Powered by Deep Web Technologies
Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "doe nuclear facilities" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


1

Independent Oversight Review, DOE/NNSA Nuclear Facilities - April 2013 |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE/NNSA Nuclear Facilities - April DOE/NNSA Nuclear Facilities - April 2013 Independent Oversight Review, DOE/NNSA Nuclear Facilities - April 2013 April 2013 Lessons Learned from the 2012 Targeted Reviews of Emergency Preparedness for Severe Natural Phenomena Events at Select DOE/NNSA Nuclear Facilities This report provides lessons learned from the 2012 reviews performed by Independent Oversight. The reviews performed during the fall of 2011 and throughout 2012 were at DOE/NNSA sites with hazard category 1 and 2 nuclear facilities, some of which also have significant quantities of hazardous chemicals on site. The purpose of the Independent Oversight review was to determine the state of emergency preparedness of selected sites by examining the sites' processes for evaluating plausible severe NPEs;

2

Independent Oversight Review, DOE Nuclear Facilities - May 2013 |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Review, DOE Nuclear Facilities - May 2013 Review, DOE Nuclear Facilities - May 2013 Independent Oversight Review, DOE Nuclear Facilities - May 2013 May 2013 Lessons Learned from Targeted Reviews of Implementation Verification Review Processes at Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities This report summarizes and analyzes the results of independent reviews of IVR and associated processes at eight DOE sites conducted by Independent Oversight from August 2011 to September 2012. The purpose of the Independent Oversight review was to evaluate the processes and methods used for verifying the implementation of safety basis hazard controls and periodically re-verifying that the controls remain in place. Independent Oversight Review, DOE Nuclear Facilities - May 2013 More Documents & Publications Independent Oversight Review, Hanford Site CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation

3

Independent Oversight Focus Area Review, DOE Nuclear Facilities - April  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Independent Oversight Focus Area Review, DOE Nuclear Facilities - Independent Oversight Focus Area Review, DOE Nuclear Facilities - April 2010 Independent Oversight Focus Area Review, DOE Nuclear Facilities - April 2010 April 2010 Review of Specific Administrative Controls at DOE Nuclear Facilities The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Independent Oversight, within the Office of Health Safety and Security occasionally reviews specific focus areas. Focus areas are aspects of safety programs that Independent Oversight determines warrant increased management attention based on reviews of performance data, inspection results, and operating experience across DOE sites. Due, in part, to operating experience and previous inspection results. DOE selected specific administrative controls (SACs) as a focus area. SACs are new or revised technical safety requirements (TSRs)

4

DOE Offers Conditional Loan Guarantee for Front End Nuclear Facility...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

DOE Offers Conditional Loan Guarantee for Front End Nuclear Facility in Idaho Uranium Enrichment Project to Create Over 1,000 Jobs in Idaho Washington, DC As part of a broad...

5

DOE-STD-1064-94; DOE Standard Guideline to Good Practices For Seasonal Facility Preservation at DOE Nuclear Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

64-94 64-94 June 1994 DOE STANDARD GUIDELINE TO GOOD PRACTICES FOR SEASONAL FACILITY PRESERVATION AT DOE NUCLEAR FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy Washington, D.C. 20585 AREA MNTY DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; (615) 576-8401. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield VA 22161; (703) 487-4650. Order No. DE94014954 DOE-STD-1064-94 FOREWORD The Guideline to Good Practices for Seasonal Facility Preservation at DOE Nuclear Facilities provides contractor maintenance organizations with information

6

Innovative cement helps DOE safeguard nuclear facilities | Argonne National  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Innovative cement helps DOE safeguard nuclear facilities Innovative cement helps DOE safeguard nuclear facilities By Jared Sagoff * April 25, 2008 Tweet EmailPrint ARGONNE, Ill. - When Argonne materials scientists Arun Wagh and Dileep Singh initially developed Ceramicrete®, a novel phosphate cement that stabilizes radioactive waste streams, they did not immediately recognize that with one or two extra ingredients, the cement could solve another problem in the nuclear complex. In the course of the development of the Ceramicrete technology, Wagh and Singh formed a multilayered collaboration among Argonne, the Russian Federal Nuclear Center (VNIIEF) in Sarov, Russia, and Ceradyne Boron Products LLC. This international scientific partnership created an unusually efficient nuclear shield that blocks the neutrons and gamma rays

7

DOE-STD-1072-94; DOE Standard Guideline to Good Practices for Facility Condition Inspections at DOE Nuclear Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

2-94 2-94 June 1994 DOE STANDARD GUIDELINE TO GOOD PRACTICES FOR FACILITY CONDITION INSPECTIONS AT DOE NUCLEAR FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy Washington, D.C. 20585 AREA MNTY DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; (615) 576-8401. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 487-4650. Order No. DE94014948 DOE-STD-1072-94 iii FOREWORD The purpose of the Guideline to Good Practices for Facility Condition Inspections

8

DOE-STD-1067; DOE Standard Guideline to Good Practices for Maintenance Facilities, Equipment, and Tools at DOE Nuclear Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

7-94 7-94 June 1994 DOE STANDARD GUIDELINE TO GOOD PRACTICES FOR MAINTENANCE FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT, AND TOOLS AT DOE NUCLEAR FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy AREA MNTY Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; (615) 576-8401. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703)487-4650. Order No. DE94014952 DOE-STD-1067-94 FOREW ORD The Guideline to Good Practices for Maintenance Facilities, Equipment, and Tools at

9

DOE - Office of Legacy Management -- Hallam Nuclear Power Facility...  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

Hallam Nuclear Power Facility - NE 01 FUSRAP Considered Sites Site: Hallam Nuclear Power Facility (NE.01 ) Designated Name: Alternate Name: Location: Evaluation Year: Site...

10

DOE - Office of Legacy Management -- Piqua Nuclear Power Facility...  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

Piqua Nuclear Power Facility - OH 08 FUSRAP Considered Sites Site: Piqua Nuclear Power Facility (OH.08 ) Designated Name: Alternate Name: Location: Evaluation Year: Site...

11

DOE Order Self Study Modules - DOE O 433.1B, Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

3.1B 3.1B MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR DOE NUCLEAR FACILITIES DOE O 433.1B Familiar Level August 2011 1 DOE O 433.1B MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR DOE NUCLEAR FACILITIES FAMILIAR LEVEL OBJECTIVES Given the familiar level of this module and the resources, you will be able to answer the following questions: 1. What is the objective of DOE O 433.1B, Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear Facilities? 2. What is the purpose for quantitative indicators in maintenance management? 3. What are three types of environmental controls included in a maintenance shop? 4. What is the relationship between DOE G 433.1-1 and DOE O 433.1A? 5. What is the purpose for post-maintenance testing? 6. What is the objective of a good equipment maintenance history program?

12

DOE-STD-1070-94; DOE Standard Guidelines for Evalation of Nuclear Facility Training Programs  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE-STD-1070-94 June 1994 DOE STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATION OF NUCLEAR FACILITY TRAINING PROGRAMS U.S. Department of Energy FSC-6910 Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; (615)576-8401. Available to the public from the U. S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA. 22161; (703)487-4650. Order No. DE94015536 DOE-STD-1070-94 iii FOREWORD The Department of Energy (DOE) Guidelines for Evaluation of Nuclear Facility Training

13

DOE-STD-1065-94; DOE Standard Guideline to Good Practices For Postmaintenance Testing at DOE Nuclear Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

65-94 65-94 June 1994 DOE STANDARD GUIDELINE TO GOOD PRACTICES FOR POSTMAINTENANCE TESTING AT DOE NUCLEAR FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy AREA MNTY Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; (423) 576-8401. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 487-4650. Order No. DE94014953 DOE-STD-1065-94 FOREWORD The purpose of the Guide to Good Practices for Postm aintenance T esting at DOE Nuclear Facilities is to provide contractor maintenance

14

DOE-STD-1068-94; DOE Standard Guideline to Good Practices For Maintenance History at DOE Nuclear Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

8-94 8-94 June 1994 DOE STANDARD GUIDELINE TO GOOD PRACTICES FOR MAINTENANCE HISTORY AT DOE NUCLEAR FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy AREA MNTY Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; (615) 576-8401. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 487-4650. Order No. DE94014950 DOE-STD-1068-94 FOREW ORD The purpose of the Guideline to Good Practices for Maintenance History at DOE Nuclear Facilities is to provide contractor maintenance organizations with information

15

DOE Order Self Study Modules - DOE O 426.2 Personnel Selection, Training, Qualification, and Certification Requirements for DOE Nuclear Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

6.2 6.2 PERSONNEL SELECTION, TRAINING, QUALIFICATION, AND CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR DOE NUCLEAR FACILITIES DOE O 426.2 Familiar Level June 2011 1 DOE O 426.2 PERSONNEL SELECTION, TRAINING, QUALIFICATION, AND CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR DOE NUCLEAR FACILITIES FAMILIAR LEVEL ___________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTIVES Given the familiar level of this module and the resources, you will be able answer the following questions: 1. What is the purpose of DOE O 426.2, Personnel Selection, Training, Qualification, and Certification Requirements for DOE Nuclear Facilities? 2. What are the DOE field elements requirements associated with DOE O 426.2? 3. What are the general contractor requirements specified in the contractor requirements

16

DOE-STD-1055-93; DOE Standard Guideline to Good Practices For Maintenance Management Involvement at DOE Nuclear Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

NOT MEASUREMENT NOT MEASUREMENT SENSITIVE SENSITIVE DOE-STD-1055-93 March 1993 DOE STANDARD GUIDELINE TO GOOD PRACTICES FOR MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT INVOLVEMENT AT DOE NUCLEAR FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy AREA MNTY Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831. Available to the public from the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 22161. Order No. DE93013953 DOE-STD-1055-93 FOREWORD The purpose of the Guideline to Good Practices for M

17

Guidelines for job and task analysis for DOE nuclear facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The guidelines are intended to be responsive to the need for information on methodology, procedures, content, and use of job and task analysis since the establishment of a requirement for position task analysis for Category A reactors in DOE 5480.1A, Chapter VI. The guide describes the general approach and methods currently being utilized in the nuclear industry and by several DOE contractors for the conduct of job and task analysis and applications to the development of training programs or evaluation of existing programs. In addition other applications for job and task analysis are described including: operating procedures development, personnel management, system design, communications, and human performance predictions.

Not Available

1983-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

18

Guideline to good practices for types of maintenance activities at DOE nuclear facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The purpose of the Guideline to Good Practices for Types of Maintenance at DOE Nuclear Facilities is to provide contractor maintenance organizations with information that may be used for the development and implementation of a properly balanced corrective, preventive and predictive maintenance program at DOE nuclear facilities. This document is intended to be an example guideline for the implementation of DOE Order 4330.4A, Maintenance Management Program, Chapter II, Element 4. DOE contractors should not feel obligated to adopt all parts of this guide. Rather, they should use the information contained herein as a guide for developing maintenance programs that are applicable to their facility.

Not Available

1993-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

19

Improving the regulation of safety at DOE nuclear facilities. Final report: Appendices  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The report strongly recommends that, with the end of the Cold War, safety and health at DOE facilities should be regulated by outside agencies rather than by any regulatory scheme, DOE must maintain a strong internal safety management system; essentially all aspects of safety at DOE`s nuclear facilities should be externally regulated; and existing agencies rather than a new one should be responsible for external regulation.

NONE

1995-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

20

DOE Offers Conditional Loan Guarantee for Front End Nuclear Facility in  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE Offers Conditional Loan Guarantee for Front End Nuclear DOE Offers Conditional Loan Guarantee for Front End Nuclear Facility in Idaho DOE Offers Conditional Loan Guarantee for Front End Nuclear Facility in Idaho May 20, 2010 - 12:00am Addthis Washington, DC - As part of a broad effort to expand the use of nuclear power in the United States and reduce carbon pollution, U.S. Secretary of Energy Steven Chu announced today the Department's first conditional commitment for a front-end nuclear facility. The $2 billion loan guarantee will support AREVA's Eagle Rock Enrichment Facility near Idaho Falls, Idaho, which will supply uranium enrichment services for the U.S. nuclear power industry. "Increasing uranium enrichment in the United States is critical to the nation's energy and national security," said Secretary Chu. "Existing

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "doe nuclear facilities" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


21

DOE Offers Conditional Loan Guarantee for Front End Nuclear Facility in  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE Offers Conditional Loan Guarantee for Front End Nuclear DOE Offers Conditional Loan Guarantee for Front End Nuclear Facility in Idaho DOE Offers Conditional Loan Guarantee for Front End Nuclear Facility in Idaho May 20, 2010 - 12:00am Addthis Washington, DC - As part of a broad effort to expand the use of nuclear power in the United States and reduce carbon pollution, U.S. Secretary of Energy Steven Chu announced today the Department's first conditional commitment for a front-end nuclear facility. The $2 billion loan guarantee will support AREVA's Eagle Rock Enrichment Facility near Idaho Falls, Idaho, which will supply uranium enrichment services for the U.S. nuclear power industry. "Increasing uranium enrichment in the United States is critical to the nation's energy and national security," said Secretary Chu. "Existing

22

DOE G 420.1-1A, Nonreactor Nuclear Safety Design Guide for use with DOE O 420.1C, Facility Safety  

Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

This Guide provides an acceptable approach for safety design of DOE hazard category 1, 2 and 3 nuclear facilities for satisfying the requirements of DOE O ...

2012-12-04T23:59:59.000Z

23

DOE Issues Landmark Rule for Risk Insurance for Advanced Nuclear Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Landmark Rule for Risk Insurance for Advanced Nuclear Landmark Rule for Risk Insurance for Advanced Nuclear Facilities DOE Issues Landmark Rule for Risk Insurance for Advanced Nuclear Facilities May 8, 2006 - 10:36am Addthis WASHINGTON, DC - The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) issued on Saturday, the interim final rule required by the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT) for risk insurance to facilitate construction of new advanced nuclear power facilities. The rule establishes the requirements for risk insurance to cover costs associated with certain regulatory or litigation-related delays in the start-up of new nuclear power plants. The resurgence of nuclear power is a key component of President Bush's Advanced Energy Initiative. The Standby Support provisions of EPACT (section 638), also referred to as federal risk insurance, authorize the Secretary of Energy to enter into

24

A survey of decontamination processes applicable to DOE nuclear facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The objective of this survey was to select an appropriate technology for in situ decontamination of equipment interiors as part of the decommissioning of U.S. Department of Energy nuclear facilities. This selection depends on knowledge of existing chemical decontamination methods. This report provides an up-to-date review of chemical decontamination methods. According to available information, aqueous systems are probably the most universally used method for decontaminating and cleaning metal surfaces. We have subdivided the technologies, on the basis of the types of chemical solvents, into acid, alkaline permanganate, highly oxidizing, peroxide, and miscellaneous systems. Two miscellaneous chemical decontamination methods (electrochemical processes and foam and gel systems) are also described. A concise technical description of various processes is given, and the report also outlines technical considerations in the choice of technologies, including decontamination effectiveness, waste handing, fields of application, and the advantages and limitations in application. On the basis of this survey, six processes were identified for further evaluation. 144 refs., 2 tabs.

Chen, L.; Chamberlain, D.B.; Conner, C.; Vandegrift, G.F.

1997-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

25

DOE-HDBK-1099-96; Establishing Nuclear Facility Drill Programs  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE-HDBK-1099-96 March 1996 DOE HANDBOOK ESTABLISHING NUCLEAR FACILITY DRILL PROGRAMS U.S. Department of Energy FSC 6910 Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; (423) 576-8401. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 487-4650. Order No. DE96008247 DOE-HDBK-1099-96 iii FOREWORD This Department of Energy (DOE) Handbook, DOE-HDBK-1099-95, Establishing Nuclear Facility Drill Programs, is approved

26

DOE-STD-1069-94; Guideline to Good Practices for Maintenance Tools and Equipment Control at DOE Nuclear Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

9-94 9-94 June 1994 DOE STANDARD GUIDELINE TO GOOD PRACTICES FOR MAINTENANCE TOOLS AND EQUIPMENT CONTROL AT DOE NUCLEAR FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy Washington, D.C. 20585 AREA MNTY DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; (615) 576-8401. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield VA 22161; (703) 487-4650. Order No. DE94014951 DOE-STD-1069-94 FOREWORD The purpose of the Guideline to Good Practices for Maintenance Tools and Equipment Control at DOE Nuclear Facilities is to provide contractor maintenance

27

DOE Order Self Study Modules - DOE O 425.1D, Verification of Readiness to Startup or Restart Nuclear Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

5.1D 5.1D VERIFICATION OF READINESS TO START UP OR RESTART NUCLEAR FACILITIES DOE O 425.1D Familiar Level June 2011 1 DOE O 425.1D VERIFICATION OF READINESS TO START UP OR RESTART NUCLEAR FACILITIES FAMILIAR LEVEL _________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTIVES Given the familiar level of this module and the resources, you will be able to perform the following: 1. What is the purpose of DOE O 425.1D, Verification of Readiness to Startup or Restart Nuclear Facilities? 2. What are the requirements for determining the level of readiness review [operational readiness reviews (ORRs) and readiness assessments (RAs)]? 3. What are the requirements for determining the startup authorization authority? 4. What are the requirements for startup notification reports?

28

General Technical Base Qualification Standard (DOE Defense Nuclear Facilities Technical Personnel)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE-STD-1146-2007 December 2007 DOE STANDARD GENERAL TECHNICAL BASE QUALIFICATION STANDARD DOE Defense Nuclear Facilities Technical Personnel U.S. Department of Energy AREA TRNG Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. DOE-STD-1146-2007 ii This document is available on the Department of Energy Technical Standards Program Web Site at http://www.hss.energy.gov/nuclearsafety/techstds/ DOE-STD-1146-2007 iv INTENTIONALLY BLANK DOE-STD-1146-2007 v TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENT................................................................................................................ vii PURPOSE ....................................................................................................................................9

29

Guideline to good practices for control of maintenance activities at DOE nuclear facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The purpose of the Guideline to Good Practices for Control of Maintenance Activities at DOE Nuclear Facilities is to provide contractor maintenance organizations with information that may be used for the development and implementation of a rigorously controlled maintenance program directed at achieving high quality work performance, personnel safety, radiological protection, operating equipment/system protection, and overall site safety and reliability at DOE nuclear facilities. This document is intended to be an example guideline for the implementation of DOE Order 4330.4A, Maintenance Management Program, Chapter II, Element 7. DOE contractors should not feel obligated to adopt all parts of this guide. Rather, they should use the information contained herein as a guide for developing maintenance programs that are applicable to their facility.

Not Available

1993-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

30

Guideline to good practices for planning, scheduling, and coordination of maintenance at DOE nuclear facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The purpose of the Guideline to Good Practices for Planning, Scheduling, and Coordination of Maintenance at DOE Nuclear Facilities is to provide contractor maintenance organizations with information that may be used for the development and implementation of a rigorously controlled maintenance program directed at planning, scheduling, and coordinating work packages for maintenance tasks at DOE nuclear facilities. This document is intended to be an example guideline for the implementation of DOE Order 4330.4A, Maintenance Management Program, Chapter II, Element 6. DOE contractors should not feel obligated to adopt all parts of this guide. Rather, they should use the information contained herein as a guide for developing maintenance programs that are applicable to their facility.

Not Available

1993-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

31

Order Module--DOE-STD-1104-2009, REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF NUCLEAR FACILITY  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE-STD-1104-2009, REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF NUCLEAR DOE-STD-1104-2009, REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF NUCLEAR FACILITY SAFETY BASIS AND SAFETY DESIGN BASIS DOCUMENTS Order Module--DOE-STD-1104-2009, REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF NUCLEAR FACILITY SAFETY BASIS AND SAFETY DESIGN BASIS DOCUMENTS The familiar level of this module is divided into two sections that are intended to provide only an overview of the material contained in DOE-STD-1104-2009, which should be consulted for complete information. The first section covers the introduction, applicability, and chapters 1 and 2. The second section covers chapters 3, 4, and 5. We have provided examples throughout the module to help familiarize you with the material. The examples will also help prepare you for the practice at the end of this module and for the criterion test.

32

DOE-STD-101-92; Compilation of Nuclear Safety Criteria Potential Application to DOE Nonreactor Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

-1O1-92 -1O1-92 DE92 011016 COMPILATION OF NUCLEAR SAFETY CRITERIA POTENTIAL APPLICATION TO DOE NONREACTOR FACILITIES Published: March 1992 U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy Office of Nuclear Safety Policy and Standards Washington,DC 20585 This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Informa- tion, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; prices available from (423) 576-8401. Available to the public from the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 22161. Order No. DE92011016 DOE-STD-101-92 CONTENTS FOREWORD 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose 1.2 Sources of Criteria and Format 1.3 Safety Analysis Report Criteria

33

Style, content and format guide for writing safety analysis documents. Volume 1, Safety analysis reports for DOE nuclear facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The purpose of Volume 1 of this 4-volume style guide is to furnish guidelines on writing and publishing Safety Analysis Reports (SARs) for DOE nuclear facilities at Sandia National Laboratories. The scope of Volume 1 encompasses not only the general guidelines for writing and publishing, but also the prescribed topics/appendices contents along with examples from typical SARs for DOE nuclear facilities.

Not Available

1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

34

DOE-STD-1050-93; DOE Standard Guideline to Good Practices For Planning, Scheduling, and Coordination of Maintenance at DOE Nuclear Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

0-93 0-93 March 1993 DOE STANDARD GUIDELINE TO GOOD PRACTICES FOR PLANNING, SCHEDULING, AND COORDINATION OF MAINTENANCE AT DOE NUCLEAR FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy AREA MNTY Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62 Oak Ridge, TN 37831. Available to the public from the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 22161. Order No. DE93014266 DOE-STD-1050-93 FOREWORD The purpose of the Guideline to Good Practices for Planning, Scheduling, and Coordination of M aintenance at DOE Nuclear Facilities is to provide contractor maintenance

35

DOE-STD-1053-93; DOE Standard Guideline to Good Practices For Control of Maintenance Activities at DOE Nuclear Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

3-93 3-93 March 1993 DOE STANDARD GUIDELINE TO GOOD PRACTICES FOR CONTROL OF MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES AT DOE NUCLEAR FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy AREA MNTY Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831. Available to the public from the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 22161. Order No. DE93014268 DOE-STD-1053-93 FOREWORD The purpose of the Guideline to Good Practices for Control of M aintenance A ctivities at DOE Nuclear Facilities is to provide contractor maintenance organizations with information

36

DOE-STD-1051-93; DOE Standard Guideline to Good Practices For Maintenance Organization and Administration at DOE Nuclear Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

1-93 1-93 March 1993 DOE STANDARD GUIDELINE TO GOOD PRACTICES FOR MAINTENANCE ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION AT DOE NUCLEAR FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy AREA MNTY Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831. Available to the public from the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Rd., VA 22161 Order No. DE93013951 DOE-STD-1051-93 FOREWORD The purpose of the Guideline to Good Practices for M aintenance Organization and A dm inistration at DOE Nuclear Facilities is to provide contractor maintenance

37

DOE-STD-1146-2001; General Technical Base Qualification Standard DOE Defense Nuclear Facilities Technical Personnel  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

46-2001 46-2001 October 2001 DOE STANDARD GENERAL TECHNICAL BASE QUALIFICATION STANDARD DOE Defense Nuclear Facilities Technical Personnel U.S. Department of Energy AREA TRNG Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from ES&H Technical Information Services, U.S. Department of Energy, (800) 473-4375, fax: (301) 903-9823. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 605-6000. DOE-STD-1146-2001 iii APPROVAL The Federal Technical Capability Panel consists of senior Department of Energy managers responsible for overseeing the Federal Technical Capability Program. This Panel is responsible

38

Nuclear Facility Design  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Design Design FUNCTIONAL AREA GOAL: Headquarters and Field organizations and their contractors ensure that nuclear facilities are designed to assure adequate protection for the public, workers, and the environment from nuclear hazards. REQUIREMENTS:  10 CFR 830.120  10 CFR 830 subpart B  DOE O 413.3  DOE O 420.1B  DOE O 414.1C  DOE O 226.1  DOE M 426.1  DEAR 970-5404-2 Guidance:  DOE G 420.1-1  Project Management Practices, Integrated Quality ( Rev E, June 2003)  DOE Implementation Plan for DNSB Recommendation 2004-2 Performance Objective 1: Contractor Program Documentation Contracts between and the contractors who operate nuclear facilities contain adequate requirements concerning the conduct of nuclear facility safety design for nuclear facility capital projects and major modifications and the

39

DOE FTCP Supplemental Competencies - Human Factors Engineering Functional Area Qualification Competency Examples for DOE Defense Nuclear Facilities Technical Personnel  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

FTCP FTCP SUPPLEMENTAL COMPETENCIES HUMAN FACTORS ENGINEERING FUNCTIONAL AREA QUALIFICATION COMPETENCY EXAMPLES For DOE Defense Nuclear Facilities Technical Personnel APPROVAL The Federal Technical Capability Panel consists of senior U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) managers responsible for overseeing the Federal Technical Capability Program. This Panel is responsible for reviewing and approving qualification standards and competencies for Department-wide application. Approval of this set of competency statements by the Federal Technical Capability Panel is indicated by signature below. ?fuv-~ Karen L. Boardman, Chairperson ~·/Cf I Federal Technical Capability Panel * '2._ 3/19/12 I luman Factors Engineering compc1cncics U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

40

Nuclear Facilities Production Facilities  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-AC04-94AL85000. Sand 2011-4582P. ENERGY U.S. DEPARTMENT OF Gamma Irradiation Facility (GIF) The GIF provides test cells for...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "doe nuclear facilities" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


41

Nuclear Physics User Facilities | U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC)  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

NP User Facilities NP User Facilities User Facilities ASCR User Facilities BES User Facilities BER User Facilities FES User Facilities HEP User Facilities NP User Facilities User Facilities Frequently Asked Questions User Facility Science Highlights Contact Information Office of Science U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20585 P: (202) 586-5430 NP User Facilities Print Text Size: A A A RSS Feeds FeedbackShare Page The Nuclear Physics program supports the operation of the following national scientific user facilities: Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC): External link RHIC at Brookhaven National Laboratory External link is a world-class scientific research facility that began operation in 2000, following 10 years of development and construction. Hundreds of physicists from around

42

DOE-STD-1071-94; DOE Standard Guideline to Good Practices for Material Receipt, Inspection, Handling, Storage, Retrieval, and Issuance at DOE Nuclear Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

71-94 71-94 June 1994 DOE STANDARD GUIDELINE TO GOOD PRACTICES FOR MATERIAL RECEIPT, INSPECTION, HANDLING, STORAGE, RETRIEVAL, AND ISSUANCE AT DOE NUCLEAR FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy AREA MNTY Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; (615) 576-8401. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 487-4650. Order No. DE94014949 DOE-STD-1071-94 FOREWORD The Guideline to Good Practices for Material Receipt, Inspection, Handling, Storage,

43

Nuclear Facility Safety Basis  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Safety Basis Safety Basis FUNCTIONAL AREA GOAL: A fully compliant Nuclear Facility Safety Basis. Program is implemented and maintained across the site. REQUIREMENTS:  10 CFR 830 Subpart B Guidance:  DOE STD 3009  DOE STD 1104  DOE STD  DOE G 421.1-2 Implementation Guide For Use in Developing Documented Safety Analyses To Meet Subpart B Of 10 CFR 830  DOE G 423.1-1 Implementation Guide For Use In Developing Technical Safety Requirements  DOE G 424.1-1 Implementation Guide For Use In Addressing Unreviewed Safety Question Requirements Performance Objective 1: Contractor Program Documentation The site contractor has developed an up-to-date, comprehensive, compliant, documented nuclear facility safety basis and associated implementing mechanisms and procedures for all required nuclear facilities and activities (10 CFR

44

DOE M 140.1-1B, Interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board  

Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

This Manual presents the process the Department of Energy will use to interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) and its staff. Cancels ...

2001-03-30T23:59:59.000Z

45

A DOE-STD-3009 hazard and accident analysis methodology for non-reactor nuclear facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This paper demonstrates the use of appropriate consequence evaluation criteria in conjunction with generic likelihood of occurrence data to produce consistent hazard analysis results for nonreactor nuclear facility Safety Analysis Reports (SAR). An additional objective is to demonstrate the use of generic likelihood of occurrence data as a means for deriving defendable accident sequence frequencies, thereby enabling the screening of potentially incredible events (<10{sup {minus}6} per year) from the design basis accident envelope. Generic likelihood of occurrence data has been used successfully in performing SAR hazard and accident analyses for two nonreactor nuclear facilities at Sandia National Laboratories. DOE-STD-3009-94 addresses and even encourages use of a qualitative binning technique for deriving and ranking nonreactor nuclear facility risks. However, qualitative techniques invariably lead to reviewer requests for more details associated with consequence or likelihood of occurrence bin assignments in the test of the SAR. Hazard analysis data displayed in simple worksheet format generally elicits questions about not only the assumptions behind the data, but also the quantitative bases for the assumptions themselves (engineering judgment may not be considered sufficient by some reviewers). This is especially true where the criteria for qualitative binning of likelihood of occurrence involves numerical ranges. Oftentimes reviewers want to see calculations or at least a discussion of event frequencies or failure probabilities to support likelihood of occurrence bin assignments. This may become a significant point of contention for events that have been binned as incredible. This paper will show how the use of readily available generic data can avoid many of the reviewer questions that will inevitably arise from strictly qualitative analyses, while not significantly increasing the overall burden on the analyst.

MAHN,JEFFREY A.; WALKER,SHARON ANN

2000-03-23T23:59:59.000Z

46

Guideline to good practices for control and calibration of measuring and test equipment (M TE) at DOE nuclear facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The purpose of the Guideline to Good Practices for Control and Calibration of Measuring and Test Equipment (M TE) at DOE Nuclear Facilities is to provide contractor maintenance organizations with information that may be used for the development and implementation of a rigorously controlled maintenance program directed at controlling and calibrating M TE used for maintenance tasks at DOE nuclear facilities. This document is intended to be an example guideline for the implementation of DOE Order 4330.4A, Maintenance Management Program, Chapter II, Element 11. DOE contractors should not feel obligated to adopt all parts of this guide. Rather, they should use the information contained herein as a guide for developing an M TE program applicable to their facility.

Not Available

1993-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

47

Office of Nuclear Facility Safety Programs: Nuclear Facility Training  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Safety (HS-30) Safety (HS-30) Office of Nuclear Safety Home » Directives » Nuclear and Facility Safety Policy Rules » Nuclear Safety Workshops Technical Standards Program » Search » Approved Standards » Recently Approved » RevCom for TSP » Monthly Status Reports » Archive » Feedback DOE Nuclear Safety Research & Development Program Office of Nuclear Safety Basis & Facility Design (HS-31) Office of Nuclear Safety Basis & Facility Design - About Us » Nuclear Policy Technical Positions/Interpretations » Risk Assessment Working Group » Criticality Safety » DOE O 420.1C Facility Safety » Beyond Design Basis Events Office of Nuclear Facility Safety Programs (HS-32) Office of Nuclear Facility Safety Programs - About Us » Facility Representative Program

48

DOE Order Self Study Modules - DOE-STD-3009-94, Preparation Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facilities Documented Safety Analyses  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

3009-94 3009-94 PREPARATION GUIDE FOR U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NONREACTOR NUCLEAR FACILITY DOCUMENTED SAFETY ANALYSES DOE-STD-3009-94 Familiar Level June 2011 1 DOE-STD-3009-94 PREPARATION GUIDE FOR U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NONREACTOR NUCLEAR FACILITY DOCUMENTED SAFETY ANALYSES FAMILIAR LEVEL _______________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTIVES Given the familiar level of this module and the resources listed below, you will be able to answer the following questions: 1. What are five general requirements for contractors who are responsible for a hazard category 1, 2, or 3 nuclear facility, as related to establishing a safety basis? 2. What actions must a contractor take when it is made aware of a potential inadequacy of

49

DOE-HDBK-3010-94; Airborne Release Fractions/Rates and Respirable Fractions for Nonreactor Nuclear Facilities, Volume II  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

3010-94 3010-94 December 1994 DOE HANDBOOK AIRBORNE RELEASE FRACTIONS/RATES AND RESPIRABLE FRACTIONS FOR NONREACTOR NUCLEAR FACILITIES Volume II - Appendices U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; (615) 576-8401. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 487-4650. Order No. DE95004711 DOE-HDBK-3010-94 Page i VOLUME II: APPENDICES APPENDIX A

50

Style, content and format guide for writing safety analysis documents: Volume 2, Safety assessment reports for DOE non-nuclear facilities  

SciTech Connect

The purpose of Volume 2 of this 4-volume style guide is to furnish guidelines on writing and publishing Safety Assessment Reports (SAs) for DOE non-nuclear facilities at Sandia National Laboratories. The scope of Volume 2 encompasses not only the general guidelines for writing and publishing, but also the prescribed topics/appendices contents along with examples from typical SAs for DOE non-nuclear facilities.

Mahn, J.A.; Silver, R.C.; Balas, Y.; Gilmore, W.

1995-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

51

DOE-HDBK-3010-94; DOE Handbook Airborne Release Fractions/Rates and Respirable Fractions for Nonreactor Nuclear Facilities, Volume 1  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

10-94 10-94 December 1994 CHANGE NOTICE NO. 1 March 2000 DOE HANDBOOK AIRBORNE RELEASE FRACTIONS/RATES AND RESPIRABLE FRACTIONS FOR NONREACTOR NUCLEAR FACILITIES Volume I - Analysis of Experimental Data U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from ES&H Technical Information Services, U.S. Department of Energy, (800) 473-4375, fax: (301) 903-9823. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 605-6000. Change Notice No. 1 DOE-HDBK-3010-94 March 2000 Airborne Release Fractions/Rates and Respirable Fractions

52

DOE-STD-3007-93 CN-1; DOE Standard Guidelines For Preparing Criticality Safety Evaluations at Department of Energy Non-Reactor Nuclear Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

7-93 7-93 November 1993 CHANGE NOTICE NO. 1 September 1998 DOE STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR PREPARING CRITICALITY SAFETY EVALUATIONS AT DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NON-REACTOR NUCLEAR FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; (423) 576-8401. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 605-6000. Order No. DE98003918 Change Notice No. 1 DOE-STD-3007-93 September 1998

53

CRAD, Facility Safety - Nuclear Facility Safety Basis | Department of  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

CRAD, Facility Safety - Nuclear Facility Safety Basis CRAD, Facility Safety - Nuclear Facility Safety Basis CRAD, Facility Safety - Nuclear Facility Safety Basis A section of Appendix C to DOE G 226.1-2 "Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities." Consists of Criteria Review and Approach Documents (CRADs) that can be used for assessment of a contractor's Nuclear Facility Safety Basis. CRADs provide a recommended approach and the types of information to gather to assess elements of a DOE contractor's programs. CRAD, Facility Safety - Nuclear Facility Safety Basis More Documents & Publications CRAD, Facility Safety - Unreviewed Safety Question Requirements Site Visit Report, Livermore Site Office - February 2011 FAQS Job Task Analyses - Nuclear Safety Specialist

54

DOE Policy on Decommissioning DOE Facilities Under CERCLA | Department...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE Policy on Decommissioning DOE Facilities Under CERCLA DOE Policy on Decommissioning DOE Facilities Under CERCLA In May 1995, the Department of Energy (DOE) issued a policy in...

55

DOE/DHS INDUSTRIAL CONTROL SYSTEM CYBER SECURITY PROGRAMS: A MODEL FOR USE IN NUCLEAR FACILITY SAFEGUARDS AND SECURITY  

SciTech Connect

Many critical infrastructure sectors have been investigating cyber security issues for several years especially with the help of two primary government programs. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) National SCADA Test Bed and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Control Systems Security Program have both implemented activities aimed at securing the industrial control systems that operate the North American electric grid along with several other critical infrastructure sectors (ICS). These programs have spent the last seven years working with industry including asset owners, educational institutions, standards and regulating bodies, and control system vendors. The programs common mission is to provide outreach, identification of cyber vulnerabilities to ICS and mitigation strategies to enhance security postures. The success of these programs indicates that a similar approach can be successfully translated into other sectors including nuclear operations, safeguards, and security. The industry regulating bodies have included cyber security requirements and in some cases, have incorporated sets of standards with penalties for non-compliance such as the North American Electric Reliability Corporation Critical Infrastructure Protection standards. These DOE and DHS programs that address security improvements by both suppliers and end users provide an excellent model for nuclear facility personnel concerned with safeguards and security cyber vulnerabilities and countermeasures. It is not a stretch to imagine complete surreptitious collapse of protection against the removal of nuclear material or even initiation of a criticality event as witnessed at Three Mile Island or Chernobyl in a nuclear ICS inadequately protected against the cyber threat.

Robert S. Anderson; Mark Schanfein; Trond Bjornard; Paul Moskowitz

2011-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

56

Idaho Site Nuclear Facilities  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Site Nuclear Facilities Idaho Idaho National Laboratorys (INL) Idaho Closure Project (ICP) This page was last updated on May 16...

57

DOE O 425.1D Admin Chg 1, Verification of Readiness to Start Up or Restart Nuclear Facilities  

Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

The order establishes requirements for verifying readiness for startup of new Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities, activities, and operations, and ...

2010-04-16T23:59:59.000Z

58

Office of Nuclear Facility Safety Programs  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Safety Programs establishes requirements related to safety management programs that are essential to the safety of DOE nuclear facilities. In addition, establishes requirements...

59

DOE G 226.1-2, Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities  

Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

The purpose of this Guide is to provide U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) line management with guidance that may be useful to them in effectively and efficiently ...

2012-06-21T23:59:59.000Z

60

DOE G 433.1-1A Admin Chg 1, Nuclear Facility Maintenance Management Program Guide for Use with DOE O 433.1B  

Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

The guide provides acceptable approaches for implementing requirements for Nuclear Maintenance Management Programs (NMMPs) set forth in DOE O 433.1B. Cancels ...

2011-09-09T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "doe nuclear facilities" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


61

Office of Nuclear Facility Basis & Facility Design  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Office of Nuclear Safety Basis & Facility Design(HS-31) Reports to the Office of Nuclear Safety About Us The Office of Nuclear Safety Basis & Facility Design establishes safety...

62

DOE Facility Management Contracts | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Contracts DOE Facility Management Contracts DOE site facility mgt contracts Internet Posting 10-11-11.pdf More Documents & Publications DOEMajorSiteFacilityContracts2-201...

63

DOE O 420.1C, Facility Safety  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

The Order establishes facility and programmatic safety requirements for DOE and NNSA for nuclear safety design criteria, fire protection, and criticality safety.

64

DOE O 420.1C, Facility Safety  

Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

The Order establishes facility and programmatic safety requirements for DOE and NNSA for nuclear safety design criteria, fire protection, criticality safety, ...

2012-12-04T23:59:59.000Z

65

Establishing nuclear facility drill programs  

SciTech Connect

The purpose of DOE Handbook, Establishing Nuclear Facility Drill Programs, is to provide DOE contractor organizations with guidance for development or modification of drill programs that both train on and evaluate facility training and procedures dealing with a variety of abnormal and emergency operating situations likely to occur at a facility. The handbook focuses on conducting drills as part of a training and qualification program (typically within a single facility), and is not intended to included responses of personnel beyond the site boundary, e.g. Local or State Emergency Management, Law Enforcement, etc. Each facility is expected to develop its own facility specific scenarios, and should not limit them to equipment failures but should include personnel injuries and other likely events. A well-developed and consistently administered drill program can effectively provide training and evaluation of facility operating personnel in controlling abnormal and emergency operating situations. To ensure the drills are meeting their intended purpose they should have evaluation criteria for evaluating the knowledge and skills of the facility operating personnel. Training and evaluation of staff skills and knowledge such as component and system interrelationship, reasoning and judgment, team interactions, and communications can be accomplished with drills. The appendices to this Handbook contain both models and additional guidance for establishing drill programs at the Department`s nuclear facilities.

NONE

1996-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

66

Facility Representative Program: DOE Facility Representatives  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

WIPP PADU PORTS ANL WVDP MOAB SFO LFO LAFO NFO SRFO RL PNSO ORP ID NPO-PX FSO NBL NPO-Y12 ORO OSO SPRU BHSO PSO SR SR NA26 DOE Facility Site Map Please help keep this...

67

Map Data: DOE Facilities | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE Facilities Map Data: DOE Facilities doefacilities.csv More Documents & Publications Map Data: Renewable Production Map Data: State Spending Map Data: State Consumption...

68

Guidance for the design and management of a maintenance plan to assure safety and improve the predictability of a DOE nuclear irradiation facility. Final report  

SciTech Connect

A program is recommended for planning the maintenance of DOE nuclear facilities that will help safety and enhance availability throughout a facility`s life cycle. While investigating the requirements for maintenance activities, a major difference was identified between the strategy suitable for a conventional power reactor and one for a research reactor facility: the latter should provide a high degree of predicted availability (referred to hereafter as ``predictability``) to its users, whereas the former should maximize total energy production. These differing operating goals necessitate different maintenance strategies. A strategy for scheduling research reactor facility operation and shutdown for maintenance must balance safety, reliability,and predicted availability. The approach developed here is based on three major elements: (1) a probabilistic risk analysis of the balance between assured reliability and predictability (presented in Appendix C), (2) an assessment of the safety and operational impact of maintenance activities applied to various components of the facility, and (3) a data base of historical and operational information on the performance and requirements for maintenance of various components. These factors are integrated into a set of guidelines for designing a new highly maintainable facility, for preparing flexible schedules for improved maintenance of existing facilities, and for anticipating the maintenance required to extend the life of an aging facility. Although tailored to research reactor facilities, the methodology has broader applicability and may therefore be used to improved the maintenance of power reactors, particularly in anticipation of peak load demands.

Booth, R.S.; Kryter, R.C.; Shepard, R.L.; Smith, O.L. [Oak Ridge National Lab., TN (United States); Upadhyaya, B.R. [Univ. of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN (United States). Dept. of Nuclear Engineering; Rowan, W.J.

1994-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

69

Review of the Pantex Site Office's Compliance with DOE Order 425.1D, Verification of Readiness to Start Up or Restart Nuclear Facilities, June 2012  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Pantex Site Office's Compliance with Pantex Site Office's Compliance with DOE Order 425.1D, Verification of Readiness to Start Up or Restart Nuclear Facilities June 2012 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy i Table of Contents 1 1.0 Purpose .................................................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1 3.0 Assessment Methodologies and Approach ........................................................................................... 1

70

Review of the Pantex Site Office's Compliance with DOE Order 425.1D, Verification of Readiness to Start Up or Restart Nuclear Facilities, June 2012  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Pantex Site Office's Compliance with Pantex Site Office's Compliance with DOE Order 425.1D, Verification of Readiness to Start Up or Restart Nuclear Facilities June 2012 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy i Table of Contents 1 1.0 Purpose .................................................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1 3.0 Assessment Methodologies and Approach ........................................................................................... 1

71

User`s guide for the KBERT 1.0 code: For the knowledge-based estimation of hazards of radioactive material releases from DOE nuclear facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The possibility of worker exposure to radioactive materials during accidents at nuclear facilities is a principal concern of the DOE. The KBERT software has been developed at Sandia National Laboratories under DOE support to address this issue by assisting in the estimation of risks posed by accidents at chemical and nuclear facilities. KBERT is an acronym for Knowledge-Based system for Estimating hazards of Radioactive material release Transients. The current prototype version of KBERT focuses on calculation of doses and consequences to in-facility workers due to accidental releases of radioactivity. This report gives detailed instructions on how a user who is familiar with the design, layout and potential hazards of a facility can use KBERT to assess the risks to workers in that facility. KBERT is a tool that allows a user to simulate possible accidents and observe the predicted consequences. Potential applications of KBERT include the evaluation of the efficacy of evacuation practices, worker shielding, personal protection equipment and the containment of hazardous materials.

Browitt, D.S.; Washington, K.E.; Powers, D.A. [and others

1995-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

72

User's guide to DOE facilities  

SciTech Connect

The Department of Energy's research laboratories represent valuable, often unique, resources for university and industrial scientists. It is DOE policy to make these laboratories and facilities available to qualified scientists. The answers to such questions as who are eligible, what and where are the facilities, what is the cost, when can they be used, are given. Data sheets are presented for each facility to provide information such as location, user contact, description of research, etc. A subject index refers to areas of research and equipment available.

Not Available

1984-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

73

DOE Policy on Decommissioning DOE Facilities Under CERCLA | Department of  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE Policy on Decommissioning DOE Facilities Under DOE Policy on Decommissioning DOE Facilities Under CERCLA DOE Policy on Decommissioning DOE Facilities Under CERCLA In May 1995, the Department of Energy (DOE) issued a policy in collaboration with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for decommissioning surplus DOE facilities consistent with the requirements of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). This policy ensures protection of the environment, worker health and public health, provides opportunities for stakeholder involvement, and achieves risk reduction without unnecessary delay. Consistent with the jointly issued "Guidance on Accelerating CERCLA Environmental Restoration at Federal Facilities" (August 22, 1994), this decommissioning policy encourages streamlined decision-making. This

74

Order Module--DOE O 420.1B, FACILITY SAFETY | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE O 420.1B, FACILITY SAFETY DOE O 420.1B, FACILITY SAFETY Order Module--DOE O 420.1B, FACILITY SAFETY To ensure that new DOE hazard category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities are designed and constructed in a manner that ensures adequate protection to the public, workers, and the environment from nuclear hazards. To ensure that major modifications to hazard category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities comply with the design and construction requirements for new hazard category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities. To ensure that new DOE nuclear reactors comply with the requirements of DOE O 420.1B and the design requirements of DOE O 5480.30, Nuclear Reactor Safety Design Criteria. DOE Order Self Study Modules - DOE O 420.1B Facility Safety More Documents & Publications Order Module--DOE O 420.2B, SAFETY OF ACCELERATOR FACILITIES

75

Facilities | U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC)  

Office of Science (SC) Website

Facilities Facilities Nuclear Physics (NP) NP Home About Research Facilities Research Facilities Project Development Science Highlights Benefits of NP Funding Opportunities Nuclear Science Advisory Committee (NSAC) News & Resources Contact Information Nuclear Physics U.S. Department of Energy SC-26/Germantown Building 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20585 P: (301) 903-3613 F: (301) 903-3833 E: sc.np@science.doe.gov More Information » Facilities Print Text Size: A A A RSS Feeds FeedbackShare Page Facilities and Project Management Division FRIB Tunnel The Facilities and Project Management Division is responsible for planning, constructing, upgrading and operating the Office of Nuclear Physics (NP) program's user facilities. These facilities include the ATLAS facility at

76

PROJECTIZING AN OPERATING NUCLEAR FACILITY  

SciTech Connect

This paper will discuss the evolution of an operations-based organization to a project-based organization to facilitate successful deactivation of a major nuclear facility. It will describe the plan used for scope definition, staff reorganization, method estimation, baseline schedule development, project management training, and results of this transformation. It is a story of leadership and teamwork, pride and success. Workers at the Savannah River Site's (SRS) F Canyon Complex (FCC) started with a challenge--take all the hazardous byproducts from nearly 50 years of operations in a major, first-of-its-kind nuclear complex and safely get rid of them, leaving the facility cold, dark, dry and ready for whatever end state is ultimately determined by the United States Department of Energy (DOE). And do it in four years, with a constantly changing workforce and steadily declining funding. The goal was to reduce the overall operating staff by 93% and budget by 94%. The facilities, F Canyon and its adjoined sister, FB Line, are located at SRS, a 310-square-mile nuclear reservation near Aiken, S.C., owned by DOE and managed by Washington Group International subsidiary Washington Savannah River Company (WSRC). These facilities were supported by more than 50 surrounding buildings, whose purpose was to provide support services during operations. The radiological, chemical and industrial hazards inventory in the old buildings was significant. The historical mission at F Canyon was to extract plutonium-239 and uranium-238 from irradiated spent nuclear fuel through chemical processing. FB Line's mission included conversion of plutonium solutions into metal, characterization, stabilization and packaging, and storage of both metal and oxide forms. The plutonium metal was sent to another DOE site for use in weapons. Deactivation in F Canyon began when chemical separations activities were completed in 2002, and a cross-functional project team concept was implemented to successfully accomplish deactivation. This concept had to allow for continued operations in FB Line until 2005, while providing distinct task-oriented teams for deactivation of the FCC. Facility workers, always the most knowledgeable about any facility, were integral parts of the project team. The team defined the scope, developed a bottoms-up estimate, reorganized personnel to designated project teams, and developed a baseline schedule with about 12,000 activities. Training was implemented to prepare the facility workers to use project management tools and concepts, which were to execute the project, coordinate activities and track progress. The project budget was estimated at $579 million. The team completed F Canyon and FB Line deactivation in August 2006, four months ahead of schedule and under budget.

Adams, N

2007-07-08T23:59:59.000Z

77

Nuclear Facility Operations | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Facility Operations Facility Operations Nuclear Facility Operations INL is a science-based, applied engineering national laboratory dedicated to meeting the nation's environmental, energy, nuclear technology, and national security needs. INL is a science-based, applied engineering national laboratory dedicated to meeting the nation's environmental, energy, nuclear technology, and national security needs. The Idaho Operations Office oversees these contract activities in accordance with DOE directives. INL is a multi-program laboratory In addition to enabling the Office of Nuclear Energy to develop space power systems and advanced fuel cycle and reactor technologies, INL facilities are used by the National Nuclear Security Administration and other DOE offices, together with other Federal agencies such as the Department of

78

Guideline to good practices for material receipt, inspection, handling, storage, retrieval, and issuance at DOE nuclear facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This guide is intended to assist facility maintenance organization in the review of existing methods and in the development of new methods for establishing a material receipt, inspection, handling, storage, retrieval, and issuance process/system which ensures timely delivery of the proper parts and materials, in the condition required for effective maintenance activities, and periodic services which provide unique and/or supplemental maintenance support. It is expected that each DOE facility may use approaches or methods different from those defined in this guide. The specific guidelines that follow reflect generally accepted industry practices. Therefore, deviation from any particular guideline would not, in itself, indicate a problem. If substantive differences exist between the intent of this guideline and actual practice, management should evaluate current practice to determine the meed to include/exclude proposed features. A change in maintenance practice would be appropriate if a performance weakness were determined to exist. The development, documentation, and implementation of other features that further enhance these guidelines for specific applications are encouraged.

Not Available

1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

79

Status and Effectiveness of DOE Efforts to Learn from Internal and External Operating Experience in Accordance with Commitment #20 of the DOE Implementation Plan for Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Recommendation 2004-1  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Safety and Security Safety and Security Report to the Secretary on the Status and Effectiveness of DOE Efforts to Learn from Internal and External Operating Experience in Accordance with Commitment #20 of the DOE Implementation Plan for Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Recommendation 2004-1 February 2011 Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy Office of Health, Safety and Security HSS Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Department-wide Action Plan for the Columbia Accident and Davis-Besse Event ........... 3 3.0 Comprehensive Operating Experience Program ................................................................. 5

80

Status and Effectiveness of DOE Efforts to Learn from Internal and External Operating Experience in Accordance with Commitment #20 of the DOE Implementation Plan for Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Recommendation 2004-1  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Safety and Security Safety and Security Report to the Secretary on the Status and Effectiveness of DOE Efforts to Learn from Internal and External Operating Experience in Accordance with Commitment #20 of the DOE Implementation Plan for Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Recommendation 2004-1 February 2011 Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy Office of Health, Safety and Security HSS Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Department-wide Action Plan for the Columbia Accident and Davis-Besse Event ........... 3 3.0 Comprehensive Operating Experience Program ................................................................. 5

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "doe nuclear facilities" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


81

Nuclear and Facility Safety Directives | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Nuclear Safety » Nuclear and Facility Safety Nuclear Safety » Nuclear and Facility Safety Directives Nuclear and Facility Safety Directives DOE Order (O) 252.1A, Technical Standards Program DOE O 252.1A promotes DOE's use of Voluntary Consensus Standards (VCS) as the primary method for application of technical standards and establishes and manages the DOE Technical Standards Program (TSP) including technical standards development, information, activities, issues, and interactions. HS-30 Contact: Jeff Feit DOE Policy (P) 420.1, Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Policy DOE P 420.1, documents the Department's nuclear safety policy to design, construct, operate, and decommission its nuclear facilities in a manner that ensures adequate protection of workers, the public, and the environment. HS-30 Contact: James O'Brien

82

Review of the Los Alamos National Laoratory Nuclear Facility...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

CM Configuration Management CMR Chemistry and Metallurgy Research CSE Cognizant System Engineer DNFSB Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board DOE U.S. Department of Energy...

83

Order Module--DOE O 433.1B, MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR DOE NUCLEAR  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

33.1B, MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR DOE 33.1B, MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR DOE NUCLEAR FACILITIES Order Module--DOE O 433.1B, MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR DOE NUCLEAR FACILITIES "The familiar level of this module is designed to summarize the basic information in DOE O 433.1B, Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear Facilities. This Order canceled DOE O 433.1A. This module is divided into three sections. Section one contains the objective, general requirements, and the responsibilities assigned to field element managers. Section two includes the requirements in attachment 2 of the Order, Maintenance Management Program Requirements for DOE Nuclear Facilities. Section three is a summary of the guidance provided in DOE G 433.1-1, Facility Maintenance Management Program Guide for Use with DOE O 433.1.The

84

Assessment of criticality safety in DOE facilities  

SciTech Connect

A study was made to assess nuclear criticality safety in DOE Facilities and to assess the effects of various types of possible improvements. The accident statistics in DOE operations show that the fatalities caused by Nuclear Criticality accidents are small compared to other accident categories. The data show the safety performance after 1965, compared to prior years, was considerably improved indicating that overall safety programs have been effective. Data on criticality safety violations were collected from eight major facilities. These data were categorized by severity indexes and causes were assigned. A total of 421 violations were used in the data base for analysis in a fault tree model. Calculations were made using the fault tree methodology to show expected improvement in safety (reduction in probability of a criticality accident) for a fixed reduction in the number of criticality violations. Based on this analysis, about equal emphasis should be placed on reducing mechanical failures and operator errors as efforts in these two areas will likely produce the most significant improvements in safety. A criticality safety infraction form was prepared to facilitate uniformity in recording data on infractions for subsequent analysis. Discussions with Nuclear Safety Specialists working in the field instilled confidence that criticality safety is being handled by concerned, capable, and knowledgable persons.

Lloyd, R.C.; Clayton, E.D.; Converse, W.E.; Kottwitz, D.A.

1981-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

85

Nonreactor Nuclear Facilities Division  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

role in developing science and technology for nuclear power programs, nuclear propulsion, nuclear medicine, and the nation's nuclear weapon program among others. Many...

86

Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

The National Nuclear Security Administration Facilities Home > About Us > Our Programs > Defense Programs > Office of Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation > Office of Test...

87

JM to Revise DOE G 226.1-2, Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities  

Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

The Guide was developed in support of DOE O 226.1B to provides guidance that may be useful to DOE line management organizations in meeting the provisions of ...

2013-04-04T23:59:59.000Z

88

AGENCY: Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, ACTION: Notice...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

upon to accomplish the mission assigned to DOE and NNSA under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, at defense nuclear facilities . We will focus on what impact DOE's and...

89

Nuclear and Facility Safety Policy Rules  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Nuclear Safety (HS-30) Office of Nuclear Safety Home Directives Nuclear and Facility Safety Policy Rules Nuclear Safety Workshops Technical Standards Program Search ...

90

DOE Site Facility Management Contracts Internet Posting | Department...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Site Facility Management Contracts Internet Posting DOE Site Facility Management Contracts Internet Posting DOE-NNSA Site Facility Mgmt Contracts AUG 2013.pdf More Documents &...

91

DOE Facility Management Contracts Facility Owner Contractor  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Univ. Of Chicago Argonne Univ. Of Chicago Argonne LLC 7/31/2006 9/30/2011 4 yrs Award Term Earned/additional 11 yrs Award Term Available 9/30/2026 M&O 2006 http://www.anl.gov/contract/ Patricia Schuneman 630-252-2956 Sergio Martinez 630-252-2075 Kristin Palmer 630-252-2127 Oak Ridge Environmental Management EM Bechtel Jacobs Co LLC 12/18/1997 12/31/2011 12/31/2011 Environmental Mgmt 1998 http://www.oakridge.doe.gov/external/Home/Procurement/RecentAwards/tabid/101/De fault.aspx Barbara Jackson 865-576-0976 Karen Shears 865-241-6411 Ames National Laboratory SC Iowa State University 12/4/2006 12/31/2011 4yrs Award Term Earned/additional 11yrs Award Term Available 12/31/2026 M&O 2007 http://www.ameslab.gov/operations/resources/contract Patricia Schuneman

92

DOE Facility Management Contracts Facility Owner Contractor  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

transition) transition) 6/15/1999 6/30/2011 2 three month option periods 9/30/2011 M&O 1999 http://www.id.energy.gov/PSD/AMWTPHomepage.html Mike Adams 208-526-5277 Wendy Bauer 208-526-2808 Paducah Remediation EM LATA Environmental Services of Kentucky 4/22/2010 7/21/2015 7/21/2015 Site Clean up 2009 http://www.emcbc.doe.gov/dept/contracting/primecontracts.php Pam Thompson 859-219-4056 Bill Creech 859-219-4044 Argonne National Laboratory SC UChicago Argonne, LLC 7/31/2006 9/30/2015 4 yrs Award Term Earned/additional 11 yrs Award Term Available 9/30/2026 M&O 2006 http://www.anl.gov/contract/ Patricia Schuneman 630-252-2956 Sergio Martinez 630-252-2075 Kristin Palmer 630-252-2127 Oak Ridge Environmental Management

93

DOE Facility Management Contracts Facility Owner Contractor  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

UChicago Argonne, LLC UChicago Argonne, LLC 7/31/2006 9/30/2011 4 yrs Award Term Earned/additional 11 yrs Award Term Available 9/30/2026 M&O 2006 http://www.anl.gov/contract/ Patricia Schuneman 630-252-2956 Sergio Martinez 630-252-2075 Kristin Palmer 630-252-2127 Oak Ridge Environmental Management EM Bechtel Jacobs Co LLC 12/18/1997 12/31/2011 12/31/2011 Environmental Mgmt 1998 http://www.oakridge.doe.gov/external/Home/Procurement/RecentAwards/tabid/101/De fault.aspx Barbara Jackson 865-576-0976 Karen Shears 865-241-6411 Ames National Laboratory SC Iowa State University 12/4/2006 12/31/2011 4yrs Award Term Earned/additional 11 yrs Award Term Available 12/31/2026 M&O 2007 http://www.ameslab.gov/operations/resources/contract Patricia Schuneman

94

WIPP Nuclear Facilities Transparency  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Transparency Technologies Other Transparency Activities Sandia National Laboratories Cooperative Monitoring Center (CMC) in conjunction with WIPP is providing this Nuclear...

95

JM for Page Change to DOE O 420.1C, Facility Safety  

Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

DOE-STD-1104 contains the Department's method and criteria for reviewing and approving nuclear facility's documented safety analysis (DSA). This review and ...

2013-06-21T23:59:59.000Z

96

DOE Order Self Study Modules - DOE STD 1063, Facility Representatives  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

63-2011 63-2011 FACILITY REPRESENTATIVES DOE-STD-1063-2011 Familiar Level August 2011 1 DOE-STD-1063-2011 FACILITY REPRESENTATIVES FAMILIAR LEVEL OBJECTIVES Given the familiar level of this module and the resources listed below, you will be able to answer the following questions: 1. What are the purpose and scope of DOE-STD-1063-2011? 2. What are the definitions of the terms listed in section 3 of DOE-STD-1063-2011? 3. What are the duties, responsibilities, and authorities of facility representatives (FRs) and other key personnel? 4. What are the requirements of the FR program? 5. What are the Department of Energy (DOE)-wide FR performance indicators (PIs)? 6. How are DOE-wide FR PIs calculated? 7. What are the FR program objectives that should be measured by an FR program

97

June 2010, Risk Assessment in Support of DOE Nuclear Safety  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Office of Nuclear Safety Policy and Assistance Office of Nuclear Safety Policy and Assistance Nuclear Safety, Quality Assurance and Environment Information Notice June 2010 1 BACKGROUND & PURPOSE: On August 12, 2009, the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) issued Recommendation 2009-1, Risk Assessment Methodologies at Defense Nuclear Facilities. This recommendation focused on the need for clear direction on use of quantitative risk assessments in nuclear safety applications at defense nuclear facilities. The Department of Energy (DOE) is presently analyzing directives, standards, training, and other tools that may support more effective development and use of

98

Improving the Safeguardability of Nuclear Facilities  

SciTech Connect

The application of a Safeguards-by-Design (SBD) process for new nuclear facilities has the potential to reduce security risks and proliferation hazards while improving the synergy of major design features and raising operational efficiency, in a world where significant expansion of nuclear energy use may occur. Correspondingly, the U.S. DOEs Next Generation Safeguards Initiative (NGSI) includes objectives to contribute to international efforts to develop SBD, and to apply SBD in the development of new U.S. nuclear infrastructure. Here, SBD is defined as a structured approach to ensure the timely, efficient and cost effective integration of international safeguards and other nonproliferation barriers with national material control and accountability, physical protection, and safety objectives into the overall design process for a nuclear facility, from initial planning through design, construction and operation. The SBD process, in its simplest form, may be applied usefully today within most national regulatory environments. Development of a mature approach to implementing SBD requires work in the areas of requirements definition, design processes, technology and methodology, and institutionalization. The U.S. efforts described in this paper are supportive of SBD work for international safeguards that has recently been initiated by the IAEA with the participation of many stakeholders including member States, the IAEA, nuclear technology suppliers, nuclear utilities, and the broader international nonproliferation community.

T. Bjornard; R. Bari; D. Hebditch; P. Peterson; M. Schanfein

2009-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

99

Protocol, High Hazard Nuclear Facility Project Oversight - November 2012 |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

High Hazard Nuclear Facility Project Oversight - November High Hazard Nuclear Facility Project Oversight - November 2012 Protocol, High Hazard Nuclear Facility Project Oversight - November 2012 November 2012 Protocol for High Hazard Nuclear Facility Project Oversight The purpose of this protocol is to establish the requirements and responsibilities for managing and conducting Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) independent oversight of high-hazard nuclear facility projects. As part of the Department of Energy's (DOE) self regulatory framework for safety and security, DOE Order 227.1, Independent Oversight Program, assigns HSS the responsibility for implementing an independent oversight program. It also requires the HSS Office of Enforcement and Oversight to conduct independent evaluations of safety and security. This

100

Airborne release fractions/rates and respirable fractions for nonreactor nuclear facilities. Volume 2, Appendices  

SciTech Connect

This document contains compiled data from the DOE Handbook on Airborne Release Fractions/Rates and Respirable Fractions for Nonreactor Nuclear facilities. Source data and example facilities utilized, such as the Plutonium Recovery Facility, are included.

Not Available

1994-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "doe nuclear facilities" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


101

Massive Cement Pour into Hanford Site Nuclear Facility Underway: Recovery  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Massive Cement Pour into Hanford Site Nuclear Facility Underway: Massive Cement Pour into Hanford Site Nuclear Facility Underway: Recovery Act Funding Puts U Canyon in Home Stretch of Demolition Preparations Massive Cement Pour into Hanford Site Nuclear Facility Underway: Recovery Act Funding Puts U Canyon in Home Stretch of Demolition Preparations June 14, 2011 - 12:00pm Addthis Media Contacts Andre Armstrong, CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company (509) 376-6773 Andre_L_Armstrong@rl.gov Geoff Tyree, DOE (509) 376-4171 Geoffrey.Tyree@rl.doe.gov RICHLAND, Wash. - Hanford workers are pouring enough cement-like material to fill six Olympic-size wimming pools in one of the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) largest nuclear facilities at the Hanford Site in southeast Washington State to prepare the massive building for demolition.

102

Massive Cement Pour into Hanford Site Nuclear Facility Underway: Recovery  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Massive Cement Pour into Hanford Site Nuclear Facility Underway: Massive Cement Pour into Hanford Site Nuclear Facility Underway: Recovery Act Funding Puts U Canyon in Home Stretch of Demolition Preparations Massive Cement Pour into Hanford Site Nuclear Facility Underway: Recovery Act Funding Puts U Canyon in Home Stretch of Demolition Preparations June 14, 2011 - 12:00pm Addthis Media Contacts Andre Armstrong, CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company (509) 376-6773 Andre_L_Armstrong@rl.gov Geoff Tyree, DOE (509) 376-4171 Geoffrey.Tyree@rl.doe.gov RICHLAND, Wash. - Hanford workers are pouring enough cement-like material to fill six Olympic-size wimming pools in one of the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) largest nuclear facilities at the Hanford Site in southeast Washington State to prepare the massive building for demolition.

103

Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement - Nuclear Facility...  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement - Nuclear Facility (CMRR-NF SEIS) | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing...

104

Criteria for Evaluation of Nuclear Facility Training Programs  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

STD-1070-94 STD-1070-94 Reaffirmed June 2013 DOE STANDARD CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION OF NUCLEAR FACILITY TRAINING PROGRAMS (Formerly Titled: Guidelines for Evaluation of Nuclear Facility Training Programs) U.S. Department of Energy FSC Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. TS DOE HDBK-1070-94 Errata June 2013 Table of Changes Page/Section Change Cover Criteria for Evaluation of Nuclear Facility Training Programs Page ii This document is available on the Department of Energy Technical Standards Program Web page at http://www.hss.doe.gov/nuclearsafety/ns/techstds/ Page iii Table of Contents Page iv This DOE Technical Standard is invoked as a requirement by DOE Order 426.2, Personnel Selection, Training, Qualifications and

105

DOE fundamentals handbook: Nuclear physics and reactor theory. Volume 1  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Nuclear Physics and Reactor Theory Handbook was developed to assist nuclear facility operating contractors in providing operators, maintenance personnel, and the technical staff with the necessary fundamentals training to ensure a basic understanding of nuclear physics and reactor theory. The handbook includes information on atomic and nuclear physics; neutron characteristics; reactor theory and nuclear parameters; and the theory of reactor operation. This information will provide personnel with a foundation for understanding the scientific principles that are associated with various DOE nuclear facility operations and maintenance.

Not Available

1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

106

DOE fundamentals handbook: Nuclear physics and reactor theory  

SciTech Connect

The Nuclear Physics and Reactor Theory Handbook was developed to assist nuclear facility operating contractors in providing operators, maintenance personnel, and the technical staff with the necessary fundamentals training to ensure a basic understanding of nuclear physics and reactor theory. The handbook includes information on atomic and nuclear physics; neutron characteristics; reactor theory and nuclear parameters; and the theory of reactor operation. This information will provide personnel with a foundation for understanding the scientific principles that are associated with various DOE nuclear facility operations and maintenance.

Not Available

1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

107

DOE fundamentals handbook: Nuclear physics and reactor theory. Volume 2  

SciTech Connect

The Nuclear Physics and Reactor Theory Handbook was developed to assist nuclear facility operating contractors in providing operators, maintenance personnel, and the technical staff with the necessary fundamentals training to ensure a basic understanding of nuclear physics and reactor theory. The handbook includes information on atomic and nuclear physics; neutron characteristics; reactor theory and nuclear parameters; and the theory of reactor operation. This information will provide personnel with a foundation for understanding the scientific principles that are associated with various DOE nuclear facility operations and maintenance.

Not Available

1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

108

For Non-DOE Facilities | Scientific and Technical Information...  

Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

Non-DOE Facilities Print page Print page Email page Email page A non-DOE facility may wish to submit STI to OSTI that is within the scope of the DOE mission. If your organization...

109

Code of Federal Regulations Procedural Rules for DOE Nuclear Activities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Code of Federal Regulations Procedural Rules for DOE Nuclear Code of Federal Regulations Procedural Rules for DOE Nuclear Activities Part II Code of Federal Regulations Procedural Rules for DOE Nuclear Activities Part II The Department of Energy (DOE) is issuing procedural rules to be used in applying its substantive regulations and orders relating to nuclear safety. These procedural rules are intended to be an essential part of the framework through which DOE deals with its contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers to ensure its nuclear facilities are operated in a manner that protects public and worker safety and the environment. In particular, this part sets forth the procedures to implement the provisions of the Price- Anderson Amendments Act of 1988 (PAAA) which subjects DOE contractors to potential civil and criminal penalties for violations of DOE rules,

110

Facility Representative Program: DOE Fundamentals Handbooks  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Fundamentals Handbooks Fundamentals Handbooks Classical Physics (DOE-HDBK-1010-92) Volume 1 of 1 Electrical Science (DOE-HDBK-1011-92) Volume 1 of 4 Volume 2 of 4 Volume 3 of 4 Volume 4 of 4 Thermodynamics, Heat Transfer and Fluid Flow (DOE-HDBK-1012-92) Volume 1 of 3 Volume 2 of 3 Volume 3 of 3 Instrumentation and Control (DOE-HDBK-1013-92) Volume 1 of 2 Volume 2 of 2 Mathematics (DOE-HDBK-1014-92) Volume 1 of 2 Volume 2 of 2 Chemistry (DOE-HDBK-1015-93) Volume 1 of 2 Volume 2 of 2 Engineering Symbology, Prints and Drawings (DOE-HDBK-1016-93) Volume 1 of 2 Volume 2 of 2 Material Science (DOE-HDBK-1017-93) Volume 1 of 2 Volume 2 of 2 Mechanical Science (DOE-HDBK-1018-93) Volume 1 of 2 Volume 2 of 2 Nuclear Physics and Reactor Theory (DOE-HDBK-1019-93) Volume 1 of 2

111

RADIATION FACILITY FOR NUCLEAR REACTORS  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

A radiation facility is designed for irradiating samples in close proximity to the core of a nuclear reactor. The facility comprises essentially a tubular member extending through the biological shield of the reactor and containing a manipulatable rod having the sample carrier at its inner end, the carrier being longitudinally movable from a position in close proximity to the reactor core to a position between the inner and outer faces of the shield. Shield plugs are provided within the tubular member to prevent direct radiation from the core emanating therethrough. In this device, samples may be inserted or removed during normal operation of the reactor without exposing personnel to direct radiation from the reactor core. A storage chamber is also provided within the radiation facility to contain an irradiated sample during the period of time required to reduce the radioactivity enough to permit removal of the sample for external handling. (AEC)

Currier, E.L. Jr.; Nicklas, J.H.

1961-12-12T23:59:59.000Z

112

Facility Representative Program: Nuclear Safety Basis Fundamentals...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Qualification Information Qualification Standards DOE Order Self-Study Modules DOE Fundamentals Handbooks Nuclear Safety Basis Self-Study Guide Energy Online Courses Available...

113

DOE Order Self Study Modules - DOE O 420.1B Facility Safety  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

0.1B 0.1B FACILITY SAFETY NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION LEARNING AND CAREER DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CHANGE NO: 2 DOE O 420.1B Level: Familiar Date: 12/1/08 1 DOE ORDER O 420.1B FACILITY SAFETY FAMILIAR LEVEL _________________________________________________________________________ OBJECTIVES Given the familiar level of this module and the listed resources, you will be able to perform the following: 1. State the purpose of implementing DOE O 420.1B. 2. State who is responsible for complying with the requirements of this Order. 3. State the general and design requirements for nuclear safety. 4. State the general programmatic requirements for an acceptable fire protection program. 5. State the fire protection design requirements for a comprehensive fire protection

114

WIRELESS FOR A NUCLEAR FACILITY  

SciTech Connect

The introduction of wireless technology into a government site where nuclear material is processed and stored brings new meaning to the term ''harsh environment''. At SRNL, we are attempting to address not only the harsh RF and harsh physical environment common to industrial facilities, but also the ''harsh'' regulatory environment necessitated by the nature of the business at our site. We will discuss our concepts, processes, and expected outcomes in our attempts to surmount the roadblocks and reap the benefits of wireless in our ''factory''.

Shull, D; Joe Cordaro, J

2007-03-28T23:59:59.000Z

115

WIRELESS FOR A NUCLEAR FACILITY  

SciTech Connect

The introduction of wireless technology into a government site where nuclear material is processed and stored brings new meaning to the term ''harsh environment''. At SRNL, we are attempting to address not only the harsh RF and harsh physical environment common to industrial facilities, but also the ''harsh'' regulatory environment necessitated by the nature of the business at our site. We will discuss our concepts, processes, and expected outcomes in our attempts to surmount the roadblocks and reap the benefits of wireless in our ''factory''.

Shull, D; Joe Cordaro, J

2007-03-28T23:59:59.000Z

116

DOE/NNSA Facility Management Contracts Facility Owner Contractor  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Facility Management Contracts Facility Management Contracts Facility Owner Contractor Award Date End Date Options/Award Term Ultimate Potential Expiration Date Contract FY Competed Parent Companies/ LLC Partners DOE Site Procurement Director DOE Contracting Officer SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory (SLAC) SC Stanford University DE-AC03-76SF00515 1/25/1981 9/30/2017 9/30/2017 M&O 1981 Stanford University Barbara Jackson 865-576-0976 Kyong H. Watson 650-926-5203 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) SC Battelle Memorial Institute DE-AC05-76RL01830 12/30/2002 9/30/2017 9/30/2017 M&O 1965 Battelle Memorial Institute Barbara Jackson 865-576-0976 Ryan Kilbury 509-372-4030 Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) SC Brookhaven Science Associates, LLC DE-AC02-98CH10886 1/5/1998 1/4/2015 1/4/2015 M&O 1998 Battelle Memorial Institute

117

DOE/NNSA Facility Management Contracts Facility Owner Contractor  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Facility Management Contracts Facility Management Contracts Facility Owner Contractor Award Date End Date Options/Award Term Ultimate Potential Expiration Date Contract FY Competed Parent Companies/ LLC Partners DOE Site Procurement Director DOE Contracting Officer SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory (SLAC) SC Stanford University DE-AC03-76SF00515 1/25/1981 9/30/2017 9/30/2017 M&O 1981 Stanford University Barbara Jackson 865-576-0976 Kyong H. Watson 650-926-5203 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) SC Battelle Memorial Institute DE-AC05-76RL01830 12/30/2002 9/30/2017 9/30/2017 M&O 1965 Battelle Memorial Institute Barbara Jackson 865-576-0976 Ryan Kilbury 509-372-4030 Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) SC Brookhaven Science Associates, LLC DE-AC02-98CH10886 1/5/1998 1/4/2015 1/4/2015 M&O 1998 Battelle Memorial Institute

118

DOE Nuclear Physics R&D Info  

Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

DOE Nuclear Physics R&D Info While quarks and gluons are fairly well understood, how they fit together to create different types of matter is still a mystery. The DOE Nuclear...

119

Infrastructure and Facilities Management | National Nuclear Security  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Infrastructure and Facilities Management | National Nuclear Security Infrastructure and Facilities Management | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Continuing Management Reform Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Us Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Media Room Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Speeches Events Social Media Video Gallery Photo Gallery NNSA Archive Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Infrastructure and Facilities Management Home > content > Infrastructure and Facilities Management Infrastructure and Facilities Management NNSA restores, rebuilds, and revitalizes the physical infrastructure of the

120

Contained Firing Facility | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Contained Firing Facility | National Nuclear Security Administration Contained Firing Facility | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Continuing Management Reform Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Us Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Media Room Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Speeches Events Social Media Video Gallery Photo Gallery NNSA Archive Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Contained Firing Facility Home > About Us > Our Programs > Defense Programs > Office of Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation > Office of Research and Development > Facilities > Contained Firing Facility

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "doe nuclear facilities" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


121

Safety Oversight of Decommissioning Activities at DOE Nuclear Sites  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (Board) is an independent federal agency established by Congress in 1988 to provide nuclear safety oversight of activities at U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) defense nuclear facilities. The activities under the Board's jurisdiction include the design, construction, startup, operation, and decommissioning of defense nuclear facilities at DOE sites. This paper reviews the Board's safety oversight of decommissioning activities at DOE sites, identifies the safety problems observed, and discusses Board initiatives to improve the safety of decommissioning activities at DOE sites. The decommissioning of former defense nuclear facilities has reduced the risk of radioactive material contamination and exposure to the public and site workers. In general, efforts to perform decommissioning work at DOE defense nuclear sites have been successful, and contractors performing decommissioning work have a good safety record. Decommissioning activities have recently been completed at sites identified for closure, including the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site, the Fernald Closure Project, and the Miamisburg Closure Project (the Mound site). The Rocky Flats and Fernald sites, which produced plutonium parts and uranium materials for defense needs (respectively), have been turned into wildlife refuges. The Mound site, which performed R and D activities on nuclear materials, has been converted into an industrial and technology park called the Mound Advanced Technology Center. The DOE Office of Legacy Management is responsible for the long term stewardship of these former EM sites. The Board has reviewed many decommissioning activities, and noted that there are valuable lessons learned that can benefit both DOE and the contractor. As part of its ongoing safety oversight responsibilities, the Board and its staff will continue to review the safety of DOE and contractor decommissioning activities at DOE defense nuclear sites.

Zull, Lawrence M.; Yeniscavich, William [Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, 625 Indiana Ave., NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20004-2901 (United States)

2008-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

122

Nuclear Science Research Facilities Nuclear Science User Guide  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

LANSCE User Guide Nuclear Science Research Facilities #12;#12;Nuclear Science User Guide Table of Contents Introduction 3 Nuclear Science Research Facilities 3 The LANSCE Accelerator 4 Time structure techniques 8 Nuclear Science User Program 11 Proposal Process 13 Information for Prospective Users 14

123

Methodology for Final Hazard Categorization for Nuclear Facilities from Category 3 to Radiological  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Office of Nuclear and Facility Safety Policy Office of Nuclear and Facility Safety Policy Nuclear Safety Technical Position NSTP 2002-2 Methodology for Final Hazard Categorization for Nuclear Facilities from Category 3 to Radiological Issue: DOE-STD-1027-92 defines a lower threshold criterion for preliminary hazard categorization as a nuclear Hazard Category 3 (HC-3) facility or activity. But it does not provide a method other than inventory reduction or segmentation on how an HC-3 facility or activity can be demonstrated to be below HC-3 (i.e., radiological) in final hazard categorization. Background: 10 CFR 830 Subpart B requires that all DOE nuclear facilities categorized as HC-3 or above have a DOE approved safety basis compliant with the requirements of Subpart B. The rule requires the use of DOE-

124

A Proposed Cost-Benefit Analysis Approach for Evaluating DOE Nuclear  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

A Proposed Cost-Benefit Analysis Approach for Evaluating DOE A Proposed Cost-Benefit Analysis Approach for Evaluating DOE Nuclear Facility Design Options A Proposed Cost-Benefit Analysis Approach for Evaluating DOE Nuclear Facility Design Options A Proposed Cost-Benefit Analysis Approach for Evaluating DOE Nuclear Facility Design Options September 19, 2012 Presenter: Dr. Kamiar Jamali, Senior Technical Advisor to the Chief of Defense Nuclear Safety, National Nuclear Security Administration, Office of Nuclear Safety NA-SH Topics Covered: The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) has begun an initiative to develop a methodology to perform cost-benefit analysis for some Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear facility applications as one potential input into nuclear safety decision-making processes. The scope, approach, precedence, and example of how it might be

125

DOE | Office of Health, Safety and Security | 2012 Facility Representative,  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Facility Representative Facility Representative Office of Nuclear Safety Home Facility Representative Home Annual Facility Rep Workshop › 2012 › 2011 › 2010 › 2009 › 2008 › 2007 › 2006 › 2005 › 2004 › 2003 › 2002 › 2001 › 2000 DOE Safety Links › ORPS Info › Operating Experience › DOE Lessons Learned › Accident Investigation Assessment Tools › FR CRADs › Surveillance Guides › Manager's Guide for Safety and Health Subject Matter Links General Program Information › Program Mission Statement › Program Directives and Guidance › FR of the Year Award Program › FR of the Year Award › FR Program Assessment Guide (Appendix B, DOE STD 1063-2011) FR Quarterly Performance Indicators Training & Qualification Information › Qualification Standards › Energy Online Courses

126

DOE-STD-1063-97; DOE Standard Establishing and Maintaining a Facility Representative Program at DOE Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

3-97 3-97 October 1997 Supersedes DOE-STD-1063-93 DOE STANDARD ESTABLISHING AND MAINTAINING A FACILITY REPRESENTATIVE PROGRAM AT DOE FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy AREA FACR Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; (423) 576-8401. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 487-4650. Order No. DE98001286 DOE-STD-1063-97 iii FOREWORD 1. This Department of Energy standard is approved for use by all DOE Components.

127

Standard Guide for Preparing Characterization Plans for Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

1.1 This standard guide applies to developing nuclear facility characterization plans to define the type, magnitude, location, and extent of radiological and chemical contamination within the facility to allow decommissioning planning. This guide amplifies guidance regarding facility characterization indicated in ASTM Standard E 1281 on Nuclear Facility Decommissioning Plans. This guide does not address the methodology necessary to release a facility or site for unconditional use. This guide specifically addresses: 1.1.1 the data quality objective for characterization as an initial step in decommissioning planning. 1.1.2 sampling methods, 1.1.3 the logic involved (statistical design) to ensure adequate characterization for decommissioning purposes; and 1.1.4 essential documentation of the characterization information. 1.2 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate saf...

American Society for Testing and Materials. Philadelphia

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

128

DOE's 2012 Facility Rep of the Year Supports EM | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE's 2012 Facility Rep of the Year Supports EM DOE's 2012 Facility Rep of the Year Supports EM DOE's 2012 Facility Rep of the Year Supports EM September 30, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis John Barnes, right, discusses a transuranic (TRU) waste container with Charles Fairburn of Savannah River Nuclear Solutions. The TRU waste container was repackaged in the Savannah River Site H-Canyon facility. Barnes has more than 23-years of experience at the Savannah River Site as a Facility Representative. John Barnes, right, discusses a transuranic (TRU) waste container with Charles Fairburn of Savannah River Nuclear Solutions. The TRU waste container was repackaged in the Savannah River Site H-Canyon facility. Barnes has more than 23-years of experience at the Savannah River Site as a Facility Representative. AIKEN, S.C. - John Barnes, a Savannah River Site (SRS) employee who works

129

DOE's 2012 Facility Rep of the Year Supports EM | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE's 2012 Facility Rep of the Year Supports EM DOE's 2012 Facility Rep of the Year Supports EM DOE's 2012 Facility Rep of the Year Supports EM September 30, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis John Barnes, right, discusses a transuranic (TRU) waste container with Charles Fairburn of Savannah River Nuclear Solutions. The TRU waste container was repackaged in the Savannah River Site H-Canyon facility. Barnes has more than 23-years of experience at the Savannah River Site as a Facility Representative. John Barnes, right, discusses a transuranic (TRU) waste container with Charles Fairburn of Savannah River Nuclear Solutions. The TRU waste container was repackaged in the Savannah River Site H-Canyon facility. Barnes has more than 23-years of experience at the Savannah River Site as a Facility Representative. AIKEN, S.C. - John Barnes, a Savannah River Site (SRS) employee who works

130

High Explosives Application Facility | National Nuclear Security...  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog The National Nuclear Security Administration High Explosives Application Facility Home > About Us > Our...

131

High Explosives Application Facility | National Nuclear Security  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Explosives Application Facility | National Nuclear Security Explosives Application Facility | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Continuing Management Reform Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Us Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Media Room Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Speeches Events Social Media Video Gallery Photo Gallery NNSA Archive Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog The National Nuclear Security Administration High Explosives Application Facility Home > About Us > Our Programs > Defense Programs > Office of Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation > Office of Research and Development >

132

DOE Cites Washington TRU Solutions for Nuclear Safety Violations |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Washington TRU Solutions for Nuclear Safety Violations Washington TRU Solutions for Nuclear Safety Violations DOE Cites Washington TRU Solutions for Nuclear Safety Violations December 22, 2005 - 4:53pm Addthis WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The Department of Energy (DOE) today notified Washington TRU Solutions (WTS) that it will fine the company $192,500 for violations of the department's nuclear safety requirements. The Preliminary Notice of Violation (PNOV) issued today cites a number of deficiencies that led to a series of low-level plutonium uptakes by workers at a WTS mobile facility (MOVER) stationed at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in Livermore, Calif. The violations reflected WTS' limited understanding of the design and operational limitations of the MOVER facility, a portable waste processing facility designed to be

133

DOE Continues Path Forward on Global Nuclear Energy Partnership |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Continues Path Forward on Global Nuclear Energy Partnership Continues Path Forward on Global Nuclear Energy Partnership DOE Continues Path Forward on Global Nuclear Energy Partnership August 3, 2006 - 8:39am Addthis Department Announces $20 Million for GNEP Siting Studies and Seeks Further Coordination with Industry WASHINGTON, DC - The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today announced $20 million to conduct detailed siting studies for public or commercial entities interested in hosting DOE's Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) facilities. Entities could qualify to receive up to $5 million per site. DOE also announced that it is seeking expressions of interest to obtain input from U.S. and international nuclear industry on the feasibility of accelerating development and deployment of advanced recycling technologies by proceeding with commercial scale demonstration

134

Nuclear Facility Operations | Department of Energy  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Idaho Operations Office oversees these contract activities in accordance with DOE directives. INL is a multi-program laboratory In addition to enabling the Office of Nuclear...

135

Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Inertial Confinement Fusion Inertial Confinement Fusion Facilities Home > About Us > Our Programs > Defense Programs > Office of Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation > Office of Inertial Confinement Fusion > Facilities Facilities Office of Inertial Confinement Fusion, Facilities ICF operates a set of world-class experimental facilities to create HEDP conditions and to obtain quantitative data in support of its numerous stockpile stewardship-related activities. To learn about three high energy experimental facilities and two small lasers that provide ICF capabilities, select the links below. National Ignition Facility, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory OMEGA and OMEGA EP, University of Rochester Laboratory for Laser Energetics Z Machine, Sandia National Laboratories

136

Independent Oversight Review, DOE Headquarters Facilities - March 2002 |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE Headquarters Facilities - March DOE Headquarters Facilities - March 2002 Independent Oversight Review, DOE Headquarters Facilities - March 2002 March 2002 Review of the Headquarters Facilities Emergency Response Plans The Secretary of Energy's Office of Independent Oversight and Performance Assurance conducted a review of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Headquarters facilities emergency response plans in February 2002. The purpose of this review was to assess the Department's readiness to respond to emergency events, such as fires and hazardous material releases (inside and outside the building), that occur at any of the following facilities: the two primary DOE Headquarters facilities, namely, the James V. Forrestal building, which is located in Washington, D.C., and the main Germantown, Maryland, facility; and the 270 Corporate Center and Cloverleaf

137

THE NGA-DOE GRANT TO EXAMINE CRITICAL ISSUES RELATED TO RADIOACTIVE WASTE AND MATERIALS DISPOSITION INVOLVING DOE FACILITIES  

SciTech Connect

Through the National Governors' Association (NGA) project ''Critical Issues Related to Radioactive Waste and Materials Disposition Involving DOE Facilities'' NGA brings together Governors' policy advisors, state regulators, and DOE officials to examine critical issues related to the cleanup and operation of DOE nuclear weapons and research facilities. Topics explored through this project include: Decisions involving disposal of mixed, low-level, and transuranic (TRU) waste and disposition of nuclear materials. Decisions involving DOE budget requests and their effect on environmental cleanup and compliance at DOE facilities. Strategies to treat mixed, low-level, and transuranic (TRU) waste and their effect on individual sites in the complex. Changes to the FFCA site treatment plans as a result of proposals in DOE's Accelerating Cleanup: Paths to Closure strategy and contractor integration analysis. Interstate waste and materials shipments. Reforms to existing RCRA and CERCLA regulations/guidance to address regulatory overlap and risks posed by DOE wastes. The overarching theme of this project is to help the Department improve coordination of its major program decisions with Governors' offices and state regulators and to ensure such decisions reflect input from these key state officials and stakeholders. This report summarizes activities conducted during the quarter from December 31, 1997 through April 30, 1998 under the NGA project. The work accomplished by the NGA project team during the past four months can be categorized as follows: maintained open communication with DOE on a variety of activities and issues within the DOE environmental management complex; and provided ongoing support to state-DOE interactions in preparation for the March 30-31, 1998 NGA Federal Facilities Compliance Task Force Meeting with DOE. maintained communication with NGA Federal Facilities Compliance Task Force members regarding DOE efforts to formulate a configuration for mixed low-level waste and low-level treatment and disposal, DOE's Environmental Management Budget, and DOE's proposed Intersite Discussions.

NONE

1998-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

138

DOE's Office of Nuclear Energy Honored  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

DOE's Office of Nuclear Energy Honored The U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Nuclear Energy was among those honored by the Partnership for Science and Technology (PST) as...

139

DOE O 457.1, Nuclear Counterterrorism  

Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

The Order defines requirements for the protection of sensitive improvised nuclear device information and provides a framework to support DOE activities related ...

2006-02-07T23:59:59.000Z

140

Facilities & Capabilities | Nuclear Science | ORNL  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Irradiated Material Examination and Testing (IMET) Facility was designed and built as a hot cell facility. It is a two-story block and brick structure with a two-story high bay...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "doe nuclear facilities" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


141

Public Reading Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Reading Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration Reading Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Continuing Management Reform Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Us Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Media Room Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Speeches Events Social Media Video Gallery Photo Gallery NNSA Archive Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Public Reading Facilities Home > About Us > Our Operations > NNSA Office of General Counsel > Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) > Public Reading Facilities Public Reading Facilities The FOIA and E-FOIA require that specific types of records as well as

142

DOE/EA-1510; Final Environmental Assessment for the Alternate Financed Facility Modernization  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Final Environmental Assessment for the Final Environmental Assessment for the Alternate Financed Facility Modernization Alternate Financed Facility Modernization January 2005 January 2005 U.S. Department of Energy U.S. Department of Energy Oak Ridge Y-12 Site Office Oak Ridge Y-12 Site Office National Nuclear Security Administration National Nuclear Security Administration DOE/EA-1510 DOE/EA-1510 Alternate Financed Facility Modernization EA Final i January 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Acronyms and Abbreviations............................................................................................. vi Chemicals and Units of Measure ................................................................................................... ix Conversion Chart ...........................................................................................................................

143

Facilities | U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC)  

Office of Science (SC) Website

Facilities Facilities Biological and Environmental Research (BER) BER Home About Research Facilities DOE Joint Genome Institute (JGI) ARM Climate Research Facility Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory Facility Metrics Science Highlights Benefits of BER Funding Opportunities Biological & Environmental Research Advisory Committee (BERAC) News & Resources Contact Information Biological and Environmental Research U.S. Department of Energy SC-23/Germantown Building 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20585 P: (301) 903-3251 F: (301) 903-5051 E: sc.ber@science.doe.gov More Information » Facilities Print Text Size: A A A RSS Feeds FeedbackShare Page BER User Facilities DOE designs, develops, builds, and operates unique, world-class facilities for the benefit of the entire research community. DOE Office of Science

144

Risk Assessment in Support of DOE Nuclear Safety, Risk Information Notice,  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Risk Assessment in Support of DOE Nuclear Safety, Risk Information Risk Assessment in Support of DOE Nuclear Safety, Risk Information Notice, June 2010 Risk Assessment in Support of DOE Nuclear Safety, Risk Information Notice, June 2010 On August 12, 2009, the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) issued Recommendation 2009-1, Risk Assessment Methodologies at Defense Nuclear Facilities. This recommendation focused on the need for clear direction on use of quantitative risk assessments in nuclear safety applications at defense nuclear facilities. The Department of Energy (DOE) is presently analyzing directives, standards, training, and other tools that may support more effective development and use of risk assessment. Working with the Chief of Defense Nuclear Safety and the Chief of Nuclear Safety, staff from the Office of Health,

145

Letter from the Nuclear Energy Institute to DOE GC | Department...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

from the Nuclear Energy Institute to DOE GC Letter from the Nuclear Energy Institute to DOE GC Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage Contingent Cost...

146

DOE Designated User Facilities Multiple Laboratories * ARM Climate Research Facility  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Designated User Facilities Designated User Facilities Multiple Laboratories * ARM Climate Research Facility Argonne National Laboratory * Advanced Photon Source (APS) * Electron Microscopy Center for Materials Research * Argonne Tandem Linac Accelerator System (ATLAS) * Center for Nanoscale Materials (CNM) * Argonne Leadership Computing Facility (ALCF) * Brookhaven National Laboratory * National Synchrotron Light Source (NSLS) * Accelerator Test Facility (ATF) * Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) * Center for Functional Nanomaterials (CFN) * National Synchrotron Light Source II (NSLS-II ) (under construction) Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory * Fermilab Accelerator Complex Idaho National Laboratory * Advanced Test Reactor ** * Wireless National User Facility (WNUF)

147

Technology Transfer Program - DOE Designated Facilities  

Spallation Neutron Source; Leadership Computing Facility * Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory (EMSL)

148

DOE Office of Science Computing Facility Operational Assessment...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Assessment (OA) Review of the efficiencies in the steady-state operations of each of the DOE Office of Science High Performance Computing (HPC) Facilities. * OMB requirement for...

149

2012 DOE Facility Representatives Workshop Lessons Learned Presentatio...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science Office of Science Office of Science Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) Laboratory (BNL) Sealed Source Leak 2012 DOE Facility...

150

Project Hanford nuclear facilities list and authorization basis information  

SciTech Connect

Rev. 4 documents and updates the Nuclear Facilities list and associated Authorization Basis (AB) information for applicable Project Hanford facilities.

EVANS, C.B.

1999-03-03T23:59:59.000Z

151

DOE Nuclear Criticality Safety Program - Nuclear Engineering Division  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

DOE Nuclear Criticality Safety Program DOE Nuclear Criticality Safety Program Nuclear Criticality Safety Overview Experience Analysis Tools Current NCS Activities Current R&D Activities DOE Criticality Safety Support Group (CSSG) Other Major Programs Work with Argonne Contact us For Employees Site Map Help Join us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter NE Division on Flickr The DOE Nuclear Criticality Safety Program Bookmark and Share J. Morman and R. Bucher load J. Morman and R. Bucher load samples into the ZPR-6 critical assembly for material worth measurements. Click on image to view larger image. The DOE Nuclear Criticality Safety Program (NCSP) is focused on maintaining fundamental infrastructure that enables retention of DOE capabilities and expertise in nuclear criticality safety necessary to support line

152

Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Office of Defense Science Office of Defense Science Facilities Home > About Us > Our Programs > Defense Programs > Office of Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation > Office of Research and Development > Facilities Facilities Office of Research and Development, Facilities The Office of Research and Development manages and oversees the operation of an exceptional suite of science, technology, and engineering facilities that support and further the national stockpile stewardship agenda. Of varying size, scope and capabilities, the facilities work in a concert to accomplish the following activities: Annual assessment of the stockpile in the face of increasing challenges due to aging or remanufacture, Reduced response times for resolving stockpile issues, Timely and certifiable completion of Life Extension Programs,

153

Appendix B: Rules and Directives Applicable to Nuclear Facilities...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Appendix B: Rules and Directives Applicable to Nuclear Facilities Line Management Oversight Appendix B: Rules and Directives Applicable to Nuclear Facilities Line Management...

154

Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Office of Defense Science Facilities Home > About Us > Our Programs > Defense Programs > Office of Research, Development, Test Capabilities and Evaluation > Office of Research and...

155

Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Office of Defense Science Facilities Home > About Us > Our Programs > Defense Programs > Office of Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation > Office of Research and Development...

156

Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Home > About Us > Our Programs > Defense Programs > Office of Research, Development, Test Capabilities and Evaluation > Office of Test Capabilities and Evaluation > Facilities...

157

Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Inertial Confinement Fusion Facilities Home > About Us > Our Programs > Defense Programs > Office of Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation > Office of Inertial Confinement...

158

THE NGA-DOE GRANT TO EXAMINE CRITICAL ISSUES RELATED TO RADIOACTIVE WASTE AND MATERIALS DISPOSITION INVOLVING DOE FACILITIES  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Through the National Governors' Association (NGA) project ''Critical Issues Related to Radioactive Waste and Materials Disposition Involving DOE Facilities'' NGA brings together Governors' policy advisors, state regulators, and DOE officials to examine critical issues related to the cleanup and operation of DOE nuclear weapons and research facilities. Topics explored through this project include: Decisions involving disposal of mixed, low-level, and transuranic (TRU) waste and disposition of nuclear materials. Decisions involving DOE budget requests and their effect on environmental cleanup and compliance at DOE facilities. Strategies to treat mixed, low-level, and transuranic (TRU) waste and their effect on individual sites in the complex. Changes to the FFCA site treatment plans as a result of proposals in DOE's Accelerating Cleanup: Paths to Closure strategy and contractor integration analysis. Interstate waste and materials shipments. Reforms to existing RCRA and CERCLA regulations/guidance to address regulatory overlap and risks posed by DOE wastes. The overarching theme of this project is to help the Department improve coordination of its major program decisions with Governors' offices and state regulators and to ensure such decisions reflect input from these key state officials and stakeholders. This report summarizes activities conducted during the quarter from April 30, 1998 through June 30, 1998 under the NGA project. The work accomplished by the NGA project team during the past four months can be categorized as follows: maintained open communication with DOE on a variety of activities and issues within the DOE environmental management complex; and provided ongoing support to state-DOE interactions. maintained communication with NGA Federal Facilities Compliance Task Force members regarding DOE efforts to formulate a configuration for mixed low-level waste and low-level treatment and disposal, DOE's Environmental Management Budget, and DOE's proposed Intersite Discussions.

NONE

1998-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

159

U.S. Department of Energy Oak Ridge Operations Nuclear Facility Safety  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

U.S. Department of Energy Oak Ridge Operations Nuclear Facility U.S. Department of Energy Oak Ridge Operations Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals, Self-Study Guide U.S. Department of Energy Oak Ridge Operations Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals, Self-Study Guide This is an open-book evaluation. Complete the questions, and submit your answers (hand-written or electronically) to the Training Center. Someone will check and grade your answers. If you achieve a score of at least 80%, you will receive a completion certificate. Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide Review Questions More Documents & Publications Requirements in DOE O 5480.19, Conduct of Operations Requirements for DOE Facilities Cross-referenced to DOE O 422.1, Conduct of Operations. U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge Operations Office Nuclear Facility

160

DOE Applauds Opening of Historic Disposal Facility | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE Applauds Opening of Historic Disposal Facility DOE Applauds Opening of Historic Disposal Facility DOE Applauds Opening of Historic Disposal Facility June 6, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis The Waste Control Specialists Federal Waste Disposal Facility in Andrews, Texas. The Waste Control Specialists Federal Waste Disposal Facility in Andrews, Texas. ANDREWS, Texas - DOE officials participated in an event today to celebrate the opening of the first commercial disposal facility of its kind. EM Senior Advisor Dave Huizenga and several other federal, state and local officials attended the event at Waste Control Specialists (WCS) in Andrews and witnessed the first container being placed in the new state-of-the-art facility. WCS is a waste processing and disposal company. "I am proud to be here today to celebrate this historic event. We

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "doe nuclear facilities" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


161

Requests by Political Candidates to Tour DOE Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

REQUESTS BY POLITICAL CANDIDATES TO TOUR DOE FACILITIES REQUESTS BY POLITICAL CANDIDATES TO TOUR DOE FACILITIES * Requests by political candidates to tour DOE facilities are subject to the provisions of the Hatch Act; the statute regulating the political activity of Federal employees. Any proposed site visit by a candidate MUST go through legal review before it can go forward. DOE employees authorizing prohibited political activities by candidates in DOE facilities or on DOE property are subject to penalties under the Hatch act. * DOE employees may not engage in political activity: (1) while on duty; (2) while on Federal property or in a room or building engaged for the purpose of conducting official duties; (3) while wearing a uniform or other item identifying the employee as a Federal employee; or (4) while using a government vehicle. Federal employees may not engage

162

DOE P 420.1 Department of Energy Nuclear Policy | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE P 420.1 Department of Energy Nuclear Policy DOE P 420.1 Department of Energy Nuclear Policy DOE P 420.1 Department of Energy Nuclear Policy PURPOSE: To document the Department of Energy's (DOE) nuclear safety policy. SCOPE: The provisions of this policy apply to all Departmental elements with responsibility for a nuclear facility, except the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, which is separately covered under Executive Order 12344, Title 50 United States Code, sections 2406 and 2511. This Policy cancels Secretary of Energy Notice 35-91, Nuclear Safety Policy, dated 9-9-91. DOE_P420-1_Final_2-8-11.pdf More Documents & Publications DOE P 420.1 Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Policy, Approved: 2-08-2011 Technical Basis for U. S. Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Policy, DOE Policy 420.1, 7/11

163

DOE Standard Integration Of Environment,Safety, and Health Into Facility  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE Standard Integration Of Environment,Safety, and Health Into DOE Standard Integration Of Environment,Safety, and Health Into Facility Disposition Activities DOE Standard Integration Of Environment,Safety, and Health Into Facility Disposition Activities The original release of DOE-STD-1120-98 provided integrated safety management guidance for enhancing worker, public, and environmental protection during all facility disposition activities. Volume One of this Standard has been revised to provide a Department of Energy (DOE) approved methodology for preparing a Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) for decommissioning of nuclear facilities, as well as environmental restoration activities that involve work not done within a permanent structure. Methodologies provided in this Standard are intended to be compliant with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part

164

Nuclear criticality safety training: guidelines for DOE contractors  

SciTech Connect

The DOE Order 5480.1A, Chapter V, Safety of Nuclear Facilities, establishes safety procedures and requirements for DOE nuclear facilities. This guide has been developed as an aid to implementing the Chapter V requirements pertaining to nuclear criticality safety training. The guide outlines relevant conceptual knowledge and demonstrated good practices in job performance. It addresses training program operations requirements in the areas of employee evaluations, employee training records, training program evaluations, and training program records. It also suggests appropriate feedback mechanisms for criticality safety training program improvement. The emphasis is on academic rather than hands-on training. This allows a decoupling of these guidelines from specific facilities. It would be unrealistic to dictate a universal program of training because of the wide variation of operations, levels of experience, and work environments among DOE contractors and facilities. Hence, these guidelines do not address the actual implementation of a nuclear criticality safety training program, but rather they outline the general characteristics that should be included.

Crowell, M.R.

1983-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

165

Natural Phenomena Hazards Analysis and Design Criteria for DOE Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

STATEMENT. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. STATEMENT. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. DOE-STD-1020-2012 December 2012 _________________ Supersedes DOE-STD-1020-2002 DOE STANDARD Natural Phenomena Hazards Analysis and Design Criteria for DOE Facilities U.S. Department of Energy AREA NPHZ Washington, D.C. 20585 NOT MEASUREMENT SENSITIVE DOE-STD-1020-2012 This document is available on the Department of Energy Technical Standards Program Web page at http://www.hss.doe.gov/nuclearsafety/ns/techstds/ DOE-STD-1020-2012 i Foreword Department of Energy (DOE) Standard (STD)-1020-2012, Natural Phenomena Hazards

166

Natural Phenomena Hazards Analysis and Design Criteria for DOE Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

STATEMENT. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. STATEMENT. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. DOE-STD-1020-2012 December 2012 _________________ Supersedes DOE-STD-1020-2002 DOE STANDARD Natural Phenomena Hazards Analysis and Design Criteria for DOE Facilities U.S. Department of Energy AREA NPHZ Washington, D.C. 20585 NOT MEASUREMENT SENSITIVE DOE-STD-1020-2012 This document is available on the Department of Energy Technical Standards Program Web page at http://www.hss.doe.gov/nuclearsafety/ns/techstds/ DOE-STD-1020-2012 i Foreword Department of Energy (DOE) Standard (STD)-1020-2012, Natural Phenomena Hazards

167

THE NGA-DOE GRANT TO EXAMINE CRITICAL ISSUES RELATED TO RADIOACTIVE WASTE AND MATERIALS DISPOSITION INVOLVING DOE FACILITIES  

SciTech Connect

Through the National Governors' Association (NGA) project ''Critical Issues Related to Radioactive Waste and Materials Disposition Involving DOE Facilities'' NGA brings together Governors' policy advisors, state regulators, and DOE officials to examine critical issues related to the cleanup and operation of DOE nuclear weapons and research facilities. Topics explored through this project include: Decisions involving disposal of mixed, low-level, and transuranic (TRU) waste and disposition of nuclear materials; Decisions involving DOE budget requests and their effect on environmental cleanup and compliance at DOE facilities; Strategies to treat mixed, low-level, and transuranic (TRU) waste and their effect on individual sites in the complex; Changes to the FFCA site treatment plans as a result of proposals in the Department's Accelerating Cleanup: Paths to Closure plan and contractor integration analysis; Interstate waste and materials shipments; and Reforms to existing RCRA and CERCLA regulations/guidance to address regulatory overlap and risks posed by DOE wastes. The overarching theme of this project is to help the Department improve coordination of its major program decisions with Governors' offices and state regulators and to ensure such decisions reflect input from these key state officials and stakeholders. This report summarizes activities conducted during the quarter from May 1, 1999, through July 30, 1999, under the NGA grant. The work accomplished by the NGA project team during the past four months can be categorized as follows: maintained open communication with DOE on a variety of activities and issues within the DOE environmental management complex; maintained communication with NGA Federal Facilities Compliance Task Force members regarding DOE efforts to formulate a configuration for mixed low-level waste and low-level treatment and disposal, external regulation of DOE; and continued to facilitate interactions between the states and DOE to develop a foundation for an ongoing substantive relationship between the Governors of key states and Secretary Richardson.

Ann M. Beauchesne

1999-07-30T23:59:59.000Z

168

THE NGA-DOE GRANT TO EXAMINE CRITICAL ISSUES RELATED TO RADIOACTIVE WASTE AND MATERIALS DISPOSITION INVOLVING DOE FACILITIES  

SciTech Connect

Through the National Governors Association (NGA) project ``Critical Issues Related to Radioactive Waste and Materials Disposition Involving DOE Facilities'' NGA brings together Governors' policy advisors, state regulators, and DOE officials to examine critical issues related to the cleanup and operation of DOE nuclear weapons and research facilities. Topics explored through this project include: Decisions involving disposal of mixed, low-level, and transuranic (TRU) waste and disposition of nuclear materials; Decisions involving DOE budget requests and their effect on environmental cleanup and compliance at DOE facilities; Strategies to treat mixed, low-level, and transuranic (TRU) waste and their effect on individual sites in the complex; Changes to the FFCA site treatment plans as a result of proposals in the Department's Accelerating Cleanup: Paths to Closure plan and contractor integration analysis; Interstate waste and materials shipments; and Reforms to existing RCRA and CERCLA regulations/guidance to address regulatory overlap and risks posed by DOE wastes. The overarching theme of this project is to help the Department improve coordination of its major program decisions with Governors' offices and state regulators and to ensure such decisions reflect input from these key state officials and stakeholders. This report summarizes activities conducted during the period from October 1, 1999 through January 31, 2000, under the NGA grant. The work accomplished by the NGA project team during the past three months can be categorized as follows: maintained open communication with DOE on a variety of activities and issues within the DOE environmental management complex; convened and facilitated the October 6--8 NGA FFCA Task Force Meeting in Oak Ridge, Tennessee; maintained communication with NGA Federal Facilities Compliance Task Force members regarding DOE efforts to formulate a configuration for mixed low-level waste and low-level treatment and disposal, external regulation of DOE; and continued to facilitate interactions between the states and DOE to develop a foundation for an ongoing substantive relationship between the Governors of key states and the Department.

Ann M. Beauchesne

2000-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

169

Technology Transfer Mechanisms at DOE Facilities  

Collaborative research between DOE Labs and public and/or private entities for the mutual benefit of the parties

170

DOE Designated User Facilities | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Microsoft Word - DesignatedUserFacilitiesApril132010 FY 2010 LDRD Report SYNCHROTRON RADIATION LIGHTSOURCES AT LAWRENCE BERKELEYNATIONAL LABORATORY ANDSTANFORD LINEAR...

171

THE NGA-DOE GRANT TO EXAMINE CRITICAL ISSUES RELATED TO RADIOACTIVE WASTE AND MATERIALS DISPOSITION INVOLVING DOE FACILITIES  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Through the National Governors' Association (NGA) project ''Critical Issues Related to Radioactive Waste and Materials Disposition Involving DOE Facilities'' NGA brings together Governors' policy advisors, state regulators, and DOE officials to examine critical issues related to the cleanup and operation of DOE nuclear weapons and research facilities. Topics explored through this project include: Decisions involving disposal of mixed, low-level, and transuranic (TRU) waste and disposition of nuclear materials; Decisions involving DOE budget requests and their effect on environmental cleanup and compliance at DOE facilities; Strategies to treat mixed, low-level, and transuranic (TRU) waste and their effect on individual sites in the complex; Changes to the FFCA site treatment plans as a result of proposals in the Department's Accelerating Cleanup: Paths to Closure plan and contractor integration analysis; Interstate waste and materials shipments; and Reforms to existing RCRA and CERCLA regulations/guidance to address regulatory overlap and risks posed by DOE wastes. The overarching theme of this project is to help the Department improve coordination of its major program decisions with Governors' offices and state regulators and to ensure such decisions reflect input from these key state officials and stakeholders. This report summarizes activities conducted during the quarter from February 1, 1999, through April 30, 1999, under the NGA grant. The work accomplished by the NGA project team during the past four months can be categorized as follows: maintained open communication with DOE on a variety of activities and issues within the DOE environmental management complex; maintained communication with NGA Federal Facilities Compliance Task Force members regarding DOE efforts to formulate a configuration for mixed low-level waste and low-level treatment and disposal, external regulation of DOE; and EM Integration activities; and continued to serve as a liaison between the NGA FFCA Task Force states and the Department.

Ann M. Beauchesne

1999-04-30T23:59:59.000Z

172

THE NGA-DOE GRANT TO EXAMINE CRITICAL ISSUES RELATED TO RADIOACTIVE WASTE AND MATERIALS DISPOSITION INVOLVING DOE FACILITIES  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Through the National Governors' Association (NGA) project ''Critical Issues Related to Radioactive Waste and Materials Disposition Involving DOE Facilities'' NGA brings together Governors' policy advisors, state regulators, and DOE officials to examine critical issues related to the cleanup and operation of DOE nuclear weapons and research facilities. Topics explored through this project include: (1) Decisions involving disposal of mixed, low-level, and transuranic (TRU) waste and disposition of nuclear materials; (2) Decisions involving DOE budget requests and their effect on environmental cleanup and compliance at DOE facilities; (3) Strategies to treat mixed, low-level, and transuranic (TRU) waste and their effect on individual sites in the complex; (4) Changes to the FFCA site treatment plans as a result of proposals in the Department's Accelerating Cleanup: Paths to Closure plan and contractor integration analysis; (5) Interstate waste and materials shipments; and (6) Reforms to existing RCRA and CERCLA regulations/guidance to address regulatory overlap and risks posed by DOE wastes. The overarching theme of this project is to help the Department improve coordination of its major program decisions with Governors' offices and state regulators and to ensure such decisions reflect input from these key state officials and stakeholders. This report summarizes activities conducted during the quarter from October 1, 1998 through January 31, 1999, under the NGA grant. The work accomplished by the NGA project team during the past four months can be categorized as follows: (1) maintained open communication with DOE on a variety of activities and issues within the DOE environmental management complex; (2) maintained communication with NGA Federal Facilities Compliance Task Force members regarding DOE efforts to formulate a configuration for mixed low-level waste and low-level treatment and disposal, external regulation of DOE; and EM Integration activities; and (3) continued to serve as a liaison between the NGA FFCA Task Force states and the Department.

Ann M. Beauchesne

1999-01-31T23:59:59.000Z

173

THE NGA-DOE GRANT TO EXAMINE CRITICAL ISSUES RELATED TO RADIOACTIVE WASTE AND MATERIALS DISPOSITION INVOLVING DOE FACILITIES  

SciTech Connect

Through the National Governors' Association (NGA) project ''Critical Issues Related to Radioactive Waste and Materials Disposition Involving DOE Facilities'' NGA brings together Governors' policy advisors, state regulators, and DOE officials to examine critical issues related to the cleanup and operation of DOE nuclear weapons and research facilities. Topics explored through this project include: (1) Decisions involving disposal of mixed, low-level, and transuranic (TRU) waste and disposition of nuclear materials; (2) Decisions involving DOE budget requests and their effect on environmental cleanup and compliance at DOE facilities; (3) Strategies to treat mixed, low-level, and transuranic (TRU) waste and their effect on individual sites in the complex; (4) Changes to the FFCA site treatment plans as a result of proposals in the Department's Accelerating Cleanup: Paths to Closure plan and contractor integration analysis; (5) Interstate waste and materials shipments; and (6) Reforms to existing RCRA and CERCLA regulations/guidance to address regulatory overlap and risks posed by DOE wastes. The overarching theme of this project is to help the Department improve coordination of its major program decisions with Governors' offices and state regulators and to ensure such decisions reflect input from these key state officials and stakeholders. This report summarizes activities conducted during the quarter from June 1, 1998 through September 30, 1998, under the NGA grant. The work accomplished by the NGA project team during the past four months can be categorized as follows: (1) maintained open communication with DOE on a variety of activities and issues within the DOE environmental management complex; (2) maintained communication with NGA Federal Facilities Compliance Task Force members regarding DOE efforts to formulate a configuration for mixed low-level waste and low-level treatment and disposal, external regulation of DOE; and EM Integration activities; and (3) continued to serve as a liaison between the NGA FFCA Task Force states and the Department.

Ann B. Beauchesne

1998-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

174

DOE-STD-1181-2004; Facility Maintenance Management Functional Area Qualification Standard  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE-STD-1181-2004 March 2004 DOE STANDARD FACILITY MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONAL AREA QUALIFICATION STANDARD DOE Defense Nuclear Facilities Technical Personnel U.S. Department of Energy AREA TRNG Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. DOE-STD-1181-2004 i This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from ES&H Technical Information Services, U.S. Department of Energy, (800) 473-4375, fax: (301) 903-9823. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 605-6000. DOE-STD-1181-2004 ii

175

Access to High Technology User Facilities at DOE National Laboratories |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Access to High Technology User Facilities at DOE National Access to High Technology User Facilities at DOE National Laboratories Access to High Technology User Facilities at DOE National Laboratories In recognition of the nation's expanding need to engage businesses and universities in the areas of commercial and basic science research, the Department has developed two special types of agreements for use at all DOE National Laboratories with approved designated user facilities. For non-commercial, basic science research, researchers may seek to use the Non-proprietary User Agreement. Under this type of agreement, the user pays its own costs of the research with the DOE laboratory, may access specialized laboratory equipment and collaborate with laboratory scientists. The non-proprietary user and the National Laboratory retain

176

DOE Applauds Opening of Historic Disposal Facility | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Applauds Opening of Historic Disposal Facility Applauds Opening of Historic Disposal Facility DOE Applauds Opening of Historic Disposal Facility June 6, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis The Waste Control Specialists Federal Waste Disposal Facility in Andrews, Texas. The Waste Control Specialists Federal Waste Disposal Facility in Andrews, Texas. ANDREWS, Texas - DOE officials participated in an event today to celebrate the opening of the first commercial disposal facility of its kind. EM Senior Advisor Dave Huizenga and several other federal, state and local officials attended the event at Waste Control Specialists (WCS) in Andrews and witnessed the first container being placed in the new state-of-the-art facility. WCS is a waste processing and disposal company. "I am proud to be here today to celebrate this historic event. We

177

Facilities | U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC)  

Office of Science (SC) Website

Facilities Facilities High Energy Physics (HEP) HEP Home About Research Facilities Facility Ops Experiments at the Energy Frontier Experiments at the Intensity Frontier Experiments at the Cosmic Frontier Projects, Missions, and Status HEP User Facilities Science Highlights Benefits of HEP Funding Opportunities Advisory Committees News & Resources Contact Information High Energy Physics U.S. Department of Energy SC-25/Germantown Building 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20585 P: (301) 903-3624 F: (301) 903-2597 E: sc.hep@science.doe.gov More Information » Facilities Print Text Size: A A A RSS Feeds FeedbackShare Page The Facilities Division supports a broad range of activities that include operations and maintenance of accelerator facilities here and abroad, development of new facilities, general accelerator R&D that covers magnet

178

Code of Federal Regulations PROCEDURAL RULES FOR DOE NUCLEAR...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

PROCEDURAL RULES FOR DOE NUCLEAR ACTIVITIES Code of Federal Regulations PROCEDURAL RULES FOR DOE NUCLEAR ACTIVITIES This part sets forth the procedures to govern the conduct of...

179

DOE P 420.1 Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Policy, Approved: 2-08-2011  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE P 420.1 Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Policy, Approved: DOE P 420.1 Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Policy, Approved: 2-08-2011 DOE P 420.1 Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Policy, Approved: 2-08-2011 PURPOSE: To document the Department of Energy's (DOE) nuclear safety policy. SCOPE: The provisions of this policy apply to all Departmental elements with responsibility for a nuclear facility, except the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, which is separately covered under Executive Order 12344, Title 50 United States Code, sections 2406 and 2511. This Policy cancels Secretary of Energy Notice 35-91, Nuclear Safety Policy, dated 9-9-91. POLICY: It is the policy of the Department of Energy to design, construct, operate, and decommission its nuclear facilities in a manner that ensures adequate protection of workers, the public, and the environment.

180

Heat Transfer Modeling of Dry Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage Facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The present work was undertaken to provide heat transfer model that accurately predicts the thermal performance of dry spent nuclear fuel storage facilities. One of the storage configurations being considered for DOE Aluminum-clad Spent Nuclear Fuel (Al-SNF), such as the Material and Testing Reactor (MTR) fuel, is in a dry storage facility. To support design studies of storage options a computational and experimental program has been conducted at the Savannah River Site (SRS). The main objective is to develop heat transfer models including natural convection effects internal to an interim dry storage canister and to geological codisposal Waste Package (WP). Calculated temperatures will be used to demonstrate engineering viability of a dry storage option in enclosed interim storage and geological repository WP and to assess the chemical and physical behaviors of the Al-SNF in the dry storage facilities. The current paper describes the modeling approaches and presents the computational results along with the experimental data.

Lee, S.Y.

1999-01-13T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "doe nuclear facilities" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


181

THE NGA-DOE GRANT TO EXAMINE CRITICAL ISSUES RELATED TO RADIOACTIVE WASTE AND MATERIALS DISPOSITION INVOLVING DOE FACILITIES  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Through the National Governors' Association (NGA) project ''Critical Issues Related to Radioactive Waste and Materials Disposition Involving DOE Facilities'' NGA brings together Governors' policy advisors, state regulators, and DOE officials to examine critical issues related to the cleanup and operation of DOE nuclear weapons and research facilities. Topics explored through this project include: Decisions involving disposal of mixed, low-level, and transuranic (TRU) waste and disposition of nuclear materials. Decisions involving DOE budget requests and their effect on environmental cleanup and compliance at DOE facilities. Strategies to treat mixed, low-level, and transuranic (TRU) waste and their effect on individual sites in the complex. Changes to the FFCA site treatment plans as a result of proposals in the Department's Accelerating Cleanup: Paths to Closure plan and contractor integration analysis. Interstate waste and materials shipments. Reforms to existing RCRA and CERCLA regulations/guidance to address regulatory overlap and risks posed by DOE wastes. The overarching theme of this project is to help the Department improve coordination of its major program decisions with Governors' offices and state regulators and to ensure such decisions reflect input from these key state officials and stakeholders. This report summarizes activities conducted during the period from April 1, 2001 through June 30, 2001, under the NGA grant.

Ethan W. Brown

2001-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

182

DOE Community-/Facility-Scale Tribal Renewable Energy Project Development  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE Community-/Facility-Scale Tribal Renewable Energy Project DOE Community-/Facility-Scale Tribal Renewable Energy Project Development and Finance Workshop DOE Community-/Facility-Scale Tribal Renewable Energy Project Development and Finance Workshop September 18, 2013 (All day) to September 20, 2013 (All day) This interactive workshop will walk participants through five steps to help tribes understand the process for and potential pitfalls of developing community- and facility-scale renewable energy projects. Attendees will learn how the development of a renewable energy project could further a tribe's goals, and hear from other tribes about their experiences. This workshop is specifically designed for, and limited to, elected tribal leaders and tribal executives, accountants, and attorneys interested in gaining knowledge and confidence to develop community- and facility-scale

183

Facility Ops | U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC)  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Facility Ops Facility Ops High Energy Physics (HEP) HEP Home About Research Facilities Facility Ops Experiments at the Energy Frontier Experiments at the Intensity Frontier Experiments at the Cosmic Frontier Projects, Missions, and Status HEP User Facilities Science Highlights Benefits of HEP Funding Opportunities Advisory Committees News & Resources Contact Information High Energy Physics U.S. Department of Energy SC-25/Germantown Building 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20585 P: (301) 903-3624 F: (301) 903-2597 E: sc.hep@science.doe.gov More Information » Facilities Facility Ops Print Text Size: A A A RSS Feeds FeedbackShare Page The Facility Operations division supports major operations at the Fermilab Tevatron Complex, U.S. LHC Operations, and operations at other labs as

184

Reports to the DOE Nuclear Data Committee  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The report in this document were submitted to the Department of Energy, Nuclear Data Committee (DOE-NDC) in April 1988. The reporting laboratories are those with a substantial program for the measurement of neutron and nuclear cross sections of relevance to the US applied nuclear energy program. Appropriate subjects are microscopic neutron cross sections relevant to the nuclear energy program, including shielding. Inverse reactions where pertinent are included; charged-particle cross sections where relevant to developing and testing nuclear models; gamma ray production, radioactive decay, and theoretical developments in nuclear structure which are applicable to nuclear energy programs; and proton and alpha-particle cross sections, at energies of up to 1 GeV, which are of interest to the space program.

Not Available

1988-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

185

Risk management activities at the DOE Class A reactor facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) and risk management group of the Association for Excellence in Reactor Operation (AERO) develops risk management initiatives and standards to improve operation and increase safety of the DOE Class A reactor facilities. Principal risk management applications that have been implemented at each facility are reviewed. The status of a program to develop guidelines for risk management programs at reactor facilities is presented.

Sharp, D.A. [Westinghouse Savannah River Co., Aiken, SC (United States); Hill, D.J. [Argonne National Lab., IL (United States); Linn, M.A. [Oak Ridge National Lab., TN (United States); Atkinson, S.A. [EG and G Idaho, Inc., Idaho Falls, ID (United States); Hu, J.P. [Brookhaven National Lab., Upton, NY (United States)

1993-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

186

DOE Standard Integration Of Environment,Safety, and Health Into Facility  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Standard Integration Of Environment,Safety, and Health Into Standard Integration Of Environment,Safety, and Health Into Facility Disposition Activities DOE Standard Integration Of Environment,Safety, and Health Into Facility Disposition Activities The original release of DOE-STD-1120-98 provided integrated safety management guidance for enhancing worker, public, and environmental protection during all facility disposition activities. Volume One of this Standard has been revised to provide a Department of Energy (DOE) approved methodology for preparing a Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) for decommissioning of nuclear facilities, as well as environmental restoration activities that involve work not done within a permanent structure. Methodologies provided in this Standard are intended to be compliant with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part

187

Updated Costs for Decommissioning Nuclear Power Facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This update of 1978 NRC cost estimates--in 1984 dollars--also estimates the costs of several special manpower and licensing options for decommissioning nuclear power facilities. The fully developed methodology offers utilities a sound basis on which to estimate the costs of decommissioning specific plants.

1985-05-13T23:59:59.000Z

188

2012 Facility EMS Annual Report Data (DOE-LM) | Department of...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Facility EMS Annual Report Data (DOE-LM) 2012 Facility EMS Annual Report Data (DOE-LM) 2012 Facility EMS Annual Report Data (DOE-LM) 2012 More Documents & Publications 2011...

189

CRAD, Nuclear Facility Construction - Structural Steel, May 29, 2009 |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Steel, May 29, Steel, May 29, 2009 CRAD, Nuclear Facility Construction - Structural Steel, May 29, 2009 May 29, 2009 Nuclear Facility Construction - Structural Steel (HSS CRAD 64-16, Rev. 0) Nuclear Facility Construction - Structural Steel criteria, review, and approach document, observes construction activities and review records and design documentation to assess the quality of structural steel fabrication and erection and to determine if requirements specified by design basis documents, contracts, and applicable codes and standards have been met. CRAD, Nuclear Facility Construction - Structural Steel, May 29, 2009 More Documents & Publications CRAD, Nuclear Facility Construction - Structural Concrete, May 29, 2009 CRAD, Nuclear Facility Construction - Mechanical Equipment - June 26, 2012

190

DOE Signs Advanced Enrichment Technology License and Facility Lease |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Advanced Enrichment Technology License and Facility Lease Advanced Enrichment Technology License and Facility Lease DOE Signs Advanced Enrichment Technology License and Facility Lease December 8, 2006 - 9:34am Addthis Announces Agreements with USEC Enabling Deployment of Advanced Domestic Technology for Uranium Enrichment WASHINGTON, DC - U.S. Secretary of Energy Samuel W. Bodman today announced the signing of a lease agreement with the United States Enrichment Corporation, Inc. (USEC) for their use of the Department's gas centrifuge enrichment plant (GCEP) facilities in Piketon, OH for their American Centrifuge Plant. The Department of Energy (DOE) also granted a non-exclusive patent license to USEC for use of DOE's centrifuge technology for uranium enrichment at the plant, which will initiate the first successful deployment of advanced domestic enrichment technology in the

191

DOE-STD-1063-2000 - Facility Representatives  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

NOT MEASUREMENT NOT MEASUREMENT SENSITIVE DOE-STD-1063-2000 March 2000 Superseding DOE-STD-1063-97 October 1997 DOE STANDARD FACILITY REPRESENTATIVES U.S. Department of Energy AREA MGMT Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. TS This document has been reproduced from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from ES&H Technical Information Services, U.S. Department of Energy, (800) 473-4375, fax: (301) 903-9823. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 605-6000. DOE-STD-1063-2000 iii FOREWORD 1. This Department of Energy standard is approved for use by all DOE Components. 2. The Revision to this DOE standard was developed by a working group consisting of

192

2012 DOE Facility Representatives/SSO Workshop Presentation ...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

requirements for explosive, chemical, and industrial hazards are contained in other DOE Rules and Directives. 4 CD NS Chief, Defense Nuclear Safety 420.1C - 420.1B NS , y...

193

Safeguards-by-Design: Early Integration of Physical Protection and Safeguardability into Design of Nuclear Facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The application of a Safeguards-by-Design (SBD) process for new nuclear facilities has the potential to minimize proliferation and security risks as the use of nuclear energy expands worldwide. This paper defines a generic SBD process and its incorporation from early design phases into existing design / construction processes and develops a framework that can guide its institutionalization. SBD could be a basis for a new international norm and standard process for nuclear facility design. This work is part of the U.S. DOEs Next Generation Safeguards Initiative (NGSI), and is jointly sponsored by the Offices of Non-proliferation and Nuclear Energy.

T. Bjornard; R. Bean; S. DeMuth; P. Durst; M. Ehinger; M. Golay; D. Hebditch; J. Hockert; J. Morgan

2009-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

194

The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board - Strategic Plan...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

all of its defense nuclear facilities. Message from the Board Peter S. Winokur, Chariman Jessie H. Roberson, Vice Chariman John E. Mansfield Joseph F. Bader DEFENSE NUCLEAR...

195

DOE-STD-1151-2002; Facility Representative Functional Area Qualification Standard  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

1151-2002 1151-2002 April 2002 DOE STANDARD FACILITY REPRESENTATIVE FUNCTIONAL AREA QUALIFICATION STANDARD DOE Defense Nuclear Facilities Technical Personnel U.S. Department of Energy AREA TRNG Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from ES&H Technical Information Services, U.S. Department of Energy, (800) 473-4375, fax: (301) 903-9823. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 605-6000. DOE-STD-1151-2002 iii APPROVAL The Federal Technical Capability Panel consists of senior Department of Energy managers

196

DOE Permitting Hydrogen Facilities: Hydrogen Fueling Stations  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Stations Stations Public-use hydrogen fueling stations are very much like gasoline ones. In fact, sometimes, hydrogen and gasoline cars can be fueled at the same station. These stations offer self-service pumps, convenience stores, and other services in high-traffic locations. Photo of a Shell fueling station showing the site convenience store and hydrogen and gasoline fuel pumps. This fueling station in Washington, D.C., provides drivers with both hydrogen and gasoline fuels Many future hydrogen fueling stations will be expansions of existing fueling stations. These facilities will offer hydrogen pumps in addition to gasoline or natural gas pumps. Other hydrogen fueling stations will be "standalone" operations. These stations will be designed and constructed to

197

Safety Software Guide Perspectives for the Design of New Nuclear Facilities (U)  

SciTech Connect

In June of this year, the Department of Energy (DOE) issued directives DOE O 414.1C and DOE G 414.1-4 to improve quality assurance programs, processes, and procedures among its safety contractors. Specifically, guidance entitled, ''Safety Software Guide for use with 10 CFR 830 Subpart A, Quality Assurance Requirements, and DOE O 414.1C, Quality Assurance, DOE G 414.1-4'', provides information and acceptable methods to comply with safety software quality assurance (SQA) requirements. The guidance provides a roadmap for meeting DOE O 414.1C, ''Quality Assurance'', and the quality assurance program (QAP) requirements of Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 830, Subpart A, Quality Assurance, for DOE nuclear facilities and software application activities. [1, 2] The order and guide are part of a comprehensive implementation plan that addresses issues and concerns documented in Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Recommendation 2002-1. [3] Safety SQA requirements for DOE as well as National Nuclear Security Administration contractors are necessary to implement effective quality assurance (QA) processes and achieve safe nuclear facility operations. DOE G 414.1-4 was developed to provide guidance on establishing and implementing effective QA processes tied specifically to nuclear facility safety software applications. The Guide includes software application practices covered by appropriate national and international consensus standards and various processes currently in use at DOE facilities. While the safety software guidance is considered to be of sufficient rigor and depth to ensure acceptable reliability of safety software at all DOE nuclear facilities, new nuclear facilities are well suited to take advantage of the guide to ensure compliant programs and processes are implemented. Attributes such as the facility life-cycle stage and the hazardous nature of each facility operations are considered, along with the category and level of importance of the software. The discussion provided herein illustrates benefits of applying the Safety Software Guide to work activities dependent on software applications and directed toward the design of new nuclear facilities. In particular, the Guide-based systematic approach with software enables design processes to effectively proceed and reduce the likelihood of rework activities. Several application examples are provided for the new facility.

VINCENT, Andrew

2005-07-14T23:59:59.000Z

198

Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions  

SciTech Connect

The 394 abstracted references on environmental restoration, nuclear facility decommissioning, uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions constitute the eleventh in a series of reports prepared annually for the US Department of Energy's Remedial Action Programs. Citations to foreign and domestic literature of all types -- technical reports, progress reports, journal articles, symposia proceedings, theses, books, patents, legislation, and research project descriptions -- have been included. The bibliography contains scientific, technical, economic, regulatory, and legal information pertinent to the US Department of Energy's Remedial Action Programs. Major sections are (1) Surplus Facilities Management Program, (2) Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning, (3) Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Programs, (4) Facilities Contaminated with Naturally Occurring Radionuclides, (5) Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program, (6) Grand Junction Remedial Action Program, (7) Uranium Mill Tailings Management, (8) Technical Measurements Center, (9) Remedial Action Program, and (10) Environmental Restoration Program. Within these categories, references are arranged alphabetically by first author. Those references having no individual author are listed by corporate affiliation or by publication title. Indexes are provided for author, corporate affiliation, title word, publication description, geographic location, subject category, and keywords. This report is a product of the Remedial Action Program Information Center (RAPIC), which selects and analyzes information on remedial actions and relevant radioactive waste management technologies.

Knox, N.P.; Webb, J.R.; Ferguson, S.D.; Goins, L.F.; Owen, P.T.

1990-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

199

Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions  

SciTech Connect

The 576 abstracted references on nuclear facility decommissioning, uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions constitute the tenth in a series of reports prepared annually for the US Department of Energy's Remedial Action Programs. Citations to foreign and domestic literature of all types--technical reports, progress reports, journal articles, symposia proceedings, theses, books, patents, legislation, and research project descriptions--have been included. The bibliography contains scientific, technical, economic, regulatory, and legal information pertinent to the US Department of Energy's Remedial Action Programs. Major sections are (1) Surplus Facilities Management Program, (2) Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning, (3) Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program, (4) Facilities Contaminated with Naturally Occurring Radionuclides, (5) Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program, (6) Uranium Mill Tailings Management, (7) Technical Measurements Center, and (8) General Remedial Action Program Studies. Within these categories, references are arranged alphabetically by first author. Those references having no individual author are listed by corporate affiliation or by publication description. Indexes are provided for author, corporate affiliation, title work, publication description, geographic location, subject category, and keywords.

Owen, P.T.; Knox, N.P.; Ferguson, S.D.; Fielden, J.M.; Schumann, P.L.

1989-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

200

Maintenance Guide for DOE Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

4 4 G Approved: XX-XX-XX IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE for use with DOE M 435.1-1 Maintenance Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Performance Assessments and Composite Analyses U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DOE G 435.1-4 i (and ii) DRAFT XX-XX-XX LLW Maintenance Guide Revision 0, XX-XX-XX Maintenance Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Performance Assessments and Composite Analyses CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.1 Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.2 Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.3 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.3.1 Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "doe nuclear facilities" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


201

DOE Order 344.1A, Parking at the Forrestal Facility  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

344.1A 344.1A Approved: 11-2-01 Admin Chg 1: 11-19-04 This directive was reviewed and certified as current and necessary by Susan J. Grant, Director, Office of Management, Budget and Evaluation/Chief Financial Officer, 11-19-04. SUBJECT: PARKING 1. OBJECTIVES. To define policies and procedures governing the assignment, use, and management of parking spaces controlled by the Department of Energy (DOE) in the Forrestal Facility. 2. CANCELLATION. This Order cancels HQ O 344.1, Parking, dated 3-5-97. 3. APPLICABILITY. This Order applies to DOE Federal employees, including National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Federal employees, parking at DOE Headquarters in the Forrestal Building. 4. REQUIREMENTS. a. General. It is the policy of DOE that its parking facility be operated in a manner

202

Nuclear Power Generating Facilities (Maine) | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Nuclear Power Generating Facilities (Maine) Nuclear Power Generating Facilities (Maine) Nuclear Power Generating Facilities (Maine) < Back Eligibility Agricultural Commercial Construction Fed. Government Fuel Distributor General Public/Consumer Industrial Installer/Contractor Institutional Investor-Owned Utility Local Government Low-Income Residential Multi-Family Residential Municipal/Public Utility Nonprofit Residential Retail Supplier Rural Electric Cooperative Schools State/Provincial Govt Systems Integrator Transportation Tribal Government Utility Program Info State Maine Program Type Siting and Permitting Provider Radiation Control Program The first subchapter of the statute concerning Nuclear Power Generating Facilities provides for direct citizen participation in the decision to construct any nuclear power generating facility in Maine. The Legislature

203

Financing Strategies for Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facility  

SciTech Connect

To help meet our nations energy needs, reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel is being considered more and more as a necessary step in a future nuclear fuel cycle, but incorporating this step into the fuel cycle will require considerable investment. This report presents an evaluation of financing scenarios for reprocessing facilities integrated into the nuclear fuel cycle. A range of options, from fully government owned to fully private owned, was evaluated using a DPL (Dynamic Programming Language) 6.0 model, which can systematically optimize outcomes based on user-defined criteria (e.g., lowest life-cycle cost, lowest unit cost). Though all business decisions follow similar logic with regard to financing, reprocessing facilities are an exception due to the range of financing options available. The evaluation concludes that lowest unit costs and lifetime costs follow a fully government-owned financing strategy, due to government forgiveness of debt as sunk costs. Other financing arrangements, however, including regulated utility ownership and a hybrid ownership scheme, led to acceptable costs, below the Nuclear Energy Agency published estimates. Overwhelmingly, uncertainty in annual capacity led to the greatest fluctuations in unit costs necessary for recovery of operating and capital expenditures; the ability to determine annual capacity will be a driving factor in setting unit costs. For private ventures, the costs of capital, especially equity interest rates, dominate the balance sheet; the annual operating costs dominate the government case. It is concluded that to finance the construction and operation of such a facility without government ownership could be feasible with measures taken to mitigate risk, and that factors besides unit costs should be considered (e.g., legal issues, social effects, proliferation concerns) before making a decision on financing strategy.

David Shropshire; Sharon Chandler

2005-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

204

Facility Safety Assessment - Nuclear Engineering Division (Argonne...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Nuclear Safety Materials Disposition Decontamination & Decommissioning Nuclear Criticality Safety Nuclear Data Program Nuclear Waste Form Modeling Departments Engineering...

205

Computer Facilities - Nuclear Engineering Division (Argonne)  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Nuclear Safety Materials Disposition Decontamination & Decommissioning Nuclear Criticality Safety Nuclear Data Program Nuclear Waste Form Modeling Departments Engineering...

206

Steam Generator Tube Integrity Facilities - Nuclear Engineering...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Nuclear Safety Materials Disposition Decontamination & Decommissioning Nuclear Criticality Safety Nuclear Data Program Nuclear Waste Form Modeling Departments Engineering...

207

DOE site facility mgt contracts Internet Posting 5-2-11.xlsx...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

site facility mgt contracts Internet Posting 5-2-11.xlsx DOE site facility mgt contracts Internet Posting 5-2-11.xlsx DOE site facility mgt contracts Internet Posting 5-2-11.xlsx...

208

DOE Order 344.1A, Parking at the Forrestal Facility | Department...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Facility DOE Order 344.1A, Parking at the Forrestal Facility Define Policies and procedures governing parking at the Forrestal facility DOE Order 344.1A, Parking at the...

209

DOE O 410.2, Management of Nuclear Materials  

Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

To establish requirements for the lifecycle management of DOE owned and/or managed accountable nuclear materials. Cancels DOE O 5660.1B.

2009-08-17T23:59:59.000Z

210

Guidelines for preparing criticality safety evaluations at Department of Energy non-reactor nuclear facilities  

SciTech Connect

This document contains guidelines that should be followed when preparing Criticality Safety Evaluations that will be used to demonstrate the safety of operations performed at DOE non-reactor nuclear facilities. Adherence to these guidelines will provide consistency and uniformity in criticality safety evaluations (CSEs) across the complex and will document compliance with the requirements of DOE Order 5480.24.

1993-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

211

DOE-HDBK-1019/2-93; DOE Fundamentals Handbook Nuclear Physics and Reactor Theory Volume 2 of 2  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

2-93 2-93 JANUARY 1993 DOE FUNDAMENTALS HANDBOOK NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND REACTOR THEORY Volume 2 of 2 U.S. Department of Energy FSC-6910 Washington, D.C. 20585 Distribution Statement A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831. Available to the public from the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal., Springfield, VA 22161. Order No. DE93012223 DOE-HDBK-1019/1-93 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND REACTOR THEORY ABSTRACT The Nuclear Physics and Reactor Theory Handbook was developed to assist nuclear facility operating contractors in providing operators, maintenance personnel, and the technical

212

DOE Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Program: Office of Nuclear Energy  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Fossil Energy Nuclear Energy Science U.S. Department of Energy Search help Home > DOE Participants > Office of Nuclear Energy Printable...

213

CTBTO Officials Visit DOE Labs and NNSA HQ | National Nuclear...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

CTBTO Officials Visit DOE Labs and NNSA HQ | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy...

214

DOE Announces Loan Guarantee Applications for Nuclear Power Plant...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Loan Guarantee Applications for Nuclear Power Plant Construction DOE Announces Loan Guarantee Applications for Nuclear Power Plant Construction October 2, 2008 - 3:43pm Addthis...

215

DOE Office of Nuclear Energy Transportation Planning, Route Selection...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Office of Nuclear Energy Transportation Planning, Route Selection, and Rail Issues DOE Office of Nuclear Energy Transportation Planning, Route Selection, and Rail Issues...

216

DOE Thermochemical Users Facility: A Proving Ground for Biomass Technology  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

The National Bioenergy Center at the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) provides a state-of-the-art Thermochemical Users Facility (TCUF) for converting renewable, biomass feedstocks into a variety of products, including electricity, high-value chemicals, and transportation fuels.

Not Available

2003-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

217

DOE-STD-3003-2000; Backup Power Sources for DOE Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE-STD-3003-2000 January 2000 Superseding DOE-STD-3003-94 September 1994 DOE STANDARD BACKUP POWER SOURCES FOR DOE FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy AREA EDCN Washington, D.C. 20858 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. METRIC This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from ES&H Technical Information Services, U.S. Department of Energy, (800) 473-4375, fax: (301) 903-9823. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 605-6000. DOE-STD-3003-2000 iii FOREWORD 1. This Standard is approved for use by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). This

218

Safety of Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Full text of publication follows: ensuring safety during all stages of facility life cycle is a widely recognised responsibility of the operators, implemented under the supervision of the regulatory body and other competent authorities. As the majority of the facilities worldwide are still in operation or shutdown, there is no substantial experience in decommissioning and evaluation of safety during decommissioning in majority of Member States. The need for cooperation and exchange of experience and good practices on ensuring and evaluating safety of decommissioning was one of the outcomes of the Berlin conference in 2002. On this basis during the last three years IAEA initiated a number of international projects that can assist countries, in particular small countries with limited resources. The main IAEA international projects addressing safety during decommissioning are: (i) DeSa Project on Evaluation and Demonstration of Safety during Decommissioning; (ii) R{sup 2}D{sup 2}P project on Research Reactors Decommissioning Demonstration Project; and (iii) Project on Evaluation and Decommissioning of Former Facilities that used Radioactive Material in Iraq. This paper focuses on the DeSa Project activities on (i) development of a harmonised methodology for safety assessment for decommissioning; (ii) development of a procedure for review of safety assessments; (iii) development of recommendations on application of the graded approach to the performance and review of safety assessments; and (iv) application of the methodology and procedure to the selected real facilities with different complexities and hazard potentials (a nuclear power plant, a research reactor and a nuclear laboratory). The paper also outlines the DeSa Project outcomes and planned follow-up activities. It also summarises the main objectives and activities of the Iraq Project and introduces the R{sup 2}D{sup 2} Project, which is a subject of a complementary paper.

Batandjieva, B.; Warnecke, E.; Coates, R. [International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna (Austria)

2008-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

219

Facilities | U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC)  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Facilities Facilities Fusion Energy Sciences (FES) FES Home About Research Facilities ITER External link DIII-D External link National Spherical Torus Experiment (NSTX) External link Alcator C-Mod External link Science Highlights Benefits of FES Funding Opportunities Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (FESAC) News & Resources Contact Information Fusion Energy Sciences U.S. Department of Energy SC-24/Germantown Building 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20585 P: (301) 903-4941 F: (301) 903-8584 E: sc.fes@science.doe.gov More Information » Facilities Print Text Size: A A A RSS Feeds FeedbackShare Page ITER ITER (Latin for "the way") is a critical step between today's studies of plasma physics and tomorrow's fusion power plants producing electricity and hydrogen. An unprecedented international collaboration of scientists

220

Groundbreaking at National Ignition Facility | National Nuclear Security  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Groundbreaking at National Ignition Facility | National Nuclear Security Groundbreaking at National Ignition Facility | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Continuing Management Reform Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Us Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Media Room Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Speeches Events Social Media Video Gallery Photo Gallery NNSA Archive Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Home > About Us > Our History > NNSA Timeline > Groundbreaking at National Ignition Facility Groundbreaking at National Ignition Facility May 29, 1997 Livermore, CA Groundbreaking at National Ignition Facility

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "doe nuclear facilities" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


221

MISSION AND NEED FOR A FUSION NUCLEAR SCIENCE FACILITY  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

MISSION AND NEED FOR A FUSION NUCLEAR SCIENCE FACILITY Mission Gerald Navratil Need Mohamed Abdou and Symposium 1-2 December 2010 #12;FUSION NUCLEAR SCIENCE FACILITY: COMMENTS ON MISSION Gerald A. Navratil Component Test Facility Theory & Simulation FESAC/Snowmass Report: ITER-Based Development Path #12;FUSION

222

NYU-DOE Pressurized Fluidized Bed Combustor Facility  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

New York University (NYU), under a Department of Energy (DOE) Contract, has designed and constructed a sub-pilot scale Pressurized Fluidized-Bed Combustor (PFBC) Facility at the Antonio Ferri Laboratories, Westbury, Long Island. The basic feature of this Experimental Research Facility is a well-instrumented, 30-inch diameter coal combustor capable of operating up to 10 atm and provided with a liberal number of ports, making it a versatile unit for study of fundamental in-bed phenomena. Additionally, the overall design features make it a flexible facility for solving a variety of industrial research problems. The main objectives of the facility are two-fold: (1) to perform research in important areas of Pressurized Fluidized-Bed Combustion like low-grade fuel combustion under pressure; and (2) to provide the PFBC community with a experimental research tool for basic and applied research in order to accelerate the commercialization of this technology. New York University will initially test the facility of burning low-grade fuels under pressure. During the test program, emphasis will be placed on burning North Dakota lignite under pressures up to 7 atm. The performance of lignite with regard to its feeding, combustion efficiency, sulfur adsorption and sorbent requirements will be investigated. This report describes the various systems of the PFBC facility and operating procedures, and presents an outline of the test program planned for the facility. Other details are provided in the Equipment and Maintenance Manual, Test Program and Data Acquisition Manual, and Training Manual.

Zakkay, V.; Kolar, A.; Sellakumar, K.; Srinivasaragavan, S.; Miller, G.; Panunzio, S.; Joseph, A.; Sundaresan, C.

1983-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

223

DOE-STD-3026-99; DOE Standard Filter Test Facility Quality Program Plan  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

6-99 6-99 February 1999 Superseding DOE NE F 3-44 July 1986 DOE STANDARD FILTER TEST FACILITY QUALITY PROGRAM PLAN U.S. Department of Energy FSC 4460 Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from ES&H Technical Information Services, U.S. Department of Energy, (800) 473-4375, fax: (301) 903-9823. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 605-6000. DOE-STD-3026-99 iii FOREWORD This Department of Energy standard supercedes DOE NE F 3-44 and is approved for use by all DOE components and their contractors.

224

Technical Basis for U. S. Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Policy, DOE  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Technical Basis for U. S. Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Policy, DOE Policy 420.1 This document provides the technical basis for the Department of Energy (DOE) Policy (P) 420.1, Nuclear Safety Policy, dated 2-8-2011. It includes an analysis of the revised Policy to determine whether it provides the necessary and sufficient high-level expectations that will lead DOE to establish and implement appropriate requirements to assure protection of the public, workers, and the environment from the hazards of DOE's operation of nuclear facilities. In developing the revised Policy and performing this analysis, DOE reviewed the current Nuclear Safety Policy (Secretary of Energy Notice [SEN] 35-91, Nuclear Safety Policy) and safety policies established by other safety

225

Nuclear fuel cycle facility accident analysis handbook  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The purpose of this Handbook is to provide guidance on how to calculate the characteristics of releases of radioactive materials and/or hazardous chemicals from nonreactor nuclear facilities. In addition, the Handbook provides guidance on how to calculate the consequences of those releases. There are four major chapters: Hazard Evaluation and Scenario Development; Source Term Determination; Transport Within Containment/Confinement; and Atmospheric Dispersion and Consequences Modeling. These chapters are supported by Appendices, including: a summary of chemical and nuclear information that contains descriptions of various fuel cycle facilities; details on how to calculate the characteristics of source terms for releases of hazardous chemicals; a comparison of NRC, EPA, and OSHA programs that address chemical safety; a summary of the performance of HEPA and other filters; and a discussion of uncertainties. Several sample problems are presented: a free-fall spill of powder, an explosion with radioactive release; a fire with radioactive release; filter failure; hydrogen fluoride release from a tankcar; a uranium hexafluoride cylinder rupture; a liquid spill in a vitrification plant; and a criticality incident. Finally, this Handbook includes a computer model, LPF No.1B, that is intended for use in calculating Leak Path Factors. A list of contributors to the Handbook is presented in Chapter 6. 39 figs., 35 tabs.

NONE

1998-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

226

EM Issues Amended Decision to Expand Use of Nuclear Facility | Department  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Issues Amended Decision to Expand Use of Nuclear Facility Issues Amended Decision to Expand Use of Nuclear Facility EM Issues Amended Decision to Expand Use of Nuclear Facility April 1, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis H-Canyon at Savannah River Site. The building is called a canyon because of its long rectangular shape and two continuous trenches that contains process vessels. H-Canyon at Savannah River Site. The building is called a canyon because of its long rectangular shape and two continuous trenches that contains process vessels. AIKEN, S.C. - EM issued an amended Record of Decision (ROD) to the Savannah River Site (SRS) Spent Nuclear Fuel Environmental Impact Statement to expand the operations of the H-Canyon Facility at SRS to support a major nuclear non-proliferation goal and save taxpayer dollars. DOE recently signed a contract allowing Atomic Energy of Canada Limited

227

EM Issues Amended Decision to Expand Use of Nuclear Facility | Department  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

EM Issues Amended Decision to Expand Use of Nuclear Facility EM Issues Amended Decision to Expand Use of Nuclear Facility EM Issues Amended Decision to Expand Use of Nuclear Facility April 1, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis H-Canyon at Savannah River Site. The building is called a canyon because of its long rectangular shape and two continuous trenches that contains process vessels. H-Canyon at Savannah River Site. The building is called a canyon because of its long rectangular shape and two continuous trenches that contains process vessels. AIKEN, S.C. - EM issued an amended Record of Decision (ROD) to the Savannah River Site (SRS) Spent Nuclear Fuel Environmental Impact Statement to expand the operations of the H-Canyon Facility at SRS to support a major nuclear non-proliferation goal and save taxpayer dollars. DOE recently signed a contract allowing Atomic Energy of Canada Limited

228

DOE LABORATORY, DOE USER FACILITY EMSL is a national scientific user facility located at Pacific  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Northwest National Laboratory. EMSL'S USEr FaciLity PrograM How to Become a User www.EMSL.PNNL.gOv EMSL-emsl_announcements@lyris.pnl.gov. For general proposal inquiries, contact the EMSL User Support Office: emsl@pnnl.gov 509-371-6003 Geochemistry. PNNL's mission is to deliver leadership and advancements in science, energy, national security

229

An assessment of testing requirement impacts on nuclear thermal propulsion ground test facility design  

SciTech Connect

Programs to develop solid core nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP) systems have been under way at the Department of Defense (DoD), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and the Department of Energy (DOE). These programs have recognized the need for a new ground test facility to support development of NTP systems. However, the different military and civilian applications have led to different ground test facility requirements. The Department of Energy (DOE) in its role as landlord and operator of the proposed research reactor test facilities has initiated an effort to explore opportunities for a common ground test facility to meet both DoD and NASA needs. The baseline design and operating limits of the proposed DoD NTP ground test facility are described. The NASA ground test facility requirements are reviewed and their potential impact on the DoD facility baseline is discussed.

Shipers, L.R.; Ottinger, C.A.; Sanchez, L.C.

1993-10-25T23:59:59.000Z

230

Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee, Facility Subcommittee visit to Idaho National Laboratory May 19-20, 2010  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Committee, Facility Subcommittee visit to Idaho National Committee, Facility Subcommittee visit to Idaho National Laboratory May 19-20, 2010 The Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee, Facility Subcommittee visited the Idaho National Laboratory on 19-20 May 2010 to tour the nuclear infrastructure and to discuss the INL plans for facility modernization as a dimension of the DOE Office of Nuclear Energy's (NE) mission. Team Members: Dr. John Ahearne, Sigma Xi, Research Triangle Park, NC Dr. Dana Christensen, Oak Ridge National Laboratory Dr. Thomas Cochran, Natural Resource Defense Council, Washington DC Dr. Andrew Klein, Oregon State University (second day only) Mr. Paul Murray, AREVA Federal Services Dr. John I. Sackett, Idaho National Laboratory, Retired, Support: Andrew Griffith, DOE/NE

231

The necessity for permanence : making a nuclear waste storage facility  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

The United States Department of Energy is proposing to build a nuclear waste storage facility in southern Nevada. This facility will be designed to last 10,000 years. It must prevent the waste from contaminating the ...

Stupay, Robert Irving

1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

232

PNC/DOE Remote Monitoring Project at Japan`s Joyo Facility  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel Development Corporation (PNC) of Japan and the US Department of Energy (DOE) are cooperating on the development of a remote monitoring system for nuclear nonproliferation efforts. This cooperation is part of a broader safeguards agreement between PNC and DOE. A remote monitoring system is being installed in a spent fuel storage area at PNC`s experimental reactor facility Joyo in Oarai. The system has been designed by Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) and is closely related to those used in other SNL remote monitoring projects. The Joyo project will particularly study the unique aspects of remote monitoring in contribution to nuclear nonproliferation. The project will also test and evaluate the fundamental design and implementation of the remote monitoring system in its application to regional and international safeguards efficiency. This paper will present a short history of the cooperation, the details of the monitoring system and a general schedule of activities.

Ross, M.; Hashimoto, Yu [Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel Development Corp., Oarai, Ibaraki (Japan). Oarai Engineering Center; Senzaki, Masao; Shigeto, Toshinori [Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel Development Corp., Tokyo (Japan); Sonnier, C. [Jupiter Corp., Albuquerque, NM (United States); Dupree, S.; Ystesund, K.; Hale, W. [Sandia National Labs., Albuquerque, NM (United States)

1996-07-25T23:59:59.000Z

233

DOE-HDBK-1169-2003; DOE Handbook Nuclear Air Cleaning Handbook  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE TECHNICAL STANDARDS NOVEMBER 2003 TS INCH-POUND DOE-HDBK-1169-2003 DOE HANDBOOK NUCLEAR AIR CLEANING HANDBOOK U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 DISTRIBUTION...

234

CRAD, Nuclear Facility Construction - Mechanical Equipment - June 26, 2012  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Nuclear Facility Construction - Mechanical Equipment - June Nuclear Facility Construction - Mechanical Equipment - June 26, 2012 CRAD, Nuclear Facility Construction - Mechanical Equipment - June 26, 2012 June 26, 2012 Nuclear Facility Construction - Mechanical Equipment Installation, (HSS CRAD 45-53, Rev. 0) The purpose of this criteria review and approach, this CRAD includes mechanical equipment installation, including connections of the equipment to installed piping systems, and attachments of the equipment to structures (concrete, structural steel, or embed plates). Mechanical equipment includes items such as pumps and motors, valves, tanks, glove boxes, heat exchangers, ion exchangers, service air system, fire pumps and tanks, and heating, ventilation, and air condition (HVAC) equipment such as fans, scrubbers and filters.

235

Moratorium on Construction of Nuclear Power Facilities (Connecticut)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

No construction shall commence on a fifth nuclear power facility until the Commissioner of Environmental Protection finds that the United States Government, through its authorized agency, has...

236

Some noise control problems peculiar to nuclear generating facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The ability to confidently predict the noise environment in a nuclear generating facility presently under construction is complicated by the design constraints of physical layout

Robert A. Putnam

1977-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

237

Approaches used for Clearance of Lands from Nuclear Facilities...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

:14 Report number: 2013:14 ISSN: 2000-0456 Available at www.stralsakerhetsmyndigheten.se Approaches used for Clearance of Lands from Nuclear Facilities among Several Countries...

238

NNSA and Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board certifications...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

allocated funding NNSA and Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board certifications free up 47 million in previously allocated funding The DNFSB and NNSA required the CMRR...

239

Evaluation of natural phenomena hazards as part of safety assessments for nuclear facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The continued operation of existing US Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear facilities and laboratories requires a safety reassessment based on current criteria and guidelines. This also includes evaluations for the effects of Natural Phenomena Hazards (NPH), for which these facilities may not have been designed. The NPH evaluations follow the requirements of DOE Order 5480.28, Natural Phenomena Hazards Mitigation (1993) which establishes NPH Performance Categories (PCs) for DOE facilities and associated target probabilistic performance goals. These goals are expressed as the mean annual probability of exceedance of acceptable behavior for structures, systems and components (SSCs) subjected to NPH effects. The assignment of an NPH Performance Category is based on the overall hazard categorization (low, moderate, high) of a facility and on the function of an SSC under evaluation (DOE-STD-1021, 1992). Detailed guidance for the NPH analysis and evaluation criteria are also provided (DOE-STD-1020, 1994). These analyses can be very resource intensive, and may not be necessary for the evaluation of all SSCs in existing facilities, in particular for low hazard category facilities. An approach relying heavily on screening inspections, engineering judgment and use of NPH experience data (S. J. Eder et al., 1993), can minimize the analytical effort, give reasonable estimates of the NPH susceptibilities, and yield adequate information for an overall safety evaluation of the facility. In the following sections this approach is described in more detail and is illustrated by an application to a nuclear laboratory complex.

Kot, C.A.; Hsieh, B.J.; Srinivasan, M.G.; Shin, Y.W.

1995-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

240

Improved Design of Nuclear Reactor Control System | U.S. DOE Office of  

Office of Science (SC) Website

Improved Design of Nuclear Reactor Improved Design of Nuclear Reactor Control System Nuclear Physics (NP) NP Home About Research Facilities Science Highlights Benefits of NP Spinoff Applications Spinoff Archives SBIR/STTR Applications of Nuclear Science and Technology Funding Opportunities Nuclear Science Advisory Committee (NSAC) News & Resources Contact Information Nuclear Physics U.S. Department of Energy SC-26/Germantown Building 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20585 P: (301) 903-3613 F: (301) 903-3833 E: sc.np@science.doe.gov More Information » Spinoff Archives Improved Design of Nuclear Reactor Control System Print Text Size: A A A RSS Feeds FeedbackShare Page Application/instrumentation: Improved Design of Nuclear Reactor Control System Developed at: Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Holifield Radioactive Ion Beam Facility (HRIBF)

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "doe nuclear facilities" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


241

DOE-STD-0100T; DOE Standard Licensed Reactor Nuclear Safety Criteria Applicable to DOE Reactors  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

00T 00T November 1993 Superseding DOE/NE-0100T April 1991 DOE STANDARD LICENSED REACTOR NUCLEAR SAFETY CRITERIA APPLICABLE TO DOE REACTORS U.S. Department of Energy Washington, D.C. 20585 AREA SAFT DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly frorn the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; (615) 576-8401. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 487-4650. Order No. DE94005221 CONTENTS

242

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board's enabling legislation  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

ENABLING STATUTE OF THE ENABLING STATUTE OF THE DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD 42 U.S.C. § 2286 et seq. NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT, FISCAL YEAR 1989 (Pub. L. No. 100-456, September 29, 1988), AS AMENDED BY NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT, FISCAL YEAR 1991 (Pub. L. No. 101-510, November 5, 1990), NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FISCAL YEARS 1992 AND 1993 (Pub. L. No. 102-190, December 5, 1991), ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 1992 (Pub. L. No. 102-486, October 24, 1992), NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FISCAL YEAR 1994 (Pub. L. No. 103-160, November 30, 1993), FEDERAL REPORTS ELIMINATION ACT OF 1998 (Pub. L. No. 105-362, November 10, 1998), NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FISCAL YEAR 2001 (Pub. L. No. 106-398, October 30, 2000), AND

243

DOE Selects Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC to Manage and...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

remediation of soil and groundwater. In support of the DOE national security and non-proliferation programs, the NNSA activities include operation of the tritium facilities,...

244

DOE-STD-1107-97; DOE Standard Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities For Key Radiation Protection Positions at DOE Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

STANDARD STANDARD KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS, AND ABILITIES FOR KEY RADIATION PROTECTION POSITIONS AT DOE FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy FSC 6910 Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. DOE-STD-1107-97 January 1997 Reaffirmed June 2005 This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; (423) 576-8401. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 487-4650. Order No. DE97003656 Reaffirmation with Errata DOE-HDBK-1107-97 Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities for Key Radiation Protection Positions at DOE

245

Preparation Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analyses  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

3009-94 3009-94 July 1994 CHANGE NOTICE NO.1 January 2000 CHANGE NOTICE NO. 2 April 2002 CHANGE NOTICE NO. 3 March 2006 DOE STANDARD PREPARATION GUIDE FOR U.S DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NONREACTOR NUCLEAR FACILITY DOCUMENTED SAFETY ANALYSES U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington, DC 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. DOE-STD-3009-94 Page ii This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from ES&H Technical Information Services, U.S. Department of Energy, (800) 473-4375, fax: (301) 903-9823. DOE-STD-3009-94 Page iii Preparation Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analyses Table of Changes

246

Nuclear Wallet Cards at BNL | U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC)  

Office of Science (SC) Website

Wallet Cards at BNL Wallet Cards at BNL Nuclear Physics (NP) NP Home About Research Facilities Science Highlights Benefits of NP Spinoff Applications Spinoff Archives SBIR/STTR Applications of Nuclear Science and Technology Funding Opportunities Nuclear Science Advisory Committee (NSAC) News & Resources Contact Information Nuclear Physics U.S. Department of Energy SC-26/Germantown Building 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20585 P: (301) 903-3613 F: (301) 903-3833 E: sc.np@science.doe.gov More Information » Spinoff Archives Nuclear Wallet Cards at BNL Print Text Size: A A A RSS Feeds FeedbackShare Page Application/instrumentation: Nuclear Wallet Cards Developed at: National Nuclear Data Center, BNL Developed in: 2000-current Result of NP research: DOE-NP nuclear data program Application currently being supported by:

247

Review and Approval of Nuclear Facility Safety Basis and Safety Design Basis Documents  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

SENSITIVE DOE-STD-1104-2009 May 2009 Superseding DOE-STD-1104-96 DOE STANDARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF NUCLEAR FACILITY SAFETY BASIS AND SAFETY DESIGN BASIS DOCUMENTS U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington, DC 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. DOE-STD-1104-2009 ii Available on the Department of Energy Technical Standards web page at http://www.hss.energy.gov/nuclearsafety/ns/techstds/ DOE-STD-1104-2009 iii CONTENTS FOREWORD .................................................................................................................................. v INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................................

248

DOE-STD-3014-96; DOE Standard Accident Analysis For Aircraft Crash Into Hazardous Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE STANDARD DOE STANDARD October 1 996 Reaffirmation May 2006 ACCIDENT CRASH INTO ANALYSIS HAZARDOUS FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 AREA SAFT DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. FOR AIRCRAFT This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; (423) 576-8401. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 487-4650. Order No. DE97000162 DOE-STD-3014-96 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS PARAGRAPH PAGE FOREWORD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

249

Financing Strategies For A Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facility  

SciTech Connect

To help meet the nations energy needs, recycling of partially used nuclear fuel is required to close the nuclear fuel cycle, but implementing this step will require considerable investment. This report evaluates financing scenarios for integrating recycling facilities into the nuclear fuel cycle. A range of options from fully government owned to fully private owned were evaluated using DPL (Decision Programming Language 6.0), which can systematically optimize outcomes based on user-defined criteria (e.g., lowest lifecycle cost, lowest unit cost). This evaluation concludes that the lowest unit costs and lifetime costs are found for a fully government-owned financing strategy, due to government forgiveness of debt as sunk costs. However, this does not mean that the facilities should necessarily be constructed and operated by the government. The costs for hybrid combinations of public and private (commercial) financed options can compete under some circumstances with the costs of the government option. This analysis shows that commercial operations have potential to be economical, but there is presently no incentive for private industry involvement. The Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA) currently establishes government ownership of partially used commercial nuclear fuel. In addition, the recently announced Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) suggests fuels from several countries will be recycled in the United States as part of an international governmental agreement; this also assumes government ownership. Overwhelmingly, uncertainty in annual facility capacity led to the greatest variations in unit costs necessary for recovery of operating and capital expenditures; the ability to determine annual capacity will be a driving factor in setting unit costs. For private ventures, the costs of capital, especially equity interest rates, dominate the balance sheet; and the annual operating costs, forgiveness of debt, and overnight costs dominate the costs computed for the government case. The uncertainty in operations, leading to lower than optimal processing rates (or annual plant throughput), is the most detrimental issue to achieving low unit costs. Conversely, lowering debt interest rates and the required return on investments can reduce costs for private industry.

David Shropshire; Sharon Chandler

2006-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

250

Enforcement handbook: Enforcement of DOE nuclear safety requirements  

SciTech Connect

This Handbook provides detailed guidance and procedures to implement the General Statement of DOE Enforcement Policy (Enforcement Policy or Policy). A copy of this Enforcement Policy is included for ready reference in Appendix D. The guidance provided in this Handbook is qualified, however, by the admonishment to exercise discretion in determining the proper disposition of each potential enforcement action. As discussed in subsequent chapters, the Enforcement and Investigation Staff will apply a number of factors in assessing each potential enforcement situation. Enforcement sanctions are imposed in accordance with the Enforcement Policy for the purpose of promoting public and worker health and safety in the performance of activities at DOE facilities by DOE contractors (and their subcontractors and suppliers) who are indemnified under the Price-Anderson Amendments Act. These indemnified contractors, and their suppliers and subcontractors, will be referred to in this Handbook collectively as DOE contractors. It should be remembered that the purpose of the Department`s enforcement policy is to improve nuclear safety for the workers and the public, and this goal should be the prime consideration in exercising enforcement discretion.

NONE

1995-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

251

DOE Science Showcase - DOE Nuclear Physics R&D Info | OSTI, US Dept of  

Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

DOE Nuclear Physics R&D Info DOE Nuclear Physics R&D Info While quarks and gluons are fairly well understood, how they fit together to create different types of matter is still a mystery. The DOE Nuclear Physics program's mission is to solve this mystery through theoretical and experimental research; the benefits to society range from fighting cancer to ensuring food safety to border protection. Find DOE research information on this topic from the OSTI databases and read about the Department's Nuclear Physics program. From the Databases Select a database to initiate a search. DOE Information Bridge DOE R&D Accomplishments Energy Citations Database ScienceCinema Science.gov WorldWideScience.org More information Accelerating Innovation: How nuclear physics benefits us all About DOE's Nuclear Physics Program

252

National Laser User Facilities Program | National Nuclear Security  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

User Facilities Program | National Nuclear Security User Facilities Program | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Continuing Management Reform Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Us Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Media Room Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Speeches Events Social Media Video Gallery Photo Gallery NNSA Archive Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog National Laser User Facilities Program Home > National Laser User Facilities Program National Laser User Facilities Program National Laser Users' Facility Grant Program Overview The Laboratory for Laser Energetics (LLE) at the University of Rochester

253

National Laser User Facilities Program | National Nuclear Security  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Laser User Facilities Program | National Nuclear Security Laser User Facilities Program | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Continuing Management Reform Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Us Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Media Room Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Speeches Events Social Media Video Gallery Photo Gallery NNSA Archive Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog National Laser User Facilities Program Home > National Laser User Facilities Program National Laser User Facilities Program National Laser Users' Facility Grant Program Overview The Laboratory for Laser Energetics (LLE) at the University of Rochester

254

Area Students Explore SRS Nuclear Facilities during National ...  

Principal Media Contact: DT Townsend Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC 803.952.7566 dt-lawrence.townsend@srs.gov DOE Media Contact: Bill Taylor

255

DOE-STD-1183-2004; Nuclear Safety Specialist Functional Area Qualification Standard  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE-STD-1183-2004 April 2004 DOE STANDARD NUCLEAR SAFETY SPECIALIST FUNCTIONAL AREA QUALIFICATION STANDARD DOE Defense Nuclear Facilities Technical Personnel U.S. Department of Energy AREA TRNG Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. DOE-STD-1183-2004 ii This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from ES&H Technical Information Services, U.S. Department of Energy, (800) 473-4375, fax: (301) 903-9823. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 605-6000. DOE-STD-1183-2004

256

Independent Activity Report, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting - October 2012 Independent Activity Report, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting - October 2012 October 2012 Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting on the Status of Integration of Safety Into the Design of the Uranium Processing Facility [HIAR-Y-12-2012-10-02] The Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) observed the public hearing of the DNFSB review of the UPF project status for integrating safety into design. The meeting was broken into three parts: a panel discussion and questioning of National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) oversight and execution; a panel discussion and questioning of the B&W Y-12 Technical Services, LLC (B&W Y-12) design project team leadership; and an open public

257

Independent Activity Report, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting - October 2012 Independent Activity Report, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting - October 2012 October 2012 Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting on the Status of Integration of Safety Into the Design of the Uranium Processing Facility [HIAR-Y-12-2012-10-02] The Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) observed the public hearing of the DNFSB review of the UPF project status for integrating safety into design. The meeting was broken into three parts: a panel discussion and questioning of National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) oversight and execution; a panel discussion and questioning of the B&W Y-12 Technical Services, LLC (B&W Y-12) design project team leadership; and an open public

258

Independent Activity Report, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting - October 2012 Independent Activity Report, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting - October 2012 October 2012 Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting on the Status of Integration of Safety Into the Design of the Uranium Processing Facility [HIAR-Y-12-2012-10-02] The Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) observed the public hearing of the DNFSB review of the UPF project status for integrating safety into design. The meeting was broken into three parts: a panel discussion and questioning of National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) oversight and execution; a panel discussion and questioning of the B&W Y-12 Technical Services, LLC (B&W Y-12) design project team leadership; and an open public

259

DOE G 420.2-1, Accelerator Facility Safety Implementation Guide for DOE O 420.2B, Safety of Accelerator Facilities  

Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

This document is an aid to understanding and meeting the requirements of DOE O 420.2B, Safety of Accelerator Facilities, dated 7/23/04. It does not impose ...

2005-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

260

Development of a safety assessment approach for decontamination and decommissioning operations at nuclear facilities  

SciTech Connect

The US Department of Energy (DOE) is responsible for nearly 1000 nuclear facilities which will eventually be decommissioned. In order to ensure that the health and safety of the workers, other personnel on site and the public in general is maintained during decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) operations, a methodology specifically for use in evaluating the nuclear safety of the associated activities is being developed within the Department. This methodology represents not so much a departure from that currently fish in the DOE when conducting safety assessments of operations at nuclear facilities but, rather, a formalization of those methods specifically adapted to the D&D activities. As such, it is intended to provide the safety assessment personnel with a framework on which they can base their technical judgement, to assure a consistent approach to safety assessment of D&D operations and to facilitate the systematic collection of data from facilities in the post-operational part of the life cycle.

Worthington, P.R. [USDOE, Washington, DC (United States); Cowgill, M.G. [Brookhaven National Lab., Upton, NY (United States)

1994-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "doe nuclear facilities" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


261

Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee Facility Subcommittee visit to Oak Ridge  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Committee Facility Subcommittee visit to Committee Facility Subcommittee visit to Oak Ridge National Laboratory Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee Facility Subcommittee visit to Oak Ridge National Laboratory The NEAC Facilities Subcommittee made a site visit to Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) on August 26, 2010. Subcommittee members included John Ahearne (Vice Chairman of NEAC and Facilities Subcommittee Chairman), Dana Christensen (ORNL), Thomas B. Cochran (Natural Resources Defense Council), Michael Corradini, (University of Wisconsin-Madison), and Andrew Klein (Oregon State University). Tansel Selekler (Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy) accompanied the Subcommittee. NEAC_Facitlity_Subcom Visit_OakRidge.pdf More Documents & Publications Meeting Materials: December 9, 2010

262

DOE O 452.4B, Security and Use Control of Nuclear Explosives and Nuclear Weapons  

Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

This Order establishes requirements to implement the nuclear explosive security and use control elements of DOE O 452.1D, Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety ...

2010-01-22T23:59:59.000Z

263

DOE-STD-6002-96; DOE Standard Safety of Magnetic Fusion Facilities: Requirements  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

6002-96 6002-96 May 1996 DOE STANDARD SAFETY OF MAGNETIC FUSION FACILITIES: REQUIREMENTS U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; (423) 576-8401. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 487-4650. Order No. DE96009495 DOE-STD-6002-96 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page FOREWORD....................................................................................................................... v

264

KRS Chapter 278: Nuclear Power Facilities (Kentucky) | Department of Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

KRS Chapter 278: Nuclear Power Facilities (Kentucky) KRS Chapter 278: Nuclear Power Facilities (Kentucky) KRS Chapter 278: Nuclear Power Facilities (Kentucky) < Back Eligibility Commercial Construction Developer Investor-Owned Utility Municipal/Public Utility Utility Program Info State Kentucky Program Type Environmental Regulations Safety and Operational Guidelines Provider Kentucky Public Service Commission No construction shall commence on a nuclear power facility in the Commonwealth until the Public Service Commission finds that the United States government, through its authorized agency, has identified and approved a demonstrable technology or means for the disposal of high-level nuclear waste. The provisions of this section shall not be construed as applying to or precluding the following nuclear-based technologies,

265

Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility The Secretary of Energy signed Section 3116 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 basis of determination for the disposal of grouted residual waste in the tank systems at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC) Tank Farm Facility (TFF) on November 19, 2006. Section 3116 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 authorizes the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, to reclassify certain waste from reprocessing spent nuclear fuel from high-level waste to low-level waste if it meets the criteria set

266

DOE-owned spent nuclear fuel program plan  

SciTech Connect

The Department of Energy (DOE) has produced spent nuclear fuel (SNF) for many years as part of its various missions and programs. The historical process for managing this SNF was to reprocess it whereby valuable material such as uranium or plutonium was chemically separated from the wastes. These fuels were not intended for long-term storage. As the need for uranium and plutonium decreased, it became necessary to store the SNF for extended lengths of time. This necessity resulted from a 1992 DOE decision to discontinue reprocessing SNF to recover strategic materials (although limited processing of SNF to meet repository acceptance criteria remains under consideration, no plutonium or uranium extraction for other uses is planned). Both the facilities used for storage, and the fuel itself, began experiencing aging from this extended storage. New efforts are now necessary to assure suitable fuel and facility management until long-term decisions for spent fuel disposition are made and implemented. The Program Plan consists of 14 sections as follows: Sections 2--6 describe objectives, management, the work plan, the work breakdown structure, and the responsibility assignment matrix. Sections 7--9 describe the program summary schedules, site logic diagram, SNF Program resource and support requirements. Sections 10--14 present various supplemental management requirements and quality assurance guidelines.

1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

267

Standard Guide for Preparing Waste Management Plans for Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

1.1 This guide addresses the development of waste management plans for potential waste streams resulting from decommissioning activities at nuclear facilities, including identifying, categorizing, and handling the waste from generation to final disposal. 1.2 This guide is applicable to potential waste streams anticipated from decommissioning activities of nuclear facilities whose operations were governed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) or Agreement State license, under Department of Energy (DOE) Orders, or Department of Defense (DoD) regulations. 1.3 This guide provides a description of the key elements of waste management plans that if followed will successfully allow for the characterization, packaging, transportation, and off-site treatment or disposal, or both, of conventional, hazardous, and radioactive waste streams. 1.4 This guide does not address the on-site treatment, long term storage, or on-site disposal of these potential waste streams. 1.5 This standard does not purport to address ...

American Society for Testing and Materials. Philadelphia

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

268

Ground Broken for New Job-Creating Accelerator Research Facility at DOEs Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Illinois  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

WASHINGTON, D.C. Today, ground was broken for a new accelerator research facility being built at the Department of Energys (DOEs) Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab) in Batavia,...

269

How much electricity does a typical nuclear power plant generate ...  

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

How much electricity does a typical nuclear power plant generate? ... tariff, and demand charge data? How is electricity used in U.S. homes?

270

DOE O 457.1A, Nuclear Counterterrorism  

Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

The Order defines requirements for the protection of sensitive improvised nuclear device information and provides a framework to support DOE activities related ...

2013-08-26T23:59:59.000Z

271

DOE's Nuclear Weapons Complex: Challenges to Safety, Security...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

and Investigations Committee on Energy and Commerce U.S. House of Representatives "DOE's Nuclear Weapons Complex: Challenges to Safety, Security, and Taxpayer Stewardship" FOR...

272

Nuclear Data Capabilities Supported by the DOE NCSP  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Nuclear Data Capabilities Supported by the DOE NCSP Symposium on Nuclear Data for Criticality responsible for developing, implementing, and maintaining nuclear criticality safety. 3 #12;NCSP Technical the Production Codes and Methods for Criticality Safety Engineers (e.g. MCNP, SCALE, & COG) · Nuclear Data

Danon, Yaron

273

The DOE/SCS Power Systems Development Facility  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The use of coal for power generation has come under increasing environmental scrutiny over the past five years. Advances in coal-based power generation technology will continue to develop towards systems that have high efficiency, environmental superiority and lower or sustainable cost-of-electricity compared to current coal-based technology. Emerging power generation technologies that work toward these goals include integrated gasification combined-cycle (IGCC) and pressurized fluidized-bed combustion (PFBC). One method for improving the efficiency and lowering the capital cost further for advanced power plants utilizing coal is by employing hot gas cleanup. Although hot gas cleanup has the potential for improving the viability of coal-based power generation, the removal of hot particulates from the gas stream has proven to be a challenging task. The demonstration of particulate control devices (PCDS) under realistic conditions for advanced power generation remains the single most important area for development. With the Southern Company`s commitment to be a major supplier of electricity worldwide and our continued use of coal as a primary fuel source, Southern Company Services (SCS) has entered into a cooperative effort with the Department of Energy (DOE) Morgantown Energy Technology Center (METC) to develop a facility where component and system integration tests can be carried out for advanced coal-based power plants. The Power Systems Development Facility (PSDF) is being designed to be a flexible facility that will address the development of the PCDs required for advanced coal-based power generation systems.

Haq, Z.U.; Pinkston, T.E.; Sears, R.E.; Vimalchand, P.

1993-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

274

Newest LANL Facility Receives LEED Gold Certification | National Nuclear  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Newest LANL Facility Receives LEED Gold Certification | National Nuclear Newest LANL Facility Receives LEED Gold Certification | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Continuing Management Reform Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Us Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Media Room Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Speeches Events Social Media Video Gallery Photo Gallery NNSA Archive Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Home > NNSA Blog > Newest LANL Facility Receives LEED Gold Certification Newest LANL Facility Receives LEED Gold Certification Posted By Office of Public Affairs RULOB LANL's newest facility, the Radiological Laboratory Utility Office

275

NNSA Holds Groundbreaking at MOX Facility | National Nuclear Security  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Groundbreaking at MOX Facility | National Nuclear Security Groundbreaking at MOX Facility | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Continuing Management Reform Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Us Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Media Room Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Speeches Events Social Media Video Gallery Photo Gallery NNSA Archive Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Home > About Us > Our History > NNSA Timeline > NNSA Holds Groundbreaking at MOX Facility NNSA Holds Groundbreaking at MOX Facility October 14, 2005 Aiken, SC NNSA Holds Groundbreaking at MOX Facility

276

U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge Operations Office Nuclear Facility  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Energy, Oak Ridge Operations Office Nuclear Energy, Oak Ridge Operations Office Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide [Fulfills ORO Safety Basis Competency 1, 2 (Part 1), or 7 (Part 1)] U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge Operations Office Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide [Fulfills ORO Safety Basis Competency 1, 2 (Part 1), or 7 (Part 1)] "This self-study guide provides an overview of safety basis terminology, requirements, and activities that are applicable to DOE and Oak Ridge Operations Office (ORO) nuclear facilities on the Oak Ridge Reservation. By completing this self-study guide, the reader will fulfill ORO Safety Basis Qualification Standard Competency 1, 2 (Part 1), or 7 (Part 1) and gain a familiarity level of knowledge regarding the following:

277

U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge Operations Office Nuclear Facility  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge Operations Office Nuclear U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge Operations Office Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide [Fulfills ORO Safety Basis Competency 1, 2 (Part 1), or 7 (Part 1)] U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge Operations Office Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide [Fulfills ORO Safety Basis Competency 1, 2 (Part 1), or 7 (Part 1)] "This self-study guide provides an overview of safety basis terminology, requirements, and activities that are applicable to DOE and Oak Ridge Operations Office (ORO) nuclear facilities on the Oak Ridge Reservation. By completing this self-study guide, the reader will fulfill ORO Safety Basis Qualification Standard Competency 1, 2 (Part 1), or 7 (Part 1) and gain a familiarity level of knowledge regarding the following:

278

DOE P 420.1 Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Policy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

POLICY POLICY Washington, D.C. Approved: 2-08-2011 SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NUCLEAR SAFETY POLICY PURPOSE: To document the Department of Energy's (DOE) nuclear safety policy. SCOPE: The provisions of this policy apply to all Departmental elements with responsibility for a nuclear facility, except the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, which is separately covered under Executive Order 12344, Title 50 United States Code, sections 2406 and 2511. This Policy cancels Secretary of Energy Notice 35-91, Nuclear Safety Policy, dated 9-9-91. POLICY: It is the policy of the Department of Energy to design, construct, operate, and decommission its nuclear facilities in a manner that ensures adequate protection of workers, the

279

DOE Turns 25 | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

> About Us > Our History > NNSA Timeline > DOE Turns 25 DOE Turns 25 October 01, 2002 Washington, DC DOE Turns 25 The Department of Energy marked the 25th anniversary of its...

280

A comparative study of worker and general public risks from nuclear facility operation using MACCS2  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Over the last five years, the US Department of Energy (DOE) has attempted to establish quantitative risk indices as minimum acceptance criteria for assurance of safe operation of its nuclear facilities. The risk indices serve as aiming points or targets to include consideration of all aspects of operation including normal conditions as well as abnormal, design basis events, and beyond-design basis events. Although initial focus of the application of these safety targets had been on DOE`s reactors, more recent assessments have also considered non-reactor facilities including those encompassing storage and nuclear processing activities. Regardless of the facility`s primary function, accident progression, event tree/fault tree logic models, and probabilistic (dose) consequence assessment model must be implemented to yield a fully integrated analysis of facility operation. The primary tool for probabilistic consequence assessment in the US is the MELCOR Accident Consequence Code System (MACCS). In this study, two version of MACCS are applied to representative source terms developed in the safety analysis associated with a waste processing facility at the Westinghouse Savannah River Company`s (WSRC`s) Savannah River Site (SRS). The MACCS versions are used to estimate population dose and subsequent health effects to workers and the general public from the SRS referenced facility operation. When combined with the frequency of occurrence evaluation, the margin of compliance with the safety targets may be quantified.

East, J.M.; O`Kula, K.R.

1994-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "doe nuclear facilities" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


281

DOE-STD-1185-2004; Nuclear Explosive Safety Study Functional Area Qualification Standard  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

STD-1185-2004 STD-1185-2004 August 2004 DOE STANDARD NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVE SAFETY STUDY FUNCTIONAL AREA QUALIFICATION STANDARD DOE Defense Nuclear Facilities Technical Personnel U.S. Department of Energy AREA TRNG Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. NOT MEASUREMENT SENSITIVE DOE-STD-1185-2004 i This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from ES&H Technical Information Services, U.S. Department of Energy, (800) 473-4375, fax: (301) 903-9823. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 605-6000. DOE-STD-1185-2004

282

DOE standard: Integration of environment, safety, and health into facility disposition activities. Volume 2: Appendices  

SciTech Connect

This volume contains the appendices that provide additional environment, safety, and health (ES and H) information to complement Volume 1 of this Standard. Appendix A provides a set of candidate DOE ES and H directives and external regulations, organized by hazard types that may be used to identify potentially applicable directives to a specific facility disposition activity. Appendix B offers examples and lessons learned that illustrate implementation of ES and H approaches discussed in Section 3 of Volume 1. Appendix C contains ISMS performance expectations to guide a project team in developing and implementing an effective ISMS and in developing specific performance criteria for use in facility disposition. Appendix D provides guidance for identifying potential Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) when decommissioning facilities fall under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, Liability Act (CERCLA) process. Appendix E discusses ES and H considerations for dispositioning facilities by privatization. Appendix F is an overview of the WSS process. Appendix G provides a copy of two DOE Office of Nuclear Safety Policy and Standards memoranda that form the bases for some of the guidance discussed within the Standard. Appendix H gives information on available hazard analysis techniques and references. Appendix I provides a supplemental discussion to Sections 3.3.4, Hazard Baseline Documentation, and 3.3.6, Environmental Permits. Appendix J presents a sample readiness evaluation checklist.

NONE

1998-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

283

Ground test facility for nuclear testing of space reactor subsystems  

SciTech Connect

Two major reactor facilities at the INEL have been identified as easily adaptable for supporting the nuclear testing of the SP-100 reactor subsystem. They are the Engineering Test Reactor (ETR) and the Loss of Fluid Test Reactor (LOFT). In addition, there are machine shops, analytical laboratories, hot cells, and the supporting services (fire protection, safety, security, medical, waste management, etc.) necessary to conducting a nuclear test program. This paper presents the conceptual approach for modifying these reactor facilities for the ground engineering test facility for the SP-100 nuclear subsystem. 4 figs.

Quapp, W.J.; Watts, K.D.

1985-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

284

Fusion Energy Sciences User Facilities | U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC)  

Office of Science (SC) Website

FES User Facilities FES User Facilities User Facilities ASCR User Facilities BES User Facilities BER User Facilities FES User Facilities HEP User Facilities NP User Facilities User Facilities Frequently Asked Questions User Facility Science Highlights Contact Information Office of Science U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20585 P: (202) 586-5430 FES User Facilities Print Text Size: A A A RSS Feeds FeedbackShare Page The Fusion Energy Sciences program supports the operation of the following national scientific user facilities: DIII-D Tokamak Facility: External link DIII-D, located at General Atomics in San Diego, California, is the largest magnetic fusion facility in the U.S. and is operated as a DOE national user facility. DIII-D has been a major contributor to the world fusion program

285

Global Nuclear Energy Initiative at LBNL | U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC)  

Office of Science (SC) Website

Global Nuclear Energy Initiative at Global Nuclear Energy Initiative at LBNL Nuclear Physics (NP) NP Home About Research Facilities Science Highlights Benefits of NP Spinoff Applications Spinoff Archives SBIR/STTR Applications of Nuclear Science and Technology Funding Opportunities Nuclear Science Advisory Committee (NSAC) News & Resources Contact Information Nuclear Physics U.S. Department of Energy SC-26/Germantown Building 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20585 P: (301) 903-3613 F: (301) 903-3833 E: sc.np@science.doe.gov More Information » Spinoff Archives Global Nuclear Energy Initiative at LBNL Print Text Size: A A A RSS Feeds FeedbackShare Page Application/instrumentation: Global nuclear energy initiative Developed at: 88-inch Cyclotron, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Developed in:

286

Nuclear Physics Related Brochures | U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC)  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Nuclear Nuclear Physics Related Brochures and Videos Nuclear Physics (NP) NP Home About Research Facilities Science Highlights Benefits of NP Funding Opportunities Nuclear Science Advisory Committee (NSAC) News & Resources NP Workforce Survey Results .pdf file (258KB) Links Databases Workshop Reports Nuclear Physics Related Brochures and Videos Contact Information Nuclear Physics U.S. Department of Energy SC-26/Germantown Building 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20585 P: (301) 903-3613 F: (301) 903-3833 E: sc.np@science.doe.gov More Information » News & Resources Nuclear Physics Related Brochures and Videos Print Text Size: A A A RSS Feeds FeedbackShare Page Brochures Accelerating Innovation NP Highlights Image Accelerating Innovation (2011) .pdf file (1.2MB): How nuclear physics benefits us all

287

Matching DOE grant program for university nuclear engineering. Final report  

SciTech Connect

The matching grant from DOE for university nuclear engineering at the University of Virginia was used primarily for student support and enhancement of the Nuclear Engineering Department's computer capabilities. This DOE grant, during this 1992-96 period, was matched by funds from Duke Power Company.

Albert B. Reynolds

1996-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

288

Rules and Directives applicable to Nuclear Facilities Oversight  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

G 231.1-1 DOE G 231.1-2 Occurrence Reporting and Processing of Operations Information ORPS Performance Analysis Guide ORPS Causal Analysis Guide Facility Representatives and line...

289

Contained Firing Facility | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Home > About Us > Our Programs > Defense Programs > Office of Research, Development, Test Capabilities and Evaluation > Office of Research and Development > Facilities >...

290

National Ignition Facility | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Home > About Us > Our Programs > Defense Programs > Office of Research, Development, Test Capabilities and Evaluation > Office of Inertial Confinement Fusion > Facilities >...

291

Groundbreaking at National Ignition Facility | National Nuclear...  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

NNSA Archive Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Home > About Us > Our History > NNSA Timeline > Groundbreaking at National Ignition Facility...

292

Nuclear Science: a survey of funding, facilities, and manpower  

SciTech Connect

In 1973 the Committee on Nuclear Science of the National Research Council initiated a re-examination of aspects (funding, manpower, and facilities) of the organization and operation of nuclear science research in order to evaluate any changes in the preceding four years and implications of such changes. The reports of the three ad hoc panels established for this purpose (funding and level of effort, nuclear facilities, manpower and education) are presented. Although they identify current problems in nuclear science, these reports do not provide simple solutions; rather, they attempt to provide updated information for use as background for continuing decisions. (RWR)

1975-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

293

Sodium Reaction Experimental Test Facility (SRETF) - Nuclear...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Form Modeling Departments Engineering Analysis Nuclear Systems Analysis Research & Test Reactor Nonproliferation and National Security Detection & Diagnostic Systems...

294

Facilities & Projects | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Continuing Management Reform Countering...

295

Integration of Facility Modeling Capabilities for Nuclear Nonproliferation Analysis  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Developing automated methods for data collection and analysis that can facilitate nuclear nonproliferation assessment is an important research area with significant consequences for the effective global deployment of nuclear energy. Facility modeling that can integrate and interpret observations collected from monitored facilities in order to ascertain their functional details will be a critical element of these methods. Although improvements are continually sought, existing facility modeling tools can characterize all aspects of reactor operations and the majority of nuclear fuel cycle processing steps, and include algorithms for data processing and interpretation. Assessing nonproliferation status is challenging because observations can come from many sources, including local and remote sensors that monitor facility operations, as well as open sources that provide specific business information about the monitored facilities, and can be of many different types. Although many current facility models are capable of analyzing large amounts of information, they have not been integrated in an analyst-friendly manner. This paper addresses some of these facility modeling capabilities and illustrates how they could be integrated and utilized for nonproliferation analysis. The inverse problem of inferring facility conditions based on collected observations is described, along with a proposed architecture and computer framework for utilizing facility modeling tools. After considering a representative sampling of key facility modeling capabilities, the proposed integration framework is illustrated with several examples.

Humberto E. Garcia

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

296

INTEGRATION OF FACILITY MODELING CAPABILITIES FOR NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION ANALYSIS  

SciTech Connect

Developing automated methods for data collection and analysis that can facilitate nuclear nonproliferation assessment is an important research area with significant consequences for the effective global deployment of nuclear energy. Facility modeling that can integrate and interpret observations collected from monitored facilities in order to ascertain their functional details will be a critical element of these methods. Although improvements are continually sought, existing facility modeling tools can characterize all aspects of reactor operations and the majority of nuclear fuel cycle processing steps, and include algorithms for data processing and interpretation. Assessing nonproliferation status is challenging because observations can come from many sources, including local and remote sensors that monitor facility operations, as well as open sources that provide specific business information about the monitored facilities, and can be of many different types. Although many current facility models are capable of analyzing large amounts of information, they have not been integrated in an analyst-friendly manner. This paper addresses some of these facility modeling capabilities and illustrates how they could be integrated and utilized for nonproliferation analysis. The inverse problem of inferring facility conditions based on collected observations is described, along with a proposed architecture and computer framework for utilizing facility modeling tools. After considering a representative sampling of key facility modeling capabilities, the proposed integration framework is illustrated with several examples.

Gorensek, M.; Hamm, L.; Garcia, H.; Burr, T.; Coles, G.; Edmunds, T.; Garrett, A.; Krebs, J.; Kress, R.; Lamberti, V.; Schoenwald, D.; Tzanos, C.; Ward, R.

2011-07-18T23:59:59.000Z

297

Integration of facility modeling capabilities for nuclear nonproliferation analysis  

SciTech Connect

Developing automated methods for data collection and analysis that can facilitate nuclear nonproliferation assessment is an important research area with significant consequences for the effective global deployment of nuclear energy. Facility modeling that can integrate and interpret observations collected from monitored facilities in order to ascertain their functional details will be a critical element of these methods. Although improvements are continually sought, existing facility modeling tools can characterize all aspects of reactor operations and the majority of nuclear fuel cycle processing steps, and include algorithms for data processing and interpretation. Assessing nonproliferation status is challenging because observations can come from many sources, including local and remote sensors that monitor facility operations, as well as open sources that provide specific business information about the monitored facilities, and can be of many different types. Although many current facility models are capable of analyzing large amounts of information, they have not been integrated in an analyst-friendly manner. This paper addresses some of these facility modeling capabilities and illustrates how they could be integrated and utilized for nonproliferation analysis. The inverse problem of inferring facility conditions based on collected observations is described, along with a proposed architecture and computer framework for utilizing facility modeling tools. After considering a representative sampling of key facility modeling capabilities, the proposed integration framework is illustrated with several examples.

Garcia, Humberto [Idaho National Laboratory (INL); Burr, Tom [Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL); Coles, Garill A [ORNL; Edmunds, Thomas A. [Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL); Garrett, Alfred [Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL); Gorensek, Maximilian [Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL); Hamm, Luther [Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL); Krebs, John [Argonne National Laboratory (ANL); Kress, Reid L [ORNL; Lamberti, Vincent [Y-12 National Security Complex; Schoenwald, David [ORNL; Tzanos, Constantine P [ORNL; Ward, Richard C [ORNL

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

298

Approaches used for Clearance of Lands from Nuclear Facilities among  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Approaches used for Clearance of Lands from Nuclear Facilities Approaches used for Clearance of Lands from Nuclear Facilities among Several Countries: Evaluation for Regulatory Input Approaches used for Clearance of Lands from Nuclear Facilities among Several Countries: Evaluation for Regulatory Input The study entitled, "Approaches used for Clearance of Lands from Nuclear Facilities among Several Countries: Evaluation for Regulatory Input," focuses on the issue of showing compliance with given clearance levels for site release (also called derived concentration guideline levels, DCGL:s). The Swedish Radiation Safety Authority (SSM) intends to continue working on establishing such clearance levels in Sweden. As a starting point, SSM foresees that levels applied will depend on the features of the specific site and on the expected future use of the land, for example

299

Hanford, WA Selected as Plutonium Production Facility | National Nuclear  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Hanford, WA Selected as Plutonium Production Facility | National Nuclear Hanford, WA Selected as Plutonium Production Facility | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Continuing Management Reform Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Us Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Media Room Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Speeches Events Social Media Video Gallery Photo Gallery NNSA Archive Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Home > About Us > Our History > NNSA Timeline > Hanford, WA Selected as Plutonium Production Facility Hanford, WA Selected as Plutonium Production Facility January 16, 1943 Hanford, WA

300

KCP celebrates production milestone at new facility | National Nuclear  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

celebrates production milestone at new facility | National Nuclear celebrates production milestone at new facility | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Continuing Management Reform Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Us Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Media Room Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Speeches Events Social Media Video Gallery Photo Gallery NNSA Archive Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Home > NNSA Blog > KCP celebrates production milestone at new facility KCP celebrates production milestone at new facility Posted By Office of Public Affairs The Kansas City Plant celebrated yet another milestone at the National

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "doe nuclear facilities" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


301

National Laser Users' Facility Grant Program | National Nuclear Security  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Users' Facility Grant Program | National Nuclear Security Users' Facility Grant Program | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Continuing Management Reform Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Us Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Media Room Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Speeches Events Social Media Video Gallery Photo Gallery NNSA Archive Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog NLUF National Laser Users' Facility Grant Program Home > About Us > Our Programs > Defense Programs > Office of Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation > University Partnerships / Academic Alliances > National Laser Users' Facility Grant Program

302

Strengthening Line Management Oversight and Federal Monitoring of Nuclear Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

14 14 Strengthening Line Management Oversight and Federal Monitoring of Nuclear Facilities Standard Review Plan Commercial Grade Dedication (CGD) August 2013 2 of 14 OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT Standard Review Plan (SRP) Commercial Grade Dedication (CGD) Applicability CD-0 CD-1 CD-2 CD-3 CD-4 Operation Post Operation August 2013 3 of 14 Table of Contents Objective ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 Overview of Commercial Grade Dedication for Nuclear Facilities .............................................................. 4 Requirements ................................................................................................................................................ 5

303

September 10, 2010 HSS Briefing to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) on Union Activities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Labor Union and Stakeholder Labor Union and Stakeholder Outreach and Collaboration Office of Health, Safety and Security Briefing to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Briefing to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Leadership Commitment Leadership Commitment " h "It is imperative that we communicate and establish relationships with those elements that train manage and elements that train, manage and represent our workforce to improve the safety culture at DOE sites." safety culture at DOE sites. Glenn S. Podonsky Chief Health, Safety and Security Officer 2 History History History History October 2006: Formation of HSS to provide an integrated DOE HQ-level function for health, safety, environment, and security into one unified office. February 2007: Established HSS Focus Group -

304

HYDROGEN IGNITION MECHANISM FOR EXPLOSIONS IN NUCLEAR FACILITY PIPE SYSTEMS  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Hydrogen and oxygen generation due to the radiolysis of water is a recognized hazard in pipe systems used in the nuclear industry, where the accumulation of hydrogen and oxygen at high points in the pipe system is expected, and explosive conditions exist. Pipe ruptures at nuclear facilities were attributed to hydrogen explosions inside pipelines, in nuclear facilities, i.e., Hamaoka, Nuclear Power Station in Japan, and Brunsbuettel in Germany. Prior to these accidents an ignition source for hydrogen was questionable, but these accidents, demonstrated that a mechanism was, in fact, available to initiate combustion and explosion. Hydrogen explosions may occur simultaneously with water hammer accidents in nuclear facilities, and a theoretical mechanism to relate water hammer to hydrogen deflagrations and explosions is presented herein.

Leishear, R

2010-05-02T23:59:59.000Z

305

Emergency Diesel Generator reliability at Department of Energy (DOE) facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This report is the culmination of the first phase of a comprehensive effort by the Department of Energy (DOE) Defense Programs (DP) Office of Self-Assessment and Emergency Management (DP-9) to assess the reliability and availability of emergency power supplies (i.e., standby or backup supplies providing electric power to systems or equipment that perform functions important to safety) at DOE management concerns over the recent number of reported failures of emergency and back-up supplies to provide power when required. Augmented Evaluation Team (AET) on-site reviews were conducted during the week of September 30, 1991 at Rocky Flats (RF), and the week of October 7, 1991 at the Richland (RL) and Savannah River (SR) sites to investigate the failures. The AET reviews focused on Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) failures because they were identified as the dominant contributor to power supply failures (46 of the 77 failures involved EDGs, as opposed to other sources such as batteries, motor-generator sets, etc.). The RF, RL, and SR sites were chosen because they were among the leaders in numbers of EDG failures. The objectives of the AET investigations were to collect, analyze, and document factual information concerning the causes, conditions, and circumstances surrounding EDG failures, to conduct a preliminary assessment of the safety significance of the failures and the site specific and generic safety implications for DOE facilities, and to identify appropriate follow-on actions necessary to complete the overall assessment of the adequacy of emergency and back-up power sources. This report presents the AET findings concerning the reliability of EDGs at the RF, RL, and SR sites, and the safety significance of EDG failures.

Not Available

1992-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

306

User Facilities | U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC)  

Office of Science (SC) Website

Facilities Facilities User Facilities ASCR User Facilities BES User Facilities BER User Facilities FES User Facilities HEP User Facilities NP User Facilities User Facilities Frequently Asked Questions User Facility Science Highlights Contact Information Office of Science U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20585 P: (202) 586-5430 Atom probe sample chamber at the Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory. Atom probe sample chamber at the Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory The x-ray nanoprobe at the Advanced Photon Source. The Hard X-ray Nanoprobe at the Advanced Photon Source. Argonne National Laboratory Titan The Titan Cray XK7 supercomputer at the Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility. Oak Ridge National Laboratory

307

DOE-HDBK-1169-2003; DOE Handbook Nuclear Air Cleaning Handbook  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

-1 -1 CHAPTER 2 SYSTEM CONSIDERATIONS 2.1 Introduction A nuclear air cleaning system is an assembly of interrelated, interactive parts that include the air cleaning system components, the contained space served by the air cleaning system (e.g., the glovebox, hot cell, room, or building), and the processes served by that system. This chapter discusses the design, operational, and codes- and standards-related requirements for nuclear facility air cleaning systems. Topics will include system, subsystem, and component design considerations, as well as general descriptions of various systems used in production and fabrication facilities, fuel processing and reprocessing plants, research facilities, storage facilities, and other applications. This chapter will also

308

Applications of Nuclear Science and Technology| U.S. DOE Office of Science  

Office of Science (SC) Website

Applications of Nuclear Science and Technology Nuclear Physics (NP) NP Home About Research Facilities Science Highlights Benefits of NP Spinoff Applications SBIR/STTR Applications of Nuclear Science and Technology Funding Opportunities Nuclear Science Advisory Committee (NSAC) News & Resources Contact Information Nuclear Physics U.S. Department of Energy SC-26/Germantown Building 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20585 P: (301) 903-3613 F: (301) 903-3833 E: sc.np@science.doe.gov More Information » Benefits of NP Applications of Nuclear Science and Technology Print Text Size: A A A RSS Feeds FeedbackShare Page Applications of Nuclear Science and Technology (ANS&T) Exchange Meeting: August 22-23, 2011 Hilton Washington DC/Rockville Hotel & Executive Meeting Center

309

NNSA labs, sites receive DOE Sustainability Awards | National Nuclear  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

labs, sites receive DOE Sustainability Awards | National Nuclear labs, sites receive DOE Sustainability Awards | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Continuing Management Reform Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Us Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Media Room Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Speeches Events Social Media Video Gallery Photo Gallery NNSA Archive Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Home > NNSA Blog > NNSA labs, sites receive DOE Sustainability Awards NNSA labs, sites receive DOE Sustainability Awards Posted By Office of Public Affairs In keeping with NNSA's commitment to improving the way it does business,

310

DOE Announces Loan Guarantee Applications for Nuclear Power Plant  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE Announces Loan Guarantee Applications for Nuclear Power Plant DOE Announces Loan Guarantee Applications for Nuclear Power Plant Construction DOE Announces Loan Guarantee Applications for Nuclear Power Plant Construction October 2, 2008 - 3:43pm Addthis WASHINGTON, DC - The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today announced it has received 19 Part I applications from 17 electric power companies for federal loan guarantees to support the construction of 14 nuclear power plants in response to its June 30, 2008 solicitation. The applications reflect the intentions of those companies to build 21 new reactors, with some applications covering two reactors at the same site. All five reactor designs that have been certified, or are currently under review for possible certification, by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) are

311

DOE NHI: Progress in Nuclear Connection Technologies  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

The U.S. Department of Energy Nuclear Hydrogen Initiative (NHI) is seeking to develop the technologies to enable the large-scale production of hydrogen from water using a nuclear powered heat source. A necessary component in any nuclear powered hydrogen production process is the energy transfer connection between the nuclear plant and the hydrogen plant. This article provides an overview of the research and development work that has been accomplished on the high-temperature heat transfer connection between the nuclear power plant and the hydrogen production plant by the NHI. A description of future work is also provided.

Steven R. Sherman

2007-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

312

Development of nuclear diagnostics for the National Ignition Facility ,,invited...  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

July 2006; published online 5 October 2006 The National Ignition Facility NIF will provide up to 1.8 MJ of laser energy for imploding inertial confinement fusion ICF targets. Ignited NIF targets are expected of nuclear diagnostics in ICF experiments. In 2005, the suite of nuclear-ignition diagnostics for the NIF

313

Method and means of monitoring the effluent from nuclear facilities  

DOE Patents (OSTI)

Radioactive iodine is detected in the effluent cooling gas from a nuclear reactor or nuclear facility by passing the effluent gas through a continuously moving adsorbent filter material which is then purged of noble gases and conveyed continuously to a detector of radioactivity. The purging operation has little or no effect upon the concentration of radioactive iodine which is adsorbed on the filter material.

Lattin, Kenneth R. (Richland, WA); Erickson, Gerald L. (Richland, WA)

1976-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

314

Handbook for the implementation of IAEA inspection activities at Department of Energy nuclear facilities  

SciTech Connect

The Nonproliferation Support Program (NSP) in the United States Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Safeguards and Security (OSS) has responsibility for supporting and aiding implementation of international and multilateral programs, agreements, and treaties at domestic facilities. In late 1995, the {open_quotes}Readiness Planning Guide for Nonproliferation Visits{close_quotes} (DOE 470.1-1) was issued to assist DOE sites prepare for the host foreign delegations visiting DOE facilities. Since then, field and head-quarters programs have expressed a need for a document that addresses domestic safeguards and security activities, specifically planning for and hosting International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) technical visits and inspections. As a result, OSS/NSP conducted a workshop to prepare a handbook that would contain guidance on domestic safeguards and security preparation and follow-on activities to ensure that this handbook could be utilized by all facilities to improve operational efficiencies and reduce implementation problems. The handbook has been structured to provide detailed background and guidance concerning the obligation, negotiation, inspection, and reporting processes for IAEH safeguards activities in DOE nuclear facilities as well as the lessons-learned by currently inspected facilities and how-we-do-it implementation examples. This paper will present an overview of the preparation and content of this new Handbook.

Zack, N.R.; Thomas, K.E. [Los Alamos National Lab., NM (United States); Coady, K.J.; Desmond, W.J. [Department of Energy, Washington, DC (United States)

1997-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

315

Non-Destructive Evaluation (NDE) and Testing Facilities - Nuclear  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Facilities > Non-Destructive Facilities > Non-Destructive Evaluation (NDE) and Testing Facilities Non-Destructive Evaluation (NDE) and Testing Facilities Overview MTS Table Top Load Frame X-ray Inspection Systems Other Facilities Work with Argonne Contact us For Employees Site Map Help Join us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter NE on Flickr Non-Destructive Evaluation (NDE) and Testing Facilities The Non-Destructive Evaluation (NDE) and Testing Facilities contain state-of-the-art NDE laboratories including microwave/millimeter wave, acoustic/ultrasonic, X-ray, thermal imaging, optics, and eddy current for health monitoring of materials and components used in aerospace, defense, and power generation (fossil and nuclear) industries as well as for medical and scientific research. Bookmark and Share

316

DOE Technical Standards Program: Overview  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Office of Nuclear Safety Vision The culture of the DOE community will be based on standards. Technical standards will formally integrate part of all DOE facility, program and...

317

Licensed reactor nuclear safety criteria applicable to DOE reactors  

SciTech Connect

This document is a compilation and source list of nuclear safety criteria that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) applies to licensed reactors; it can be used by DOE and DOE contractors to identify NRC criteria to be evaluated for application to the DOE reactors under their cognizance. The criteria listed are those that are applied to the areas of nuclear safety addressed in the safety analysis report of a licensed reactor. They are derived from federal regulations, USNRC regulatory guides, Standard Review Plan (SRP) branch technical positions and appendices, and industry codes and standards.

Not Available

1993-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

318

Structural Integrity Program for the Calcined Solids Storage Facilities at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center  

SciTech Connect

This report documents the activities of the structural integrity program at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center relevant to the high-level waste Calcined Solids Storage Facilities and associated equipment, as required by DOE M 435.1-1, ''Radioactive Waste Management Manual.'' Based on the evaluation documented in this report, the Calcined Solids Storage Facilities are not leaking and are structurally sound for continued service. Recommendations are provided for continued monitoring of the Calcined Solids Storage Facilities.

Bryant, J.W.; Nenni, J.A.

2003-05-22T23:59:59.000Z

319

Safeguards Guidance Document for Designers of Commercial Nuclear Facilities: International Nuclear Safeguards Requirements and Practices For Uranium Enrichment Plants  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This report is the second in a series of guidelines on international safeguards requirements and practices, prepared expressly for the designers of nuclear facilities. The first document in this series is the description of generic international nuclear safeguards requirements pertaining to all types of facilities. These requirements should be understood and considered at the earliest stages of facility design as part of a new process called Safeguards-by-Design. This will help eliminate the costly retrofit of facilities that has occurred in the past to accommodate nuclear safeguards verification activities. The following summarizes the requirements for international nuclear safeguards implementation at enrichment plants, prepared under the Safeguards by Design project, and funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), Office of NA-243. The purpose of this is to provide designers of nuclear facilities around the world with a simplified set of design requirements and the most common practices for meeting them. The foundation for these requirements is the international safeguards agreement between the country and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), pursuant to the Treaty on the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Relevant safeguards requirements are also cited from the Safeguards Criteria for inspecting enrichment plants, found in the IAEA Safeguards Manual, Part SMC-8. IAEA definitions and terms are based on the IAEA Safeguards Glossary, published in 2002. The most current specification for safeguards measurement accuracy is found in the IAEA document STR-327, International Target Values 2000 for Measurement Uncertainties in Safeguarding Nuclear Materials, published in 2001. For this guide to be easier for the designer to use, the requirements have been restated in plainer language per expert interpretation using the source documents noted. The safeguards agreement is fundamentally a legal document. As such, it is written in a legalese that is understood by specialists in international law and treaties, but not by most outside of this field, including designers of nuclear facilities. For this reason, many of the requirements have been simplified and restated. However, in all cases, the relevant source document and passage is noted so that readers may trace the requirement to the source. This is a helpful living guide, since some of these requirements are subject to revision over time. More importantly, the practices by which the requirements are met are continuously modernized by the IAEA and nuclear facility operators to improve not only the effectiveness of international nuclear safeguards, but also the efficiency. As these improvements are made, the following guidelines should be updated and revised accordingly.

Robert Bean; Casey Durst

2009-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

320

DOE-HDBK-1113-98; Radiological Safety Training for Uranium Facilities...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

FACILITIES" Dennis Kubicki, Technical Standards Manager, EH-24 SUBJECT. HANDBOOK, DOE-HDBK-1113-98, "RADIOLOGICAL SAFETY TRAINING FOR TO: In February 2005, a notice of intent...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "doe nuclear facilities" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


321

Evaluation of the Cask Transportation Facility Modifications (CTFM) compliance to DOE order 6430.1A  

SciTech Connect

This report was prepared to evaluate the compliance of Cask Transportation Facility Modifications (CTFM) to DOE Order 6430.1A.

ARD, K.E.

1999-07-14T23:59:59.000Z

322

GRR/Elements/18-CA-a.12 - Does the Facility Discharge Waste Water...  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

2 - Does the Facility Discharge Waste Water to Wells by Injection < GRR | Elements Jump to: navigation, search GRR-logo.png GEOTHERMAL REGULATORY ROADMAP Roadmap Home Roadmap...

323

Release of radioisotopes and activated materials from nuclear installations and facilities  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

wastes coming from the decommissioning of nuclear reactors,use of a nuclear facility The decommissioning, refurbishingdisposed of. The decommissioning of a nuclear power station

Manfredi, P.F.; Millaud, J.E.

2001-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

324

EA-0930: Facility Operations at the U.S. DOE Grand Junction Projects  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

30: Facility Operations at the U.S. DOE Grand Junction 30: Facility Operations at the U.S. DOE Grand Junction Projects Office, Grand Junction, Colorado EA-0930: Facility Operations at the U.S. DOE Grand Junction Projects Office, Grand Junction, Colorado SUMMARY This EA evaluates the environmental impacts of the proposal to expand and upgrade the U.S. Department of Energy's Grand Junction Projects Office facilities and operations in Grand Junction, Colorado. PUBLIC COMMENT OPPORTUNITIES None available at this time. DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE FOR DOWNLOAD June 8, 1996 EA-0930: Finding of No Significant Impact Facility Operations at the U.S. DOE Grand Junction Projects Office, Grand Junction, Colorado June 8, 1996 EA-0930: Final Environmental Assessment Facility Operations at the U.S. DOE Grand Junction Projects Office, Grand

325

Summary of New DOE-STD-1020-2011 NPH Analysis and Design Criteria for DOE Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Summary of New DOE-STD-1020-2011 Summary of New DOE-STD-1020-2011 NPH Analysis and Design Criteria for DOE Facilities (Proposed) Quazi Hossain, LLNL Joe Hunt, BWXT/Y-12 Robert Kennedy, RPK Consulting Carl Mazzola, Shaw Environmental, Inc. Steve McDuffie, DOE Gerald Meyers, DOE DOE Natural Phenomena Hazards Workshop October 25-26, 2011 Purpose of Revising the current version of DOE-STD-1020 * To conform to the new DOE O 420.1C (in review) that no longer refers to the Natural Phenomena Hazards (NPH) guidance document, DOE G 420.1-2 * To provide a single/central guidance document that the new DOE O 420.1C can require for NPH analysis and design criteria * To put back analysis and design requirements for all major NPHs in a single document that were fragmented when, with the issuance of STD-

326

DOE Cites Fluor Fernald Inc. for Nuclear Safety Violations  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

Washington, D.C. -The Department of Energy (DOE) today notified Fluor Fernald, Inc. (Fluor Fernald) that it will fine the company $33,000 for violations of the department's nuclear safety...

327

DOE, State of Idaho Sign Agreement on Nuclear Research  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

DOE, State of Idaho Sign Agreement on Nuclear Research The State of Idaho and the U.S. Department of Energy signed an agreement on Jan. 6, 2011 that streamlines the process used by...

328

DOE Cites University of Chicago for Nuclear Safety Violations | Department  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

University of Chicago for Nuclear Safety Violations University of Chicago for Nuclear Safety Violations DOE Cites University of Chicago for Nuclear Safety Violations March 7, 2006 - 11:42am Addthis WASHINGTON , DC - The Department of Energy (DOE) today issued a Preliminary Notice of Violation (PNOV) to the University of Chicago (University), the Management and Operating contractor for DOE's Argonne National Laboratory (ANL), for nuclear safety violations identified through several safety reviews and inspections conducted by DOE. A series of reviews and inspections, the most recent of which occurred in 2005, identified breakdowns in the contractor's quality improvement, radiation protection, work process, and independent and management assessment programs. Prior to 2005, senior contractor management at ANL

329

2012 DOE Facility Representatives Workshop Lessons Learned Presentatio...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

t the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Accident Prepared by Kevin T. Gray, National Nuclear Security Administration, Sandia Site Office, May 2012. Presentation Outline I. Brief review of...

330

Order Module--DOE O 433.1B, MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE O 433.1B, MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR DOE NUCLEAR FACILITIES Order Module--DOE O 433.1B, MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR DOE NUCLEAR FACILITIES "The familiar level of...

331

Nuclear Physics (NP) Homepage | U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC)  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

NP Home NP Home Nuclear Physics (NP) NP Home About Research Facilities Science Highlights Benefits of NP Funding Opportunities Nuclear Science Advisory Committee (NSAC) News & Resources Contact Information Nuclear Physics U.S. Department of Energy SC-26/Germantown Building 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20585 P: (301) 903-3613 F: (301) 903-3833 E: sc.np@science.doe.gov More Information » Accelerating Innovation .pdf file (1.2MB) Nuclear Physics supports the experimental and theoretical research needed to create a roadmap of matter that will help unlock the secrets of how the universe and everything in it is put together.Read More .pdf file (1.2MB) Accelerating Innovation What is Nuclear Physics? .pdf file (1.2MB) Nuclear physicists study the fundamental building blocks of matter, from

332

Nuclear Resonance Fluorescence at MIT | U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC)  

Office of Science (SC) Website

Resonance Fluorescence at MIT Resonance Fluorescence at MIT Nuclear Physics (NP) NP Home About Research Facilities Science Highlights Benefits of NP Spinoff Applications Spinoff Archives SBIR/STTR Applications of Nuclear Science and Technology Funding Opportunities Nuclear Science Advisory Committee (NSAC) News & Resources Contact Information Nuclear Physics U.S. Department of Energy SC-26/Germantown Building 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20585 P: (301) 903-3613 F: (301) 903-3833 E: sc.np@science.doe.gov More Information » Spinoff Archives Nuclear Resonance Fluorescence at MIT Print Text Size: A A A RSS Feeds FeedbackShare Page Application/instrumentation: Material Identification and Object Imaging Using Nuclear Resonance Fluorescence Developed at: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

333

Neutron Detectors for Detection of Nuclear Materials at LANL| U.S. DOE  

Office of Science (SC) Website

Neutron Detectors for Detection of Neutron Detectors for Detection of Nuclear Materials at LANL Nuclear Physics (NP) NP Home About Research Facilities Science Highlights Benefits of NP Spinoff Applications Spinoff Archives SBIR/STTR Applications of Nuclear Science and Technology Funding Opportunities Nuclear Science Advisory Committee (NSAC) News & Resources Contact Information Nuclear Physics U.S. Department of Energy SC-26/Germantown Building 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20585 P: (301) 903-3613 F: (301) 903-3833 E: sc.np@science.doe.gov More Information » Spinoff Archives Neutron Detectors for Detection of Nuclear Materials at LANL Print Text Size: A A A RSS Feeds FeedbackShare Page Application/instrumentation: Very Large Array Neutron Detector (VLAND); Development of large volume efficient neutron detectors for use in detection of small amounts (~ 1 gm)

334

Nuclear Reaction Cross Sections Database at BNL | U.S. DOE Office of  

Office of Science (SC) Website

Reaction Cross Sections Reaction Cross Sections Database at BNL Nuclear Physics (NP) NP Home About Research Facilities Science Highlights Benefits of NP Spinoff Applications Spinoff Archives SBIR/STTR Applications of Nuclear Science and Technology Funding Opportunities Nuclear Science Advisory Committee (NSAC) News & Resources Contact Information Nuclear Physics U.S. Department of Energy SC-26/Germantown Building 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20585 P: (301) 903-3613 F: (301) 903-3833 E: sc.np@science.doe.gov More Information » Spinoff Archives Nuclear Reaction Cross Sections Database at BNL Print Text Size: A A A RSS Feeds FeedbackShare Page Application/instrumentation: Generation and maintenance of database containing evaluated (recommended) nuclear reaction cross sections for all nuclei relevant to applied

335

DOE Announces Loan Guarantee Applications for Nuclear Power Plant  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Loan Guarantee Applications for Nuclear Power Plant Loan Guarantee Applications for Nuclear Power Plant Construction DOE Announces Loan Guarantee Applications for Nuclear Power Plant Construction October 2, 2008 - 3:43pm Addthis WASHINGTON, DC - The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today announced it has received 19 Part I applications from 17 electric power companies for federal loan guarantees to support the construction of 14 nuclear power plants in response to its June 30, 2008 solicitation. The applications reflect the intentions of those companies to build 21 new reactors, with some applications covering two reactors at the same site. All five reactor designs that have been certified, or are currently under review for possible certification, by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) are represented in the Part I applications. DOE also has received Part I

336

User Facilities | U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC)  

Office of Science (SC) Website

User User Facilities Scientific User Facilities (SUF) Division SUF Home About User Facilities X-Ray Light Sources Neutron Scattering Facilities Nanoscale Science Research Centers Electron-Beam Microcharacterization Centers Accelerator & Detector Research & Development Principal Investigators' Meetings Scientific Highlights Construction Projects BES Home User Facilities Print Text Size: A A A RSS Feeds FeedbackShare Page BES User Facilities Brochure .pdf file (7.4MB)Brochure .pdf file (7.4MB) The BES user facilities provide open access to specialized instrumentation and expertise that enable scientific users from universities, national laboratories, and industry to carry out experiments and develop theories that could not be done at their home institutions. These forefront research facilities require resource commitments well

337

Local Government Implementation of Long-Term Stewardship at Two DOE Facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The Department of Energy (DOE) is responsible for cleaning up the radioactive and chemical contamination that resulted from the production of nuclear weapons. At more than one hundred sites throughout the country DOE will leave some contamination in place after the cleanup is complete. In order to protect human health and the environment from the remaining contamination DOE, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), state environmental regulatory agencies, local governments, citizens and other entities will need to undertake long-term stewardship of such sites. Long-term stewardship includes a wide range of actions needed to protect human health in the environment for as long as the risk from the contamination remains above acceptable levels, such as barriers, caps, and other engineering controls and land use controls, signs, notices, records, and other institutional controls. In this report the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) and the Energy Communities Alliance (ECA) examine how local governments, state environmental agencies, and real property professionals implement long-term stewardship at two DOE facilities, Losa Alamos National Laboratory and Oak Ridge Reservation.

John Pendergrass; Roman Czebiniak; Kelly Mott; Seth Kirshenberg; Audrey Eidelman; Zachary Lamb; Erica Pencak; Wendy Sandoz

2003-08-13T23:59:59.000Z

338

Maintenance Guide for DOE Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

Maintenance Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Performance Assessments and Composite Analyses

339

Siting of nuclear facilities. Selections from Nuclear Safety  

SciTech Connect

The report presented siting policy and practice for nuclear power plants as developed in the U.S. and abroad. Twenty-two articles from Nuclear Safety on this general topic are reprinted since they provide a valuable reference source. The appendices also include reprints of some relevant regulatory rules and guides on siting. Advantages and disadvantages of novel siting concepts such as underground containment, offshore siting, and nuclear energy parks are addressed. Other topics include site criteria, risk criteria, and nuclear ship criteria.

Buchanan, J.R.

1976-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

340

DOE Turns 25 | National Nuclear Security Administration  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Y-12 Earn 11 R&D 100 Awards Jul 2, 2013 US, International Partners Remove Last Remaining HEU from Vietnam, Set Nuclear Security Milestone View All > Timeline Curious about NNSA...

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "doe nuclear facilities" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


341

Statement of Intent No. 2 between DOE and the Nuclear Decommissioning...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Statement of Intent No. 2 between DOE and the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority Statement of Intent No. 2 between DOE and the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority Statement of Intent...

342

DOE O 452.2D Admin Chg 1, Nuclear Explosive Safety  

Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

This Department of Energy (DOE) Order establishes requirements to implement the nuclear explosive safety (NES) elements of DOE O 452.1D, Nuclear Explosive and ...

2009-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

343

CRAD, Nuclear Facility Construction - Piping and Pipe Supports Inspection -  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Construction - Piping and Pipe Supports Construction - Piping and Pipe Supports Inspection - March 29, 2012 CRAD, Nuclear Facility Construction - Piping and Pipe Supports Inspection - March 29, 2012 March 29, 2012 Nuclear Facility Construction - Piping and Pipe Supports Inspection Criteria, Approach and Lines of Inquiry (HSS CRAD 45-52, Rev. 0) For the purpose of this criteria review and approach, this Criteria Review and Approach Document (CRAD) includes piping and pipe supports and attachments of the pipe supports to structures (concrete, structural steel, or embed plates). Pipe supports include rigid restraints, welded attachments to piping, struts, snubbers, spring cans, and constant supports. Inspection of pipe whip restraints are also included in this CRAD. Selection of nuclear facility piping systems for inspection should be

344

Facilities | U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC)  

Office of Science (SC) Website

Facilities Facilities Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) ASCR Home About Research Facilities Accessing ASCR Supercomputers Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility (OLCF) Argonne Leadership Computing Facility (ALCF) National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center (NERSC) Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Research & Evaluation Prototypes (REP) Innovative & Novel Computational Impact on Theory and Experiment (INCITE) ASCR Leadership Computing Challenge (ALCC) Science Highlights Benefits of ASCR Funding Opportunities Advanced Scientific Computing Advisory Committee (ASCAC) News & Resources Contact Information Advanced Scientific Computing Research U.S. Department of Energy SC-21/Germantown Building 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20585 P: (301) 903-7486 F: (301)

345

Airborne Release Fractions/Rates and Respirable Fractions for Nonreactor Nuclear Facilities, Volume II  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

TS NOT MEASUREMENT SENSITIVE DOE-HDBK-3010-94 December 1994 Reaffirmed 2013 DOE HANDBOOK AIRBORNE RELEASE FRACTIONS/RATES AND RESPIRABLE FRACTIONS FOR NONREACTOR NUCLEAR FACILITIES Volume II - Appendices U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; (615) 576-8401. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 487-4650. Order No. DE95004711 DOE-HDBK-3010-94

346

Ground Broken for New Job-Creating Accelerator Research Facility at DOE's  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Ground Broken for New Job-Creating Accelerator Research Facility at Ground Broken for New Job-Creating Accelerator Research Facility at DOE's Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Illinois Ground Broken for New Job-Creating Accelerator Research Facility at DOE's Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Illinois December 16, 2011 - 11:49am Addthis WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, ground was broken for a new accelerator research facility being built at the Department of Energy's (DOE's) Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab) in Batavia, Illinois. Supported jointly by the state of Illinois and DOE, the construction of the Illinois Accelerator Research Center (IARC) will provide a state-of-the-art facility for research, development and industrialization of particle accelerator technology, and create about 200 high-tech jobs. DOE's Office

347

Order Module--DOE O 420.2B, SAFETY OF ACCELERATOR FACILITIES | Department  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

420.2B, SAFETY OF ACCELERATOR FACILITIES 420.2B, SAFETY OF ACCELERATOR FACILITIES Order Module--DOE O 420.2B, SAFETY OF ACCELERATOR FACILITIES This module will discuss the objectives and requirements associated with the Order and the contractor requirements document. We have provided an example to help familiarize you with the material. The example will also help prepare you for the practice at the end of this module and for the criterion test. Before continuing, you should obtain a copy of the Order at DOE Directives, Regulations, and Standards Portal Home Page or through the course manager. You may need to refer to these documents to complete the example, practice, and criterion test. DOE Order Self Study Modules - DOE O 420.1B Facility Safety More Documents & Publications Order Module--DOE O 420.1B, FACILITY SAFETY

348

Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: A selected bibliography, Vol. 18. Part 2. Indexes  

SciTech Connect

This bibliography contains 3638 citations with abstracts of documents relevant to environmental restoration, nuclear facility decontamination and decommissioning (D&D), uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions. This report is the eighteenth in a series of bibliographies prepared annually for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Environmental Restoration. Citations to foreign and domestic literature of all types - technical reports, progress reports, journal articles, symposia proceedings, theses, books, patents, legislation, and research project descriptions - have been included in Part 1 of the report. The bibliography contains scientific, technical, financial, and regulatory information that pertains to DOE environmental restoration programs. The citations are separated by topic into 16 sections, including (1) DOE Environmental Restoration Program; (2) DOE D&D Program; (3) Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning; (4) DOE Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Programs; (5) NORM-Contaminated Site Restoration; (6) DOE Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Project; (7) Uranium Mill Tailings Management; (8) DOE Site-Wide Remedial Actions; (9) DOE Onsite Remedial Action Projects; (10) Contaminated Site Remedial Actions; (11) DOE Underground Storage Tank Remediation; (12) DOE Technology Development, Demonstration, and Evaluations; (13) Soil Remediation; (14) Groundwater Remediation; (15) Environmental Measurements, Analysis, and Decision-Making; and (16) Environmental Management Issues. Within the 16 sections, the citations are sorted by geographic location. If a geographic location is not specified, the citations are sorted according to the document title. In Part 2 of the report, indexes are provided for author, author affiliation, selected title phrase, selected title word, publication description, geographic location, and keyword.

NONE

1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

349

Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility Complex Compliance Demonstration for DOE Order 435.1  

SciTech Connect

This compliance demonstration document provides an analysis of the Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility (ICDF) Complex compliance with DOE Order 435.1. The ICDF Complex includes the disposal facility (landfill), evaporation pond, administration facility, weigh scale, and various staging/storage areas. These facilities were designed and constructed to be compliant with DOE Order 435.1, Resource Conservation and Recovery act Subtitle C, and Toxic Substances Control Act polychlorinated biphenyl design and construction standards. The ICDF Complex is designated as the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) facility for the receipt, staging/storage, treatment, and disposal of INL Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) waste streams.

Simonds, J.

2007-11-06T23:59:59.000Z

350

GRR/Elements/18-CA-c.1 - What Level of Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Does  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

GRR/Elements/18-CA-c.1 - What Level of Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Does GRR/Elements/18-CA-c.1 - What Level of Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Does the Facility Require < GRR‎ | Elements Jump to: navigation, search Edit 18-CA-b.1 - What Level of Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Does the Facility Require California employs a five-tier permitting program which imposes regulatory requirements matching the degree of risk posed by the level of hazardous waste: * The Full Permit Tier includes all facilities requiring a RCRA permit as well as selected non-RCRA activities under Title 22 California Code of Regulations. * The Standardized Permit Tier includes facilities that manage waste not regulated by RCRA, but regulated as hazardous waste in California. * Onsite Treatment Permits (3-Tiered) includes onsite treatment of non-RCRA waste regulated in California.

351

MORTALITY AMONG WORKERS AT THE SAVANNAH RIVER NUCLEAR FUELS PRODUCTION FACILITY  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

MORTALITY AMONG WORKERS AT THE SAVANNAH RIVER NUCLEAR FUELS MORTALITY AMONG WORKERS AT THE SAVANNAH RIVER NUCLEAR FUELS PRODUCTION FACILITY Donna L. Cragle and Janice P. Watkins, Center for Epidemiologic Research; Kathryn Robertson-DeMers, Bechtel Hanford, Inc. Donna Cragle, Oak Ridge Associated Universities, P.O. Box 117, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0117 Key Words: mortality study, radiation exposure, leukemia, occupational cohort, trend test INTRODUCTION Since 1952 the Savannah River Site (SRS), located in Aiken, South Carolina, has operated as a Department of Energy (DOE) production facility for nuclear fuels and other materials. A previous study 1 through 1980 of 9,860 white males employed at least 90 consecutive days at the SRS between 1952 and 1974 found an increased number of leukemia deaths among

352

Licensed reactor nuclear safety criteria applicable to DOE reactors  

SciTech Connect

The Department of Energy (DOE) Order DOE 5480.6, Safety of Department of Energy-Owned Nuclear Reactors, establishes reactor safety requirements to assure that reactors are sited, designed, constructed, modified, operated, maintained, and decommissioned in a manner that adequately protects health and safety and is in accordance with uniform standards, guides, and codes which are consistent with those applied to comparable licensed reactors. This document identifies nuclear safety criteria applied to NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) licensed reactors. The titles of the chapters and sections of USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.70, Standard Format and Content of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants, Rev. 3, are used as the format for compiling the NRC criteria applied to the various areas of nuclear safety addressed in a safety analysis report for a nuclear reactor. In each section the criteria are compiled in four groups: (1) Code of Federal Regulations, (2) US NRC Regulatory Guides, SRP Branch Technical Positions and Appendices, (3) Codes and Standards, and (4) Supplemental Information. The degree of application of these criteria to a DOE-owned reactor, consistent with their application to comparable licensed reactors, must be determined by the DOE and DOE contractor.

Not Available

1991-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

353

JM to Revise DOE O 420.1B, Facility Safety (9-23-10)  

Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

This approval includes revision of the three implementing Guides: DOE G 420.1-1, Nonreactor Nuclear Safety Design Criteria and Explosive Safety Criteria Guide ...

2010-09-23T23:59:59.000Z

354

Order Module--DOE-STD-1063-2011, FACILITY REPRESENTATIVES | Department of  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE-STD-1063-2011, FACILITY REPRESENTATIVES DOE-STD-1063-2011, FACILITY REPRESENTATIVES Order Module--DOE-STD-1063-2011, FACILITY REPRESENTATIVES The familiar level of this module is divided into three sections. The first section addresses the purpose and scope of DOE-STD-1063-2011, the purpose of the FR program, and the duties, responsibilities, and authorities of FRs and other key personnel. In the second section, the requirements of the FR program are discussed. The third section covers the three appendices of this standard: FR performance indicators, an FR program assessment guide, and the process to determine FR staffing. We have provided examples and a practice to help familiarize you with the material. The practice will also help prepare you for the criterion test. DOE Order Self Study Modules - DOE STD 1063, Facility Representatives

355

DOE Initiates Environmental Impact Statement for Global Nuclear Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Initiates Environmental Impact Statement for Global Nuclear Initiates Environmental Impact Statement for Global Nuclear Energy Partnership Technology Demonstrations DOE Initiates Environmental Impact Statement for Global Nuclear Energy Partnership Technology Demonstrations March 22, 2006 - 9:39am Addthis WASHINGTON , DC - The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today announced plans to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) for the technology demonstration program of the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) initiative. DOE issued in the Federal Register today an Advance Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS for the GNEP technology demonstration program and plans to issue the final Notice of Intent in summer 2006. The advance notice requests comments from the public and private sectors on the scope of the EIS, reasonable alternatives, and other relevant information.

356

DOE Initiates Environmental Impact Statement for Global Nuclear Energy  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Environmental Impact Statement for Global Nuclear Environmental Impact Statement for Global Nuclear Energy Partnership Technology Demonstrations DOE Initiates Environmental Impact Statement for Global Nuclear Energy Partnership Technology Demonstrations March 22, 2006 - 9:39am Addthis WASHINGTON , DC - The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today announced plans to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) for the technology demonstration program of the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) initiative. DOE issued in the Federal Register today an Advance Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS for the GNEP technology demonstration program and plans to issue the final Notice of Intent in summer 2006. The advance notice requests comments from the public and private sectors on the scope of the EIS, reasonable alternatives, and other relevant information.

357

DOE Office of Science Publishes Update of Landmark Plan: "Facilities...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

many of the planned facilities." For example: In 2003, the number one priority, ITER, the international collaboration that aims to harness fusion energy, which powers the...

358

DOE Permitting Hydrogen Facilities: Using Fuel Cells for Backup...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

cells provide highly effective backup to power these facilities in event of electrical grid power outages. The telecommunications industry has expanded rapidly as mobile...

359

New Horizons on the Nuclear Landscape | U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC)  

Office of Science (SC) Website

Science Highlights » 2012 Science Highlights » 2012 » New Horizons on the Nuclear Landscape Nuclear Physics (NP) NP Home About Research Facilities Science Highlights Benefits of NP Funding Opportunities Nuclear Science Advisory Committee (NSAC) News & Resources Contact Information Nuclear Physics U.S. Department of Energy SC-26/Germantown Building 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20585 P: (301) 903-3613 F: (301) 903-3833 E: sc.np@science.doe.gov More Information » June 2012 New Horizons on the Nuclear Landscape New calculations have quantified the boundaries and uncertainties of the 'chart of the nuclides'-the extended periodic table of all matter. Print Text Size: A A A Subscribe FeedbackShare Page Click to enlarge photo. Enlarge Photo Image courtesy of University of Tennessee/ORNL

360

DOE-HDBK-1169-2003; DOE Handbook Nuclear Air Cleaning Handbook  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

i i INTRODUCTION The 4th edition of the Nuclear Air Cleaning Handbook succeeds three previous editions: ERDA 76-21, Nuclear Air Cleaning Handbook (1976); ORNL/NSIC-65, Design, Construction and Testing of High-Efficiency Air Filtration Systems for Nuclear Applications (1970); and NSIC-13, Filters, Sorbents, and Air Cleaning Systems as Engineered Safeguards in Nuclear Installations (1966). It benefits from over 25 years of industry experience since the previous edition was published. Along with U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission documents and consensus standards such as the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code On Nuclear Air and Gas Treatment (ASME AG-1), this handbook addresses systems and equipment used in nuclear facilities to capture and control radioactive

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "doe nuclear facilities" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


361

The Use of Staff Augmentation Subcontracts at the National Nuclear Security Administration's Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility, IG-0887  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

The Use of Staff Augmentation The Use of Staff Augmentation Subcontracts at National Nuclear Security Administration's Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility DOE/IG-0887 May 2013 U.S. Department of Energy Office of Inspector General Office of Audits and Inspections Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 May 15, 2013 MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY FROM: Gregory H. Friedman Inspector General SUBJECT: INFORMATION: Audit Report on "The Use of Staff Augmentation Subcontracts at the National Nuclear Security Administration's Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility" BACKGROUND Shaw AREVA MOX Services, LLC (MOX Services) is responsible for the design and construction of the National Nuclear Security Administration's (NNSA) nearly $5 billion Mixed

362

Iraq nuclear facility dismantlement and disposal project (NDs Project).  

SciTech Connect

The Al Tuwaitha nuclear complex near Baghdad contains a number of facilities from Saddam Hussan's nuclear weapons program. Past military operations, lack of upkeep and looting have created an enormous radioactive waste problem at the Al Tuwaitha complex, which contains various, uncharacterized radioactive wastes, yellow cake, sealed radioactive sources, and contaminated metals that must be constantly guarded. Iraq has never had a radioactive waste disposal facility and the lack of a disposal facility means that ever increasing quantities of radioactive material must be held in guarded storage. The Iraq Nuclear Facility Dismantlement and Disposal Program (the NDs Program) has been initiated by the U.S. Department of State (DOS) to assist the Government of Iraq (GOI) in eliminating the threats from poorly controlled radioactive materials, while building human capacities so that the GOI can manage other environmental cleanups in their country. The DOS is funding the IAEA to provide technical assistance via Technical Cooperation projects. Program coordination will be provided by the DOS, consistent with GOI policies, and Sandia National Laboratories will be responsible for coordination of participants and waste management support. Texas Tech University will continue to provide in-country assistance, including radioactive waste characterization and the stand-up of the Iraq Nuclear Services Company. The GOI owns the problems in Iraq and will be responsible for implementation of the NDs Program.

Cochran, John Russell

2010-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

363

Basis for Section 3116 Determination for the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility at the Idaho National Laboratory  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

NE-ID-11226 NE-ID-11226 Revision 0 Basis for Section 3116 Determination for the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility November 2006 DOE/NE-ID-11226 Revision 0 Basis for Section 3116 Determination for the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility November 2006 ii CONTENTS ACRONYMS.............................................................................................................................................. vii 1. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE.................................................................................................. 1 2. BACKGROUND................................................................................................................................ 5 2.1 Tank Farm Facility Description.............................................................................................

364

DOE to Build Hydrogen Fuel Test Facility at West Virginia Airport |  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE to Build Hydrogen Fuel Test Facility at West Virginia Airport DOE to Build Hydrogen Fuel Test Facility at West Virginia Airport DOE to Build Hydrogen Fuel Test Facility at West Virginia Airport March 25, 2009 - 1:00pm Addthis Washington, DC - The Office of Fossil Energy's National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) today announced plans to construct and operate a hydrogen fuel production plant and vehicle fueling station at the Yeager Airport in Charleston, W.Va. The facility will use grid electricity to split water to produce pure hydrogen fuel. The fuel will be used by the airport's operations and the 130th Air Wing of the West Virginia Air National Guard. NETL will begin operations at the Yeager Airport facility in August 2009 and plans to conduct two years of testing and evaluation. The facility will be designed using "open architecture," allowing the capability to add

365

DOE G 151.1-5, Biosafety Facilities  

Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

The Guide assists DOE/NNSA field elements and operating contractors in incorporating hazardous biological agents/toxins into emergency management programs, as ...

2007-07-11T23:59:59.000Z

366

Twenty-third DOE/NRC Nuclear Air Cleaning and Treatment Conference  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This paper presents the details of the Nuclear Air Cleaning and Treatment Conference held in Buffalo, New York during July 1994. Topics discussed include: nuclear air cleaning codes and standards; waste disposal; particulate filter developments; sampling and monitoring of process and effluent streams; off-gasses from fuel reprocessing; adsorbents and adsorption; accident control and analysis; revised source terms for power plant accidents; and the highlight of the conference concerned operations at the West Valley DOE facility where construction is underway to solidify radioactive wastes.

Bellamy, R.R.; Hayes, J.J.; First, M.W. [Harvard Univ., Boston, MA (United States). Harvard Air Cleaning Lab.

1995-03-24T23:59:59.000Z

367

Preparation Guide for U. S. Department of Energy Nonreator Nuclear Facility Document Safety Analysis  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

SENSITIVE DOE-STD-3009-94 July 1994 CHANGE NOTICE NO. 1 January 2000 CHANGE NOTICE NO. 2 April 2002 DOE STANDARD PREPARATION GUIDE FOR U.S DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NONREACTOR NUCLEAR FACILITY DOCUMENTED SAFETY ANALYSES U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington, DC 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. TS TS This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from ES&H Technical Information Services, U.S. Department of Energy, (800) 473-4375, fax: (301) 903-9823. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161;

368

Preparation Guide for U. S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE-STD-3009-94 July 1994 CHANGE NOTICE NO. 12 January 2000 5 December 24 April 20021 DOE STANDARD PREPARATION GUIDE FOR U.S DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NONREACTOR NUCLEAR FACILITY DOCUMENTED SAFETY ANALYSISANALYSES REPORTS U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington, DC 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. TS This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from ES&H Technical Information Services, U.S. Department of Energy, (800) 473-4375, fax: (301) 903-9823. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161;

369

Airborne Release Fractions/Rates and Respirable Fractions for Nonreactor Nuclear Facilities, Volume 1  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

TS NOT MEASUREMENT SENSITIVE DOE-HDBK-3010-94 December 1994 Reaffirmed 2013 DOE HANDBOOK AIRBORNE RELEASE FRACTIONS/RATES AND RESPIRABLE FRACTIONS FOR NONREACTOR NUCLEAR FACILITIES Volume I - Analysis of Experimental Data U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; (615) 576-8401. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 487-4650.

370

Facility Metrics | U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC)  

Office of Science (SC) Website

Achieve an average operation time of the BER scientific user facilities as a percentage of the total scheduled annual operating time of greater than 98%. FY12: 98% of total...

371

Radiological safety training for accelerator facilities: DOE handbook  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This program management guide describes the proper implementation standard for core training as outline in the DOE Radiological Control (RadCon) Manual. Its purpose is to assist DOE employees and Managing and Operating (M&O) contractors having responsibility for implementing the core training recommended by the RadCon Manual.

NONE

1997-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

372

DOE-STD-3003-2000: Backup Power Sources For DOE Facilities -...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Technical Standards, DOE-STD-3003-2000 - January 27, 2000 Technical Standards, DOE Orders and Applicable CFRsDEAR Crosswalk - February 2, 2002 Technical Standards,...

373

DOE Cites Bechtel Jacobs Company for Nuclear Safety Violations | Department  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Jacobs Company for Nuclear Safety Violations Jacobs Company for Nuclear Safety Violations DOE Cites Bechtel Jacobs Company for Nuclear Safety Violations August 4, 2005 - 2:36pm Addthis WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Department of Energy (DOE) today notified the Bechtel Jacobs Company (BJC) that it will fine the company $247,500 for violations of the department's nuclear safety requirements. The company is the department's contractor responsible for environmental cleanup and waste management at its Oak Ridge Reservation in Tennessee. "One of our top safety priorities is to improve the performance of subcontractors, and to do that we need to hold prime contractors responsible," said John Shaw, Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health. "Our goal is to have work conducted in a manner that protects

374

Environmental Assessment for The Proposed Construction and Operation of a Biosafety Level 3 Facility at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA (DOE/EA-1442) (12/02)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Environmental Assessment for The Proposed Construction and Operation of a Biosafety Level 3 Facility at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California December 2002 Department of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration Oakland Operations Office EA for the Proposed Construction and Operation of a Biosafety Level 3 Facility at LLNL ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), has responsibility for national programs to reduce and counter threats from weapons of mass destruction including nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons (bioweapons). NNSA's bioscience work at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in support of these missions requires work with infectious agents, including those historically used for bioweapons.

375

Radiological risk guidelines for nonreactor nuclear facilities at the Pacific Northwest Laboratory  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Radiological risk evaluation guidelines for the public and workers have been developed at the Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) based upon the Nuclear Safety Policy of the US Department of Energy (DOE) established in Secretary of Energy Notice SEN-35-91 (DOE 1991). The DOE nuclear safety policy states that the general public be protected-such that no individual bears significant additional risk to health and safety from the operation of a DOE nuclear facility above the risks to which members of the general population are normally exposed. The radiological risk evaluation guidelines developed at PNL are unique in that they are (1) based upon quantitative risk goals and (2) provide a consistent level of risk management. These guidelines are used to evaluate the risk from radiological accidents that may occur during research and development activities at PNL. A safety analyst uses the frequency of the potential accident and the radiological dose to a given receptor to determine if the accident consequences meet the objectives of the Nuclear Safety Policy.

Lucas, D.E.; Ikenberry, T.A.

1994-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

376

10 C.F.R. 820: Procedural Rules for DOE Nuclear Activities |...  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

20: Procedural Rules for DOE Nuclear Activities 10 C.F.R. 820: Procedural Rules for DOE Nuclear Activities Stakeholders: DOE employees Scope: 10 C.F.R. 820 outlines the appropriate...

377

Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: A selected bibliography, Volume 18. Part 1B: Citations with abstracts, sections 10 through 16  

SciTech Connect

This bibliography contains 3,638 citations with abstracts of documents relevant to environmental restoration, nuclear facility decontamination and decommissioning (D and D), uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions. The bibliography contains scientific, technical, financial, and regulatory information that pertains to DOE environmental restoration programs. The citations are separated by topic into 16 sections, including (1) DOE Environmental Restoration Program; (2) DOE D and D Program; (3) Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning; (4) DOE Formerly Utilized sites Remedial Action Program; (5) NORM-Contaminated Site Restoration; (6) DOE Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Project; (7) Uranium Mill Tailings Management; (8) DOE Site-Wide Remedial Actions; (9) DOE Onsite Remedial Action Projects; (10) Contaminated Site Remedial Actions; (11) DOE Underground Storage Tank Remediation; (12) DOE Technology Development, Demonstration, and Evaluation; (13) Soil Remediation; (14) Groundwater Remediation; (15) Environmental Measurements, Analysis, and Decision-Making; and (16) Environmental Management Issues.

NONE

1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

378

Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: A selected bibliography, Volume 18. Part 1A: Citations with abstracts, sections 1 through 9  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

This bibliography contains 3,638 citations with abstracts of documents relevant to environmental restoration, nuclear facility decontamination and decommissioning (D and D), uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions. The bibliography contains scientific, technical, financial, and regulatory information that pertains to DOE environmental restoration programs. The citations are separated by topic into 16 sections, including (1) DOE Environmental Restoration program; (2) DOE D and D Program; (3) Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning; (4) DOE Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program; (5) NORM-Contaminated Site Restoration; (6) DOE Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Project; (7) Uranium Mill Tailings Management; (8) DOE Site-Wide Remedial Actions; (9) DOE Onsite Remedial Action Projects; (10) Contaminated Site Remedial Actions; (11) DOE Underground Storage Tank Remediation; (12) DOE Technology Development, Demonstration, and Evaluation; (13) Soil Remediation; (14) Groundwater Remediation; (15) Environmental Measurements, Analysis, and Decision-Making; and (16) Environmental Management Issues.

NONE

1997-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

379

DOE - Office of Legacy Management -- Nuclear Development Corp of America -  

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

Nuclear Development Corp of America Nuclear Development Corp of America - NY 32 FUSRAP Considered Sites Site: NUCLEAR DEVELOPMENT CORP. OF AMERICA (NY.32) Eliminated from consideration under FUSRAP Designated Name: Not Designated Alternate Name: None Location: 5 New Street , White Plains , New York NY.32-1 Evaluation Year: 1987 NY.32-2 Site Operations: Conducted experiments involving uranium recovery from scrap. NY.32-2 Site Disposition: Eliminated - No Authority - Facility was licensed to handle nuclear materials NY.32-2 NY.32-3 Radioactive Materials Handled: Yes Primary Radioactive Materials Handled: Uranium NY.32-2 Radiological Survey(s): None Indicated Site Status: Eliminated from consideration under FUSRAP Also see Documents Related to NUCLEAR DEVELOPMENT CORP. OF AMERICA

380

Integration of facility modeling capabilities for nuclear nonproliferation analysis  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Developing automated methods for data collection and analysis that can facilitate nuclearnonproliferation assessment is an important research area with significant consequences for the effective global deployment of nuclear energy. Facilitymodeling that can integrate and interpret observations collected from monitored facilities in order to ascertain their functional details will be a critical element of these methods. Although improvements are continually sought, existing facilitymodeling tools can characterize all aspects of reactor operations and the majority of nuclear fuel cycle processing steps, and include algorithms for data processing and interpretation. Assessing nonproliferation status is challenging because observations can come from many sources, including local and remote sensors that monitor facility operations, as well as open sources that provide specific business information about the monitored facilities, and can be of many different types. Although many current facility models are capable of analyzing large amounts of information, they have not been integrated in an analyst-friendly manner. This paper addresses some of these facilitymodelingcapabilities and illustrates how they could be integrated and utilized for nonproliferationanalysis. The inverse problem of inferring facility conditions based on collected observations is described, along with a proposed architecture and computer framework for utilizing facilitymodeling tools. After considering a representative sampling of key facilitymodelingcapabilities, the proposed integration framework is illustrated with several examples.

Burr, Tom [Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL); Gorensek, M. B. [Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL); Krebs, John [Argonne National Laboratory (ANL); Kress, Reid L [ORNL; Lamberti, Vincent [Y-12 National Security Complex; Schoenwald, David [ORNL; Ward, Richard C [ORNL

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "doe nuclear facilities" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


381

DOE P 430.1, Land and Facility Use Planning  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Washington, DC 20585 Washington, DC 20585 December 21, 1994 MEMORANDUM FOR SECRETARIAL OFFICERS . AND OPERATIONS OFFICE MANAGERS FROM: HAZEL R. O'LEARY /s/ SUBJECT: Land and Facility Use Policy Today, I issued an innovative Departmental policy that strengthens the stewardship of our vast lands and facilities and encourages the return of some of these national resources to their rightful owners -- the American public. The policy will stimulate local economies, cut costs and redtape. and ensure public participation in our planning processes. The new policy states: It is Department of Energy policy to manage all of its land and facilities as valuable #national resources. Our stewardship will be based on the principles of ecosystem management and sustainable development. We will integrate mission. economic.

382

Amended Record of Decision for the Interim Management of Nuclear Materials (DOE/EIS-0220) (1/26/01)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

88 88 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 18 / Friday, January 26, 2001 / Notices 1 A ''pit'' is a nuclear weapon component. 2 A physical blend of uranium oxide and plutonium oxide. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Interim Management of Nuclear Materials AGENCY: Department of Energy ACTION: Amended record of decision. SUMMARY: On December 12, 1995, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) issued a Record of Decision (ROD) and Notice of Preferred Alternatives, 60 FR 65300 (December 19, 1995), for the final environmental impact statement, Interim Management of Nuclear Materials (IMNM EIS) (DOE/EIS-0220, October 20, 1995), at the Savannah River Site (SRS), Aiken, South Carolina. As part of its decision, DOE decided to construct a new facility, the Actinide Packaging and Storage Facility (APSF), to prepare, package, and store

383

Clearance Levels For Redundant Material From Decommissioning Of Nuclear Facilities  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Currently, a great deal is happening in the regulatory field regarding the release of radiologically contaminated material: . The IAEA is working on the revision of Safety Series 89 (governing the principles of exemption and clearance) and of the TECDOC 855 on clearance levels. . The European Commission Directive on basic safety standards for protection against ionizing radiation in both nuclear and non-nuclear industries will become effective in May 2000. . The U.S. NRC has issued its draft on clearance of material from nuclear facilities (NUREG 1640), as well as an "issues" paper on the release of solid materials. The U.S. State Department has launched an International Radioactive Source Management Initiative, one of the objectives being to "develop international standards and guidelines and `harmonize' U.S. and IAEA radioactive clearance levels." Of great significance to the implementor of clearance regulations in the nuclear industry is the emergence of the NORM issue durin...

Shankar Menon Program; Shankar Menon

2000-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

384

Doe Bay Village Resort Pool & Spa Low Temperature Geothermal Facility |  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Doe Bay Village Resort Pool & Spa Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Doe Bay Village Resort Pool & Spa Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Doe Bay Village Resort Pool & Spa Low Temperature Geothermal Facility Facility Doe Bay Village Resort Sector Geothermal energy Type Pool and Spa Location Olga, Washington Coordinates Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[]}

385

A framework for nuclear facility safeguard evaluation using probabilistic methods and expert elicitation  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

With the advancement of the next generation of nuclear fuel cycle facilities, concerns of the effectiveness of nuclear facility safeguards have been increasing due to the inclusion of highly enriched material and reprocessing ...

Iamsumang, Chonlagarn

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

386

Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee, Facility Subcommittee visit to Idaho National Laboratory  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE))

The Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee, Facility Subcommittee visited the Idaho National Laboratory on 19-20 May 2010 to tour the nuclear infrastructure and to discuss the INL plans for facility...

387

INDUSTRIAL CONTROL SYSTEM CYBER SECURITY: QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS RELEVANT TO NUCLEAR FACILITIES, SAFEGUARDS AND SECURITY  

SciTech Connect

Typical questions surrounding industrial control system (ICS) cyber security always lead back to: What could a cyber attack do to my system(s) and; how much should I worry about it? These two leading questions represent only a fraction of questions asked when discussing cyber security as it applies to any program, company, business, or organization. The intent of this paper is to open a dialog of important pertinent questions and answers that managers of nuclear facilities engaged in nuclear facility security and safeguards should examine, i.e., what questions should be asked; and how do the answers affect an organization's ability to effectively safeguard and secure nuclear material. When a cyber intrusion is reported, what does that mean? Can an intrusion be detected or go un-noticed? Are nuclear security or safeguards systems potentially vulnerable? What about the digital systems employed in process monitoring, and international safeguards? Organizations expend considerable efforts to ensure that their facilities can maintain continuity of operations against physical threats. However, cyber threats particularly on ICSs may not be well known or understood, and often do not receive adequate attention. With the disclosure of the Stuxnet virus that has recently attacked nuclear infrastructure, many organizations have recognized the need for an urgent interest in cyber attacks and defenses against them. Several questions arise including discussions about the insider threat, adequate cyber protections, program readiness, encryption, and many more. These questions, among others, are discussed so as to raise the awareness and shed light on ways to protect nuclear facilities and materials against such attacks.

Robert S. Anderson; Mark Schanfein; Trond Bjornard; Paul Moskowitz

2011-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

388

DOE O 350.2B, Use of Management and Operating or Other Facility Management Contractor Employees for Services to DOE in the Washington, D.C. Area  

Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

To establish policies and procedures for management of Department of Energy (DOE), including National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), management and ...

2011-05-31T23:59:59.000Z

389

DOE/EA-1613: Environmental Assessment for the Proposed High Explosive Pressing Facility (June 2008)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE/EA-1613 DOE/EA-1613 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE PROPOSED HIGH EXPLOSIVE PRESSING FACILITY PANTEX PLANT * AMARILLO, TEXAS * JUNE 2008 Environmental Assessment for the Proposed High Explosive Pressing Facility Pantex Plant June 2008 Page i CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................ 1 2.1 Alternatives ........................................................................................................................... 1 2.1.1 Preferred Alternative ..............................................................................................

390

Final report to DOE: Matching Grant Program for the Penn State University Nuclear Engineering Program  

SciTech Connect

The DOE/Industry Matching Grant Program is designed to encourage collaborative support for nuclear engineering education as well as research between the nation's nuclear industry and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Despite a serious decline in student enrollments in the 1980s and 1990s, the discipline of nuclear engineering remained important to the advancement of the mission goals of DOE. The program is designed to ensure that academic programs in nuclear engineering are maintained and enhanced in universities throughout the U.S. At Penn State, the Matching Grant Program played a critical role in the survival of the Nuclear Engineering degree programs. Funds were used in a variety of ways to support both undergraduate and graduate students directly. Some of these included providing seed funding for new graduate research initiatives, funding the development of new course materials, supporting new teaching facilities, maintenance and purchase of teaching laboratory equipment, and providing undergraduate scholarships, graduate fellowships, and wage payroll positions for students.

Jack S. Brenizer, Jr.

2003-01-17T23:59:59.000Z

391

Neutron Scattering Facilities | U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC)  

Office of Science (SC) Website

Neutron Scattering Facilities Neutron Scattering Facilities Scientific User Facilities (SUF) Division SUF Home About User Facilities X-Ray Light Sources Neutron Scattering Facilities Nanoscale Science Research Centers Electron-Beam Microcharacterization Centers Accelerator & Detector Research & Development Principal Investigators' Meetings Scientific Highlights Construction Projects BES Home User Facilities Neutron Scattering Facilities Print Text Size: A A A RSS Feeds FeedbackShare Page This activity supports the operation of three DOE neutron scattering facilities, which are unique and effective tools for probing the structure of matter. Neutron scattering is particularly well-suited for determining the atomic positions of both light and heavy atoms in a solid and thermal fluctuations in these positions. In addition the neutron

392

Nuclear Wallet Cards at BNL | U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC...  

Office of Science (SC) Website

Wallet Cards at BNL Nuclear Physics (NP) NP Home About Research Facilities Science Highlights Benefits of NP Spinoff Applications SBIRSTTR Applications of Nuclear Science and...

393

Global Nuclear Energy Initiative at LBNL | U.S. DOE Office of...  

Office of Science (SC) Website

Global Nuclear Energy Initiative at LBNL Nuclear Physics (NP) NP Home About Research Facilities Science Highlights Benefits of NP Spinoff Applications Spinoff Archives SBIRSTTR...

394

Improved Design of Nuclear Reactor Control System | U.S. DOE...  

Office of Science (SC) Website

Improved Design of Nuclear Reactor Control System Nuclear Physics (NP) NP Home About Research Facilities Science Highlights Benefits of NP Spinoff Applications Spinoff Archives...

395

DOE/EA-1445; Construction of a Child-Care Facility (September 2002)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

CHILD CARE FACILITY CHILD CARE FACILITY AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) ACTION: Finding of No Significant Impact (FONS!) SUMMARY: The DOE has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA), DOE/EA-1445, to analyze the potential environmental consequences of a facility construction effort at the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, campus of the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL). Within the existing NETL site, the DOE would construct aI-story, approximately 8,600 ft2 building to provide childcare housing for a maximum of 90 children. Based on the analysis in the EA, the DOE has detennined that the proposed action is not a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment within the meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969,42 United States Code 4321 et seq.

396

DOE Programs and Major Site/Facility Contractors | Scientific and Technical  

Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

DOE Programs and Major Site/Facility Contractors DOE Programs and Major Site/Facility Contractors Print page Print page Email page Email page DOE Programs and Major Site/Facility Contractors have the option to provide metadata via the Announcement Notice 241.1 web notice, Batch Upload, or Harvesting. The metadata-based announcement notice generated and supplied by DOE and contractors for unclassified STI products includes the basic Dublin Core metadata elements, supplemented by a few DOE data elements, and a minimal number of subelements necessary to further identify the announcement/availability of the STI product. Principal Investigators and Authors A Principal Investigator is designated by a research organization to have an appropriate level of authority and responsibility for the proper conduct of the research, the use of funds, and administrative requirements,

397

Lessons Learned from the 200 West Pump and Treatment Facility Construction Project at the US DOE Hanford Site - A Leadership for Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Gold-Certified Facility  

SciTech Connect

CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation Company (CHPRC) designed, constructed, commissioned, and began operation of the largest groundwater pump and treatment facility in the U.S. Department of Energys (DOE) nationwide complex. This one-of-a-kind groundwater pump and treatment facility, located at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation Site (Hanford Site) in Washington State, was built to an accelerated schedule with American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds. There were many contractual, technical, configuration management, quality, safety, and Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) challenges associated with the design, procurement, construction, and commissioning of this $95 million, 52,000 ft groundwater pump and treatment facility to meet DOEs mission objective of treating contaminated groundwater at the Hanford Site with a new facility by June 28, 2012. The project teams successful integration of the projects core values and green energy technology throughout design, procurement, construction, and start-up of this complex, first-of-its-kind Bio Process facility resulted in successful achievement of DOEs mission objective, as well as attainment of LEED GOLD certification, which makes this Bio Process facility the first non-administrative building in the DOE Office of Environmental Management complex to earn such an award.

Dorr, Kent A.; Ostrom, Michael J.; Freeman-Pollard, Jhivaun R.

2013-01-11T23:59:59.000Z

398

Pyroprocessing of Fast Flux Test Facility Nuclear Fuel  

SciTech Connect

Used nuclear fuel from the Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) was recently transferred to the Idaho National Laboratory and processed by pyroprocessing in the Fuel Conditioning Facility. Approximately 213 kg of uranium from sodium-bonded metallic FFTF fuel was processed over a one year period with the equipment previously used for the processing of EBR-II used fuel. The peak burnup of the FFTF fuel ranged from 10 to 15 atom% for the 900+ chopped elements processed. Fifteen low-enriched uranium ingots were cast following the electrorefining and distillation operations to recover approximately 192 kg of uranium. A material balance on the primary fuel constituents, uranium and zirconium, during the FFTF campaign will be presented along with a brief description of operating parameters. Recoverable uranium during the pyroprocessing of FFTF nuclear fuel was greater than 95% while the purity of the final electrorefined uranium products exceeded 99%.

B.R. Westphal; G.L. Fredrickson; G.G. Galbreth; D. Vaden; M.D. Elliott; J.C. Price; E.M. Honeyfield; M.N. Patterson; L. A. Wurth

2013-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

399

Benefits of explosive cutting for nuclear-facility applications  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

The study discussed in this report was a cost/benefit analysis to determine: (1) whether explosive cutting is cost effective in comparison with alternative metal sectioning methods and (2) whether explosive cutting would reduce radiation exposure or provide other benefits. Two separate approaches were pursued. The first was to qualitatively assess cutting methods and factors involved in typical sectioning cases and then compare the results for the cutting methods. The second was to prepare estimates of work schedules and potential radiation exposures for candidate sectioning methods for two hypothetical, but typical, sectioning tasks. The analysis shows that explosive cutting would be cost effective and would also reduce radiation exposure when used for typical nuclear facility sectioning tasks. These results indicate that explosive cutting should be one of the principal cutting methods considered whenever steel or similar metal structures or equipment in a nuclear facility are to be sectioned for repair or decommissioning. 13 figures, 7 tables. (DLC)

Hazelton, R.F.; Lundgren, R.A.; Allen, R.P.

1981-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

400

DOE-HDBK-1169-2003; DOE Handbook Nuclear Air Cleaning Handbook  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

0-1 0-1 CHAPTER 10 FIRE PROTECTION 10.1 Introduction A separate chapter on fire protection is included in this Handbook because fire is the dominant public risk accident in nuclear facilities. This chapter focuses on fire prevention and protection of the ventilation systems in industrial and Government facilities such as energy production reactors, fuel processing and reprocessing facilities, research establishments, special applications facilities, waste processing plants, and storage and salvage sites. High-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters are extremely susceptible to damage when exposed to the effects of fire, smoke, and water; it is the intent of this chapter to provide the designer with the experience gained over the years from hard lessons learned in protecting HEPA filters from fire.

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "doe nuclear facilities" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


401

Idaho National Laboratory DOE-NE's National Nuclear Capability-  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

4-2023 4-2023 Idaho National Laboratory DOE-NE's National Nuclear Capability- Developing and Maintaining the INL Infrastructure TEN-YEAR SITE PLAN DOE/ID-11474 Final June 2012 Sustainable INL continues to exceed DOE goals for reduction in the use of petroleum fuels - running its entire bus fleet on biodiesel while converting 75% of its light-duty fleet to E85 fuel. The Energy Systems Laboratory (ESL), slated for completion this year, will be a state-of-the-art laboratory with high-bay lab space where leading bioenergy feedstock processing, advanced battery testing, and hybrid energy systems integration research will be conducted. The Advanced Test Reactor is the world's most advanced nuclear research capability - crucial to (1) the ongoing development of safe, efficient

402

Assessment of a hot hydrogen nuclear propulsion fuel test facility  

DOE Green Energy (OSTI)

Subsequent to the announcement of the Space Exploration Initiative (SEI), several studies and review groups have identified nuclear thermal propulsion as a high priority technology for development. To achieve the goals of SEI to place man on Mars, a nuclear rocket will operate at near 2700K and in a hydrogen environment at near 60 atmospheres. Under these conditions, the operational lifetime of the rocket will be limited by the corrosion rate at the hydrogen/fuel interface. Consequently, the Los Alamos National Laboratory has been evaluating requirements and design issues for a test facility. The facility will be able to directly heat fuel samples by electrical resistance, microwave deposition, or radio frequency induction heating to temperatures near 3000K. Hydrogen gas at variable pressure and temperatures will flow through the samples. The thermal gradients, power density, and operating times envisioned for nuclear rockets will be duplicated as close as reasonable. The post-sample flow stream will then be scrubbed and cooled before reprocessing. The baseline design and timetable for the facility will be discussed. 7 refs.

Watanabe, H.H.; Howe, S.D.; Wantuck, P.J.

1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

403

DOE-STD-1083-95; DOE Standard Requesting and Granting Exemptions to Nuclear Safety Rules  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

3-95 3-95 February 1995 DOE STANDARD REQUESTING AND GRANTING EXEMPTIONS TO NUCLEAR SAFETY RULES U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831; (615) 576-8401. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 487-4650. Order No. DE95007451 DOE-STD-1083-95 iii FOREWORD 1. This Department of Energy (DOE) standard has been prepared by the Office of Environment, Safety and Health with the assistance of Hank George of Synergy Consultants and

404

DOE Order Self Study Modules - DOE O 452.1D, Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety Program and  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

CONTINUING TRAINING SELF- CONTINUING TRAINING SELF- STUDY PROGRAM DOE O 452.1D NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVE AND WEAPON SURETY PROGRAM DOE O 452.2D NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVE SAFETY DOE O 452.1D and DOE O 452.2D Familiar Level June 2011 1 DOE O 452.1D NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVE AND WEAPON SURETY PROGRAM DOE O 452.2D NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVE SAFETY FAMILIAR LEVEL OBJECTIVES Given the familiar level of this module and the resources listed below, you will be able to answer the following questions: 1. What are the objectives of implementing U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) O 452.1D? 2. Define the following terms as they apply to this Order: Abnormal environment High explosive detonation 3. What are the objectives of implementing DOE O 452.2D? 4. What are the general requirements of DOE O 452.2D?

405

Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide Review Questions  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Oak Ridge Operations Oak Ridge Operations Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide Review Questions Name: Organization: Directions: This is an open-book evaluation. Complete the questions, and submit your answers (hand-written or electronically) to the Training Center. Someone will check and grade your answers. If you achieve a score of at least 80%, you will receive a completion certificate. Questions: 1. What is safety basis (SB)? 2. How does SB fit with integrated safety management (ISM)? 3. In what primary DOE documents can requirements and guidance for SB be found? 4. What are the "graded approach" factors that DOE takes into account in ensuring that the level of analysis and documentation and the actions used to comply with the requirements are

406

Review and Approval of Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Documents (Documented Safety Analyses and Technical Safety Requirements)  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

February 1996 February 1996 CHANGE NOTICE NO. 2 Date November 2005 DOE STANDARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF NUCLEAR FACILITY SAFETY BASIS DOCUMENTS (DOCUMENTED SAFETY ANALYSES AND TECHNICAL SAFETY REQUIREMENTS) U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington, DC 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from ES&H Technical Information Services, U.S. Department of Energy, (800) 473-4375, Fax: (301) 903-9823. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Adminis tration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 605-6000.

407

Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide Review Questions  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Oak Ridge Operations Oak Ridge Operations Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide Review Questions Name: Organization: Directions: This is an open-book evaluation. Complete the questions, and submit your answers (hand-written or electronically) to the Training Center. Someone will check and grade your answers. If you achieve a score of at least 80%, you will receive a completion certificate. Questions: 1. What is safety basis (SB)? 2. How does SB fit with integrated safety management (ISM)? 3. In what primary DOE documents can requirements and guidance for SB be found? 4. What are the "graded approach" factors that DOE takes into account in ensuring that the level of analysis and documentation and the actions used to comply with the requirements are

408

DOE Solid-State Lighting in Higher Ed Facilities  

SciTech Connect

The focus of the workshop was on higher education facilities because college and university campuses are an important market for lighting products and they use almost every kind of luminaire on the market. This workshop was seen as a chance for SSL manufacturers large and small to get the inside scoop from a group of people that specify, pay for, install, use, maintain, and dispose of lighting systems for nearly every type of application. Workshop attendees explored the barriers to SSL adoption, the applications where SSL products could work better than existing technologies, and where SSL luminaires are currently falling short. This report summarizes the Workshop activities and presentation highlights.

Miller, Naomi J.; Curry, Ku' Uipo J.

2010-07-20T23:59:59.000Z

409

DOE/EIS-0236, Oakland Operations Office, National Ignition Facility Final  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

DOE/EIS-0236, Oakland Operations Office, National Ignition Facility DOE/EIS-0236, Oakland Operations Office, National Ignition Facility Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement to the Stockpile Stewardship and Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Volume II: Response to Public Comments (January 2 DOE/EIS-0236, Oakland Operations Office, National Ignition Facility Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement to the Stockpile Stewardship and Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Volume II: Response to Public Comments (January 2 DOE issued the Draft SEIS for public review and comment by mailings to stakeholders and by announcements in the Federal Register (FR) on November 5, 1999, (64 FR 60430) (Attachment 4 of Volume I) and on November 12, 1999 (64 FR 61635) correcting a document title (Attachment 5 of Volume I). On

410

The performance assessment process for DOE low-level waste disposal facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Safety of the low-level waste disposal facilities, as well as al US DOE facilities, is a primary criterion in their design and operation. Safety of low-level waste disposal facilities is evaluated from two perspectives. Operational safety is evaluated based on the perceived level of hazard of the operation. The safety evaluations vary from simple safety assessments to very complex safety analysis reports, depending on the degree of hazard associated with the facility operation. Operational requirements for the Department's low-level waste disposal facilities, including long-term safety are contained in DOE Order 5820.2A, Radioactive Waste Management (1). This paper will focus on the process of conducting long-term performance analyses rather than on operational safety analysis.

Wilhite, E.L.

1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

411

The performance assessment process for DOE low-level waste disposal facilities  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Safety of the low-level waste disposal facilities, as well as al US DOE facilities, is a primary criterion in their design and operation. Safety of low-level waste disposal facilities is evaluated from two perspectives. Operational safety is evaluated based on the perceived level of hazard of the operation. The safety evaluations vary from simple safety assessments to very complex safety analysis reports, depending on the degree of hazard associated with the facility operation. Operational requirements for the Department`s low-level waste disposal facilities, including long-term safety are contained in DOE Order 5820.2A, Radioactive Waste Management (1). This paper will focus on the process of conducting long-term performance analyses rather than on operational safety analysis.

Wilhite, E.L.

1992-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

412

Structural Integrity Program for the Calcined Solids Storage Facilities at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center  

SciTech Connect

This report documents the activities of the structural integrity program at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center relevant to the high-level waste Calcined Solids Storage Facilities and associated equipment, as required by DOE M 435.1-1, ''Radioactive Waste Management Manual.'' Based on the evaluation documented in this report, the Calcined Solids Storage Facilities are not leaking and are structurally sound for continued service. Recommendations are provided for continued monitoring of the Calcined Solids Storage Facilities.

Bryant, J.W.; Nenni, J.A.

2003-05-22T23:59:59.000Z

413

DOE M 452.2-1A Admin Chg 1, Nuclear Explosive Safety Manual  

Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

This Department of Energy (DOE) Manual provides supplemental details on selected topics to support the requirements of DOE O 452.2D, Nuclear Explosive Safety, ...

2009-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

414

Nuclear criticality safety analysis summary report: The S-area defense waste processing facility  

SciTech Connect

The S-Area Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) can process all of the high level radioactive wastes currently stored at the Savannah River Site with negligible risk of nuclear criticality. The characteristics which make the DWPF critically safe are: (1) abundance of neutron absorbers in the waste feeds; (2) and low concentration of fissionable material. This report documents the criticality safety arguments for the S-Area DWPF process as required by DOE orders to characterize and to justify the low potential for criticality. It documents that the nature of the waste feeds and the nature of the DWPF process chemistry preclude criticality.

Ha, B.C.

1994-10-21T23:59:59.000Z

415

Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: a selected bibliography  

SciTech Connect

This bibliography contains 693 references with abstracts on the subject of nuclear facility decommissioning, uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions. Foreign, as well as domestic, literature of all types - technical reports, progress reports, journal articles, conference papers, symposium proceedings, theses, books, patents, legislation, and research project descriptions - has been included in this publication. The bibliography contains scientific (basic research as well as applied technology), economic, regulatory, and legal literature pertinent to the US Department of Energy's Remedial Action Program. Major chapters are Surplus Facilities Management Program, Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning, Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program, Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program, Grand Junction Remedial Action Program, and Uranium Mill Tailings Management. Chapter sections for chapters 1 and 2 include: Design, Planning, and Regulations; Site Surveys; Decontamination Studies; Dismantlement and Demolition; Land Decontamination and Reclamation; Waste Disposal; and General Studies. The references within each chapter are arranged alphabetically by leading author. References having no individual author are arranged by corporate author or by title. Indexes are provided for (1) author; (2) corporate affiliation; (3) title; (4) publication description; (5) geographic location; and (6) keywords. An appendix of 202 bibliographic references without abstracts or indexes has been included in this bibliography. This appendix represents literature identified but not abstracted due to time constraints.

Owen, P.T.; Knox, N.P.; Fielden, J.M.; Johnson, C.A.

1982-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

416

Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: a selected bibliography  

SciTech Connect

This bibliography contains 693 references with abstracts on the subject of nuclear facility decommissioning, uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions. Foreign, as well as domestic, literature of all types - technical reports, progress reports, journal articles, conference papers, symposium proceedings, theses, books, patents, legislation, and research project descriptions - has been included in this publication. The bibliography contains scientific (basic research as well as applied technology), economic, regulatory, and legal literature pertinent to the US Department of Energy's Remedial Action Program. Major chapters are Surplus Facilities Management Program, Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning, Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program, Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program, Grand Junction Remedial Action Program, and Uranium Mill Tailings Management. Chapter sections for chapters 1 and 2 include: Design, Planning, and Regulations; Site Surveys; Decontamination Studies; Dismantlement and Demolition; Land Decontamination and Reclamation; Waste Disposal; and General Studies. The references within each chapter are arranged alphabetically by leading author. References having no individual author are arranged by corporate author or by title. Indexes are provided for (1) author; (2) corporate affiliation; (3) title; (4) publication description; (5) geographic location; and (6) keywords. An appendix of 202 bibliographic references without abstracts or indexes has been included in this bibliography. This appendix represents literature identified but not abstracted due to time constraints.

Owen, P.T.; Knox, N.P.; Fielden, J.M.; Johnson, C.A.

1982-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

417

The Advanced Test Reactor National Scientific User Facility Advancing Nuclear Technology  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

To help ensure the long-term viability of nuclear energy through a robust and sustained research and development effort, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) designated the Advanced Test Reactor and associated post-irradiation examination facilities a National Scientific User Facility (ATR NSUF), allowing broader access to nuclear energy researchers. The mission of the ATR NSUF is to provide access to world-class nuclear research facilities, thereby facilitating the advancement of nuclear science and technology. The ATR NSUF seeks to create an engaged academic and industrial user community that routinely conducts reactor-based research. Cost free access to the ATR and PIE facilities is granted based on technical merit to U.S. university-led experiment teams conducting non-proprietary research. Proposals are selected via independent technical peer review and relevance to DOE mission. Extensive publication of research results is expected as a condition for access. During FY 2008, the first full year of ATR NSUF operation, five university-led experiments were awarded access to the ATR and associated post-irradiation examination facilities. The ATR NSUF has awarded four new experiments in early FY 2009, and anticipates awarding additional experiments in the fall of 2009 as the results of the second 2009 proposal call. As the ATR NSUF program mature over the next two years, the capability to perform irradiation research of increasing complexity will become available. These capabilities include instrumented irradiation experiments and post-irradiation examinations on materials previously irradiated in U.S. reactor material test programs. The ATR critical facility will also be made available to researchers. An important component of the ATR NSUF an education program focused on the reactor-based tools available for resolving nuclear science and technology issues. The ATR NSUF provides education programs including a summer short course, internships, faculty-student team projects and faculty/staff exchanges. In June of 2008, the first week-long ATR NSUF Summer Session was attended by 68 students, university faculty and industry representatives. The Summer Session featured presentations by 19 technical experts from across the country and covered topics including irradiation damage mechanisms, degradation of reactor materials, LWR and gas reactor fuels, and non-destructive evaluation. High impact research results from leveraging the entire research infrastructure, including universities, industry, small business, and the national laboratories. To increase overall research capability, ATR NSUF seeks to form strategic partnerships with university facilities that add significant nuclear research capability to the ATR NSUF and are accessible to all ATR NSUF users. Current partner facilities include the MIT Reactor, the University of Michigan Irradiated Materials Testing Laboratory, the University of Wisconsin Characterization Laboratory, and the University of Nevada, Las Vegas transmission Electron Microscope User Facility. Needs for irradiation of material specimens at tightly controlled temperatures are being met by dedication of a large in-pile pressurized water loop facility for use by ATR NSUF users. Several environmental mechanical testing systems are under construction to determine crack growth rates and fracture toughness on irradiated test systems.

T. R. Allen; J. B. Benson; J. A. Foster; F. M. Marshall; M. K. Meyer; M. C. Thelen

2009-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

418

DOE-HDBK-1145-2001; Radiological Safety Training for Plutonium Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

SENSITIVE SENSITIVE DOE-HDBK-1145-2001 August 2001 DOE STANDARD Radiological Safety Training for Plutonium Facilities U.S. Department of Energy AREA TRNG Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from ES&H Technical Information Services, U.S. Department of Energy, (800) 473-4375, fax (301) 903-9823. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 605-6000. Radiological Safety Training for Plutonium Facilities DOE-HDBK-1145-2001 Program Management Guide Foreword This Handbook describes an implementation process for training as recommended in

419

Assessment of nuclear safety and nuclear criticality potential in the Defense Waste Processing Facility  

SciTech Connect

A panel of experts in the fields of process engineering, process chemistry, and safety analysis met together on January 26, 1993, and February 19, 1993, to discuss nuclear safety and nuclear criticality potential in the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) processes. Nuclear safety issues and possibilities of nuclear criticality incidents in the DWPF were examined in depth. The discussion started at the receipt of slurry feeds: The Low Point Pump Pit Precipitate Tank (LPPPPT) and the Low Point Pump Pit Sludge Tank (LPPPST), and went into detail the whole DWPF processes. This report provides discussion of each of the areas and processes of the DWPF in terms of potential nuclear safety issues and nuclear criticality concerns.

Ha, B.C.

1993-05-10T23:59:59.000Z

420

ASTM STANDARD GUIDE FOR EVALUATING DISPOSAL OPTIONS FOR REUSE OF CONCRETE FROM NUCLEAR FACILITY DECOMMISSIONING  

SciTech Connect

Within the nuclear industry, many contaminated facilities that require decommissioning contain huge volumes of concrete. This concrete is generally disposed of as low-level waste at a high cost. Much of the concrete is lightly contaminated and could be reused as roadbed, fill material, or aggregate for new concrete, thus saving millions of dollars. However, because of the possibility of volumetric contamination and the lack of a method to evaluate the risks and costs of reusing concrete, reuse is rarely considered. To address this problem, Argonne National Laboratory-East (ANL-E) and the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory teamed to write a ''concrete protocol'' to help evaluate the ramifications of reusing concrete within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). This document, titled the Protocol for Development of Authorized Release Limits for Concrete at U.S. Department of Energy Site (1) is based on ANL-E's previously developed scrap metal recycle protocols; on the 10-step method outlined in DOE's draft handbook, Controlling Release for Reuse or Recycle of Property Containing Residual Radioactive Material (2); and on DOE Order 4500.5, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment (3). The DOE concrete protocol was the basis for the ASTM Standard Guide for Evaluating Disposal Options for Concrete from Nuclear Facility Decommissioning, which was written to make the information available to a wider audience outside DOE. The resulting ASTM Standard Guide is a more concise version that can be used by the nuclear industry worldwide to evaluate the risks and costs of reusing concrete from nuclear facility decommissioning. The bulk of the ASTM Standard Guide focuses on evaluating the dose and cost for each disposal option. The user calculates these from the detailed formulas and tabulated data provided, then compares the dose and cost for each disposal option to select the best option that meets regulatory requirements. With this information, the reuse of concrete may be possible, thus reducing dose and decontamination and decommissioning costs. This paper outlines ten steps required to release concrete for reuse and discusses the disposal options covered in the ASTM Standard Guide.

Phillips, Ann Marie; Meservey, Richard H.

2003-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "doe nuclear facilities" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


421

Notices DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DOE/NSF Nuclear Science Advisory  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

58 Federal Register 58 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 20, 2013 / Notices DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DOE/NSF Nuclear Science Advisory Committee AGENCY: Department of Energy, Office of Science. ACTION: Notice of open meeting. SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the DOE/NSF Nuclear Science Advisory Committee (NSAC). The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of these meetings be announced in the Federal Register. DATES: Thursday, December 19, 2013, 9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m. ADDRESSES: Gaithersburg Marriott Washingtonian Center, 9751 Washingtonian Boulevard, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20878, (301) 590-0044. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brenda L. May, U.S. Department of Energy; SC-26/Germantown Building,

422

Conceptual design report: Nuclear materials storage facility renovation. Part 6, Alternatives study  

SciTech Connect

The Nuclear Materials Storage Facility (NMSF) at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) was a Fiscal Year (FY) 1984 line-item project completed in 1987 that has never been operated because of major design and construction deficiencies. This renovation project, which will correct those deficiencies and allow operation of the facility, is proposed as an FY 97 line item. The mission of the project is to provide centralized intermediate and long-term storage of special nuclear materials (SNM) associated with defined LANL programmatic missions and to establish a centralized SNM shipping and receiving location for Technical Area (TA)-55 at LANL. Based on current projections, existing storage space for SNM at other locations at LANL will be loaded to capacity by approximately 2002. This will adversely affect LANUs ability to meet its mission requirements in the future. The affected missions include LANL`s weapons research, development, and testing (WRD&T) program; special materials recovery; stockpile survelliance/evaluation; advanced fuels and heat sources development and production; and safe, secure storage of existing nuclear materials inventories. The problem is further exacerbated by LANL`s inability to ship any materials offsite because of the lack of receiver sites for material and regulatory issues. Correction of the current deficiencies and enhancement of the facility will provide centralized storage close to a nuclear materials processing facility. The project will enable long-term, cost-effective storage in a secure environment with reduced radiation exposure to workers, and eliminate potential exposures to the public. This report is organized according to the sections and subsections outlined by Attachment 111-2 of DOE Document AL 4700.1, Project Management System. It is organized into seven parts. This document, Part VI - Alternatives Study, presents a study of the different storage/containment options considered for NMSF.

1995-07-14T23:59:59.000Z

423

DOE nuclear material packaging manual: storage container requirements for plutonium oxide materials  

Science Conference Proceedings (OSTI)

Loss of containment of nuclear material stored in containers such as food-pack cans, paint cans, or taped slip lid cans has generated concern about packaging requirements for interim storage of nuclear materials in working facilities such as the plutonium facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). In response, DOE has recently issued DOE M 441.1 'Nuclear Material Packaging Manual' with encouragement from the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. A unique feature compared to transportation containers is the allowance of filters to vent flammable gases during storage. Defining commonly used concepts such as maximum allowable working pressure and He leak rate criteria become problematic when considering vented containers. Los Alamos has developed a set of container requirements that are in compliance with 441.1 based upon the activity of heat-source plutonium (90% Pu-238) oxide, which bounds the requirements for weapons-grade plutonium oxide. The pre and post drop-test He leak rates depend upon container size as well as the material contents. For containers that are routinely handled, ease of handling and weight are a major consideration. Relatively thin-walled containers with flat bottoms are desired yet they cannot be He leak tested at a differential pressure of one atmosphere due to the potential for plastic deformation of the flat bottom during testing. The He leak rates and He leak testing configuration for containers designed for plutonium bearing materials will be presented. The approach to meeting the other manual requirements such as corrosion and thermal degradation resistance will be addressed. The information presented can be used by other sites to evaluate if their conditions are bounded by LANL requirements when considering procurement of 441.1 compliant containers.

Veirs, D Kirk [Los Alamos National Laboratory

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

424

Argonne's role in DOE/NNSA International Nuclear Safeguards and...  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Nuclear Safety Materials Disposition Decontamination & Decommissioning Nuclear Criticality Safety Nuclear Data Program Nuclear Waste Form Modeling Departments Engineering...

425

ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGE TO DOE O 474.2, NUCLEAR MATERIAL CONTROL...  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Chg 1: 8-3-2011 NUCLEAR MATERIAL CONTROL AND ACCOUNTABILITY U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Office of Health, Safety and Security DOE O 474.2 DOE O 474.2 1 6-27-2011 NUCLEAR...

426

Does nuclear matter bind at large $N_c$?  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

The existence of nuclear matter at large $N_c$ is investigated in the framework of effective hadronic models of the Walecka type. This issue is strongly related to the nucleon-nucleon attraction in the scalar channel, and thus to the nature of the light scalar mesons. Different scenarios for the light scalar sector correspond to different large $N_c$ scaling properties of the parameters of the hadronic models. In all realistic phenomenological scenarios for the light scalar field(s) responsible for the attraction in the scalar channel it is found that nuclear matter does not bind in the large $N_c$ world. We thus conclude that $N_c = 3$ is in this respect special: 3 is fortunately not large at all and allows for nuclear matter, while large $N_c$ would not.

Bonanno, Luca

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

427

DOE Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation DNN | Open Energy Information  

Open Energy Info (EERE)

Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation DNN Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation DNN Jump to: navigation, search Name DOE Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation (DNN) Place Washington, Washington, DC Zip 20585 Product String representation "Washington D.C. ... ear operations." is too long. Coordinates 38.89037°, -77.031959° Loading map... {"minzoom":false,"mappingservice":"googlemaps3","type":"ROADMAP","zoom":14,"types":["ROADMAP","SATELLITE","HYBRID","TERRAIN"],"geoservice":"google","maxzoom":false,"width":"600px","height":"350px","centre":false,"title":"","label":"","icon":"","visitedicon":"","lines":[],"polygons":[],"circles":[],"rectangles":[],"copycoords":false,"static":false,"wmsoverlay":"","layers":[],"controls":["pan","zoom","type","scale","streetview"],"zoomstyle":"DEFAULT","typestyle":"DEFAULT","autoinfowindows":false,"kml":[],"gkml":[],"fusiontables":[],"resizable":false,"tilt":0,"kmlrezoom":false,"poi":true,"imageoverlays":[],"markercluster":false,"searchmarkers":"","locations":[{"text":"","title":"","link":null,"lat":38.89037,"lon":-77.031959,"alt":0,"address":"","icon":"","group":"","inlineLabel":"","visitedicon":""}]}

428

Decommissioning of Ris's nuclear facilities. Descriptions and cost assessment.  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

nuclear facilities at Ris National Laboratory to be decommissioned and gives an assessment of the work to be done and the costs incurred. Three decommissioning scenarios were considered with decay times of 10, 25 and 40 years for the DR 3 reactor. The assessments conclude, however, that there will not be much to gain by allowing for the longer decay periods; some operations still will need to be performed remotely. Furthermore, the report describes some of the legal and licensing framework for the decommissioning and gives an assessment of the amounts of radioactive waste to be transferred to a Danish repository. ISBN 87-550-2844-6; 87-550-2846-2 (Internet)

Edited Kurt Lauridsen

2001-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

429

DOE Office of Science Publishes Update of Landmark Plan, "Facilities for  

Office of Science (SC) Website

DOE Office of DOE Office of Science Publishes Update of Landmark Plan, "Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Year Outlook" News Featured Articles Science Headlines 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 Presentations & Testimony News Archives Contact Information Office of Science U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Ave., SW Washington, DC 20585 P: (202) 586-5430 10.11.07 DOE Office of Science Publishes Update of Landmark Plan, "Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Year Outlook" Print Text Size: A A A Subscribe FeedbackShare Page WASHINGTON, DC - The U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science today released a comprehensive update of its landmark 2003 publication, Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Year Outlook, that shows the

430

Order Module--DOE O 452.1D, NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVE AND WEAPON SURETY PROGRAM,  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Order Module--DOE O 452.1D, NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVE AND WEAPON SURETY Order Module--DOE O 452.1D, NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVE AND WEAPON SURETY PROGRAM, DOE O 452.2D, NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVE SAFETY Order Module--DOE O 452.1D, NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVE AND WEAPON SURETY PROGRAM, DOE O 452.2D, NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVE SAFETY "To prevent accidents and inadvertent or unauthorized use of U.S. nuclear weapons and nuclear explosives. In conjunction with the Department of Defense (DoD), to protect the public health and safety by providing dual-agency judgment and responsibility for the safety, security, and use control (surety) of nuclear weapons. To establish nuclear explosive surety standards and nuclear weapon design surety requirements. To address surety vulnerabilities during all phases of the nuclear weapon life cycle and to upgrade surety during weapon stockpile refurbishments and/or new weapon

431

Facilities  

NLE Websites -- All DOE Office Websites (Extended Search)

Facilities Facilities Facilities LANL's mission is to develop and apply science and technology to ensure the safety, security, and reliability of the U.S. nuclear deterrent; reduce global threats; and solve other emerging national security and energy challenges. Contact Operator Los Alamos National Laboratory (505) 667-5061 Some LANL facilities are available to researchers at other laboratories, universities, and industry. Unique facilities foster experimental science, support LANL's security mission DARHT accelerator DARHT's electron accelerators use large, circular aluminum structures to create magnetic fields that focus and steer a stream of electrons down the length of the accelerator. Tremendous electrical energy is added along the way. When the stream of high-speed electrons exits the accelerator it is

432

Format and Content Guide for DOE Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

2 2 G Approved: XX-XX-XX IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE for use with DOE M 435.1-1 Format and Content Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Performance Assessments and Composite Analyses U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DOE G 435.1-2 i DRAFT XX-XX-XX LLW PA and CA Format and Content Guide Revision 0, XX-XX-XX Format and Content Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Performance Assessments and Composite Analyses CONTENTS List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v List of Acronyms and Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v PART A: INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

433

Performance assessment of DOE spent nuclear fuel and surplus plutonium  

SciTech Connect

Yucca Mountain, in southern Nevada, is under consideration by the US Department of Energy (DOE) as a potential site for the disposal of the nation`s radioactive wastes in a geologic repository. The wastes consist of commercial spent fuel, DOE spent nuclear fuel (SNF), high level waste (HLW), and surplus plutonium. The DOE was mandated by Congress in the fiscal 1997 Energy and Water Appropriations Act to complete a viability assessment (VA) of the repository in September of 1998. The assessment consists of a preliminary design concept for the critical elements of the repository, a total system performance assessment (TSPA), a plan and cost estimate for completion of the license application, and an estimate of the cost to construct and operate the repository. This paper presents the results of the sensitivity analyses that were conducted to examine the behavior of DOE SNF and plutonium waste forms in the environment of the base case repository that was modeled for the TSPA-VA. Fifteen categories of DOE SNF and two Plutonium waste forms were examined and their contribution to radiation dose to humans was evaluated.

Duguid, J.O.; Vallikat, V.; McNeish, J.

1998-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

434

The value of historical records and corporate memory in environmental restoration work at DOE facilities  

SciTech Connect

Historical records of older envirorunental and waste-related work at Department of Energy (DOE) facilities are often overlooked in the rush to meet current-time deadlines. Nevertheless, historical records of activities, and corporate memory of why specific activities took place, can prove extremely useful and cost-effective in modem environmental work. This paper wig concentrate on the value of historical records for older sites within the DOE complex. Already available information can save thousands to millions of dollars in the course of environmental restoration work at one DOE facility. This money can be better spent on sites and areas that require these expenses, rather than re-developing information that is already available and otherwise known. The intent of this paper is to present information on the value and types of historical records available at DOE facilities, and examples of possible current uses of those records during current site environmental work. Illustrative examples of the use of historical records are drawn from experience gained at the Rocky Flats Plant (RFP), near Denver, Colorado. It is hoped that, where possible, such historical information will see increasing use in order to allow for more efficient, effective, and less costly environmental work at DOE facilities.

Swenson, B.A. (EG and G Rocky Flats, Inc., Golden, CO (United States). Rocky Flats Plant); Blaha, F.J. (Wright Water Engineers, Inc. (United States)); Sieben, A.K. (Doty and Associates (United States))

1993-01-28T23:59:59.000Z

435

Radiological Training for Tritium Facilities DOE-HDBK-1105-2002  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Superseding Superseding DOE-HDBK-1105-96 December 1996 DOE HANDBOOK RADIOLOGICAL TRAINING FOR TRITIUM FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy AREA TRNG Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. TS This document has been reproduced from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from ES&H Technical Information Services, U.S. Department of Energy, (800) 473-4375, fax: (301) 903-9823. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 605-6000. (PART 1 OF 4) Radiological Training for Tritium Facilities Program Management Guide

436

Fusion Nuclear Science Facility (FNSF) before Upgrade to Component Test Facility (CTF)  

SciTech Connect

The compact (R0~1.2-1.3m) Fusion Nuclear Science Facility (FNSF) is aimed at providing a fully integrated, continuously driven fusion nuclear environment of copious fusion neutrons. This facility would be used to test, discover, understand, and innovate scientific and technical solutions for the challenges facing DEMO, by addressing the multi-scale synergistic interactions involving fusion plasma material interactions, tritium fuel cycle, power extraction, and the nuclear effects on materials. Such a facility properly designed would provide, initially at the JET-level plasma pressure (~30%T2) and conditions (e.g., Hot-Ion H-Mode), an outboard fusion neutron flux of 0.25 MW/m2 while requiring a fusion power of 19 MW. If and when this research operation is successful, its performance can be extended to 1 MW/m2 and 76 MW by reaching for twice the JET plasma pressure and Q. High-safety factor q and moderate- plasmas would minimize plasma-induced disruptions, helping to deliver reliably a neutron fluence of 1 MW-yr/m2 and a duty factor of 10% presently anticipated for the FNS research. Success of this research will depend on achieving time-efficient installation and replacement of all components using extensive remote handling (RH). This in turn requires modular designs for all internal components, including the single-turn toroidal field coil center-post with RH-compatible bi-directional sliding joints. Such device goals would further dictate placement of support structures and vacuum seal welds behind the internal and shielding components. If these further goals could be achieved, the FNSF would provide a ready upgrade path to the Component Test Facility (CTF), which would aim to test, at higher neutron fluence and duty cycle, the demanding fusion nuclear engineering and technologies for DEMO. This FNSF-CTF strategy would be complementary to the ITER and the Broader Approach programs, and thereby help mitigate the risks of an aggressive world fusion DEMO R&D Program. The key physics and technology research needed in the next decade to manage the potential risks of this FNSF are identified.

Peng, Yueng Kay Martin [ORNL

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

437

DOE-HDBK-1113-98, CN 1, Reaffirm; Radiological Safety Training for Uranium Facilities  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

REAFFIRMATION WITH REAFFIRMATION WITH ERRATA April 2005 DOE HANDBOOK RADIOLOGICAL SAFETY TRAINING FOR URANIUM FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy FSC 6910 Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. DOE-HDBK-1113-98 ii This document has been reproduced from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from ES&H Technical Information Services, U.S. Department of Energy, (800) 473-4375, fax: (301) 903-9823. Available to the public from U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 605-6000. DOE-HDBK-1113-98 iii April 2005 Reaffirmation with Errata Changes to DOE-HDBK-1113-98, Radiological

438

DOE Office of Science Publishes Update of Landmark Plan: "Facilities for  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Office of Science Publishes Update of Landmark Plan: Office of Science Publishes Update of Landmark Plan: "Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Year Outlook" DOE Office of Science Publishes Update of Landmark Plan: "Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Year Outlook" October 11, 2007 - 3:21pm Addthis WASHINGTON, DC - The U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science today released a comprehensive update of its landmark 2003 publication, Facilities for the Future of Science: A Twenty-Year Outlook, that shows the agency has made "significant progress" in deploying the scientific facilities and instruments that the United States needs to capture world scientific leadership, extend the frontiers of science and support the Department's missions. When it was published four years ago, the Facilities Outlook was the first

439

Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility Complex Compliance Demonstration for DOE Order 435.1  

SciTech Connect

This compliance demonstration document provides an analysis of the Idaho CERCLA Disposal Facility (ICDF) Complex compliance with DOE Order 435.1. The ICDF Complex includes the disposal facility (landfill), evaporation pond, admin facility, weigh scale, decon building, treatment systems, and various staging/storage areas. These facilities were designed and are being constructed to be compliant with DOE Order 435.1, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Subtitle C, and Toxic Substances Control Act polychlorinated biphenyl design and construction standards. The ICDF Complex is designated as the central Idaho National Laboratory (INL) facilityyy for the receipt, staging/storage, treatment, and disposal of INL Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) waste streams. This compliance demonstration document discusses the conceptual site model for the ICDF Complex area. Within this conceptual site model, the selection of the area for the ICDF Complex is discussed. Also, the subsurface stratigraphy in the ICDF Complex area is discussed along with the existing contamination beneath the ICDF Complex area. The designs for the various ICDF Complex facilities are also included in this compliance demonstration document. These design discussions are a summary of the design as presented in the Remedial Design/Construction Work Plans for the ICDF landfill and evaporation pond and the Staging, Storage, Sizing, and Treatment Facility. Each of the major facilities or systems is described including the design criteria.

J. Simonds

2006-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

440

Preoperational Subsurface Conditions at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Service Wastewater Discharge Facility  

SciTech Connect

The Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC) Service Wastewater Discharge Facility replaces the existing percolation ponds as a disposal facility for the INTEC Service Waste Stream. A preferred alternative for helping decrease water content in the subsurface near INTEC, closure of the existing ponds is required by the INTEC Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Record of Decision (ROD) for Waste Area Group 3 Operable Unit 3-13 (DOE-ID 1999a). By August 2002, the replacement facility was constructed approximately 2 miles southwest of INTEC, near the Big Lost River channel. Because groundwater beneath the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) is protected under Federal and State of Idaho regulations from degradation due to INEEL activities, preoperational data required by U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 5400.1 were collected. These data include preexisting physical, chemical, and biological conditions that could be affected by the discharge; background levels of radioactive and chemical components; pertinent environmental and ecological parameters; and potential pathways for human exposure or environmental impact. This document presents specific data collected in support of DOE Order 5400.1, including: four quarters of groundwater sampling and analysis of chemical and radiological parameters; general facility description; site specific geology, stratigraphy, soils, and hydrology; perched water discussions; and general regulatory requirements. However, in order to avoid duplication of previous information, the reader is directed to other referenced publications for more detailed information. Documents that are not readily available are compiled in this publication as appendices. These documents include well and borehole completion reports, a perched water evaluation letter report, the draft INEEL Wellhead Protection Program Plan, and the Environmental Checklist.

Ansley, Shannon L.

2002-02-20T23:59:59.000Z

Note: This page contains sample records for the topic "doe nuclear facilities" from the National Library of EnergyBeta (NLEBeta).
While these samples are representative of the content of NLEBeta,
they are not comprehensive nor are they the most current set.
We encourage you to perform a real-time search of NLEBeta
to obtain the most current and comprehensive results.


441

Rocky Flats CAAS System Recalibrated, Retested, and Analyzed to Install in the Criticality Experiments Facility at the Nevada Test Site  

E-Print Network (OSTI)

Nuclear Facilities, DOE- HDBK-3010-94, Vol. 1 (1994). 8. T.in the DOE Handbook, DOE-HDBK-3010-94 (Ref. 7). According to

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

442

DOE G 430.1-2, Implementation Guide for Surveillance and Maintenance during Facility Transition and Disposition  

Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

As DOE facilities complete mission operations and are declared excess, they pass into a transition phase that ultimately prepares them for disposition. The ...

1999-09-29T23:59:59.000Z

443

DOE-STD-1128-98; Changes to DOE-STD-1128-98, "Guide for Occupational Radiological Protection in Plutonium Facilities"  

Energy.gov (U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)) Indexed Site

Changes to DOE-STD-1128-98, "Guide for Occupational Radiological Protection in Plutonium Changes to DOE-STD-1128-98, "Guide for Occupational Radiological Protection in Plutonium Facilities Section/Page Change Cover Change "Metric" to "Not Measurement Sensitive". Throughout the document Change "the DOE Radiological Control Manual (RCM)" to "the DOE standard DOE- STD-1098-99, Radiological Control (RCS)". Change "RCM" to "RCS". Replace (DOE, 1993c) with (DOE, 1998a). Replace (DOE, 19941) with (DOE, 1999b). Delete reference to DOE Order 5700C, Quality Assurance. Replace ANSI N13.6-1989 (ANSI, 1996) with ANSI/HPS N13.6 (ANSI, 1999a). Change "ANSI N323-1993 (ANSI, 1993)" to "ANSI N323a (ANSI, 1997b)". Change "DO