05-21-03, Waste Disposal Cell 15 • CAS 05-21-04, Waste Disposal Cell 17 Closure of the following CAS was previously documented in the Addendum to the Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 577: Area 5 Chromium Containing Waste Disposal Cells, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, DOE/EMNV--0030-ADD, dated September 2022 (DOE EM Nevada Program 2022): • CAS 05-21-05, Waste Disposal Cell 20 This second addendum to the Closure Report documents the closure activities that have occurred for CAS 05-21-06, Waste Disposal Cell 21. This is the last CAS in CAU 577. The final waste shipment was placed in the waste disposal cell on November 21, 2022. Following this, closure activities began on November 28, 2022, and were conducted according to the Corrective Action Decision Document/Corrective Action Plan (CADD/CAP) for CAU 577 (DOE EM Nevada Program 2021b). The following closure activities were performed: • Constructing an engineered evapotranspiration cover • Installing two subsidence monuments and vadose zone monitoring equipment • Seeding the cover with a mixture of native plant species • Installing four concrete monuments on the corners of the cover and placing two use restriction (UR) warning signs on each monument These activities fulfill applicable federal and state regulations for closure of CAS 05-21-06 and minimize potential future exposure pathways to buried waste. Completed closure activities are also consistent with closure of the nine historical Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) units included in Section 10.2.2 of the RCRA Permit that governs hazardous waste management activities at the Nevada National Security Site (Permit NEV HW0101) (NDEP 2023). UR documentation for this CAS is included in Appendix B of this report. The post-closure plan is presented in detail in the CADD/CAP for CAU 577 (DOE EM Nevada Program 2021b), and the requirements are summarized in Section 5.2 of this document. In accordance with paragraph 5D of the SA, a request to incorporate the requirements for post-closure monitoring of CAU 577 was included with the permit application for RCRA Permit NEV HW0101 that was submitted in January 2022 (NNSA/NFO 2022). The request included the post-closure requirements for the three CASs that had been closed at the time of submittal of the application as well as requirements that would be implemented upon future approval of closure of the remaining two CASs. All CAU 577 post-closure monitoring requirements have been captured in the April 4, 2023, Revision 7 of the RCRA Permit (NDEP 2023). As the RCRA Permit NEV HW0101 has been revised since the submittal of the original CAU 577 Closure Report (DOE EM Nevada Program 2021a) and Addendum 1 (DOE EM Nevada Program 2022), the post-closure requirements in this Addendum 2 report do not align with the previous documents. Specific changes resulting from the issuance of Revision 7 of the RCRA Permit are discussed in Section 5.2 of this report. The requirements in this report are consistent with the current permit (NDEP 2023) and supersede all requirements listed in the CAU 577 Closure Report and Addendum 1. All CAU 577 post-closure requirements should be conducted in accordance with the version of the RCRA Permit that is current at the time of the activities being performed. The DOE EM Nevada Program is requesting a Notice of Completion from NDEP for closure of CAU 577. Although CAU 577 is not a legacy site, the FFACO process is being followed to ensure proper closure of the chromium-containing waste. Therefore, transfer of CAU 577 from Appendix III of the FFACO to Appendix IV, Closed Corrective Action Units, is requested, as all closure activities have been completed.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2023

Results for the January 2023 Semiannual Tank 50 Salt Solution Sample

In this Technical Report, the chemical and radionuclide contaminant results from the January 2023 Semiannual sample of Tank 50 salt solution are presented in tabulated form. The information from this characterization will be used by Savannah River Mission Completion (SRMC) for the transfer of aqueous waste from Tank 50 to the Saltstone Production Facility (SPF), where the waste will be treated and disposed in the Saltstone Disposal Facility. This Technical Report compares results, where applicable, to SPF Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) LIMITS and TARGETS that were established at the time the Tank 50 sample was obtained.1 The chemical and radionuclide contaminant results from the characterization of the January 2023 semiannual sampling of Tank 50 were requested by SRMC personnel via a Task Technical Request (TTR)2 and details of the testing are presented in the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) Task Technical and Quality Assurance Plan (TTQAP).3 This Technical Report is part of Deliverable 2 relating to Task 1 from the SRMC request.2 Data pertaining to the regulatory limits for Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) metals per Task 2 from the SRMC request will be obtained semiannually for the January 2023 and July 2023 Tank 50 samples.

Crawford, Charles L.↗

DOE OSTI2023

Sodium Components Maintenance Shop (SCMS) Carbonation Vessel – Partial HWMA/RCRA Closure Certification Report

This report documents the Hazardous Waste Management Act (HWMA)/ Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Partial Closure Certification of the Sodium Components Maintenance Shop (SCMS) Carbonation Vessel. The HWMA/RCRA Closure followed the multi step review and evaluation closure process identified in the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Materials and Fuels Complex (MFC) HWMA/RCRA Partial Permit Closure Plan, October 1, 2015. This closure certification report documents that the SCMS Carbonation Vessel was removed from the SCMS, packaged as hazardous waste and stored for future treatment and disposal, and therefore has met the closure performance standards in accordance with the Department of Energy Idaho National Laboratory Materials and Fuels Complex HWMA/RCRA Partial Permit Closure Plan (EPA No. ID4890008952, October 1, 2015).

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2020

Stakeholder-Engaged Structured Decision Making for the Los Alamos Legacy Cleanup Mission - 20501

The Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) environmental legacy cleanup program requires decisions to be made for environmental remediation, decommissioning and disposal or management of radioactive waste. This legacy cleanup program was established to address groundwater contamination, material disposal areas (MDAs) that have been used to dispose of radioactive and other waste material, and 'aggregate areas' that might produce radioactive or other chemical waste as a result of remediation activities. The LANL site is regulated for environmental concerns under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). However, some parts of LANL, such as material disposal area G (MDA G), have disposed of radioactive waste under DOE Order 435.1, and are subject to other regulations. For example, decommissioning the remote-handled TRU material stored in 33 shafts at MDA G falls under EPA's 40 CFR 191. Collectively, the regulations are all aimed in the same direction of finding the best solution, either through constructs such as 'as low as reasonably achievable' (ALARA), considering balancing factors as opposed to only cost and human health risk, and, under EPA regulations such as RCRA and NEPA, evaluating impact from all chemicals and both human health and ecological endpoints. Despite the basic goals and objectives of the regulations or their guidance, the main challenge is in their implementation. Arguably perhaps, but really in principle, all of these (and similar) regulations are asking for a decision analysis to be performed. Implementation challenges encountered have included lack of understanding of decision analysis in the industry, lack of effective stakeholder engagement in the decision analysis process, and lack of appreciation of the need to separate value judgments from science, the latter leading to developing conservative, or protective, science-based models. Conservative models lead to poor solutions, lack of effective stakeholder engagement leads to long drawn out protracted approaches to finding a solution (which also might never be found with this approach), and lack of understanding of decision analysis and Bayesian statistics causes poor models to be built, which creates unfortunate situations of 'garbage in, garbage out' becoming the basis for decision making. Stakeholder-engaged structured decision making (SDM) is an approach to solving problems that relies on the theory of decision science to involve stakeholders in the decision-making process. This approach incorporates stakeholder values using a scientifically rigorous methodology that separates value judgments from science in a way that helps avoid the pitfalls of biased, protective, or conservative modeling. This approach has its foundation in Keeney's 1992 treatise on value-focused thinking [1]. Keeney advocated a paradigm shift in decision making based on the idea that the standard way of thinking about decisions is backwards. The standard approach of focusing first on identifying alternatives rather than on articulating values results in a reactive approach with the emphasis on mechanics and fixed choices instead of the core values that have meaning to stakeholders. This paradigm shift effectively engages all stakeholders in the decision-making process while using a values focused thinking approach that can lead to the identification of decision opportunities and the creation of better alternatives. The intent is to be proactive and generate solutions that are related directly to values and objectives as identified by stakeholders. There are, perhaps, two overarching reasons why SDM can be used to benefit LANL's environmental legacy cleanup. Some of LANL's remaining waste management and environmental management problems are challenging and complex (for example, the Cr and RDX plumes, and MDAs) and while the traditional approach has, arguably, worked well for relatively simple risk-based problems, it cannot, or should not, be applied to more complex problems if the most effective and efficient solutions are desired. The second reason is cost. This has perhaps become more critical since publication of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports that DoE's environmental liability is considered a high-risk concern for the nation [2]. The focus of SDM is on structuring solutions to decision risk problems by first addressing stakeholder and decision maker values and subsequently developing decision objectives and ways to measure those objectives, preference weighting across objectives, identifying decision alternatives that best achieve those values, and characterizing uncertainty in predictions of the measures. Because a complete decision model is created using SDM, it can be evaluated to find the main elements of the model that drive, or predict, the best solution. This approach creates complete decision models that are transparent, traceable, reproducible and technically defensible. The science behind SDM, or decision analysis, is well founded, yet it is not unusual to see ad hoc approaches to decision making implemented under various environmental regulations that are pertinent to the LANL site, including NEPA, RCRA and DOE Order 435.1. Such ad hoc approaches are often not transparent or traceable, and lack reproducibility and technical defensibility. The LANL legacy cleanup program has embarked on using SDM to address the complex problems that remain. Stakeholder meetings have been held, and a prototype version of the stakeholder value system has been developed. Further meetings are expected in the future to address specific project needs. This is a long-term endeavor considering the complex environmental problems faced by DOE EM in Los Alamos (EM-LA), and careful planning, consideration of stakeholder value systems, and engagement with stakeholders throughout the SDM process is expected to lead to a successful endpoint. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗