SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
The Airport Risk Assessment Model (ARAM) model automatically determines the optimal allocation of limited security resources to minimize total risk to the airport. At the same time, the model adds an element of randomness to the, reducing the predictability of asset schedules and further increasing countermeasure effectiveness.
NASA’s Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) project aims to enable the integration of new aviation paradigms such as Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) while providing the necessary infrastructure for future concepts such as On-Demand Mobility (ODM) and Urban Air Mobility (UAM) operations in the National Airspace System (NAS). In order to do so, the UTM project has developed an architecture to allow communication among UAS operators, UAS Service Suppliers (USS), Air Navigation Service Providers (ANSP), and the public. As part of this framework, the Supplemental Data Service Providers (SDSP) are envisioned as model and/or data based services that disseminate essential or enhanced information to ensure safe operations within low-altitude airspace. These services include terrain and obstacle data, specialized weather data, surveillance, constraint information, risk monitoring, etc. This paper highlights the development efforts of a non-participant casualty risk assessment SDSP called Ground Risk Assessment Service Provider (GRASP) which assists operators with preflight planning. GRASP is based on the previously introduced UTM Risk Assessment Framework (URAF) and allows UAS operators to simulate and visualize potential non-participant casualty risks associated with their proposed flight. The risk assessment capability also allows operators to revise their flight plans if the casualty risks are determined to be above acceptable thresholds. GRASP is configured to account for future improvements including servicing airborne aircraft as part of NASA’s System-Wide Safety (SWS) project.
Performing impact risk assessment for the 2017 Planetary Defense Conference (PDC17) hypothetical impact exercise, to take place at the PDC17 conference, May 15-20, 2017. Impact scenarios and trajectories are developed and provided by NASA's Near Earth Objects Office at JPL (Paul Chodas). These results represent purely hypothetical impact scenarios, and do not reflect any known asteroid threat. Risk assessment was performed using the Probabilistic Asteroid Impact Risk (PAIR) model developed by the Asteroid Threat Assessment Project (ATAP) at NASA Ames Research Center. This presentation includes sample results that may be presented or used in discussions during the various stages of the impact exercisecenter dot Some cases represent alternate scenario options that may not be used during the actual impact exercise at the PDC17 conference. Updates to these initial assessments and/or additional scenario assessments may be performed throughout the impact exercise as different scenario options unfold.
At a geologic CO 2 sequestration (GCS) site, geologic uncertainty usually leads to large uncertainty in the predictions of properties that influence metrics for leakage risk assessment, such as CO 2 saturations and pressures in potentially leaky wellbores, CO 2 /brine leakage rates, and leakage consequences such as changes in drinking water quality in groundwater aquifers. The large uncertainty in these risk-related system properties and risk metrics can lead to over-conservative risk management decisions to ensure safe operations of GCS sites. The objective of this work is to develop a novel approach based on dynamic risk assessment to effectively reduce the uncertainty in the predicted risk-related system properties and risk metrics. We demonstrate our framework for dynamic risk assessment on two case studies: a 3D synthetic example and a synthetic field example based on the Rock Springs Uplift (RSU) storage site in Wyoming, USA. Results show that the U.S. National Risk Assessment Partnership’s Open Source Integrated Assessment Model (NRAP-Open-IAM) coupled with a conformance evaluation can be used to effectively quantify and reduce the uncertainty in the predictions of risk-related system properties and risk metrics in GCS.
This paper documents how tools developed by the National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP) complement the Bowtie risk assessment approach through the demonstration of a risk-based Area of Review (AoR) determination for the Quest Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) facility near Edmonton, Alberta with the NRAP Open-Source Integrated Assessment Model (NRAP Open-IAM). The Bowtie risk assessment for the Quest CCS site was developed by Shell Canada Ltd., who operates the asset on behalf of the Athabasca Oil Sand Project — a joint venture, owned by Canadian Natural Resources Ltd, Chevron Canada and Shell Canada Ltd. The Quest Bowtie treats site risk comprehensively – considering a large set of technical and project risks (e.g., operational risks, above ground infrastructure, public perception, etc.). NRAP tools, methods, and analyses are focused on quantitative assessment of subsurface technical risks. NRAP-Open-IAM was used to evaluate potential groundwater impacts at the Quest site, i.e., a sufficient change above background groundwater quality levels to be measurable, should CO 2 and/or brine leak from the reservoir via a faulty and/or compromised wellbore. Our results show there is a low potential for groundwater impact and support a further reduction (from ~460 to 100 km 2 ) to the established AoR for the Quest site. Integrating both approaches early in the site characterization period could significantly benefit commercial-scale projects by drastically reducing the region over which leakage risks (e.g., legacy wells) need to be evaluated, i.e., the AoR. This is especially true for brownfield sites, which could contain hundreds to thousands of legacy wells. Further, basing monitoring network design on those regions where impacts are most likely to occur has the potential to facilitate more efficient deployment of monitoring technologies and improve the likelihood of detecting a leak should one occur.
Radiation-induced health risks are a primary concern for human exploration outside the Earth's magnetosphere, and require improved approaches to risk estimation and tools for mitigation including shielding and biological countermeasures. Solar proton events are the major concern for short-term lunar missions (<60 d), and for long-term missions (>60 d) such as Mars exploration, the exposures to the high energy and charge (HZE) ions that make-up the galactic cosmic rays are the major concern. Health risks from radiation exposure are chronic risks including carcinogenesis and degenerative tissue risks, central nervous system effects, and acute risk such as radiation sickness or early lethality. The current estimate is that a more than four-fold uncertainty exists in the projection of lifetime mortality risk from cosmic rays, which severely limits analysis of possible benefits of shielding or biological countermeasure designs. Uncertainties in risk projections are largely due to insufficient knowledge of HZE ion radiobiology, which has led NASA to develop a unique probabilistic approach to radiation protection. We review NASA's approach to radiation risk assessment including its impact on astronaut dose limits and application of the ALARA (As Low as Reasonably Achievable) principle. The recently opened NASA Space Radiation Laboratory (NSRL) provides the capability to simulate the cosmic rays in controlled ground-based experiments with biological and shielding models. We discuss how research at NSRL will lead to reductions in the uncertainties in risk projection models. In developing mission designs, the reduction of health risks and mission constraints including costs are competing concerns that need to be addressed through optimization procedures. Mitigating the risks from space radiation is a multi-factorial problem involving individual factors (age, gender, genetic makeup, and exposure history), operational factors (planetary destination, mission length, and period in the solar cycle), and shielding characteristics (materials, mass, and topology). We review optimization metrics for radiation protection including scenarios that integrate biophysics models of radiation risks, operational variables, and shielding design tools needed to assess exploration mission designs. We discuss the application of a crosscutting metric, based on probabilistic risk assessment, to lunar and Mars mission trade studies including the assessment of multi-factorial problems and the potential benefits of new radiation health research strategies or mitigation technologies.
Radiation-induced health risks are a primary concern for human exploration outside the Earth's magnetosphere, and require improved approaches to risk estimation and tools for mitigation including shielding and biological countermeasures. Solar proton events are the major concern for short-term lunar missions (<60 d), and for long-term missions (>60 d) such as Mars exploration, the exposures to the high energy and charge (HZE) ions that make-up the galactic cosmic rays are the major concern. Health risks from radiation exposure are chronic risks including carcinogenesis and degenerative tissue risks, central nervous system effects, and acute risk such as radiation sickness or early lethality. The current estimate is that a more than four-fold uncertainty exists in the projection of lifetime mortality risk from cosmic rays, which severely limits analysis of possible benefits of shielding or biological countermeasure designs. Uncertainties in risk projections are largely due to insufficient knowledge of HZE ion radiobiology, which has led NASA to develop a unique probabilistic approach to radiation protection. We review NASA's approach to radiation risk assessment including its impact on astronaut dose limits and application of the ALARA (As Low as Reasonably Achievable) principle. The recently opened NASA Space Radiation Laboratory (NSRL) provides the capability to simulate the cosmic rays in controlled ground-based experiments with biological and shielding models. We discuss how research at NSRL will lead to reductions in the uncertainties in risk projection models. In developing mission designs, the reduction of health risks and mission constraints including costs are competing concerns that need to be addressed through optimization procedures. Mitigating the risks from space radiation is a multi-factorial problem involving individual factors (age, gender, genetic makeup, and exposure history), operational factors (planetary destination, mission length, and period in the solar cycle), and shielding characteristics (materials, mass, and topology). We review optimization metrics for radiation protection including scenarios that integrate biophysics models of radiation risks, operational variables, and shielding design tools needed to assess exploration mission designs. We discuss the application of a crosscutting metric, based on probabilistic risk assessment, to lunar and Mars mission trade studies including the assessment of multi-factorial problems and the potential benefits of new radiation health research strategies or mitigation technologies.
Radiation-induced health risks are a primary concern for human exploration outside the Earth's magnetosphere, and require improved approaches to risk estimation and tools for mitigation including shielding and biological countermeasures. Solar proton events are the major concern for short-term lunar missions (<60 d), and for long-term missions (>60 d) such as Mars exploration, the exposures to the high energy and charge (HZE) ions that make-up the galactic cosmic rays are the major concern. Health risks from radiation exposure are chronic risks including carcinogenesis and degenerative tissue risks, central nervous system effects, and acute risk such as radiation sickness or early lethality. The current estimate is that a more than four-fold uncertainty exists in the projection of lifetime mortality risk from cosmic rays, which severely limits analysis of possible benefits of shielding or biological countermeasure designs. Uncertainties in risk projections are largely due to insufficient knowledge of HZE ion radiobiology, which has led NASA to develop a unique probabilistic approach to radiation protection. We review NASA's approach to radiation risk assessment including its impact on astronaut dose limits and application of the ALARA (As Low as Reasonably Achievable) principle. The recently opened NASA Space Radiation Laboratory (NSRL) provides the capability to simulate the cosmic rays in controlled ground-based experiments with biological and shielding models. We discuss how research at NSRL will lead to reductions in the uncertainties in risk projection models. In developing mission designs, the reduction of health risks and mission constraints including costs are competing concerns that need to be addressed through optimization procedures. Mitigating the risks from space radiation is a multi-factorial problem involving individual factors (age, gender, genetic makeup, and exposure history), operational factors (planetary destination, mission length, and period in the solar cycle), and shielding characteristics (materials, mass, and topology). We review optimization metrics for radiation protection including scenarios that integrate biophysics models of radiation risks, operational variables, and shielding design tools needed to assess exploration mission designs. We discuss the application of a crosscutting metric, based on probabilistic risk assessment, to lunar and Mars mission trade studies including the assessment of multi-factorial problems and the potential benefits of new radiation health research strategies or mitigation technologies.
This paper describes an approach to risk assessment and analysis suited to the early phase, concurrent design of a space mission. The approach integrates an agile, multi-user risk collection tool, a more in-depth risk analysis tool, and repositories of risk information. A JPL developed tool, named RAP, is used for collecting expert opinions about risk from designers involved in the concurrent design of a space mission. Another in-house developed risk assessment tool, named DDP, is used for the analysis.
This report documents activities performed by Idaho National Laboratory (INL) during Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) Program, Risk Informed Systems Analysis (RISA) Pathway, digital instrumentation and control (DI&C) risk assessment project. In FY 2019, the RISA Pathway initiated a project to develop a risk assessment strategy for delivering a technical basis to support effective, and secure DI&C technologies for digital upgrades/designs. A risk assessment-informed framework was proposed for this strategy, which aims to (1) provide a best-estimate, risk informed capability to quantitatively estimate the safety margin obtained from plant modernization, especially for safety-related DI&C systems, (2) support and supplement existing risk informed DI&C design guides by providing quantitative risk information and evidence, (3) offer a capability of design architecture evaluation of various DI&C systems, (4) assure the long-term safety and reliability of safety-related DI&C systems, and (5) reduce uncertainty in costs and support integration of DI&C systems in the plant. To achieve these technical goals, the LWRS-developed framework provides a means to address relevant technical issues by: (1) defining a risk informed analysis process for DI&C upgrade that integrates hazard analysis, reliability analysis, and consequence analysis, (2) applying risk informed tools to address common cause failures (CCFs) and quantify corresponding failure probabilities for DI&C technologies, particularly software CCFs, (3) evaluating the impact of digital failures at the component level, system level, and plant level, and (4) providing insights and suggestions on designs to manage the risks, thus to support the development and deployment of advanced DI&C technologies in nuclear power plants (NPPs). Adding diversity within a system or components is the primary means to eliminate and mitigate CCFs, but diversity also increases system complexity and may not address all sources of systematic failures. Optimization of diversity and redundancy applications for the safety-critical DI&C systems remains a challenge. To deal with the technical issues in addressing potential software CCFs in safety-related DI&C systems of NPPs and supporting relevant design optimization, the proposed framework provides: (a) A best-estimate, risk informed capability to address new technical digital issues quantitatively, focusing on software CCFs in safety-related DI&C systems of NPPs; (b) A common and a modularized platform for DI&C designers, software developers, cybersecurity analysts, and plant engineers to predict and prevent risk in the early design stage of DI&C systems; (c) Technical bases and risk informed insights to assist users address the risk informed alternatives for evaluation of CCFs in safety-related DI&C systems of NPPs; and (d) A risk informed tool that offers a capability of design architecture evaluation of various DI&C systems to support system design decisions in diversity and redundancy applications. The research and development efforts of this project in FY 2023 are focused on refining current methods on software CCF modeling and estimation and exploring additional innovative approaches to risk assessment of DI&C systems to enable a more comprehensive and complete assessment of various safety-related DI&C design architectures. The primary audience of this report are DI&C designers, engineers, and probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) practitioners. This includes stakeholders, such as the nuclear utilities and regulators who consider the deployment and upgrade of DI&C systems, DI&C software developers and reviewers, and cybersecurity specialists. It should be noted that all the analyses are performed for the demonstration of the methodology, not for the evaluation of an actual digital control system. Results are obtained based on limited design information and testing data.
It is necessary to understand the safety implications and risk mitigation options for fuel cell electric bus fleet deployment, especially for related facilities responsible for operations such as production, storage, compression, and dispensing of hydrogen for use by the buses. In this report, we present a quantitative risk assessment for a potential fuel cell electric bus fleet that was motivated by efforts to improve resilience at the Portland International Airport but can be applicable to a range of hydrogen case studies and use cases. We estimated risk for a facility that produces, stores, compresses, and dispenses hydrogen for the fleet of buses, with a focus on individual risk to people in terms of annual frequency of fatality. We considered the frequency of hydrogen leaks that could result in harmful physical outcomes like jet fires or explosions, and the consequences of those outcomes for people. We created customized fault trees to calculate the frequencies of different sizes of leaks and event sequence diagrams to calculate ignition probabilities for the various leak sizes. We also leveraged the HyRAM+ toolkit to use these inputs to calculate overall risk for the facility, which we separated into one section responsible for producing, storing, and compressing hydrogen, and one section responsible for dispensing the hydrogen to the buses. We found that the dispensing area seemed to have a higher risk than the production/storage/compression area of the facility, largely because of the inclusion of a component with a high leak frequency (the heat exchanger used to cool the hydrogen before entering the vehicle, to prevent overheating and expansion of hydrogen in the onboard tank). For the example production and refueling facility we evaluated and the data we used for the analysis, the leak frequency had a larger impact on the risk differences between the two sections on the facility, compared to the physical outcome consequence, which was slightly different due to the varying fuel conditions, but not substantially different. Actions can be taken to prevent these hazards (e.g., lowering leak frequencies in system components) or to mitigate the consequences if they do occur (e.g., installing barriers to protect people if ignition events occur). The choice of which actions to take depends not only on safety considerations but also on space, time, staffing, feasibility, and financial constraints. Therefore, the quantitative risk assessment approach can help understand relative risk contributions from different components, leak sizes, consequences, and human actions, to prioritize risk reduction strategies and balance these parameters. The outcomes of this report may be useful for a variety of stakeholders working in the hydrogen, transportation, vehicle, and aviation sector, including those responsible for aspects like facility design, operations, and regulations. There is not a single value of risk that determines whether a hypothetical system is “safe” or not. The insights about risk mitigations may be leveraged, and the quantitative risk assessment approach can be applied to other case studies to understand risk priorities and contributions specific to different FCEB and hydrogen facility uses.
This report provides a roadmap and toolkit for site-specific risk assessments across a broad range of industrial customers co-located with nuclear power plants (NPPs). This report builds upon the body of work sponsored by the Department of Energy (DOE) Light-Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) Flexible Plant Operation and Generation Pathway that presented hazards assessment and generic probabilistic risk assessments (PRAs) for the addition of a heat extraction system (HES) to light-water reactors co-located with hydrogen production facilities. The report expands the hazards assessments to include other industrial facilities: an oil refinery, a methanol plant, a synthetic fuel (synfuel) plant, the production of synthetic gas (syngas) as part of the methanol and synfuel plants, and wood pulp and paper mills. All these facilities are specified through industrial process and requirements research performed by national laboratories, universities, and interaction with industry. Many of the processes used in this report are pre-conceptual designs to use for decarbonization of the current technology facilities. A process of failure modes and effects analysis (what can go wrong) and accidentology (what has historically gone wrong) was used to determine the hazards presented to the NPP by the addition of the HES and the industrial customer. Chemical properties of feedstocks and products are summarized as part of the hazards assessment. Example analysis procedures are provided for each of the hazard types identified. These deterministic analyses can be used to assess adherence to licensing criteria. They can also be used to meet other safety goals like protection of the public, workers, or industrial facility equipment. The probabilistic analysis consisted of three sizes of HESs modeled in a PRA to assess the impact on the initiating events (IE) and results of the PRA. The PRA results conclude that the resulting increases in IE frequencies are below the limits required for small changes to existing NPPs under 10 CFR 50.59.
The objective of the Midwest Regional Carbon Initiative (MRCI) project is to implement a collaborative Regional Initiative (RI) to accelerate the deployment of carbon capture, and storage (CCS) in the Midwest-Northeastern quadrant of the United States. This report is a Technical Summary report describing work performed on Tasks 2.4 (Conducting Regional/Subregional Analysis) and 2.5 (Assessing and Managing Risk) during the MRCI project. In Task 2.4, detailed numerical reservoir simulation models were developed for selected carbon storage (CS) systems identified under Task 2.1 (Battelle, 2021a) in the MRCI study area. The objective of Task 2.4 is to demonstrate a dynamic modeling methodology for evaluating the suitability of the (selected) CS systems in the MRCI region for hosting a commercial-scale storage project. In this study, CO2 injectivity was evaluated for different CS systems with an annual injection rate of 1 million metric tonnes (MMT) of CO2 considered as the minimum requirement for a commercial scale project. The objective of Task 2.5 is to assess key risks associated with storing CO2 in the different CS systems across the MRCI region and to demonstrate a method(s) for assessing these risks that may be used by developers of future CO2 storage projects in the region. The risk analysis was limited to evaluating two types of leakage risks (i.e., wellbore leakage, flow across unfractured caprock) at three modeled sites considered in Task 2.4.
For the purpose of performing safety analysis and risk assessment for a probable offnominal suborbital/orbital atmospheric reentry resulting in vehicle breakup, a synthesis of trajectory propagation coupled with thermal analysis and the evaluation of node failure is required to predict the sequence of events, the timeline, and the progressive demise of spacecraft components. To provide this capability, the Simulation for Prediction of Entry Article Demise (SPEAD) analysis tool was developed. This report discusses the capabilities, modeling, and validation of the SPEAD analysis tool. SPEAD is applicable for Earth or Mars, with the option for 3 or 6 degrees-of-freedom (DOF) trajectory propagation. The atmosphere and aerodynamics data are supplied in tables, for linear interpolation of up to 4 independent variables. The gravitation model can include up to 20 zonal harmonic coefficients. The modeling of a single motor is available and can be adapted to multiple motors. For thermal analysis, the aerodynamic radiative and free-molecular/continuum convective heating, black-body radiative cooling, conductive heat transfer between adjacent nodes, and node ablation are modeled. In a 6- DOF simulation, the local convective heating on a node is a function of Mach, angle-ofattack, and sideslip angle, and is dependent on 1) the location of the node in the spacecraft and its orientation to the flow modeled by an exposure factor, and 2) the geometries of the spacecraft and the node modeled by a heating factor and convective area. Node failure is evaluated using criteria based on melting temperature, reference heat load, g-load, or a combination of the above. The failure of a liquid propellant tank is evaluated based on burnout flux from nucleate boiling or excess internal pressure. Following a component failure, updates are made as needed to the spacecraft mass and aerodynamic properties, nodal exposure and heating factors, and nodal convective and conductive areas. This allows the trajectory to be propagated seamlessly in a single run, inclusive of the trajectories of components that have separated from the spacecraft. The node ablation simulates the decreasing mass and convective/reference areas, and variable heating factor. A built-in database provides the thermo-mechanical properties of For the purpose of performing safety analysis and risk assessment for a probable offnominal suborbital/orbital atmospheric reentry resulting in vehicle breakup, a synthesis of trajectory propagation coupled with thermal analysis and the evaluation of node failure is required to predict the sequence of events, the timeline, and the progressive demise of spacecraft components. To provide this capability, the Simulation for Prediction of Entry Article Demise (SPEAD) analysis tool was developed. This report discusses the capabilities, modeling, and validation of the SPEAD analysis tool. SPEAD is applicable for Earth or Mars, with the option for 3 or 6 degrees-of-freedom (DOF) trajectory propagation. The atmosphere and aerodynamics data are supplied in tables, for linear interpolation of up to 4 independent variables. The gravitation model can include up to 20 zonal harmonic coefficients. The modeling of a single motor is available and can be adapted to multiple motors. For thermal analysis, the aerodynamic radiative and free-molecular/continuum convective heating, black-body radiative cooling, conductive heat transfer between adjacent nodes, and node ablation are modeled. In a 6- DOF simulation, the local convective heating on a node is a function of Mach, angle-ofattack, and sideslip angle, and is dependent on 1) the location of the node in the spacecraft and its orientation to the flow modeled by an exposure factor, and 2) the geometries of the spacecraft and the node modeled by a heating factor and convective area. Node failure is evaluated using criteria based on melting temperature, reference heat load, g-load, or a combination of the above. The failure of a liquid propellant tank is evaluated based on burnout flux from nucleate boiling or excess internal pressure. Following a component failure, updates are made as needed to the spacecraft mass and aerodynamic properties, nodal exposure and heating factors, and nodal convective and conductive areas. This allows the trajectory to be propagated seamlessly in a single run, inclusive of the trajectories of components that have separated from the spacecraft. The node ablation simulates the decreasing mass and convective/reference areas, and variable heating factor. A built-in database provides the thermo-mechanical properties of
The present work is a continuation of the 2020 IEA PVPS Task 12 Human Health Risk Assessment Methods for PV Part 3: Module Disposal Risks. The 2020 report performed a human health risk assessment (HHRA) for disposal of a cadmium telluride (CdTe) PV module in an unlined landfill, focusing solely on risks from cadmium. This study extends the 2020 HHRA on CdTe PV, analyzing eleven constituent elements: Cd, Se, Te, Cu, Si, Cr(III), Mo, Sn, Zn, Ni, and Al. The present HHRA was performed through two methods: utilization of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA) Delisting Risk Assessment Software (DRAS V.4.0) on eight exposure pathways for cancer risk and non-cancer hazards; and comparison of exposure point concentrations to federal standards for groundwater, surface water, air, and soil exposure pathways. Cancer risks and non-cancer hazards posed by elemental leaching through all evaluated exposure pathways, using both methods, were found to be several orders of magnitude below USEPA health-protective thresholds. Cadmium exhibited both the highest risks and lowest uncertainty considering data availability on chemical content, leachate, and federal screening levels.
The present work is a continuation of the 2020 IEA PVPS Task 12 Human Health Risk Assessment Methods for PV Part 3: Module Disposal Risks. The 2020 report performed a human health risk assessment (HHRA) for disposal of a cadmium telluride (CdTe) PV module in an unlined landfill, focusing solely on risks from cadmium. This study extends the 2020 HHRA on CdTe PV, analyzing eleven constituent elements: Cd, Se, Te, Cu, Si, Cr(III), Mo, Sn, Zn, Ni, and Al. The present HHRA was performed through two methods: utilization of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA) Delisting Risk Assessment Software (DRAS V.4.0) on eight exposure pathways for cancer risk and non-cancer hazards; and comparison of exposure point concentrations to federal standards for groundwater, surface water, air, and soil exposure pathways. Cancer risks and non-cancer hazards posed by elemental leaching through all evaluated exposure pathways, using both methods, were found to be several orders of magnitude below USEPA health-protective thresholds. Cadmium exhibited both the highest risks and lowest uncertainty considering data availability on chemical content, leachate, and federal screening levels.
This report builds upon the body of work sponsored by the Department of Energy (DOE) Light-Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) Flexible Power Operation and Generation (FPOG) program that presented generic probabilistic risk assessments (PRAs) for the addition of a heat extraction system (HES) to light-water reactors to support the co-location of a high temperature hydrogen electrolysis facility (HTEF). Probabilistic and deterministic hazards assessments and risk analyses are leveraged throughout this report. Several improvements and new analyses are included in this report. First, higher amounts of detail in the specifications of the generic HTEFs are used to produce scaled results for a 100, 500, and 1000 MW nominal hydrogen production facility. An additional hazard assessment of 1000 kg of hydrogen storage is performed. The facility hazards and footprint are assessed to determine the safe distance required for placement near the nuclear power plant (NPP). Second, specific designs for corresponding HESs for the different levels of support required by the HTEFs are analyzed in the PRA model. Third, a hazards analysis of the specified HTEFs leads not only to effects of the quantified risk assessment for the NPP, but also qualitative hazards assessment for the community. Finally, a seismic analysis and a high winds analysis have each been added to the PRA. The results investigate the applicability of the potential licensing approaches which do not require a full United States (U.S.) Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licensing review. The PRAs are generic and include listed assumptions. The HTEF design built for this project has further eliminated many conservative assumptions from the prior PRAs in this series. The PRA results indicate that the 10 CFR 50.59 licensing approach is justified due to the minimal increase in initiating event frequencies for all design basis accidents, with none exceeding 7.7%. The PRA results for core damage frequency and large early release frequency support the use of NRC Regulation Guide 1.174 as further risk information that supports a change without a full licensing amendment review. The hazard analyses and PRA confirm the need for engineered blast barriers of storage tanks and the common production header leaving the HTEF. The hazards analyses and PRA also confirm with high confidence that using the assumptions of design in this report that the safety case for licensing an HES addition and an HTEF sited with its unprotected high-pressure stage components 187 meters from the NPP’s transmission towers (the most fragile structure, system, and component) is strong.
A probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) approach has been developed and applied to the risk analysis of capsule abort during ascent. The PRA is used to assist in the identification of modeling and simulation applications that can significantly impact the understanding of crew risk during this potentially dangerous maneuver. The PRA approach is also being used to identify the appropriate level of fidelity for the modeling of those critical failure modes. The Apollo launch escape system (LES) was chosen as a test problem for application of this approach. Failure modes that have been modeled and/or simulated to date include explosive overpressure-based failure, explosive fragment-based failure, land landing failures (range limits exceeded either near launch or Mode III trajectories ending on the African continent), capsule-booster re-contact during separation, and failure due to plume-induced instability. These failure modes have been investigated using analysis tools in a variety of technical disciplines at various levels of fidelity. The current paper focuses on the development and application of a blast overpressure model for the prediction of structural failure due to overpressure, including the application of high-fidelity analysis to predict near-field and headwinds effects.