Results for “Task Force”

DOE OSTI2020

EBS Task Force: Task 9/FEBEX Modeling Final Report: Thermo-Hydrological Modeling with PFLOTRAN

This report outlines Sandia National Laboratories modeling studies applied to Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the Full-scale Engineered Barriers Experiment in Crystalline Host Rock (FEBEX) in situ test for the SKB EBS Task Force Task 9. The FEBEX test was a full-scale test conducted over ~18 years at the Grimsel, Switzerland Underground Research Laboratory (URL) managed by NAGRA. It involved emplacing simulated waste packages, in the form of welded cylindrical heaters, inside a tunnel in crystalline granitic rock and surrounded by a bentonite barrier and cement plug. Sensors emplaced within the bentonite monitored the wetting-up, heating, and drying out of the bentonite barrier, and the large resulting data set provides an excellent opportunity for validation of multiphysics Thermal-Hydrological (TH), Thermal-Hydrologic-Chemical (THC), and Thermal-Hydrological-Mechanical (THM) modeling approaches for underground nuclear waste storage and the performance of engineered bentonite barriers. The present status of the EBS Task Force is finalizing Task 9, which follows years of modeling studies of the FEBEX test, by many notable modeling teams (Gens et al., 2009; Sanchez et al. 2010; 2012; Samper et al., 2018). These modeling studies generally use two-dimensional axisymmetric meshes, ignoring threedimensional effects, gravity and asymmetric wetting and dry out of the bentonite engineered barrier. This study investigates these effects with use of the PFLOTRAN THC code with massively parallel computational methods in modeling FEBEX Stage 1 and Stage 2 results. The PFLOTRAN numerical code is an open source, state-of-the-art, massively parallel subsurface flow and reactive transport code operating in a high-performance computing environment (Hammond et al., 2014). Section 2 describes the applied partial differential equations describing mass, momentum and energy balance used in this study, considerations derived by assuming phase equilibrium between gas and liquid phases, constitutive equations for granite, cement plug, and bentonite domains, and specific approaches for use inthe PFLOTRAN code. Section 3 describes the geometry, meshing, and model set-up. Section 4 describes modeling results, Section 5 compares modeling results to field testing data, and Section 6 gives conclusions. The Appendix provides detailed information required by the EBSTask Force for final reporting.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2019

EBS Task Force: Task 9 - SNL Updates on TH and THM Modeling of FEBEX In-Situ Test.

Abstract not provided.

Hadgu, Teklu↗

DOE OSTI2017

GeoVision Analysis: Reservoir Maintenance and Development Task Force Report (GeoVision Analysis Supporting Task Force Report : Reservoir Maintenance and Development)

This report documents the key findings from the Reservoir Maintenance and Development (RM&D) Task of the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE), Geothermal Technologies Office (GTO) Geothermal Vision Study (GeoVision Study). The GeoVision Study had the objective of conduc ting analyses of future geothermal growth based on sets of current and future geothermal technology developments. The RM&D Task is one of seven tasks within the GeoVision Study with the others being, Exploration and Confirmation, Potential to Penetration, Institutional Market Barriers, Environmental and Social Impacts, Thermal Applications, and Hybrid Systems. The full set of findings and the details of the GeoVision Study can be found in the final GeoVision Study report on the DOE-GTO website. As applied here, RM&D refers to the activities associated with developing, exploiting, and maintaining a known geothermal resource. It assumes that the site has already been vetted and that the resource has been evaluated to be of sufficient quality to move towards full-scale development. It also assumes that the resource is to be developed for power generation, as opposed to low-temperature or direct use applications. This document presents the key factors influencing RM&D from both a technological and operational standpoint and provides a baseline of its current state. It also looks forward to describe areas of research and development that must be pursued if the development geothermal energy is to reach its full potential.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2023

On the feasibility of future colliders: report of the Snowmass'21 Implementation Task Force

Colliders are essential research tools for particle physics. Numerous future collider proposal were discussed in the course of the US high energy physics community strategic planning exercise Snowmass'21. The Implementation Task Force (ITF) has been established to evaluate the proposed future accelerator projects for performance, technology readiness, schedule, cost, and environmental impact. Corresponding metrics has been developed for uniform comparison of the proposals ranging from Higgs/EW factories to multi-TeV lepton, hadron and ep collider facilities, based on traditional and advanced acceleration technologies. Here, this article describes the metrics and approaches, and presents evaluations of future colliders performed by the ITF.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Geothermal Interagency Collaboration Task Force: Summary of Findings

This report summarizes the findings of the Geothermal Interagency Collaboration Task Force (Task Force) and associated stakeholder forums and Tribal listening sessions. The Task Force included federal agencies and state agencies in California and Nevada with a nexus to geothermal regulatory and permitting approvals. The Task Force met twice over the course of 2022 to discuss current geothermal regulatory and permitting challenges and strategies for improved coordination and permit processing. In addition, the project team held four forums/listening sessions in 2022 with geothermal industry representatives, environmental non-governmental organizations, and Tribes to gain additional insight and perspective on the geothermal regulatory process and managing potential cultural and natural resource conflicts that may arise during geothermal development.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2018

GeoVision Analysis: Exploration Task Force Report

The GeoVision study effort included ground-breaking, detailed research on current and future market conditions and geothermal technologies in order to forecast and quantify the electric and non-electric deployment potentials under a range of scenarios, in addition to their impacts on the Nation’s jobs, economy and environment. Coordinated by the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Geothermal Technologies Office (GTO), the GeoVision study development relied on the collection, modeling, and analysis of robust datasets through seven national laboratory partners, which were organized into eight technical Task Force groups. The purpose of this report is to provide a central repository for the research conducted by the Exploration Task Force. The Exploration Task Force consists of four individuals representing three national laboratories: Patrick Dobson (task lead) and Christine Doughty of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Anna Wall of National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Travis McLing of Idaho National Laboratory, and Chester Weiss of Sandia National Laboratories. As part of the GeoVision analysis, our team conducted extensive scientific and financial analyses on a number of topics related to current and future geothermal exploration methods. The GeoVision Exploration Task Force complements the drilling and resource technology investigations conducted as part of the Reservoir Maintenance and Development Task Force. The Exploration Task Force however has focused primarily on early stage R&D technologies in exploration and confirmation drilling, along with an evaluation of geothermal financing challenges and assumptions, and innovative “blue-sky” technologies. This research was used to develop geothermal resource supply curves (through the use of GETEM) for use in the ReEDS capacity expansion modeling that determines geothermal technology deployment potential. It also catalogues and explores the large array of early-stage R&D technologies with the potential to dramatically reduce exploration and geothermal development costs, forming the basis of the GeoVision Technology Improvement (TI) scenario. These modeling topics are covered in detail in Potential to Penetration task force report. Most of the research contained herein has been published in peer-reviewed papers or conference proceedings and are cited and referenced accordingly. The sections that follow provide a central repository for all of the research findings of the Exploration and Confirmation Task Force. In summary, it provides a comprehensive discussion of Engineered Geothermal Systems (EGS) and associated technology challenges, the risks and costs of conducting geothermal exploration, a review of existing government efforts to date in advancing early-stage R&D in both exploration and EGS technologies, as well as a discussion of promising and innovative technologies and implementation of blue-sky concepts that could significantly reduce costs, lower risks, and shorten the time needed to explore and develop geothermal resources of all types.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2018

GeoVision Analysis Supporting Task Force Report: Geothermal Hybrid Systems

This report documents findings from the Hybrid Systems Task Force of the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Geothermal Technologies Office (GTO) Geothermal Vision Study (GeoVision Study). The GeoVision Study projects and quantifies the future electric and nonelectric deployment potentials of geothermal technologies within a range of scenarios in addition to their impacts on U.S. jobs, the economy, and environment. The Hybrid Systems Task Force is one of seven task forces within the GeoVision Study with the others being Exploration and Confirmation, Potential to Penetration, Thermal Applications, Reservoir Maintenance and Development, Institutional Market Barriers, and Social and Environmental Impacts. A summary of the study is captured in DOE’s report, GeoVision: Harnessing the Heat Beneath Our Feet. The Hybrid Systems Task Force investigated geothermal hybrid systems that have potential to increase the utilization of geothermal resources and/or decrease the costs of geothermal power generation. Applications evaluated include: hybrid thermal power generation in which geothermal energy is coupled with solar or fossil heat sources; use of geothermal energy to provide process heat for thermal desalination or CO 2 capture from fossil power plants; analysis of compressed air energy storage augmented with geothermal energy; as well as an assessment of potential mineral recovery from geothermal brines. This report additionally discusses areas of research and development that should be pursued to enhance the ability of geothermal hybrid systems to provide valuable benefits in operational flexibility, reduction of project risks, increased energy security, and the ability to recover critical and strategic materials.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2017

Status Report on Activities of the Systems Assessment Task Force, OECD-NEA Expert Group on Accident Tolerant Fuels for LWRs

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development /Nuclear Energy Agency (OECD/NEA) Nuclear Science Committee approved the formation of an Expert Group on Accident Tolerant Fuel (ATF) for LWRs (EGATFL) in 2014. Chaired by Kemal Pasamehmetoglu, INL Associate Laboratory Director for Nuclear Science and Technology, the mandate for the EGATFL defines work under three task forces: (1) Systems Assessment, (2) Cladding and Core Materials, and (3) Fuel Concepts. Scope for the Systems Assessment task force (TF1) includes definition of evaluation metrics for ATF, technology readiness level definition, definition of illustrative scenarios for ATF evaluation, and identification of fuel performance and system codes applicable to ATF evaluation. The identification of irradiation facilities around the world that are being used, or are planned to be used, for the irradiation testing of ATF cladding and fuel materials was later added to the TF1 scope (April 2017). The Cladding and Core Materials (TF2) and Fuel Concepts (TF3) task forces have worked to identify gaps and needs for modeling and experimental demonstration; define key properties of interest; identify the data necessary to perform concept evaluation under normal conditions and illustrative scenarios; identify available infrastructure (internationally) to support experimental needs; and make recommendations on priorities. Where possible, considering proprietary and other export restrictions (e.g., International Traffic in Arms Regulations), the Expert Group has facilitated the sharing of data and lessons learned across the international group membership. The Systems Assessment task force is chaired by Shannon Bragg-Sitton (Idaho National Laboratory [INL], U.S.), the Cladding Task Force is chaired by Marie Moatti (Electricite de France [EdF], France), and the Fuels Task Force is chaired by a Masaki Kurata (Japan Atomic Energy Agency [JAEA], Japan). The original Expert Group mandate was established for June 2014 to June 2016. In April 2016 the Expert Group voted to extend the mandate one additional year to June 2017 in order to complete the task force deliverables; this request was subsequently approved by the Nuclear Science Committee. All reports are currently in final draft and will be submitted to NEA for final formatting/editing in October 2017. A final EGATFL meeting will be held at NEA Headquarters in Paris, France on November 2-3, 2017 to resolve any final comments on the task force reports. This report provides brief summary of the Systems Assessment Task Force deliverable report.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2016

Status Report on Activities of the Systems Assessment Task Force, OECD-NEA Expert Group on Accident Tolerant Fuels for LWRs

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development /Nuclear Energy Agency (OECD/NEA) Nuclear Science Committee approved the formation of an Expert Group on Accident Tolerant Fuel (ATF) for LWRs (EGATFL) in 2014. Chaired by Kemal Pasamehmetoglu, INL Associate Laboratory Director for Nuclear Science and Technology, the mandate for the EGATFL defines work under three task forces: (1) Systems Assessment, (2) Cladding and Core Materials, and (3) Fuel Concepts. Scope for the Systems Assessment task force (TF1) includes definition of evaluation metrics for ATF, technology readiness level definition, definition of illustrative scenarios for ATF evaluation, and identification of fuel performance and system codes applicable to ATF evaluation. The Cladding and Core Materials (TF2) and Fuel Concepts (TF3) task forces will identify gaps and needs for modeling and experimental demonstration; define key properties of interest; identify the data necessary to perform concept evaluation under normal conditions and illustrative scenarios; identify available infrastructure (internationally) to support experimental needs; and make recommendations on priorities. Where possible, considering proprietary and other export restrictions (e.g., International Traffic in Arms Regulations), the Expert Group will facilitate the sharing of data and lessons learned across the international group membership. The Systems Assessment task force is chaired by Shannon Bragg-Sitton (Idaho National Laboratory [INL], U.S.), the Cladding Task Force is chaired by Marie Moatti (Electricite de France [EdF], France), and the Fuels Task Force is chaired by a Masaki Kurata (Japan Atomic Energy Agency [JAEA], Japan). The original Expert Group mandate was established for June 2014 to June 2016. In April 2016 the Expert Group voted to extend the mandate one additional year to June 2017 in order to complete the task force deliverables; this request was subsequently approved by the Nuclear Science Committee. This report provides an update on the status Systems Assessment Task Force activities.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2015

Status Report on Activities of the Systems Assessment Task Force, OECD-NEA Expert Group on Accident Tolerant Fuels for LWRs

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development /Nuclear Energy Agency (OECD/NEA) Nuclear Science Committee approved the formation of an Expert Group on Accident Tolerant Fuel (ATF) for LWRs (EGATFL) in 2014. Chaired by Kemal Pasamehmetoglu, INL Associate Laboratory Director for Nuclear Science and Technology, the mandate for the EGATFL defines work under three task forces: (1) Systems Assessment, (2) Cladding and Core Materials, and (3) Fuel Concepts. Scope for the Systems Assessment task force includes definition of evaluation metrics for ATF, technology readiness level definition, definition of illustrative scenarios for ATF evaluation, parametric studies, and selection of system codes. The Cladding and Core Materials and Fuel Concepts task forces will identify gaps and needs for modeling and experimental demonstration; define key properties of interest; identify the data necessary to perform concept evaluation under normal conditions and illustrative scenarios; identify available infrastructure (internationally) to support experimental needs; and make recommendations on priorities. Where possible, considering proprietary and other export restrictions (e.g., International Traffic in Arms Regulations), the Expert Group will facilitate the sharing of data and lessons learned across the international group membership. The Systems Assessment Task Force is chaired by Shannon Bragg-Sitton (INL), while the Cladding Task Force will be chaired by a representative from France (Marie Moatti, Electricite de France [EdF]) and the Fuels Task Force will be chaired by a representative from Japan (Masaki Kurata, Japan Atomic Energy Agency [JAEA]). This report provides an overview of the Systems Assessment Task Force charter and status of work accomplishment.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2019

GeoVision Analysis Supporting Task Force Report: Electric Sector Potential to Penetration

This report describes research and analysis performed in support of the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office for its Geothermal Vision Study. A summary of the study is captured in DOE’s report, GeoVision: Harnessing the Heat Beneath Our Feet and included ground-breaking, detailed research on geothermal technologies. The study projects and quantifies the future electric and nonelectric deployment potentials of these geothermal technologies within a range of scenarios in addition to their impacts on U.S. jobs, the economy, and environment. Coordinated by the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office, the Geothermal Vision Study development relied on collecting, modeling, and analyzing robust data sets through seven national laboratory partners that were organized into eight technical task force groups. These task forces and their respective principal leading national laboratory are listed in Table F-1. The table also provides a guide to the final research documents produced by each GeoVision task force. In most cases, these were prepared as laboratory reports, and they are referenced accordingly. Consult these external reports for detailed discussions of the topics contained within, which form the basis of the GeoVision analysis.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2019

GeoVision Analysis Supporting Task Force Report: Barriers-An Analysis of Non-Technical Barriers to Geothermal Deployment and Potential Improvement Scenarios

This report describes research and analysis performed in support of the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office for its Geothermal Vision Study. A summary of the study is captured in DOE’s report, GeoVision: Harnessing the Heat Beneath Our Feet and included ground-breaking, detailed research on geothermal technologies. The study projects and quantifies the future electric and nonelectric deployment potentials of these geothermal technologies within a range of scenarios in addition to their impacts on U.S. jobs, the economy, and environment. Coordinated by the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office, the Geothermal Vision Study development relied on collecting, modeling, and analyzing robust data sets through seven national laboratory partners that were organized into eight technical task force groups. These task forces and their respective principal leading national laboratory are listed in Table F-1. The table also provides a guide to the final research documents produced by each GeoVision task force. In most cases, these were prepared as laboratory reports, and they are referenced accordingly. Consult these external reports for detailed discussions of the topics contained within, which form the basis of the GeoVision analysis.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2019

GeoVision Analysis Supporting Task Force Report: Thermal Applications-Quantifying Technical, Economic, and Market Potential of Geothermal District Heating Systems in the United States

This report describes research and analysis performed in support of the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office for its Geothermal Vision Study. A summary of the study is captured in DOE’s report, GeoVision: Harnessing the Heat Beneath Our Feet and included ground-breaking, detailed research on geothermal technologies. The study projects and quantifies the future electric and nonelectric deployment potentials of these geothermal technologies within a range of scenarios in addition to their impacts on U.S. jobs, the economy, and environment. Coordinated by the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office, the Geothermal Vision Study development relied on collecting, modeling, and analyzing robust data sets through seven national laboratory partners that were organized into eight technical task force groups. These task forces and their respective principal leading national laboratory are listed in Table F-1. The table also provides a guide to the final research documents produced by each GeoVision task force. In most cases, these were prepared as laboratory reports, and they are referenced accordingly. Consult these external reports for detailed discussions of the topics contained within, which form the basis of the GeoVision analysis.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2019

GeoVision Analysis Supporting Task Force Report: Impacts-The Employment Opportunities, Water Impacts, Emission Reductions, and Air Quality Improvements of Achieving High Penetrations of Geothermal Power in the United States

This report describes research and analysis performed in support of the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office for its Geothermal Vision Study. A summary of the study is captured in DOE’s report, GeoVision: Harnessing the Heat Beneath Our Feet and included ground-breaking, detailed research on geothermal technologies. The study projects and quantifies the future electric and nonelectric deployment potentials of these geothermal technologies within a range of scenarios in addition to their impacts on U.S. jobs, the economy, and environment. Coordinated by the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office, the Geothermal Vision Study development relied on collecting, modeling, and analyzing robust data sets through seven national laboratory partners that were organized into eight technical task force groups. These task forces and their respective principal leading national laboratory are listed in Table F-1. The table also provides a guide to the final research documents produced by each GeoVision task force. In most cases, these were prepared as laboratory reports, and they are referenced accordingly. Consult these external reports for detailed discussions of the topics contained within, which form the basis of the GeoVision analysis.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2014

Sci—Fri PM: Topics — 03: The Global Task Force on Radiotherapy for Cancer Control: Core Investments

The Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) is a membership-based, non-governmental organization with a mandate to “…to unite the cancer community to reduce the global cancer burden, to promote greater equity, and to integrate cancer control into the world health and development agenda.” COMP is an associate member of the UICC. It is well recognized by the UICC that there are major gaps between high, and low and middle income countries, in terms of access to cancer services including access to radiation therapy. In this context, the UICC has developed a Global Task Force on Radiotherapy for Cancer Control with a charge to answer a single question: “What does it cost to close the gap between what exists today and reasonable access to radiotherapy globally?” The Task Force consists of leaders internationally recognized for their radiation treatment related expertise (radiation oncologists, medical physicists, radiation therapists) as well as those with global health and economics specialization. The Task Force has developed three working groups: (1) to look at the global burden of cancer; (2) to look at the infrastructure requirements (facilities, equipment, personnel); and (3) to consider outcomes in terms of numbers of lives saved and palliated patients. A report is due at the World Cancer Congress in December 2014. This presentation reviews the infrastructure considerations under analysis by the second work group. The infrastructure parameters being addressed include capital costs of buildings and equipment and operating costs, which include human resources, equipment servicing and quality control, and general overhead.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

Nuclear Testing and the Joint Task Force System

During the 1940s, 50s, and early 60s, the United States conducted eight nuclear test operations in the far reaches of the Pacific Ocean. These operations were possible only because of a military command and control organization, the joint task force. Commanded by the Army Navy, and Air Force on a rotating basis, each of the seven JTFs provided the means by which the thousands of ships, planes, material, and personnel were moved over thousands of miles of ocean. The first task force, JTF-1, was created to test the destructive effects of the Fat Man bomb on Naval vessels at Bikini Atoll in the summer of 1946. Commanded by Vice Admiral William “Spike” Blandy, JTF-1 was a purely military operation supported by the MED. Never meant to be a permanent organization, JTF-1 was dissolved soon after completing its mission.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2016

"FACILS 2014: Microbially-driven facilitation systems in environmental biotechnology" (hereafter "FACILS") presented here by the European Commission (EC)-United States (US) Task Force on Biotechnology Research

As we enter the 21st century, the sustainability of the biosphere is a global challenge that can best be met with a global response. This includes how we train and promote our next generation of research scientists in the emerging arenas of genome-enabled biology and a bio-based economy. It is this fundamental issue that formed the motivation for designing and conducting a shortcourse entitled “FACILIS 2014: Microbially-driven facilitation systems in environmental biotechnology” (hereafter “FACILIS”) presented here by the European Commission (EC)-United States (US) Task Force on Biotechnology Research. This WG was established in 1994 under the umbrella of the US-EC Task Force on Biotechnology Research, a transatlantic collaborative group overseen by the US Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and the EC. The Environmental Biotechnology Working Group maintains several goals, including establishing research links between scientists in EU countries and the US and fostering the careers of junior scientists from both sides of the Atlantic to the global nature of scientific cooperation. To that end, a shortcourse was held at the University of Milan in Italy on July 12-25 2014 organized around cross-cutting themes of genomic science and designed to attract a stellar group of interdisciplinary early carrier researchers. A total of 22 students, 10 from the US and 12 from the EU participated. The course provided them with hands-on experience with the latest scientific methods in genomics and bioinformatics; using a format that combines lectures, laboratory research and field work with the final goal to enable researchers to finally turn data into knowledge.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2014

Current Status and Recommendations for the Future of Research, Teaching, and Testing in the Biological Sciences of Radiation Oncology: Report of the American Society for Radiation Oncology Cancer Biology/Radiation Biology Task Force, Executive Summary

In early 2011, a dialogue was initiated within the Board of Directors (BOD) of the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) regarding the future of the basic sciences of the specialty, primarily focused on the current state and potential future direction of basic research within radiation oncology. After consideration of the complexity of the issues involved and the precise nature of the undertaking, in August 2011, the BOD empanelled a Cancer Biology/Radiation Biology Task Force (TF). The TF was charged with developing an accurate snapshot of the current state of basic (preclinical) research in radiation oncology from the perspective of relevance to the modern clinical practice of radiation oncology as well as the education of our trainees and attending physicians in the biological sciences. The TF was further charged with making suggestions as to critical areas of biological basic research investigation that might be most likely to maintain and build further the scientific foundation and vitality of radiation oncology as an independent and vibrant medical specialty. It was not within the scope of service of the TF to consider the quality of ongoing research efforts within the broader radiation oncology space, to presume to consider their future potential, or to discourage in any way the investigators committed to areas of interest other than those targeted. The TF charge specifically precluded consideration of research issues related to technology, physics, or clinical investigations. This document represents an Executive Summary of the Task Force report.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗