SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “STANDARDS”

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 127 records · Page 7

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2020

National Cost-effectiveness of ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2016

The purpose of this analysis is to examine the cost-effectiveness of the 2016 edition of ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 (ASHRAE 2016). Standard 90.1 is developed by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard Standing Project Committee (SSPC) 90.1. It is the model energy standard for commercial and multi-family residential buildings over three floors (42 USC 6833). PNNL analyzed the cost-effectiveness of changes in Standard 90.1 from 90.1-2013 to 90.1-2016, as applied in commercial buildings across the United States. During the development of new editions of Standard 90.1, the cost-effectiveness of individual changes (addenda) is often calculated to support the deliberations of ASHRAE Standard Standing Project Committee (SSPC) 90.1. The ASHRAE process, however, does not include analysis of the cost-effectiveness of the entire package of addenda from one edition of the standard to the next, which is of particular interest to adopting State and local governments. Providing States with an analysis of cost-effectiveness may encourage more rapid adoption of newer editions of energy codes based on Standard 90.1. This information may also inform the development of future editions of Standard 90.1. To establish the cost-effectiveness of Standard 90.1-2016, three main tasks were addressed: (1) Identification of building elements impacted by the updated standard; (2) Allocation of associated installation, maintenance, and replacement costs; and (3) Cost-effectiveness analysis of required changes In addition to installation, maintenance, and replacement costs, energy cost differences were needed to determine cost-effectiveness. The energy costs for each edition of Standard 90.1 were determined previously under the development of Standard 90.1-2016, as described below. The current analysis builds on the previous PNNL analysis (as outlined in Section 5.2) of the energy use and energy cost saving impacts of Standard 90.1-2016 compared to previous editions. The overall energy savings analysis of Standard 90.1 utilized a suite of 16 prototype EnergyPlus building models in 15 climate locations representing all eight U.S. climate zones. Detailed methodology and overall energy saving results from Standard 90.1-2016 are documented in the DOE technical report titled Energy Savings Analysis: ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2016 (DOE. 2018b).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2018

Development of a Technical Standard for Radiological Characterization of DAW - 18062

Throughout its 70+-year history, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and its predecessor agencies have performed a wide mission involving nuclear materials and weapons development, production, testing, and modernization. While the initial mission components relied heavily upon reactor physics and chemistry, the environmental programs have increasingly relied upon development of more accurate and effective measurement methodologies to determine the radiological and chemical properties of the unique waste streams that were generated during the weapons production and testing mission. Over time, the DOE laboratories and former production sites have developed a wide range of site-specific processes and procedures for conducting radiological characterization of dry active waste (DAW) that is managed as low-level radioactive waste. This has resulted in a Complex-wide variability among sites with respect to the methodologies and instrumentation used to characterize individual waste streams. The DAW-type waste was selected for development of a characterization standard since it is a simple, voluminous, and repetitive waste stream with a substantial knowledge base, established experience history at multiple site locations, and the potential for realization of programmatic benefits though standardization. The Energy Facility Contractors Group (EFCOG) Waste Management Working Group (WMWG) has proposed the development of a new DOE Technical Standard for radiological characterization of DAW. The purpose of the proposed new standard is to provide a technical resource that integrates and enhances the utilization of current site-specific methodologies and processes. A Technical Basis Document (TBD) has been prepared to support the development and utilization of the new standard by providing detailed information for use by site personnel when implementing the guidance provided in the standard. It also provides the rationale for and details concerning the recommended technical approaches for radiological characterization of representative DAW-type waste streams. The TBD will be included as an appendix to the proposed standard. Adoption of a standardized approach to DAW characterization will take advantage of multiple applications for a technology that is both mature and stable. The DAW characterization process is repetitive and lends itself to implementation at a wide range of operating locations - resulting in economies of scale, compliance with regulatory requirements, and consistent implementation of procedures which support design, operations, maintenance, and management of facilities, activities and programs. The purpose of the proposed new Technical Standard for DAW Radiological Characterization is to integrate and improve the utilization of current site-specific methodologies and processes and will include a comprehensive evaluation and comparison of current radiological characterization methodologies to determine which ones are most reliable and effective in producing relevant and valid data. In view of the long history and participation by several agencies in the regulation of nuclear programs, existing Voluntary Consensus Standards have also been reviewed for relevancy and applicability to the new proposed standard. The proposed new Standard will be developed in concert with existing scientific and regulatory guidance to produce a document that incorporates the state of current knowledge and site practices with a graded approach to applying those methodologies that are applicable and effective for characterizing a wide range of DAW-type wastes - including, but not limited to, debris, low specific activity (LSA) material, and surface contaminated objects (SCO). Under the leadership of the National Laboratory Subgroup of the EFCOG/WMWG), an EFCOG team will develop the proposed technical standard. This process will incorporate the information gathered during preparation of the TBD, which will serve as a technical resource to support the technical approach for selection of DAW characterization methodologies. Preparation of the TBD included a detailed survey of historical site practices and examination of the characterization approaches and measurement methodologies currently being applied to DAW-type wastes. Future activities include the development and submittal of a Project Justification Statement that will be submitted to the DOE Technical Standards Program for review and comment. The EFCOG/WMWG Team will respond to reviewer comments, as required. Following final concurrence by affected organizations through the DOE Technical Standards Coordination process, the EFCOG/WMWG Team will prepare the draft technical standard and respond to comments generated during RevCom review and final format review by the DOE Technical Standards Management Program. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2025

Domestic and International Consensus Standards for Nuclear Criticality Safety - Overview & Status

The domestic and international consensus standards for nuclear criticality safety (NCS) were developed based on the lessons-learned from process criticality accidents. These consensus standards were developed to reduce the rate of process criticality accidents in facilities that process, store, handle, or transport fissionable materials by hand. After a significant increase in criticality accidents through the mid-1960s, the rate of criticality accidents decreased as a result of these standards, and the criticality accident rate is extremely low from an industrial safety perspective. The last known criticality accident inside the United States was in 1978 (nearly 47 years ago) at the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant, and outside the United States, an accident occurred at Tokai-mura, Japan, in 1999 (almost 26 years ago). The domestic consensus standards for NCS include the American National Standards (ANS) that are prepared and published by the American Nuclear Society and approved by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). The ANS Standards Board, the NCS Consensus Committee, and the ANS-8 Subcommittee oversee the development and maintenance of these standards. There are currently 18 standards in the ANS-8 series. Nine ANS-8 standards are either in revision mode or planned for revision. A new standard for the use of nondestructive assay measurements (ANSI/ANS-8.28-2024) for NCS was approved in March of 2024. The international consensus standards for NCS calculations, procedures, and practices are maintained and developed within the International Organization for Standardization, Technical Committee 85 “Nuclear Energy,” Subcommittee 5, “Nuclear Fuel Technology,” and Working Group 8, “Nuclear Criticality Safety.” Eleven standards are currently available, four standards are proposed for revision, and four standards are at various stages of development. This paper provides the NCS community with a high-level overview and status report of domestic and international NCS consensus standards to stimulate interest and to support their continued development.

Bowen, Douglas G [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000212460026)↗

DOE OSTI2019

Development of a Technical Standard for Radiological Characterization of DAW - 19552

Since the Manhattan Project, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and its predecessor agencies have performed a wide mission involving nuclear materials and weapons development, production, testing, and modernization. While the initial mission components relied heavily upon reactor physics and chemistry, the environmental programs have increasingly relied upon development of more accurate and effective measurement methodologies to determine the radiological and chemical properties of the unique waste streams that were generated during the weapons production and testing mission. During the ongoing site cleanup program, the DOE laboratories and former production sites have developed a wide range of site-specific processes and procedures for conducting radiological characterization of dry active waste (DAW) that is managed as low-level radioactive waste. This has resulted in a Complex-wide variability among sites with respect to the methodologies and instrumentation used to characterize individual waste streams. The DAW-type waste was selected for development of a characterization standard since it is a simple, voluminous, and repetitive waste stream with a substantial knowledge base, established experience history at multiple site locations, and the potential for realization of programmatic benefits though standardization. Implementation of a consistent, standardized approach to DAW characterization will take advantage of multiple applications for a technology that is both mature and stable. The DAW characterization process is repetitive and lends itself to implementation at a wide range of operating locations - resulting in economies of scale, compliance with regulatory requirements, and consistent implementation of procedures which support design, operations, maintenance, and management of facilities, activities and environmental restoration programs. In response to a request from DOE, the Energy Facility Contractors Group (EFCOG) Waste Management Working Group (WMWG) is supporting the development of a new DOE Technical Standard for Radiological Characterization of DAW. The purpose of the proposed new standard is to provide a technical resource that integrates and enhances the utilization of current site-specific methodologies and processes. An EFCOG/WMWG technical team has prepared a Technical Basis Document (TBD) to support the development and utilization of the new standard. The TBD provides detailed reference information for use by site personnel when implementing the guidance to be provided in the standard. It also provides the rationale for and details concerning the recommended technical approaches for radiological characterization of representative DAW-type waste streams. The TBD is an essential resource and will be included as an appendix to the proposed standard. Formulation of the new standard will draw upon the information contained in the TBD in order to integrate and improve the utilization of current site-specific methodologies and processes. It will also include a comparison of current radiological characterization methodologies to determine which ones are most reliable and effective in producing relevant and valid data. In view of the long history and participation by several agencies in the regulation of nuclear programs, existing Voluntary Consensus Standards have also been identified in the TBD and will be referenced for relevancy and applicability to the new proposed standard. A Project Justification Statement (PJS) was also developed by the EFCOG/WMWG Team. Following internal Team review and approval by EFCOG, the draft PJS was submitted through Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) and the DOE Argonne Site Office Technical Standards Managers for review and approval by the DOE Argonne Site Office Manager. After resolution of comments and approval by the Manager, the PJS will be submitted to the DOE/HQ Technical Standards Program Manager (TSPM) for formal coordination. Following resolution of technical comments received during the PJS coordination process and receipt of a technical standards project number assigned by the TSPM, the Team will confirm the overall preparation schedule and develop an Internal Draft Technical Standard for coordination with the DOE Argonne Site Office. Following comment resolution, the Team will then prepare a Coordination Draft for submittal to the DOE Technical Standards RevCom review process and will respond to comments generated during this Complex-wide review. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2022

Domestic and International Standards for Nuclear Criticality Safety – Overview and Status

The domestic and international consensus standards for nuclear criticality safety (NCS) have provided guidance for staff performing hands-on work in operations with fissionable materials. These consensus standards have contributed directly to the significant reduction in the rate of criticality accidents in process facilities since the 1940s. The last known criticality accident inside the United States was in 1978 (nearly 43 years ago) at the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant, and outside the United States, an accident occurred at Tokai-mura, Japan, in 1999 (23 years ago). The domestic consensus standards for NCS include the American Nuclear Society (ANS) standards. The ANS Standards Board, the NCS Consensus Committee, and the ANS-8 Subcommittee oversee the development and maintenance of these standards. There are currently eighteen standards in the ANS-8 series. Currently, there are six ANS-8 standards in revision mode and eleven in a maintenance mode with one new standard under development. The international consensus standards for NCS calculations, procedures, and practices are maintained and developed within the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Technical Committee 85 on Nuclear Energy, Subcommittee 5 on Nuclear Fuel Technology, and Working Group 8, “Nuclear Criticality Safety.” Eleven standards are currently available, three standards are in revision mode, and two standards are development. This paper provides the NCS community with an overview and status report of domestic and international NCS consensus standards to stimulate interest and to support their continued development.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2022

Domestic and International Standards for Nuclear Criticality Safety - Overview & Status [Abstract]

The domestic and international consensus standards for nuclear criticality safety (NCS) have provided guidance for staff performing hands-on work in operations with fissionable materials. These consensus standards have contributed directly to the significant reduction in the rate of criticality accidents in process facilities since the 1940s. The last known criticality accident inside the United States was in 1978 (nearly 43 years ago) at the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant, and outside the United States, an accident occurred at Tokai-mura, Japan, in 1999 (22 years ago). The domestic consensus standards for NCS include the American Nuclear Society (ANS) standards. The ANS Standards Board, the NCS Consensus Committee, and the ANS-8 Subcommittee oversee the development and maintenance of these standards. There are currently eighteen standards in the ANS-8 series. Currently, there are six ANS-8 standards in re- vision mode and eleven in a maintenance mode with one new standard under development. The international consensus standards for NCS calculations, procedures, and practices are maintained and developed within the International Organization for Standardization, Technical Committee 85 on Nuclear Energy, Subcommittee 5 on Nuclear Fuel Technology, and Working Group 8, “Nuclear Criticality Safety.” Eleven standards are currently available, three standards are in revision mode, and two standards are development. This paper provides the NCS community with an overview and status report of domestic and international NCS consensus standards to stimulate interest and to support their continued development.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗

DOE OSTI2021

Comparison of ISO and ANSI/ANS Nuclear Criticality Safety Standards [Slides]

This paper provides a high-level comparison between the international and domestic nuclear criticality safety (NCS) standards, as requested by members of the Nuclear Criticality Safety Division. Currently, there are 18 enacted American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/American National Standards (ANS) standards, and 1 ANSI/ANS standard, in progress. There are 11 NCS standards from the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Technical Committee 85 (TC85) on Nuclear Energy, Subcommittee 5 (SC5) on Nuclear Fuel Cycle, Working Group 8 (WG8). NCS standard revisions are in progress for both standards organizations. The key differences between the ISO TC85/SC5/WG8 and ANSI/ANS-8 consensus NCS standards are summarized. The hard work done by the ANS-8 and WG8 volunteers allows for applicable, high-quality consensus standards for use by the NCS community. This paper defines the current status of each ANSI/ANS and ISO standard, the work in in progress, the revisions/amendments in progress, and WG8/ANS-8 non-standard business in progress. A forthcoming paper will compare the development process for ISO and ANSI/ANS standards.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2017

Overview and status of domestic and international standards for nuclear criticality safety

For many years, the domestic and international consensus standards for nuclear criticality safety (NCS) have provided guidance for those performing hands-on operations involving fissionable materials. These consensus standards have been crucial to reducing the number of criticality accidents in process facilities. The last known criticality accident inside the United States was in 1978 (39 years ago at this writing) at the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant, and outside the United States, an accident occurred at Tokai-Mura, Japan, in 1999 (18 years ago at this writing). The domestic consensus standards for NCS include the American Nuclear Society (ANS) standards. The ANS Standards Board, the NCS Consensus Committee, and the ANS-8 Subcommittee oversee the development and maintenance of these standards. There are currently eighteen standards in revision (seven) or maintenance (eleven) cycles, and one standard is currently in development. The international consensus standards for NCS calculations, procedures, and practices are maintained and developed within the International Organization for Standardization, Technical Committee 85 on Nuclear Energy, Subcommittee 5 on Nuclear Fuel Technology, and Working Group 8, Nuclear Criticality Safety. Seven standards are currently available, one standard is in revision, and four standards are at various stages of development. This paper provides the NCS community with an overview and status report of domestic and international NCS consensus standards to stimulate interest and to support their continued development. (author)

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2024

ANS-8 Nuclear Criticality Safety Consensus Standards - Current Initiatives

The nuclear criticality safety (NCS) consensus standards are developed as using rigorous procedures of the Standards Board of the American Nuclear Society. These procedures have been accredited by the American National Standards Institute, Inc., as meeting the criteria for American National Standards. The Nuclear Criticality Safety Consensus Committee (NCSCC) that approved all 18 NCS consensus standards is balanced to ensure that competent, concerned, and varied interests have had an opportunity to participate. The ANS-8 subcommittee (ANS-8) consists of 17 NCS experts with many years of experience as end users of ANS standards who serve on standard working groups to develop and maintain standards. ANS-8 ensures that the technical content of the standards is adequate for NCS community use. Attempts are made to ensure that ANS-8 consists of NCS professionals with a diverse range of experience such that all standards are applicable to as many sites as possible. ANS-8 is a very active subcommittee, and some active projects in progress are discussed in this paper: basis statement development for all standards, development of a glossary for consistency of definitions across all ANS-8 standards, and Considering the Criticality Safety Support Group (CSSG) Recommendation 2016-04 to the ANS Standards Board for changes in several ANS-8 standards.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗

NASA NTRS1993

Optical media standards for industry

Optical storage is a new and growing area of technology that can serve to meet some of the mass storage needs of the computer industry. Optical storage is characterized by information being stored and retrieved by means of diode lasers. When most people refer to optical storage, they mean rotating disk media, but there are 1 or 2 products that use lasers to read and write to tape. Optical media also usually means removable media. Because of its removability, there is a recognized need for standardization, both of the media and of the recording method. Industry standards can come about in one or more different ways. An industry supported body can sanction and publish a formal standard. A company may ship enough of a product that it so dominates an application or industry that it acquires 'standard' status without an official sanction. Such de facto standards are almost always copied by other companies with varying degrees of success. A governmental body can issue a rule or law that requires conformance to a standard. The standard may have been created by the government, or adopted from among many proposed by industry. These are often known as de jure standards. Standards are either open or proprietary. If approved by a government or sanctioning body, the standard is open. A de facto standard may be either open or proprietary. Optical media is too new to have de facto standards accepted by the marketplace yet. The proliferation of non-compatible media types in the last 5 years of optical market development have convinced many of the need for recognized media standards.

Hallam, Kenneth J.↗

NASA NTRS2007

Standardizing Navigation Data: A Status Update

This paper presents the work of the Navigation Working Group of the Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) on development of standards addressing the transfer of orbit, attitude and tracking data for space objects. Much progress has been made since the initial presentation of the standards in 2004, including the progression of the orbit data standard to an accepted standard, and the near completion of the attitude and tracking data standards. The orbit, attitude and tracking standards attempt to address predominant parameterizations for their respective data, and create a message format that enables communication of the data across space agencies and other entities. The messages detailed in each standard are built upon a keyword = value paradigm, where a fixed list of keywords is provided in the standard where users specify information about their data, and also use keywords to encapsulate their data. The paper presents a primer on the CCSDS standardization process to put in context the state of the message standards, and the parameterizations supported in each standard, then shows examples of these standards for orbit, attitude and tracking data. Finalization of the standards is expected by the end of calendar year 2007.

VanEepoel, John M.↗

DOE OSTI2017

A thorough assessment of China’s standard for energy consumption of buildings

China's Design Standard for Energy Efficiency of Public Buildings (the Design Standard) is widely used in the design phase to regulate the energy efficiency of physical assets (envelope, lighting, HVAC) in buildings. However, the standard does not consider many important factors that influence the actual energy use in buildings, and this can lead to gaps between the design estimates and actual energy consumption. To achieve the national energy savings targets defined in the strategic 12th Five-Year Plan, China developed the first standard for energy consumption of buildings GB/T51161-2016 (the Consumption Standard). This study provides an overview of the Consumption Standard, identifies its strengths and weaknesses, and recommends future improvements. The analysis and discussion of the constraint value and the leading value, two key indicators of the energy use intensity, provide insight into the intent and effectiveness of the Consumption Standard. The results indicated that consistency between China's Design Standard GB 50189-2015 and the Consumption Standard GB/T51161-2016 could be achieved if the Design Standard used the actual building operations and occupant behavior in calculating the energy use in Chinese buildings. The development of an outcome-based code in the U.S. was discussed in comparison with China's Consumption Standard, and this revealed the strengths and challenges associated with implementing a new compliance method based on actual energy use in buildings in the U.S. Overall, this study provides important insights into the latest developments of actual consumption-based building energy standards, and this information should be valuable to building designers and energy policy makers in China and the U.S.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2018

Proposal and evaluation of subordinate standard solar irradiance spectra for applications in solar energy systems

Reference solar irradiance spectra are needed to specify key parameters of solar technologies such as photovoltaic cell efficiency, in a comparable way. The IEC 60904-3 and ASTM G173 standards present such spectra for Direct Normal Irradiance (DNI) and Global Tilted Irradiance (GTI) on a 37 degrees tilted sun-facing surface for one set of clear-sky conditions with an air mass of 1.5 and low aerosol content. The IEC/G173 standard spectra are the widely accepted references for these purposes. Hence, the authors support the future replacement of the outdated ISO 9845 spectra with the IEC spectra within the ongoing update of this ISO standard. The use of a single reference spectrum per component of irradiance is important for clarity when comparing and rating solar devices such as PV cells. However, at some locations the average spectra can differ strongly from those defined in the IEC/G173 standards due to widely different atmospheric conditions and collector tilt angles. Therefore, additional subordinate standard spectra for other atmospheric conditions and tilt angles are of interest for a rough comparison of product performance under representative field conditions, in addition to using the main standard spectrum for product certification under standard test conditions. This simplifies the product selection for solar power systems when a fully-detailed performance analysis is not feasible (e.g. small installations). Also, the effort for a detailed yield analyses can be reduced by decreasing the number of initial product options. After appropriate testing, this contribution suggests a number of additional spectra related to eight sets of atmospheric conditions and tilt angles that are currently considered within ASTM and ISO working groups. The additional spectra, called subordinate standard spectra, are motivated by significant spectral mismatches compared to the IEC/G173 spectra (up to 6.5%, for PV at 37 degrees tilt and 10-15% for CPV). These mismatches correspond to potential accuracy improvements for a quick estimation of the average efficiency by applying the appropriate subordinate standard spectrum instead of the IEC/G173 spectra. The applicability of these spectra for PV performance analyses is confirmed at five test sites, for which subordinate spectra could be intuitively selected based on the average atmospheric aerosol optical depth (AOD) and precipitable water vapor at those locations. The development of subordinate standard spectra for DNI and concentrating solar power (CSP) and concentrating PV (CPV) is also considered. However, it is found that many more sets of atmospheric conditions would be required to allow the intuitive selection of DNI spectra for the five test sites, due in particular to the stronger effect of AOD on DNI compared to GTI. In conclusion, the matrix of subordinate GTI spectra described in this paper are recommended to appear as an option in the annex of future standards, in addition to the obligatory use of the main spectrum from the ASTM G173 and IEC 60904 standards.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2016

The Advancement of Cool Roof Standards in China from 2010 to 2015

Since the initiation of the U.S.-China Clean Energy Research Center-Building Energy Efficiency (CERC-BEE) cool roof research collaboration between the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Heat Island Group and Chinese institutions in 2010, new cool surface credits (insulation trade- offs) have been adopted in Chinese building energy efficiency standards, industry standards, and green building standards. JGJ 75-2012: Design Standard for Energy Efficiency of Residential Buildings in Hot Summer and Warm Winter Zone became the first national level standard to provide cool surface credits. GB/T 50378-2014: Assessment Standard for Green Building is the first national level green building standard that offers points for heat island mitigation. JGJ/T 359-2015: Technical Specification for Application of Architectural Reflective Thermal Insulation Coating is the first industry standard that offers cool coating credits for both public and residential buildings in all hot-summer climates (Hot Summer/Cold Winter, Hot Summer/Warm Winter). As of December 2015, eight provinces or municipalities in hot-summer regions have credited cool surfaces credits in their residential and/or public building design standards; five other provinces or municipalities in hot-summer regions recommend, but do not credit, the use of cool surfaces in their building design standards. Cool surfaces could be further advanced in China by including cool roof credits for residential and public building energy efficiency standards in all hot-summer regions; developing a standardized process for natural exposure and aged-property rating of cool roofing products; and adapting the U.S.-developed laboratory aging process for roofing materials to replicate solar reflectance changes induced by natural exposure in China.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2017

A Perspective on the Interaction Between the NCSD and ANSI/ANS-8 Standards

The intent of this paper is to illuminate the reasons behind the culture of standards involvement by the criticality safety community in the NCSD, and specifically highlight those NCSD activities that build/support this culture. Many NCSD members are currently active in ANSI/ANS-8 and other standards and have been for the last half century. This paper was inspired by a request from ANS’s Professional Divisions Committee concerning how the professional divisions could “increase support to Standards development as Subject Matter Experts”. The healthy level of involvement (i.e., culture) by the NCSD membership in standards was noted. A history of the ANSI/ANS-8 series standards is provided, with roots going back to 1955. The need became apparent during a cluster of nuclear criticality accidents that occurred between 1958-1962. The first NCS related standard was the American Standard N6.1-1964, the parent of ANSI/ANS-8.1, which was prepared in 1958 and adopted in 1964. Thus, the involvement in standards by the NCS community goes back more than 50 years. The NCSD continues to help foster a culture of standards use and development. However, the support provided by the NCSD is frequently not recognized, and standards activities are often viewed as separate from the NCSD. This paper highlights the interaction between the NCSD and the ANSI/ANS-8 standards activities as well as the benefit of this support.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗

DOE OSTI2017

A Perspective on the Interaction Between the NCSD and ANSI/ANS-8 Standards [Slides]

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗

DOE OSTI2016

An Evaluation of Standardized Canisters in the Waste Management System - 16317

Development of a standardized canister system represents an opportunity to develop an integrated approach to addressing storage, transportation, and disposal issues in the waste management system. However, regardless of timing and method, deployment of such a system would have the potential to cause significant system-wide impacts. This evaluation expands upon previous standardized-canister system evaluations and compares continued loading of dual-purpose canisters (i.e., the status quo) with loading of standardized canister systems in the near term, that is, before repository requirements are known and/or before operating reactors shut down. This evaluation quantitatively compares order-of-magnitude costs and logistics for different standardization scenarios with those of status quo scenarios, provides insight into quantifiable impacts of loading standardized canister systems in the near term, tests system-level analysis tools and associated input, and identifies scenarios for further analysis. This is a technical paper that does not take into account the contractual limitations under the Standard Contract (10 CFR Part 961). As work on assessing standardized canister system scenarios has progressed, new data for at-reactor and interim storage facility (ISF) operations have been collected and/or generated to provide more realism at the system level, and past scenarios were re-evaluated with this new information. In addition, new scenarios were developed and analyzed that focused on (1) bare fuel transported from reactors to an ISF in re-usable bare fuel casks and deferring deployment of a standardized canister system to the ISF, (2) alternative acceptance strategies based on conclusions from previous systems architecture studies, and (3) the impacts of having to accommodate spent fuel in differently sized canisters for different potential repository geologies. Results of this evaluation indicate that shifting the loading of standardized canisters from the reactor to the ISF does not result in a significant change in total system cost. Results also show that some alternative acceptance strategies could reduce the number of years that spent nuclear fuel (SNF) stays on-site at reactors for cases involving standardized canisters (consistent with previous results that looked at dual-purpose canisters). Finally, incorporating the new at-reactor loading data of small standardized canisters shows a significant system-wide cost reduction when compared to previous estimates of at-reactor loading of small canisters. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2017

A perspective on the interaction between the NCSD and ANSI/ANS-8 standards

The intent of this paper is to illuminate the reasons behind the culture of standards involvement by the criticality safety community in the NCSD (Nuclear Criticality Safety Division), and specifically highlight those NCSD activities that build/support this culture. Many NCSD members are currently active in ANSI/ANS-8 and other standards and have been for the last half century. This paper was inspired by a request from ANS's Professional Divisions Committee concerning how the professional divisions could 'increase support to Standards development as Subject Matter Experts'. The healthy level of involvement (i.e., culture) by the NCSD membership in standards was noted. A history of the ANSI/ANS-8 series standards is provided, with roots going back to 1955. The need became apparent during a cluster of nuclear criticality accidents that occurred between 1958-1962. The first NCS related standard was the American Standard N6.1-1964, the parent of ANSI/ANS-8.1, which was prepared in 1958 and adopted in 1964. Thus, the involvement in standards by the NCS community goes back more than 50 years. The NCSD continues to help foster a culture of standards use and development. However, the support provided by the NCSD is frequently not recognized, and standards activities are often viewed as separate from the NCSD. This paper highlights the interaction between the NCSD and the ANSI/ANS-8 standards activities as well as the benefit of this support. (authors)

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗