Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “performance objectives”

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 19 records

Evaluating scheduling algorithms for traffic with heterogeneous performance objectives

Two types of network traffic are considered: traffic with deadlines, for which the most important performance objective is based on loss rate, and packets without deadlines, for which the most important performance objective is based on mean delay. An optimal scheduling algorithm is presented to minimize weighted loss rate and weighted mean delay in the queues that form at the switches and at the network access points of a packet-switched network, where weights reflect the relative importance of packets. Although not practical for implementation, the algorithm is intended as a standard for the comparison of the performance of other scheduling algorithms. The algorithm is more general and lower computational complexity than previously published algorithms, enabling performance evaluation of some important scenarios that could not previously have been considered. Using the optimal performance results of this algorithm, the performance of the first-come-first-served, static priority, and earliest deadline first scheduling algorithms is evaluated. The results suggest that network efficiency could be improved by using a more sophisticated heuristic scheduling algorithm rather than one of the aforementioned algorithms.

Peha, Jon M.↗

Multi-attribute subjective evaluations of manual tracking tasks vs. objective performance of the human operator

A computational method to deal with the multidimensional nature of tracking and/or monitoring tasks is developed. Operator centered variables, including the operator's perception of the task, are considered. Matrix ratings are defined based on multidimensional scaling techniques and multivariate analysis. The method consists of two distinct steps: (1) to determine the mathematical space of subjective judgements of a certain individual (or group of evaluators) for a given set of tasks and experimental conditionings; and (2) to relate this space with respect to both the task variables and the objective performance criteria used. Results for a variety of second-order trackings with smoothed noise-driven inputs indicate that: (1) many of the internally perceived task variables form a nonorthogonal set; and (2) the structure of the subjective space varies among groups of individuals according to the degree of familiarity they have with such tasks.

Siapkaras, A.↗

JUSTIFI: Software for Improving Performance Objectives via Energy Efficiency

With growing energy supply concerns and rising costs, energy efficiency is a critical component of industrial energy resilience and competitiveness by directly reducing energy operating costs. Energy efficiency projects in manufacturing also yield valuable benefits to other key metrics, such as improved quality, reduced maintenance costs, improved safety, decreased pollution, and enhanced productivity. However, it is difficult to receive approval for energy efficiency projects, so implementation rates are low, even when meeting capital project payback period criteria. The inclusion and quantification of non-energy benefits (NEBs) in the decision-making process for energy efficiency projects can improve the overall financial payback period while demonstrating a positive impact on the firm's key performance metrics and business strategy. Despite their significant financial and strategic value, NEBs are rarely factored into decision-making due to lack of tools to effectively identify and quantify them. Therefore, a comprehensive and integrative approach is needed for the rapidly evolving energy landscape. To address these challenges, through funding from U.S. Department of Energy, our new assessment methodology integrates common continuous improvement six sigma concepts, such as the DMAIC process, and a protocol of guiding questions, into energy efficiency assessments to identify NEBs. We have also developed open-source software, JUSTIFI, to guide users through this process, data collection, and quantification. It is designed to be used concurrently with DOE energy system analysis software suite, MEASUR. Our methodology and tools inform energy assessors, firm engineering, decision makers, and workforce seeking to increase energy resilience and to maximize benefits aligned with performance metrics.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Time-Varying Reference Model Modification of Adaptive Control with Multi-Objective Performance Optimization

This paper presents an adaptive control approach that modifies a reference model in order to satisfy a multi-objective optimization of two performance signals: a linear signal and a quadratic signal. The time varying reference model modification is accomplished by the real-time solutions of the time-varying Riccati and Sylvester equations coupled with the least-squares parameter estimation of the sensitivities of the performance signals to be minimized. The effectiveness of the proposed method is to be demonstrated by a flight control application of maneuver load alleviation and drag minimization.

Adaptive Control↗

Active member control of a precision structure with an H(infinity) performance objective

This paper addresses the noncollocated control of active structures using active structural elements. A top level architecture for active structures is presented, and issues pertaining to robust control of structures are discussed. Controllers optimized for an H sub inf performance specification are implemented on a test structure and the results are compared with analytical predictions. Directions for further research are identified.

Fanson, J. L.↗

JUSTIFI: Software for Improving Performance Objectives via Energy Efficiency

With growing energy supply concerns and rising costs, energy efficiency is a critical component of industrial energy resilience and competitiveness by directly reducing energy operating costs. Energy efficiency projects in manufacturing also yield valuable benefits to other key metrics, such as improved quality, reduced maintenance costs, improved safety, decreased pollution, and enhanced productivity. However, it is difficult to receive approval for energy efficiency projects, so implementation rates are low, even when meeting capital project payback period criteria. The inclusion and quantification of non-energy benefits (NEBs) in the decision-making process for energy efficiency projects can improve the overall financial payback period while demonstrating a positive impact on the firm's key performance metrics and business strategy. Despite their significant financial and strategic value, NEBs are rarely factored into decision-making due to lack of tools to effectively identify and quantify them. Therefore, a comprehensive and integrative approach is needed for the rapidly evolving energy landscape. To address these challenges, through funding from U.S. Department of Energy, our new assessment methodology integrates common continuous improvement six sigma concepts, such as the DMAIC process, and a protocol of guiding questions, into energy efficiency assessments to identify NEBs. We have also developed open-source software, JUSTIFI, to guide users through this process, data collection, and quantification. It is designed to be used concurrently with DOE energy system analysis software suite, MEASUR. Our methodology and tools inform energy assessors, firm engineering, decision makers, and workforce seeking to increase energy resilience and to maximize benefits aligned with performance metrics.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Lightning Detection and Ranging system LDAR system description and performance objectives

The instruments used at the six remote stations to measure both the time-of-arrival of the envelope of the pulsed 60 MHz to 80 MHz portion of the RF signal emitted by lightning, and the electric field waveforms are described as well as the two methods of transmitting the signal to the central station. Other topics discussed include data processing, recording, and reduction techniques and the software used for the 2100S, 2114, and 2116 computers.

Poehler, H. A.↗

Antenna bias rigging for performance objective

An optimum bias rigging for a paraboloidal antenna can be used to minimize the expected average mean-square half-pathlength surface deviations. Statistics of deep space planetary missions are employed to develop weighting factors for antenna elevation angles during these missions. A procedure is shown to compute the optimum rigging angle from these weights.

Levy, R.↗

Robust Multilayer Insulation for Cryogenic Systems

New requirements for thermal insulation include robust Multilayer insulation (MU) systems that work for a range of environments from high vacuum to no vacuum. Improved MLI systems must be simple to install and maintain while meeting the life-cycle cost and thermal performance objectives. Performance of actual MLI systems has been previously shown to be much worse than ideal MLI. Spacecraft that must contain cryogens for both lunar service (high vacuum) and ground launch operations (no vacuum) are planned. Future cryogenic spacecraft for the soft vacuum environment of Mars are also envisioned. Industry products using robust MLI can benefit from improved cost-efficiency and system safety. Novel materials have been developed to operate as excellent thermal insulators at vacuum levels that are much less stringent than the absolute high vacuum requirement of current MLI systems. One such robust system, Layered Composite Insulation (LCI), has been developed by the Cryogenics Test Laboratory at NASA Kennedy Space Center. The experimental testing and development of LCI is the focus of this paper. LCI thermal performance under cryogenic conditions is shown to be six times better than MLI at soft vacuum and similar to MLI at high vacuum. The experimental apparent thermal conductivity (k-value) and heat flux data for LCI systems are compared with other MLI systems.

Fesmire, J. E.↗

Update to the Performance Assessment for the Savannah River Site Saltstone Disposal Facility - 20124

In 2019, Savannah River Remediation developed a revision to the performance assessment (PA) on behalf of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Savannah River Operations Office (SR) for the near-surface disposal of low-level waste at the Savannah River Site (SRS) Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF). Soluble waste from SRS Tank Farms undergoes salt processing to remove cesium and other high activity constituents. The low-activity decontaminated salt solution (DSS) is then immobilized by mixing it into a cementitious waste form known as saltstone. After mixing, the saltstone is poured into leak-tight concrete vaults, known as saltstone disposal units (SDUs), where the waste form cures. By the time of facility closure, the SDF is expected to consist of 15 SDUs with a combined capacity of 1.06 E+09 L (280 Mgal) of cured saltstone. The facility operates under a Disposal Authorization Statement (DAS) from DOE and a permit from the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC). Since the start of operations in 1990, the SDF has received almost 6.7 E+07 L (18 Mgal) of DSS, resulting in the safe disposal of 2.7 E+16 Bq (7.3 E+05 Ci) of activity. Due to the radioactive decay of short-lived contaminants, the total remaining activity in the disposed waste is estimated to be approximately 1.4 E+16 Bq (3.9 E+05 Ci), as of September 2018. The Disposal Authorization Statement requires a demonstration that the system of engineered and natural features of the disposal facility will limit releases from the facility and be protective of human health and the environment for at least the next 1,000 years. The long-term performance of the facility was evaluated under the requirements of the DoE's Radioactive Waste Management Manual (US DOE Manual 435.1-1). Simulations were performed to demonstrate that the disposal facility would meet performance objectives specified in the manual. The evaluation was based on numerical models that simulate the releases of contaminants from the saltstone waste form. Contaminants were transported through groundwater and air pathways to points of assessment to evaluate compliance. In addition, the potential consequences of an inadvertent human intrusion (IHI) were also evaluated. In accordance with the guidance and recommendations in US DoE's technical standard for DAS, deterministic and probabilistic analyses were performed to demonstrate the SDF system, which includes the engineered cover system, the SDUs, the waste form, and the natural features of the site, provides a reasonable expectation that saltstone disposal will meet performance objectives. Post-closure doses to future members of the public (MOP) were evaluated; dose estimates from the air pathway were well below the 1.0 E-04 Sv/yr (10 mrem/yr) performance objective within 1,000 years, and the calculated doses to the MOP from all exposure pathways, including the groundwater and air pathways, were well below the 2.5 E-04 Sv/yr (25 mrem/yr) performance objective within 1,000 years. Doses following an assumed intrusion event within the facility boundaries were well below the IHI performance objectives, where the acute IHI dose was below the acute IHI dose performance objective of 5.0 E-03 Sv (500 mrem) and the chronic IHI dose was below the chronic IHI dose performance objective of 1.0 E-03 Sv/yr (100 mrem/yr) within 1,000 years. (author)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Annual Status Report (FY 2020): Performance Assessment for the Disposal of Low Level Waste in the 200 East Area Burial Grounds

This annual review provides the projected dose estimates of radionuclide inventories disposed in the 200 East Area Low-Level Waste Burial Grounds (LLBGs) since September 26, 1988. These estimates are calculated using the original dose methodology developed in the performance assessment (PA) analysis (WHC-SD-WM-TI-730). The estimates are compared with requirements of DOE O 435.1 Chg 1 and performance objectives defined in companion documents DOE M 435.1-1 Chg 1and DOE-STD-5002-2017). All performance objectives are currently satisfied, and operational waste acceptance criteria (HNF-EP-0063) and waste acceptance practices continue to be sufficient to maintain compliance with performance objectives. Inventory estimates and associated dose estimates from future waste disposal actions are unchanged from previous years’ evaluations that indicate potential impacts well below performance objectives; therefore, future compliance with DOE O 435.1 Chg 1 is expected. A new PA study was initiated in fiscal year (FY) 2019 for evaluation of active disposal sites within the 200 East and 200 West Areas (Trench 94 in 200 East; Trenches 31 and 34 in 200 West) due to extended time elapsing between the current annual status report and the original PA for the active disposal sites. The new PA for the active disposal sites is expected to be completed in FY 2021. Within the active burial grounds in the 200 East Area, low-level waste and mixed low-level waste will continue to be disposed of in the dedicated U.S. Navy reactor compartment trench at the 218-E-12B Burial Ground (Trench 94). During this reporting period (FY 2020, from October 1, 2019, through September 30, 2020), two reactor compartments were disposed in Trench 94. Results from sorption experiments are summarized for this reporting period to quantify the efficacy of concrete waste forms in retaining key radionuclides (e.g., technetium-99 and iodine-129). The test durations ranged from 1 to 3 months. Continued groundwater monitoring of the 200 East Area LLBGs indicates no groundwater contamination due to LLBG waste. Current assumptions about future land use at the Hanford Site are consistent with PA analysis1 assumptions of a post-closure facility that will not be degraded by human activity. The LLBGs are located in an area identified for waste management and containment of residual contamination. This area will remain after final environmental remediation and the proposed shrinkage of Hanford Site boundaries to small sections within the 200 East and 200 West Areas in the Central Plateau (DOE/EIS-0391). The current closure plan for the LLBGs (DOE/RL-2000-707) estimates that the 200 East LLBGs will be closed in the 2050 timeframe. The Disposal Authorization Statement, other technical basis documents, and the radioactive waste management basis are of continued adequacy to meet the performance objectives of DOE O 435.1 Chg 1. Overall, there are no substantive changes to primary PA assumptions nor the PA analysis conclusion; therefore, compliance with DOE O 435.1 Chg 1 and the Disposal Authorization Statement is maintained.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Performance Assessment for the Disposal of Low-Level Waste in the 200 West Area Burial Grounds (Annual Status Report FY 2022)

This annual review provides the projected dose estimates of radionuclide inventories disposed in the active 200 West Area Low-Level Waste Burial Grounds (LLBGs) since September 26, 1988. These estimates are calculated using the original dose methodology developed in the performance assessment (PA) analysis (WHC-EP-0645). The estimates are compared with the performance objectives defined in U.S. Department of Energy requirements (DOE O 435.1 and its companion documents DOE M 435.1-1 and DOE-STD-5002-2017). All performance objectives are currently satisfied, and operational waste acceptance criteria (HNF-EP-0063) and waste acceptance practices continue to be sufficient to maintain compliance with performance objectives. Inventory estimates and associated dose estimates from future waste disposal actions are unchanged from previous years’ evaluations that indicate potential impacts well below performance objectives; therefore, future compliance with DOE O 435.1 is expected. Within the active burial grounds, low-level and mixed low-level waste currently may be disposed only in two lined trenches in the 218-W-5 Burial Ground (Trenches 31 and 34) until they are either filled or a decision is made to close these trenches. Some mixed low-level waste is also disposed at the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility in the 200 West Area (which is covered under a separate PA). During this (fiscal year 2022) reporting period (October 1, 2021, through September 30, 2022), waste was disposed to the 200 West Area LLBGs. Continued groundwater monitoring of the 200 West Area LLBGs indicates no groundwater contamination due to LLBG waste. Current assumptions about future land use at the Hanford Site are consistent with PA analysis assumptions of a postclosure facility that will not be degraded by human activity. The LLBGs are in an area identified for waste management and containment of residual contamination (DOE/EIS-0391). The current closure plan for the LLBGs (DOE/RL-2000-70) estimates that the 200 West LLBGs will be closed in the 2050 timeframe. The Disposal Authorization Statement, other technical basis documents, and the radioactive waste management basis are of continued adequacy to meet the performance objectives of DOE O 435.1. Overall, there are no substantive changes to primary PA assumptions and no changes to the PA analysis conclusion; therefore, compliance with DOE O 435.1 and the Disposal Authorization Statement is maintained. A new PA to evaluate the long-term impacts of three disposal trenches that are currently active within the 200 East and 200 West Areas (Trench 94 in the 200 East Area and Trenches 31 and 34 in the 200 West Area) was initiated in fiscal year 2019 and completed in fiscal year 2022. Corrective actions addressing 3 key issues and 31 secondary issues identified during the review process were developed and submitted to the Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Federal Review Group Co-Chairs for review and approval. This PA provides additional technical basis for the continued adequacy of the existing Operating Disposal Authorization Statement.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Updated Application of Frequency of Detection Methods for the INL Site Ambient Air Monitoring Network

This report presents a quantitative assessment of the current INL Site air monitoring network using frequency of detection (FD) methods. The first assessment of the INL network was performed in 2015 and made recommendations for improving the network. As a result of changes made in response to the recommendations and the addition of new source locations, the network was modified and reassessed in 2017. Since 2017, administration of the air sampling program has been consolidated under one contractor, which resulted in additional changes to the network (sampler numbers and locations) and changes in radionuclide detection levels. As a result of these changes and others, an updated assessment of the INL Site ambient air monitoring network was performed. The same two exposure scenarios used in previous assessments were used for this assessment: a resident scenario and a shepherd/rancher scenario. The resident was assumed to be continuously present at their residence/business/farm operation outside the INL Site boundary while the shepherd/rancher was assumed to be present 24-hours at the nearest INL grazing allotment boundary in each of the 22.5-degree sectors along the sector centerline from each source. Updates to both the resident and shepherd/rancher receptor locations were included. Other changes include updates to flow rates for stack sources, expansion of the list of important radionuclides based on the most recent National Emission Standards for Hazardous Pollutants (NESHAPs) analysis, and updated dose coefficients. The assessment was conducted to determine whether the current INL monitoring network is capable of detecting releases of important radionuclides from INL Site sources that have the potential to exceed a conservative dose threshold for the two exposure scenarios. The assessment revealed that for the resident scenario, the current network meets the desired performance objective (FD = 95%) for all radionuclides and sources except for Cl-36 from the TRA-770 stack (94.4%). For the shepherd/rancher scenario, the FD performance objective is met for all radionuclides and sources except tritium from MFC-774 and TAN 679 (91% for both). An investigation of reported emissions for the past three years revealed that Cl 36 is not emitted from TRA-770, and routine tritium emissions from MFC-774 and TAN-679 are very small and the sources are likely incapable of emitting enough tritium to cause a release that should be detectable by the monitoring network. This assessment is based on a conservative dose threshold. This coupled with fact that the FD for Cl 36 is only slightly less than the performance objective and Cl-36 is not emitted from TRA-770, modifying the network (i.e. adding another sampler, increasing sampler flow rate, moving samplers) to meet the 95% performance objective for this radionuclide/source/receptor scenario is not warranted. Similarly, because tritium emissions from MFC-774 and TAN-679 are very small and these two sources are likely incapable of causing a dose due to tritium release that should be detectable by the network, modifications to increase tritium detection for these sources is also unwarranted at this time. However, if it is required to meet the performance objective for tritium for all sources and receptor scenarios, additional analysis determined the FD could be raised from 91% to > 99% for both sources by adding two tritium samplers to the network.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

Performance Assessment for the Disposal of Low Level Waste in the 200 East Area Burial Grounds (FY2019 Annual Status Report)

This annual review provides the projected dose estimates of radionuclide inventories disposed in the 200 East Area Low-Level Waste Burial Grounds (LLBGs) since September 26, 1988. These estimates are calculated using the original dose methodology developed in the performance assessment (PA) analysis (WHC-SD-WM-TI-730) and are compared with U.S. Department of Energy requirements (DOE O 435.1 and performance objectives defined in companion documents DOE M 435.1 and DOE-STD-5002-2017). All performance objectives are currently satisfied, and operational waste acceptance criteria (HNF-EP-0063) and waste acceptance practices continue to be sufficient to maintain compliance with performance objectives. Inventory estimates and associated dose estimates from future waste disposal actions are unchanged from previous years’ evaluations, indicating that potential impacts are well below performance objectives; therefore, future compliance with DOE O 435.1 is expected. A new PA study has been initiated in this fiscal year (FY) 2019 for evaluation of active disposal sites within the 200 West and East Areas (Trenches 31 and 34 in 200 West; Trench 94 in 200 East) because extended time has elapsed between the current annual status report and the original PA (WHC-SD-WM-TI-370) for the active disposal sites. The new PA for the active disposal sites is expected to be completed in FY 2021.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Risk of Performance and Behavioral Health Decrements Due to Inadequate Cooperation, Coordination, Communication, and Psychosocial Adaptation within a Team

A team is defined as: "two or more individuals who interact socially and adaptively, have shared or common goals, and hold meaningful task interdependences; it is hierarchically structured and has a limited life span; in it expertise and roles are distributed; and it is embedded within an organization/environmental context that influences and is influenced by ongoing processes and performance outcomes" (Salas, Stagl, Burke, & Goodwin, 2007, p. 189). From the NASA perspective, a team is commonly understood to be a collection of individuals that is assigned to support and achieve a particular mission. Thus, depending on context, this definition can encompass both the spaceflight crew and the individuals and teams in the larger multi-team system who are assigned to support that crew during a mission. The Team Risk outcomes of interest are predominantly performance related, with a secondary emphasis on long-term health; this is somewhat unique in the NASA HRP in that most Risk areas are medically related and primarily focused on long-term health consequences. In many operational environments (e.g., aviation), performance is assessed as the avoidance of errors. However, the research on performance errors is ambiguous. It implies that actions may be dichotomized into "correct" or "incorrect" responses, where incorrect responses or errors are always undesirable. Researchers have argued that this dichotomy is a harmful oversimplification, and it would be more productive to focus on the variability of human performance and how organizations can manage that variability (Hollnagel, Woods, & Leveson, 2006) (Category III1). Two problems occur when focusing on performance errors: 1) the errors are infrequent and, therefore, difficult to observe and record; and 2) the errors do not directly correspond to failure. Research reveals that humans are fairly adept at correcting or compensating for performance errors before such errors result in recognizable or recordable failures. Astronauts are notably adept high performers. Most failures are recorded only when multiple, small errors occur and humans are unable to recognize and correct or compensate for these errors in time to prevent a failure (Dismukes, Berman, Loukopoulos, 2007) (Category III). More commonly, observers record variability in levels of performance. Some teams commit no observable errors but fail to achieve performance objectives or perform only adequately, while other teams commit some errors but perform spectacularly. Successful performance, therefore, cannot be viewed as simply the absence of errors or the avoidance of failure Johnson Space Center (JSC) Joint Leadership Team, 2008). While failure is commonly attributed to making a major error, focusing solely on the elimination of error(s) does not significantly reduce the risk of failure. Failure may also occur when performance is simply insufficient or an effort is incapable of adjusting sufficiently to a contextual change (e.g., changing levels of autonomy).

Landon, Lauren Blackwell↗

Performance Assessment for the Disposal of Low-Level Waste in the 200 East Area Burial Grounds (Annual Status Report FY 2022)

This annual review provides the projected dose estimates of radionuclide inventories disposed in the 200 East Area Low-Level Waste Burial Grounds (LLBGs) since September 26, 1988. These estimates are calculated using the original dose methodology developed in the performance assessment (PA) analysis (WHC-SD-WM-TI-730). The estimates are compared with the performance objectives defined in U.S. Department of Energy requirements (DOE O 435.1 and its companion documents DOE M 435.1-1 and DOE-STD-5002-2017). All performance objectives are currently satisfied, and operational waste acceptance criteria (HNF-EP-0063) and waste acceptance practices continue to be sufficient to maintain compliance with performance objectives. Inventory estimates and associated dose estimates from future waste disposal actions are unchanged from previous years’ evaluations that indicate potential impacts well below performance objectives; therefore, future compliance with DOE O 435.1 is expected.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Performance Assessment for the Disposal of Low-Level Waste in the 200 West Area Burial Grounds (Annual Status Report FY 2021)

This annual review provides the projected dose estimates of radionuclide inventories disposed in the active 200 West Area Low-Level Waste Burial Grounds (LLBGs) since September 26, 1988. These estimates are calculated using the original dose methodology developed in the performance assessment (PA) analysis (WHC-EP-0645). The estimates are compared with the performance objectives defined in U.S. Department of Energy requirements (DOE O 435.1 and its companion documents DOE M 435.1-1 and DOE-STD-5002-2017). All performance objectives are currently satisfied, and operational waste acceptance criteria (HNF-EP-0063). and waste acceptance practices continue to be sufficient to maintain compliance with performance objectives. Inventory estimates and associated dose estimates from future waste disposal actions are unchanged from previous years’ evaluations that indicate potential impacts well below performance objectives; therefore, future compliance with DOE O 435.1 is expected.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗