Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “panels”

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 OSTI2020

Panel Session 26: Risk-Based Approaches to Environmental Remediation and Adaptive Site Management

This panel discussed the needs and importance of developing risk-based approaches to environmental remediation that will enable complex sites to be adaptively managed by applying cost-effective remedies that are protective of human health and the environment. The discussion emphasized risk-based approaches within decision processes and subsequent incorporation into regulatory decision documents. Remedy approaches, remediation exit strategies, and long-term monitoring plans that support risk-based end-states for difficult-to-remediate sites were discussed Panelists with presentations: Risk-Informed Approaches to Environmental Remediation and Adaptive Site Management (Vicky Freedman); ITRC Adaptive Site Management Perspective (Michael Truex); Optimization During Operations and Maintenance Phase at the Hanford Site 200-ZP-1 Groundwater Operable Unit (Emerald Laija, Kate Amrhein, Michael Truex); Adaptive Management: EPA Overview (Benjamin Simes); Decommissioning and Environmental Remediation Section Division of Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Waste Technology (Horst Monken Fernandes)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 35: Strategies and Successes in Increasing Efficiency and Reducing Cost to Accelerate Work While Maintaining Operational Excellence (R1.5)

This panel focused on results-based project execution and ways to improve the effectiveness of large radioactive clean-up site operations while increasing efficiency and reducing cost. Panelists discussed best practices and lessons learned from their sites and projects as they work within budgetary, resource and technological constraints. Panelist with presentations: CNS Journey (Morgan Smith)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 37: The Wants and Needs of Graduating Students and New Engineers: Are Companies Even Listening? (R8.1)

This panel focused on new hires, graduating scientists and engineers having open lines of communication with employers. Considering the projected shortfalls in the workforce, effective communication of wants-and-needs of both the employer and employee must exist. Do these needs differ between industries and/or generations? Currently, it seems that both sides must work harder to achieve this level of communication. With this new approach, both sides can express their wants and needs for a more satisfied workforce and a better work environment. Panelists with presentations: The Future of Work: What Employers Seek From Recent Graduates (Melody Bell); Graduating Students and New Engineers - Wants and Needs - Are Companies Even Listening? (Joseph Aylor); Industry and Education: Bridging the Gap (Arthur Baranovskiy)

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 45: Savannah River National Laboratory Advancing the EM Mission Through Technology

This panel focused on Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) activities and addressed: 1) Initial development work that SRNL performed to develop the technologies and processes, as well as design the equipment for the DOE EM HLW tank waste treatment and soil and groundwater mission, 2) Implemented technology and process improvements to the EM systems, and 3) Current technologies being evaluated for future implementation to improve throughput and reduce cost/schedule. Panelists with presentations: Advancing the EM Mission: SRNL Technology Approach (Connie Herman); Nuclear Materials Management (William Bates); Adjust, Adapt, Attest, and Adjudicate (Bruce Wiersma); SRNL Research and Development for Technological Advancements in the Liquid Waste Mission at SRS (Frank Pennebaker); EM TD Applies Solutions at SRS (Andrew Fellinger); Remediation of Complex Groundwater Plumes: Three Decades of Cleanup Success (Carol Eddy-Dilek)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 47: Decommissioning, Issues and Possibilities/Opportunities

This panel focused on decommissioning projects in the US and abroad. This interactive discussion between the audience and panelists included - 1) logistics (from cradle to grave); 2) organizational aspects of decommissioning; 3) regulatory aspects and issues; 4) definition of the back-end with regard to packages and Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC); and 5) identification and management of difficult-to-handle decontamination and demolition (D and D) waste (e.g. damaged fuel, legacy/forgotten waste inside Nuclear Power Plants, etc.). Panelist with presentations: JCNPP Lessons Learned (Manuel Ondaro del Pino)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Session 058 - Panel: Ensuring Strong Return on Investment for DOE EM Technology Development: DOE Views (1/2) (R1.26)

The panel represented the views of US DOE National Laboratories and DOE Contractors and focused on DOE Technology Development Projects discussing how they approach tech development to maximize return on investment. Successful examples were discussed. Panelists with presentations: Ensuring a Strong ROI for DOE EM Technology Development (Jud Virden); The DOE EM Technology Development Technical Assistance Program (Carol Eddy-Dilek); SRR Liquid Waste Technology Development Program: Encouraging Creativity Maximize Return on Investment (Vijay Jain); Ensuring Strong Return on Investment for DOE EM Technology Development: A Vendor Perspective (Martin Williams)

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 70: Nuclear Power Plant Waste Management, LLRW Processing Issues

This panel focused on senior utility managers discussing issues with commercial LLW processors. LLW processors had an opportunity to update utilities/NPPs on new or different services or technologies being offered to assist in their radioactive waste management goals, changes to their facility license, revisions to their acceptance guidelines, and emerging compliance issues. Panelists with presentations: UniTech - 'Expanding to Reduce Costs' LLW Processor Update (Gregg Johnstone); Veolia Nuclear Solutions Federal Services - Alaron Nuclear Services (Dave Garber); EnergySolutions Tennessee Processing Facilities (Fred Schulz); Complex Waste Management Issues Services and Treatment Facilities (George M. Taylor)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 80: Interagency Community of Practice in Risk and Performance Assessment

This panel focused on the status of the Inter-agency Performance and Risk Assessment Community of Practice (P and RA COP). Representatives from the P and RA COP and subject matter experts discussed lessons learned and provided feedback on building the P and RA COP to support risk-informed environmental decision making. Panelists with presentations: Understanding Mechanisms to Manage Uncertainty and Risk in Waste Containment Systems (Craig Benson, University of Virginia - CRESP (USA) Scaling for Performance Assessments (Paul Black, Katie Catlett, Doug Anderson, Paul Duffy, Tom Stockton, Sam Van Sickle, John Carson); Interagency Community of Practice in Rick and Performance Assessment (Horst Monken Fernandes); Institutional Controls as a Risk Management Tool (David Esh); Superfund: Explanation of Screening and PRG's for Risk and Dose Assessment (Stuart Walker)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 89: Progress on Deep Repository Around the World

This panel focused on the progress of deep repository programs, worldwide. While efforts on a deep geological repository for SNF/UNF and HLW in the USA were terminated in 2010, several other repository programs continue to make considerable progress 10 and deserve to be recognized. Panelists from national, multi-national, and international repository programs and organizations reported on the status and future plans as well as the perceived reasons underlying the success and the failure of components of their respective repository program. This session provided a forum for interested parties to present, exchange, and take advantage of, as appropriate, repository progress, challenges, concepts/designs and other lessons learned around the world, including site characterization, site selection, research and development, licensing, construction, operation, and public acceptance and participation. Panelists with presentations: Switzerland's Geological Repository Program for Radioactive Waste (Tim Vietor); Update on NWMO's Progress in Implementing Canada's Plan (Sarah Hirschorn); Cigeo Project Progress and Next Milestones (Corinne Bauer)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 1: WMS 2020 Plenary Session

The plenary panel focused on government and industry world leaders speaking on the pressing issues facing radioactive waste management in 2020 and beyond. Panelists included an OECD/ NEA representative for the international community, a Huntington Ingalls Industries representative for the commercial sector, and the US DOE Senior Advisor to the Under Secretary of Science representing DOE Environmental Management. Panelists with presentations: WM2020 Speech (Michael Lempke); Optimization: A Better Path toward Managing Nuclear Decommissioning and Legacies (William Magwood); Update On the DOE Environmental Management Program (William White)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 110B: US DOE High-Level Radioactive Waste (HLW) Interpretation

This panel focused on the US DOE High-Level radioactive Waste (HLW) definition interpretation. Discussion integrated topics such as the issuance of the HLW interpretation Federal Registration Notice, the status of the draft Environmental Assessment that analyzes the treatment and commercial disposal of up to 10,000-gallons of SRS Defense Waste Processing Facility recycle wastewater in South Carolina, and the path forward. Panelists with presentations: Status on the Environmental Assessment for the Commercial Disposal of Defense Waste Processing Facility Recycle Wastewater from SRS (Theresa Kliczewski); Enhancing Stakeholder Engagement on the HLW interpretation (Kara Colton, Rick McLeod); Technical Aspects of Potential Disposal of SRS DWPF Recycle Wastewater (Kent Rosenberger)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 129: Perspectives (US and Non-US) on the Use of Risk and Dose Assessment Tools (R9.3)

This panel focused on various dose and risk assessment tools for assessments, Deactivation and Decommissioning, remediation, and closure of sites of chemical and radioactive wastes. Representatives from the US government agencies, non-US countries and their representative regulatory bodies or authorities, as well as performance/risk assessment practitioners compared and contrasted the various guidance from regulatory agencies and authorities on how tools such as the Preliminary Remediation Goals (PRG) calculator, the Dose Compliance Concentrations (DCC) calculator, and Residual Radioactivity (RESRAD) should be used in support of analyses and decisions for environmental cleanup activities. Panelists with presentations: Cumulative Impact Evaluation: Innovative Tools for Evaluation of Groundwater Protection (Alaa Aly); Superfund Evaluation Process for Alternative Risk and Dose Models (with Focus on EPA and DOE Tools) (Stuart Walker); NRC Staff Perspective on Risk-Informed Approach and Reasonable Safety Assurance in D and D and LLW (Rateb (Boby) Abu Eid)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 13: D and D Collaboration Between US DOE EM and NNSA (R6.3)

This panel focused on the interaction and collaboration between US Department of Energy's Office of Environmental Management (DOE EM) and National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) offices and sites. Panelists with presentations: NNSA and DOE EM Collaboration on Facility Disposition (Deborah Couchman-Griswold); DOE EM and NNSA D and D Collaboration at the Y-12 National Security Complex (Diane McDaniel); Working Together to Achieve Environmental Cleanup Success in Oak Ridge (Laura Wilkerson, James Daffron); DOE-EM - NNSA (Rick Demmer)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 145: Challenges and Opportunities in Establishing a System for Transportation of SNF/UNF

Issues associated with establishing a SNF Transportation System in the U.S. are complex. In part, this is because in the US when discussing SNF, there are two distinct categories. The two categories represent significant differences in ownership, transportation-regulator, and even the physical characteristics of the SNF. Specifically, the physical differences in the SNF include size of the rods, associated quantities to be shipped, cladding material, and radionuclide content/enrichment. The first is commercial SNF (i.e., that associated with nuclear power plants), owned by utilities, until a permanent repository is built with DOE obligated by law to then assume the responsibility for shipping and ownership of the SNF. Since no-permanent repository currently exists, most commercial SNF is stored near the reactor in which it was installed, hence requiring no shipments. Although current shipments of commercial SNF are very limited, the few that do occur are generally performed to support a utilities SNF consolidation effort utility and for post irradiation examination/testing. However, with approximately 83,000 metric tons currently being stored at more than 70 sites around the U.S., when a permanent repository becomes available, the required number of shipments will be extensive. The second category is DOE and research reactor fuel. These fuel rods are generally much smaller in length than commercial fuel rods, with the quantity of rods transported in a shipment significantly less than the number of rods in a typical commercial fuel assembly. Currently, most of the SNF shipments within the U.S come from this category. DOE is currently managing about 2500 metric tons of heavy metal of SNF. This panel focused on updates and status of transportation of SNF/UNF. Panelists provided updates and information on continuing impacts, risk assessment, equipment (rail cars, handling, securement), possible rail routing, and proposed inspection equipment/routing prior to shipments. Panelists with presentations: Preparing for Nuclear Waste Transportation (Daniel Ogg); Challenges and Opportunities in Establishing a System for Transportation of SNF/UNF (Kathy Langan); UNF Transportation: Challenges and Opportunities (Michael Valenzano)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 2: Hot Topics in US DOE Environmental Management

The well-attended Panel Session was chaired by Martin Schneider. The four panelists did not provide presentations. Rather the session was a discussion focusing on pressing issues facing US DOE Environmental Management (EM) sites and how the program is moving forward. The session began by momentarily reflecting on a success: the three Tank Waste Treatment Facilities will soon be coming online. These three facilities will treat as much waste in two years as was treated in the past 30 years. That is a significant milestone in progress. Also, safety enhancements at WIPP are a big success. The panelists noted that there will be challenges with the victories of the startup of the Waste Treatment Facilities. Treating tank waste is the last EM mission and will help with the relationships with the stakeholders, regulators and Congress. One of the biggest challenges will be moving back to full operation mode. Although the operation will increase productivity of reducing/managing the tank waste, it will decrease life cycle cost and lessen years of cleanup. The challenge will be having people understand that EM will be operating 24/7 and that maintenance will be key in keeping the operations. EM will be working together with the regulators to show tangible progress that will be effective and efficient. By working together, they can find opportunities/technologies for streamlining and accelerating cleanup. Recent changes to the regulatory framework between DOE-EM Los Alamos Field Office and New Mexico Environmental Department have helped cleanup in Los Alamos. Every year EM and the agencies review progress and come to agreements on the next work priorities. At Savannah River Site, the Federal Facility Agreement among EM, South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has developed a small core team that work are shared by together in resolving issues that come up. The discussion moved on to how progress can be made by sharing lessons learned among the contractors. An example of how these learned lessons can be shared is that key representatives from projects across the EM sites participate in various forums to review/contribute to the work planned. Other opportunities can be by temporary assignments of DOE staff to gain experience and by monthly EM Headquarters report that provide the lessons learned across the EM sites. The panelists discussed how skyline changes are the best examples of tangible progress. Decontamination and Demolition (D and D) of structures are the easiest tangible progress that can be seen. Whereas tank waste cleanup is the hardest to see. Disposal of waste onsite versus offsite is another challenge, and timely discussions are necessary to get to the best value to the government.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 23: Start-up of Three Major DOE Treatment Facilities - SWPF, IWTU and DFLAW

This panel focused on the DOE-EM planning to complete construction and start up three major treatment facilities in the next 18 months. This included the Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF) at Savannah River, the Integrated Waste treatment Unit (IWTU) at Idaho and the Direct Feed Low-Activity Waste (DFLAW) at Hanford. DOE Site Managers from SC, ID and WA introduced each facility then the DOE Contractor provided the details on their biggest challenges in regulatory issues, construction, start-up and operations of each facility. Panelists with presentations: Lessons in Managing Risks in First of a Kind Nuclear Construction and Start-Up (Pamela Marks); Integrated Waste Treatment Unit (Connie Flohr); IWTI-Fluor (Frederick Hughes); Startup and Commissioning (Tom Fletcher)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 25: DOE Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Update 2020

This panel focused on the WIPP operational efficiencies and capital improvement progress in the year 2020. Because WIPP is a key component of the US DOE EM cleanup strategy, the progress on returning WIPP to full design capacity and throughput by 2021 is of importance. Panelists with presentations: Status of WIPP Capital Asset Projects (Stephen Smith); WIPP Update (Sean Dunagan); CBFO Update (Greg Sosson)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 34: US DOE Featured Site: Savannah River Operations Office: 70 Years of Service

The Savannah River Site celebrates its 70. anniversary on November 28, 2020. On this date in 1950, President Harry S. Truman requested the Dupont Company to design, build and operate what was then known as the Savannah River Plant in response to the Soviet Union's detonation of its first atomic weapon, which set the Cold War into motion. During the 1950's, six South Carolina towns were relocated for the construction of SRS and by 1953, the 310 square mile site was complete. Nearly 40,000 workers were employed t build five nuclear reactors and support facilities, two chemical separations plants, heavy water extraction plant, nuclear fuel and target fabrication facility tritium extraction facility and waste management facilities. SRS played a key role in winning the Cold War and for seven decades, SRS has been a leader within the DOE complex. Today, the site supports environmental stewardship and maintains the nation's nuclear deterrent while ensuring the safekeeping and disposal of domestic and international nuclear materials. The site continues to support the nation's nuclear defense as it explores new potential NNSA missions. SRS has a proud 70- year history and looks forward to a future of service as a national asset and strong community partner. The session was kicked off with a video message from Secretary of Energy, Dan Brouillette, who thanked employees past and current for their efforts. The video also provided an overview of the history and future of the Site. This panel provided an overview of the Savannah River Site's 70 years of service (history, challenges, opportunities, and future) presented by the SRS's Senior leadership and the local Aiken, South Carolina Mayor. Panelists with presentations: US DOE Secretary Dan Brouillette's Overview of DOE and SRS - A Legacy of 70 Years of Service (Amy Boyette); 70 Years of Service (Michael Budney); 70 Years of Service (Stuart MacVean); SRS Liquid Waste (Thomas Foster); National Nuclear Security Administration (Nicole Nelson-Jean)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗