SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “programmatic risk integration”

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

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 19 records

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2014

Fuel Fabrication Capability Research and Development Plan

The purpose of this document is to provide a comprehensive review of the mission of the Fuel Fabrication Capability (FFC) within the Global Threat Reduction Initiative Convert Program, along with research and development (R&D) needs that have been identified as necessary to ensuring mission success. The design and fabrication of successful nuclear fuels must be closely linked endeavors. Therefore, the overriding motivation behind the FFC R&D program described in this plan is to foster closer integration between fuel design and fabrication to reduce programmatic risk. These motivating factors are all interrelated, and progress addressing one will aid understanding of the others. The FFC R&D needs fall into two principal categories, 1) baseline process optimization, to refine the existing fabrication technologies, and 2) manufacturing process alternatives, to evaluate new fabrication technologies that could provide improvements in quality, repeatability, material utilization, or cost. The FFC R&D Plan examines efforts currently under way in regard to coupon, foil, plate, and fuel element manufacturing, and provides recommendations for a number of R&D topics that are of high priority but not currently funded (i.e., knowledge gaps). The plan ties all FFC R&D efforts into a unified vision that supports the overall Convert Program schedule in general, and the fabrication schedule leading up to the MP-1 and FSP-1 irradiation experiments specifically. The fabrication technology decision gates and down-selection logic and schedules are tied to the schedule for fabricating the MP-1 fuel plates, which will provide the necessary data to make a final fuel fabrication process down-selection. Because of the short turnaround between MP-1 and the follow-on FSP-1 and MP-2 experiments, the suite of specimen types that will be available for MP-1 will be the same as those available for FSP-1 and MP-2. Therefore, the only opportunity to explore parameter space and alternative processing is between now and 2016 when the candidate processes are down-selected in preparation for the MP-1, FSP-1, and MP-2 plate manufacturing campaigns. A number of key risks identified by the FFC are discussed in this plan, with recommended mitigating actions for those activities within FFC, and identification of risks that are impacted by activities in other areas of the Convert Program. The R&D Plan does not include discussion of FFC initiatives related to production-scale manufacturing of fuel (e.g., establishment of the Pilot Line Production Facility), rather, the goal of this plan is to document the R&D activities needed ultimately to enable high-quality and cost-effective production of the fuel by the commercial fuel fabricator. The intent is for this R&D Plan to be a living document that will be reviewed and updated on a regular basis (e.g., annually) to ensure that FFC R&D activities remain properly aligned to the needs of the Convert Program. This version of the R&D Plan represents the first annual review and revision.

Convert Program↗

DOE OSTI2017

The Future of Robotics/Remote Handling Solutions for the Nuclear Industry - 17347

The nuclear industry is seeing a resurgence of development and utilization of advanced integrated systems; fused sensor arrays; autonomous, remote and hybrid operations; and augmented reality display and control system interfaces. A new age of 'robotics' and remote handling technologies. For many years the use of robotics in nuclear applications has been done sparingly due to technical limitations, perceived and real reliability issues, perceived and real risk concerns, and cost. Although robotics have been used successfully on a variety of projects globally, the underuse of this technology, particularly within the nuclear industry both public and private, is overwhelming. As the number of complex, high hazard projects in the nuclear industry increases, the use of robotics for maintenance, inspection, repair, decommissioning, and remediation activities will become increasingly vital in the future. The risks associated with direct human exposure are high and thus eliminating the risk, or managing it to acceptable levels by using robotics/remote handling as well as other technologies is critical to success as more extreme environment operations and tasks are undertaken. Recent and ongoing advances in technology now allows us to safely and effectively remove the direct / in-situ human element from these type of activities. All the while delivering the same or better outcomes when considering the alternatives when limited or no direct / in-situ human intervention would be allowed. The biggest obstacles the nuclear industry faces center on the cost, reliability, maintainability, effectiveness and appropriate uses of robotics/remote handling solutions in a nuclear (radiation and/or contamination) environment. In order to mitigate these concerns, a sound approach to the use of robotics needs to be addressed. This approach must include: 1. A better understanding of what technology is available and how it can be utilized across multiple sectors, e.g. Commercial Off-the-Shelf (COTS) technology modified / adapted for the nuclear sector; 2. How to implement technology in an integrated pragmatic approach that is cost effective by combining technological know-how / subject matter expertise (SME) with the equivalent subject matter expertise in regulatory, operational and maintenance requirements and limitations, such that a more complete set of functional and operational requirements can be jointly developed in the process. 3. The integration of requirements (project, site, regulatory, etc.), risk management (human factors) and technology, i.e. a marriage between political, programmatic, and technological factors. As the development of robotic/remote handling technology progresses and the successful implementation on projects is demonstrated, the better off the industry will be. This paper provides an overview of the fundamental issues facing the nuclear industry with regard to effective and successful technology selection, maturation, deployment, and integrated risk management, and offers suggestions on how we may overcome these persistent issues now and in the future. Robotic systems and solution experts that are focused on the integration of proven technologies - and that are an integrated part of the project team from its onset - are a necessity for successful planning during nuclear operations. The approach to nuclear operations should always be, 'what is the simplest, most effective way we can approach a particular project need?'. Understanding and implementing the right technologies is where the true value will be recognized. The integration of systems, which includes more than just robotics, is key when developing schemes for these types of complex operations. Often times during planning, the remote handling needs of the job are set aside to be evaluated at a later time due to risk concerns and lack of knowledge. The issue is, experts in the area of robotics or remote handling are rarely involved in the upfront planning. As a result, unnecessary constraints, risks, and obstacles are imposed on project teams to deliver. If done intelligently, this should be introduced at the forefront of planning. Using this type of sound approach leads to effective task organization for the end user. By developing an overall philosophy that leverages proven technologies with implementation expertise; i.e. solutions versus products, is a recipe for success. This is the area that is under-appreciated in the industry and one that needs to be recognized on a much broader scale. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2020

Modernization of Technical Requirements for Licensing of Advanced Non-Light Water Reactors: Risk-Informed and Performance-Based Evaluation of Defense-in-Depth Adequacy

This document supports the work contained in Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 18-04 “Risk-Informed Performance-Based Technology Inclusive Guidance for Advanced Reactor Licensing Basis Development” Revision 0. NEI 18-04 presents a modern, technology-inclusive, risk-informed, and performance-based (TI-RIPB) process for selection of Licensing Basis Events (LBEs); safety classification of structures, systems, and components (SSCs) and associated risk-informed special treatments; and determination of defense-in-depth (DID) adequacy for non-LWRs. The NEI guidance document provides one acceptable means for addressing the aforementioned topics as part of demonstrating a specific design provides reasonable assurance of adequate radiological protection. This report provides the framework and associated methodology guidelines and discussion for establishing, then evaluating, confirming, and documenting the adequacy of defense-in-depth (DID) for advanced non-light-water reactor technologies. It was developed as part of the Licensing Modernization Project led by Southern Company and cost-shared by the United States Department of Energy and has benefited from considerable NRC formal reviews and public workshops. The methodology converts the DID philosophy into a structured process that is implementable, embraces existing United States and international definitions and philosophies of DID that set the foundation for the process. It builds on the DID framework developed in the Department of Energy Next Generation Nuclear Plant Project and earlier works on this subject. The approach to establishing DID adequacy involves the incorporation of DID attributes into the plant capabilities and programmatic elements of DID. The integrated evaluation of DID adequacy includes both quantitative elements to incorporate risk-informed and performance-based (RIPB) considerations and qualitative elements that address uncertainties and limitations in the quantitative models and supporting data. Demonstration of DID adequacy ensures that there are multiple layers of defense for risk-significant challenges to the design and that the plant capabilities and programs that support each layer are provided in a manner that minimizes dependencies among these layers. The focus of this report is assurance of DID adequacy with respect to protection of the public from radiological exposures resulting from accidental releases of radioactive material. While other hazards are not specifically addressed, this methodology is expected to be beneficial for determining DID adequacy for them as well. Risk-informed evaluation of DID considers the integrated performance of all plant SSCs and associated programs to manage daily operational activities, transients, and accidents, including the evaluation of strategies for accident prevention and mitigation. The RIPB LBE scenario methodology used in this evaluation defines the challenges to the plant safety features included in the plant design basis and beyond, and the scope of all deterministic and probabilistic safety evaluations. By examining event sequences across the whole spectrum of LBEs, a systematic assessment of DID can be accomplished.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2024

CloudZero Phase 2 Technical Report

Expand upon the successful Phase 1 net zero cloud test proof of concept by moving actual OT systems to the cloud and proving cloud feasibility to support various OT technologies such as IoT, Machine Learning, etc. Explore threat analysis when these technologies are moved to the cloud. A detailed analysis in NREL ARIES Cyber Range will be used to conduct deeper analysis of cloud suitability to support OT and net zero system operations in a higher fidelity representative environment. Outputs will identify, quantify, and document the results and cyber security risks associated with the move of these OT technologies in a formal delivered report. Programmatic Benefits: Identify cloud integration challenges for energy systems characterize the cloud threat space, contribute to policy and standards discussions, empower the sector to change their cloud culture where appropriate.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2020

IMPLEMENTING CYBERSECURITY INTO AN EXISTING NATIONAL NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION PROGRAMME – A CASE STUDY

Cyber threat profiling and risk mitigation is critical to any nuclear state organization and should be considered as part of any comprehensive nuclear security programme. Defining and evaluating the impact of the cyber threat to mission can be challenging. An existing national nuclear non-proliferation organization undertook an effort to incorporate computer security activities into its programme to address cyber risk. One of the primary goals of this endeavour was to develop a set of prioritised recommendations for organizational follow-through. The organization dedicated subject matter expert resources in the form of a cyber task force to support this goal. Opportunities were identified where computer security could be built into each programme including office-level strategies and tools. Of course, no new identified threat vector is easily considered and incorporated into existing programmes without impact. There are many obstacles to be overcome. Technically literate subject matter experts are difficult to find, management has comparatively less experience applying computer security into its programmes, and trying to change the culture to consider computer security risk at policy and programmatic levels takes time and management attention. As an outcome of this process, a roadmap for program integration was developed, including the establishment of a cyber support team. This paper will discuss the challenges and successes associated with establishing such a team.

Cyber Security, Nuclear, Non-proliferation↗

DOE OSTI2017

Technetium Management Program Plan - 17376

Technetium management is a high-priority activity for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM) complex. Waste management and remediation issues involving technetium represent environmental risks and challenges that are unique to DOE. This plan lays out the technology development activities that are underway as well as future technology needs to address technetium issues across DOE EM sites and across programmatic areas of tank waste, groundwater and soils, and facility decommissioning and deactivation in order to be comprehensive and to allow integration of similar activities. The program was developed in close coordination with site representatives and program offices. Activities and needs that were identified share common themes and were grouped into areas of characterization, treatment, and disposition. Characterization includes understanding the inventory at particular locations, the chemical species, and chemical and physical behavior, whether in a treatment process flowsheet or a geological setting that displays periodic contaminant releases. The tools for characterization in these different environments might use the same sensors or protocols. Treatment options include methods to capture technetium such as ion-exchange or manipulation of oxidation states, which also may be applied across program areas. Disposition includes end-points of the processes and environmental risk, including waste form behavior, mobility of technetium once it is treated or remediated, and long-term monitoring. Disposition represents integration of all cleanup actions at a site. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2015

Integrating regulatory, programmatic and technical needs for modeling tools to support decision-making - 15219

The U.S. Department of Energy (US DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM), Office of Soil and Groundwater Remediation, is supporting development of the Advanced Simulation Capability for Environmental Management (ASCEM). ASCEM provides a modeling work-flow to support decision-making for site restoration, tank closure and waste management activities. Potential users involved in regulatory applications (e.g., performance and risk assessments and other activities supporting regulatory decisions) are a key target group for the tool-set. Decision-making in these applications often requires consideration of multiple perspectives, including: regulators and the public, oversight and project management personnel, as well as practitioners involved in conducting the calculations, each with different interests. From its inception, a key objective of the ASCEM project has been to actively seek input from these different user perspectives to help guide development. ASCEM formed a User Steering Committee (USC) with membership representing interests from management/staff at DOE Site Contractors, DOE-HQ and Field offices and Regulators (State and Federal). The project also provides opportunities for input from the broader user community through participation in meetings of the Performance and Risk Assessment (P and RA) Community of Practice (CoP), routine briefings and participation in meetings of the Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Federal Review Group, and direct interactions with users involved in regulatory applications. Interactions with users involved in regulatory applications have influenced the requirements for the tool-sets and are reflected in capabilities that have been and are being implemented. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2016

Pursuing Cost Effective Tank Waste Characterization at the Savannah River Site - 16172

The U. S. Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management has tasked the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) with developing strategies and technologies to understand, optimize, scale, and speed up tank waste characterization. This scope is part of a multi-year project with the end goal of implementing programmatic changes that accelerate tank waste processing and tank closure schedules, and at the same time reduce characterization costs, while maintaining data integrity. The project is currently in its second year. During the first year of the project, SRNL completed a series of activities focused on understanding the range of current characterization practices, needs, gaps, risks, and potential alternative approaches. Based on the results, conclusions were drawn regarding aspects of the programs that are most costly and time consuming; particular waste constituents that drive costs, schedule, and program risks; alternative characterization approaches (other than sampling and analysis) that are less expensive and more rapid; new laboratory methods holding the greatest promise for reducing characterization costs and schedule; and in whole, the primary areas where current characterization practices can be improved. SRNL's current scope is focusing on three primary activities: 1) development of a technical basis/strategy for improving the cost effectiveness and schedule of SRNL's tank closure characterization program; 2) design/assembly of hardware, plumbing, and software for automating select radiochemical separation and waste removal processes; and 3) development and testing of alternative radiochemical separation protocols most likely to improve high resource demand/time consuming analysis methods (such as Ra-226, Pa-231, Tc-99/I-129, and/or Y/trivalent actinide separations). (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2016

FutureGen 2.0 Oxy-combustion Large Scale Test – Final Report

The primary objectives of the FutureGen 2.0 CO 2 Oxy-Combustion Large Scale Test Project were to site, permit, design, construct, and commission, an oxy-combustion boiler, gas quality control system, air separation unit, and CO 2 compression and purification unit, together with the necessary supporting and interconnection utilities. The project was to demonstrate at commercial scale (168MWe gross) the capability to cleanly produce electricity through coal combustion at a retrofitted, existing coal-fired power plant; thereby, resulting in near-zeroemissions of all commonly regulated air emissions, as well as 90% CO 2 capture in steady-state operations. The project was to be fully integrated in terms of project management, capacity, capabilities, technical scope, cost, and schedule with the companion FutureGen 2.0 CO 2 Pipeline and Storage Project, a separate but complementary project whose objective was to safely transport, permanently store and monitor the CO 2 captured by the Oxy-combustion Power Plant Project. The FutureGen 2.0 Oxy-Combustion Large Scale Test Project successfully achieved all technical objectives inclusive of front-end-engineering and design, and advanced design required to accurately estimate and contract for the construction, commissioning, and start-up of a commercial-scale "ready to build" power plant using oxy-combustion technology, including full integration with the companion CO 2 Pipeline and Storage project. Ultimately the project did not proceed to construction due to insufficient time to complete necessary EPC contract negotiations and commercial financing prior to expiration of federal co-funding, which triggered a DOE decision to closeout its participation in the project. Through the work that was completed, valuable technical, commercial, and programmatic lessons were learned. This project has significantly advanced the development of near-zero emission technology and will be helpful to plotting the course of, and successfully executing future large demonstration projects. This Final Scientific and Technical Report describes the technology and engineering basis of the project, inclusive of process systems, performance, effluents and emissions, and controls. Further, the project cost estimate, schedule, and permitting requirements are presented, along with a project risk and opportunity assessment. Lessons-learned related to these elements are summarized in this report. Companion reports Oxy-combustion further document the accomplishments and learnings of the project, including: A.01 Project Management Report which describes what was done to coordinate the various participants, and to track their performance with regard to schedule and budget B.02 Lessons Learned - Technology Integration, Value Improvements, and Program Management, which describes the innovations and conclusions that we arrived upon during the development of the project, and makes recommendations for improvement of future projects of a similar nature . B.03 Project Economics, which details the capital and operation costs and their basis, and also illustrates the cost of power produced by the plant with certain sensitivities. B.04 Power Plant, Pipeline, and Injection Site Interfaces, which details the interfaces between the two FutureGen projects B.05 Contractual Mechanisms for Design, Construction, and Operation, which describes the major EPC, and Operations Contracts required to execute the project.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2019

Systems Engineering Project - Tritium

The purpose of this project is to apply a systems engineering method to a programmatic improvement or implementation of a system found within the Weapons and Complex Integration (WCI) Nuclear Materials Technology Program (NMTP) at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). This project identifies an opportunity for improvement of the Tritium Processing Station (TPS) based on key stakeholder requirements. This document will cover the generation of the selected concept, system operational context and use cases, the production of verifiable engineering requirements, functional decomposition, and an assessment of risk via a failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA).

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2020

Readiness Evaluation for Sustained Operations

Readiness evaluation for sustained operations is a continuous function that progresses from overseeing establishment of five key programmatic elements during design and construction phases to monitoring the output of those elements performing during commissioning and operations. Continuously assessing readiness for sustained operations becomes an important business function for the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of River Protection as competition for federal funds increases with increasing waste treatment operations throughout the Office of Environmental Management complex. The five key programmatic elements are as follows: Risk management – Risks and opportunities should prioritize continuous improvement initiatives and be informed by the design and technical authorities and stakeholder monitors. Continuous improvement – All levels of the project organization should exhibit commitment to continuous improvement and learning. Continuity of design and technical authorities – The authorities are responsible for managing knowledge for its effective use in the other elements. Stakeholder monitoring – Active and deliberate monitoring of stakeholder relationships. Sustained operations integrated business planning – Integrated business planning in a federal environment competitive for congressional funding.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2016

Transition and Transfer of Remediated Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) Sites from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)

The US Department of Energy (DOE) expects to receive the transfer of 10 FUSRAP Sites from the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) over the next 10 years; however, the timing of the transfers is highly dependent upon federal funding of the ongoing remedial actions. When remediation for each site is complete and the 2-year operations and maintenance period has concluded, each site will transfer from USACE to DOE for long-term surveillance and maintenance (LTS&M). US DOE’s Office of Legacy Management (LM) will accept program responsibility for these sites and conduct LTS&M activities required to maintain protectiveness, preserve site-specific knowledge, and retain the cleanup and stewardship records while keeping stakeholders informed. Since the last FUSRAP site transfer occurred in 2007, LM in coordination with USACE intends to establish a transition process to promote the seamless transfer of sites from the time when the first record of decision is signed to the completion of FUSRAP activities. The approach to transfer active FUSRAP sites to completed sites status has been historically outlined in foundational documents such as the 1999 Memorandum of Understanding and supporting letters of agreement between the two agencies. As more complex FUSRAP sites are completed, this transition process will provide a model between the two agencies to communicate future long-term care liabilities. Ultimately, the FUSRAP transition process is structured to acquire and preserve site knowledge and information necessary for protecting the environment and public health. As of 2015, LM has transitioned and accepted programmatic responsibility for over 90 sites. From LM’s perspective, successful transition of any site includes understanding the long-term environmental liabilities. LM uses site transition framework requirements from past transitions to develop site-specific transition plans. Site-specific transition plans are developed by LM in coordination with USACE and executed during the 2-year operations and maintenance period. An integrated project team of subject matter experts is assembled to address the conditions of the transitioning site; acquire a site records collection; evaluate site operations and final site conditions and associated risks; identify and contact stakeholders; and document the basis for site LTS&M requirements. While the majority of the transition activities are completed by LM, close coordination between US DOE LM and USACE throughout this process is essential for an effective and seamless transfer to assure that there is no lapse in site protectiveness.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

Transition and Transfer of Remediated FUSRAP Sites from USACE to US DOE for Long-Term Surveillance and Maintenance - 16209

The US Department of Energy (DOE) expects to receive the transfer of 10 FUSRAP Sites from the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) over the next 10 years; however, the timing of the transfers is highly dependent upon federal funding of the ongoing remedial actions. When remediation for each site is complete and the 2-year operations and maintenance period has concluded, each site will transfer from USACE to DOE for long-term surveillance and maintenance (LTS and M). US DOE's Office of Legacy Management (LM) will accept program responsibility for these sites and conduct LTS and M activities required to maintain protectiveness, preserve site-specific knowledge, and retain the cleanup and stewardship records while keeping stakeholders informed. Since the last FUSRAP site transfer occurred in 2007, LM in coordination with USACE intends to establish a transition process to promote the seamless transfer of sites from the time when the first record of decision is signed to the completion of FUSRAP activities. The approach to transfer active FUSRAP sites to completed sites status has been historically outlined in foundational documents such as the 1999 Memorandum of Understanding and supporting letters of agreement between the two agencies. As more complex FUSRAP sites are completed, this transition process will provide a model between the two agencies to communicate future long-term care liabilities. Ultimately, the FUSRAP transition process is structured to acquire and preserve site knowledge and information necessary for protecting the environment and public health. As of 2015, LM has transitioned and accepted programmatic responsibility for over 90 sites. From LM's perspective, successful transition of any site includes understanding the long-term environmental liabilities. LM uses site transition framework requirements from past transitions to develop site-specific transition plans. Site-specific transition plans are developed by LM in coordination with USACE and executed during the 2-year operations and maintenance period. An integrated project team of subject matter experts is assembled to address the conditions of the transitioning site; acquire a site records collection; evaluate site operations and final site conditions and associated risks; identify and contact stakeholders; and document the basis for site LTS and M requirements. While the majority of the transition activities are completed by LM, close coordination between US DOE LM and USACE throughout this process is essential for an effective and seamless transfer to assure that there is no lapse in site protectiveness. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2016

Direct Feed Low Activity Waste (DFLAW) Program: Development, Progression and Risk Management - 16476

This Direct Feed Low-Activity Waste (DFLAW) Program paper describes the key programmatic elements to enable the startup of treatment and disposal of Hanford tank waste through a phased startup of the Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP). Specifically the DFLAW Program consists of the Low- Activity Waste (LAW) vitrification facility, and the direct feed to LAW of treated tank farm supernatant from the Low-Activity Waste Pretreatment System (LAWPS). This document identifies the overall strategy, objectives, and processes of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of River Protection (ORP) and all supporting DOE subcontractors, and describes the scope of the program elements. In addition gaps, risks, and opportunities to successful integration for commissioning of all needed systems and facilities to produce immobilized LAW product (ILAW) are described. The scope of the DFLAW Program extends up to the point that LAW Facility hot commissioning is complete and all DFLAW systems are fully operational. The DFLAW Program coordinates, integrates, and monitors all the activities necessary to successfully commission and start up the WTP LAW facility. This involves integrating the readiness of all the plant, personnel and program/procedures that support startup of hot commissioning of tank farms systems, WTP systems, waste treatment and disposal systems, and site utility, infrastructure and services. Multiple Hanford contractors have responsibilities to execute and perform scope under the umbrella of the DFLAW Program. The primary focus of the One System organization, comprised of WTP Project and Tank Operations Contract (TOC) personnel, is to manage the coordination and integration across the interfaces of the work scope described above. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2016

Development of Plug-and-Play Interchangeable Components for Unmanned Aerial System with Mobile Manipulation Capability

The safe cleanup of the environmental legacy brought about from decades of nuclear weapons development and government-sponsored nuclear energy research is of vital importance. The sites of U.S. Department of Energy hold 6.5 trillion liters of contaminated groundwater and 40 million cubic meters of soil and debris contaminated with radionuclides, metals, and organics. The deactivation and decommissioning process (D and D) involves conversion of active, excess, and/or abandoned facilities to a final disposition. Because of residual radioactivity and dangerous chemicals, and the physical condition of these facilities, D and D presents unique hazards that must be addressed from safety, environmental, programmatic, and technological standpoints. This problem calls for development of informed D and D strategies including in-situ decommissioning, efficacy of D and D operations, productivity and personnel safety of D and D operation, facilitation of acceptable facility end-states, and independent verification. To identify and address D and D risks and challenges, innovative applications and timely insertion of existing commercially available technologies, processes and robotics or remote hardware are necessary. Aerial robotic unmanned autonomous systems (UAS) enable remote sensing operations. To address the needs of UAS-based sensing and sampling applications, we are developing plug-and-play interchangeable components for integration into the UAS: a neutron/gamma radiation sensor, a gas sensor for detection of vapors in air, and a miniature manipulator. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2019

2019 Wireless Test Bed Range Manual

Idaho National Laboratory (INL), Next Generation Wireless Test Bed (NGWTB) program, is part of the Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP) initiative. Our nation’s reliance on wireless and Internet technology is rapidly evolving as more corporations and government agencies, employees, and handheld devices include mobile connectivity for both voice and data. The competitive advantage offered by a mobile workforce is leading many corporations to make wireless integration and convergence a top business priority. Similarly, military systems worldwide are rapidly embracing next-generation commercial technologies to accelerate network-centric capabilities and provide enhanced situational awareness. While handheld devices such as laptops, BlackBerrys, and cell phones once had limited mobility and range, they are rapidly incorporating new and multiple protocols such as Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, Satellite, and broadband cellular (3G/4G) on a single platform to increase their effectiveness and agility. Worldwide there is exponential growth in public Wi-Fi and/or Satellite connectivity access nodes, and 3G/4G cellular continues to evolve and expand the range and speed of these devices. Additionally, critical infrastructure networks, previously isolated or connected with dedicated wireline circuits, are incorporating Zigbee for wireless sensor networks, wireless LANs for maintenance functions, and cellular or Internet based backhaul to manage control centers. Yet with all the build-up surrounding wireless technology, few understand the complexities surrounding wireless protocols and security, the risks of converged network infrastructures, need for interoperability of communication systems, or mitigation measures to safely use and improve new technologies in both commercial and military environments. With no single vendor source for all the telecommunications equipment needed for wireless infrastructure upgrades, and no one entity providing end-to-end testing or independent validation, the INL's NGWTB program fulfills a niche for facilitating integrated testing of multiple technologies, across multiple wireless domains, of next generation wireless telecommunications systems. NGWTB engineers and technicians have constructed and operate domain infrastructure in the Wireless Personal Area Network (WPAN), Wireless Local Area Network (WLAN), Wireless Metropolitan Area Networks (WMAN), and Wireless Wide Area Networks (WWAN). Advantages that make the INL's NGWTB the place to conduct project and programmatic testing include: • NTIA Experimental Station authority • Geographically isolated and low-noise radio frequency (RF) test areas located on a 890 sm DOE reservation • Access to isolated high-speed LAN and FOT networks The rollout of next-generation networks will involve deploying new technologies at every level including new: handsets, frequencies, antenna arrays, cell configurations that are optimized for both data and voice, massive upgrade of cell controllers’ “land-line” phone links from low bandwidth connections to higher capacity fiber or wireless backhaul, and integration of voice switching and Internet/data network protocols (Voice-Over-IP, Web phones). These systems are expected to greatly transform our nation's communications infrastructure and the types of services it provides.

2G↗

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 OSTI2019

Integrated Commercial Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) Prefeasibility Study at Rock Springs Uplift, Wyoming (Final Report)

To establish the potential of safe, long-term commercial-scale carbon capture & storage (CCS) in southwestern Wyoming, the University of Wyoming formed a CCS coordination team (CCT) to complete a Phase I CarbonSAFE pre-feasibility study adjacent to the region’s largest coal-fired power plant, the Jim Bridger Plant (JBP). The study’s primary objective was to evaluate the potential of storing 50+ million metric tons of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) in stacked reservoirs over a period of 25 years. In addition, this integrated study evaluated related aspects of carbon capture utilization & storage (CCUS) at the study site, including: (1) the CO 2 character of post-combustion flue gas from JBP and the technical capacity for retrofitting proven commercial-scale CO 2 capture technology relative to CO 2 source character and technological constraints; (2) utilization of the existing CO 2 pipeline network in the immediate vicinity of JBP for enhanced oil recovery (CO 2 -EOR) and utilizing that network as part of a regional hub for CO 2 storage from other anthropogenic sources; (3) assessment of the challenges and benefits of meeting all of CarbonSAFE programmatic Phase I goals relative to Wyoming’s carbon management regulatory framework; and (4) assessment of the community and environmental factors that may impact CCS at JBP. With respect to storage, we analyzed the potential of stacked Mesozoic reservoirs at the study site, focusing on the Entrada and Nugget sandstones. The reservoir response to injection simulations varied greatly between formations, though they both were capable of CO 2 storage. The Entrada Sandstone is relative thin (~40’) and heterogeneous; storage using one injection and production well was limited to 1.2 Mt over 25 years at the study site. The Nugget Sandstone is much thicker (> 400’) and generally homogeneous; storage using one injection and production well approached 15.0 Mt over 25 years; this scenario suggests that the storage potential in the Nugget Sandstone is close to the estimated P90 calculation of 9.6 Mt/mi 2 as models indicate a storage potential of 8.3 Mt/mi 2 at saturation. Both reservoirs’ storage capacity benefited greatly from coupling an injection well with an offset production well; total storage capacity increased and reservoir pressure stayed below critical thresholds. This indicates that implementing a pressure management strategy at the study site would optimize storage and decrease risk. Seals associated with the targeted reservoirs were shown to be capable of retaining the potential storage volumes, and the site benefits from multiple seal redundancies (i.e. > 7,000’ of seal formations). Furthermore, assessment of different reservoir variables (e.g., fluid composition, pressure, etc.) indicates all reservoirs at the study site are isolated. Storage assessments from Mesozoic reservoirs were coupled with simulations from the site’s Paleozoic reservoirs (the Weber Sandstone and Madison Limestone), which were the focus of previous study. The fully integrated stacked reservoir pre-feasibility studies suggest that the Nugget and Madison formations alone could safely store 50 million metric tons of CO 2 within the study site. Furthermore, both formations are true saline reservoirs near JBP, making them ideal target reservoirs for CO 2 sequestration. Analysis of Wyoming’s laws and regulations confirm that the State has a favorable policy environment for CCS/CCUS. The project’s economic models estimated that the following revenues collectively are sufficient to finance the project over its lifespan if CO 2 utilization is coupled with CCS via the following strategies: (1) sales of CO 2 for EOR (approximately $69 million/year); (2) use of CO 2 tax credits such as amended §45Q and §48A (approximately $484 million total); and (3) sales of low-carbon electricity and marketable carbon offset/credits into carbon-constrained markets (approximately $11-$17 million/year) to West Coast consumers. These revenue estimates are broadly consistent with other studies that concluded arbitrage in JBP retail electricity sales between California and Wyoming could help to support the cost of deploying CCS at JBP. The models also indicate that maintaining a successful business case for long-term CCS -- wherein associated capture, transportation and operational costs are fully addressed at JBP -- is reliant on numerous external factors that complicate predictions. This study suggests that this site meets the CarbonSAFE program’s requirements of being able to feasibly store 50+ million metric tons of CO 2 over 25 years within the site’s stacked reservoirs, especially if coupled with pressure management strategies. This study suggests that the Nugget Sandstone and the Madison Limestone are two of the best reservoirs in the State with respect to overall storage capacity. In addition, the site’s proximity to existing CO 2 transportation networks, CO 2 -EOR opportunities, ability to sell to markets that value low-carbon electricity, Wyoming’s existing carbon regulatory framework, and a public that is well-educated with respect to energy markets and issues collectively increase the potential for implementing commercial-scale CCS adjacent to the JBP. With respect to the available technical and non-technical site data, and the reservoir quality at the study site, we suggest that this site is capable of moving directly into Phase III of the CarbonSAFE program.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗