Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Guidance”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

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

At least 163 records · Page 9
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2023

Exercise Design Guidance for Solar Cybersecurity

The intent of this resource is to provide recommendations on how State Energy Offices and Public Utility Commissions might design an energy emergency exercise, drill, or other simulation focused on solar cybersecurity scenarios . Exercise practitioners, planners, or facilitators interested in exploring solar cybersecurity incident response, preparedness, recovery, or mitigation may find this a valuable resource . This is an advanced supplementary resource for persons or entities with prior exercise experience and knowledge . It should not be used as a baseline educational resource for how to conduct and evaluate an exercise . It is based on a set of standard concepts, terms, and procedures that are common among the exercise community . This tool may be referenced in conjunction with the Hypothetical Solar Cyberattack Scenarios and Impacts tool within the CATSS Toolkit

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Development of Guidance for the Disposition of Used Oil and Oil Samples at the Columbia Generating Station - 20232

It is a fact that oil can become contaminated during plant operations. When used oil is collected, the water is decanted from the used oil. The separated used oil is typically analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides and then sent off-site for processing (incineration) or recycling. If there is no detectable radioactivity, then some plants may release the oil for unrestricted use. Many nuclear power plants have no standard process for evaluating Tritium and Carbon-14 in oil; therefore, there may be variability in how plants are determining whether oil contains Tritium and Carbon-14, and at what concentration. Questions may arise whether there is a technically sound basis and evaluation method for used oil and if process knowledge and/or sampling may be appropriate in making that determination. Recently, there has been an increase in regulatory scrutiny regarding these practices to ensure that the utilities are evaluating oil for all plant-produced radionuclides prior to free release. Regulators have indicated that the requirement to conduct adequate surveys should include evaluating oils for Tritium and Carbon-14. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2024

Requesting an Exemption from Standard Compliance: EPAct State and Alternative Fuel Provider Fleet Program Guidance Document

The U.S. Department of Energy established the Alternative Fuel Transportation Program (Program) and associated regulatory requirements pursuant to the Energy Policy Act of 1992. The Program, otherwise known as the State and Alternative Fuel Provider Fleet Program, requires covered state government and alternative fuel provider fleets operating under Standard Compliance to acquire alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) as a specific percentage of their annual non-excluded light-duty vehicle acquisitions. The opportunity for covered fleets operating under Standard Compliance to request exemptions from their AFV-acquisition requirements serves as administrative relief in the unlikely event a fleet is unable to satisfy its requirements through the normally available compliance alternatives. These alternatives include the acquisition of light-duty AFVs, the acquisition of other, creditable vehicles (e.g., gasoline-fueled hybrid electric vehicles), making certain investments, the purchase of biodiesel for use in medium- or heavy-duty vehicles to the maximum extent allowed, and purchasing or trading for banked AFV credits. This document addresses requests for exemptions from the AFV-acquisition requirements to help covered fleets better understand: How to file a request for an exemption, information and documentation DOE needs to process an exemption request, and important policies relevant for filing exemption requests.

ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS,ENERGY PLANNING, POLIC↗
DOE OSTI2021

Design Guidelines for Deployable Wind Turbines for Military Operational Energy Applications

This document aims to provide guidance on the design and operation of deployable wind systems that provide maximum value to missions in defense and disaster relief. Common characteristics of these missions are shorter planning and execution time horizons and a global scope of potential locations. Compared to conventional wind turbine applications, defense and disaster response applications place a premium on rapid shipping and installation, short-duration operation (days to months), and quick teardown upon mission completion. Furthermore, defense and disaster response applications are less concerned with cost of energy than conventional wind turbine applications. These factors impart design drivers that depart from the features found in conventional distributed wind turbines, thus necessitating unique design guidance. The supporting information for this guidance comes from available relevant references, technical analyses, and input from industry and military stakeholders. This document is not intended to be a comprehensive, prescriptive design specification. This document is intended to serve as a written record of an ongoing discussion of stakeholders about the best currently available design guidance for deployable wind turbines to help facilitate the effective development and acquisition of technology solutions to support mission success. The document is generally organized to provide high-level, focused guidance in the main body, with more extensive supporting details available in the referenced appendices. Section 2 begins with a brief qualitative description of the design guidelines being considered for the deployable wind turbines. Section 3 provides an overview of the characteristics of the mobile power systems commonly used in U.S. military missions. Section 4 covers current military and industry standards and specifications that are relevant to a deployable wind turbine design. Section 5 presents the deployable turbine design guidelines for the application cases.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Recommendations for an Applicant to Calculate Activity Data for Greenhouse Gases Estimates

In 2009, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) directed the NRC staff to address climate change issues and consider the impacts of the emissions of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) and other greenhouse gases (GHGs) in its environmental reviews for major licensing actions (NRC 2009b). To implement this direction from the Commission, the staff issued guidance in 2011 and updated guidance in 2014 in Attachment 1 to Interim Staff Guidance COL/ESP-ISG-026 (NRC 2011; NRC 2014). This guidance provides a simpler method than the method described in RG 4.2 Rev. 3, that an applicant can use to meet the plant parameter envelope (PPE) value from the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Licensing of New Nuclear Reactors (NR GEIS). NRC staff estimated the 97-year lifecycle GHG emissions from a reference 1000 megawatt electrical (MWe) light-water reactor (LWR) for various activities associated with construction, operation (including uranium fuel cycle), and decommissioning of nuclear power plants and presented the results in Appendix H of the NR GEIS. Appendix H of the NR GEIS includes estimates of direct emissions from construction equipment and emergency diesel engines in a nuclear facility and indirect emissions from workforce vehicular traffic, fuel transportation and the uranium fuel cycle. The NR GEIS Section 3.3 extended the estimates in Appendix H for the installation of two 1000 MWe nuclear reactors on the same site. Scaling factors were used to extrapolate the GHG emissions of a reference 1000 MWe reactor to a two-unit nuclear reactor plant (each reactor unit generating 1000 MWe). GHG emission estimates for building, operation, decommissioning and safe storage (SAFSTOR) for a two-unit nuclear reactor plant would be based on the plant’s physical size, and therefore estimates for these source categories were assumed to be twice the value of the reference 1000 MWe reactor. However, GHG emissions from the fuel cycle (including fuel transportation) were scaled upward by a factor of 3, based on plant efficiencies greater than the 80 percent assumption in Appendix H. Table 1 below shows the PPE emissions for two 1000 MWe nuclear reactors as provided in NR GEIS. The total GHG emissions for two 1000 MWe reactors were calculated as 2,534,000 metric tons (MT) of CO 2 equivalent (CO 2 (e)) based on a 97 year GHG life cycle period. The GHG emissions lifetime of 97 years for a reference nuclear reactor includes a 7-year building phase, 40 years of operation, 10 years of active decommissioning, and 40 years of SAFSTOR operations (NRC 2024). Construction equipment and vehicular traffic from workers commute would contribute to the GHG emissions during a 7-year building phase. Uranium fuel cycle, vehicular traffic, fuel and waste transportation, and testing of standby diesel generators would contribute to GHG emissions during the 40-year operations phase. While NRC’s regulations allow up to 60 years of reactor facility decommissioning, Appendix H estimated that most of the GHGs would occur over an estimated 10-year period during which to the licensee would engage in significant demolition and earth-moving activities, as discussed in Supplement 1 to NUREG-0586 (NRC 2002). Vehicular traffic by the workforce during a 40-year SAFSTOR period would additionally contribute GHG emissions. The carbon footprint for a 40-year SAFSTOR period was separately analyzed from the decommissioning activities as provided in Table YYYY-2 of the staff issued guidance in 2011 (NRC 2011).

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Assessment of Survey Results from Advanced Reactor Industry Domain Experts on Nonlinear Soil-Structure Interaction Analysis Software Verification and Validation

The seismic load case has a significant impact on the design and cost of nuclear power plants. Given the need to substantially reduce cost, advanced reactor designers are looking to leverage numerical tools that enable seismic analysis of an integrated vessel/support/structure/soil system. Modern nonlinear analysis tools provide a solution, capturing dynamic coupling between components (including soil-structure interaction (SSI)) concurrent with nonlinear behavior in one or more parts of the system. Although these methods have a rich history of technical development and implementation, software quality assurance (SQA) following nuclear industry standards remains a significant burden for those wishing to adopt such methods for advanced reactor design and licensing. To reduce the SQA burden, this project will develop the guidance for SQA verification and validation (V&V) of coupled nonlinear SSI analysis tools, to include a test matrix of software features and test problems to support commercial grade dedication (CGD). The guidance is intended to be technology-neutral: supporting designers of all advanced reactors. To maximize the value of the project to reactor designers, the project team performed focused surveys of and interviews with advanced reactor designers. Additionally, the project surveyed members of the broader industry involved in reactor design and licensing. The aggregated industry feedback consists of written survey responses, live polling responses, focused interviews, and informal feedback provided after outreach presentations, collectively referred to as “survey results”. Herein, the survey results are reported, reviewed, and assessed to inform follow-on project activities. The survey results confirmed the familiarity of the industry with the coupled nonlinear SSI analysis. They also affirm the project need based upon the expressed intent to (1) incorporate nonlinear features and (2) pursue the coupled nonlinear SSI analysis to reduce seismic demands and construction costs. All reactor designers indicated their intent to incorporate two or more nonlinear features, and all reactor designer respondents opined that the coupled nonlinear SSI analysis would allow for the optimization of the reactor design and construction. However, the programmatic challenges, whether real or perceived, present a significant barrier to reactor designers. The barrier most commonly identified by the reactor designer population was regulatory risk, with 70% citing this as a reason not to pursue the approach. The perceived regulatory risk identified by the reactor designers underscores the importance of regulator engagement and dialogue in this project. Additionally, half of the reactor designers identified cost and lack of guidance as a deterrent. The survey results also provide insights to tailor specific aspects of the guidance document and test matrix. The project plans to prepare both a formal referenceable guidance document and a collaborative, web-based test matrix and problem set. The project will focus on more complete test problem definitions for the prioritized nonlinear features over shallower problem descriptions for a larger set of features. The nonlinearities prioritized as high based upon survey feedback include fluid-structure interaction and seismic isolation and energy dissipation devices. The nonlinearities prioritized as intermediate include nonlinear geomaterials, nonlinear concrete, nonlinear steel, and interface/contact nonlinearity. Deep embedment and the associated nonlinear phenomena are assigned the lowest priority based upon survey feedback.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Moving Zero Energy Office Buildings to the Mainstream: Establishing Design Guidelines and Energy Targets: Preprint

Office buildings represent a significant portion of the commercial sector and are ideal candidates to lead the market towards achieving zero energy or zero energy ready buildings. The variety of sizes and uses for office buildings make them challenging to determine set design guidance that can be deployed across the market. A project committee for ASHRAE’s Zero Energy - Advanced Energy Design Guide (ZE-AEDG) for small and medium office buildings , comprised of members from five major national associations with market-pull in commercial buildings, created design guidance for achieving zero energy office buildings for new construction and major retrofit. This design guidance focuses on the process, providing a pathway for both office owners and design teams to achieve zero energy status. Energy use intensity targets range from 16 kBtu/ft²·yr to 36 kBtu/ft²·yr for the different climate zones were established such that office buildings can be “zero-ready,” that is, having low energy consumption that can easily be offset with renewables, preferably on-site. The design guidance was rooted in extensive energy modeling, as well as case studies of actual office buildings that have achieved high levels of energy performance and met zero energy or zero energy ready status. A unique aspect of the zero-energy guide is that it is not compared against a baseline but focuses on achieving an absolute target. The paper presents process of creating the targets, the selection of strategies to achieve the targets, and sample case studies that show how the cost-sensitive solutions are achievable for the design community. It also presents outreach strategies to deploy market achievable zero energy measures.

buildings↗
DOE OSTI2021

Pumped Storage Hydropower Valuation Guidebook: A Cost-Benefit and Decision Analysis Valuation Framework

As an energy storage technology, pumped storage hydropower (PSH) supports various aspects of power system operations. However, determining the value of PSH plants and their many services and contributions to the system has been a challenge. While there is a general understanding that PSH resources provide many services and benefits for the operation of power systems, estimating the value of these services—and especially the monetary value of some of those services—has been a challenge. The objective of this project, funded by the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Water Power Technologies Office (WPTO), is to advance the state of the art in assessing the value of PSH plants and their contributions to the power system. The specific goal is to develop detailed, step-by-step valuation guidance that PSH developers, plant owners or operators, and other stakeholders can use to assess the value of existing or potential new PSH plants and their services. The specific goals of this project are: (1) to develop comprehensive and transparent valuation guidance that will support consistent valuation assessments and comparisons of PSH projects or project design alternatives, (2) to test the PSH valuation guidance and its underlying methodology by applying it to two selected PSH projects, and (3) to transfer and disseminate the PSH valuation guidance to the hydropower industry, PSH developers, and other stakeholders. The authors believe that the application of a consistent, transparent, and repeatable valuation process will advance valuation assessments and allow stakeholders to compare valuation analyses performed for different PSH projects or design alternatives. It will also increase the acceptance of valuation results and enable better understanding of the true value that PSH technology brings to the grid.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Experiences of Member States in Building a Nuclear Security Infrastructure for New Nuclear Power Programmes

A nuclear power programme has many benefits, but it is a major undertaking that requires careful planning and preparation as well as a substantial investment in time. It also necessitates the establishment of a sustainable national infrastructure with committed and sustained financial and human resources. While nuclear power is not unique in this respect, it is different from other sources of energy because of the risks associated with the use of nuclear material, as well as the need for compliance with international legal instruments, internationally accepted nuclear safety standards, nuclear security guidance, and safeguards requirements. The IAEA’s Milestones in the Development of a National Infrastructure for Nuclear Power, IAEA Nuclear Energy Series No. NG-G-3.1 (Rev. 1), defines a phased approach that identifies 19 infrastructure issues that should be addressed in each of the three phases of the development of a nuclear infrastructure for a nuclear power programme. The publication Evaluation of the Status of National Nuclear Infrastructure Development IAEA Nuclear Energy Series NG-T-3.2 (Rev. 2) provides a methodology to determine the status of the infrastructure conditions covering all 19 issues identified in the Milestones Approach. A companion IAEA Implementing Guide, Establishing the Nuclear Security Infrastructure for a Nuclear Power Programme, IAEA Nuclear Security Series No. 19, provides guidance on the recommended actions to be taken by a State to establish an effective national nuclear security infrastructure for a nuclear power programme using the Milestones Approach. This publication is intended to provide guidance based on the experiences and good practices of Member States with embarking nuclear power programmes as well as Member States that are expanding their nuclear power programmes. The guidance is in the form of case studies, which highlight challenges, issues, and solutions identified by Member States as lessons learned for new nuclear power programmes. This TECDOC is designed to present the experiences of Member States to assist other Member States in developing a nuclear security programme. It addresses the key actions necessary to establish an effective national nuclear security infrastructure for a nuclear power programme consistent with the three phases of the IAEA Milestones Approach. The Member States that provided case studies in this document are at different stages in the development of a nuclear power programme.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2026

Cyber-Informed Engineering for Strategic Planning

The CIE Guide for Engaging Organizational Leadership: Board and C-Suite describes how to apply CIE at the senior-level of organizational management. This guidance integrates CIE concepts into theory and practice of guiding coalition leadership to improve permeation of CIE concepts throughout organizational culture. This guide incorporates feedback from CIE community of practice volunteers in a study of how business administrative and strategic planning and management guidance and course materials can be applied to CIE implementation throughout an organization's principles and processes. This guide defines the interests guiding senior leadership, managers and supervisors, and technicians and workers involved in creating and operating and maintaining systems, and cultural/ historical/ political assumptions or influences shaped the landscape that could facilitate or impede development of CIE. The included guidance for organizational strategic management and leadership can be imbedded into contract guidance based on the CIE implementation guide and lessons learned from industry application.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2023

Autonomous sense and guide machine learning system

A system for generating a machine learning system to generate guidance information based on locations of objects is provided. The system accesses training data that includes training time-of-arrival (“TOA”) information of looks and guidance information for each look. The guidance information is based on a training collection of object locations. The TOA of a look represents, for each object location of a training collection of object locations, times between signals transmitted by transmitters and return signals received by receivers. The return signals represent signals reflected from an object at the object location. The system trains a machine learning system using the training data wherein the machine learning system inputs TOA information and outputs guidance information.

Beer, N. Reginald↗
DOE OSTI2023

How to Flatten the Earth?

Since the passage of the Geospatial Data Act (GDA) in 2018, federal agencies, including the Department of Energy (DOE), have been working to ensure compliance and outline guidance for the geospatial datasets and affiliated products publicly released from their agencies. At DOE this sparked work to develop a geospatial data management strategy and implementation plan; both of which spotlighted the need for the agency to set preferred guidance for the agency to use to inform the release of any public facing geospatial data and products. One of the immediate needs was set around establishing preferred guidance for coordinate systems, given the foundational role they play in all geospatial data, as they help reference data to the earth. DOE’s Geospatial Information Officer (GIO) and the Geospatial Sciences Steering Committee (GSSC) worked together to summarize best practices and current DOE uses to outline recommendations for coordinate systems to use for public geospatial data and products. This poster summarizes the role of coordinate systems, trends in coordinate system use from across the Department that were used to set preferred guidance for the Department to consider when releasing public-facing geospatial data and products.

Bauer, Jennifer↗
DOE OSTI2020

New Beginnings: Optimising Waste and End-state at UK Nuclear Sites to Enable Environmental Permit surrender (the GRR) - 20193

The decommissioning of nuclear sites involves the management of large volumes of radioactive waste, other conventional waste, and the clean-up of land and groundwater contamination. In the UK, the disposal of radioactive waste from nuclear sites is regulated by the Environment Agency (England), Natural Resources Wales (Wales) and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Scotland). All three environment agencies seek to make sure that the generation and disposal of radioactive waste is optimised: ensuring impacts to people are 'as low as reasonably achievable' (ALARA). With a large proportion of UK nuclear sites embarking on decommissioning, the environment agencies have collaboratively developed new guidance: the 'Management of radioactive waste from the decommissioning of nuclear sites: Guidance on the Requirements for Release from radioactive substances regulation' (referred to as the GRR)[1]. The environment agencies worked in liaison with the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR), the UK nuclear safety regulator, and the UK government body responsible, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA). Prior to finalising the guidance, a 12 month trial was completed at three of the NDA's nuclear sites, enabling the environment agencies to test their draft GRR guidance against 'real world scenarios' and the challenge of incorporating its requirements into decommissioning plans. Experience gained during the trial was incorporated into the current version of the GRR, published in July 2018. The GRR represents the 'new beginning' of this paper's title because for the first time, the UK environmental regulators have expressed in detail their requirements for surrender of environmental permits for nuclear sites. The GRR provides a framework for a UK nuclear site to plan, assess and justify its management of radioactive waste and deliver through decommissioning, an optimal, environmentally safe and sustainable end-state. This paper will describe the requirements and technical standards within the GRR, the establishment of defensible clean-up criteria and the production of a Waste Management Plan (WMP), supported by a Site-Wide Environmental Safety Case (SWESC). It will describe the experience gleaned by operators and regulators during the trial and it will highlight current work by regulators to implement the new approach proportionately. Finally, this paper will look forward and outline planned amendments to legislation in the UK affecting nuclear sites that should enable the full benefits of the GRR to be realised in the future. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2026

A Framework for Building Security into the Design Process

This report presents guidance to support the implementation of security objectives during the design process for nuclear facilities using an organization’s quality management system. The guidance in this document is intended for design vendors and operators of nuclear power facilities. Additionally, this guidance document can be beneficial to regulatory bodies, industry partners, customers, and other stakeholders within the nuclear power market. This report aims to ensure security consequences are identified before designs are completed, which may lead to reduced costs and higher security effectiveness and efficiency.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Unlocking multiphysics design guidelines on Si/C composite nanostructures for high-energy-density and robust lithium-ion battery anode

In general, current material fabrication guidance for novel designs of Si/C composite particle materials focuses on electrochemical behavior and redox reactions at the nano/micro level. However, such guidance cannot provide detailed information for predicting mechanical deformations of the composite particles, especially when the mechanical field coupled with electrochemical and thermal fields. Here, we establish an electro-chemo-mechanical model and implement it to quantitatively analyze the multiphysics behavior of five representative Si/C composite nanostructures. Modeling and computation discover that yolk-shell and dual-shell structures are more robust in terms of particle fractures. When considering electrochemical performance, the yolk-shell structure is the best among the compared five Si/C composites. Finally, we map design guidance to further illustrate quantitative structure-property relationships. This study provides novel insights on Si/C composite nanostructure anode material design and additional powerful design tools for next-generation high-energy-density lithium-ion batteries.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2023

Comparative Analysis of Standard and Advanced USL Methodologies for Nuclear Criticality Safety

The American National Standards Institute/American Nuclear Society national standards 8.1 and 8.24 provide guidance on the requirements and recommendations for establishing confidence in the results of the computerized models used to support operation with fissionable materials. By design, the guidance is not prescriptive, leaving freedom to the analysts to determine how the various sources of uncertainties are to be statistically aggregated. Due to the involved use of statistics entangled with heuristic recipes, the resulting safety margins are often difficult to interpret. Also, these technical margins are augmented by additional administrative margins, which are required to ensure compliance with safety standards or regulations, eliminating the incentive to understand their differences. With the new resurgent wave of advanced nuclear systems, e.g., advanced reactors, fuel cycles, and fuel concepts, focused on economizing operation, there is a strong need to develop a clear understanding of the uncertainties and their consolidation methods to reduce them in manners that can be scientifically defended. In response, the current studies compare the analyses behind four notable methodologies for upper subcriticality limit estimation that have been documented in the nuclear criticality safety literature: the parametric, nonparametric, Whisper, and TSURFER methodologies. Specifically, the work offers a deep dive into the various assumptions of the noted methodologies, their adequacies, and their limitations to provide guidance on developing confidence for the emergent nuclear systems that are expected to be challenged by the scarcity of experimental data. Here, to limit the scope, the current work focuses on the application of these methodologies to criticality safety experiments, where the goal is to calculate a bias, a bias uncertainty, and a tolerance limit for k eff in support of determining an upper subcriticality limit for nuclear criticality safety.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗