skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Summary of 2017 EFCOG Training "How DOE Does Training" Survey Results

Abstract

Thirteen training organizations associated with the Energy Facility Contractors Group (EFCOG) Training Working Group were approached earlier this year for information on core training requirements of their organizations. Of the organizations surveyed, 85% responded, which helped create the data shown here. We thank them for their support.

Authors:
 [1]
  1. Los Alamos National Lab. (LANL), Los Alamos, NM (United States)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Los Alamos National Lab. (LANL), Los Alamos, NM (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE
OSTI Identifier:
1367803
Report Number(s):
LA-UR-17-25099
DOE Contract Number:
AC52-06NA25396
Resource Type:
Technical Report
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS

Citation Formats

Hanson, Todd. Summary of 2017 EFCOG Training "How DOE Does Training" Survey Results. United States: N. p., 2017. Web. doi:10.2172/1367803.
Hanson, Todd. Summary of 2017 EFCOG Training "How DOE Does Training" Survey Results. United States. doi:10.2172/1367803.
Hanson, Todd. 2017. "Summary of 2017 EFCOG Training "How DOE Does Training" Survey Results". United States. doi:10.2172/1367803. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1367803.
@article{osti_1367803,
title = {Summary of 2017 EFCOG Training "How DOE Does Training" Survey Results},
author = {Hanson, Todd},
abstractNote = {Thirteen training organizations associated with the Energy Facility Contractors Group (EFCOG) Training Working Group were approached earlier this year for information on core training requirements of their organizations. Of the organizations surveyed, 85% responded, which helped create the data shown here. We thank them for their support.},
doi = {10.2172/1367803},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = 2017,
month = 6
}

Technical Report:

Save / Share:
  • A trend summary of four Solvent Hold Tank (SHT) monthly samples; MCU-16-122-124 (March 2017), MCU-17-130-132 (April 2017), MCU-17-133-135 (May 2017), and MCU-17-141-149 (June 2017) are reported. Analyses of the June SHT sample (MCU-17-141-149) indicated that the modifier (CS-7SB) and the extractant (MaxCalix) concentrations were slightly below (4% each) their nominal recommended levels (169,000 mg/L and 46,400 mg/L respectively). The suppressor (TiDG) level has decreased since the January 2017 measurement but has remained steady in the range of 666 to 705 mg/L, well above the minimum recommended level (479 mg/L), but below the nominal level. The “flat” trends observed in themore » TiDG, MaxCalix, modifier, and Gamma measurement are consistent with the solvent being idle since January 10, 2017.« less
  • This report provides a technical summary of the expansions and updates to the 2017 release of Argonne National Laboratory’s Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation (GREET®) model, including references and links to key technical documents related to these expansions and updates. The GREET 2017 release includes an updated version of the GREET1 (the fuel-cycle GREET model) and GREET2 (the vehicle-cycle GREET model), both in the Microsoft Excel platform and in the GREET.net modeling platform. Figure 1 shows the structure of the GREET Excel modeling platform. The .net platform integrates all GREET modules together seamlessly.
  • A survey was designed to query former Biorisk management (BRM) trainees in the East Africa region about their practices post-training and their perceived future training needs. A subset of those surveyed had been trained as BRM trainers. The survey was conducted to obtain a baseline of BRM practices that can serve as a benchmark for performance monitoring, to identify priorities for future BRM training and to gauge local BRM trainers' abilities to deliver effective training. The survey revealed that less than 50% of the respondents could identify evidence of a BRM system in their institute. Coaching and mentoring by BRMmore » experts was identified as being of highest benefit to enable success as BRM practitioners. Local trainers reached 1538 trainees in the previous year and reported that trainings positively correlated with desired BRM behavior. Acknowledgements The authors wish to sincerely thank all of the former biorisk management trainees in East Africa who agreed to participate in this survey. Their candid and honest input was extremely insightful. We also thank Lora Grainger (06826) and Ben Brodsky (Manager, 06824) for careful and critical review of the report. We are grateful for the financial support of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Cooperative Biological Engagement Program.« less
  • A survey was designed to query former Biorisk management (BRM) trainees in the East Africa region about their practices post-training and their perceived future training needs. A subset of those surveyed had been trained as BRM trainers. The survey was conducted to obtain a baseline of BRM practices that can serve as a benchmark for performance monitoring, to identify priorities for future BRM training and to gauge local BRM trainers' abilities to deliver effective training. The survey revealed that less than 50% of the respondents could identify evidence of a BRM system in their institute. Coaching and mentoring by BRMmore » experts was identified as being of highest benefit to enable success as BRM practitioners. Local trainers reached 1538 trainees in the previous year and reported that trainings positively correlated with desired BRM behavior. Acknowledgements The authors wish to sincerely thank all of the former biorisk management trainees in East Africa who agreed to participate in this survey. Their candid and honest input was extremely insightful. We also thank Lora Grainger (06826) and Ben Brodsky (Manager, 06824) for careful and critical review of the report. We are grateful for the financial support of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Cooperative Biological Engagement Program.« less
  • A primary objective of the National Surface Water Survey and, thus, of the National Stream Survey is to ensure that the data collected are scientifically sound and of known quality. An extensive quality-assurance program was established in support of the objective. To evaluate the effectiveness of the quality-assurance program, several types of quality-assurance and quality-control samples were collected and analyzed during a pilot survey that was conducted prior to the initiation of National Stream Survey Phase I field activities. The report presents a statistical analysis of results obtained for field duplicate samples, blank samples, and audit samples used in themore » pilot survey. The results show that even overall estimated within-batch precision was adequate to meet the analytical data quality objectives established for the National Stream Survey and that detection limit goals were achieved at the contract analytical laboratories. The observed system decision limits and system detection limits, however, must be considered in interpreting the pilot study data and data from future surveys that employ similar sampling, processing, and analytical methods.« less