Sample records for nonreactor nuclear safety

  1. Preparation Of Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2014-11-12T23:59:59.000Z

    This Department of Energy (DOE) Standard (STD), DOE-STD-3009-2014, describes a method for preparing a Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) that is acceptable to DOE for nonreactor nuclear facilities.

  2. Nonreactor Nuclear Safety Design Criteria and Explosive Safety Criteria Guide for Use with DOE O 420.1, Facility Safety

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2000-03-28T23:59:59.000Z

    This Guide provides guidance on the application of requirements for nonreactor nuclear facilities and explosives facilities of Department of Energy (DOE) O 420.1, Facility Safety, Section 4.1, Nuclear and Explosives Safety Design Criteria. No cancellation.

  3. Guidelines for Preparing Criticality Safety Evaluations at Department of Energy Non-Reactor Nuclear Facilities

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2007-02-07T23:59:59.000Z

    This standard provides a framework for generating Criticality Safety Evaluations (CSE) supporting fissionable material operations at Department of Energy (DOE) nonreactor nuclear facilities. This standard imposes no new criticality safety analysis requirements.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  5. Nonreactor Nuclear Safety Design Guide for use with DOE O 420.1C, Facility Safety

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2012-12-04T23:59:59.000Z

    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 420.1C. Cancels DOE G 420.1-1.

  6. Preparation Of Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis -

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What's Possible forPortsmouth/Paducah ProjectPRE-AWARD ACCOUNTINGQuantitative hiRX Measurements

  7. Preparation of Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis

    Broader source: Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn April 23, 2014, an OHA AdministrativeofDepartment DOE-STD-3009-94 July 1994A coolingThe

  8. Nuclear Engineer

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This position is located in the Nuclear Safety Division which has specific responsibility for managing the development, analysis, review, and approval of non-reactor nuclear facility safety bases...

  9. Nuclear Engineer

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This position is located in the Nuclear Safety Division (NSD) which has specific responsibility for managing the development, analysis, review, and approval of non-reactor nuclear facility safety...

  10. Nuclear Engineering Nuclear Criticality Safety

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Kemner, Ken

    development, Nuclear Operations Division (NOD) waste management and storage activities and other laboratoryNuclear Engineering Nuclear Criticality Safety The Nuclear Engineering Division (NE) of Argonne National Laboratory is experienced in performing criticality safety and shielding evaluations for nuclear

  11. Design of Safety Significant Safety Instrumented Systems Used at DOE Non-Reactor Nuclear Facilities

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels DataDepartment of Energy Your Density Isn't Your Destiny:Revised Finding of No53197E T A * S H I E L D *DepartmentTSDepartment3,of

  12. Nuclear Safety Regulatory Framework

    Broader source: Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    overall Nuclear Safety Policy & ESH Goals Safety Basis Review and Approval In the DOE governance model, contractors responsible for the facility develop the safety basis and...

  13. Nuclear-fuel-cycle risk assessment: descriptions of representative non-reactor facilities, Sections 15-19

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Schneider, K.J.

    1982-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Information is presented under the following section headings: fuel reprocessing; spent fuel and high-level and transuranic waste storage; spent fuel and high-level and transuranic waste disposal; low-level and intermediate-level waste disposal; and, transportation of radioactive materials in the nuclear fuel cycle. In each of the first three sections a description is given on the mainline process, effluent processing and waste management systems, plant layout, and alternative process schemes. Safety information and a summary are also included in each. The section on transport of radioactive materials includes information on the transportation of uranium ore, uranium ore concentrate, UF/sub 6/, PuO/sub 2/ powder, unirradiated uranium and mixed-oxide fuel assemblies, spent fuel, solidified high-level waste, contact-handled transuranic waste, remote-handled transuranic waste, and low and intermediate level nontransuranic waste. A glossary is included. (JGB)

  14. Office of Nuclear Safety

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Office of Nuclear Safety establishes nuclear safety requirements and expectations for the Department to ensure protection of workers and the public from the hazards associated with nuclear operations with all Department operations.

  15. Nuclear-fuel-cycle risk assessment: descriptions of representative non-reactor facilities. Sections 1-14

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Schneider, K.J.

    1982-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Fuel Cycle Risk Assessment Program was initiated to provide risk assessment methods for assistance in the regulatory process for nuclear fuel cycle facilities other than reactors. This report, the first from the program, defines and describes fuel cycle elements that are being considered in the program. One type of facility (and in some cases two) is described that is representative of each element of the fuel cycle. The descriptions are based on real industrial-scale facilities that are current state-of-the-art, or on conceptual facilities where none now exist. Each representative fuel cycle facility is assumed to be located on the appropriate one of four hypothetical but representative sites described. The fuel cycles considered are for Light Water Reactors with once-through flow of spent fuel, and with plutonium and uranium recycle. Representative facilities for the following fuel cycle elements are described for uranium (or uranium plus plutonium where appropriate): mining, milling, conversion, enrichment, fuel fabrication, mixed-oxide fuel refabrication, fuel reprocessing, spent fuel storage, high-level waste storage, transuranic waste storage, spent fuel and high-level and transuranic waste disposal, low-level and intermediate-level waste disposal, and transportation. For each representative facility the description includes: mainline process, effluent processing and waste management, facility and hardware description, safety-related information and potential alternative concepts for that fuel cycle element. The emphasis of the descriptive material is on safety-related information. This includes: operating and maintenance requirements, input/output of major materials, identification and inventories of hazardous materials (particularly radioactive materials), unit operations involved, potential accident driving forces, containment and shielding, and degree of hands-on operation.

  16. Nuclear Safety Research and Development...

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    Nuclear Safety Research and Development Proposal Review and Prioritization Process and Criteria Nuclear Safety Research and Development Program Office of Nuclear Safety Office of...

  17. Nuclear Explosive Safety Manual

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2009-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

    This Manual provides supplemental details to support the requirements of DOE O 452.2D, Nuclear Explosive Safety.

  18. Nuclear Explosive Safety

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2015-01-26T23:59:59.000Z

    This Department of Energy (DOE) Order establishes requirements to implement the nuclear explosive safety (NES) elements of DOE O 452.1E, Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety Program, or successor directive, for routine and planned nuclear explosive operations (NEOs).

  19. Nuclear Explosive Safety

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2014-07-10T23:59:59.000Z

    The Order establishes requirements to implement the nuclear explosive safety (NES) elements of DOE O 452.1E, Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety Program, for routine and planned nuclear explosive operations (NEOs).

  20. Nuclear Safety (Pennsylvania)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Nuclear Safety Division conducts a comprehensive nuclear power plant oversight review program of the nine reactors at the five nuclear power sites in Pennsylvania. It also monitors the...

  1. Guidelines for Preparing Criticality Safety Evaluations at Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facilities

    Broader source: Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742Energy ChinaofSchaefer To: CongestionDevelopment ofofthePerformance RequirementsSTD-3007-2007

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn April 23, 2014, an OHA AdministrativeofDepartment DOE-STD-3009-94 July 1994 CHANGE

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn April 23, 2014, an OHA AdministrativeofDepartment DOE-STD-3009-94 July 1994

  4. Promulgating Nuclear Safety Requirements

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    1996-05-15T23:59:59.000Z

    Applies to all Nuclear Safety Requirements Adopted by the Department to Govern the Conduct of its Nuclear Activities. Cancels DOE P 410.1. Canceled by DOE N 251.85.

  5. Nuclear Explosive Safety

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2009-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

    This Order establishes requirements to implement the nuclear explosive safety elements of DOE O 452.1D, Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety Program, for routine and planned nuclear explosive operations. Cancels DOE O 452.2C. Admin Chg 1, 7-10-13

  6. Nuclear Explosive Safety

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2009-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

    This Department of Energy (DOE) Order establishes requirements to implement the nuclear explosive safety (NES) elements of DOE O 452.1D, Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety Program, for routine and planned nuclear explosive operations (NEOs). Cancels DOE O 452.2C. Admin Chg 1, dated 7-10-13, cancels DOE O 452.2D.

  7. Office of Nuclear Facility Safety Programs

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Office of Nuclear Facility Safety Programs establishes nuclear safety requirements related to safety management programs that are essential to the safety of DOE nuclear facilities.

  8. Nuclear Explosive Safety

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2006-06-12T23:59:59.000Z

    The directive provides supplemental details to support the requirements of DOE O 452.2C, Nuclear Explosive Safety, dated 6-12-06. Canceled by DOE M 452.2-1A.

  9. Nuclear Explosive Safety

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2006-06-12T23:59:59.000Z

    The directive establishes specific nuclear explosive safety (NES) program requirements to implement the DOE NES standards and other NES criteria for routine and planned nuclear explosive operations. Cancels DOE O 452.2B. Canceled by DOE O 452.2D.

  10. Safety Culture in Nuclear Installations

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    IAEA-TECDOC-1329 Safety Culture in Nuclear Installations, Guidance for use in the Enhancement of Safety Culture, International Atomic Energy Agency IAEA, December 2002.

  11. Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard The Nuclear Safety Information (NSI) Dashboard provides a new user interface to the Occurrence Reporting...

  12. Nuclear Explosive Safety Manual - DOE Directives, Delegations...

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    1A Admin Chg 1, Nuclear Explosive Safety Manual by Carl Sykes Functional areas: Administrative Change, Defense Nuclear Facility Safety and Health Requirement, Nuclear Safety,...

  13. PRELIMINARY NUCLEAR CRITICALITY NUCLEAR SAFETY EVLAUATION FOR THE CONTAINER SURVEILLANCE AND STORAGE CAPABILITY PROJECT

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Low, M; Matthew02 Miller, M; Thomas Reilly, T

    2007-04-30T23:59:59.000Z

    Washington Safety Management Solutions (WSMS) provides criticality safety services to Washington Savannah River Company (WSRC) at the Savannah River Site. One activity at SRS is the Container Surveillance and Storage Capability (CSSC) Project, which will perform surveillances on 3013 containers (hereafter referred to as 3013s) to verify that they meet the Department of Energy (DOE) Standard (STD) 3013 for plutonium storage. The project will handle quantities of material that are greater than ANS/ANSI-8.1 single parameter mass limits, and thus required a Nuclear Criticality Safety Evaluation (NCSE). The WSMS methodology for conducting an NCSE is outlined in the WSMS methods manual. The WSMS methods manual currently follows the requirements of DOE-O-420.1B, DOE-STD-3007-2007, and the Washington Savannah River Company (WSRC) SCD-3 manual. DOE-STD-3007-2007 describes how a NCSE should be performed, while DOE-O-420.1B outlines the requirements for a Criticality Safety Program (CSP). The WSRC SCD-3 manual implements DOE requirements and ANS standards. NCSEs do not address the Nuclear Criticality Safety (NCS) of non-reactor nuclear facilities that may be affected by overt or covert activities of sabotage, espionage, terrorism or other security malevolence. Events which are beyond the Design Basis Accidents (DBAs) are outside the scope of a double contingency analysis.

  14. Nuclear Explosive Safety Manual

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2009-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

    This Department of Energy (DOE) Manual provides supplemental details on selected topics to support the requirements of DOE O 452.2D, Nuclear Explosive Safety, dated 4/14/09. Cancels DOE M 452.2-1. Admin Chg 1, dated 7-10-13, cancels DOE M 452.2-1A.

  15. Nuclear Explosive Safety Evaluation Processes

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2009-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

    This Manual provides supplemental details to support the nuclear explosive safety evaluation requirement of DOE O 452.2D, Nuclear Explosive Safety. Does not cancel other directives. Admin Chg 1, 7-10-13.

  16. CRAD, Nuclear Safety Delegations for Documented Safety Analysis...

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    Safety Delegations for Documented Safety Analysis Approval - January 8, 2015 (EA CRAD 31-09, Rev. 0) CRAD, Nuclear Safety Delegations for Documented Safety Analysis Approval -...

  17. Nuclear explosive safety study process

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1997-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Nuclear explosives by their design and intended use require collocation of high explosives and fissile material. The design agencies are responsible for designing safety into the nuclear explosive and processes involving the nuclear explosive. The methodology for ensuring safety consists of independent review processes that include the national laboratories, Operations Offices, Headquarters, and responsible Area Offices and operating contractors with expertise in nuclear explosive safety. A NES Study is an evaluation of the adequacy of positive measures to minimize the possibility of an inadvertent or deliberate unauthorized nuclear detonation, high explosive detonation or deflagration, fire, or fissile material dispersal from the pit. The Nuclear Explosive Safety Study Group (NESSG) evaluates nuclear explosive operations against the Nuclear Explosive Safety Standards specified in DOE O 452.2 using systematic evaluation techniques. These Safety Standards must be satisfied for nuclear explosive operations.

  18. Nuclear Reactions and Reactor Safety

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Onuchic, José

    Nuclear Reactions and Reactor Safety DO NOT LICK We haven't entirely nailed down what element nuclear chain reaction, 1938 #12;Nuclear Chain Reactions Do nuclear chain reactions lead to runaway explosions? or ? -Controlled nuclear chain reactions possible: control energy release/sec -> More

  19. Nuclear reactor safety device

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Hutter, Ernest (Wilmette, IL)

    1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A safety device is disclosed for use in a nuclear reactor for axially repositioning a control rod with respect to the reactor core in the event of an upward thermal excursion. Such safety device comprises a laminated helical ribbon configured as a tube-like helical coil having contiguous helical turns with slidably abutting edges. The helical coil is disclosed as a portion of a drive member connected axially to the control rod. The laminated ribbon is formed of outer and inner laminae. The material of the outer lamina has a greater thermal coefficient of expansion than the material of the inner lamina. In the event of an upward thermal excursion, the laminated helical coil curls inwardly to a smaller diameter. Such inward curling causes the total length of the helical coil to increase by a substantial increment, so that the control rod is axially repositioned by a corresponding amount to reduce the power output of the reactor.

  20. Hot Cell Facility (HCF) Safety Analysis Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MITCHELL,GERRY W.; LONGLEY,SUSAN W.; PHILBIN,JEFFREY S.; MAHN,JEFFREY A.; BERRY,DONALD T.; SCHWERS,NORMAN F.; VANDERBEEK,THOMAS E.; NAEGELI,ROBERT E.

    2000-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Safety Analysis Report (SAR) is prepared in compliance with the requirements of DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports, and has been written to the format and content guide of DOE-STD-3009-94 Preparation Guide for U. S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports. The Hot Cell Facility is a Hazard Category 2 nonreactor nuclear facility, and is operated by Sandia National Laboratories for the Department of Energy. This SAR provides a description of the HCF and its operations, an assessment of the hazards and potential accidents which may occur in the facility. The potential consequences and likelihood of these accidents are analyzed and described. Using the process and criteria described in DOE-STD-3009-94, safety-related structures, systems and components are identified, and the important safety functions of each SSC are described. Additionally, information which describes the safety management programs at SNL are described in ancillary chapters of the SAR.

  1. Nuclear Safety Regulatory Framework

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels DataDepartment of Energy Your Density Isn'tOrigin of Contamination in ManyDepartment of Energy NorthBDepartment of Energy Nuclear Safety

  2. CRAD, Facility Safety- Nuclear Facility Safety Basis

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    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.

  3. Nuclear Explosive Safety Evaluation Processes

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2009-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

    This Manual provides supplemental details to support the nuclear explosive safety (NES) evaluation requirement of Department of Energy (DOE) Order (O) 452.2D, Nuclear Explosive Safety, dated 4/14/09. Admin Chg 1, dated 7-10-13, cancels DOE M 452.2-2.

  4. Nuclear Reactor Safety Design Criteria

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    1993-01-19T23:59:59.000Z

    The order establishes nuclear safety criteria applicable to the design, fabrication, construction, testing, and performance requirements of nuclear reactor facilities and safety class structures, systems, and components (SSCs) within these facilities. Cancels paragraphs 8a and 8b of DOE 5480.6. Cancels DOE O 5480.6 in part. Certified 11-18-10.

  5. Nuclear reactor safety device

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Hutter, E.

    1983-08-15T23:59:59.000Z

    A safety device is described for use in a nuclear reactor for axially repositioning a control rod with respect to the reactor core in the event of a thermal excursion. It comprises a laminated strip helically configured to form a tube, said tube being in operative relation to said control rod. The laminated strip is formed of at least two materials having different thermal coefficients of expansion, and is helically configured such that the material forming the outer lamina of the tube has a greater thermal coefficient of expansion than the material forming the inner lamina of said tube. In the event of a thermal excursion the laminated strip will tend to curl inwardly so that said tube will increase in length, whereby as said tube increases in length it exerts a force on said control rod to axially reposition said control rod with respect to said core.

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

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels DataDepartment of Energy Your Density Isn't Your Destiny:Revised Finding of No Significant Impact610-94 December8-96 August 199600T

  7. Status and Value of International Standards for Nuclear Criticality Safety

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hopper, Calvin Mitchell [ORNL] [ORNL

    2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This presentation provides an update to the author's standards report provided at the ICNC-2007 meeting. It includes a discussion about the difference between, and the value of participating in, the development of international 'consensus' standards as opposed to nonconsensus standards. Standards are developed for a myriad of reasons. Generally, standards represent an agreed upon, repeatable way of doing something as defined by an individual or group of people. They come in various types. Examples include personal, family, business, industrial, commercial, and regulatory such as military, community, state, federal, and international standards. Typically, national and international 'consensus' standards are developed by individuals and organizations of diverse backgrounds representing the subject matter users and developers of a service or product and other interested parties or organizations. Within the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Technical Committee 85 (TC85) on nuclear energy, Subcommittee 5 (SC5) on nuclear fuel technology, there is a Working Group 8 (WG8) on standardization of calculations, procedures, and practices related to criticality safety. WG8 has developed, and is developing, ISO standards within the category of nuclear criticality safety of fissionable materials outside of reactors (i.e., nonreactor fissionable material nuclear fuel cycle facilities). Since the presentation of the ICNC-2007 report, WG8 has issued three new finalized international standards and is developing two more new standards. Nearly all elements of the published WG8 ISO standards have been incorporated into IAEA nonconsensus guides and standards. The progression of consensus standards development among international partners in a collegial environment establishes a synergy of different concepts that broadens the perspectives of the members. This breadth of perspectives benefits the working group members in their considerations of consensus standards developments in their own countries. A testament to the value of the international standards efforts is that nearly all elements of the published WG8 ISO standards have been incorporated into IAEA nonconsensus guides and standards and are mainly consistent with international ISO member domestic standards.

  8. Nuclear Explosive Safety Evaluation Processes - DOE Directives...

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    2 Admin Chg 1, Nuclear Explosive Safety Evaluation Processes by Carl Sykes Functional areas: Administrative Change, Defense Nuclear Facility Safety and Health Requirement, Defense...

  9. NEW - DOE O 420.1 Chg 1, Facility Safety

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    The Order establishes facility and programmatic safety requirements for DOE and NNSA for nuclear safety design criteria, fire protection, criticality safety, natural phenomena hazards (NPH) mitigation, and System Engineer Program. This Page Change is limited in scope to changes necessary to invoke DOE-STD-1104, Review and Approval of Nuclear Facility Safety Basis and Safety Design Basis Document, and revised DOE-STD-3009-2014, Preparation of Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis as required methods. DOE O 420.1C Chg 1, dated 2-27-15, cancels DOE O 420.1C, dated 12-4-12.

  10. Facility Safety (9-23-10)--Withdrawn

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2010-09-23T23:59:59.000Z

    Withdrawn, 5-19-2014--This approval includes revision of the three implementing Guides: DOE G 420.1-1, Nonreactor Nuclear Safety Design Criteria and Explosive Safety Criteria Guide for Use with DOE O 420.1, Facility Safety; DOE G 420.1-2, Guide for the Mitigation of Natural Phenomena Hazards for DOE Nuclear Facilities and NonNuclear Facilities; and DOE G 420.1-3, Implementation Guide for DOE Fire Protection and Emergency Services Programs for Use with DOE O 420.1B, Facility Safety

  11. Nuclear reactor safety heat transfer

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jones, O.C.

    1982-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Reviewed is a book which has 5 parts: Overview, Fundamental Concepts, Design Basis Accident-Light Water Reactors (LWRs), Design Basis Accident-Liquid-Metal Fast Breeder Reactors (LMFBRs), and Special Topics. It combines a historical overview, textbook material, handbook information, and the editor's personal philosophy on safety of nuclear power plants. Topics include thermal-hydraulic considerations; transient response of LWRs and LMFBRs following initiating events; various accident scenarios; single- and two-phase flow; single- and two-phase heat transfer; nuclear systems safety modeling; startup and shutdown; transient response during normal and upset conditions; vapor explosions, natural convection cooling; blockages in LMFBR subassemblies; sodium boiling; and Three Mile Island.

  12. Safety of Nuclear Explosive Operations

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2001-08-07T23:59:59.000Z

    This directive establishes responsibilities and requirements to ensure the safety of routine and planned nuclear explosive operations and associated activities and facilities. Cancels DOE O 452.2A and DOE G 452.2A-1A. Canceled by DOE O 452.2C.

  13. Autoclave nuclear criticality safety analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    D`Aquila, D.M. [Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., Piketon, OH (United States); Tayloe, R.W. Jr. [Battelle, Columbus, OH (United States)

    1991-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    Steam-heated autoclaves are used in gaseous diffusion uranium enrichment plants to heat large cylinders of UF{sub 6}. Nuclear criticality safety for these autoclaves is evaluated. To enhance criticality safety, systems are incorporated into the design of autoclaves to limit the amount of water present. These safety systems also increase the likelihood that any UF{sub 6} inadvertently released from a cylinder into an autoclave is not released to the environment. Up to 140 pounds of water can be held up in large autoclaves. This mass of water is sufficient to support a nuclear criticality when optimally combined with 125 pounds of UF{sub 6} enriched to 5 percent U{sup 235}. However, water in autoclaves is widely dispersed as condensed droplets and vapor, and is extremely unlikely to form a critical configuration with released UF{sub 6}.

  14. Nuclear Safety Information Agreement Between the U.S. Nuclear...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Information Agreement Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, and the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Environment,...

  15. Total safety: A new safety culture to integrate nuclear safety and operational safety

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Saji, G. [Japan Atomic Energy Research Institute, Ibaraki-ken (Japan); Murphy, G.A. [ed.

    1991-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The creation of a complete and thorough safety culture is proposed for the purpose of providing additional assurance about nuclear safety and improving the performance of nuclear power plants. The safety philosophy developed a combination of the former hardware-oriented nuclear safety approach and recent operational safety concepts. The improvement of the latter, after TMI-2 and Chernobyl, has been proven very effective in reducing the total risk associated with nuclear power plants. The first part of this article introduces a {open_quotes}total safety{close_quotes} concept. This extends the concept of {open_quotes}nuclear safety{close_quotes} and makes it closer to the public perception of safety. This concept is defined by means of a taxonomy of total safety. The second part of the article shows that total safety can be achieved by integrating it into a modern quality assurance (QA) system since it is tailored to make implementation into a framework of QA easier. The author believes that the outstanding success experienced by various industries as a result of introducing the modern QA system should lead to its application for ensuring the safety and performance of nuclear facilities. 15 refs., 3 figs.

  16. Elements of a nuclear criticality safety program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hopper, C.M.

    1995-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Nuclear criticality safety programs throughout the United States are quite successful, as compared with other safety disciplines, at protecting life and property, especially when regarded as a developing safety function with no historical perspective for the cause and effect of process nuclear criticality accidents before 1943. The programs evolved through self-imposed and regulatory-imposed incentives. They are the products of conscientious individuals, supportive corporations, obliged regulators, and intervenors (political, public, and private). The maturing of nuclear criticality safety programs throughout the United States has been spasmodic, with stability provided by the volunteer standards efforts within the American Nuclear Society. This presentation provides the status, relative to current needs, for nuclear criticality safety program elements that address organization of and assignments for nuclear criticality safety program responsibilities; personnel qualifications; and analytical capabilities for the technical definition of critical, subcritical, safety and operating limits, and program quality assurance.

  17. A philosophy for space nuclear systems safety

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Marshall, A.C.

    1992-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The unique requirements and contraints of space nuclear systems require careful consideration in the development of a safety policy. The Nuclear Safety Policy Working Group (NSPWG) for the Space Exploration Initiative has proposed a hierarchical approach with safety policy at the top of the hierarchy. This policy allows safety requirements to be tailored to specific applications while still providing reassurance to regulators and the general public that the necessary measures have been taken to assure safe application of space nuclear systems. The safety policy used by the NSPWG is recommended for all space nuclear programs and missions.

  18. Systems Issues in Nuclear Reactor Safety

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    de Weck, Olivier L.

    Systems Issues in Nuclear Reactor Safety Commissioner George ApostolakisCommissioner George Apostolakis U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission CmrApostolakis@nrc.gov MIT SDM Conference on Systems Thinking, source, and special nuclear materials to ensure adequate protection of public health and safety, 3

  19. FLUOR HANFORD SAFETY MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    GARVIN, L J; JENSEN, M A

    2004-04-13T23:59:59.000Z

    This document summarizes safety management programs used within the scope of the ''Project Hanford Management Contract''. The document has been developed to meet the format and content requirements of DOE-STD-3009-94, ''Preparation Guide for US. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analyses''. This document provides summary descriptions of Fluor Hanford safety management programs, which Fluor Hanford nuclear facilities may reference and incorporate into their safety basis when producing facility- or activity-specific documented safety analyses (DSA). Facility- or activity-specific DSAs will identify any variances to the safety management programs described in this document and any specific attributes of these safety management programs that are important for controlling potentially hazardous conditions. In addition, facility- or activity-specific DSAs may identify unique additions to the safety management programs that are needed to control potentially hazardous conditions.

  20. WIPP-016, Rev. 0 Nuclear Criticality Safety Evaluation for

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    WIPP-016, Rev. 0 Nuclear Criticality Safety Evaluation for Contact-Handled Transuranic Waste/2008 Guidance (if applicable): _______________________ #12;NUCLEAR CRITICALITY SAFETY EVALUATION FOR CONTACT, directors, employees, agents, consultants or personal services contractors. #12;NUCLEAR CRITICALITY SAFETY

  1. Nuclear Safety Research and Development Program Proposal Submittal...

    Broader source: Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    Nuclear Safety Research and Development Program Proposal Submittal Instructions for Fiscal Year 2015 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Nuclear Safety Research and Development (NSR&D) Program...

  2. Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Update - Dale...

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Update - Dale Govan, Departmental Representative to the DNFSB Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Update - Dale Govan,...

  3. Nuclear Explosive Safety - DOE Directives, Delegations, and Requiremen...

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    2D Admin Chg 1, Nuclear Explosive Safety by Carl Sykes This Department of Energy (DOE) Order establishes requirements to implement the nuclear explosive safety (NES) elements of...

  4. Nuclear Explosive Safety - DOE Directives, Delegations, and Requiremen...

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    52.2E, Nuclear Explosive Safety by Angela Chambers Functional areas: Safety, Security This Department of Energy (DOE) Order establishes requirements to implement the nuclear...

  5. Western University Nuclear Radiation Safety Inspection Checklist

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Sinnamon, Gordon J.

    May 2012 Western University Nuclear Radiation Safety Inspection Checklist Permit Holder to nuclear substances or radiation devices is restricted to authorized radiation users listed on the permit radiation labs whenever unsealed nuclear substances are used in these designated locations. 1.7(d

  6. Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data. 1992 annual report: Nonreactors: Volume 7, No. 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The annual report of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission`s Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data (AEOD) is devoted to the activities performed during 1992. The report is published in two separate parts. NUREG-1272, Vol. 7, No. 1, covers power reactors and presents an overview of the operating experience of the nuclear power industry from the NRC perspective, including comments about the trends of some key performance measures. The report also includes the principal findings and issues identified in AEOD studies over the past year and summarizes information from such sources as licensee event reports, diagnostic evaluations, and reports to the NRC`s Operations Center. NUREG-1272, Vol. 7, No. 2, covers nonreactors and presents a review of the events and concerns during 1992 associated with the use of licensed material in nonreactor applications, such as personnel overexposures and medical misadministrations. Both reports also contain a discussion of the Incident Investigation Team program and summarize both the Incident Investigation Team and Augmented Inspection Team reports. Each volume contains a list of the AEOD reports issued for 1981--1992.

  7. Nuclear criticality safety department training implementation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Carroll, K.J.; Taylor, R.G.; Worley, C.A.

    1996-09-06T23:59:59.000Z

    The Nuclear Criticality Safety Department (NCSD) is committed to developing and maintaining a staff of qualified personnel to meet the current and anticipated needs in Nuclear Criticality Safety (NCS) at the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant. The NCSD Qualification Program is described in Y/DD-694, Qualification Program, Nuclear Criticality Safety Department This document provides a listing of the roles and responsibilities of NCSD personnel with respect to training and details of the Training Management System (TMS) programs, Mentoring Checklists and Checksheets, as well as other documentation utilized to implement the program. This document supersedes Y/DD-696, Revision 2, dated 3/27/96, Training Implementation, Nuclear Criticality Safety Department. There are no backfit requirements associated with revisions to this document.

  8. Nuclear Criticality Safety Application Guide: Safety Analysis Report Update Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. (MMES) is committed to performing and documenting safety analyses for facilities it manages for the Department of Energy (DOE). Safety analyses are performed to identify hazards and potential accidents; to analyze the adequacy of measures taken to eliminate, control, or mitigate hazards; and to evaluate potential accidents and determine associated risks. Safety Analysis Reports (SARs) are prepared to document the safety analysis to ensure facilities can be operated safely and in accordance with regulations. Many of the facilities requiring a SAR process fissionable material creating the potential for a nuclear criticality accident. MMES has long had a nuclear criticality safety program that provides the technical support to fissionable material operations to ensure the safe processing and storage of fissionable materials. The guiding philosophy of the program has always been the application of the double-contingency principle, which states: {open_quotes}process designs shall incorporate sufficient factors of safety to require at least two unlikely, independent, and concurrent changes in process conditions before a criticality accident is possible.{close_quotes} At Energy Systems analyses have generally been maintained to document that no single normal or abnormal operating conditions that could reasonably be expected to occur can cause a nuclear criticality accident. This application guide provides a summary description of the MMES Nuclear Criticality Safety Program and the MMES Criticality Accident Alarm System requirements for inclusion in facility SARs. The guide also suggests a way to incorporate the analyses conducted pursuant to the double-contingency principle into the SAR. The prime objective is to minimize duplicative effort between the NCSA process and the SAR process and yet adequately describe the methodology utilized to prevent a nuclear criticality accident.

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

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels DataDepartment of Energy Your Density Isn't Your Destiny:Revised Finding of No Significant6-2002 October SENSITIVEFAQs for3006-95

  10. Nuclear Explosive Safety Study Functional Area Qualification Standard

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2010-05-27T23:59:59.000Z

    A Nuclear Explosive Safety Study (NESS) is performed on all DOE Nuclear Explosive Operations (NEOs) in accordance with DOE O 452.1D, Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety Program; DOE O 452.2D, Nuclear Explosive Safety; and DOE M 452.2-2, Nuclear Explosive Safety Evaluation Processes.

  11. Office of Nuclear Safety Basis and Facility Design

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Office of Nuclear Safety Basis & Facility Design establishes safety basis and facility design requirements and expectations related to analysis and design of nuclear facilities to ensure protection of workers and the public from the hazards associated with nuclear operations.

  12. DOE's Approach to Nuclear Facility Safety Analysis and Management

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Presenter: Dr. James O'Brien, Director, Office of Nuclear Safety, Office of Health, Safety and Security, US Department of Energy

  13. Safety Evaluation Report of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Contact Handled (CH) Waste Documented Safety Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Washington TRU Solutions LLC

    2005-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Safety Evaluation Report (SER) documents the Department of Energy’s (DOE's) review of Revision 9 of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Contact Handled (CH) Waste Documented Safety Analysis, DOE/WIPP-95-2065 (WIPP CH DSA), and provides the DOE Approval Authority with the basis for approving the document. It concludes that the safety basis documented in the WIPP CH DSA is comprehensive, correct, and commensurate with hazards associated with CH waste disposal operations. The WIPP CH DSA and associated technical safety requirements (TSRs) were developed in accordance with 10 CFR 830, Nuclear Safety Management, and DOE-STD-3009-94, Preparation Guide for U. S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports.

  14. Management of National Nuclear Power Programs for assured safety

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Connolly, T.J. (ed.)

    1985-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Topics discussed in this report include: nuclear utility organization; before the Florida Public Service Commission in re: St. Lucie Unit No. 2 cost recovery; nuclear reliability improvement and safety operations; nuclear utility management; training of nuclear facility personnel; US experience in key areas of nuclear safety; the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission - function and process; regulatory considerations of the risk of nuclear power plants; overview of the processes of reliability and risk management; management significance of risk analysis; international and domestic institutional issues for peaceful nuclear uses; the role of the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO); and nuclear safety activities of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

  15. Pantex receives two safety awards | National Nuclear Security...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    two safety awards | National Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear...

  16. Sandia Energy - Sandia Nuclear Power Safety Expert Elected to...

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    Nuclear Power Safety Expert Elected to National Academy of Engineering Home Infrastructure Security Energy Nuclear Energy Capabilities News News & Events Research & Capabilities...

  17. Nuclear Safety Research and Development Annual Report, December...

    Broader source: Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    December 8, 2014 This document is the first annual report of DOE's Nuclear Safety Research and Development (NSR&D) Program, managed by the Office of Nuclear Safety in the Office of...

  18. Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide ...

    Broader source: Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    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) November 2002 Nuclear...

  19. Central Technical Authority Responsibilities Regarding Nuclear Safety Requirements

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2007-08-28T23:59:59.000Z

    The order establishes Central Technical Authority and Chief of Nuclear Safety/Chief of Defense Nuclear Safety responsibilities and requirements directed by the Secretary of Energy in the development and issuance of Department of Energy regulations and directives that affect nuclear safety. No cancellations.

  20. Safety of Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2008-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  1. Nuclear Explosive Safety Study Process

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels DataDepartment of Energy Your Density Isn'tOrigin of Contamination in ManyDepartment of Energy NorthB O|WorkNationalNuclear Energyi

  2. Nuclear Safety | Department of Energy

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYouTube YouTube Note: Since the.pdfBreaking ofOilNEWResponse to Time-Based Rates from theLiabilityEnergyNuclear

  3. Office of Nuclear Safety | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial602 1,39732onMake YourDepartment ofC TEnergy Nuclear Safety andNuclear

  4. NEW - DOE O 452.2E, Nuclear Explosive Safety

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    This Department of Energy (DOE) Order establishes requirements to implement the nuclear explosive safety (NES) elements of DOE O 452.1D, Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety Program, or successor directive, for routine and planned nuclear explosive operations (NEOs).

  5. Double-clad nuclear fuel safety rod

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    McCarthy, William H. (Los Altos, CA); Atcheson, Donald B. (Cupertino, CA); Vaidyanathan, Swaminathan (San Jose, CA)

    1984-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A device for shutting down a nuclear reactor during an undercooling or overpower event, whether or not the reactor's scram system operates properly. This is accomplished by double-clad fuel safety rods positioned at various locations throughout the reactor core, wherein melting of a secondary internal cladding of the rod allows the fuel column therein to shift from the reactor core to place the reactor in a subcritical condition.

  6. Safety Reports Series No. 11, Developing Safety Culture in Nuclear Activities: Practical Suggestions to Assist Progress, International Atomic Energy Agency

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Safety Reports Series No. 11, Developing Safety Culture in Nuclear Activities: Practical Suggestions to Assist Progress, International Atomic Energy Agency

  7. Ris-R-1318(EN) Nuclear Safety Research

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    . Risø Decommissioning has the task of preparing for the decommissioning of Risø's nuclear facilitiesRisø-R-1318(EN) Nuclear Safety Research Department Annual Report 2001 Edited by B. Majborn, A This report presents a summary of the work of the Nuclear Safety Research Department in 2001. The department

  8. Ris-R-1019(EN) Nuclear Safety Research

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    .2 Severe accidents 7 2.3 Decommissioning of research reactors 9 2.4 Nuclear information 10 3 RadiationRisø-R-1019(EN) Nuclear Safety Research and Facilities Department Annual Report 1997 Edited by B of the work of the Nuclear Safety Research and Facilities Department in 1997. The department´s research

  9. WIPP-025, Rev. 0 Summary of Nuclear Criticality Safety

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant #12;SUMMARY OF NUCLEAR CRITICALITY SAFETY EVALUATION FOR SHIELDED CONTAINERS PLANT WIPP-025, REV. 0 AUGUST 2009 Summary of Nuclear Criticality Safety Evaluation for Shielded ISOLATION PILOT PLANT WIPP-025, REV. 0 AUGUST 2009 ES-1 Executive Summary This report summarizes the nuclear

  10. Ris-R-1104(EN) Nuclear Safety Research

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    .4 Radioanalytical chemistry 36 3.5 Ecophysiology 38 3.6 Radioactive waste 41 4 Nuclear facilities and services 43 4Risř-R-1104(EN) Nuclear Safety Research and Facilities Department Annual Report 1998 Edited by B, Roskilde, Denmark April 1999 #12;Abstract The report presents a summary of the work of the Nuclear Safety

  11. Ris-M-2944(EN) Nuclear Safety Research

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    for Maintaining Nuclear Knowledge 23 3.3. DR 1 24 4. THE WASTE MANAGEMENT SECTION 26 4.1. Waste Management 26 4Risř-M-2944(EN) 3> Nuclear Safety Research Department Annual Progress Report 1990 Edited by F. Heikel Vinther Risř National Laboratory, Roskilde, Denmark July 1991 #12;Nuclear Safety Research

  12. Ris-R-1162(EN) Nuclear Safety Research

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    .4 Radioanalytical chemistry 26 3.5 Radioactive waste 29 4 Nuclear facilities and services 30 4.1 Research reactor DRRisř-R-1162(EN) Nuclear Safety Research and Facilities Department Annual Report 1999 Edited by B, Denmark April 2000 #12;Abstract The report presents a summary of the work of the Nuclear Safety Research

  13. Safety program considerations for space nuclear reactor systems

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cropp, L.O.

    1984-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report discusses the necessity for in-depth safety program planning for space nuclear reactor systems. The objectives of the safety program and a proposed task structure is presented for meeting those objectives. A proposed working relationship between the design and independent safety groups is suggested. Examples of safety-related design philosophies are given.

  14. Nuclear Safety Policy - DOE Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    ARCHIVED SEN-35-91, Nuclear Safety Policy by jnichols Functional areas: Environment, Safety, and Health, Canceled by DOE P 420.1 n3591.pdf -- PDF Document, 20 KB Writer: jnichols...

  15. DOE Standard 3009-2014, Preparation of Nonreactor Nuclear Facility...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    the use of the original version. The DOE-STD-3009-2014 training team (led by Garrett Smith: garrett.smith@hq.doe.gov (AU-31), and supported by David Compton, Jeff Woody, and...

  16. DOE Standard 3009-2014, Preparation of Nonreactor Nuclear Facility

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613PortsmouthBartlesvilleAbout »DepartmentLaboratory | DepartmentCoal Plantfor

  17. Sandia Energy - Sandia Teaches Nuclear Safety Course

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOE Office of ScienceandMesa del Sol Home Distribution GridDocuments HomeDatabase on EngineATeaches Nuclear Safety

  18. Nuclear Safety Regulatory Framework | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33Frequently Asked QuestionsDepartment ofDepartment640 FederalDepartment ofNRC'sNuclear Safety

  19. Safety Series No. 75-INSAG-4, Safety Culture: A report by the International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group, International Atomic Energy Agency

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Safety Series No. 75-INSAG-4, Safety Culture: A report by the International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group, International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA, 1991

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

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2014-12-19T23:59:59.000Z

    This Standard describes a framework and the criteria to be used for approval of (1) safety basis documents, as required by 10 Code of Federal Regulation (C.F.R.) 830, Nuclear Safety Management, and (2) safety design basis documents, as required by Department of Energy (DOE) Standard (STD)-1189-2008, Integration of Safety into the Design Process.

  1. Nuclear Safety Basis Program Review Overview and Management Oversight...

    Broader source: Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    This SRP, Nuclear Safety Basis Program Review, consists of five volumes. It provides information to help strengthen the technical rigor of line management oversight and federal...

  2. Office of Nuclear Safety and Environmental Assessments | Department...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    examine implementation of safety management programs during phases of the life cycle of a nuclear facility including operation, deactivation, decontamination, decommissioning and...

  3. Nuclear Safety Enforcement Letter issued to Sandia Corporation...

    Broader source: Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    Enforcement Letter issued to Sandia Corporation Nuclear Safety Enforcement Letter issued to Sandia Corporation 9222014 Enforcement Letter, Sandia Corporation, September 22, 2014...

  4. Independent Oversight Assessment of the Nuclear Safety Culture...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Safety Research document "MANAGEMENT OF CHANGE IN THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY - Evidence from maintenance reorganizations," NKS 119, March 2006. xiv | RECOMMENDATIONS Enforcement and...

  5. Spent Nuclear Fuel project integrated safety management plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Daschke, K.D.

    1996-09-17T23:59:59.000Z

    This document is being revised in its entirety and the document title is being revised to ``Spent Nuclear Fuel Project Integrated Safety Management Plan.

  6. Senior Technical Safety Manager Qualification Program Self-Assessment- Chief of Nuclear Safety

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This Chief of Nuclear Safety (CNS) Report was prepared to summarize the results of the July 2013 CNS self-assessment of the Senior Technical Safety Manager Qualification Program.

  7. Estimating inventory thresholds for nuclear facilities using DOE STD-1027-92 Attachment 1 Table A.1 ``Thresholds for Radionuclides``

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Price, D. [Onsite Engineering and Management, Inc. (United States); Hildum, J.S.; Williams, A.C. [Onsite Engineering and Management, Inc. (United States)

    1997-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    It has recently been reports that Table A.1 of Attachment 1 of DOE STD-1027-92 is being improperly used to determine the Category 3 inventory threshold values for non-reactor nuclear facilities. The concern of this paper is that Safety Analysts and Facility Managers at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), as well as at other locations in the DOE Complex, are improperly using the entries in Table A.1. It is noted at this point that the common use of this table is to establish the lower thresholds for both Categories 2 and 3 non-reactor nuclear facilities by considering inventory quantities, as opposed to a postulated accident scenario. This paper will provide insight regarding this error and will show that the error is most likely non-conservative in nature.

  8. Ris-R-739(p*tf Nuclear Safety Research

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    D. i3 Risř-R-739(p*tf Nuclear Safety Research Department Annual Progress Report 1993 Edited by B 1994 #12;Nuclear Safety Research ****-mp. The activities cover health physics, reactor physics, operation of the small reactor DR.1, and radioactive waste

  9. Providing Nuclear Criticality Safety Analysis Education through Benchmark Experiment Evaluation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    John D. Bess; J. Blair Briggs; David W. Nigg

    2009-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    One of the challenges that today's new workforce of nuclear criticality safety engineers face is the opportunity to provide assessment of nuclear systems and establish safety guidelines without having received significant experience or hands-on training prior to graduation. Participation in the International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project (ICSBEP) and/or the International Reactor Physics Experiment Evaluation Project (IRPhEP) provides students and young professionals the opportunity to gain experience and enhance critical engineering skills.

  10. Nuclear Plant/Hydrogen Plant Safety: Issues and Approaches

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Steven R. Sherman

    2007-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The U.S. Department of Energy, through its agents the Next Generation Nuclear Plant Project and the Nuclear Hydrogen Initiative, is working on developing the technologies to enable the large scale production of hydrogen using nuclear power. A very important consideration in the design of a co-located and connected nuclear plant/hydrogen plant facility is safety. This study provides an overview of the safety issues associated with a combined plant and discusses approaches for categorizing, quantifying, and addressing the safety risks.

  11. Accurate fission data for nuclear safety

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    A. Solders; D. Gorelov; A. Jokinen; V. S. Kolhinen; M. Lantz; A. Mattera; H. Penttila; S. Pomp; V. Rakopoulos; S. Rinta-Antila

    2013-04-08T23:59:59.000Z

    The Accurate fission data for nuclear safety (AlFONS) project aims at high precision measurements of fission yields, using the renewed IGISOL mass separator facility in combination with a new high current light ion cyclotron at the University of Jyvaskyla. The 30 MeV proton beam will be used to create fast and thermal neutron spectra for the study of neutron induced fission yields. Thanks to a series of mass separating elements, culminating with the JYFLTRAP Penning trap, it is possible to achieve a mass resolving power in the order of a few hundred thousands. In this paper we present the experimental setup and the design of a neutron converter target for IGISOL. The goal is to have a flexible design. For studies of exotic nuclei far from stability a high neutron flux (10^12 neutrons/s) at energies 1 - 30 MeV is desired while for reactor applications neutron spectra that resembles those of thermal and fast nuclear reactors are preferred. It is also desirable to be able to produce (semi-)monoenergetic neutrons for benchmarking and to study the energy dependence of fission yields. The scientific program is extensive and is planed to start in 2013 with a measurement of isomeric yield ratios of proton induced fission in uranium. This will be followed by studies of independent yields of thermal and fast neutron induced fission of various actinides.

  12. Accurate fission data for nuclear safety

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Solders, A; Jokinen, A; Kolhinen, V S; Lantz, M; Mattera, A; Penttila, H; Pomp, S; Rakopoulos, V; Rinta-Antila, S

    2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Accurate fission data for nuclear safety (AlFONS) project aims at high precision measurements of fission yields, using the renewed IGISOL mass separator facility in combination with a new high current light ion cyclotron at the University of Jyvaskyla. The 30 MeV proton beam will be used to create fast and thermal neutron spectra for the study of neutron induced fission yields. Thanks to a series of mass separating elements, culminating with the JYFLTRAP Penning trap, it is possible to achieve a mass resolving power in the order of a few hundred thousands. In this paper we present the experimental setup and the design of a neutron converter target for IGISOL. The goal is to have a flexible design. For studies of exotic nuclei far from stability a high neutron flux (10^12 neutrons/s) at energies 1 - 30 MeV is desired while for reactor applications neutron spectra that resembles those of thermal and fast nuclear reactors are preferred. It is also desirable to be able to produce (semi-)monoenergetic neutrons...

  13. Nuclear criticality safety engineer qualification program utilizing SAT

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Baltimore, C.J.; Dean, J.C.; Henson, T.L. [Lockheed Martin Utility Services, Inc., Paducah, KY (United States)

    1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    As part of the privatization process of the U.S. uranium enrichment plants, the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant (PGDP) and the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant (PORTS) have been in transition from U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) regulatory oversight to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) oversight since July 1993. One of the focus areas of this transition has been training and qualification of plant personnel who perform tasks important to nuclear safety, such as nuclear criticality safety (NCS) engineers.

  14. Review of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Hanford Site Waste Treatment...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Review of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Hanford Site Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Project, October 2010 Review of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Hanford Site Waste...

  15. Design and Transient Analysis of Passive Safety Cooling Systems for Advanced Nuclear Reactors

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Galvez, Cristhian

    2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    passive safety cooling systems. To develop an understandingthe passive safety cooling system and recommend an approachof Passive Safety Cooling Systems for Advanced Nuclear

  16. Independent Activity Report, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety...

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    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...

  17. Nuclear Safety Workshop Agenda - Post Fukushima Initiatives and...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Initiatives and Results In response to the March 2011 accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, Secretary Chu initiated a series of actions to review the safety of...

  18. CRAD, New Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis and Technical...

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    Technical Safety Requirements - December 2, 2014 (EA CRAD 31-07, Rev. 0) More Documents & Publications CRAD, Nuclear Reactor Facility Operations - December 4, 2014 (EA CRAD 31-08...

  19. Interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    1996-12-30T23:59:59.000Z

    The manual defines the process DOE will use to interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board and its staff. Canceled by DOE M 140.1-1A. Does not cancel other directives.

  20. Interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    1999-01-26T23:59:59.000Z

    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 DOE M 140.1-1.

  1. Interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2001-03-30T23:59:59.000Z

    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 DOE M 140.1-1A.

  2. Technical basis for the nuclear criticality representative accident and associated represented hazardous conditions

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    CARSON, D.M.

    2003-03-20T23:59:59.000Z

    This technical basis document was developed to support the Tank Farms Documented Safety Analysis (DSA), and describes the risk binning process and the technical basis for assigning risk bins for the nuclear criticality representative accident and associated hazardous conditions. The purpose of the risk binning process is to determine the need for safety-significant structures, systems, and components (SSC) and technical safety requirement (TSR)-level controls for a given representative accident or represented hazardous condition based on an evaluation of the frequency and consequence. Note that the risk binning process is not applied to facility workers, because all facility worker hazardous conditions are considered for safety-significant SSCs and/or TSR-level controls. Determination of the need for safety-class SSCs was performed in accordance with DOE-STD-3009-94, ''Preparation Guide for US Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analyses'', as described in this report.

  3. Nuclear Safety Design Principles & the Concept of Independence: Insights from Nuclear Weapon Safety for Other High-Consequence Applications.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brewer, Jeffrey D.

    2014-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Insights developed within the U.S. nuclear weapon system safety community may benefit system safety design, assessment, and management activities in other high consequence domains. The approach of assured nuclear weapon safety has been developed that uses the Nuclear Safety Design Principles (NSDPs) of incompatibility, isolation, and inoperability to design safety features, organized into subsystems such that each subsystem contributes to safe system responses in independent and predictable ways given a wide range of environmental contexts. The central aim of the approach is to provide a robust technical basis for asserting that a system can meet quantitative safety requirements in the widest context of possible adverse or accident environments, while using the most concise arrangement of safety design features and the fewest number of specific adverse or accident environment assumptions. Rigor in understanding and applying the concept of independence is crucial for the success of the approach. This paper provides a basic description of the assured nuclear weapon safety approach, in a manner that illustrates potential application to other domains. There is also a strong emphasis on describing the process for developing a defensible technical basis for the independence assertions between integrated safety subsystems.

  4. Safety Oversight of Decommissioning Activities at DOE Nuclear Sites

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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

    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.

  5. aerospace nuclear safety: Topics by E-print Network

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    aerospace nuclear safety First Page Previous Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next Page Last Page Topic Index 1 AEROSPACE SAFETY ADVISORY...

  6. ACCIDENT ANALYSES & CONTROL OPTIONS IN SUPPORT OF THE SLUDGE WATER SYSTEM SAFETY ANALYSIS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    WILLIAMS, J.C.

    2003-11-15T23:59:59.000Z

    This report documents the accident analyses and nuclear safety control options for use in Revision 7 of HNF-SD-WM-SAR-062, ''K Basins Safety Analysis Report'' and Revision 4 of HNF-SD-SNF-TSR-001, ''Technical Safety Requirements - 100 KE and 100 KW Fuel Storage Basins''. These documents will define the authorization basis for Sludge Water System (SWS) operations. This report follows the guidance of DOE-STD-3009-94, ''Preparation Guide for US. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Safety Analysis Reports'', for calculating onsite and offsite consequences. The accident analysis summary is shown in Table ES-1 below. While this document describes and discusses potential control options to either mitigate or prevent the accidents discussed herein, it should be made clear that the final control selection for any accident is determined and presented in HNF-SD-WM-SAR-062.

  7. A Safer Nuclear Enterprise - Application to Nuclear Explosive Safety (NES)(U)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Morris, Tommy J. [Los Alamos National Laboratory

    2012-07-05T23:59:59.000Z

    Activities and infrastructure that support nuclear weapons are facing significant challenges. Despite an admirable record and firm commitment to make safety a primary criterion in weapons design, production, handling, and deployment - there is growing apprehension about terrorist acquiring weapons or nuclear material. At the NES Workshop in May 2012, Scott Sagan, who is a proponent of the normal accident cycle, presented. Whether a proponent of the normal accident cycle or High Reliability Organizations - we have to be diligent about our safety record. Constant vigilance is necessary to maintain our admirable safety record and commitment to Nuclear Explosive Safety.

  8. FAQS Qualification Card – Nuclear Explosive Safety Study

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    A key element for the Department’s Technical Qualification Programs is a set of common Functional Area Qualification Standards (FAQS) and associated Job Task Analyses (JTA). These standards are developed for various functional areas of responsibility in the Department, including oversight of safety management programs identified as hazard controls in Documented Safety Analyses (DSA).

  9. A REVIEW OF LIGHT-WATER REACTOR SAFETY STUDIES. VOLUME 3 OF THE FINAL REPORT ON HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Nero, A.V.

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Charges Relating to Nuclear Reactor Safety," 1976, availableissues impor tant to nuclear reactor safety. This report wasstudies of overall nuclear reactor safety have been

  10. A REVIEW OF LIGHT-WATER REACTOR SAFETY STUDIES. VOLUME 3 OF THE FINAL REPORT ON HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Nero, A.V.

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Charges Relating to Nuclear Reactor Safety," 1976, availablestudies of light-water nuclear reactor safety, emphasizingstudies of overall nuclear reactor safety have been

  11. Aging of safety class 1E transformers in safety systems of nuclear power plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Roberts, E.W.; Edson, J.L.; Udy, A.C. [Lockheed Idaho Technologies Co., Idaho Falls, ID (United States)

    1996-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report discusses aging effects on safety-related power transformers in nuclear power plants. It also evaluates maintenance, testing, and monitoring practices with respect to their effectiveness in detecting and mitigating the effects of aging. The study follows the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission`s (NRC`s) Nuclear Plant-Aging Research approach. It investigates the materials used in transformer construction, identifies stressors and aging mechanisms, presents operating and testing experience with aging effects, analyzes transformer failure events reported in various databases, and evaluates maintenance practices. Databases maintained by the nuclear industry were analyzed to evaluate the effects of aging on the operation of nuclear power plants.

  12. A Domain-Specific Safety Analysis for Digital Nuclear Plant Protection Systems

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    A Domain-Specific Safety Analysis for Digital Nuclear Plant Protection Systems Sanghyun Yoon through safety analy- sis is strongly mandated for safety-critical systems. Nuclear plant protection. INTRODUCTION Safety-critical systems (e.g. nuclear power plants and air- planes) require rigorous quality

  13. Notice of Intent to Develop a Page Change for DOE O 420.1C, Facility Safety

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2013-06-21T23:59:59.000Z

    The Page Change will be strictly limited in scope to changes necessary to accomplish the following objectives: (1) to invoke revised DOE-STD- 1104-20xx, Review and Approval of Nuclear Facility Safety Basis and Safety Design Basis Document, as a required method; (2) to invoke revised DOE-STD-3009-20xx, Preparation of Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis, as a required method for new nuclear facilities as discussed below; and (3) to make miscellaneous administrative corrections and clarifications based on the one-year implementation review required by DOE O 251.1C, Departmental Directives Program. This JM is an update to one approved June 21, 2013.

  14. Nuclear power safety in central and eastern Europe

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wilson, R. [Harvard Univ., Cambridge, MA (United States)

    1995-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Chernobyl accident showed the weaknesses in the Soviet approach to safety, particularly of nuclear reactors. Until recently, Western governments, scientists, and engineers did not understand how to help their Russian colleagues make a greater society. This article discusses the two main types of Soviet reactors, their safety problems, and the help Westerners are giving to make them safer. 35 refs., 1 fig., 4 tabs.

  15. Nuclear criticality safety tools in the Chernobyl-4 accident analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Landeyro, P.A.

    1988-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The collaboration with the Italian Safety Authority (DISP), started in July 1986, has the aim of studying, from a neutronic point of view, the possible initiator event and the accident dynamics in unit four of the Chernobly nuclear power plant. This report was produced within the framework of that collaboration. A main condition of the present work was making use of standard calculational methods employed in nuclear criticality safety analysis. This means that the neutron multiplication factor calculation should be made with the modules and the cross-section libraries of the SCALE system or in any case with some KENO IV version and the burnup calculation with the ORIGEN code.

  16. Nuclear Power - Operation, Safety and Environment 

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Today's nuclear reactors are safe and highly efficient energy systems that offer electricity and a multitude of co-generation energy products ranging from potable water to heat for industrial applications. At the same time, ...

  17. Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Policy

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2011-02-08T23:59:59.000Z

    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. Cancels SEN-35-91.

  18. HANFORD SAFETY ANALYSIS & RISK ASSESSMENT HANDBOOK (SARAH)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    EVANS, C B

    2004-12-21T23:59:59.000Z

    The purpose of the Hanford Safety Analysis and Risk Assessment Handbook (SARAH) is to support the development of safety basis documentation for Hazard Category 2 and 3 (HC-2 and 3) U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear facilities to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 830, ''Nuclear Safety Management''. Subpart B, ''Safety Basis Requirements.'' Consistent with DOE-STD-3009-94, Change Notice 2, ''Preparation Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analyses'' (STD-3009), and DOE-STD-3011-2002, ''Guidance for Preparation of Basis for Interim Operation (BIO) Documents'' (STD-3011), the Hanford SARAH describes methodology for performing a safety analysis leading to development of a Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) and derivation of Technical Safety Requirements (TSR), and provides the information necessary to ensure a consistently rigorous approach that meets DOE expectations. The DSA and TSR documents, together with the DOE-issued Safety Evaluation Report (SER), are the basic components of facility safety basis documentation. For HC-2 or 3 nuclear facilities in long-term surveillance and maintenance (S&M), for decommissioning activities, where source term has been eliminated to the point that only low-level, residual fixed contamination is present, or for environmental remediation activities outside of a facility structure, DOE-STD-1120-98, ''Integration of Environment, Safety, and Health into Facility Disposition Activities'' (STD-1120), may serve as the basis for the DSA. HC-2 and 3 environmental remediation sites also are subject to the hazard analysis methodologies of this standard.

  19. Nuclear space power safety and facility guidelines study

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mehlman, W.F.

    1995-09-11T23:59:59.000Z

    This report addresses safety guidelines for space nuclear reactor power missions and was prepared by The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory (JHU/APL) under a Department of Energy grant, DE-FG01-94NE32180 dated 27 September 1994. This grant was based on a proposal submitted by the JHU/APL in response to an {open_quotes}Invitation for Proposals Designed to Support Federal Agencies and Commercial Interests in Meeting Special Power and Propulsion Needs for Future Space Missions{close_quotes}. The United States has not launched a nuclear reactor since SNAP 10A in April 1965 although many Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators (RTGs) have been launched. An RTG powered system is planned for launch as part of the Cassini mission to Saturn in 1997. Recently the Ballistic Missile Defense Office (BMDO) sponsored the Nuclear Electric Propulsion Space Test Program (NEPSTP) which was to demonstrate and evaluate the Russian-built TOPAZ II nuclear reactor as a power source in space. As of late 1993 the flight portion of this program was canceled but work to investigate the attributes of the reactor were continued but at a reduced level. While the future of space nuclear power systems is uncertain there are potential space missions which would require space nuclear power systems. The differences between space nuclear power systems and RTG devices are sufficient that safety and facility requirements warrant a review in the context of the unique features of a space nuclear reactor power system.

  20. Reducing nuclear danger through intergovernmental technical exchanges on nuclear materials safety management

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jardine, L.J. [Lawrence Livermore National Lab., CA (United States); Peddicord, K.L. [Texas A and M Univ., College Station, TX (United States); Witmer, F.E.; Krumpe, P.F. [USDOE, Washington, DC (United States); Lazarev, L.; Moshkov, M. [Radievyj Inst., Leningrad (Russian Federation)

    1997-04-09T23:59:59.000Z

    The United States and Russia are dismantling nuclear weapons and generating hundreds of tons of excess plutonium and high enriched uranium fissile nuclear materials that require disposition. The U.S. Department of Energy and Russian Minatom organizations.are planning and implementing safe, secure storage and disposition operations for these materials in numerous facilities. This provides a new opportunity for technical exchanges between Russian and Western scientists that can establish an improved and sustained common safety culture for handling these materials. An initiative that develops and uses personal relationships and joint projects among Russian and Western participants involved in fissile nuclear materials safety management contributes to improving nuclear materials nonproliferation and to making a safer world. Technical exchanges and workshops are being used to systematically identify opportunities in the nuclear fissile materials facilities to improve and ensure the safety of workers, the public, and the environment.

  1. Risk Assessment in Support of DOE Nuclear Safety, Risk Information Notice, June 2010

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    On August 12, 2009, the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board(DNFSB) issued Recommendation 2009?1, Risk Assessment Methodologies at Defense Nuclear Facilities. Thisrecommendation focused on the...

  2. Proceedings of the Nuclear Criticality Technology and Safety Project Workshop

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sanchez, R.G. [comp.

    1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report is the proceedings of the annual Nuclear Criticality Technology and Safety Project (NCTSP) Workshop held in Monterey, California, on April 16--28, 1993. The NCTSP was sponsored by the Department of Energy and organized by the Los Alamos Critical Experiments Facility. The report is divided into six sections reflecting the sessions outlined on the workshop agenda.

  3. Development of the Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard- September 2012

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    A working group with nuclear safety expertise used paired pairing computer software to develop first, a severity-weighted factor for the 17 Groups of ORPS Reporting Criteria and then, a severity-weighted factor for the sixty-five ORPS reporting criteria.

  4. SCALE 6: Comprehensive Nuclear Safety Analysis Code System

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bowman, Stephen M [ORNL

    2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Version 6 of the Standardized Computer Analyses for Licensing Evaluation (SCALE) computer software system developed at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, released in February 2009, contains significant new capabilities and data for nuclear safety analysis and marks an important update for this software package, which is used worldwide. This paper highlights the capabilities of the SCALE system, including continuous-energy flux calculations for processing multigroup problem-dependent cross sections, ENDF/B-VII continuous-energy and multigroup nuclear cross-section data, continuous-energy Monte Carlo criticality safety calculations, Monte Carlo radiation shielding analyses with automated three-dimensional variance reduction techniques, one- and three-dimensional sensitivity and uncertainty analyses for criticality safety evaluations, two- and three-dimensional lattice physics depletion analyses, fast and accurate source terms and decay heat calculations, automated burnup credit analyses with loading curve search, and integrated three-dimensional criticality accident alarm system analyses using coupled Monte Carlo criticality and shielding calculations.

  5. Reevaluating nuclear safety and security in a post 9/11 era.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Booker, Paul M.; Brown, Lisa M.

    2005-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report has the following topics: (1) Changing perspectives on nuclear safety and security; (2) Evolving needs in a post-9/11 era; (3) Nuclear Weapons--An attractive terrorist target; (4) The case for increased safety; (5) Evolution of current nuclear weapons safety and security; (6) Integrated surety; (7) The role of safety and security in enabling responsiveness; (8) Advances in surety technologies; and (9) Reevaluating safety.

  6. Software reliability and safety in nuclear reactor protection systems

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lawrence, J.D. [Lawrence Livermore National Lab., CA (United States)

    1993-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Planning the development, use and regulation of computer systems in nuclear reactor protection systems in such a way as to enhance reliability and safety is a complex issue. This report is one of a series of reports from the Computer Safety and Reliability Group, Lawrence Livermore that investigates different aspects of computer software in reactor National Laboratory, that investigates different aspects of computer software in reactor protection systems. There are two central themes in the report, First, software considerations cannot be fully understood in isolation from computer hardware and application considerations. Second, the process of engineering reliability and safety into a computer system requires activities to be carried out throughout the software life cycle. The report discusses the many activities that can be carried out during the software life cycle to improve the safety and reliability of the resulting product. The viewpoint is primarily that of the assessor, or auditor.

  7. Floating nuclear power plant safety assurance principles

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zvonarev, B.M.; Kuchin, N.L.; Sergeev, I.V.

    1993-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    In the north regions of the Russian federation and low density population areas, there is a real necessity for ecological clean energy small power sources. For this purpose, floating nuclear power plants, designed on the basis of atomic ship building engineering, are being conceptualized. It is possible to use the ship building plants for the reactor purposes. Issues such as radioactive waste management are described.

  8. PLC-Based Safety Critical Software Development for Nuclear Power Plants

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    PLC-Based Safety Critical Software Development for Nuclear Power Plants Junbeom Yoo1 , Sungdeok Cha development technique for nuclear power plants'I&C soft- ware controllers. To improve software safety, we in developing safety-critical control software for a Korean nuclear power plant, and experience to date has been

  9. Q)Tf(^/7^,\\ Ris-R-625(pff Nuclear Safety Research

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    and nuclear releases. fields of radiation protection, reactor safety and radioactive waste managementQ)Tf(^/7^,\\ Risř-R-625(pff Nuclear Safety Research Department Annual Progress Report 1991 Edited Roskilde, Denmark March 1992 #12;Nuclear Safety Research Department Annual Progress Report 1991 Riso-R-62S

  10. Nuclear Safety Reporting Criteria | Department of Energy

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels DataDepartment of Energy Your Density Isn'tOrigin of Contamination in ManyDepartment of Energy NorthBDepartment of Energy Nuclear

  11. Sandia Energy - Nuclear Energy Safety Technologies

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOnItemResearch > TheNuclear PressLaboratory Fellows Jerry

  12. Nuclear safety | Princeton Plasma Physics Lab

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOE Office of Science (SC)Integrated CodesTransparencyDOE Project TapsDOERecoveryNuclearLife Cycleenergysafety

  13. NSPWG-recommended safety requirements and guidelines for SEI nuclear propulsion

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Marshall, A.C.; Sawyer, J.C. Jr.; Bari, R.A.; Brown, N.W.; Cullingford, H.S.; Hardy, A.C.; Lee, J.H.; Mcculloch, W.H.; Niederauer, G.F.; Remp, K. (Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM (United States) NASA, Washington (United States) Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY (United States) General Electric Co., San Jose, CA (United States) NASA, Johnson Space Center, Houston, Tn (United States) L

    1992-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    An interagency Nuclear Safety Policy Working Group (NSPWG) was chartered to recommend nuclear safety policy, requirements, and guidelines for the Space Exploration Initiative (SEI) nuclear propulsion program to facilitate the implementation of mission planning and conceptual design studies. The NSPWG developed a top-level policy to provide the guiding principles for the development and implementation of the nuclear propulsion safety program and the development of safety functional requirements. In addition, the NSPWG reviewed safety issues for nuclear propulsion and recommended top-level safety requirements and guidelines to address these issues. Safety requirements were developed for reactor start-up, inadvertent criticality, radiological release and exposure, disposal, entry, and safeguards. Guidelines were recommended for risk/reliability, operational safety, flight trajectory and mission abort, space debris and meteoroids, and ground test safety. In this paper the specific requirements and guidelines will be discussed. 9 refs.

  14. NSPWG-recommended safety requirements and guidelines for SEI nuclear propulsion

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Marshall, A.C.; Lee, J.H.; McCulloch, W.H. (Sandia National Labs., Albuquerque, NM (United States)); Sawyer, J.C. Jr. (National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC (United States)); Bari, R.A. (Brookhaven National Lab., Upton, NY (United States)); Brown, N.W. (General Electric Co., San Jose, CA (United States)); Cullingford, H.S.; Hardy, A.C. (National Aeronautics and Space Administ

    1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    An Interagency Nuclear Safety Policy Working Group (NSPWG) was chartered to recommend nuclear safety policy, requirements, and guidelines for the Space Exploration Initiative (SEI) nuclear propulsion program to facilitate the implementation of mission planning and conceptual design studies. The NSPWG developed a top- level policy to provide the guiding principles for the development and implementation of the nuclear propulsion safety program and the development of Safety Functional Requirements. In addition the NSPWG reviewed safety issues for nuclear propulsion and recommended top-level safety requirements and guidelines to address these issues. Safety requirements were developed for reactor start-up, inadvertent criticality, radiological release and exposure, disposal, entry, and safeguards. Guidelines were recommended for risk/reliability, operational safety, flight trajectory and mission abort, space debris and meteoroids, and ground test safety. In this paper the specific requirements and guidelines will be discussed.

  15. NSPWG-recommended safety requirements and guidelines for SEI nuclear propulsion

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Marshall, A.C.; Lee, J.H.; McCulloch, W.H. [Sandia National Labs., Albuquerque, NM (United States); Sawyer, J.C. Jr. [National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC (United States); Bari, R.A. [Brookhaven National Lab., Upton, NY (United States); Brown, N.W. [General Electric Co., San Jose, CA (United States); Cullingford, H.S.; Hardy, A.C. [National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Houston, TX (United States). Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center; Niederauer, G.F. [Los Alamos National Lab., NM (United States); Remp, K. [National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Cleveland, OH (United States). Lewis Research Center; Rice, J.W. [Idaho National Engineering Lab., Idaho Falls, ID (United States); Sholtis, J.A. [Department of the Air Force, Kirtland AFB, NM (United States)

    1992-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    An Interagency Nuclear Safety Policy Working Group (NSPWG) was chartered to recommend nuclear safety policy, requirements, and guidelines for the Space Exploration Initiative (SEI) nuclear propulsion program to facilitate the implementation of mission planning and conceptual design studies. The NSPWG developed a top- level policy to provide the guiding principles for the development and implementation of the nuclear propulsion safety program and the development of Safety Functional Requirements. In addition the NSPWG reviewed safety issues for nuclear propulsion and recommended top-level safety requirements and guidelines to address these issues. Safety requirements were developed for reactor start-up, inadvertent criticality, radiological release and exposure, disposal, entry, and safeguards. Guidelines were recommended for risk/reliability, operational safety, flight trajectory and mission abort, space debris and meteoroids, and ground test safety. In this paper the specific requirements and guidelines will be discussed.

  16. Double-clad nuclear-fuel safety rod

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    McCarthy, W.H.; Atcheson, D.B.

    1981-12-30T23:59:59.000Z

    A device for shutting down a nuclear reactor during an undercooling or overpower event, whether or not the reactor's scram system operates properly. This is accomplished by double-clad fuel safety rods positioned at various locations throughout the reactor core, wherein melting of a secondary internal cladding of the rod allows the fuel column therein to shift from the reactor core to place the reactor in a subcritical condition.

  17. Some aspects of nuclear power plant safety under war conditions

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Stritar, A.; Mavko, B.; Susnik, J.; Sarler, B. (Jozef Stefan Inst., Ljubljana (Slovenia))

    1993-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In the summer of 1991, the Krsko nuclear power plant in Slovenia found itself in an area of military operations. This was probably the first commercial nuclear power plant to have been threatened by an attack by fighter jets. A number of never-before-asked questions had to be answered by the operating staff and supporting organizations. Some aspects of nuclear power plant safety under war conditions are described, such as the selection of the best plant operating state before the attack and the determination of plant system vulnerability and dose releases from the potentially damaged spent fuel in the spent-fuel pit. The best operating mode to which the plant should be brought before the attack is cold shutdown, and radiological consequences to the environment after the spent fuel is damaged and the water in the pit is lost are not very high. The problem of nuclear power plant safety under war conditions should be addressed in more detail in the future.

  18. ROBERT J. BUDNITZ Occupation: Physicist in Energy/Environmental Research and Nuclear Safety

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Ajo-Franklin, Jonathan

    ROBERT J. BUDNITZ Occupation: Physicist in Energy/Environmental Research and Nuclear Safety Birth December 2004 to September 2007 (in Livermore): Leader, Nuclear & Risk Science Group, Energy & Environment Directorate Associate Program Leader for Nuclear Systems Safety and Security, E&E Directorate October 2002

  19. Formal Verification of Safety I&C System Designs: Two Nuclear Power Plant Related Applications

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Heljanko, Keijo

    C4.2 Formal Verification of Safety I&C System Designs: Two Nuclear Power Plant Related Applications and control (I&C) systems play a crucial role in the operation of nuclear power plants (NPP) and other safety is available. The use of model checking to verify two nuclear power plant related systems is described: an arc

  20. Walking and Climbing Service Robots for Safety Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Pressure Vessels

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Chen, Sheng

    Walking and Climbing Service Robots for Safety Inspection of Nuclear Reactor Pressure Vessels B of Electronics and Computer Science, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK Abstract: Nuclear reactor and the usefulness of these robots for improving safety inspection of nuclear reactors in general are discussed

  1. ME 379M-Nuclear Safety and Security ABET EC2000 syllabus

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Ben-Yakar, Adela

    ME 379M- Nuclear Safety and Security Page 1 ABET EC2000 syllabus ME 379M Nuclear Safety assessment models and nuclear non-proliferation. Failure classifications, failure modes, effects, and criticality analysis (FMECA), fault and event trees, reliability block diagrams. Specific areas from the code

  2. Foundational development of an advanced nuclear reactor integrated safety code.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Clarno, Kevin (Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN); Lorber, Alfred Abraham; Pryor, Richard J.; Spotz, William F.; Schmidt, Rodney Cannon; Belcourt, Kenneth (Ktech Corporation, Albuquerque, NM); Hooper, Russell Warren; Humphries, Larry LaRon

    2010-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the activities and results of a Sandia LDRD project whose objective was to develop and demonstrate foundational aspects of a next-generation nuclear reactor safety code that leverages advanced computational technology. The project scope was directed towards the systems-level modeling and simulation of an advanced, sodium cooled fast reactor, but the approach developed has a more general applicability. The major accomplishments of the LDRD are centered around the following two activities. (1) The development and testing of LIME, a Lightweight Integrating Multi-physics Environment for coupling codes that is designed to enable both 'legacy' and 'new' physics codes to be combined and strongly coupled using advanced nonlinear solution methods. (2) The development and initial demonstration of BRISC, a prototype next-generation nuclear reactor integrated safety code. BRISC leverages LIME to tightly couple the physics models in several different codes (written in a variety of languages) into one integrated package for simulating accident scenarios in a liquid sodium cooled 'burner' nuclear reactor. Other activities and accomplishments of the LDRD include (a) further development, application and demonstration of the 'non-linear elimination' strategy to enable physics codes that do not provide residuals to be incorporated into LIME, (b) significant extensions of the RIO CFD code capabilities, (c) complex 3D solid modeling and meshing of major fast reactor components and regions, and (d) an approach for multi-physics coupling across non-conformal mesh interfaces.

  3. Implementing 10 CFR 830 at the FEMP Silos: Nuclear Health and Safety Plans as Documented Safety Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fisk, Patricia; Rutherford, Lavon

    2003-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The objective of the Silos Project at the Fernald Closure Project (FCP) is to safely remediate high-grade uranium ore residues (Silos 1 and 2) and metal oxide residues (Silo 3). The evolution of Documented Safety Analyses (DSAs) for these facilities has reflected the changes in remediation processes. The final stage in silos DSAs is an interpretation of 10 CFR 830 Safe Harbor Requirements that combines a Health and Safety Plan with nuclear safety requirements. This paper will address the development of a Nuclear Health and Safety Plan, or N-HASP.

  4. Facility Safety

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    1996-10-24T23:59:59.000Z

    Establishes facility safety requirements related to: nuclear safety design, criticality safety, fire protection and natural phenomena hazards mitigation.

  5. Facility Safety

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    1995-11-16T23:59:59.000Z

    Establishes facility safety requirements related to: nuclear safety design, criticality safety, fire protection and natural phenomena hazards mitigation.

  6. Safety culture in the nuclear power industry : attributes for regulatory assessment

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Alexander, Erin L

    2004-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Safety culture refers to the attitudes, behaviors, and conditions that affect safety performance and often arises in discussions following incidents at nuclear power plants. As it involves both operational and management ...

  7. LESSONS LEARNED IN DEVELOPMENT OF THE HANFORD SWOC MASTER DOCUMENTED SAFETY ANALYSIS (MDSA) & IMPLEMENTATION VALIDATION REVIEW (IVR)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    MORENO, M.R.

    2004-04-02T23:59:59.000Z

    DOE set clear expectations on a cost-effective approach for achieving compliance with the Nuclear Safety Management requirements (20 CFR 830, Nuclear Safety Rule), which ensured long-term benefit to Hanford, via issuance of a nuclear safety strategy in February 2003. To facilitate implementation of these expectations, tools were developed to streamline and standardize safety analysis and safety document development with the goal of a shorter and more predictable DOE approval cycle. A Hanford Safety Analysis and Risk Assessment Handbook (SARAH) was approved to standardize methodologies for development of safety analyses. A Microsoft Excel spreadsheet (RADIDOSE) was approved for the evaluation of radiological consequences for accident scenarios often postulated at Hanford. Standard safety management program chapters were approved for use as a means of compliance with the programmatic chapters of DOE-STD-3009, ''Preparation Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Safety Analysis Reports''. An in-process review was developed between DOE and the Contractor to facilitate DOE approval and provide early course correction. The new Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) developed to address the operations of four facilities within the Solid Waste Operations Complex (SWOC) necessitated development of an Implementation Validation Review (IVR) process. The IVR process encompasses the following objectives: safety basis controls and requirements are adequately incorporated into appropriate facility documents and work instructions, facility personnel are knowledgeable of controls and requirements, and the DSA/TSR controls have been implemented. Based on DOE direction and safety analysis tools, four waste management nuclear facilities were integrated into one safety basis document. With successful completion of implementation of this safety document, lessons-learned from the in-process review, safety analysis tools and IVR process were documented for future action and consideration at other DOE sites.

  8. Nuclear criticality safety evaluation of Spray Booth Operations in X-705, Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sheaffer, M.K.; Keeton, S.C.

    1993-09-20T23:59:59.000Z

    This report evaluates nuclear criticality safety for Spray Booth Operations in the Decontamination and Recovery Facility, X-705, at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant. A general description of current procedures and related hardware/equipment is presented. Control parameters relevant to nuclear criticality safety are explained, and a consolidated listing of administrative controls and safety systems is developed. Based on compliance with DOE Orders and MMES practices, the overall operation is evaluated, and recommendations for enhanced safety are suggested.

  9. SURVEYS OF ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE AND SAFETY CULTURE IN NUCLEAR POWER

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BROWN,B.S.

    2000-07-30T23:59:59.000Z

    The results of a survey of organizational culture at a nuclear power plant are summarized and compared with those of a similar survey which has been described in the literature on high-reliability organizations. A general-purpose cultural inventory showed a profile of organizational style similar to that reported in the literature; the factor structure for the styles was also similar to that of the plant previously described. A specialized scale designed to measure safety culture did not distinguish among groups within the organization that would be expected to differ.

  10. FTCP Site Specific Information - Chief of Nuclear Safety | Department of

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011AT&T,OfficeEnd of YearFLASH2011-17-OPAMDepartment ofEnergy Chief of Nuclear Safety

  11. Nuclear Safety Software & Quality Assurance | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial602 1,39732onMake YourDepartment of EnergyNoticeFacilityNuclearSafety

  12. Office of Nuclear Safety and Environmental Assessments | Department of

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613 122Commercial602 1,39732onMake YourDepartment ofC TEnergy Nuclear Safety and

  13. Nuclear and Facility Safety Directives | Department of Energy

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYouTube YouTube Note: Since the.pdfBreaking ofOilNEWResponse to Time-Based Rates fromNuclear Securityand Facility Safety

  14. 2012 Nuclear Safety Workshop Photos | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic2UraniumEnergy CityDepartmentDepartment ofDepartment2 DOE2012 Nuclear Safety

  15. Development of an auditable safety analysis in support of a radiological facility classification

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kinney, M.D. [Roy F. Weston, Inc., Rockville, MD (United States); Young, B. [Dept. of Energy, Albuquerque, NM (United States)

    1995-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In recent years, U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facilities commonly have been classified as reactor, non-reactor nuclear, or nuclear facilities. Safety analysis documentation was prepared for these facilities, with few exceptions, using the requirements in either DOE Order 5481.1B, Safety Analysis and Review System; or DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports. Traditionally, this has been accomplished by development of an extensive Safety Analysis Report (SAR), which identifies hazards, assesses risks of facility operation, describes and analyzes adequacy of measures taken to control hazards, and evaluates potential accidents and their associated risks. This process is complicated by analysis of secondary hazards and adequacy of backup (redundant) systems. The traditional SAR process is advantageous for DOE facilities with appreciable hazards or operational risks. SAR preparation for a low-risk facility or process can be cost-prohibitive and quite challenging because conventional safety analysis protocols may not readily be applied to a low-risk facility. The DOE Office of Environmental Restoration and Waste Management recognized this potential disadvantage and issued an EM limited technical standard, No. 5502-94, Hazard Baseline Documentation. This standard can be used for developing documentation for a facility classified as radiological, including preparation of an auditable (defensible) safety analysis. In support of the radiological facility classification process, the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Project has developed an auditable safety analysis document based upon the postulation criteria and hazards analysis techniques defined in DOE Order 5480.23.

  16. Cover letter, 10/29/03, re Nuclear Safety Technical Position, Deliverable 4.2.1

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The enclosed Nuclear Safety Technical Position is Deliverable 4.2.1. under the Implementation Plan for Defense Nuclear Facilitises Board (DNFSB) Recommendation 2002-3, Requirements for Design...

  17. Applications of nuclear data covariances to criticality safety and spent fuel characterization

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Williams, Mark L [ORNL] [ORNL; Ilas, Germina [ORNL] [ORNL; Marshall, William BJ J [ORNL] [ORNL; Rearden, Bradley T [ORNL] [ORNL

    2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Covariance data computational methods and data used for sensitivity and uncertainty analysis within the SCALE nuclear analysis code system are presented. Applications in criticality safety calculations and used nuclear fuel analysis are discussed.

  18. Documentation of Hanford Site independent review of the Hanford Waste Vitrification Plant Preliminary Safety Analysis Report. Revision 3

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Herborn, D.I.

    1993-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC) is the Integrating Contractor for the Hanford Waste Vitrification Plant (HWVP) Project, and as such is responsible for preparation of the HWVP Preliminary Safety Analysis Report (PSAR). The HWVP PSAR was prepared pursuant to the requirements for safety analyses contained in US Department of Energy (DOE) Orders 4700.1, Project Management System (DOE 1987); 5480.5, Safety of Nuclear Facilities (DOE 1986a); 5481.lB, Safety Analysis and Review System (DOE 1986b) which was superseded by DOE order 5480-23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports, for nuclear facilities effective April 30, 1992 (DOE 1992); and 6430.lA, General Design Criteria (DOE 1989). The WHC procedures that, in large part, implement these DOE requirements are contained in WHC-CM-4-46, Nonreactor Facility Safety Analysis Manual. This manual describes the overall WHC safety analysis process in terms of requirements for safety analyses, responsibilities of the various contributing organizations, and required reviews and approvals.

  19. Nuclear Safety Risk Management in Refueling Outage of Qinshan Nuclear Power Plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Meijing Wu; Guozhang Shen [Qinshan Nuclear power company (China)

    2006-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The NPP is used to planning maintenance, in-service inspection, surveillance test, fuel handling and design modification in the refueling outage; the operator response capability will be reduced plus some of the plant systems out of service or loss of power at this time. Based on 8 times refueling outage experiences of the Qinshan NPP, this article provide some good practice and lesson learned for the nuclear safety risk management focus at four safety function areas of Residual Heat Removal Capability, Inventory Control, Power availability and Reactivity control. (authors)

  20. Underwater nuclear power plants: improved safety, environmental compatibility and efficiency

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Galustov, K.Z.; Abadjyan, K.A.; Pavlov, A.B.

    1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The further development of nuclear power engineering depends on the creation of a new generation of nuclear power plant (NPP) projects that have a high degree of safety. Decisions ensuring secure NPP exploitation must be based on the possibility of eliminating or localizing accidents. Using environmental properties to achieve secure NPP exploitation and accident elimination leads to suggest the construction of NPPs in water. An efficient way to provide energy to remote coastal areas is through use of floatable construction of prefabricated units. Floatable construction raises the quality of works, reduces expenditures on industrial facilities, and facilities building conditions in districts with extreme climatic conditions. A type of NPP that is situated on a shelf with the reactor compartment placed at the sea bottom is proposed. The underwater location of the reactor compartment on the fixed depth allows the natural water environment conditions of natural hydrostatic pressure, heat transfer and circulation to provide NPP safety. An example of new concept for power units with under-water localization of the reactor compartment is provided by the double-block NPP in a VVER reactor.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  2. Report to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission on Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data, 1986

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    1987-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This annual report of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data (AEOD) is devoted to the activities performed during calendar year 1986. Comments and observations are provided on operating experience at nuclear power plants and other NRC licensees, including results from selected AEOD studies; summaries of abnormal occurrences involving US nuclear plants; reviews of licensee event reports and their quality, reactor scram experience from 1984 to 1986, engineered safety features actuations, and the trends and patterns analysis program; and assessments of nonreactor and medical misadministration events. In addition, the report provides the year-end status of all recommendations included in AEOD studies, and listings of all AEOD reports issued from 1980 through 1986.

  3. Proceedings of the international meeting on thermal nuclear reactor safety. Vol. 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    1983-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Separate abstracts are included for each of the papers presented concerning current issues in nuclear power plant safety; national programs in nuclear power plant safety; radiological source terms; probabilistic risk assessment methods and techniques; non LOCA and small-break-LOCA transients; safety goals; pressurized thermal shocks; applications of reliability and risk methods to probabilistic risk assessment; human factors and man-machine interface; and data bases and special applications.

  4. Nuclear Safety. Technical Progress Journal, October--December 1991: Volume 32, No. 4

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document is a review journal that covers significant developments in the field of nuclear safety. Its scope includes the analysis and control of hazards associated with nuclear energy, operations involving fissionable materials, and the products of nuclear fission and their effects on the environment. Primary emphasis is on safety in reactor design, construction, and operation; however, the safety aspects of the entire fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing, nuclear waste disposal, handling of radioisotopes, and environmental effects of these operations, are also treated.

  5. Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) Environmental Restoration (ER) Program Baseline Safety Analysis File (BSAF)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Baseline Safety Analysis File (BSAF) is a facility safety reference document for the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL) environmental restoration activities. The BSAF contains information and guidance for safety analysis documentation required by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for environmental restoration (ER) activities, including: Characterization of potentially contaminated sites. Remedial investigations to identify and remedial actions to clean up existing and potential releases from inactive waste sites Decontamination and dismantlement of surplus facilities. The information is INEL-specific and is in the format required by DOE-EM-STD-3009-94, Preparation Guide for U.S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Safety Analysis Reports. An author of safety analysis documentation need only write information concerning that activity and refer to BSAF for further information or copy applicable chapters and sections. The information and guidance provided are suitable for: {sm_bullet} Nuclear facilities (DOE Order 5480-23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports) with hazards that meet the Category 3 threshold (DOE-STD-1027-92, Hazard Categorization and Accident Analysis Techniques for Compliance with DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports) {sm_bullet} Radiological facilities (DOE-EM-STD-5502-94, Hazard Baseline Documentation) Nonnuclear facilities (DOE-EM-STD-5502-94) that are classified as {open_quotes}low{close_quotes} hazard facilities (DOE Order 5481.1B, Safety Analysis and Review System). Additionally, the BSAF could be used as an information source for Health and Safety Plans and for Safety Analysis Reports (SARs) for nuclear facilities with hazards equal to or greater than the Category 2 thresholds, or for nonnuclear facilities with {open_quotes}moderate{close_quotes} or {open_quotes}high{close_quotes} hazard classifications.

  6. Frequently Asked Questions Regarding DOE-STD-1195-2011, Design...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Design of Safety Significant Safety Instrumented Systems Used at DOE Non-Reactor Nuclear Facilities Frequently Asked Questions Regarding DOE-STD-1195-2011, Design of...

  7. Nuclear safety information sharing agreement between NRC and...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    3116 Public Meeting Summaries - July 2007 Fifth National Report for the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management...

  8. Myths and representations in French nuclear history: The impact on decommissioning safety

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Paris-Sud XI, Université de

    Myths and representations in French nuclear history: The impact on decommissioning safety C. Martin. The decommissioning of many operational plants (whether because nuclear power is being withdrawn, or because plants accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant has shown that in many countries the debate on the withdrawal

  9. ASSESSING NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SAFETY AND RECOVERY FROM EARTHQUAKES USING A SYSTEM-OF-SYSTEMS

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Paris-Sud XI, Université de

    by Monte Carlo simulation the probability that the nuclear power plant enters in an unsafe stateASSESSING NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SAFETY AND RECOVERY FROM EARTHQUAKES USING A SYSTEM in which the plant is embedded. As a test system, we consider the impacts produced on a nuclear power plant

  10. Nuclear criticality safety aspects of gaseous uranium hexafluoride (UF{sub 6}) in the diffusion cascade

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Huffer, J.E. [Parallax, Inc., Atlanta, GA (United States)

    1997-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This paper determines the nuclear safety of gaseous UF{sub 6} in the current Gaseous Diffusion Cascade and auxiliary systems. The actual plant safety system settings for pressure trip points are used to determine the maximum amount of HF moderation in the process gas, as well as the corresponding atomic number densities. These inputs are used in KENO V.a criticality safety models which are sized to the actual plant equipment. The ENO V.a calculation results confirm nuclear safety of gaseous UF{sub 6} in plant operations..

  11. Potential safety-related incidents with possible applicability to a nuclear fuel reprocessing plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Durant, W.S.; Perkins, W.C.; Lee, R.; Stoddard, D.H.

    1982-05-20T23:59:59.000Z

    The Safety Technology Group is developing methodology that can be used to assess the risk of operating a plant to reprocess spent nuclear fuel. As an early step in the methodology, a preliminary hazards analysis identifies safety-related incidents. In the absence of appropriate safety features, these incidents could lead to significant consequences and risk to onsite personnel or to the public. This report is a compilation of potential safety-related incidents that have been identified in studies at SRL and in safety analyses of various commercially designed reprocessing plants. It is an expanded revision of the version originally published as DP-1558, Published December 1980.

  12. Safety and Nonsafety Communications and Interactions in International Nuclear Power Plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kisner, Roger A [ORNL; Mullens, James Allen [ORNL; Wilson, Thomas L [ORNL; Wood, Richard Thomas [ORNL; Korsah, Kofi [ORNL; Qualls, A L [ORNL; Muhlheim, Michael David [ORNL; Holcomb, David Eugene [ORNL; Loebl, Andy [ORNL

    2007-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Current industry and NRC guidance documents such as IEEE 7-4.3.2, Reg. Guide 1.152, and IEEE 603 do not sufficiently define a level of detail for evaluating interdivisional communications independence. The NRC seeks to establish criteria for safety systems communications that can be uniformly applied in evaluation of a variety of safety system designs. This report focuses strictly on communication issues related to data sent between safety systems and between safety and nonsafety systems. Further, the report does not provide design guidance for communication systems nor present detailed failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) results for existing designs. This letter report describes communications between safety and nonsafety systems in nuclear power plants outside the United States. A limited study of international nuclear power plants was conducted to ascertain important communication implementations that might have bearing on systems proposed for licensing in the United States. This report provides that following information: 1.communications types and structures used in a representative set of international nuclear power reactors, and 2.communications issues derived from standards and other source documents relevant to safety and nonsafety communications. Topics that are discussed include the following: communication among redundant safety divisions, communications between safety divisions and nonsafety systems, control of safety equipment from a nonsafety workstation, and connection of nonsafety programming, maintenance, and test equipment to redundant safety divisions during operation. Information for this report was obtained through publicly available sources such as published papers and presentations. No proprietary information is represented.

  13. Manual of functions, assignments, and responsibilities for nuclear safety: Revision 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-10-15T23:59:59.000Z

    The FAR Manual is a convenient easy-to-use collection of the functions, assignments, and responsibilities (FARs) of DOE nuclear safety personnel. Current DOE directives, including Orders, Secretary of Energy Notices, and other assorted policy memoranda, are the source of this information and form the basis of the FAR Manual. Today, the majority of FARs for DOE personnel are contained in DOE`s nuclear safety Orders. As these Orders are converted to rules in the Code of Federal Regulations, the FAR Manual will become the sole source for information relating to the functions, assignments, responsibilities of DOE nuclear safety personnel. The FAR Manual identifies DOE directives that relate to nuclear safety and the specific DOE personnel who are responsible for implementing them. The manual includes only FARs that have been extracted from active directives that have been approved in accordance with the procedures contained in DOE Order 1321.1B.

  14. 2011 Annual Criticality Safety Program Performance Summary

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Andrea Hoffman

    2011-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The 2011 review of the INL Criticality Safety Program has determined that the program is robust and effective. The review was prepared for, and fulfills Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) item H.20, 'Annual Criticality Safety Program performance summary that includes the status of assessments, issues, corrective actions, infractions, requirements management, training, and programmatic support.' This performance summary addresses the status of these important elements of the INL Criticality Safety Program. Assessments - Assessments in 2011 were planned and scheduled. The scheduled assessments included a Criticality Safety Program Effectiveness Review, Criticality Control Area Inspections, a Protection of Controlled Unclassified Information Inspection, an Assessment of Criticality Safety SQA, and this management assessment of the Criticality Safety Program. All of the assessments were completed with the exception of the 'Effectiveness Review' for SSPSF, which was delayed due to emerging work. Although minor issues were identified in the assessments, no issues or combination of issues indicated that the INL Criticality Safety Program was ineffective. The identification of issues demonstrates the importance of an assessment program to the overall health and effectiveness of the INL Criticality Safety Program. Issues and Corrective Actions - There are relatively few criticality safety related issues in the Laboratory ICAMS system. Most were identified by Criticality Safety Program assessments. No issues indicate ineffectiveness in the INL Criticality Safety Program. All of the issues are being worked and there are no imminent criticality concerns. Infractions - There was one criticality safety related violation in 2011. On January 18, 2011, it was discovered that a fuel plate bundle in the Nuclear Materials Inspection and Storage (NMIS) facility exceeded the fissionable mass limit, resulting in a technical safety requirement (TSR) violation. The TSR limits fuel plate bundles to 1085 grams U-235, which is the maximum loading of an ATR fuel element. The overloaded fuel plate bundle contained 1097 grams U-235 and was assembled under an 1100 gram U-235 limit in 1982. In 2003, the limit was reduced to 1085 grams citing a new criticality safety evaluation for ATR fuel elements. The fuel plate bundle inventories were not checked for compliance prior to implementing the reduced limit. A subsequent review of the NMIS inventory did not identify further violations. Requirements Management - The INL Criticality Safety program is organized and well documented. The source requirements for the INL Criticality Safety Program are from 10 CFR 830.204, DOE Order 420.1B, Chapter III, 'Nuclear Criticality Safety,' ANSI/ANS 8-series Industry Standards, and DOE Standards. These source requirements are documented in LRD-18001, 'INL Criticality Safety Program Requirements Manual.' The majority of the criticality safety source requirements are contained in DOE Order 420.1B because it invokes all of the ANSI/ANS 8-Series Standards. DOE Order 420.1B also invokes several DOE Standards, including DOE-STD-3007, 'Guidelines for Preparing Criticality Safety Evaluations at Department of Energy Non-Reactor Nuclear Facilities.' DOE Order 420.1B contains requirements for DOE 'Heads of Field Elements' to approve the criticality safety program and specific elements of the program, namely, the qualification of criticality staff and the method for preparing criticality safety evaluations. This was accomplished by the approval of SAR-400, 'INL Standardized Nuclear Safety Basis Manual,' Chapter 6, 'Prevention of Inadvertent Criticality.' Chapter 6 of SAR-400 contains sufficient detail and/or reference to the specific DOE and contractor documents that adequately describe the INL Criticality Safety Program per the elements specified in DOE Order 420.1B. The Safety Evaluation Report for SAR-400 specifically recognizes that the approval of SAR-400 approves the INL Criticality Safety Program. No new source requirements were released in 2011. A revision to LRD-18001 is

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  16. Nuclear nonproliferation and safety: Challenges facing the International Atomic Energy Agency

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Chairman of the Senate Committee on Govermental Affairs asked the United States General Accounting Office (GAO) to review the safeguards and nuclear power plant safety programs of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). This report examines (1) the effectiveness of IAEA`s safeguards program and the adequacy of program funding, (2) the management of U.S. technical assistance to the IAEA`s safeguards program, and (3) the effectiveness of IAEA`s program for advising United Nations (UN) member states about nuclear power plant safety and the adequacy of program funding. Under its statute and the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, IAEA is mandated to administer safeguards to detect diversions of significant quantities of nuclear material from peaceful uses. Because of limits on budget growth and unpaid contributions, IAEA has had difficulty funding the safeguards program. IAEA also conducts inspections of facilities or locations containing declared nuclear material, and manages a program for reviewing the operational safety of designated nuclear power plants. The U.S. technical assistance program for IAEA safeguards, overseen by an interagency coordinating committee, has enhanced the agency`s inspection capabilities, however, some weaknesses still exist. Despite financial limitations, IAEA is meeting its basic safety advisory responsibilities for advising UN member states on nuclear safety and providing requested safety services. However, IAEA`s program for reviewing the operational safety of nuclear power plants has not been fully effective because the program is voluntary and UN member states have not requested IAEA`s review of all nuclear reactors with serious problems. GAO believes that IAEA should have more discretion in selecting reactors for review.

  17. Airborne Release Fractions/Rates and Respirable Fractions for Nonreactor Nuclear Facilities, Volume 1

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011AT&T, Inc.'s Reply Comments AT&T,FACT S HEET FACTAgenda: TheAof(2010-SE-0301) TS

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

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011AT&T, Inc.'s Reply Comments AT&T,FACT S HEET FACTAgenda: TheAof(2010-SE-0301) TS

  19. Application of Neutron-Absorbing Structural-Amorphous metal (SAM) Coatings for Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) Container to Enhance Criticality Safety Controls

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    241 Pu, etc. ). To prevent nuclear criticality in spent fuelto enhance criticality safety for spent nuclear fuel inSpent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) Container to Enhance Criticality

  20. SHSD Manager Safety Engineering Group Manager

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Safety, Machine Shop Safety, Tier I Program, Traffic Safety S. Moss: Nuclear Criticality Safety G. Shepherd: Explosives Safety, Facility Authorization Basis, Nuclear Safety R. Travis: Readiness Evaluations

  1. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Safety and Environmental...

    Broader source: Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    Safety, must comply with national consensus industry standards and the model building codes applicable for the state or region in which the facility is located. Certain...

  2. Nuclear Safety Component and Services Procurement, June 29, 2011...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    require component and materials replacement identified and implemented? * Are appropriate preventive maintenance requirements for stored safety-related equipment identified and...

  3. CRAD, Nuclear Safety- Oak Ridge National Laboratory High Flux Isotope Reactor

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    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) used for a February 2007 assessment of the Nuclear Safety Program in preparation for restart of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory High Flux Isotope Reactor.

  4. Safety of nuclear power reactors in the former Eastern European countries

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chakraborty, S. [Swiss Federal Nuclear Safety Inspectorate, Villigen (Switzerland)

    1995-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This article discusses the safety of nuclear power plants in the former Eastern European countries (including the former Soviet Union). The current international design fabrication, construction, operation, safely, regulatory standards and practices, and ways to resolve plant problems are addressed in light of experience with the Western nuclear power development programs. 9 refs., 4 figs.

  5. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 92 (2007) 609618 The nuclear industry's transition to risk-informed regulation and

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    2007-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    improvement in safety based on Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) performance indicatorsReliability Engineering and System Safety 92 (2007) 609­618 The nuclear industry's transition a Nuclear Science and Engineering Department, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139

  6. WASTE PROCESSING ANNUAL NUCLEAR SAFETY RELATED R AND D REPORT FOR CY2008

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fellinger, A.

    2009-10-15T23:59:59.000Z

    The Engineering and Technology Office of Waste Processing identifies and reduces engineering and technical risks associated with key waste processing project decisions. The risks, and actions taken to mitigate those risks, are determined through technology readiness assessments, program reviews, technology information exchanges, external technical reviews, technical assistance, and targeted technology development and deployment (TDD). The Office of Waste Processing TDD program prioritizes and approves research and development scopes of work that address nuclear safety related to processing of highly radioactive nuclear wastes. Thirteen of the thirty-five R&D approved work scopes in FY2009 relate directly to nuclear safety, and are presented in this report.

  7. Safety of Department of Energy-Owned Nuclear Reactors

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    1986-09-23T23:59:59.000Z

    To establish reactor safety program requirements assure that the safety of each Department of Energy-owned (DOE-owned) reactor is properly analyzed, evaluated, documented, and approved by DOE; and reactors are sited, designed, constructed, modified, operated, maintained, and decommissioned in a manner that gives adequate protection for health and safety and will be in accordance with uniform standards, guides, and codes which are consistent with those applied to comparable licensed reactors. Cancels Chap. 6 of DOE O 5480.1A. Paragraphs 7b(3), 7e(3) & 8c canceled by DOE O 5480.23 & canceled by DOE N 251.4 of 9-29-95.

  8. Personnel Selection, Qualification, and Training Requirements for DOE Nuclear Facilities

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2001-07-12T23:59:59.000Z

    To establish selection, qualification, and training requirements for management and operating (M&O) contractor personnel involved in the operation, maintenance, and technical support of Department of Energy and National Nuclear Security Administration Category A and B reactors and non-reactor nuclear facilities. Canceled by DOE O 426.2

  9. Preliminary nuclear safety assessment of the NEPST (Topaz II) space reactor program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Marshall, A.C.

    1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The United States (US) Strategic Defense Initiative Organization (SDIO) decided to investigate the possibility of launching a Russian Topaz II space nuclear power system. A preliminary nuclear safety assessment was conducted to determine whether or not a space mission could be conducted safely and within budget constraints. As part of this assessment, a safety policy and safety functional requirements were developed to guide both the safety assessment and future Topaz II activities. A review of the Russian flight safety program was conducted and documented. Our preliminary nuclear safety assessment included a number of deterministic analyses, such as; neutronic analysis of normal and accident configurations, an evaluation of temperature coefficients of reactivity, a reentry and disposal analysis, an analysis of postulated launch abort impact accidents, and an analysis of postulated propellant fire and explosion accidents. Based on the assessment to date, it appears that it will be possible to safely launch the Topaz II system in the US with a modification to preclude water flooded criticality. A full scale safety program is now underway.

  10. Energy Department and Catholic University Improve Safety of Nuclear Waste

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    A new waste processing plant in Washington will help to safely remove nuclear and chemical waste, thanks to research from Catholic University.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    VINCENT, Andrew

    2005-07-14T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  12. Organizational analysis and safety for utilities with nuclear power plants: perspectives for organizational assessment. Volume 2. [PWR; BWR

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Osborn, R.N.; Olson, J.; Sommers, P.E.; McLaughlin, S.D.; Jackson, M.S.; Nadel, M.V.; Scott, W.G.; Connor, P.E.; Kerwin, N.; Kennedy, J.K. Jr.

    1983-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This two-volume report presents the results of initial research on the feasibility of applying organizational factors in nuclear power plant (NPP) safety assessment. Volume 1 of this report contains an overview of the literature, a discussion of available safety indicators, and a series of recommendations for more systematically incorporating organizational analysis into investigations of nuclear power plant safety. The six chapters of this volume discuss the major elements in our general approach to safety in the nuclear industry. The chapters include information on organizational design and safety; organizational governance; utility environment and safety related outcomes; assessments by selected federal agencies; review of data sources in the nuclear power industry; and existing safety indicators.

  13. Aging of Class 1E batteries in safety systems of nuclear power plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Edson, J.L.; Hardin, J.E.

    1987-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report presents the results of a study of aging effects on safety-related batteries in nuclear power plants. The purpose is to evaluate the aging effects caused by operation within a nuclear facility and to evaluate maintenance, testing, and monitoring practices with respect to their effectiveness in detecting and mitigating the effects of aging. The study follows the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) Nuclear Plant-Aging Research approach and investigates the materials used in battery construction, identifies stressors and aging mechanisms, presents operating and testing experience with aging effects, analyzes battery-failure events reported in various data bases, and evaluates recommended maintenance practices. Data bases that were analyzed included the NRC's Licensee Event Report system, the Institute for Nuclear Power Operations' Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System, the Oak Ridge National Laboratory's In-Plant Reliability Data System, and The S.M. Stoller Corporation's Nuclear Power Experience data base.

  14. Technology, safety, and costs of decommissioning reference nuclear research and test reactors. Main report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Konzek, G.J.; Ludwick, J.D.; Kennedy, W.E. Jr.; Smith, R.I.

    1982-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Safety and Cost Information is developed for the conceptual decommissioning of two representative licensed nuclear research and test reactors. Three decommissioning alternatives are studied to obtain comparisons between costs (in 1981 dollars), occupational radiation doses, potential radiation dose to the public, and other safety impacts. The alternatives considered are: DECON (immediate decontamination), SAFSTOR (safe storage followed by deferred decontamination), and ENTOMB (entombment). The study results are presented in two volumes. Volume 1 (Main Report) contains the results in summary form.

  15. Index to Nuclear Safety: a technical progress review by chronology, permuted title, and author, Volume 18 (1) through Volume 22 (6)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cottrell, W.B.; Passiakos, M.

    1982-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This index to Nuclear Safety covers articles published in Nuclear Safety, Volume 18, Number 1 (January-February 1977) through Volume 22, Number 6 (November-December 1981). The index is divided into three section: a chronological list of articles (including abstracts), a permuted-title (KWIC) index, and an author index. Nuclear Safety, a bimonthly technical progress review prepared by the Nuclear Safety Information Center, covers all safety aspects of nuclear power reactors and associated facilities. Over 300 technical articles published in Nuclear Safety in the last 5 years are listed in this index.

  16. Space nuclear safety program, May 1983. Progress report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bronisz, S.E. (comp.)

    1983-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The studies related to the use of /sup 238/PuO/sub 2/ in radioisotope power systems, pertained to the General-Purpose Heat Source (compatibility and safety verification) and to the Light-Weight Radioisotope Heater units (overpressure and impact tests).

  17. Potential safety-related incidents with possible applicability to a nuclear fuel reprocessing plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Perkins, W.C.; Durant, W.S.; Dexter, A.H.

    1980-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The occurrence of certain potential events in nuclear fuel reprocessing plants could lead to significant consequences involving risk to operating personnel or to the general public. This document is a compilation of such potential initiating events in nuclear fuel reprocessing plants. Possible general incidents and incidents specific to key operations in fuel reprocessing are considered, including possible causes, consequences, and safety features designed to prevent, detect, or mitigate such incidents.

  18. Technical Basis for U. S. Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Policy, DOE Policy 420.1

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    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.

  19. The impact of offsite factors on the safety performance of small nuclear power plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Baranaev, Yu.D.; Viktorov, A.N. [Inst. of Physics and Power Engineering, Obninsk (Russian Federation)

    1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The results of an analysis of the influence of offsite factors on small nuclear power-plant (SNPP) safety performance during postulated severe accidents are presented. Given the plant locations in the immediate vicinity of residential areas and the impossibility of accomplishing the expeditious evacuation of the public, the risk caused by an SNPP severe accident may be considerably less than that for such an event in a large nuclear power plant. 3 refs., 3 figs., 5 tabs.

  20. ON THE USE OF SPRAY SYSTEMS: AN EXAMPLE OF R&D WORK IN HYDROGEN SAFETY FOR NUCLEAR APPLICATIONS

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Boyer, Edmond

    1 ON THE USE OF SPRAY SYSTEMS: AN EXAMPLE OF R&D WORK IN HYDROGEN SAFETY FOR NUCLEAR APPLICATIONS systems related to hydrogen safety in nuclear power plants have been the subject of several experimental l'Energie Atomique, CEA Saclay, DEN/DM2S/SFME, 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette Cedex, France 2 Institut de

  1. Y-12 hosts safety workshop | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA Approved: 5-13-14Russian NuclearNational Nuclear Securitysafety workshop |

  2. Worldwide advanced nuclear power reactors with passive and inherent safety: What, why, how, and who

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Forsberg, C.W.; Reich, W.J.

    1991-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The political controversy over nuclear power, the accidents at Three Mile Island (TMI) and Chernobyl, international competition, concerns about the carbon dioxide greenhouse effect and technical breakthroughs have resulted in a segment of the nuclear industry examining power reactor concepts with PRIME safety characteristics. PRIME is an acronym for Passive safety, Resilience, Inherent safety, Malevolence resistance, and Extended time after initiation of an accident for external help. The basic ideal of PRIME is to develop power reactors in which operator error, internal sabotage, or external assault do not cause a significant release of radioactivity to the environment. Several PRIME reactor concepts are being considered. In each case, an existing, proven power reactor technology is combined with radical innovations in selected plant components and in the safety philosophy. The Process Inherent Ultimate Safety (PIUS) reactor is a modified pressurized-water reactor, the Modular High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor (MHTGR) is a modified gas-cooled reactor, and the Advanced CANDU Project is a modified heavy-water reactor. In addition to the reactor concepts, there is parallel work on super containments. The objective is the development of a passive box'' that can contain radioactivity in the event of any type of accident. This report briefly examines: why a segment of the nuclear power community is taking this new direction, how it differs from earlier directions, and what technical options are being considered. A more detailed description of which countries and reactor vendors have undertaken activities follows. 41 refs.

  3. Educating Next Generation Nuclear Criticality Safety Engineers at the Idaho National Laboratory

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    J. D. Bess; J. B. Briggs; A. S. Garcia

    2011-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    One of the challenges in educating our next generation of nuclear safety engineers is the limitation of opportunities to receive significant experience or hands-on training prior to graduation. Such training is generally restricted to on-the-job-training before this new engineering workforce can adequately provide assessment of nuclear systems and establish safety guidelines. Participation in the International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project (ICSBEP) and the International Reactor Physics Experiment Evaluation Project (IRPhEP) can provide students and young professionals the opportunity to gain experience and enhance critical engineering skills. The ICSBEP and IRPhEP publish annual handbooks that contain evaluations of experiments along with summarized experimental data and peer-reviewed benchmark specifications to support the validation of neutronics codes, nuclear cross-section data, and the validation of reactor designs. Participation in the benchmark process not only benefits those who use these Handbooks within the international community, but provides the individual with opportunities for professional development, networking with an international community of experts, and valuable experience to be used in future employment. Traditionally students have participated in benchmarking activities via internships at national laboratories, universities, or companies involved with the ICSBEP and IRPhEP programs. Additional programs have been developed to facilitate the nuclear education of students while participating in the benchmark projects. These programs include coordination with the Center for Space Nuclear Research (CSNR) Next Degree Program, the Collaboration with the Department of Energy Idaho Operations Office to train nuclear and criticality safety engineers, and student evaluations as the basis for their Master's thesis in nuclear engineering.

  4. Superconducting Magnet Safety Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) facilities present unique hazards not found in most

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Maroncelli, Mark

    Superconducting Magnet Safety Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) facilities present unique hazards not found in most laboratory environments. The NMR facilities maintain superconducting magnets which have the units. Facility design and installation: Design and installation of a new NMR facility requires a number

  5. International Symposium on Fusion Nuclear Technology (ISFNT-5) SAFETY ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH MOBILIZED ACTIVATION

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    California at Los Angeles, University of

    International Symposium on Fusion Nuclear Technology (ISFNT-5) SAFETY ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH MOBILIZED ACTIVATION PRODUCTS IN SELECTED APEX DESIGNS K. A. McCarthy, D. A. Petti, R. L. Moore, and B. J. In this paper we concentrate on mobilization of first wall materials during ingress events, and provide guidance

  6. Next Generation Nuclear Plant Structures, Systems, and Components Safety Classification White Paper

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pete Jordan

    2010-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This white paper outlines the relevant regulatory policy and guidance for a risk-informed approach for establishing the safety classification of Structures, Systems, and Components (SSCs) for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant and sets forth certain facts for review and discussion in order facilitate an effective submittal leading to an NGNP Combined Operating License application under 10 CFR 52.

  7. Space nuclear safety program: Progress report, April-June 1987

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    George, T.G. (comp.)

    1988-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This quarterly report describes studies related to the use of /sup 238/PuO/sub 2/ in radioisotope power systems, carried out for the Office of Special Nuclear Projects of the US Department of Energy by Los Alamos National Laboratory. Most of the studies discussed are ongoing; the results and conclusions described may change as the work progresses.

  8. Space nuclear safety program: Progress report, July--September 1987

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    George, T.G. (comp.)

    1989-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This quarterly report describes studies related to the use of /sup 238/PuO/sub 2/ in radioisotope power systems, carried out for the Office of Special Nuclear Projects of the US Department of Energy by Los Alamos National Laboratory. The studies discussed are ongoing; the results and conclusions described may change as the work progresses. 20 figs., 4 tabs.

  9. Space nuclear safety program. Progress report, July 1983

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bronisz, S.E. (comp.)

    1983-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This technical monthly report covers studies related to the use of /sup 238/PuO/sub 2/ in radioisotope power systems carried out for the Office of Special Nuclear Projects of the US Department of Energy by Los Alamos National Laboratory. Most of the studies discussed here are ongoing. Results and conclusions described may change as the work continues.

  10. DOE Cites University of Chicago for Nuclear Safety Violations | Department

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613PortsmouthBartlesvilleAbout »Department of Energy Safety and Ecologyof Energy

  11. DOE Cites Washington TRU Solutions for Nuclear Safety Violations |

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613PortsmouthBartlesvilleAbout »Department of Energy Safety and EcologyofDepartment of

  12. CRAD, Nuclear Safety Component - June 29, 2011 | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613PortsmouthBartlesville EnergyDepartment of EnergyCONFIGURATIONNuclear Safety

  13. Nuclear Safety Policy, Guidance & Reports | Department of Energy

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What's Possible for Renewable Energy:Nanowire3627 Federal Register /76Safeguards and SecurityNuclear

  14. Annual Report To Congress. Department of Energy Activities Relating to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, Calendar Year 2003

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    2004-02-28T23:59:59.000Z

    The Department of Energy (Department) submits an Annual Report to Congress each year detailing the Department’s activities relating to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (Board), which provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary of Energy (Secretary) regarding public health and safety issues at the Department’s defense nuclear facilities. In 2003, the Department continued ongoing activities to resolve issues identified by the Board in formal recommendations and correspondence, staff issue reports pertaining to Department facilities, and public meetings and briefings. Additionally, the Department is implementing several key safety initiatives to address and prevent safety issues: safety culture and review of the Columbia accident investigation; risk reduction through stabilization of excess nuclear materials; the Facility Representative Program; independent oversight and performance assurance; the Federal Technical Capability Program (FTCP); executive safety initiatives; and quality assurance activities. The following summarizes the key activities addressed in this Annual Report.

  15. Assessment of safety-critical software in nuclear power plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Parnas, D.L.; Madey, J. [McMaster Univ., Hamilton, Ontario (Canada); Asmis, G.J.K. [Atomic Energy Control Board, Ottawa (Canada)

    1991-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This article outlines an approach in the design, documentation, and evaluation of computer systems. This allows the use of software in many safety-critical applications because it enables the systematic comparison of the program behavior with the engineering specifications of the computer system. Many of the ideas in this article have been used by the Atomic Energy Control Board of Canada in its safety assessment of the software for the shutdown systems of the Darlington Station. The four main elements of this approach follow: (1) Formal Documentation of Software Requirements: Most of the details of a complex environment can be ignored by system implementers and reviewers if they are given a complete and precise statement of the behavioral requirements for the computer system. We describe five mathematical relations that specify the requirements for the software in a computerized control system. (2) Design and Documentation of the Module Structure: Complexity caused by interactions between separately written components can be reduced by applying Data Abstraction, Abstract Data Types, and Object-Oriented Programming if the interfaces are precisely and completely documented. (3) Program Function Documentation: Software executions are lengthy sequences of state changes described by algorithms. The effects of these executive sequences can be precisely specified documented with tabular presentations of the program functions. Also, large programs can be decomposed and presented at a collection of well-documented smaller programs. (4) Tripod Approach to Assessment: There are three basic approaches to the assessment of complex software products: (i) testing, (ii) systematic inspection, and (iii) certification of people and processes. Assessment of a complex system cannot depend on any one of these alone. The approach used on the Darlington shutdown software, which included systematic inspection as well as planned and statistically designed random testing, is outlined.

  16. Independent Safety Assessment of the TOPAZ-II space nuclear reactor power system (Revised)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1993-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Independent Safety Assessment described in this study report was performed to assess the safety of the design and launch plans anticipated by the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) in 1993 for a Russian-built, U.S.-modified, TOPAZ-II space nuclear reactor power system. Its conclusions, and the bases for them, were intended to provide guidance for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) management in the event that the DOD requested authorization under section 91b. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, for possession and use (including ground testing and launch) of a nuclear-fueled, modified TOPAZ-II. The scientists and engineers who were engaged to perform this assessment are nationally-known nuclear safety experts in various disciplines. They met with participants in the TOPAZ-II program during the spring and summer of 1993 and produced a report based on their analysis of the proposed TOPAZ-II mission. Their conclusions were confined to the potential impact on public safety and did not include budgetary, reliability, or risk-benefit analyses.

  17. Passive cooling safety system for liquid metal cooled nuclear reactors

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Hunsbedt, Anstein (Los Gatos, CA); Boardman, Charles E. (Saratoga, CA); Hui, Marvin M. (Sunnyvale, CA); Berglund, Robert C. (Saratoga, CA)

    1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A liquid metal cooled nuclear reactor having a passive cooling system for removing residual heat resulting from fuel decay during reactor shutdown. The passive cooling system comprises a plurality of partitions surrounding the reactor vessel in spaced apart relation forming intermediate areas for circulating heat transferring fluid which remove and carry away heat from the reactor vessel. The passive cooling system includes a closed primary fluid circuit through the partitions surrounding the reactor vessel and a partially adjoining secondary open fluid circuit for carrying transferred heat out into the atmosphere.

  18. FAQS Reference Guide - Nuclear Safety Specialist | Department of Energy

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011AT&T,OfficeEnd of Year 2010SaltInstrumentation and Control FAQS Reference GuideNuclear

  19. Nuclear Explosive Safety Study Functional Area Qualification Standard

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels DataDepartment of Energy Your Density Isn'tOrigin of Contamination in ManyDepartment of Energy NorthB O|WorkNationalNuclear Energyi NOT

  20. Nuclear Explosives Safety Study Functional Area Qualification Standard

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels DataDepartment of Energy Your Density Isn'tOrigin of Contamination in ManyDepartment of Energy NorthB O|WorkNationalNuclear

  1. Nuclear safety information sharing agreement between NRC and DOE's Office

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYouTube YouTube Note: Since the.pdfBreaking ofOilNEWResponse to Time-Based Rates fromNuclear Securityand Facility

  2. Safety aspects of ground testing for large nuclear rockets

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Goldman, M.I.

    1988-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Present nuclear rocket reactors under test in Nevada are operated at nominal power levels of 1000 Mw. It does not seem unreasonable in the future to anticipate reactors with power levels in the range up to 5,000 Mw for space applications. It has been shown that the normal testing of large nuclear rocket engines at NRDS could impose some restrictions on the fuel performance which would not otherwise be required by space flight operation. The only apparent alternative would require a capability for decontaminating effluent gases prior to release to the atmosphere. In addition to the source restrictions, tests will almost certainly be controlled by wind and atmospheric stability conditions, and the requirements for monitoring and control of off-site exposures will be much more stringent than those presently in force. An analysis of maximum accidents indicates that projections of present credible occurrences cannot be tolerated in larger engine tests. The apparent alternatives to a significant (order of magnitude or better) reduction in credible accident consequences, are the establishment of an underground test facility, a facility in an area equivalent to the Pacific weapons proving ground, or in space.

  3. DOE Cites Safety and Ecology Corp. for Violating Nuclear Safety Rules |

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 111 1,613PortsmouthBartlesvilleAbout »Department of Energy Safety and Ecology Corp. for

  4. Nuclear criticality safety in D and D operations: a Los Alamos experience

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Schlesser, J.A.

    1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    Decommissioning operations at the Los Alamos National Laboratory require the interaction of several disciplines so that the effort to D&D radiological facilities can proceed unencumbered, on schedule, and within budget. Although playing a minor role, the Laboratory`s Nuclear Criticality Safety Group has provided criticality safety guidance to one such D&D team efficiently and cost-effectively. During the first major D&D effort at Los Alamos, a total of about 6 kilograms of uranium [U(93)] was recovered from a facility thought to contain only tens of grams.

  5. Technology, safety, and costs of decommissioning reference nuclear research and test reactors. Appendices

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Konzek, G.J.; Ludwick, J.D.; Kennedy, W.E. Jr.; Smith, R.I.

    1982-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Safety and Cost Information is developed for the conceptual decommissioning of two representative licensed nuclear research and test reactors. Three decommissioning alternatives are studied to obtain comparisons between costs (in 1981 dollars), occupational radiation doses, potential radiation dose to the public, and other safety impacts. The alternatives considered are: DECON (immediate decontamination), SAFSTOR (safe storage followed by deferred decontamination), and EMTOMB (entombment). The study results are presented in two volumes. Volume 2 (Appendices) contains the detailed data that support the results given in Volume 1, including unit-component data.

  6. Just in Time DSA-The Hanford Nuclear Safety Basis Strategy

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Olinger, S. J.; Buhl, A. R.

    2002-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

    The U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office (RL) is responsible for 30 hazard category 2 and 3 nuclear facilities that are operated by its prime contractors, Fluor Hanford Incorporated (FHI), Bechtel Hanford, Incorporated (BHI) and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL). The publication of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 830, Subpart B, Safety Basis Requirements (the Rule) in January 2001 imposed the requirement that the Documented Safety Analyses (DSA) for these facilities be reviewed against the requirements of the Rule. Those DSA that do not meet the requirements must either be upgraded to satisfy the Rule, or an exemption must be obtained. RL and its prime contractors have developed a Nuclear Safety Strategy that provides a comprehensive approach for supporting RL's efforts to meet its long term objectives for hazard category 2 and 3 facilities while also meeting the requirements of the Rule. This approach will result in a reduction of the total number of safety basis documents that must be developed and maintained to support the remaining mission and closure of the Hanford Site and ensure that the documentation that must be developed will support: compliance with the Rule; a ''Just-In-Time'' approach to development of Rule-compliant safety bases supported by temporary exemptions; and consolidation of safety basis documents that support multiple facilities with a common mission (e.g. decontamination, decommissioning and demolition [DD&D], waste management, surveillance and maintenance). This strategy provides a clear path to transition the safety bases for the various Hanford facilities from support of operation and stabilization missions through DD&D to accelerate closure. This ''Just-In-Time'' Strategy can also be tailored for other DOE Sites, creating the potential for large cost savings and schedule reductions throughout the DOE complex.

  7. Handbook of nuclear power plant seismic fragilities, Seismic Safety Margins Research Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cover, L.E.; Bohn, M.P.; Campbell, R.D.; Wesley, D.A.

    1983-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Seismic Safety Margins Research Program (SSMRP) has a gola to develop a complete fully coupled analysis procedure (including methods and computer codes) for estimating the risk of an earthquake-induced radioactive release from a commercial nuclear power plant. As part of this program, calculations of the seismic risk from a typical commercial nuclear reactor were made. These calculations required a knowledge of the probability of failure (fragility) of safety-related components in the reactor system which actively participate in the hypothesized accident scenarios. This report describes the development of the required fragility relations and the data sources and data reduction techniques upon which they are based. Both building and component fragilities are covered. The building fragilities are for the Zion Unit 1 reactor which was the specific plant used for development of methodology in the program. Some of the component fragilities are site-specific also, but most would be usable for other sites as well.

  8. Introduction to the nuclear criticality safety evaluation of facility X-705, Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sheaffer, M.K.; Keeton, S.C.

    1993-08-16T23:59:59.000Z

    This report is the first in a series of documents that will evaluate nuclear criticality safety in the Decontamination and Recovery Facility, X-705, Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant. It provides an overview of the facility, categorizes its functions for future analysis, reviews existing NCS documentation, and explains the follow-on effort planned for X-705. A detailed breakdown of systems, subsystems, and operational areas is presented and cross-referenced to existing NCS documentation.

  9. Impact of Fuel Failure on Criticality Safety of Used Nuclear Fuel

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Marshall, William BJ J [ORNL] [ORNL; Wagner, John C [ORNL] [ORNL

    2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Commercial used nuclear fuel (UNF) in the United States is expected to remain in storage for considerably longer periods than originally intended (e.g., <40 years). Extended storage (ES) time and irradiation of nuclear fuel to high-burnup values (>45 GWd/t) may increase the potential for fuel failure during normal and accident conditions involving storage and transportation. Fuel failure, depending on the severity, can result in changes to the geometric configuration of the fuel, which has safety and regulatory implications. The likelihood and extent of fuel reconfiguration and its impact on the safety of the UNF is not well understood. The objective of this work is to assess and quantify the impact of fuel reconfiguration due to fuel failure on criticality safety of UNF in storage and transportation casks. This effort is primarily motivated by concerns related to the potential for fuel degradation during ES periods and transportation following ES. The criticality analyses consider representative UNF designs and cask systems and a range of fuel enrichments, burnups, and cooling times. The various failed-fuel configurations considered are designed to bound the anticipated effects of individual rod and general cladding failure, fuel rod deformation, loss of neutron absorber materials, degradation of canister internals, and gross assembly failure. The results quantify the potential impact on criticality safety associated with fuel reconfiguration and may be used to guide future research, design, and regulatory activities. Although it can be concluded that the criticality safety impacts of fuel reconfiguration during transportation subsequent to ES are manageable, the results indicate that certain configurations can result in a large increase in the effective neutron multiplication factor, k{sub eff}. Future work to inform decision making relative to which configurations are credible, and therefore need to be considered in a safety evaluation, is recommended.

  10. Conduct and results of the Interagency Nuclear Safety Review Panel's evaluation of the Ulysses space mission

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sholtis, J.A. Jr. (Directorate of Nuclear Surety, Air Force Inspection Safety Center, Kirtland AFB, New Mexico 87117-5000 (USA)); Gray, L.B. (Office of Safety Mission Quality, National Aeronautics Space Administration, Washington, DC 20546 (USA)); Huff, D.A. (Office of Environment, Safety, Health, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC 20545 (USA)); Klug, N.P. (Office of Light Water Reactor Safety Technology, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC 20545 (USA)); Winchester, R.O. (Directorate of Nuclear Surety, Air Force Inspection Safety Center, Kirtland, AFB, New Mexico 87111-5000 (USA))

    1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The recent 6 October 1990 launch and deployment of the nuclear-powered Ulysses spacecraft from the Space Shuttle {ital Discovery} culminated an extensive safety review and evaluation effort by the Interagency Nuclear Safety Review Panel (INSRP). After more than a year of detailed independent review, study, and analysis, the INSRP prepared a Safety Evaluation Report (SER) on the Ulysses mission, in accordance with Presidential Directive-National Security Council memorandum 25. The SER, which included a review of the Ulysses Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) and an independent characterization of the mission risks, was used by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in its decision to request launch approval as well as by the Executive Office of the President in arriving at a launch decision based on risk-benefit considerations. This paper provides an overview of the Ulysses mission and the conduct as well as the results of the INSRP evaluation. While the mission risk determined by the INSRP in the SER was higher than that characterized by the Ulysses project in the FSAR, both reports indicated that the radiological risks were relatively small. In the final analysis, the SER proved to be supportive of a positive launch decision. The INSRP evaluation process has demonstrated its effectiveness numerous times since the 1960s. In every case, it has provided the essential ingredients and perspective to permit an informed launch decision at the highest level of our Government.

  11. Nuclear fuel cycle facility accident analysis handbook

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1998-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  12. The potential role of new technology for enhanced safety and performance of nuclear power plants through improved service maintenance

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Achorn, Ted Glen

    1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Refinements in the safety and performance of nuclear power plants must be made to maintain public confidence and ensure competitiveness with other power sources. The aircraft industry, US Navy, and other programs have ...

  13. Hazard Categorization and Accident Analysis Techniques for Compliance with DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    1997-12-12T23:59:59.000Z

    he purpose of this DOE Standard is to establish guidance for the preparation and review of hazard categorization and accident analyses techniques as required in DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports.

  14. Numerical study of the THM effects on the near-field safety of a hypothetical nuclear waste repository - BMT1 of the DECOVALEX III project. Part 3: Effects of THM coupling in sparsely fractured rocks

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    2004-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Safety of a Hypothetical Nuclear Waste Repository – BMT1 ofsafety of a hypothetical nuclear waste repository – BMT1 ofsafety of a hypothetical nuclear waste repository – BMT1 of

  15. CRITICALITY SAFETY CONTROLS AND THE SAFETY BASIS AT PFP

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kessler, S

    2009-04-21T23:59:59.000Z

    With the implementation of DOE Order 420.1B, Facility Safety, and DOE-STD-3007-2007, 'Guidelines for Preparing Criticality Safety Evaluations at Department of Energy Non-Reactor Nuclear Facilities', a new requirement was imposed that all criticality safety controls be evaluated for inclusion in the facility Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) and that the evaluation process be documented in the site Criticality Safety Program Description Document (CSPDD). At the Hanford site in Washington State the CSPDD, HNF-31695, 'General Description of the FH Criticality Safety Program', requires each facility develop a linking document called a Criticality Control Review (CCR) to document performance of these evaluations. Chapter 5, Appendix 5B of HNF-7098, Criticality Safety Program, provided an example of a format for a CCR that could be used in lieu of each facility developing its own CCR. Since the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) is presently undergoing Deactivation and Decommissioning (D&D), new procedures are being developed for cleanout of equipment and systems that have not been operated in years. Existing Criticality Safety Evaluations (CSE) are revised, or new ones written, to develop the controls required to support D&D activities. Other Hanford facilities, including PFP, had difficulty using the basic CCR out of HNF-7098 when first implemented. Interpretation of the new guidelines indicated that many of the controls needed to be elevated to TSR level controls. Criterion 2 of the standard, requiring that the consequence of a criticality be examined for establishing the classification of a control, was not addressed. Upon in-depth review by PFP Criticality Safety staff, it was not clear that the programmatic interpretation of criterion 8C could be applied at PFP. Therefore, the PFP Criticality Safety staff decided to write their own CCR. The PFP CCR provides additional guidance for the evaluation team to use by clarifying the evaluation criteria in DOE-STD-3007-2007. In reviewing documents used in classifying controls for Nuclear Safety, it was noted that DOE-HDBK-1188, 'Glossary of Environment, Health, and Safety Terms', defines an Administrative Control (AC) in terms that are different than typically used in Criticality Safety. As part of this CCR, a new term, Criticality Administrative Control (CAC) was defined to clarify the difference between an AC used for criticality safety and an AC used for nuclear safety. In Nuclear Safety terms, an AC is a provision relating to organization and management, procedures, recordkeeping, assessment, and reporting necessary to ensure safe operation of a facility. A CAC was defined as an administrative control derived in a criticality safety analysis that is implemented to ensure double contingency. According to criterion 2 of Section IV, 'Linkage to the Documented Safety Analysis', of DOESTD-3007-2007, the consequence of a criticality should be examined for the purposes of classifying the significance of a control or component. HNF-PRO-700, 'Safety Basis Development', provides control selection criteria based on consequence and risk that may be used in the development of a Criticality Safety Evaluation (CSE) to establish the classification of a component as a design feature, as safety class or safety significant, i.e., an Engineered Safety Feature (ESF), or as equipment important to safety; or merely provides defense-in-depth. Similar logic is applied to the CACs. Criterion 8C of DOE-STD-3007-2007, as written, added to the confusion of using the basic CCR from HNF-7098. The PFP CCR attempts to clarify this criterion by revising it to say 'Programmatic commitments or general references to control philosophy (e.g., mass control or spacing control or concentration control as an overall control strategy for the process without specific quantification of individual limits) is included in the PFP DSA'. Table 1 shows the PFP methodology for evaluating CACs. This evaluation process has been in use since February of 2008 and has proven to be simple and effective. Each control identified i

  16. Sandia Energy - Risk and Safety Assessment

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    Risk and Safety Assessment Home Stationary Power Nuclear Fuel Cycle Nuclear Energy Safety Technologies Risk and Safety Assessment Risk and Safety AssessmentTara...

  17. Pacific Northwest Laboratory: Annual report for 1986 to the Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health: Part 5, Nuclear and operational safety

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Faust, L.G.; Kennedy, W.E.; Steelman, B.L.; Selby, J.M.

    1987-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Part 5 of the 1986 Annual Report to the Department of Energy's Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health presents Pacific Northwest Laboratory's progress on work performed for the Office of Nuclear Safety, the Office of Operational Safety, and for the Office of Environmental Analysis. For each project, as identified by the Field Task Proposal/Agreement, articles describe progress made during fiscal year 1986. Authors of these articles represent a broad spectrum of capabilities derived from three of the seven research departments of the Laboratory, reflecting the interdisciplinary nature of the work.

  18. International Conference on Nuclear Thermal Hydraulics, Operations and Safety (NUTHOS-6) Nara, Japan, October 4-8, 2004.

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    The 6th International Conference on Nuclear Thermal Hydraulics, Operations and Safety (NUTHOS-6 Junbeom Yoo, Suhyun Park, Hojung Bang, Taihyo Kim, Sungdeok Cha Korea Advanced Institute of Science for assuring quality of software. In the area of nuclear power plant control systems, testing on software

  19. Annual report to Congress. Department of Energy activities relating to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, calendar year 2000

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    None

    2001-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Annual Report to the Congress describes the Department of Energy's activities in response to formal recommendations and other interactions with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. During 2000, the Department completed its implementation and proposed closure of one Board recommendation and completed all implementation plan milestones associated with two additional Board recommendations. Also in 2000, the Department formally accepted two new Board recommendations and developed implementation plans in response to those recommendations. The Department also made significant progress with a number of broad-based safety initiatives. These include initial implementation of integrated safety management at field sites and within headquarters program offices, issuance of a nuclear safety rule, and continued progress on stabilizing excess nuclear materials to achieve significant risk reduction.

  20. Development of a Societal-Risk Goal for Nuclear Power Safety

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Vicki Bier; Michael Corradini; Robert Youngblood; Caleb Roh; Shuji Liu

    2014-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The safety-goal policy of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has never included a true societal-risk goal. The NRC did acknowledge that the original goal for the risk of latent cancer facilities “was an individual risk goal not related to the number of people involved,” and stated that “a true societal risk goal would place a limit on the aggregate number of people affected.” However, this limitation was never satisfactorily addressed. Moreover, the safety goal has historically focused primarily on fatalities and latent health effects, while experience with actual nuclear accidents has shown that societal disruption can be significant even in accidents that yield only small to modest numbers of fatalities. Therefore, we have evaluated the social disruption effects from severe reactor accidents as a basis to develop a societal-risk goal for nuclear power plants, considering both health effects and non-health concerns such as property damage and land interdiction. Our initial analysis considered six different nuclear power plant sites in the U.S. for Boiling Water Reactors and Pressurized Water Reactors. The accident sequences considered for these two reactor types were station blackout sequences (both short-term and long-term SBO) as well as an STSBO with RCIC failure for the BWR and a Steam Generator Tube Rupture for the PWR. The source term release was an input in a RASCAL calculation of the off-site consequences using actual site-based weather data for each of the six plant sites randomly selected over a two-year period. The source term release plumes were then compared to Geographical Information System data for each site to determine the population affected and that would need to be evacuated to meet current emergency preparedness regulations. Our results to date suggest that number of people evacuated to meet current protective action guidelines appears to be a good proxy for disruption -- and, unlike other measures of disruption, has the advantage of being relatively straightforward to calculate for a given accident scenario and a given geographical location and plant site. Revised safety goals taking into account the potential for societal disruption could in principle be applied to the current generation of nuclear plants, but could also be used in evaluating and siting new technologies, such as small modular light water reactors, advanced Gen-IV high-temperature reactors, as well as reactor designs with passive safety features such as filtered vented containments.

  1. Techniques to evaluate the importance of common cause degradation on reliability and safety of nuclear weapons.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Darby, John L.

    2011-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    As the nuclear weapon stockpile ages, there is increased concern about common degradation ultimately leading to common cause failure of multiple weapons that could significantly impact reliability or safety. Current acceptable limits for the reliability and safety of a weapon are based on upper limits on the probability of failure of an individual item, assuming that failures among items are independent. We expanded the current acceptable limits to apply to situations with common cause failure. Then, we developed a simple screening process to quickly assess the importance of observed common degradation for both reliability and safety to determine if further action is necessary. The screening process conservatively assumes that common degradation is common cause failure. For a population with between 100 and 5000 items we applied the screening process and conclude the following. In general, for a reliability requirement specified in the Military Characteristics (MCs) for a specific weapon system, common degradation is of concern if more than 100(1-x)% of the weapons are susceptible to common degradation, where x is the required reliability expressed as a fraction. Common degradation is of concern for the safety of a weapon subsystem if more than 0.1% of the population is susceptible to common degradation. Common degradation is of concern for the safety of a weapon component or overall weapon system if two or more components/weapons in the population are susceptible to degradation. Finally, we developed a technique for detailed evaluation of common degradation leading to common cause failure for situations that are determined to be of concern using the screening process. The detailed evaluation requires that best estimates of common cause and independent failure probabilities be produced. Using these techniques, observed common degradation can be evaluated for effects on reliability and safety.

  2. Implementing Stakeholders' Access to Expertise: Experimenting on Nuclear Installations' Safety Cases - 12160

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gilli, Ludivine; Charron, Sylvie [Institut de Radioprotection et de Surete Nucleaire (IRSN), Fontenay-aux-Roses (France)

    2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In 2009 and 2010, the Institute for Nuclear Safety and Radiation Protection (IRSN) led two pilot actions dealing with nuclear installations' safety cases. One concerned the periodical review of the French 900 MWe nuclear reactors, the other concerned the decommissioning of a workshop located on the site of Areva's La Hague fuel-reprocessing plant site in Northwestern France. The purpose of both these programs was to test ways for IRSN and a small number of stakeholders (Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) members, local elected officials, etc.) to engage in technical discussions. The discussions were intended to enable the stakeholders to review future applications and provide valuable input. The test cases confirmed there is a definite challenge in successfully opening a meaningful dialogue to discuss technical issues, in particular the fact that most expertise reports were not public and the conflict that exists between the contrary demands of transparency and confidentiality of information. The test case also confirmed there are ways to further improvement of stakeholders' involvement. (authors)

  3. Institutional implications of establishing safety goals for nuclear power plants. [PWR; BWR

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Morris, F.A.; Hooper, R.L.

    1983-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The purpose of this project is to anticipate and address institutional problems that may arise from the adoption of NRC's proposed Policy Statement on Safety Goals for Nuclear Power Plants. The report emphasizes one particular category of institutional problems: the possible use of safety goals as a basis for legal challenges to NRC actions, and the resolution of such challenges by the courts. Three types of legal issues are identified and analyzed. These are, first, general legal issues such as access to the legal system, burden of proof, and standard of proof. Second is the particular formulation of goals. Involved here are such questions as sustainable rationale, definitions, avoided issues, vagueness of time and space details, and degree of conservatism. Implementation brings up the third set of issues which include interpretation and application, linkage to probabilistic risk assessment, consequences as compared to events, and the use of results.

  4. Effect of {gamma}-irradiation on strength of concrete for nuclear-safety structures

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Vodak, F. [Czech Technical University (CVUT), Faculty of Civil Engineering, Prague, Thakurova 7, CZ 166 29 Prague 6 (Czech Republic); Trtik, K. [Czech Technical University (CVUT), Faculty of Civil Engineering, Prague, Thakurova 7, CZ 166 29 Prague 6 (Czech Republic); Sopko, V. [Czech Technical University (CVUT), Faculty of Civil Engineering, Prague, Thakurova 7, CZ 166 29 Prague 6 (Czech Republic); Kapickova, O. [Czech Technical University (CVUT), Faculty of Civil Engineering, Prague, Thakurova 7, CZ 166 29 Prague 6 (Czech Republic); Demo, P. [Czech Technical University (CVUT), Faculty of Civil Engineering, Prague, Thakurova 7, CZ 166 29 Prague 6 (Czech Republic)]. E-mail: demo@fzu.cz

    2005-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Concrete applied for construction of nuclear power plant (NPP) Temelin (Czech Republic) has been exposed to {gamma}-irradiation up to dose 6x10{sup 5} Gy. Depending on the level of irradiation, changes in strength, porous structure and phase composition of the concrete have been studied. It is found that irradiation lowers both the strength of concrete (about 10%) and volume (resp. surface) of porous space. On the other hand, {gamma}-irradiation increases the ratio of calcite, CaCO{sub 3}, in the concrete. Observed effects are discussed with respect to safety of NPPs.

  5. Monitoring the Long-Term Safety Performance of a Repository for Used Nuclear Fuel - 12294

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Villagran, J.E. [Nuclear Waste Management Organization, Toronto (Canada)

    2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The nuclear waste management programs of several nations include plans for the design, construction and operation of deep geological repositories. Some of these programs have initiated the licensing process for their repository designs. Monitoring strategies and systems are at different levels of development in each program and there is common ground with respect to the ultimate goal of the monitoring function. In this context, the primary functions of a monitoring system are considered to be the verification of safety performance and making available information that may be required for implementation of future decisions such as the timing of repository decommissioning and closure or the possible retrieval of waste containers. This study examines some of the relevant issues and outlines a conceptual monitoring system for further study and development during implementation of Adaptive Phased Management, the method selected by the Government of Canada for long-term management of used nuclear fuel. (author)

  6. Operation Cornerstone onsite radiological safety report for announced nuclear tests, October 1988--September 1989

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1990-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Cornerstone was the name assigned to the series of underground nuclear experiments conducted at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) from October 1, 1988, through September 30, 1989. This report includes those experiments publicly announced. Remote radiation measurements were taken during and after each nuclear experiment by a telemetry system. Radiation Protection Technicians (RPT) with portable radiation detection instruments surveyed reentry routes into ground zeros (GZ) before other planned entries were made. Continuous surveillance was provided while personnel were in radiation areas and appropriate precautions were taken to protect persons from unnecessary exposure to radiation and toxic gases. Protective clothing and equipment were issued as needed. Complete radiological safety and industrial hygiene coverage were provided during drilling and mineback operations. Telemetered and portable radiation detector measurements are listed. Detection instrumentation used is described and specific operational procedures are defined.

  7. Use of artificial intelligence to enhance the safety of nuclear power plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Uhrig, R.E.

    1988-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In the operation of a nuclear power plant, the sheer magnitude of the number of process parameters and systems interactions poses difficulties for the operators, particularly during abnormal or emergency situations. Recovery from an upset situation depends upon the facility with which the available raw data can be converted into and assimilated as meaningful knowledge. Plant personnel are sometimes affected by stress and emotion, which may have varying degrees of influence on their performance. Expert systems can take some of the uncertainty and guesswork out of their decisions by providing expert advice and rapid access to a large information base. Application of artificial intelligence technologies, particularly expert systems, to control room activities in a nuclear power plant has the potential to reduce operator error and improve power plant safety and reliability. 12 refs.

  8. Privatization of the gaseous diffusion plants and impacts on nuclear criticality safety administration

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    D`Aquila, D.M.; Holliday, R.T. [Lockheed Martin Utility Services, Inc., Piketon, OH (United States); Dean, J.C. [Lockheed Martin Utility Services, Inc., Paducah, KY (United States)

    1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    The Energy Policy Act of 1992 created the United States Enrichment Corporation (USEC) on July 1, 1993. The USEC is a government-owned business that leases those Gaseous Diffusion Plant (GDP) facilities at the Portsmouth, Ohio, and Paducah, Kentucky, sites from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) that are required for enriching uranium. Lockheed Martin Utility Services is the operating contractor for the USEC-leased facilities. The DOE has retained use of, and regulation over, some facilities and areas at the Portsmouth and Paducah sites for managing legacy wastes and environmental restoration activities. The USEC is regulated by the DOE, but is currently changing to regulation under the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The USEC is also preparing for privatization of the uranium enrichment enterprise. These changes have significantly affected the nuclear criticality safety (NCS) programs at the sites.

  9. Safety of interim storage solutions of used nuclear fuel during extended term

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shelton, C.; Bader, S.; Issard, H.; Arslan, M. [AREVA, 7135 Minstrel Way, Suite 300 Columbia, MD 21045 (United States)

    2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In 2013, the total amount of stored used nuclear fuel (UNF) in the world will reach 225,000 T HM. The UNF inventory in wet storage will take up over 80% of the available total spent fuel pool (SFP) capacity. Interim storage solutions are needed. They give flexibility to the nuclear operators and ensure that nuclear reactors continue to operate. However, we need to keep in mind that they are also an easy way to differ final decision and implementation of a UNF management approach (recycling or final disposal). In term of public perception, they can have a negative impact overtime as it may appear that nuclear industry may have significant issues to resolve. In countries lacking an integrated UNF management approach, the UNF are being discharged from the SFPs to interim storage (mostly to dry storage) at the same rate as UNF is being discharged from reactors, as the SFPs at the reactor sites are becoming full. This is now the case in USA, Taiwan, Switzerland, Spain, South Africa and Germany. For interim storage, AREVA has developed different solutions in order to allow the continued operation of reactors while meeting the current requirements of Safety Authorities: -) Dry storage canisters on pads, -) Dual-purpose casks (dry storage and transportation), -) Vault dry storage, and -) Centralized pool storage.

  10. Facility Safety

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2000-11-20T23:59:59.000Z

    The objective of this Order is to establish facility safety requirements related to: nuclear safety design, criticality safety, fire protection and natural phenomena hazards mitigation. The Order has Change 1 dated 11-16-95, Change 2 dated 10-24-96, and the latest Change 3 dated 11-22-00 incorporated. The latest change satisfies a commitment made to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) in response to DNFSB recommendation 97-2, Criticality Safety.

  11. Subject: Integrated Safety Analysis: Why It Is Appropriate for Fuel Recycling Facilities Project Number: 689Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Letter, 9/10/10

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Enclosed for your review is a Nuclear Energy Institute white paper on the use of Integrated Safety Analysis (ISA) at U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission-licensed recycling facilities. This paper is...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1995-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    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.

  13. Updating Human Factors Engineering Guidelines for Conducting Safety Reviews of Nuclear Power Plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    O, J.M.; Higgins, J.; Stephen Fleger - NRC

    2011-09-19T23:59:59.000Z

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) reviews the human factors engineering (HFE) programs of applicants for nuclear power plant construction permits, operating licenses, standard design certifications, and combined operating licenses. The purpose of these safety reviews is to help ensure that personnel performance and reliability are appropriately supported. Detailed design review procedures and guidance for the evaluations is provided in three key documents: the Standard Review Plan (NUREG-0800), the HFE Program Review Model (NUREG-0711), and the Human-System Interface Design Review Guidelines (NUREG-0700). These documents were last revised in 2007, 2004 and 2002, respectively. The NRC is committed to the periodic update and improvement of the guidance to ensure that it remains a state-of-the-art design evaluation tool. To this end, the NRC is updating its guidance to stay current with recent research on human performance, advances in HFE methods and tools, and new technology being employed in plant and control room design. This paper describes the role of HFE guidelines in the safety review process and the content of the key HFE guidelines used. Then we will present the methodology used to develop HFE guidance and update these documents, and describe the current status of the update program.

  14. BFS, a Legacy to the International Reactor Physics, Criticality Safety, and Nuclear Data Communities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    J. Blair Briggs; Anatoly Tsibulya; Yevgeniy Rozhikhin

    2012-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Interest in high-quality integral benchmark data is increasing as efforts to quantify and reduce calculational uncertainties accelerate to meet the demands of next generation reactor and advanced fuel cycle concepts. Two Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) activities, the International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project (ICSBEP), initiated in 1992, and the International Reactor Physics Experiment Evaluation Project (IRPhEP), initiated in 2003, have been identifying existing integral experiment data, evaluating those data, and providing integral benchmark specifications for methods and data validation for nearly two decades. Thus far, 14 countries have contributed to the IRPhEP, and 20 have contributed to the ICSBEP. Data provided by these two projects will be of use to the international reactor physics, criticality safety, and nuclear data communities for future decades The Russian Federation has been a major contributor to both projects with the Institute of Physics and Power Engineering (IPPE) as the major contributor from the Russian Federation. Included in the benchmark specifications from the BFS facilities are 34 critical configurations from BFS-49, 61, 62, 73, 79, 81, 97, 99, and 101; spectral characteristics measurements from BFS-31, 42, 57, 59, 61, 62, 73, 97, 99, and 101; reactivity effects measurements from BFS-62-3A; reactivity coefficients and kinetics measurements from BFS-73; and reaction rate measurements from BFS-42, 61, 62, 73, 97, 99, and 101.

  15. Nuclear criticality safety experiments, calculations, and analyses - 1958 to 1982. Volume 2. Summaries. Complilation of papers from the Transactions of the American Nuclear Society

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Koponen, B.L.; Hampel, V.E.

    1982-10-21T23:59:59.000Z

    This compilation contains 688 complete summaries of papers on nuclear criticality safety as presented at meetings of the American Nuclear Society (ANS). The selected papers contain criticality parameters for fissile materials derived from experiments and calculations, as well as criticality safety analyses for fissile material processing, transport, and storage. The compilation was developed as a component of the Nuclear Criticality Information System (NCIS) now under development at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The compilation is presented in two volumes: Volume 1 contains a directory to the ANS Transaction volume and page number where each summary was originally published, the author concordance, and the subject concordance derived from the keyphrases in titles. Volume 2 contains-in chronological order-the full-text summaries, reproduced here by permission of the American Nuclear Society from their Transactions, volumes 1-41.

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

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels DataDepartment of Energy Your Density Isn't Your Destiny:Revised Finding of No Significant Impact6

  17. DOE-HDBK-3010-94; Airborne Release Fractions/Rates and Respirable Fractions for Nonreactor Nuclear Facilities

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOn AprilA Approved:AdministrationAnalysisDarby/%2AO 474.2 Chg U.S. S p e chonors

  18. Annual report to Congress: Department of Energy activities relating to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, Calendar Year 1999

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    None

    2000-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This is the tenth Annual Report to the Congress describing Department of Energy activities in response to formal recommendations and other interactions with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (Board). The Board, an independent executive-branch agency established in 1988, provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary of Energy regarding public health and safety issues at the Department's defense nuclear facilities. The Board also reviews and evaluates the content and implementation of health and safety standards, as well as other requirements, relating to the design, construction, operation, and decommissioning of the Department's defense nuclear facilities. During 1999, Departmental activities resulted in the closure of nine Board recommendations. In addition, the Department has completed all implementation plan milestones associated with three Board recommendations. One new Board recommendation was received and accepted by the Department in 1999, and a new implementation plan is being developed to address this recommendation. The Department has also made significant progress with a number of broad-based initiatives to improve safety. These include expanded implementation of integrated safety management at field sites, opening of a repository for long-term storage of transuranic wastes, and continued progress on stabilizing excess nuclear materials to achieve significant risk reduction.

  19. Annual report to Congress: Department of Energy activities relating to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, calendar year 1998

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1999-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This is the ninth Annual Report to the Congress describing Department of Energy (Department) activities in response to formal recommendations and other interactions with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (Board). The Board, an independent executive-branch agency established in 1988, provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary of energy regarding public health and safety issues at the Department`s defense nuclear facilities. The Board also reviews and evaluates the content and implementation of health and safety standards, as well as other requirements, relating to the design, construction, operation, and decommissioning of the Department`s defense nuclear facilities. The locations of the major Department facilities are provided. During 1998, Departmental activities resulted in the proposed closure of one Board recommendation. In addition, the Department has completed all implementation plan milestones associated with four other Board recommendations. Two new Board recommendations were received and accepted by the Department in 1998, and two new implementation plans are being developed to address these recommendations. The Department has also made significant progress with a number of broad-based initiatives to improve safety. These include expanded implementation of integrated safety management at field sites, a renewed effort to increase the technical capabilities of the federal workforce, and a revised plan for stabilizing excess nuclear materials to achieve significant risk reduction.

  20. Technology, Safety and Costs of Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors At Multiple-Reactor Stations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wittenbrock, N. G.

    1982-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Safety and cost information is developed for the conceptual decommissioning of large (1175-MWe) pressurized water reactors (PWRs) and large (1155-MWe) boiling water reactors {BWRs) at multiple-reactor stations. Three decommissioning alternatives are studied: DECON (immediate decontamination), SAFSTOR (safe storage followed by deferred decontamination), and ENTOMB (entombment). Safety and costs of decommissioning are estimated by determining the impact of probable features of multiple-reactor-station operation that are considered to be unavailable at a single-reactor station, and applying these estimated impacts to the decommissioning costs and radiation doses estimated in previous PWR and BWR decommissioning studies. The multiple-reactor-station features analyzed are: the use of interim onsite nuclear waste storage with later removal to an offsite nuclear waste disposal facility, the use of permanent onsite nuclear waste disposal, the dedication of the site to nuclear power generation, and the provision of centralized services. Five scenarios for decommissioning reactors at a multiple-reactor station are investigated. The number of reactors on a site is assumed to be either four or ten; nuclear waste disposal is varied between immediate offsite disposal, interim onsite storage, and immediate onsite disposal. It is assumed that the decommissioned reactors are not replaced in one scenario but are replaced in the other scenarios. Centralized service facilities are provided in two scenarios but are not provided in the other three. Decommissioning of a PWR or a BWR at a multiple-reactor station probably will be less costly and result in lower radiation doses than decommissioning an identical reactor at a single-reactor station. Regardless of whether the light water reactor being decommissioned is at a single- or multiple-reactor station: • the estimated occupational radiation dose for decommissioning an LWR is lowest for SAFSTOR and highest for DECON • the estimated cost of decommissioning a PWR is lowest for ENTOMB and highest for SAFSTOR • the estimated cost of decommissioning a BWR is lowest for OECON and highest for SAFSTOR. In all cases, SAFSTOR has the lowest occupational radiation dose and the highest cost.

  1. Development of a Method for Quantifying the Reliability of Nuclear Safety-Related Software

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Yi Zhang; Michael W. Golay

    2003-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The work of our project is intended to help introducing digital technologies into nuclear power into nuclear power plant safety related software applications. In our project we utilize a combination of modern software engineering methods: design process discipline and feedback, formal methods, automated computer aided software engineering tools, automatic code generation, and extensive feasible structure flow path testing to improve software quality. The tactics include ensuring that the software structure is kept simple, permitting routine testing during design development, permitting extensive finished product testing in the input data space of most likely service and using test-based Bayesian updating to estimate the probability that a random software input will encounter an error upon execution. From the results obtained the software reliability can be both improved and its value estimated. Hopefully our success in the project's work can aid the transition of the nuclear enterprise into the modern information world. In our work, we have been using the proprietary sample software, the digital Signal Validation Algorithm (SVA), provided by Westinghouse. Also our work is being done with their collaboration. The SVA software is used for selecting the plant instrumentation signal set which is to be used as the input the digital Plant Protection System (PPS). This is the system that automatically decides whether to trip the reactor. In our work, we are using -001 computer assisted software engineering (CASE) tool of Hamilton Technologies Inc. This tool is capable of stating the syntactic structure of a program reflecting its state requirements, logical functions and data structure.

  2. Exploration of high-dimensional scalar function for nuclear reactor safety analysis and visualization

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Maljovec, D.; Wang, B.; Pascucci, V. [Scientific Computing and Imaging Institute, University of Utah (United States); Bremer, P. T. [Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (United States); Pernice, M.; Mandelli, D.; Nourgaliev, R. [Idaho National Laboratory (United States)

    2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The next generation of methodologies for nuclear reactor Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) explicitly accounts for the time element in modeling the probabilistic system evolution and uses numerical simulation tools to account for possible dependencies between failure events. The Monte-Carlo (MC) and the Dynamic Event Tree (DET) approaches belong to this new class of dynamic PRA methodologies. A challenge of dynamic PRA algorithms is the large amount of data they produce which may be difficult to visualize and analyze in order to extract useful information. We present a software tool that is designed to address these goals. We model a large-scale nuclear simulation dataset as a high-dimensional scalar function defined over a discrete sample of the domain. First, we provide structural analysis of such a function at multiple scales and provide insight into the relationship between the input parameters and the output. Second, we enable exploratory analysis for users, where we help the users to differentiate features from noise through multi-scale analysis on an interactive platform, based on domain knowledge and data characterization. Our analysis is performed by exploiting the topological and geometric properties of the domain, building statistical models based on its topological segmentations and providing interactive visual interfaces to facilitate such explorations. We provide a user's guide to our software tool by highlighting its analysis and visualization capabilities, along with a use case involving data from a nuclear reactor safety simulation. (authors)

  3. Submersion Criticality Safety Analysis of Tungsten-Based Fuel for Nuclear Power and Propulsion Applications

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    A.E. Craft; R. C. O'Brien; S. D. Howe; J. C. King

    2014-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Center for Space Nuclear Research (CSNR) is developing tungsten-encapsulated fuels for space nuclear applications. Aims to develop NTP fuels that are; Affordable Low impact on production and testing environment Producible on a large scale over suitable time period Higher-performance compared to previous graphite NTP fuel elements Space nuclear reactors remain subcritical before and during launch, and do not go critical until required by its mission. A properly designed reactor will remain subcritical in any launch abort scenario, where the reactor falls back to Earth and becomes submerged in terrestrial material. Submersion increases neutron reflection and thermalizes the neutrons, which typically increases the reactivity of the core. This effect is usually very significant for fast-spectrum reactors. This research provided a submersion criticality safety analysis for a representative tungsten/uranium oxide fueled reactor. Determine the submersion behavior of a reactor fueled by tungsten-based fuel. Considered fuel compositions with varying: Rhenium content (wt% rhenium in tungsten) Fuel loading fractions (UO2 vol%)

  4. Exploration of High-Dimensional Scalar Function for Nuclear Reactor Safety Analysis and Visualization

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dan Maljovec; Bei Wang; Valerio Pascucci; Peer-Timo Bremer; Michael Pernice; Robert Nourgaliev

    2013-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The next generation of methodologies for nuclear reactor Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) explicitly accounts for the time element in modeling the probabilistic system evolution and uses numerical simulation tools to account for possible dependencies between failure events. The Monte-Carlo (MC) and the Dynamic Event Tree (DET) approaches belong to this new class of dynamic PRA methodologies. A challenge of dynamic PRA algorithms is the large amount of data they produce which may be difficult to visualize and analyze in order to extract useful information. We present a software tool that is designed to address these goals. We model a large-scale nuclear simulation dataset as a high-dimensional scalar function defined over a discrete sample of the domain. First, we provide structural analysis of such a function at multiple scales and provide insight into the relationship between the input parameters and the output. Second, we enable exploratory analysis for users, where we help the users to differentiate features from noise through multi-scale analysis on an interactive platform, based on domain knowledge and data characterization. Our analysis is performed by exploiting the topological and geometric properties of the domain, building statistical models based on its topological segmentations and providing interactive visual interfaces to facilitate such explorations. We provide a user’s guide to our software tool by highlighting its analysis and visualization capabilities, along with a use case involving dataset from a nuclear reactor safety simulation.

  5. Use of probabilistic risk assessment in expert system usage for nuclear power plant safety

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Uhrig, R.E.

    1987-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The introduction of probability risk assessments (PRA's) to nuclear power plants in the Rasmussen Report (WASH-1400) gave us a means of evaluating the risk to the public associated with the operation of nuclear power plants, at least on a relative basis. While the choice of the ''source term'' and methodology in a PRA significantly influence the absolute probability and the consequences of core melt, comparison of two PRA calculations for two configurations of the same plant, carried out on a consistent basis, can be readily identify the increase in risk associated with going from one configuration of a plant to another by removing components or systems from service. This ratio of core melt probabilities (assuming no recovery of failed systems) obtained from two PRA calculations for different configurations was the criterion (called ''risk factor'') chosen as a basis for making a decision in an expert system as to what mitigating action, if any, would be taken to avoid a trip situation from developing. PRISIM was developed by JBF Associates of Knoxville under the sponsorship of the NRC as a system for Resident Inspectors at nuclear power plants to provide them with a relative safety status of the plant under all configurations. PRISIM calculated the risk factor---the ration of core melt probabilities of the plant under the current configuration relative to the normal configuration with all systems functioning---using an algorithm that emulates the results of the original PRA. It also presents time and core melt (assuming no recovery of systems or components).

  6. Safety research programs sponsored by Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research: Progress report, January 1--March 31, 1989

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Weiss, A.J. (comp.)

    1989-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This progress report describes current activities and technical progress in the programs at Brookhaven National Laboratory sponsored by the Division of Regulatory Applications, Division of Engineering, Division of Safety Issue Resolution, and Division of Systems Research of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research following the reorganization in July 1988. The previous reports have covered the period October 1, 1976 through December 31, 1988.

  7. The Development, Content, Design, and Conduct of the 2011 Piloted US DOE Nuclear Criticality Safety Program Criticality Safety Engineering Training and Education Project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hopper, Calvin Mitchell [ORNL] [ORNL

    2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In May 1973 the University of New Mexico conducted the first nationwide criticality safety training and education week-long short course for nuclear criticality safety engineers. Subsequent to that course, the Los Alamos Critical Experiments Facility (LACEF) developed very successful 'hands-on' subcritical and critical training programs for operators, supervisors, and engineering staff. Since the inception of the US Department of Energy (DOE) Nuclear Criticality Technology and Safety Project (NCT&SP) in 1983, the DOE has stimulated contractor facilities and laboratories to collaborate in the furthering of nuclear criticality as a discipline. That effort included the education and training of nuclear criticality safety engineers (NCSEs). In 1985 a textbook was written that established a path toward formalizing education and training for NCSEs. Though the NCT&SP went through a brief hiatus from 1990 to 1992, other DOE-supported programs were evolving to the benefit of NCSE training and education. In 1993 the DOE established a Nuclear Criticality Safety Program (NCSP) and undertook a comprehensive development effort to expand the extant LACEF 'hands-on' course specifically for the education and training of NCSEs. That successful education and training was interrupted in 2006 for the closing of the LACEF and the accompanying movement of materials and critical experiment machines to the Nevada Test Site. Prior to that closing, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) was commissioned by the US DOE NCSP to establish an independent hands-on NCSE subcritical education and training course. The course provided an interim transition for the establishment of a reinvigorated and expanded two-week NCSE education and training program in 2011. The 2011 piloted two-week course was coordinated by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and jointly conducted by the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) classroom education and facility training, the Sandia National Laboratory (SNL) hands-on criticality experiments training, and the US DOE National Criticality Experiment Research Center (NCERC) hands-on criticality experiments training that is jointly supported by LLNL and LANL and located at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) This paper provides the description of the bases, content, and conduct of the piloted, and future US DOE NCSP Criticality Safety Engineer Training and Education Project.

  8. International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Thermal-Hydraulics, Operation and Safety (NUTHOS-9) N9P0302 Kaohsiung, Taiwan, September 9-13, 2012

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Haviland, David

    The 9th International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Thermal-Hydraulics, Operation and Safety (NUTHOS-9 Kudinov Division of Nuclear Power Safety, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Roslagstullsbacken 21, SE proportional to terminal melt spread thickness. At certain thickness, the melt layer becomes non

  9. The safety review and approval process for space nuclear power sources

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bennett, G.L. [National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC (United States)

    1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Over the past 30 yr. the U.S. Government has evolved a process for the safety review and launch approval of nuclear power sources (NPSs) proposed for launch into space. This process, which involves a number of governmental agencies, ensures that the various postulated accident scenarios are considered, that the responses of the NPSs to the accident environments are assessed, and that appropriate elements of the Federal Government are involved in the launch approval. This process has worked very well in the successful launches of 37 radioisotope thermoelectric generators and 1 reactor by the United States since 1961. Particular attention will be focused on the recent launch of the Galileo spacecraft. 19 refs., 12 figs., 4 tabs.

  10. Additional Studies of the Criticality Safety of Failed Used Nuclear Fuel

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Marshall, William BJ J [ORNL] [ORNL; Wagner, John C [ORNL] [ORNL

    2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Commercial used nuclear fuel (UNF) in the United States is expected to remain in storage for periods potentially greater than 40 years. Extended storage (ES) time and irradiation to high-burnup values (>45 GWd/t) may increase the potential for fuel failure during normal and accident conditions involving storage and transportation. Fuel failure, depending on the severity, could result in changes to the geometric configuration of the fuel, which has safety and regulatory implications. The likelihood and extent of fuel reconfiguration and its impact on the safety of the UNF is not well understood. The objective of this work is to assess and quantify the impact of fuel reconfiguration due to fuel failure on criticality safety of UNF in storage and transportation casks. Criticality analyses are conducted considering representative UNF designs covering a range of enrichments and burnups in multiple cask systems. Prior work developed a set of failed fuel configuration categories and specific configurations were evaluated to understand trends and quantify the consequences of worst-case potential reconfiguration progressions. These results will be summarized here and indicate that the potential impacts on subcriticality can be rather significant for certain configurations (e.g., >20% keff). It can be concluded that the consequences of credible fuel failure configurations from ES or transportation following ES are manageable (e.g., <5% keff). The current work expands on these efforts and examines some modified scenarios and modified approaches to investigate the effectiveness of some techniques for reducing the calculated increase in keff. The areas included here are more realistic modeling of some assembly types and the effect of reconfiguration of some assemblies in the storage and transportation canister.

  11. Safety research programs sponsored by Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research: Quarterly progress report, July 1-September 30, 1986

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bari, R.A.; Bezler, P.; Boccio, J.L.; Ginsberg, T.; Greene, G.A.; Guppy, J.G.; Hall, R.E.; Hofmayer, C.H.; Khatib-Rahbar, H.; Luckas, W.J. Jr.

    1987-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This progress report will describe current activities and technical progress in the programs at Brookhaven National Laboratory sponsored by the Division of Accident Evaluation, Division of Engineering Technology, and Division of Risk Analysis and Operations of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research. The projects reported are the following: High Temperature Reactor Research, SSC code improvements, Thermal-Hydraulic Reactor Safety Experiments, Thermodynamic Core-Concrete Interaction Experiments and Analysis, Plant Analyzer, Code Assessment and Application, Code Maintenance (RAMONA-3B), MELCOR Verification and Benchmarking, Source Term Code Package Verification and Benchmarking, Uncertainty Analysis of the Source Term; Stress Corrosion Cracking of PWR Steam Generator Tubing, Soil-Structure Interaction Evaluation and Structural Benchmarks, Identification of Age Related Failure Modes; Application of HRA/PRA Results to Support Resolution of Generic Safety Issues Involving Human Performance, Protective Action Decisionmaking, Rebaseling of Risk for Zion, Containment Performance Design Objective, and Operational Safety Reliability Research.

  12. Facility Safety

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2005-12-22T23:59:59.000Z

    The order establishes facility and programmatic safety requirements for nuclear and explosives safety design criteria, fire protection, criticality safety, natural phenomena hazards (NPH) mitigation, and the System Engineer Program.Chg 1 incorporates the use of DOE-STD-1189-2008, Integration of Safety into the Design Process, mandatory for Hazard Category 1, 2 and 3 nuclear facilities. Cancels DOE O 420.1A.

  13. Safety apparatus for nuclear reactor to prevent structural damage from overheating by core debris

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Gabor, John D. (Western Springs, IL); Cassulo, John C. (Stickney, IL); Pedersen, Dean R. (Naperville, IL); Baker, Jr., Louis (Downers Grove, IL)

    1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The invention teaches safety apparatus that can be included in a nuclear reactor, either when newly fabricated or as a retrofit add-on, that will minimize proliferation of structural damage to the reactor in the event the reactor is experiencing an overheating malfunction whereby radioactive nuclear debris might break away from and be discharged from the reactor core. The invention provides a porous bed or sublayer on the lower surface of the reactor containment vessel so that the debris falls on and piles up on the bed. Vapor release elements upstand from the bed in some laterally spaced array. Thus should the high heat flux of the debris interior vaporize the coolant at that location, the vaporized coolant can be vented downwardly to and laterally through the bed to the vapor release elements and in turn via the release elements upwardly through the debris. This minimizes the pressure buildup in the debris and allows for continuing infiltration of the liquid coolant into the debris interior.

  14. Stochastic sampling method with MCNPX for nuclear data uncertainty propagation in criticality safety applications

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zhu, T.; Vasiliev, A.; Wieselquist, W.; Ferroukhi, H. [Paul Scherrer Institut, 5232 Villigen (Switzerland)

    2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In the domain of criticality safety, the efficient propagation of uncertainty in nuclear data to uncertainty in k{sub eff} is an important area of current research. In this paper, a method based on stochastic sampling is presented for uncertainty propagation in MCNPX calculations. To that aim, the nuclear data (i.e. cross sections) are assumed to have a multivariate normal distribution and simple random sampling is performed following this presumed probability distribution. A verification of the developed stochastic sampling procedure with MCNPX is then conducted using the {sup 239}Pu Jezebel experiment as well as the PB-2 BWR and TMI-1 PWR pin cell models from the Uncertainty Analysis in Modeling (UAM) exercises. For the Jezebel case, it is found that the developed stochastic sampling approach predicts similar k{sub eff} uncertainties compared to conventional sensitivity and uncertainty methods. For the UAM models, slightly lower uncertainties are obtained when comparing to existing preliminary results. Further details of these verification studies are discussed and directions for future work are outlined. (authors)

  15. The ORSphere Benchmark Evaluation and Its Potential Impact on Nuclear Criticality Safety

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    John D. Bess; Margaret A. Marshall; J. Blair Briggs

    2013-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In the early 1970’s, critical experiments using an unreflected metal sphere of highly enriched uranium (HEU) were performed with the focus to provide a “very accurate description…as an ideal benchmark for calculational methods and cross-section data files.” Two near-critical configurations of the Oak Ridge Sphere (ORSphere) were evaluated as acceptable benchmark experiments for inclusion in the International Handbook of Evaluated Criticality Safety Benchmark Experiments (ICSBEP Handbook). The results from those benchmark experiments were then compared with additional unmoderated and unreflected HEU metal benchmark experiment configurations currently found in the ICSBEP Handbook. For basic geometries (spheres, cylinders, and slabs) the eigenvalues calculated using MCNP5 and ENDF/B-VII.0 were within 3 of their respective benchmark values. There appears to be generally a good agreement between calculated and benchmark values for spherical and slab geometry systems. Cylindrical geometry configurations tended to calculate low, including more complex bare HEU metal systems containing cylinders. The ORSphere experiments do not calculate within their 1s uncertainty and there is a possibility that the effect of the measured uncertainties for the GODIVA I benchmark may need reevaluated. There is significant scatter in the calculations for the highly-correlated ORCEF cylinder experiments, which are constructed from close-fitting HEU discs and annuli. Selection of a nuclear data library can have a larger impact on calculated eigenvalue results than the variation found within calculations of a given experimental series, such as the ORCEF cylinders, using a single nuclear data set.

  16. Technical basis for environmental qualification of microprocessor-based safety-related equipment in nuclear power plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Korsah, K.; Wood, R.T. [Oak Ridge National Lab., TN (United States); Hassan, M. [Brookhaven National Lab., Upton, NY (United States); Tanaka, T.J. [Sandia National Labs., Albuquerque, NM (United States)

    1998-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document presents the results of studies sponsored by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to provide the technical basis for environmental qualification of computer-based safety equipment in nuclear power plants. The studies were conducted by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), Sandia National Laboratories (SNL), and Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL). The studies address the following: (1) adequacy of the present test methods for qualification of digital I and C systems; (2) preferred (i.e., Regulatory Guide-endorsed) standards; (3) recommended stressors to be included in the qualification process during type testing; (4) resolution of need for accelerated aging for equipment to be located in a benign environment; and (5) determination of an appropriate approach for addressing the impact of smoke in digital equipment qualification programs. Significant findings from the studies form the technical basis for a recommended approach to the environmental qualification of microprocessor-based safety-related equipment in nuclear power plants.

  17. Concentration of Actinides in Plant Mounds at Safety Test Nuclear Sites in Nevada

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    David S. Shafer; Jenna Gommes

    2008-09-15T23:59:59.000Z

    Plant mounds or blow-sand mounds are accumulations of soil particles and plant debris around large shrubs and are common features in deserts in the southwestern United States. Believed to be an important factor in their formation, the shrubs create surface roughness that causes wind-suspended particles to be deposited and resist further suspension. Shrub mounds occur in some plant communities on the Nevada Test Site, the Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR), and Tonopah Test Range (TTR), including areas of surface soil contamination from past nuclear testing. In the 1970s as part of early studies to understand properties of actinides in the environment, the Nevada Applied Ecology Group (NAEG) examined the accumulation of isotopes of Pu, {sup 241}Am, and U in plant mounds at safety test sites. The NAEG studies found concentrations of these contaminants to be greater in shrub mounds than in the surrounding areas of desert pavement. For example, at Project 57 on the NTTR, it was estimated that 15 percent of the radionuclide inventory of the site was associated with shrub mounds, which accounted for 17 percent of the surface area of the site, a ratio of inventory to area of 0.85. At Clean Slate III at the TTR, 29 percent of the inventory was associated with approximately 32 percent of the site covered by shrub mounds, a ratio of 0.91. While the total inventory of radionuclides in intershrub areas was greater, the ratio of radionuclide inventory to area was 0.40 and 0.38, respectively, at the two sites. The comparison between the shrub mounds and adjacent desert pavement areas was made for only the top 5 cm since radionuclides at safety test sites are concentrated in the top 5 cm of intershrub areas. Not accounting for radionuclides associated with the shrub mounds would cause the inventory of contaminants and potential exposure to be underestimated. As part of its Environmental Restoration Soils Subproject, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office has proposed that the majority of its contaminated soil 'Corrective Action Units', including the safety test sites, be closed by fencing and posting with administrative controls. The concentration of actinides in the shrub mounds has important implications for postclosure management of the safety test sites. Because resuspension factors at safety test sites can be three to four orders-of-magnitude higher than soil sites associated with atmospheric tests where criticality occurred, the shrub mounds are an important factor in stabilization of actinide contaminants. Loss of shrubs associated with mounds from fire or plant die-back from drought could cause radionuclides at these sites to become more prone to suspension and water erosion until the sites are stabilized. Alternatively, although shrub mounds are usually composed of predominantly fine sand size particles, smaller silt and clay size particles in them are often high in CaCO{sub 3} content. The CaCO{sub 3} may act as a cementing agent to limit erosion of the shrub mounds even if the vegetation cover is temporarily lost.

  18. Design and Transient Analysis of Passive Safety Cooling Systems for Advanced Nuclear Reactors

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Galvez, Cristhian

    2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    L. J. Hamilton Nuclear Reactor Analysis John Wiley and Sons,R. J. Neuhold, Introductury Nuclear Reactor Dynamics. ANSL. J. Hamilton Nuclear Reactor Analysis John Wiley and Sons,

  19. Design and Transient Analysis of Passive Safety Cooling Systems for Advanced Nuclear Reactors

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Galvez, Cristhian

    2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    heat transfer. Nuclear Technology 163 (2008) 344- [18] V.and Electricity . Nuclear Technology 144 [5] D. F. Williams,Vessel Technology . Nuclear Technology, 78 (1987) 245- [5

  20. Expectations on Documented Safety Analysis for Deactivated Inactive Nuclear Facilities in a State of Long Term Surveillance & Maintenance or Decommissioning

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    JACKSON, M.W.

    2002-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    DOE promulgated 10 CFR 830 ''Nuclear Safety Management'' on October 10, 2000. Section 204 of the Rule requires that contractors at DOE hazard category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities develop a ''Documented Safety Analysis'' (DSA) that summarizes the work to be performed, the associated hazards, and hazard controls necessary to protect workers, the public, and the environment. Table 2 of Appendix A to the rule has been provided to ensure that DSAs are prepared in accordance with one of the available predetermined ''safe harbor'' approaches. The table presents various acceptable safe harbor DSAs for different nuclear facility operations ranging from nuclear reactors to decommissioning activities. The safe harbor permitted for decommissioning of a nuclear facility encompasses methods described in DOE-STD-1 120-98, ''Integration of Environment, Safety and Health into Facility Disposition Activities,'' and provisions in 29 CFR 1910.120 or 29 CFR 1926.65 (HAZWOPER). Additionally, an evaluation of public safety impacts and development of necessary controls is required when the facility being decommissioned contains radiological inventory or contamination exceeding the Rule's definition for low-level residual fixed radioactivity. This document discusses a cost-effective DSA approach that is based on the concepts of DOE-STD-I 120 and meets the 10 CFR 830 safe harbor requirements for both transition surveillance and maintenance as well as decommissioning. This DSA approach provides continuity for inactive Hanford nuclear facilities that will eventually transition into decommissioning. It also uses a graded approach that meets the expectations of DOE-STD-3011 and addresses HAZWOPER requirements to provide a sound basis for worker protection, particularly where intrusive work is being conducted.

  1. Numerical study of the THM effects on the near-field safety of a hypothetical nuclear waste repository--BMT1 of the DECOVALEX III project. Part 1: Conceptualization

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Paris-Sud XI, Université de

    Numerical study of the THM effects on the near-field safety of a hypothetical nuclear waste on the safety of a hypothetical nuclear waste repository at the near-field and are presented in three on the safety of nuclear waste repositories. To achieve the second objective, hypothetical benchmark test

  2. Safety

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOnItemResearch > TheNuclear Press ReleasesIn theTreatmentSRS Economic0ScienceSTEMSULI

  3. Facility Safety - DOE Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    Change, Safety, The order establishes facility and programmatic safety requirements for nuclear and explosives safety design criteria, fire protection, criticality safety,...

  4. 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)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    "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...

  5. Proceedings of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission twentieth water reactor safety information meeting; Volume 2, Severe accident research, Thermal hydraulics

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Weiss, A.J. [comp.] [Brookhaven National Lab., Upton, NY (United States)

    1993-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This three-volume report contains papers presented at the Twentieth Water Reactor Safety Information Meeting held at the Bethesda Marriott Hotel, Bethesda, Maryland, during the week of October 21--23, 1992. The papers describe progress and results of programs in nuclear safety research conducted in this country and abroad. Foreign participation in the meeting included 10 different papers presented by researchersfrom CEC, China, Finland, France, Germany, Japan, Spain and Taiwan. Selected papers have been processed separately for inclusion in the Energy Science and Technology Database.

  6. Operational safety enhancement of Soviet-designed nuclear reactors via development of nuclear power plant simulators and transfer of related technology

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kohut, P.; Epel, L.G.; Tutu, N.K. [and others

    1998-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The US Department of Energy (DOE), under the US government`s International Nuclear Safety Program (INSP), is implementing a program of developing and providing simulators for many of the Russian and Ukrainian Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs). Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) and Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) manage and provide technical oversight of the various INSP simulator projects for DOE. The program also includes a simulator technology transfer process to simulator design organizations in Russia and Ukraine. Training programs, installation of new simulators, and enhancements in existing simulators are viewed as providing a relatively fast and cost-effective technology transfer that will result in measurable improvement in the safety culture and operation of NPPs. A review of this program, its present status, and its accomplishments are provided in this paper.

  7. Nuclear Data for Criticality Safety and Reactor Applications at the Gaerttner LINAC Center Y. Danon, R.M. Bahran, E.J. Blain, A.M. Daskalakis, B.J. McDermott, D.G. Williams

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Danon, Yaron

    Nuclear Data for Criticality Safety and Reactor Applications at the Gaerttner LINAC Center Y. Danon used in reactor and nuclear criticality safety applications. The goal of this program is to provide to nuclear criticality, neutron shielding applications, nuclear reactor design, and to better understand

  8. Roadmap to an Engineering-Scale Nuclear Fuel Performance & Safety Code

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Turner, John A [ORNL; Clarno, Kevin T [ORNL; Hansen, Glen A [ORNL

    2009-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Developing new fuels and qualifying them for large-scale deployment in power reactors is a lengthy and expensive process, typically spanning a period of two decades from concept to licensing. Nuclear fuel designers serve an indispensable role in the process, at the initial exploratory phase as well as in analysis of the testing results. In recent years fuel performance capabilities based on first principles have been playing more of a role in what has traditionally been an empirically dominated process. Nonetheless, nuclear fuel behavior is based on the interaction of multiple complex phenomena, and recent evolutionary approaches are being applied more on a phenomenon-by-phenomenon basis, targeting localized problems, as opposed to a systematic approach based on a fundamental understanding of all interacting parameters. Advanced nuclear fuels are generally more complex, and less understood, than the traditional fuels used in existing reactors (ceramic UO{sub 2} with burnable poisons and other minor additives). The added challenges are primarily caused by a less complete empirical database and, in the case of recycled fuel, the inherent variability in fuel compositions. It is clear that using the traditional approach to develop and qualify fuels over the entire range of variables pertinent to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Nuclear Energy on a timely basis with available funds would be very challenging, if not impossible. As a result the DOE Office of Nuclear Energy has launched the Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation (NEAMS) approach to revolutionize fuel development. This new approach is predicated upon transferring the recent advances in computational sciences and computer technologies into the fuel development program. The effort will couple computational science with recent advances in the fundamental understanding of physical phenomena through ab initio modeling and targeted phenomenological testing to leapfrog many fuel-development activities. Realizing the full benefits of this approach will likely take some time. However, it is important that the developmental activities for modeling and simulation be tightly coupled with the experimental activities to maximize feedback effects and accelerate both the experimental and analytical elements of the program toward a common objective. The close integration of modeling and simulation and experimental activities is key to developing a useful fuel performance simulation capability, providing a validated design and analysis tool, and understanding the uncertainties within the models and design process. The efforts of this project are integrally connected to the Transmutation Fuels Campaign (TFC), which maintains as a primary objective to formulate, fabricate, and qualify a transuranic-based fuel with added minor actinides for use in future fast reactors. Additional details of the TFC scope can be found in the Transmutation Fuels Campaign Execution Plan. This project is an integral component of the TFC modeling and simulation effort, and this multiyear plan borrowed liberally from the Transmutation Fuels Campaign Modeling and Simulation Roadmap. This document provides the multiyear staged development plan to develop a continuum-level Integrated Performance and Safety Code (IPSC) to predict the behavior of the fuel and cladding during normal reactor operations and anticipated transients up to the point of clad breach.

  9. Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) project Integrated Safety Management System phase I and II Verification Review Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    CARTER, R.P.

    1999-11-19T23:59:59.000Z

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) commits to accomplishing its mission safely. To ensure this objective is met, DOE issued DOE P 450.4, Safety Management System Policy, and incorporated safety management into the DOE Acquisition Regulations ([DEAR] 48 CFR 970.5204-2 and 90.5204-78). Integrated Safety Management (ISM) requires contractors to integrate safety into management and work practices at all levels so that missions are achieved while protecting the public, the worker, and the environment. The contractor is required to describe the Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS) to be used to implement the safety performance objective.

  10. Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation Waste Integrated Performance and Safety Codes (NEAMS Waste IPSC).

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Schultz, Peter Andrew

    2011-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The objective of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation Waste Integrated Performance and Safety Codes (NEAMS Waste IPSC) is to provide an integrated suite of computational modeling and simulation (M&S) capabilities to quantitatively assess the long-term performance of waste forms in the engineered and geologic environments of a radioactive-waste storage facility or disposal repository. Achieving the objective of modeling the performance of a disposal scenario requires describing processes involved in waste form degradation and radionuclide release at the subcontinuum scale, beginning with mechanistic descriptions of chemical reactions and chemical kinetics at the atomic scale, and upscaling into effective, validated constitutive models for input to high-fidelity continuum scale codes for coupled multiphysics simulations of release and transport. Verification and validation (V&V) is required throughout the system to establish evidence-based metrics for the level of confidence in M&S codes and capabilities, including at the subcontiunuum scale and the constitutive models they inform or generate. This Report outlines the nature of the V&V challenge at the subcontinuum scale, an approach to incorporate V&V concepts into subcontinuum scale modeling and simulation (M&S), and a plan to incrementally incorporate effective V&V into subcontinuum scale M&S destined for use in the NEAMS Waste IPSC work flow to meet requirements of quantitative confidence in the constitutive models informed by subcontinuum scale phenomena.

  11. Computer code for space-time diagnostics of nuclear safety parameters

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Solovyev, D. A.; Semenov, A. A.; Gruzdov, F. V.; Druzhaev, A. A.; Shchukin, N. V.; Dolgenko, S. G.; Solovyeva, I. V.; Ovchinnikova, E. A. [National Research Nuclear Univ. MEPhI, Kashirskoe, 31, 115409, Moscow (Russian Federation)

    2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The computer code ECRAN 3D (Experimental and Calculation Reactor Analysis) is designed for continuous monitoring and diagnostics of reactor cores and databases for RBMK-1000 on the basis of analytical methods for the interrelation parameters of nuclear safety. The code algorithms are based on the analysis of deviations between the physically obtained figures and the results of neutron-physical and thermal-hydraulic calculations. Discrepancies between the measured and calculated signals are equivalent to obtaining inadequacy between performance of the physical device and its simulator. The diagnostics system can solve the following problems: identification of facts and time for inconsistent results, localization of failures, identification and quantification of the causes for inconsistencies. These problems can be effectively solved only when the computer code is working in a real-time mode. This leads to increasing requirements for a higher code performance. As false operations can lead to significant economic losses, the diagnostics system must be based on the certified software tools. POLARIS, version 4.2.1 is used for the neutron-physical calculation in the computer code ECRAN 3D. (authors)

  12. New Resolved Resonance Region Evaluation for 63Cu and 65Cu for Nuclear Criticality Safety Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sobes, Vladimir [ORNL] [ORNL; Leal, Luiz C [ORNL] [ORNL; Guber, Klaus H [ORNL] [ORNL; Forget, Benoit [Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)] [Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT); Kopecky, S. [EC-JRC-IRMM, Geel, Belgium] [EC-JRC-IRMM, Geel, Belgium; Schillebeeckx, P. [EC-JRC-IRMM, Geel, Belgium] [EC-JRC-IRMM, Geel, Belgium; Siegler, P. [EC-JRC-IRMM, Geel, Belgium] [EC-JRC-IRMM, Geel, Belgium

    2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A new resolved resonance region evaluation of 63Cu and 65Cu was done in the energy region from 10-5 eV to 99.5 keV. The R-Matrix SAMMY method using the Reich-Moore approximation was used to create a new set of consistent resonance parameters. The new evaluation was based on three experimental transmission data sets; two measured at ORELA and one from MITR, and two radiative capture experimental data sets from GELINA. A total of 141 new resonances were identied for 63Cu and 117 for 65Cu. The corresponding set of external resonances for each isotope was based on the identied resonances above 99.5 keV from the ORELA transmission data. The negative external levels (bound levels) were determined to match the dierential thermal cross section measured at the MITR. Double dierential elastic scattering cross sections were calculated from the new set of resonance parameters. Benchmarking calculations were carried out on a set of ICSBEP benchmarks. This work is in support of the DOE Nuclear Criticality Safety Program.

  13. Aerosol particle transport modeling for preclosure safety studies of nuclear waste repositories

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gelbard, F. [Sandia National Labs., Albuquerque, NM (USA)

    1989-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    An important concern for preclosure safety analysis of a nuclear waste repository is the potential release to the environment of respirable aerosol particles. Such particles, less than 10 {mu}m in aerodynamic diameter, may have significant adverse health effects if inhaled. To assess the potential health effects of these particles, it is not sufficient to determine the mass fraction of respirable aerosol. The chemical composition of the particles is also of importance since different radionuclides may pose vastly different health hazards. Thus, models are needed to determine under normal and accident conditions the particle size and the chemical composition distributions of aerosol particles as a function of time and of position in the repository. In this work a multicomponent sectional aerosol model is used to determine the aerosol particle size and composition distributions in the repository. A range of aerosol mass releases with varying mean particle sizes and chemical compositions is used to demonstrate the sensitivities and uncertainties of the model. Decontamination factors for some locations in the repository are presented. 8 refs., 1 tab.

  14. Assessing conformance to safety goals using nonparametric empirical Bayes methods: A nuclear reactor application

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Martz, H.F.; Johnson, J.W. [Los Alamos National Lab., NM (United States)

    1997-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Nonparametric empirical Bayes methods are used to develop decision criteria for use in deciding whether the risk of a given facility is compatible with a corresponding specified quantitative safety goal. The criteria utilize the uncertain results of a probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) and are derived from an empirical Bayes point of view in which the results from a set of similar facilities are used to estimate the population variability curve (PVC) for the parameter of interest. The PVC is estimated nonparametrically in the sense that the distributional family to which the PVC belongs is completely unknown and unspecified. For the assumed model, the method guarantees that all facilities ultimately accepted as being compatible with the goal have a prespecified exact assurance probability that the goal is not exceeded. The method also accounts for two possible biases in the PRA results. Criteria are developed for use in assessing the compatibility of nuclear power plant PRA-produced severe core damage frequency estimates with a corresponding subsidiary objective.

  15. Processes and Procedures for Application of CFD to Nuclear Reactor Safety Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Richard W. Johnson; Richard R. Schultz; Patrick J. Roache; Ismail B. Celik; William D. Pointer; Yassin A. Hassan

    2006-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Traditionally, nuclear reactor safety analysis has been performed using systems analysis codes such as RELAP5, which was developed at the INL. However, goals established by the Generation IV program, especially the desire to increase efficiency, has lead to an increase in operating temperatures for the reactors. This increase pushes reactor materials to operate towards their upper temperature limits relative to structural integrity. Because there will be some finite variation of the power density in the reactor core, there will be a potential for local hot spots to occur in the reactor vessel. Hence, it has become apparent that detailed analysis will be required to ensure that local ‘hot spots’ do not exceed safety limits. It is generally accepted that computational fluid dynamics (CFD) codes are intrinsically capable of simulating fluid dynamics and heat transport locally because they are based on ‘first principles.’ Indeed, CFD analysis has reached a fairly mature level of development, including the commercial level. However, CFD experts are aware that even though commercial codes are capable of simulating local fluid and thermal physics, great care must be taken in their application to avoid errors caused by such things as inappropriate grid meshing, low-order discretization schemes, lack of iterative convergence and inaccurate time-stepping. Just as important is the choice of a turbulence model for turbulent flow simulation. Turbulence models model the effects of turbulent transport of mass, momentum and energy, but are not necessarily applicable for wide ranges of flow types. Therefore, there is a well-recognized need to establish practices and procedures for the proper application of CFD to simulate flow physics accurately and establish the level of uncertainty of such computations. The present document represents contributions of CFD experts on what the basic practices, procedures and guidelines should be to aid CFD analysts to obtain accurate estimates of the flow and energy transport as applied to nuclear reactor safety. However, it is expected that these practices and procedures will require updating from time to time as research and development affect them or replace them with better procedures. The practices and procedures are categorized into five groups. These are: 1.Code Verification 2.Code and Calculation Documentation 3.Reduction of Numerical Error 4.Quantification of Numerical Uncertainty (Calculation Verification) 5.Calculation Validation. These five categories have been identified from procedures currently required of CFD simulations such as those required for publication of a paper in the ASME Journal of Fluids Engineering and from the literature such as Roache [1998]. Code verification refers to the demonstration that the equations of fluid and energy transport have been correctly coded in the CFD code. Code and calculation documentation simply means that the equations and their discretizations, etc., and boundary and initial conditions used to pose the fluid flow problem are fully described in available documentation. Reduction of numerical error refers to practices and procedures to lower numerical errors to negligible or very low levels as is reasonably possible (such as avoiding use of first-order discretizations). The quantification of numerical uncertainty is also known as calculation verification. This means that estimates are made of numerical error to allow the characterization of the numerical

  16. Facility Safety

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    1995-10-13T23:59:59.000Z

    Establishes facility safety requirements related to: nuclear safety design, criticality safety, fire protection and natural phenomena hazards mitigation. Cancels DOE 5480.7A, DOE 5480.24, DOE 5480.28 and Division 13 of DOE 6430.1A. Canceled by DOE O 420.1A.

  17. Facility Safety

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2005-12-22T23:59:59.000Z

    This Order establishes facility and programmatic safety requirements for Department of Energy facilities, which includes nuclear and explosives safety design criteria, fire protection, criticality safety, natural phenomena hazards mitigation, and the System Engineer Program. Cancels DOE O 420.1A. DOE O 420.1B Chg 1 issued 4-19-10.

  18. Facility Safety

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2012-12-04T23:59:59.000Z

    The Order establishes facility and programmatic safety requirements for DOE and NNSA for nuclear safety design criteria, fire protection, criticality safety, natural phenomena hazards (NPH) mitigation, and System Engineer Program. Cancels DOE O 420.1B, DOE G 420.1-2 and DOE G 420.1-3.

  19. Facts and Lessons of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident and Safety Improvement- The Operator Viewpoints

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Presenter: Akira Kawano, General Manager, Nuclear International Relations and Strategy Group, Nuclear Power and Plant Siting Administrative Department, Tokyo Electric Power Company

  20. Design and Transient Analysis of Passive Safety Cooling Systems for Advanced Nuclear Reactors

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Galvez, Cristhian

    2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Advisory Committee and Generation IV International Forum.Nuclear Energy Agency The Generation IV International Forum.Technology Roadmap for Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems.

  1. Safety Culture in the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Reactor Oversight Process

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Presenter: Undine Shoop, Chief, Health Physics and Human Performance Branch, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

  2. ReseaRch at the University of Maryland Nuclear Safety Research at the University of Maryland

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Hill, Wendell T.

    Research on nuclear energy started at the University of Maryland just after World War II, when and nuclear weapons was followed by controversial accidents and regulation. Today, nuclear power is considered that analyze the risks involved in the use of nuclear energy. Understanding and Using Radiation The ionizing

  3. Exploratory Nuclear Reactor Safety Analysis and Visualization via Integrated Topological and Geometric Techniques

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dan Maljovec; Bei Wang; Valerio Pascucci; Peer-Timo Bremer; Diego Mandelli; Michael Pernice; Robert Nourgaliev

    2013-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    A recent trend in the nuclear power engineering field is the implementation of heavily computational and time consuming algorithms and codes for both design and safety analysis. In particular, the new generation of system analysis codes aim to embrace several phenomena such as thermo-hydraulic, structural behavior, and system dynamics, as well as uncertainty quantification and sensitivity analyses. The use of dynamic probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) methodologies allows a systematic approach to uncertainty quantification. Dynamic methodologies in PRA account for possible coupling between triggered or stochastic events through explicit consideration of the time element in system evolution, often through the use of dynamic system models (simulators). They are usually needed when the system has more than one failure mode, control loops, and/or hardware/process/software/human interaction. Dynamic methodologies are also capable of modeling the consequences of epistemic and aleatory uncertainties. The Monte-Carlo (MC) and the Dynamic Event Tree (DET) approaches belong to this new class of dynamic PRA methodologies. The major challenges in using MC and DET methodologies (as well as other dynamic methodologies) are the heavier computational and memory requirements compared to the classical ET analysis. This is due to the fact that each branch generated can contain time evolutions of a large number of variables (about 50,000 data channels are typically present in RELAP) and a large number of scenarios can be generated from a single initiating event (possibly on the order of hundreds or even thousands). Such large amounts of information are usually very difficult to organize in order to identify the main trends in scenario evolutions and the main risk contributors for each initiating event. This report aims to improve Dynamic PRA methodologies by tackling the two challenges mentioned above using: 1) adaptive sampling techniques to reduce computational cost of the analysis and 2) topology-based methodologies to interactively visualize multidimensional data and extract risk-informed insights. Regarding item 1) we employ learning algorithms that aim to infer/predict simulation outcome and decide the coordinate in the input space of the next sample that maximize the amount of information that can be gained from it. Such methodologies can be used to both explore and exploit the input space. The later one is especially used for safety analysis scopes to focus samples along the limit surface, i.e. the boundaries in the input space between system failure and system success. Regarding item 2) we present a software tool that is designed to analyze multi-dimensional data. We model a large-scale nuclear simulation dataset as a high-dimensional scalar function defined over a discrete sample of the domain. First, we provide structural analysis of such a function at multiple scales and provide insight into the relationship between the input parameters and the output. Second, we enable exploratory analysis for users, where we help the users to differentiate features from noise through multi-scale analysis on an interactive platform, based on domain knowledge and data characterization. Our analysis is performed by exploiting the topological and geometric properties of the domain, building statistical models based on its topological segmentations and providing interactive visual interfaces to facilitate such explorations.

  4. Nuclear Criticality Safety Evaluation of the 9965, 9968, 9972, 9973, 9974, and 9975 Shipping Casks

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Frost, R.L.

    1999-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

    A Nuclear Criticality Safety Evaluation (NCSE) has been performed for the 9965, 9968, 9972, 9973, 9974, and 9975 SRS-designed shipping casks. This was done in support of the recertification effort for the 9965 and 9968, and the certification of the newly designed 9972-9975 series. The analysis supports the use of these packages as Fissile Class I for shipment of fissionable material from the SRS FB-Line, HB-Line, and from Lawrence Livermore national Laboratory. six different types of material were analyzed with varying Isotopic composition, of both oxide and metallic form. The mass limits required to support the fissile Class I rating for each of the envelopes are given in the Table below. These mass limits apply if DOE approves an exception as described in 10 CFR 71.55(c), such that water leakage into the primary containment vessel does not need to be considered in the criticality analysis. If this exception is not granted, the mass limits are lower than those shown below. this issue is discussed in detail in sections 5 and 6 of the report.One finding from this work is important enough to highlight in the abstract. The fire tests performed for this family of shipping casks indicates only minimal charring of the Celotex thermal insulation. Analysis of the casks with no Celotex insulation (assuming it has all burned away), results in values of k-eff that exceed 1.0. Therefore, the Celotex insulation must remain intact in order to guarantee sub criticality of the 9972-9975 family of shipping casks.

  5. Cognitive decision errors and organization vulnerabilities in nuclear power plant safety management: Modeling using the TOGA meta-theory framework

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cappelli, M. [UTFISST, ENEA Casaccia, via Anguillarese 301, Rome (Italy); Gadomski, A. M. [ECONA, Centro Interuniversitario Elaborazione Cognitiva Sistemi Naturali e Artificiali, via dei Marsi 47, Rome (Italy); Sepiellis, M. [UTFISST, ENEA Casaccia, via Anguillarese 301, Rome (Italy); Wronikowska, M. W. [UTFISST, ENEA Casaccia, via Anguillarese 301, Rome (Italy); Poznan School of Social Sciences (Poland)

    2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In the field of nuclear power plant (NPP) safety modeling, the perception of the role of socio-cognitive engineering (SCE) is continuously increasing. Today, the focus is especially on the identification of human and organization decisional errors caused by operators and managers under high-risk conditions, as evident by analyzing reports on nuclear incidents occurred in the past. At present, the engineering and social safety requirements need to enlarge their domain of interest in such a way to include all possible losses generating events that could be the consequences of an abnormal state of a NPP. Socio-cognitive modeling of Integrated Nuclear Safety Management (INSM) using the TOGA meta-theory has been discussed during the ICCAP 2011 Conference. In this paper, more detailed aspects of the cognitive decision-making and its possible human errors and organizational vulnerability are presented. The formal TOGA-based network model for cognitive decision-making enables to indicate and analyze nodes and arcs in which plant operators and managers errors may appear. The TOGA's multi-level IPK (Information, Preferences, Knowledge) model of abstract intelligent agents (AIAs) is applied. In the NPP context, super-safety approach is also discussed, by taking under consideration unexpected events and managing them from a systemic perspective. As the nature of human errors depends on the specific properties of the decision-maker and the decisional context of operation, a classification of decision-making using IPK is suggested. Several types of initial situations of decision-making useful for the diagnosis of NPP operators and managers errors are considered. The developed models can be used as a basis for applications to NPP educational or engineering simulators to be used for training the NPP executive staff. (authors)

  6. Safety research programs sponsored by Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research. Volume 3. No. 2. Quarterly progress report, April 1-June 30, 1983

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bari, R A; Cerbone, R J; Ginsberg, T; Greene, G A; Guppy, J G; Hall, R E; Luckas, Jr, W J; Reich, M; Saha, P; Sastre, C

    1983-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The projects reported are the following: HTGR Safety Evaluation, SSC development, Validation and Application, CRBR balance of plant modeling, thermal-hydraulic reactor safety experiments, LWR plant analyzer development, LWR code assessment and application, thermal reactor code development (RAMONA-3B); stress corrosion cracking of PWR steam generator tubing, bolting failure analysis, probability based load combinations for design of category I structures, mechanical piping benchmark problems; human error data for nuclear power plant safety related events, criteria for human engineering regulatory guides and human factors in nuclear power plant safeguards.

  7. Safety research programs sponsored by Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research. Quarterly progress report, July 1-September 30, 1983. Volume 3, No. 3

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Weiss, A J [comp.

    1984-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The projects reported are the following: HTGR Safety Evaluation, SSC Development, Validation and Application, CRBR Balance of Plant Modeling, Thermal-Hydraulic Reactor Safety Experiments, LWR Plant Analyzer Development, LWR Code Assessment and Application, Thermal Reactor Code Development (RAMONA-3B); Stress Corrosion Cracking of PWR Steam Generator Tubing, Bolting Failure Analysis, Probability Based Load Combinations for Design of Category I Structures, Mechanical Piping Benchmark Problems; Human Error Data for Nuclear Power Plant Safety-Related Events, and Human Factors in Nuclear Power Plant Safeguards.

  8. Safety research programs sponsored by Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research. Quarterly progress report, January 1-March 31, 1983. Volume 3, No. 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bari, R A; Cerbone, R J; Ginsberg, T; Greene, G A; Guppy, J G; Hall, R E; Luckas, Jr, W J; Reich, M; Saha, P; Sastre, C

    1983-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The projects reported are the following: HTGR Safety Evaluation, SSC Development, Validation and Application, CRBR Balance of Plant Modeling, Thermal-Hydraulic Reactor Safety Experiments, LWR Plant Analyzer Development, LWR Code Assessment and Application; Stress Corrosion Cracking of PWR Steam Generator Tubing, Bolting Failure Analysis, Probability Based Load Combinations for Design of Category I Structures, Mechanical Piping Benchmark Problems, Soil Structure Interaction; Human Error Data for Nuclear Power Plant Safety Related Events, Criteria for Human Engineering Regulatory Guides and Human Factors in Nuclear Power Plant Safeguards.

  9. DOE-STD-3009-2014 Training Modules (Changes to DOE-STD-3009 and...

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    training for DOE-STD-3009-2014, Preparation of Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis. It focuses on Changes to DOE-STD-3009 and Expectations for Effective...

  10. Nuclear reactor safety. Quarterly progress report, October 1-December 31, 1979

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jackson, J.F.; Stevenson, M.G. (comps.)

    1980-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Progress is reported in the following areas: LWRs, LMFBRs, HTGRs, GCFRs, and safety analysis of the TMI-2 severe overcooling accident. (DLC)

  11. Regulatory analysis for the resolution of Generic Safety Issue 29: Bolting degradation or failure in nuclear power plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chang, T.Y.

    1991-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Generic Safety Issue (GSI)-29 deals with staff concerns about public risk due to degradation or failure of safety-related bolting in nuclear power plants. The issue was initiated in November 1982. Value-impact studies of a mandatory program on safety-related bolting for operating plants were inconclusive: therefore, additional regulatory requirements for operating plants could not be justified in accordance with provisions of 10 CFR 50.109. In addition, based on operating experience with bolting in both nuclear and conventional power plants, the actions already taken through bulletins, generic letters, and information notices, and the industry-proposed actions, the staff concluded that a sufficient technical basis exists for the resolution of GSI-29. The staff further concluded that leakage of bolted pressure joints is possible but catastrophic failure of a reactor coolant pressure boundary joint that will lead to significant accident sequences is highly unlikely. For future plants, it was concluded that a new Standard Review Plant section should be developed to codify existing bolting requirements and industry-developed initiatives. 9 refs., 1 tab.

  12. Numerical study of the THM effects on the near-field safety of a hypothetical nuclear waste repository--BMT1 of the DECOVALEX III project. Part 2: Effects of THM

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Paris-Sud XI, Université de

    Numerical study of the THM effects on the near-field safety of a hypothetical nuclear waste, Germany (7) Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC), Ottawa, Canada (8) Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), Berkeley, USA (9) INERIS-LAEGO, Ecole des Mines de Nancy, Nancy, France (10) Japan Nuclear

  13. Safety evaluation report related to the operation of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 (Docket Nos. 50-390 and 50-391). Supplement No. 14

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tam, P.S.

    1994-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Supplement No. 14 to the Safety Evaluation Report for the application filed by the Tennessee Valley Authority for license to operate Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Docket Nos. 50-390 and 50-391, located in Rhea County, Tennessee, has been prepared by the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The purpose of this supplement is to update the Safety Evaluation with additional information submitted by the applicant since Supplement No. 13 was issued, and matters that the staff had under review when Supplement No. 13 was issued.

  14. Rewriting the standard on the functional requirements for computers used in safety systems of nuclear power plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Matras, J.R. [Science Applications International Corp., Las Vegas, NV (United States)

    1991-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Because of the rapid development of state-of-the-art computer technology, a rewrite of ANSI/IEEE-ANS-7-4.3.2-1982, {open_quotes}Application Criteria for Digital Computer Systems of Nuclear Power Generating Stations,{close_quotes} was required. This article outlines the thrust of this rewrite, which is nearing the balloting process, and identifies standards and guidelines to be used in the development of a highly reliable to be used in the development of a highly reliable computer system. The rewrite activity has been in process approximately 2 yr and is a cooperative project of the American Nuclear Society (ANS) Nuclear Power Plant Standards Committee (NUPPSCO) and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Nuclear Power Engineering Committee (NPEC). Because computer technology has progressed significantly since ANSI/IEEE-ANS-7-4.3.2-1982 was issued, the rewrite was a very interesting challenge to the work group. The primary difference between the 1982 version and the rewrite is that the 1982 version addressed the quality assurance aspects of the Quality criteria, which included the integration of hardware and software and subsequent verification and validation, whereas the rewrite, being a product of IEEE Std 603-1991, {open_quotes}IEEE Standard Criteria for Safety Systems for Nuclear Power Generating Stations,{close_quotes} was written to establish the minimum requirements for computer systems (hardware, software, and interfaces) used in safety systems. This article presents an introduction to the scope of the rewrite, provides a brief comment on how the work group addressed the scope, and follows with details on how the work group addressed the scope and rewrite direction. 1 fig., 1 tab.

  15. Review of nuclear power plant safety cable aging studies with recommendations for improved approaches and for future work.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Gillen, Kenneth Todd; Bernstein, Robert

    2010-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Many U. S. nuclear power plants are approaching 40 years of age and there is a desire to extend their life for up to 100 total years. Safety-related cables were originally qualified for nuclear power plant applications based on IEEE Standards that were published in 1974. The qualifications involved procedures to simulate 40 years of life under ambient power plant aging conditions followed by simulated loss of coolant accident (LOCA). Over the past 35 years or so, substantial efforts were devoted to determining whether the aging assumptions allowed by the original IEEE Standards could be improved upon. These studies led to better accelerated aging methods so that more confident 40-year lifetime predictions became available. Since there is now a desire to potentially extend the life of nuclear power plants way beyond the original 40 year life, there is an interest in reviewing and critiquing the current state-of-the-art in simulating cable aging. These are two of the goals of this report where the discussion is concentrated on the progress made over the past 15 years or so and highlights the most thorough and careful published studies. An additional goal of the report is to suggest work that might prove helpful in answering some of the questions and dealing with some of the issues that still remain with respect to simulating the aging and predicting the lifetimes of safety-related cable materials.

  16. The safety climate of a Department of Energy nuclear facility: A sociotechnical analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Johnson, A.E.; Harbour, J.L.

    1993-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Government- and public-sponsored groups are increasingly demanding greater accountability by the Department of Energy`s weapons complex. Many of these demands have focused on the development of a positive safety climate, one that not only protects workers onsite, but also the surrounding populace and environment as well. These demands are, in part, a response to findings which demonstrate a close linkage between actual organizational safety performance and the organization`s safety climate, i.e., the collective attitudes employees hold concerning the level of safety in their organization. This paper describes the approach taken in the systematic assessment of the safety climate at EG&G Rocky Flats Plant (RFP).

  17. An overview of research activities on materials for nuclear applications at the INL Safety, Tritium and Applied Research facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    P. Calderoni; P. Sharpe; M. Shimada

    2009-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Safety, Tritium and Applied Research facility at the Idaho National Laboratory is a US Department of Energy National User Facility engaged in various aspects of materials research for nuclear applications related to fusion and advanced fission systems. Research activities are mainly focused on the interaction of tritium with materials, in particular plasma facing components, liquid breeders, high temperature coolants, fuel cladding, cooling and blanket structures and heat exchangers. Other activities include validation and verification experiments in support of the Fusion Safety Program, such as beryllium dust reactivity and dust transport in vacuum vessels, and support of Advanced Test Reactor irradiation experiments. This paper presents an overview of the programs engaged in the activities, which include the US-Japan TITAN collaboration, the US ITER program, the Next Generation Power Plant program and the tritium production program, and a presentation of ongoing experiments as well as a summary of recent results with emphasis on fusion relevant materials.

  18. Evaluation of station blackout accidents at nuclear power plants: Technical findings related to unresolved safety issue A-44: Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1988-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    ''Station Blackout,'' which is the complete loss of alternating current (AC) electrical power in a nuclear power plant, has been designated as Unresolved Safety Issue A-44. Because many safety systems required for reactor core decay heat removal and containment heat removal depend on AC power, the consequences of a station blackout could be severe. This report documents the findings of technical studies performed as part of the program to resolve this issue. The important factors analyzed include: the fequency of loss of offsite power; the probability that emergency or onsite AC power supplies would be unavailable; the capability and reliability of decay heat removal systems independent of AC power; and the likelihood that offsite power would be restored before systems that cannot operate for extended periods without AC power fail, thus resulting in core damage. This report also addresses effects of different designs, locations, and operational features on the estimated frequency of core damage resulting from station blackout events.

  19. Spent nuclear fuel project cold vacuum drying facility safety equipment list

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    IRWIN, J.J.

    1999-02-24T23:59:59.000Z

    This document provides the safety equipment list (SEL) for the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility (CVDF). The SEL was prepared in accordance with the procedure for safety structures, systems, and components (SSCs) in HNF-PRO-516, ''Safety Structures, Systems, and Components,'' Revision 0 and HNF-PRO-097, Engineering Design and Evaluation, Revision 0. The SEL was developed in conjunction with HNF-SO-SNF-SAR-O02, Safety Analysis Report for the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility, Phase 2, Supporting Installation of Processing Systems (Garvin 1998). The SEL identifies the SSCs and their safety functions, the design basis accidents for which they are required to perform, the design criteria, codes and standards, and quality assurance requirements that are required for establishing the safety design basis of the SSCs. This SEL has been developed for the CVDF Phase 2 Safety Analysis Report (SAR) and shall be updated, expanded, and revised in accordance with future phases of the CVDF SAR until the CVDF final SAR is approved.

  20. Guidelines for nuclear power plant safety issue prioritization information development. Supplement 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Andrews, W.B.; Gallucci, R.H.V.; Konzek, G.J.; Heaberlin, S.W.; Fecht, B.A.; Allen, C.H.; Allen, R.D.; Bickford, W.E., Carbaugh, E.H.; Lewis, J.R.

    1983-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This is the third in a series of reports to document the use of a methodology developed by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory to calculate, for prioritization purposes, the risk, dose and cost impacts of implementing resolutions to reactor safety issues (NUREG/CR-2800, Andrews et al. 1983). This report contains results of issue-specific analyses for 31 issues. Each issue was considered within the constraints of available information as of summer 1983, and two staff-weeks of labor. The results are referenced, as one consideration in setting priorities for reactor safety issues, in NUREG-0933, A Prioritization of Generic Safety Issues.

  1. Guidelines for nuclear power plant safety issue prioritization information development. Supplement 4

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tabatabai, A.S.; Fecht, B.A.; Powers, T.B.; Bickford, W.E.; Andrews, W.B.; Gallucci, R.H.V.; Bian, S.H.; Daling, P.M.; Eschbach, E.J.; Allen, C.H.

    1986-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This is the fifth in a series of reports to document the use of a methodology developed by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory to calculate, for prioritization purposes, the risk, dose and cost impacts of implementing resolutions to reactor safety issues (NUREG/CR-2800, Andrews et al. 1983). This report contains results of issue-specific analyses for 23 issues. Each issue was considered within the constraints of available information as of winter 1986, and two staff-weeks of labor. The results are referenced, as one consideration in setting priorities for reactor safety issues, in NUREG-0933, ''A Prioritization of Generic Safety Issues.''

  2. Safety Bulletin

    Broader source: Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    in the documented safety analysis. BACKGROUND On March 11 , 2011 , the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station in Japan was damaged by a magnitude 9.0 earthquake and the...

  3. Facility Safety

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2002-05-20T23:59:59.000Z

    To establish facility safety requirements for the Department of Energy, including National Nuclear Security Administration. Cancels DOE O 420.1. Canceled by DOE O 420.1B.

  4. Report to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission on analysis and evaluation of operational data - 1987: Power reactors

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    none,

    1988-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This annual report of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data (AEOD) is devoted to the activities performed during 1987. The report is published in two volumes. NUREG-1272, Vol. 2, No. 1, covers Power Reactors and presents an overview of the operating experience of the nuclear power industry, with comments regarding the trends of some key performance measures. The report also includes the principal findings and issues identified in AEOD studies over the past year, and summarizes information from Licensee Event Reports, the NRC's Operations Center, and Diagnostic Evaluations. NUREG-1272, Vol. 2, No. 2, covers Nonreactors and presents a review of the nonreactors events and misadministration reports that were reported in 1987 and a brief synopsis of AEOD studies published in 1987. Each volume contains a list of the AEOD Reports issued for 1980-1987.

  5. Nuclear criticality safety bounding analysis for the in-tank-precipitation (ITP) process, impacted by fissile isotopic weight fractions

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bess, C.E.

    1994-04-22T23:59:59.000Z

    The In-Tank Precipitation process (ITP) receives High Level Waste (HLW) supernatant liquid containing radionuclides in waste processing tank 48H. Sodium tetraphenylborate, NaTPB, and monosodium titanate (MST), NaTi{sub 2}O{sub 5}H, are added for removal of radioactive Cs and Sr, respectively. In addition to removal of radio-strontium, MST will also remove plutonium and uranium. The majority of the feed solutions to ITP will come from the dissolution of supernate that had been concentrated by evaporation to a crystallized salt form, commonly referred to as saltcake. The concern for criticality safety arises from the adsorption of U and Pt onto MST. If sufficient mass and optimum conditions are achieved then criticality is credible. The concentration of u and Pt from solution into the smaller volume of precipitate represents a concern for criticality. This report supplements WSRC-TR-93-171, Nuclear Criticality Safety Bounding Analysis For The In-Tank-Precipitation (ITP) Process. Criticality safety in ITP can be analyzed by two bounding conditions: (1) the minimum safe ratio of MST to fissionable material and (2) the maximum fissionable material adsorption capacity of the MST. Calculations have provided the first bounding condition and experimental analysis has established the second. This report combines these conditions with canyon facility data to evaluate the potential for criticality in the ITP process due to the adsorption of the fissionable material from solution. In addition, this report analyzes the potential impact of increased U loading onto MST. Results of this analysis demonstrate a greater safety margin for ITP operations than the previous analysis. This report further demonstrates that the potential for criticality in the ITP process due to adsorption of fissionable material by MST is not credible.

  6. Guidelines for nuclear-power-plant safety-issue-prioritization information development

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Andrews, W.B.; Gallucci, R.H.V.; Heaberlin, S.W.; Bickford, W.E.; Konzek, G.J.; Strenge, D.L.; Smith, R.I.; Weakley, S.A.

    1983-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Pacific Northwest Laboratory has developed a methodology, with examples, to calculate - to an approximation serviceable for prioritization purposes - the risk, dose and cost impacts of implementing resolutions to reactor safety issues. This report is an applications guide to issue-specific calculations. A description of the approach, mathematical models, worksheets and step-by-step examples are provided. Analysis using this method is intended to provide comparable results for many issues at a cost of two staff-weeks per issue. Results will be used by the NRC to support decisions related to issue priorities in allocation of resources to complete safety issue resolutions.

  7. Review guidelines on software languages for use in nuclear power plant safety systems. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hecht, H.; Hecht, M.; Graff, S.; Green, W.; Lin, D.; Koch, S.; Tai, A.; Wendelboe, D. [SoHaR, Inc., Beverly Hills, CA (United States)

    1996-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Guidelines for the programming and auditing of software written in high level languages for safety systems are presented. The guidelines are derived from a framework of issues significant to software safety which was gathered from relevant standards and research literature. Language-specific adaptations of these guidelines are provided for the following high level languages: Ada, C/C++, Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) Ladder Logic, International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) Standard 1131-3 Sequential Function Charts, Pascal, and PL/M. Appendices to the report include a tabular summary of the guidelines and additional information on selected languages.s

  8. Development of an Updated Societal-Risk Goal for Nuclear Power Safety

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Vicki Bier; Michael Corradini; Robert Youngblood; Caleb Roh; Shuji Liu

    2014-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report briefly summarizes work done in FY 2013 on the subject LDRD. The working hypothesis is that societal disruption should be addressed in a safety goal. This is motivated by the point that the Fukushima disaster resulted in very little public dose, but enormous societal disruption; a goal that addressed societal disruption would fill a perceived gap in the US NRC safety goal structure. This year's work entailed analyzing the consequences of postulated accidents at various reactor sites in the US, specifically with a view to quantifying the number of people relocated and the duration of their relocation, to see whether this makes sense as a measure of societal disruption.

  9. Guidelines for nuclear power plant safety issue prioritization information development. Supplement 5

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Daling, P.M.; Lavender, J.C. [Pacific Northwest National Lab., Richland, WA (United States)

    1996-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This is the sixth in a series of reports to document the development and use of a methodology developed by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) to calculate, for prioritization purposes, the risk, dose, and cost impacts of implementing potential resolutions to reactor safety issues (see NUREG/CR-2800, Andrews, et al., 1983). This report contains the results of issue-specific analyses for 34 generic issues. Each issue was considered within the constraints of available information at the time the issues were examined and approximately 2 staff-weeks of labor. The results are referenced as one consideration in NUREG-0933, A Prioritization of Generic Safety Issues (Emrit, et al., 1983).

  10. Safety research programs sponsored by Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research. Quarterly progress report, October 1-December 31, 1983. Volume 3, No. 4

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Weiss, A J [comp.

    1984-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The projects reported are the following: High Temperature Reactor Research, SSC Development, Validation and Application, CRBR Balance of Plant Modeling, Thermal-Hydraulic Reactor Safety Experiments, Development of Plant Analyzer, Code Assessment and Application (Transient and LOCA Analyses), Thermal Reactor Code Development (RAMONA-3B), Calculational Quality Assurance in Support of PTS; Stress Corrosion Cracking of PWR Steam Generator Tubing, Bolting Failure Analysis, Probability Based Load Combinations for Design of Category I Structures, Mechanical Piping Benchmark Problems, Identification of Age-Related Failure Modes; Analysis of Human Error Data for Nuclear Power Plant Safety-Related Events, Human Factors in Nuclear Power Plant Safeguards, Emergency Action Levels, and Protective Action Decision Making.

  11. 2013 Annual Workforce Analysis and Staffing Plan Report- Chief of Nuclear Safety

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Managers perform an annual workforce analysis of their organization and develop staffing plans that identify technical capabilities and positions they need to ensure safe operation of defense nuclear facilities.

  12. 2014 Annual Workforce Analysis and Staffing Plan Report- Chief of Nuclear Safety

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Managers perform an annual workforce analysis of their organization and develop staffing plans that identify technical capabilities and positions they need to ensure safe operation of defense nuclear facilities.

  13. 2012 Annual Workforce Analysis and Staffing Plan Report- Chief of Nuclear Safety

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Managers perform an annual workforce analysis of their organization and develop staffing plans that identify technical capabilities and positions they need to ensure safe operation of defense nuclear facilities.

  14. Design and Transient Analysis of Passive Safety Cooling Systems for Advanced Nuclear Reactors

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Galvez, Cristhian

    2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    H. G. MacPherson The molten salt adventure Nuclear Scienceand P.F. Peterson, Molten-Salt-Cooled Advanced High-Clarno Assessment of candidate molten salt coolants for the

  15. Safety Software Quality Assurance Functions, Responsibilities, and Authorities for Nuclear Facilities and Activities

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2003-08-27T23:59:59.000Z

    To assign roles and responsibilities for improving the quality of safety software. DOE N 411.2 (archived) extends this Notice until 01/31/2005. DOE N 411.3 extends this Notice until 1/31/06. Canceled by DOE O 414.1C. does not cancel other directives.

  16. >r 9 5 6 O 0 V 3 Ris-R-807(EN) Nuclear Safety Research

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    and Meetings 19 3 Reactor Physics 20 3.1 Reactor Physics 20 3.2 Reactor Safety 22 3.3 Activities at the DRI. The Waste Management Section is responsible for the safe handling and storage of radioactive waste from Risř.1.1 Personnel Dosimetry Risř's personnel dosimetry service covers the individual monitoring of the personnel

  17. NUCLEAR PLANT AND CONTROL

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    NUCLEAR PLANT OPERATIONS AND CONTROL KEYWORDS: software require- ments, safety analysis, formal, the missiles, and the digital protection systems embed- ded in nuclear power plants. Obviously, safety method SOFTWARE SAFETY ANALYSIS OF DIGITAL PROTECTION SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS USING A QUALITATIVE FORMAL

  18. Nuclear Fission Reactor Safety Research in FP7 and future perspectives

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Garbil, Roger

    2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The European Union (?U) has defined in the Europe 2020 strategy and 2050 Energy Roadmap its long-term vision for establishing a secure, sustainable and competitive energy system and setting up legally binding targets by 2020 for reducing greenhouse emissions, by increasing energy efficiency and the share of renewable energy sources while including a significant share from nuclear fission. Nuclear energy can enable the further reduction in harmful emissions and can contribute to the EU’s competitive energy system, security of supply and independence from fossil fuels. Nuclear fission is a valuable option for those 14 EU countries that promote its use as part of their national energy mix. The European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies (EGE) adopted its Opinion No.27 ‘An ethical framework for assessing research, production and use of energy’ and proposed an integrated ethics approach for the research, production and use of energy in the EU, seeking equilibrium among four criteria – access ...

  19. Preliminary systems-interaction results from the Digraph Matrix Analysis of the Watts Bar Nuclear Power Plant safety-injection systems

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sacks, I.J.; Ashmore, B.C.; Champney, J.M.; Alesso, H.P.

    1983-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report provides preliminary results generated by a Digraph Matrix Analysis (DMA) for a Systems Interaction analysis performed on the Safety Injection System of the Tennessee Valley Authority Watts Bar Nuclear Power Plant. An overview of DMA is provided along with a brief description of the computer codes used in DMA.

  20. RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH AND RELATED STANDARDS FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS. VOLUME 2 OF HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Nero, A.V.

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    average value for nuclear plants) aFinal Envir. Statement (Statement, Koshkonong Nuclear Plant, August 1976. U. S.rem; operation of the nuclear plants themselves only *Other

  1. An evaluation of the effectiveness of the US Department of Energy Integrated Safety Process (SS-21) for Nuclear Explosive Operations using quantitative hazard analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fischer, S.R.; Konkel, H.; Bott, T.; Eisenhawer, S.; Auflick, J.; Houghton, K.; Maloney, K.; DeYoung, L.; Wilson, M. [Los Alamos National Lab., NM (United States)]|[Sandia National Labs., Albuquerque, NM (United States)

    1996-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This paper evaluates the effectiveness of the US Department of Energy Integrated Safety Process or ``Seamless Safety (SS-21)`` program for reducing risk associated with nuclear explosive operations. A key element in the Integrated Safety Process is the use of hazard assessment techniques to evaluate process design changes in parallel or concurrently with process design and development. This concurrent hazard assessment method recently was employed for the B61-0, 2 & 5 and W69 nuclear explosive dismantlement activities. This paper reviews the SS-21 hazard assessment process and summarizes the results of the concurrent hazard assessments performed for the B61 and W69 dismantlement programs. Comparisons of quantitative hazard assessment results before and after implementation of the SS-21 design process shed light on the effectiveness of the SS-21 program for achieving risk reduction.

  2. The JRC-ITU approach to the safety of advanced nuclear fuel cycles

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Fanghaenel, T.; Rondinella, V.V.; Somers, J.; Konings, R.; Erdmann, N.; Uffelen, P. van; Glatz, J.P. [European Commission, Joint Research Centre - JRC, Institute for Transuranium Elements - ITU, Postfach 2340, 76125 Karlsruhe (Germany)

    2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The JRC-ITU safety studies of advanced fuels and cycles adopt two main axes. First the full exploitation of still available and highly relevant knowledge and samples from past fuel preparation and irradiation campaigns (complementing the limited number of ongoing programmes). Secondly, the shift of focus from simple property measurement towards the understanding of basic mechanisms determining property evolution and behaviour of fuel compounds during normal, off-normal and accident conditions. The final objective of the second axis is the determination of predictive tools applicable to systems and conditions different from those from which they were derived. State of the art experimental facilities, extensive networks of partnerships and collaboration with other organizations worldwide, and a developing programme for training and education are essential in this approach. This strategy has been implemented through various programs and projects. The SUPERFACT programme constitutes the main body of existing knowledge on the behavior in-pile of MOX fuel containing minor actinides. It encompassed all steps of a closed fuel cycle. Another international project investigating the safety of a closed cycle is METAPHIX. In this case a U-Pu19-Zr10 metal alloy containing Np, Am and Cm constitutes the fuel. 9 test pins have been prepared and irradiated. In addition to the PIE (Post Irradiation Examination), pyrometallurgical separation of the irradiated fuel has been performed, to demonstrate all the steps of a multiple recycling closed cycle and characterize their safety relevant aspects. Basic studies like thermodynamic fuel properties, fuel-cladding-coolant interactions have also been carried out at JRC-ITU.

  3. Safety Aspects of Wet Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel, OAS-L-13-11

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels DataDepartment of Energy Your Density Isn'tOrigin ofEnergy atLLC - FE DKT. 10-160-LNG - ORDERSTATE0-1 CHAPTER1the1-2009 MaySafety

  4. Nuclear Safety Research and Development (NSR&D) Program | Department of

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page onYouTube YouTube Note: Since the.pdfBreaking ofOilNEWResponse to Time-Based Rates from theLiabilityEnergy Safety

  5. Nuclear Safety R&D in the Waste Processing Technology Development & Deployment Program

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742 33 1112011 Strategic2 OPAM615_CostNSAR - T en Y earEnergy Research andSiteSafety R&D in the

  6. Activities in Support of Continuing the Service of Nuclear Power Plant Safety-Related Concrete Structures

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Naus, Dan J [ORNL

    2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Nuclear power plant (NPP) concrete structures are described. In-service inspection and testing requirements in the U.S. are summarized. The license renewal process in the U.S. is outlined and its current status provided. Operating experience related to performance of the concrete structures is presented. Basic components of a program to manage aging of the concrete structures are identified and described: (1) Degradation mechanisms, damage models, and material performance; (2) Assessment and remediation: i.e., component selection, in- service inspection, non-destructive examinations, and remedial actions; and (3) Estimation of performance at present or some future point in time: i.e., application of structural reliability theory to the design and optimization of in-service inspection/maintenance strategies, and determination of the effects of degradation on plant risk. Finally, areas are noted where additional research would be of benefit to aging management of nuclear power plant concrete structures.

  7. Assessment of inservice conditions of safety-related nuclear plant structures

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ashar, H.; Bagchi, G.

    1995-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The report is a compilation from a number of sources of information related to the condition Of structures and civil engineering features at operating nuclear power plants in the United States. The most significant information came from the hands-on inspection of the six old plants (licensed prior to 1977) performed by the staff of the Civil Engineering and Geosciences Branch (ECGB) in the Division of Engineering of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. For the containment structures, most of the information related to the degraded conditions came from the licensees as part of the Licensing Event Report System (10 CFR 50.73), or as part of the requirement under limiting condition of operation of the plant-specific Technical Specifications. Most of the information related to the degradation of other Structures and civil engineering features was extracted from the industry survey, the reported incidents, and the plant visits. The report discusses the condition of the structures and civil engineering features at operating nuclear power plants and provides information that would help detect, alleviate, and correct the degraded conditions of the structures and civil engineering features.

  8. Technology, safety and costs of decommissioning reference nuclear fuel cycle facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Elder, H.K.

    1986-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The radioactive wastes expected to result from decommissioning nuclear fuel cycle facilities are reviewed and classified in accordance with 10 CFR 61. Most of the wastes from the MOX plant (exclusive of the lagoon wastes) will require interim storage (11% Class A 49 m/sup 3/; 89% interim storage, 383 m/sup 3/). The MOX plant lagoon wastes are Class A waste (2930 m/sup 3/). All of the wastes from the U-Fab and UF/sub 6/ plants are designated as Class A waste (U-Fab 1090 m/sup 3/, UF/sub 6/ 1259 m/sup 3/).

  9. Nuclear Explosives Safety Evaluation Process (DOE-STD-3015-2004)

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels DataDepartment of Energy Your Density Isn'tOrigin of Contamination in ManyDepartment of Energy NorthB O|WorkNationalNuclear Energyi

  10. Proceedings of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission fifteenth water reactor safety information meeting: Volume 6, Decontamination and decommissioning, accident management, TMI-2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Weiss, A. J. [comp.

    1988-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This six-volume report contains 140 papers out of the 164 that were presented at the Fifteenth Water Reactor Safety Information Meeting held at the National Bureau of Standards, Gaithersburg, Maryland, during the week of October 26-29, 1987. The papers are printed in the order of their presentation in each session and describe progress and results of programs in nuclear safety research conducted in this country and abroad. This report, Volume 6, discusses decontamination and decommissioning, accident management, and the Three Mile Island-2 reactor accident. Thirteen reports have been cataloged separately.

  11. Report on the American Nuclear Society International Topical Meeting: {open_quotes}The safety, status, and future of non-commercial reactors and irradiation Facilities{close_quotes}

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Silver, E.G. [Oak Ridge National Laboratory, TN (United States)

    1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The American Nuclear Society`s International Topical Meeting, The Safety, Status, and Future of Non-Commercial Reactors and Irradiation Facilities, also known as SAFOR 90, was held in Boise, Idaho, September 30 to October 4, 1990. In 19 half-day sessions, 102 papers were presented which covered operating research reactors, production reactors, the use of reactors for training and research, probabilistic risk assessments applied to research reactors, plans for new facilities, and new fuels and reactor types. A special session on space reactor safety was also presented. 11 refs., 1 tab.

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

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels DataDepartment of Energy Your Density Isn't Your Destiny:Revised Finding of No Significant Impact610-94 December 1994 CHANGE NOTICE NO. 1

  13. Nuclear materials 1993 annual report. Volume 8, No. 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    NONE

    1995-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This annual report of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission`s Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data (AEOD) describes activities conducted during 1993. The report is published in two parts. NUREG-1272, Vol. 8, No. 1, covers power reactors and presents an overview of the operating experience of the nuclear power industry from the NRC perspective, including comments about the trends of some key performance measures. The report also includes the principal findings and issues identified in AEOD studies over the past year and summarizes information from such sources as licensee event reports, diagnostic evaluations, and reports to the NRC`s Operations Center. NUREG-1272, Vol. 8, No. 2, covers nuclear materials and presents a review of the events and concerns during 1993 associated with the use of licensed material in nonreactor applications, such as personnel overexposures and medical misadministrations. Note that the subtitle of No. 2 has been changed from ``Nonreactors`` to ``Nuclear Materials.`` Both reports also contain a discussion of the Incident Investigation Team program and summarize both the Incident Investigation Team and Augmented Inspection Team reports. Each volume contains a list of the AEOD reports issued from 1980 through 1993.

  14. RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH AND RELATED STANDARDS FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS. VOLUME 2 OF HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Nero, A.V.

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    in U. S. Conunercial Nuclear Power Plants", Report WASH-Related Standards for Nuclear Power Plants," by A.V. NeroResponse Planning for Nuclear Power Plants in California,"

  15. Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation (NEAMS) Waste Integrated Performance and Safety Codes (IPSC) : FY10 development and integration.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Criscenti, Louise Jacqueline; Sassani, David Carl; Arguello, Jose Guadalupe, Jr.; Dewers, Thomas A.; Bouchard, Julie F.; Edwards, Harold Carter; Freeze, Geoffrey A.; Wang, Yifeng; Schultz, Peter Andrew

    2011-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the progress in fiscal year 2010 in developing the Waste Integrated Performance and Safety Codes (IPSC) in support of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation (NEAMS) Campaign. The goal of the Waste IPSC is to develop an integrated suite of computational modeling and simulation capabilities to quantitatively assess the long-term performance of waste forms in the engineered and geologic environments of a radioactive waste storage or disposal system. The Waste IPSC will provide this simulation capability (1) for a range of disposal concepts, waste form types, engineered repository designs, and geologic settings, (2) for a range of time scales and distances, (3) with appropriate consideration of the inherent uncertainties, and (4) in accordance with robust verification, validation, and software quality requirements. Waste IPSC activities in fiscal year 2010 focused on specifying a challenge problem to demonstrate proof of concept, developing a verification and validation plan, and performing an initial gap analyses to identify candidate codes and tools to support the development and integration of the Waste IPSC. The current Waste IPSC strategy is to acquire and integrate the necessary Waste IPSC capabilities wherever feasible, and develop only those capabilities that cannot be acquired or suitably integrated, verified, or validated. This year-end progress report documents the FY10 status of acquisition, development, and integration of thermal-hydrologic-chemical-mechanical (THCM) code capabilities, frameworks, and enabling tools and infrastructure.

  16. Analysis of Flow in Pilot Operated Safety and Relief Valve of Nuclear Reactor Coolant System

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kwon, Soon-Bum; Lee, Dong-Won [Department of Mechanical Engineering, Kyungpook National University, 1370, Sankyuk-dong, Daegu 702-701 (Korea, Republic of); Kim, In-Goo; Ahn, Hyung-Joon; Kim, Hho-Jung [Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety, 19, Kusungdong, Yousungku, Daejon 305-338 (Korea, Republic of)

    2004-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    When the POSRV equipped in a nuclear power plant opens in instant by a failure in coolant system of PWR, a moving shock wave generates, and propagates downstream of the valve, inducing a complicated unsteadiness. The moving shock wave may exert severe load to the structure. In this connection, a method of gradual opening of the valve is used to reduce the load acting on the wall at the downstream of the POSRV. In the present study, experiments and calculations are performed to investigate the detail unsteady flow at the various pipe units and the effect of valve opening time on the flow downstream of the valve. In calculation by using of air as working fluid, 2-dimensional, unsteady compressible Navier-Stokes equations are solved by finite volume method. It was found that when the incident shock wave passes through the pipe unit, it may experience diffraction, reflection and interaction with a vortex. Furthermore, the geometry of the pipe unit affects the reflection type of shock wave and changes the load acting on the wall of pipe unit. It was also turned out that the maximum force acting on the wall of the pipe unit becomes in order of T-junction, 108 deg. elbow and branch in magnitude, respectively. And, the results obtained that show that the rapid pressure rise due to the moving shock wave by instant POSRV valve opening is attenuated by employing the gradual opening. (authors)

  17. Numerical solutions of the aerosol general dynamic equation for nuclear reactor safety studies

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Park, J.W.

    1988-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Methods and approximations inherent in modeling of aerosol dynamics and evolution for nuclear reactor source term estimation have been investigated. Several aerosol evolution problems are considered to assess numerical methods of solving the aerosol dynamic equation. A new condensational growth model is constructed by generalizing Mason's formula to arbitrary particle sizes, and arbitrary accommodation of the condensing vapor and background gas at particle surface. Analytical solution is developed for the aerosol growth equation employing the new condensation model. The space-dependent aerosol dynamic equation is solved to assess implications of spatial homogenization of aerosol distributions. The results of our findings are as follows. The sectional method solving the aerosol dynamic equation is quite efficient in modeling of coagulation problems, but should be improved for simulation of strong condensation problems. The J-space transform method is accurate in modeling of condensation problems, but is very slow. For the situation considered, the new condensation model predicts slower aerosol growth than the corresponding isothermal model as well as Mason's model, the effect of partial accommodation is considerable on the particle evolution, and the effect of the energy accommodation coefficient is more pronounced than that of the mass accommodation coefficient. For the initial conditions considered, the space-dependent aerosol dynamics leads to results that are substantially different from those based on the spatially homogeneous aerosol dynamic equation.

  18. Operating experience feedback report-reliability of safety-related steam turbine-driven standby pumps used in US commerical nuclear power plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boardman, J.R. [Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC (United States)

    1995-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Pump failure experience is collected by two primary means: (1) Licensee Event Reports, and (2) Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System failure reports. Certain safety-related turbine-driven standby pumps were identified by these data systems as experiencing significant ongoing repetitive failures of their turbine drivers, resulting in low reliability of the pump units. The root causes of identified failures were determined, and actions to preclude these repetitive failures were identified. 5 refs., 1 tab.

  19. A safety and regulatory assessment of generic BWR and PWR permanently shutdown nuclear power plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Travis, R.J.; Davis, R.E.; Grove, E.J.; Azarm, M.A. [Brookhaven National Lab., Upton, NY (United States)

    1997-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The long-term availability of less expensive power and the increasing plant modification and maintenance costs have caused some utilities to re-examine the economics of nuclear power. As a result, several utilities have opted to permanently shutdown their plants. Each licensee of these permanently shutdown (PSD) plants has submitted plant-specific exemption requests for those regulations that they believe are no longer applicable to their facility. This report presents a regulatory assessment for generic BWR and PWR plants that have permanently ceased operation in support of NRC rulemaking activities in this area. After the reactor vessel is defueled, the traditional accident sequences that dominate the operating plant risk are no longer applicable. The remaining source of public risk is associated with the accidents that involve the spent fuel. Previous studies have indicated that complete spent fuel pool drainage is an accident of potential concern. Certain combinations of spent fuel storage configurations and decay times, could cause freshly discharged fuel assemblies to self heat to a temperature where the self sustained oxidation of the zircaloy fuel cladding may cause cladding failure. This study has defined four spent fuel configurations which encompass all of the anticipated spent fuel characteristics and storage modes following permanent shutdown. A representative accident sequence was chosen for each configuration. Consequence analyses were performed using these sequences to estimate onsite and boundary doses, population doses and economic costs. A list of candidate regulations was identified from a screening of 10 CFR Parts 0 to 199. The continued applicability of each regulation was assessed within the context of each spent fuel storage configuration and the results of the consequence analyses.

  20. RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH AND RELATED STANDARDS FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS. VOLUME 2 OF HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Nero, A.V.

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA Energy and Environment

  1. Technical Safety Requirements for the B695 Segment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Laycak, D

    2008-09-11T23:59:59.000Z

    This document contains Technical Safety Requirements (TSRs) for the Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (RHWM) Division's B695 Segment of the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The TSRs constitute requirements regarding the safe operation of the B695 Segment. The TSRs are derived from the Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) for the B695 Segment (LLNL 2007). The analysis presented there determined that the B695 Segment is a low-chemical hazard, Hazard Category 3, nonreactor nuclear facility. The TSRs consist primarily of inventory limits as well as controls to preserve the underlying assumptions in the hazard analyses. Furthermore, appropriate commitments to safety programs are presented in the administrative controls section of the TSRs. The B695 Segment (B695 and the west portion of B696) is a waste treatment and storage facility located in the northeast quadrant of the LLNL main site. The approximate area and boundary of the B695 Segment are shown in the B695 Segment DSA. Activities typically conducted in the B695 Segment include container storage, lab-packing, repacking, overpacking, bulking, sampling, waste transfer, and waste treatment. B695 is used to store and treat radioactive, mixed, and hazardous waste, and it also contains equipment used in conjunction with waste processing operations to treat various liquid and solid wastes. The portion of the building called Building 696 Solid Waste Processing Area (SWPA), also referred to as B696S in this report, is used primarily to manage solid radioactive, mixed, and hazardous waste. Operations specific to the SWPA include sorting and segregating waste, lab-packing, sampling, and crushing empty drums that previously contained waste. Furthermore, a Waste Packaging Unit will be permitted to treat hazardous and mixed waste. RHWM generally processes LLW with no, or extremely low, concentrations of transuranics (i.e., much less than 100 nCi/g). Wastes processed often contain only depleted uranium and beta- and gamma-emitting nuclides, e.g., {sup 90}Sr, {sup 137}Cs, {sup 3}H. Chapter 5 of the DSA documents the derivation of TSRs and develops the operational limits that protect the safety envelope defined for this facility. The DSA is applicable to the handling of radioactive waste stored and treated in the B695 Segment. Section 5 of the TSR, Administrative Controls, contains those Administrative Controls necessary to ensure safe operation of the B695 Segment. A basis explanation for each of the requirements described in Section 5.5, Specific Administrative Controls is provided in Appendix B. The basis explanation does not constitute an additional requirement, but is intended as an expansion of the logic and reasoning behind development of the requirement. Programmatic Administrative Controls are addressed in Section 5.6. This introduction to the B695 Segment TSRs is not part of the TSR limits or conditions and contains no requirements related to B695 Segment operations or to the safety analyses in the DSA.

  2. Technical Safety Requirements for the Waste Storage Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Larson, H L

    2007-09-07T23:59:59.000Z

    This document contains Technical Safety Requirements (TSR) for the Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (RHWM) WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES, which include Area 612 (A612) and the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) Storage Area at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The TSRs constitute requirements regarding the safe operation of the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. These TSRs are derived from the Documented Safety Analysis for the Waste Storage Facilities (DSA) (LLNL 2006). The analysis presented therein determined that the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are low-chemical hazard, Hazard Category 2 non-reactor nuclear facilities. The TSRs consist primarily of inventory limits and controls to preserve the underlying assumptions in the hazard and accident analyses. Further, appropriate commitments to safety programs are presented in the administrative controls sections of the TSRs. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are used by RHWM to handle and store hazardous waste, TRANSURANIC (TRU) WASTE, LOW-LEVEL WASTE (LLW), mixed waste, California combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste generated at LLNL as well as small amounts from other U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facilities, as described in the DSA. In addition, several minor treatments (e.g., drum crushing, size reduction, and decontamination) are carried out in these facilities. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are located in two portions of the LLNL main site. A612 is located in the southeast quadrant of LLNL. The A612 fenceline is approximately 220 m west of Greenville Road. The DWTF Storage Area, which includes Building 693 (B693), Building 696 Radioactive Waste Storage Area (B696R), and associated yard areas and storage areas within the yard, is located in the northeast quadrant of LLNL in the DWTF complex. The DWTF Storage Area fenceline is approximately 90 m west of Greenville Road. A612 and the DWTF Storage Area are subdivided into various facilities and storage areas, consisting of buildings, tents, other structures, and open areas as described in Chapter 2 of the DSA. Section 2.4 of the DSA provides an overview of the buildings, structures, and areas in the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES, including construction details such as basic floor plans, equipment layout, construction materials, controlling dimensions, and dimensions significant to the hazard and accident analysis. Chapter 5 of the DSA documents the derivation of the TSRs and develops the operational limits that protect the safety envelope defined for the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. This TSR document is applicable to the handling, storage, and treatment of hazardous waste, TRU WASTE, LLW, mixed waste, California combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste received or generated in the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. Section 5, Administrative Controls, contains those Administrative Controls necessary to ensure safe operation of the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. Programmatic Administrative Controls are in Section 5.6. This Introduction to the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES TSRs is not part of the TSR limits or conditions and contains no requirements related to WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES operations or to the safety analyses of the DSA.

  3. Safety and Security Enfrocment Process Overview

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    are to enhance and protect worker safety and health, nuclear safety, and classified information security by fostering a culture that seeks to attain and sustain compliance...

  4. Challenge problem and milestones for : Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation (NEAMS) waste Integrated Performance and Safety Codes (IPSC).

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Freeze, Geoffrey A.; Wang, Yifeng; Howard, Robert; McNeish, Jerry A.; Schultz, Peter Andrew; Arguello, Jose Guadalupe, Jr.

    2010-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the specification of a challenge problem and associated challenge milestones for the Waste Integrated Performance and Safety Codes (IPSC) supporting the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation (NEAMS) Campaign. The NEAMS challenge problems are designed to demonstrate proof of concept and progress towards IPSC goals. The goal of the Waste IPSC is to develop an integrated suite of modeling and simulation capabilities to quantitatively assess the long-term performance of waste forms in the engineered and geologic environments of a radioactive waste storage or disposal system. The Waste IPSC will provide this simulation capability (1) for a range of disposal concepts, waste form types, engineered repository designs, and geologic settings, (2) for a range of time scales and distances, (3) with appropriate consideration of the inherent uncertainties, and (4) in accordance with robust verification, validation, and software quality requirements. To demonstrate proof of concept and progress towards these goals and requirements, a Waste IPSC challenge problem is specified that includes coupled thermal-hydrologic-chemical-mechanical (THCM) processes that describe (1) the degradation of a borosilicate glass waste form and the corresponding mobilization of radionuclides (i.e., the processes that produce the radionuclide source term), (2) the associated near-field physical and chemical environment for waste emplacement within a salt formation, and (3) radionuclide transport in the near field (i.e., through the engineered components - waste form, waste package, and backfill - and the immediately adjacent salt). The initial details of a set of challenge milestones that collectively comprise the full challenge problem are also specified.

  5. RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH AND RELATED STANDARDS FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS. VOLUME 2 OF HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Nero, A.V.

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Report LBL-5287. "Power Plant Reliability-Availability andConunercial Nuclear Power Plants", Report WASH-1400 (NUREG-Standards for Nuclear Power Plants," by A.V. Nero and Y.C.

  6. Technical Safety Requirements for the Waste Storage Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Laycak, D T

    2008-06-16T23:59:59.000Z

    This document contains Technical Safety Requirements (TSR) for the Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (RHWM) WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES, which include Area 625 (A625) and the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) Storage Area at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The TSRs constitute requirements regarding the safe operation of the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. These TSRs are derived from the 'Documented Safety Analysis for the Waste Storage Facilities' (DSA) (LLNL 2008). The analysis presented therein determined that the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are low-chemical hazard, Hazard Category 2 non-reactor nuclear facilities. The TSRs consist primarily of inventory limits and controls to preserve the underlying assumptions in the hazard and accident analyses. Further, appropriate commitments to safety programs are presented in the administrative controls sections of the TSRs. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are used by RHWM to handle and store hazardous waste, TRANSURANIC (TRU) WASTE, LOW-LEVEL WASTE (LLW), mixed waste, California combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste generated at LLNL as well as small amounts from other U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facilities, as described in the DSA. In addition, several minor treatments (e.g., size reduction and decontamination) are carried out in these facilities. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are located in two portions of the LLNL main site. A625 is located in the southeast quadrant of LLNL. The A625 fenceline is approximately 225 m west of Greenville Road. The DWTF Storage Area, which includes Building 693 (B693), Building 696 Radioactive Waste Storage Area (B696R), and associated yard areas and storage areas within the yard, is located in the northeast quadrant of LLNL in the DWTF complex. The DWTF Storage Area fenceline is approximately 90 m west of Greenville Road. A625 and the DWTF Storage Area are subdivided into various facilities and storage areas, consisting of buildings, tents, other structures, and open areas as described in Chapter 2 of the DSA. Section 2.4 of the DSA provides an overview of the buildings, structures, and areas in the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES, including construction details such as basic floor plans, equipment layout, construction materials, controlling dimensions, and dimensions significant to the hazard and accident analysis. Chapter 5 of the DSA documents the derivation of the TSRs and develops the operational limits that protect the safety envelope defined for the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. This TSR document is applicable to the handling, storage, and treatment of hazardous waste, TRU WASTE, LLW, mixed waste, California combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste received or generated in the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. Section 5, Administrative Controls, contains those Administrative Controls necessary to ensure safe operation of the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. Programmatic Administrative Controls are in Section 5.6.

  7. Technical Safety Requirements for the Waste Storage Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Laycak, D T

    2010-03-05T23:59:59.000Z

    This document contains Technical Safety Requirements (TSR) for the Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (RHWM) WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES, which include Area 625 (A625) and the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) Storage Area at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The TSRs constitute requirements regarding the safe operation of the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. These TSRs are derived from the Documented Safety Analysis for the Waste Storage Facilities (DSA) (LLNL 2009). The analysis presented therein determined that the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are low-chemical hazard, Hazard Category 2 non-reactor nuclear facilities. The TSRs consist primarily of inventory limits and controls to preserve the underlying assumptions in the hazard and accident analyses. Further, appropriate commitments to safety programs are presented in the administrative controls sections of the TSRs. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are used by RHWM to handle and store hazardous waste, TRANSURANIC (TRU) WASTE, LOW-LEVEL WASTE (LLW), mixed waste, California combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste generated at LLNL as well as small amounts from other U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facilities, as described in the DSA. In addition, several minor treatments (e.g., size reduction and decontamination) are carried out in these facilities. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are located in two portions of the LLNL main site. A625 is located in the southeast quadrant of LLNL. The A625 fenceline is approximately 225 m west of Greenville Road. The DWTF Storage Area, which includes Building 693 (B693), Building 696 Radioactive Waste Storage Area (B696R), and associated yard areas and storage areas within the yard, is located in the northeast quadrant of LLNL in the DWTF complex. The DWTF Storage Area fenceline is approximately 90 m west of Greenville Road. A625 and the DWTF Storage Area are subdivided into various facilities and storage areas, consisting of buildings, tents, other structures, and open areas as described in Chapter 2 of the DSA. Section 2.4 of the DSA provides an overview of the buildings, structures, and areas in the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES, including construction details such as basic floor plans, equipment layout, construction materials, controlling dimensions, and dimensions significant to the hazard and accident analysis. Chapter 5 of the DSA documents the derivation of the TSRs and develops the operational limits that protect the safety envelope defined for the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. This TSR document is applicable to the handling, storage, and treatment of hazardous waste, TRU WASTE, LLW, mixed waste, California combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste received or generated in the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. Section 5, Administrative Controls, contains those Administrative Controls necessary to ensure safe operation of the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. Programmatic Administrative Controls are in Section 5.4.

  8. Radioisotope Power System Delivery, Ground Support and Nuclear Safety Implementation: Use of the Multi-Mission Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator for the NASA's Mars Science Laboratory

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    S.G. Johnson; K.L. Lively; C.C. Dwight

    2014-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Radioisotope power systems have been used for over 50 years to enable missions in remote or hostile environments. They are a convenient means of supplying a few milliwatts up to a few hundred watts of useable, long-term electrical power. With regard to use of a radioisotope power system, the transportation, ground support and implementation of nuclear safety protocols in the field is a complex process that requires clear identification of needed technical and regulatory requirements. The appropriate care must be taken to provide high quality treatment of the item to be moved so it arrives in a condition to fulfill its missions in space. Similarly it must be transported and managed in a manner compliant with requirements for shipment and handling of special nuclear material. This presentation describes transportation, ground support operations and implementation of nuclear safety and security protocols for a radioisotope power system using recent experience involving the Multi-Mission Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator for National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Mars Science Laboratory, which launched in November of 2011.

  9. Sandia National Laboratories: Nuclear Energy Systems Laboratory...

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    Laboratory (NESL) Transient Nuclear Fuels Testing Radiation Effects Sciences Solar Electric Propulsion Nuclear Energy Safety Technologies Experimental Testing...

  10. Sandia National Laboratories: Nuclear Energy Systems Laboratory...

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    Laboratory (NESL) Transient Nuclear Fuels Testing Radiation Effects Sciences Solar Electric Propulsion Nuclear Energy Safety Technologies Experimental Testing Phenomenological...

  11. Nuclear Explosives Safety

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2014-10-16T23:59:59.000Z

    This draft has been scheduled for final review before the Directives Review Board on 10/16/14. All major comments and concerns should be provided to your DRB representative, following your organization process. If you do not know who your representative is, please see the list of DRB members at https://www.directives.doe.gov/beta/references/directives-review-board. If your office is represented by Ingrid Kolb, Director, Office of Management, please submit your major concerns and comments to the DRB Liaison, Camille Beben (Camille.Beben@hq.doe.gov; 202-586-1014). All major comments and concerns should be submitted by COB 10/16/2014.

  12. Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    1992-04-30T23:59:59.000Z

    Cancels DOE O 5481.1B; paragraphs 7b(3), 7e(3) & 8c of DOE O 5480.6; and 51, 7b(3), 7b(4), 7e(3), 8a & 8h of DOE O 5480.5.

  13. WIPP Documents - Nuclear Safety

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOnItemResearch >Internship Program TheSiteEureka AnalyticsLarge fileHazardousLabel

  14. High-altitude-nuclear electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) environment simulation public health and safety considerations. Technical report, 1 Oct 89-31 May 91

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Casey, K.

    1992-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The existence of electromagnetic fields external to the working volumes of high-altitude nuclear electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) environment simulators has raised both environmental and public-health concerns regarding the safety of HEMP environment simulator operations. This report contains a review of what HEMP is, what its effects on defense systems are, and why and how HEMP environment simulation testing is conducted. The state of present knowledge concerning the external simulator fields and their possible effects on biological and electronic systems is summarized. Research initiatives are identified to aid in answering the most important questions regarding the continued environmental safety of HEMP simulator operations. These initiatives are intended to support (1) development of options for modification and/or relocation of HEMP environment simulator facilities and (2) determination of safe exposure levels for biological and electronic systems. Recommendations for specific DoD actions are given.

  15. TWRS safety program plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Calderon, L.M., Westinghouse Hanford

    1996-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Management of Nuclear Safety, Industrial Safety, Industrial Hygiene, and Fire Protection programs, functions, and field support resources for Tank Waste Remediation Systems (TWRS) has, until recently, been centralized in TWRS Safety, under the Emergency, Safety, and Quality organization. Industrial hygiene technician services were also provided to support operational needs related to safety basis compliance. Due to WHC decentralization of safety and reengineering efforts in West Tank Farms, staffing and safety responsibilities have been transferred to the facilities. Under the new structure, safety personnel for TWRS are assigned directly to East Tank Farms, West Tank Farms, and a core Safety Group in TWRS Engineering. The Characterization Project Operations (CPO) safety organization will remain in tact as it currently exists. Personnel assigned to East Tank Farms, West Tank Farms, and CPO will perform facility-specific or project-specific duties and provide field implementation of programs. Those assigned to the core group will focus on activities having a TWRS-wide or programmatic focus. Hanford-wide activities will be the responsibility of the Safety Center of Expertise. In order to ensure an effective and consistent safety program for TWRS under the new organization program functions, goals, organizational structure, roles, responsibilities, and path forward must be clearly established. The purpose of the TWRS Safety Program Plan is to define the overall safety program, responsibilities, relationships, and communication linkages for safety personnel under the new structure. In addition, issues associated with reorganization transition are addressed, including training, project ownership, records management, and dissemination of equipment. For the purpose of this document ``TWRS Safety`` refers to all safety professionals and technicians (Industrial Safety, Industrial Hygiene, Fire Protection, and Nuclear Safety) within the TWRS organization, regardless of their location in the organization.

  16. Technical note: Erroneous data in {open_quotes}Nuclear Safety Guide, TID-7016, Revision 2,{close_quotes} NUREG/CR-0095, ORNL/NUREG/CSD-6 (1978)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Whitesides, G.E. [Oak Ridge National Lab., TN (United States)

    1991-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Nuclear Safety Guide, TID-7016 Rev 2 was issued as NUREG/CR-0095 in 1978. Table 2.8 of this report has been found to contain errors. The table was designed to indicate configurations with effective multipliction factors of 0.95. Because of an error in configuration descriptions, some of the configurations have multiplication factors as high as 1.09. A corrected table is available from the undersigned, and Revision 3 of the report is being prepared. Norman L. Pruvost, LANL HSE-6, P. O. Box 1663, M/S-F691, Los Alamos, NM 87545.

  17. Systems interaction results from the digraph matrix analysis of the Watts Bar Nuclear Power Plant high pressure safety injection systems. Volume 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sacks, I.J.; Ashmore, B.C.; Alesso, H.P.

    1983-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Spatial and functional coupling of nuclear power plant systems that lead to interdependencies are called Systems Interactions. At present, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is investigating ways of integrating a systems interactions study with existing Probabilistic Risk Assessment efforts. One approach is based on graph-theoretic methods utilizing matrix representations of logic diagrams called Digraph Matrix Analysis (DMA). The objective in this report is to demonstrate the capabilities of Digraph Matrix Analysis to model an accident sequence (including front line systems, support systems and human actions) as a continuous, well-integrated logic model in order to identify and evaluate functional systems interactions. The selected accident sequence, loss of high pressure safety injection during an S1 LOCA, was modeled and qualitative and quantitative comparisons were made to WASH 1400 aand other studies.

  18. Iron oxide aerosol experiments in steam-air atmospheres: NSPP (Nuclear Safety Pilot Plant) tests 501-505 and 511: Data record report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Adams, R.E.; Tobias, M.L.

    1987-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This data record report summarizes the results from five tests involving Fe/sub 2/O/sub 3/ test aerosol in a steam-air environment and one test in a dry air environment. This research sponsored by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission was conducted in the Nuclear Safety Pilot Plant at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. The purpose of this project is to provide a data base on the behavior of aerosols in containment under conditions assumed to occur in postulated LWR accident sequences; this data base will provide experimental validation of aerosol behavioral codes under development. In the report a brief description is given of each test together with the results in the form of tables and graphs. Included are data on aerosol mass concentration, aerosol fallout and plateout rates, total mass fallout and plateout, aerosol particle size, vessel atmosphere pressure, vessel atmosphere temperatures, temperature gradients near the vessel wall, and steam condensation rates on the vessel wall.

  19. Limestone concrete aerosol experiments in steam-air atmospheres: NSPP (Nuclear Safety Pilot Plant) Tests 521, 522, and 531: Data record report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tobias, M.L.; Adams, R.E.

    1987-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This data record report summarizes the results from two tests involving limestone concrete test aerosol in a steam-air environment and one test in a dry air environment. This research sponsored by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission was conducted in the Nuclear Safety Pilot Plant at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. The purpose of this project is to provide a data base on the behavior of aerosols in containment under conditions assumed to occur in postulated LWR accident sequences; this data base will provide experimental validation of aerosol behavioral codes under development. In the report a brief description is given of each test together with the results in the form of tables and graphs. Included are data on aerosol mass concentration, aerosol fallout and plateout rates, total mass fallout and plateout, aerosol particle size, vessel atmosphere pressure, vessel atmosphere temperatures, temperature gradients near the vessel wall, and steam condensation rates on the vessel wall.

  20. Facility Safety

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2013-06-21T23:59:59.000Z

    DOE-STD-1104 contains the Department's method and criteria for reviewing and approving nuclear facility's documented safety analysis (DSA). This review and approval formally document the basis for DOE, concluding that a facility can be operated safely in a manner that adequately protects workers, the public, and the environment. Therefore, it is appropriate to formally require implementation of the review methodology and criteria contained in DOE-STD-1104.

  1. 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 (OSTI)

    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

    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.

  2. Sandia National Laboratories: Nuclear Energy Publications

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    Publications Nuclear Energy Publications Nuclear Energy Safety Fact Sheets Assuring Safe Transportation of Nuclear and Hazardous Materials Human Reliability Assessment (HRA)...

  3. National Nuclear Security Administration Supplemental Listing...

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    National Nuclear Security Administration Supplemental Listing of Directives Affecting Nuclear Safety Requirements Last Updated 062014 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY National Nuclear...

  4. In-Situ Radiological Surveys to Address Nuclear Criticality Safety Requirements During Remediation Activities at the Shallow Land Disposal Area, Armstrong County, Pennsylvania - 12268

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Norris, Phillip; Mihalo, Mark; Eberlin, John; Lambert, Mike [Cabrera Services (United States); Matthews, Brian [Nuclear Safety Associates (United States)

    2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Cabrera Services Inc. (CABRERA) is the remedial contractor for the Shallow Land Disposal Area (SLDA) Site in Armstrong County Pennsylvania, a United States (US) Army Corps of Engineers - Buffalo District (USACE) contract. The remediation is being completed under the USACE's Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) which was established to identify, investigate, and clean up or control sites previously used by the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and its predecessor, the Manhattan Engineer District (MED). As part of the management of the FUSRAP, the USACE is overseeing investigation and remediation of radiological contamination at the SLDA Site in accordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), 42 US Code (USC), Section 9601 et. seq, as amended and, the National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Section 300.430(f) (2). The objective of this project is to clean up radioactive waste at SLDA. The radioactive waste contains special nuclear material (SNM), primarily U-235, in 10 burial trenches, Cabrera duties include processing, packaging and transporting the waste to an offsite disposal facility in accordance with the selected remedial alternative as defined in the Final Record of Decision (USACE, 2007). Of particular importance during the remediation is the need to address nuclear criticality safety (NCS) controls for the safe exhumation and management of waste containing fissile materials. The partnership between Cabrera Services, Inc. and Measutronics Corporation led to the development of a valuable survey tool and operating procedure that are essential components of the SLDA Criticality Safety and Material Control and Accountability programs. Using proven existing technologies in the design and manufacture of the Mobile Survey Cart, the continued deployment of the Cart will allow for an efficient and reliable methodology to allow for the safe exhumation of the Special Nuclear Material in existing SLDA trenches. (authors)

  5. A nuclear criticality safety assessment of the loss of moderation control in 2 1/2 and 10-ton cylinders containing enriched UF{sub 6}

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Newvahner, R.L. [Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., Piketon, OH (United States); Pryor, W.A. [PAI Corp., Oak Ridge, TN (United States)

    1991-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

    Moderation control for maintaining nuclear criticality safety in 2 {1/2}-ton, 10-ton, and 14-ton cylinders containing enriched uranium hexafluoride (UF{sub 6}) has been used safely within the nuclear industry for over thirty years, and is dependent on cylinder integrity and containment. This assessment evaluates the loss of moderation control by the breaching of containment and entry of water into the cylinders. The first objective of this study was to estimate the required amounts of water entering these large UF{sub 6} cylinders to react with, and to moderate the uranium compounds sufficiently to cause criticality. Hypothetical accident situations were modeled as a uranyl fluoride (UO{sub 2}F{sub 2}) slab above a UF{sub 6} hemicylinder, and a UO{sub 2}F{sub 2} sphere centered within a UF{sub 6} hemicylinder. These situations were investigated by computational analyses utilizing the KENO V.a Monte Carlo Computer Code. The results were used to estimate both the masses of water required for criticality, and the limiting masses of water that could be considered safe. The second objective of the assessment was to calculate the time available for emergency control actions before a criticality would occur, i.e., a {open_quotes}safetime{close_quotes}, for various sources of water and different size openings in a breached cylinder. In the situations considered, except the case for a fire hose, the safetime appears adequate for emergency control actions. The assessment shows that current practices for handling moderation controlled cylinders of low enriched UF{sub 6}, along with the continuation of established personnel training programs, ensure nuclear criticality safety for routine and emergency operations.

  6. Pantex Plant final safety analysis report, Zone 4 magazines. Staging or interim storage for nuclear weapons and components: Issue D

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This Safety Analysis Report (SAR) contains a detailed description and evaluation of the significant environmental, safety, and health (ES&H) issues associated with the operations of the Pantex Plant modified-Richmond and steel arch construction (SAC) magazines in Zone 4. It provides (1) an overall description of the magazines, the Pantex Plant, and its surroundings; (2) a systematic evaluations of the hazards that could occur as a result of the operations performed in these magazines; (3) descriptions and analyses of the adequacy of the measures taken to eliminate, control, or mitigate the identified hazards; and (4) analyses of potential accidents and their associated risks.

  7. Review guidelines for software languages for use in nuclear power plant safety systems: Final report. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hecht, M.; Decker, D.; Graff, S.; Green, W.; Lin, D.; Dinsmore, G.; Koch, S. [SoHaR, Inc., Beverly Hills, CA (United States)

    1997-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Guidelines for the programming and auditing of software written in high level languages for safety systems are presented. The guidelines are derived from a framework of issues significant to software safety which was gathered from relevant standards and research literature. Language-specific adaptations of these guidelines are provided for the following high level languages: Ada83 and Ada95; C and C++; International Electrochemical Commission (IEC) Standard 1131-3 Ladder Logic, Sequential Function Charts, Structured Text, and Function Block Diagrams; Pascal; and PL/M. Appendices to the report include a tabular summary of the guidelines and additional information on selected languages.

  8. Microsoft PowerPoint - Fire Safety workshop NQA-1 CGD 4 29 15...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Nuclear and Facility Safety Programs Workshop Fire Safety Track May 5th, 2015 Overview NQA 1 Commercial Grade Dedication Critical Characteristics Department of Energy Nuclear and...

  9. Risk-informed public safety policy for seismic events in the vicinity of a nuclear power plant

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Afolayan Jejeloye, Olubukola

    2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs) are potentially vulnerable to accidents, which can either be internally or externally initiated. External events include natural events like tornadoes, hurricanes, and earthquakes. The purpose ...

  10. Technical Basis for U. S. Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Policy, DOE Policy 420.1, 7/11

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    It is the policy of the Department of Energy (DOE) to design, construct, operate anddecommission its nuclear facilities in a manner that ensures adequate protection ofworkers, the public, and the...

  11. Safety evaluation report related to the operation of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 (Docket Nos. 50-390 and 50-391). Supplement No. 15

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Tam, P.S.

    1995-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report supplements the Safety Evaluation Report (SER), NUREG-0847 (June 1982), Supplement No. 1 (September 1982), Supplement No. 2 (January 1984), Supplement No. 3 (January 1985), Supplement No. 4 (March 1985), Supplement No. 5 (November 1990), Supplement No. 6 (April 1991), Supplement No. 7 (September 1991), Supplement No. 8 (January 1992), Supplement No. 9 (June 1992), Supplement No. 10 (October 1992), Supplement No. 11 (April 1993), Supplement No. 12 (October 1993), Supplement No. 13 (April 1994), and Supplement No. 14 (December 1994) issued by the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission with respect to the application filed by the Tennessee Valley Authority, as applicant and owner, for licenses to operate the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 (Docket Nos. 50-390 and 50-391). The facility is located in Rhea County, Tennessee, near the Watts Bar Dam on the Tennessee River. This supplement provides recent information regarding resolution of some of the outstanding and confirmatory items, and proposed license conditions identified in the SER.

  12. Contribution to the safety assessment of instrumentation and control software for nuclear power plants: Application to SPIN N4

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Soubies, B.; Henry, J.Y.; LeMeur, M.; Elsensohn, O.; Boulc`h, J.

    1994-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    1300 MWe pressurized water reactors (PWRs), like the 1400 MWe reactors, operate with microprocessor-based safety systems. This is particularly the case for the Digital Integrated Protection System (SPIN), which trips the reactor in an emergency and sets in action the safeguard functions. The software used in these systems must therefore be highly dependable in the execution of their functions.

  13. Worker Safety and Health Program for DOE (Including the National Nuclear Security Administration) Federal and Contractor Employees

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2011-10-20T23:59:59.000Z

    This document was developed to assist the Department of Energy (DOE or the Department) Federal and contractor employees in effectively developing, managing, and implementing a worker safety and health program. Cancels DOE G 440.1-1A and DOE G 440.1-8. Adm Chg 1, dated 3-22-13.

  14. Worker Safety and Health Program for DOE (Including the National Nuclear Security Administration) Federal and Contractor Employees

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2011-10-20T23:59:59.000Z

    This document was developed to assist the Department of Energy (DOE or the Department) Federal and contractor employees in effectively developing, managing, and implementing a worker safety and health program. Cancels DOE G 440.1-1A and DOE G 440.1-8. Adm Chg 1, dated 3-22-13, cancels DOE G 440.1-1B.

  15. Thermal reactor safety

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1980-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Information is presented concerning new trends in licensing; seismic considerations and system structural behavior; TMI-2 risk assessment and thermal hydraulics; statistical assessment of potential accidents and verification of computational methods; issues with respect to improved safety; human factors in nuclear power plant operation; diagnostics and activities in support of recovery; LOCA transient analysis; unresolved safety issues and other safety considerations; and fission product transport.

  16. Safety of Accelerator Facilities

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2004-07-23T23:59:59.000Z

    To establish accelerator-specific safety requirements which, when supplemented by other applicable safety and health requirements, will serve to prevent injuries and illnesses associated with Department of Energy (DOE) or National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) accelerator operations. Cancels DOE O 420.2A. Certified 5-13-08. Canceled by DOE O 420.2C.

  17. Safety of Accelerator Facilities

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2001-01-08T23:59:59.000Z

    To establish accelerator-specific safety requirements which, when supplemented by other applicable safety and health requirements, will serve to prevent injuries and illnesses associated with Department of Energy (DOE) or National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) accelerator operations. Cancels DOE O 420.2. Canceled by DOE O 420.2B.

  18. Delivering safety

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Baldwin, N.D.; Spooner, K.G.; Walkden, P. [British Nuclear Group Ltd, Daresbury, Warrington (United Kingdom)

    2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In the United Kingdom there have been significant recent changes to the management of civil nuclear liabilities. With the formation in April 2005 of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), ownership of the civil nuclear licensed sites in the UK, including the Magnox Reactor Stations, passed to this new organisation. The NDAs mission is to seek acceleration of the nuclear clean up programme and deliver increased value for money and, consequently, are driving their contractors to seek more innovative ways of performing work. British Nuclear Group manages the UK Magnox stations under contract to the NDA. This paper summarises the approach being taken within its Reactor Sites business to work with suppliers to enhance working arrangements at sites, improve the delivery of decommissioning programmes and deliver improvements in safety and environmental performance. The UK Magnox stations are 1. generation gas-graphite reactors, constructed in the 1950's and 1960's. Two stations are currently still operating, three are shut-down undergoing defueling and the other five are being decommissioned. Despite the distractions of industry restructuring, an uncompromising policy of demanding improved performance in conjunction with improved safety and environmental standards has been adopted. Over the past 5 years, this policy has resulted in step-changes in performance at Reactor Sites, with increased electrical output and accelerated defueling and decommissioning. The improvements in performance have been mirrored by improvements in safety (DACR of 0 at 5 sites); environmental standards (reductions in energy and water consumption, increased waste recycling) and the overall health of the workforce (20% reduction in sickness absence). These achievements have, in turn, been recognised by external bodies, resulting in several awards, including: the world's first ISRS and IERS level 10 awards (Sizewell, 2006), the NUMEX plant maintenance award (Bradwell, 2006), numerous RoSPA awards at site and sector level and nomination, at Company level, for the RoSPA George Earle trophy for outstanding performance in Health and Safety (Reactor Sites, 2006). After 'setting the scene' and describing the challenges that the company has had to respond to, the paper explains how these improvements have been delivered. Specifically it explains the process that has been followed and the parts played by sites and suppliers to deliver improved performance. With the experience of already having transitioned several Magnox stations from operations to defueling and then to decommissioning, the paper describes the valuable experience that has been gained in achieving an optimum change process and maintaining momentum. (authors)

  19. A REVIEW OF LIGHT-WATER REACTOR SAFETY STUDIES. VOLUME 3 OF THE FINAL REPORT ON HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Nero, A.V.

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    for sabotage of nuclear plants or the potential forAccidents in Large Nuclear Plants" (AEC Report, WASH-/40),YEAR FROM POTENTIAL NUCLEAR PLANT ACCIDENTS(a) Consequence

  20. RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLANNING FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS IN CALIFORNIA. VOLUME 4 OF THE FINAL REPORT ON HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Yen, W.W.S.

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    EMERGENCY PLANNING FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS: THE LICENSINGEmergency Planning for Nuclear Power Plants Determination ofproposed nuclear power plants . . . . . . . . . • . . . .

  1. Key Practical Issues in Strengthening Safety Culture, INSAG-15

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Key Pratical Issues in Strengthening Safety Culture, INSAG-15. A report by the International Nuclear Safety Advisory Gorup, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, 2002.

  2. achieving industrial safety: Topics by E-print Network

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    Safety culture refers to the attitudes, behaviors, and conditions that affect safety performance and often arises in discussions following incidents at nuclear power plants. As it...

  3. Request to Cancel DOE M 452.2-2 Admin Chg 1, Nuclear Explosive Safety Evaluation Process

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2014-04-21T23:59:59.000Z

    NNSA has completed a top down review of four directives that address nuclear explosives operations and is developing a revision to clarify the purpose of conducting NES evaluations, the nature and categorization of findings, and timing of reviews for ongoing operations.

  4. Nuclear reactor engineering

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Glasstone, S.; Sesonske, A.

    1981-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Chapters are presented concerning energy from nuclear fission; nuclear reactions and radiations; diffusion and slowing-down of neutrons; principles of reactor analysis; nuclear reactor kinetics and control; energy removal; non-fuel reactor materials; the reactor fuel system; radiation protection and environmental effects; nuclear reactor shielding; nuclear reactor safety; and power reactor systems.

  5. Proceedings of the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission review group conference on advanced instrumentation research for reactor safety held at Oak Ridge National Laboratory on July 29-31, 1980. Conference proceedings

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hon, A.L.; Basdekas, D.; Hsu, Y.Y.; Kondic, N.; Van Houten, R.

    1980-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The report compiles the technical presentations during the Advanced Instrumentation Research for the Reactor Safety Review Group Meeting held in July 1980. The three-day meeting covered the Power Plant Instrumentation, Two-Phase Flow Instrumentation, Fuel Behavior Research Instrumentation and Advanced Reactor Instrumentation research programs sponsored by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Division of Reactor Safety Research. In addition, two invited papers from the nuclear industry were also presented. The conference is held each year to review the up-to-date instrumentation research results by the contractors. It also provides the opportunity for the researchers and experts to exchange experience on advanced instrumentation development. The report serves as a vehicle to disseminate the state-of-the-art information to the research community and the nuclear industry.

  6. Summary and bibliography of safety-related events at boiling-water nuclear power plants as reported in 1980

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McCormack, K.E.; Gallaher, R.B.

    1982-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document presents a bibliography that contains 100-word abstracts of event reports submitted to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission concerning operational events that occurred at boiling-water-reactor nuclear power plants in 1980. The 1547 abstracts included on microfiche in this bibliography describe incidents, failures, and design or construction deficiencies that were experienced at the facilities. These abstracts are arranged alphabetically by reactor name and then chronologically for each reactor. Full-size keyword and permuted-title indexes to facilitate location of individual abstracts are provided following the text. Tables that summarize the information contained in the bibliography are also provided. The information in the tables includes a listing of the equipment items involved in the reported events and the associated number of reports for each item. Similar information is given for the various kinds of instrumentation and systems, causes of failures, deficiencies noted, and the time of occurrence (i.e., during refueling, operation, testing, or construction).

  7. Technical Safety Requirements for the B695 Segment of the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Larson, H L

    2007-09-07T23:59:59.000Z

    This document contains Technical Safety Requirements (TSRs) for the Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (RHWM) Division's B695 Segment of the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The TSRs constitute requirements regarding the safe operation of the B695 Segment of the DWTF. The TSRs are derived from the Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) for the B695 Segment of the DWTF (LLNL 2004). The analysis presented there determined that the B695 Segment of the DWTF is a low-chemical hazard, Hazard Category 3, nonreactor nuclear facility. The TSRs consist primarily of inventory limits as well as controls to preserve the underlying assumptions in the hazard analyses. Furthermore, appropriate commitments to safety programs are presented in the administrative controls section of the TSRs. The B695 Segment of the DWTF (B695 and the west portion of B696) is a waste treatment and storage facility located in the northeast quadrant of the LLNL main site. The approximate area and boundary of the B695 Segment of the DWTF are shown in the B695 Segment of the DWTF DSA. Activities typically conducted in the B695 Segment of the DWTF include container storage, lab-packing, repacking, overpacking, bulking, sampling, waste transfer, and waste treatment. B695 is used to store and treat radioactive, mixed, and hazardous waste, and it also contains equipment used in conjunction with waste processing operations to treat various liquid and solid wastes. The portion of the building called Building 696 Solid Waste Processing Area (SWPA), also referred to as B696S in this report, is used primarily to manage solid radioactive waste. Operations specific to the SWPA include sorting and segregating low-level waste (LLW) and transuranic (TRU) waste, lab-packing, sampling, and crushing empty drums that previously contained LLW. A permit modification for B696S was submitted to DTSC in January 2004 to store and treat hazardous and mixed waste. Upon approval of the permit modification, B696S rooms 1007, 1008, and 1009 will be able to store hazardous and mixed waste for up to 1 year. Furthermore, an additional drum crusher and a Waste Packaging Unit will be permitted to treat hazardous and mixed waste. RHWM generally processes LLW with no, or extremely low, concentrations of transuranics (i.e., much less than 100 nCi/g). Wastes processed often contain only depleted uranium and beta- and gamma-emitting nuclides, e.g., {sup 90}Sr, {sup 137}Cs, {sup 3}H. Chapter 5 of the DSA documents the derivation of TSRs and develops the operational limits that protect the safety envelope defined for this facility. The DSA is applicable to the handling of radioactive waste stored and treated in the B695 Segment of the DWTF. Section 5 of the TSR, Administrative Controls, contains those Administrative Controls necessary to ensure safe operation of the B695 Segment of the DWTF. A basis explanation follows each of the requirements described in Section 5.5, Specific Administrative Controls. The basis explanation does not constitute an additional requirement, but is intended as an expansion of the logic and reasoning behind development of the requirement. Programmatic Administrative Controls are addressed in Section 5.6.

  8. RESEARCH SAFETY RADIATION SAFETY

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    and Communications Manager (951) 827-6303 janette.ducut@ucr.edu Beiwei Tu, MS, CIH, CSP Safety and Industrial Hygiene

  9. Theory and Implementation of Nuclear Safety System Codes - Part II: System Code Closure Relations, Validation, and Limitations

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Glenn A Roth; Fatih Aydogan

    2014-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This is Part II of two articles describing the details of thermal-hydraulic sys- tem codes. In this second part of the article series, the system code closure relationships (used to model thermal and mechanical non-equilibrium and the coupling of the phases) for the governing equations are discussed and evaluated. These include several thermal and hydraulic models, such as heat transfer coefficients for various flow regimes, two phase pressure correlations, two phase friction correlations, drag coefficients and interfacial models be- tween the fields. These models are often developed from experimental data. The experiment conditions should be understood to evaluate the efficacy of the closure models. Code verification and validation, including Separate Effects Tests (SETs) and Integral effects tests (IETs) is also assessed. It can be shown from the assessments that the test cases cover a significant section of the system code capabilities, but some of the more advanced reactor designs will push the limits of validation for the codes. Lastly, the limitations of the codes are discussed by considering next generation power plants, such as Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), analyz- ing not only existing nuclear power plants, but also next generation nuclear power plants. The nuclear industry is developing new, innovative reactor designs, such as Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), High-Temperature Gas-cooled Reactors (HTGRs) and others. Sub-types of these reactor designs utilize pebbles, prismatic graphite moderators, helical steam generators, in- novative fuel types, and many other design features that may not be fully analyzed by current system codes. This second part completes the series on the comparison and evaluation of the selected reactor system codes by discussing the closure relations, val- idation and limitations. These two articles indicate areas where the models can be improved to adequately address issues with new reactor design and development.

  10. October 24, 2003, Criteria and Guidelines For the Assessment of Safety System Software and Firmware at Defense Nuclear Facilities

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels DataDepartment of Energy Your Density Isn'tOrigin of Contamination in ManyDepartment of OrderSUBCOMMITTEE of the NUCLEAR ENERGY4.1

  11. RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLANNING FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS IN CALIFORNIA. VOLUME 4 OF THE FINAL REPORT ON HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Yen, W.W.S.

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    DENSITIES AROUND CALIFORNIA NUCLEAR POWER PLANT. le Iil _. .AROUND CALIFORNIA NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS Miles San OnofreIN CALIFORNIA The California Nuclear Power Plant Emergency

  12. RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLANNING FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS IN CALIFORNIA. VOLUME 4 OF THE FINAL REPORT ON HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Yen, W.W.S.

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    from the Rancho Seco nuclear plant was simulated, A total ofdistributions around the nuclear plant sites based on thegrowth surrounding nuclear plants after the issuance of the

  13. CONTROL OF POPULATION DENSITIES SURROUNDING NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS. VOLUME 5 OF THE FINAL REPORT ON HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Nero, jA.V.

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    surrounding a nuclear plant, and they are stronglylocation for a nuclear plant, but it is the measures thatand consequences of nuclear plant accidents and would match

  14. RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLANNING FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS IN CALIFORNIA. VOLUME 4 OF THE FINAL REPORT ON HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Yen, W.W.S.

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    S. Commercial Nuclear Power Plants. WASH-1400. October 1975.Content of for Nuclear Power Plants. Regulatory Guide 1.101.PLANNING FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS: THE LICENSING PROCESS

  15. The (safety-related) heat exchangers aging management guideline for commercial nuclear power plants, and developments since 1994

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Clauss, J.M.

    1998-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The US Department of Energy (DOE), in cooperation with the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and US nuclear power plant utilities, is preparing a series of aging management guidelines (AMGs) for commodity types of components (e.g., heat exchangers, electrical cable and terminations, pumps). Commodities are included in this series based on their importance to continued nuclear plant operation and license renewal. The AMGs contain a detailed summary of operating history, stressors, aging mechanisms, and various types of maintenance and surveillance practices that can be combined to create an effective aging management program. Each AMG is intended for use by the systems engineers and plant maintenance staff (i.e., an AMG is intended to be a hands-on technical document rather than a licensing document). The heat exchangers AMG, published in June 1994, includes the following information of interest to nondestructive examination (NDE) personnel: aging mechanisms determined to be non-significant for all applications; aging mechanisms determined to be significant for some applications; effective conventional programs for managing aging; and effective unconventional programs for managing aging. Since the AMG on heat exchangers was published four years ago, a brief review has been conducted to identify emerging regulatory issues, if any. The results of this review and lessons learned from the collective set of AMGs are presented.

  16. Nuclear Power

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Vilhena and Bardo E.J. Bodmann Carbon-#1;? in Terrestrial and Aquatic Environment of Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant: Sources of Production, Releases and Dose Estimates #3;?? Jonas Mazeika Impact of radionuclide discharges from Temel?n Nuclear Power... (chapter 5), ? Instrumentation and control (chapter 6), ? Diagnostics (chapter 7), ? Safety evaluation methods (chapters 6, 8, 9 and 10), ? Environment and nuclear power plants (chapters 11 - 15), ? Human factors (chapter 16), ? Software development...

  17. CRAD, Facility Safety- Technical Safety Requirements

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    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 Technical Safety Requirments (TSA).

  18. China's Nuclear Industry After Fukushima

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    YUAN, Jingdong

    2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Brief 2013-9 January 2013 China’s Nuclear Industry Aftera significant impact on the future of China’s nuclear power.the importance of safety as China builds more nuclear power

  19. Cold Vacuum Drying Facility hazard analysis report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Krahn, D.E.

    1998-02-23T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the methodology used in conducting the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility (CVDF) hazard analysis to support the CVDF phase 2 safety analysis report (SAR), and documents the results. The hazard analysis was performed in accordance with DOE-STD-3009-94, Preparation Guide for US Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Safety Analysis Reports, and implements the requirements of US Department of Energy (DOE) Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports.

  20. K Basin Hazard Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    PECH, S.H.

    2000-08-23T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the methodology used in conducting the K Basins Hazard Analysis, which provides the foundation for the K Basins Final Safety Analysis Report. This hazard analysis was performed in accordance with guidance provided by DOE-STD-3009-94, Preparation Guide for U. S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Safety Analysis Reports and implements the requirements of DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Report.

  1. K Basins Hazard Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    WEBB, R.H.

    1999-12-29T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the methodology used in conducting the K Basins Hazard Analysis, which provides the foundation for the K Basins Safety Analysis Report (HNF-SD-WM-SAR-062, Rev.4). This hazard analysis was performed in accordance with guidance provided by DOE-STD-3009-94, Preparation Guide for U. S. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Safety Analysis Reports and implements the requirements of DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Report.

  2. Canister storage building hazard analysis report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Krahn, D.E.; Garvin, L.J.

    1997-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the methodology used in conducting the Canister Storage Building (CSB) hazard analysis to support the final CSB safety analysis report (SAR) and documents the results. The hazard analysis was performed in accordance with DOE-STD-3009-94, Preparation Guide for US Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Safety Analysis Report, and implements the requirements of DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Report.

  3. Cold Vacuum Drying (CVD) Facility Hazards Analysis Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    CROWE, R.D.

    2000-08-07T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes the methodology used in conducting the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility (CVDF) Hazard Analysis to support the CVDF Final Safety Analysis Report and documents the results. The hazard analysis was performed in accordance with DOE-STD-3009-94, ''Preparation Guide for US. Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Safety Analysis Reports,'' and implements the requirements of DOE Order 5480.23, ''Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports.''

  4. Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety Program - DOE Directives...

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    1E, Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety Program by Angela Chambers Functional areas: Defense Nuclear Facility Safety and Health Requirement, Defense Programs, Nuclear Weapons...

  5. Hanford safety analysis and risk assessment handbook (SARAH)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    GARVIN, L.J.

    2003-01-20T23:59:59.000Z

    The purpose of the Hanford Safety Analysis and Risk Assessment Handbook (SARAH) is to support the development of safety basis documentation for Hazard Category 1,2, and 3 U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear facilities. SARAH describes currently acceptable methodology for development of a Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) and derivation of technical safety requirements (TSR) based on 10 CFR 830, ''Nuclear Safety Management,'' Subpart B, ''Safety Basis Requirements,'' and provides data to ensure consistency in approach.

  6. A REVIEW OF LIGHT-WATER REACTOR SAFETY STUDIES. VOLUME 3 OF THE FINAL REPORT ON HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Nero, A.V.

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    IMPACTS OF FOSSIL-FUEL NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA Energy and Environment

  7. Criticality Safety Evaluation of a LLNL Training Assembly for Criticality Safety (TACS)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Heinrichs, D P

    2006-06-26T23:59:59.000Z

    Hands-on experimental training in the physical behavior of multiplying systems is one of ten key areas of training required for practitioners to become qualified in the discipline of criticality safety as identified in DOE-STD-1135-99, ''Guidance for Nuclear Criticality Safety Engineer Training and Qualification''. This document is a criticality safety evaluation of the training activities (or operations) associated with HS-3200, ''Laboratory Class for Criticality Safety''. These activities utilize the Training Assembly for Criticality Safety (TACS). The original intent of HS-3200 was to provide LLNL fissile material handlers with a practical hands-on experience as a supplement to the academic training they receive biennially in HS-3100, ''Fundamentals of Criticality Safety'', as required by ANSI/ANS-8.20-1991, ''Nuclear Criticality Safety Training''. HS-3200 is to be enhanced to also address the training needs of nuclear criticality safety professionals under the auspices of the NNSA Nuclear Criticality Safety Program.

  8. Exploration of High-dimensional Scalar Function for Nuclear Reactor Safety Analysis and Visualization: A User's Guide to TopoXG*

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dan Maljovec; Bei Wang; Valerio Pascucci; Peer-Timo Bremer; Michael Pernice; Diego Mandelli

    2012-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Large-scale simulation datasets can be modeled as high-dimensional scalar functions defined over a discrete sample of the domain. The goals of our proposed research are two-fold. First, we would like to provide structural analysis of a function at multiple scales and provide insight into the relationship between the input parameters and the output. Second, we enable exploratory analysis for users, where we help the users to differentiate features from noise through multi-scale analysis on an interactive platform, based on domain knowledge and data characterization. TopoXG is a software package that is designed to address these goals. The unique contribution of TopoXG lies in exploiting the topological and geometric properties of the domain, building statistical models based on its topological segmentations and providing interactive visual interfaces to facilitate such explorations. We provide a user’s guide to TopoXG, by highlighting its analysis and visualization capabilities, and giving several use cases involving datasets from nuclear reactor safety simulations.

  9. Enforcement Guidance Supplement 99-01, Enforcement of 10 CFR...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    5, 1996). 10 CFR 830.7 states that the Rule shall apply in a graded approach to all DOE reactor and nonreactor nuclear facilities. Nonreactor nuclear facilities were defined to...

  10. Seismic Safety Guide

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eagling, D.G. (ed.)

    1983-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This guide provides managers with practical guidelines for administering a comprehensive earthquake safety program. The Guide is comprehensive with respect to earthquakes in that it covers the most important aspects of natural hazards, site planning, evaluation and rehabilitation of existing buildings, design of new facilities, operational safety, emergency planning, special considerations related to shielding blocks, non-structural elements, lifelines, fire protection and emergency facilities. Management of risk and liabilities is also covered. Nuclear facilities per se are not dealt with specifically. The principles covered also apply generally to nuclear facilities but the design and construction of such structures are subject to special regulations and legal controls.

  11. Use of InSpector{sup TM} 1 1000 Instrument with LaBr{sub 3} for Nuclear Criticality Safety (NCS) Applications at the Westinghouse Hematite Decommissioning Project (HDP) - 13132

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Pritchard, Megan [Nuclear Safety Associates, P.O. Box 471488, Charlotte, NC 28247 (United States)] [Nuclear Safety Associates, P.O. Box 471488, Charlotte, NC 28247 (United States); Guido, Joe [System One Services, 12 Federal St. Ste. 205, Pittsburgh, PA 15212 (United States)] [System One Services, 12 Federal St. Ste. 205, Pittsburgh, PA 15212 (United States)

    2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Westinghouse Hematite Decommissioning Project (HDP) is a former nuclear fuel cycle facility that is currently undergoing decommissioning. One aspect of the decommissioning scope is remediation of buried nuclear waste in unlined burial pits. The current Nuclear Criticality Safety program relies on application of criticality controls based on radiological setpoints from a 2 x 2 Sodium Iodide (NaI) detector. Because of the nature of the material buried (Low Enriched Uranium (LEU), depleted uranium, thorium, and radium) and the stringent threshold for application of criticality controls based on waste management (0.1 g {sup 235}U/L), a better method for {sup 235}U identification and quantification has been developed. This paper outlines the early stages of a quick, in-field nuclear material assay and {sup 235}U mass estimation process currently being deployed at HDP. Nuclear material initially classified such that NCS controls are necessary can be demonstrated not to require such controls and dispositioned as desired by project operations. Using Monte Carlo techniques and a high resolution Lanthanum Bromide (LaBr) detector with portable Multi-Channel Analyzer (MCA), a bounding {sup 235}U mass is assigned to basic geometries of nuclear material as it is excavated. The deployment of these methods and techniques has saved large amounts of time and money in the nuclear material remediation process. (authors)

  12. Nuclear Reaction Data Centers

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    McLane, V.; Nordborg, C.; Lemmel, H.D.; Manokhin, V.N.

    1988-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The cooperating Nuclear Reaction Data Centers are involved in the compilation and exchange of nuclear reaction data for incident neutrons, charged particles and photons. Individual centers may also have services in other areas, e.g., evaluated data, nuclear structure and decay data, reactor physics, nuclear safety; some of this information may also be exchanged between interested centers. 20 refs., 1 tab.

  13. National Nuclear Security Administration Supplemental Listing...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Updated 91511 National Nuclear Security Administration Supplemental Listing of Directives Affecting Nuclear Safety Requirements Last Updated 091511 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY...

  14. On the quantification of safety margins

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Pagani, Lorenzo P

    2004-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The nuclear industry has relied on the concept of Defense in Depth (DID) and traditional safety margins to deal with the uncertainties associated with the design and operation of nuclear facilities. These concepts were ...

  15. Mars mission safety

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Buden, D. (EG G Idaho, Idaho Falls (USA))

    1989-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Precautions that need to be taken to assure safety on a manned Mars mission with nuclear thermal propulsion are briefly considered. What has been learned from the 1955 SNAP-10A operation of a nuclear reactor in space and from the Rover/NERVA project is reviewed. The ways that radiation hazards can be dealt with at various stages of a Mars mission are examined.

  16. A REVIEW OF LIGHT-WATER REACTOR SAFETY STUDIES. VOLUME 3 OF THE FINAL REPORT ON HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Nero, A.V.

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Nuclear Power Reactors PROTECTION AGAINST SABOTAGE Protection Against Industrial Sabotage I1C-4 Decominarion and Decommissioning

  17. Design of Complex Systems to Achieve Passive Safety: Natural Circulation Cooling of Liquid Salt Pebble Bed Reactors

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Scarlat, Raluca Olga

    2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    decommissioning. For example, methodologies that are common practice for the safety analysis of nuclear

  18. CONTROL OF POPULATION DENSITIES SURROUNDING NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS. VOLUME 5 OF THE FINAL REPORT ON HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Nero, jA.V.

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Related Standards for Nuclear Power Plants," by A.V. NeroResponse Planning for Nuclear Power Plants in California,"Densities Surrounding Nuclear Power Plants," by A.V. Nero,

  19. CONTROL OF POPULATION DENSITIES SURROUNDING NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS. VOLUME 5 OF THE FINAL REPORT ON HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Nero, jA.V.

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Standards for Nuclear Power Plants," by A.V. Nero and Y.C.Planning for Nuclear Power Plants in California," by W.W.S.Surrounding Nuclear Power Plants," by A.V. Nero, C.H.

  20. Hanford Generic Interim Safety Basis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lavender, J.C.

    1994-09-09T23:59:59.000Z

    The purpose of this document is to identify WHC programs and requirements that are an integral part of the authorization basis for nuclear facilities that are generic to all WHC-managed facilities. The purpose of these programs is to implement the DOE Orders, as WHC becomes contractually obligated to implement them. The Hanford Generic ISB focuses on the institutional controls and safety requirements identified in DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports.

  1. Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation Waste Integrated Performance and Safety Codes (NEAMS Waste IPSC) verification and validation plan. version 1.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bartlett, Roscoe Ainsworth; Arguello, Jose Guadalupe, Jr.; Urbina, Angel; Bouchard, Julie F.; Edwards, Harold Carter; Freeze, Geoffrey A.; Knupp, Patrick Michael; Wang, Yifeng; Schultz, Peter Andrew; Howard, Robert (Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN); McCornack, Marjorie Turner

    2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The objective of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation Waste Integrated Performance and Safety Codes (NEAMS Waste IPSC) is to provide an integrated suite of computational modeling and simulation (M&S) capabilities to quantitatively assess the long-term performance of waste forms in the engineered and geologic environments of a radioactive-waste storage facility or disposal repository. To meet this objective, NEAMS Waste IPSC M&S capabilities will be applied to challenging spatial domains, temporal domains, multiphysics couplings, and multiscale couplings. A strategic verification and validation (V&V) goal is to establish evidence-based metrics for the level of confidence in M&S codes and capabilities. Because it is economically impractical to apply the maximum V&V rigor to each and every M&S capability, M&S capabilities will be ranked for their impact on the performance assessments of various components of the repository systems. Those M&S capabilities with greater impact will require a greater level of confidence and a correspondingly greater investment in V&V. This report includes five major components: (1) a background summary of the NEAMS Waste IPSC to emphasize M&S challenges; (2) the conceptual foundation for verification, validation, and confidence assessment of NEAMS Waste IPSC M&S capabilities; (3) specifications for the planned verification, validation, and confidence-assessment practices; (4) specifications for the planned evidence information management system; and (5) a path forward for the incremental implementation of this V&V plan.

  2. Packaging and Transportation Safety

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2003-04-04T23:59:59.000Z

    To establish safety requirements for the proper packaging and transportation of Department of Energy (DOE)/National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) offsite shipments and onsite transfers of hazardous materials and for modal transport. Cancels DOE O 460.1A. Canceled by DOE O 460.1C.

  3. Reactor safety method

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Vachon, Lawrence J. (Clairton, PA)

    1980-03-11T23:59:59.000Z

    This invention relates to safety means for preventing a gas cooled nuclear reactor from attaining criticality prior to start up in the event the reactor core is immersed in hydrogenous liquid. This is accomplished by coating the inside surface of the reactor coolant channels with a neutral absorbing material that will vaporize at the reactor's operating temperature.

  4. Implementation Guide for Use in Developing Technical Safety Requirements

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2010-11-03T23:59:59.000Z

    This Guide provides elaboration for the content of TSRs. Section 10 CFR 830.205 of the Nuclear Safety Management rule, requires Department of Energy (DOE) contractors responsible for category 1, 2, and 3 DOE nuclear facilities to develop Technical Safety Requirements (TSRs). These TSRs identify the limitations to each DOE owned, contractor operated nuclear facility based on the documented safety analysis (DSA) and any additional safety requirements established for the facility. Cancels DOE G 423.1-1.

  5. Implementation Guide for Use in Developing Technical Safety Requirements

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2010-11-03T23:59:59.000Z

    This Guide provides elaboration for the content of TSRs. Section 10 CFR 830.205 of the Nuclear Safety Management rule, requires Department of Energy (DOE) contractors responsible for category 1, 2, and 3 DOE nuclear facilities to develop Technical Safety Requirements (TSRs). These TSRs identify the limitations to each DOE owned, contractor operated nuclear facility based on the documented safety analysis (DSA) and any additional safety requirements established for the facility. Does not cancel other directives.

  6. DOE's Safety Bulletin No. 2011-01, Events Beyond Design Safety...

    Broader source: Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    and mitigation of events that may fall outside those analyzed in the documented safety analysis. BACKGROUND On March 11, 2011, the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station...

  7. RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLANNING FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS IN CALIFORNIA. VOLUME 4 OF THE FINAL REPORT ON HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Yen, W.W.S.

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR. GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA Energy and Environment

  8. CONTROL OF POPULATION DENSITIES SURROUNDING NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS. VOLUME 5 OF THE FINAL REPORT ON HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Nero, jA.V.

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA Energy and Environment

  9. FACILITY WORKER TECHNICAL BASIS DOCUMENT

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    SHULTZ, M.V.

    2005-03-31T23:59:59.000Z

    This technical basis document was developed to support RPP-13033, ''Tank Farms Documented Safety Analysis (DSA). It describes the criteria and methodology for allocating controls to hazardous conditions with significant facility worker (FW) consequence and presents the results of the allocation. The criteria and methodology for identifying controls that address FW safety are in accordance with DOE-STD-3009-94, ''Preparation Guide for US Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analyses''.

  10. Chemical Safety Vulnerability Working Group Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report marks the culmination of a 4-month review conducted to identify chemical safety vulnerabilities existing at DOE facilities. This review is an integral part of DOE's efforts to raise its commitment to chemical safety to the same level as that for nuclear safety.

  11. Nuclear Safety | Department of Energy

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level:Energy: Grid Integration Redefining What's Possible for Renewable Energy:Nanowire3627 Federal Register /76Safeguards and

  12. Defense Nuclear Facility Safety Board

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645U.S. DOEThe Bonneville Power Administration wouldDECOMPOSITIONPortal Decision Support forDeep Insights from8, 2014

  13. Louisiana Nuclear Energy and Radiation Control Law (Louisiana)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality is responsible for the regulation of nuclear energy safety, permitting and radiation safety and control in Louisiana. The Department operates...

  14. Department of Energy Cites Savannah River Nuclear Solutions for...

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) Indexed Site

    for Worker Safety and Health Violations Department of Energy Cites Savannah River Nuclear Solutions for Worker Safety and Health Violations October 8, 2010 - 12:00am...

  15. B PLANT DOCUMENTED SAFETY ANALYSIS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    DODD, E.N.; KERR, N.R.

    2003-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This document provides the documented safety analysis (DSA) and Central Plateau Remediation Project (CP) requirements that apply to surveillance and maintenance (S&M) activities at the 221-B Canyon Building and ancillary support structures (B Plant). The document replaces BHI-010582, Documented Safety Analysis for the B-Plant Facility. The B Plant is non-operational, deactivated and undergoing long term S&M prior to decontamination and decommissioning (D&D). This DSA is compliant with 10 CFR 830, Nuclear Safety Management, Subpart B, ''Safety Basis Requirements.'' The DSA was developed in accordance with U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) standard DOE-STD-1120-98, Integration of Environment, Safety, and Health into Facility Disposition Activities (DOE 1998) per Table 2 of 10 CFR 830 Appendix A, DOE Richland Operation Office (RL) direction (02-ABD-0053, Fluor Hanford Nuclear Safety Basis Strategy and Criteria) for facilities in long term S&M, and RL Direction (02-ABD-0091, ''FHI Nuclear Safety Expectations for Nuclear Facilities in Surveillance and Maintenance''). A crosswalk was prepared to identify potential inconsistencies between the previous B Plant safety analysis and DOE-STD-1120-98 guidance. In general, the safety analysis met the criteria of DOE-STD-1120-98. Some format and content changes have been made, including incorporating recent facility modifications and updating the evaluation guidelines and control selection criteria in accordance with RL direction (02-ABD-0053). The facility fire hazard analysis (FHA) and Technical Safety Requirements (TSR) are appended to this DSA as an aid to the users, to minimize editorial redundancy, and to provide an efficient basis for update.

  16. Verifying Therapy Safety Interlock System with SPIN Motlatsi Seotsanyana1

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Geldenhuys, Jaco

    , air traffic and space vehicle control systems, nuclear power plant safety control systems, medical as banking systems) to embedded environments (such as nuclear power plant safety control systemsVerifying Therapy Safety Interlock System with SPIN Motlatsi Seotsanyana1 , Jaco Geldenhuys2 1

  17. RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLANNING FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS IN CALIFORNIA. VOLUME 4 OF THE FINAL REPORT ON HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Yen, W.W.S.

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Vol. 16, No.1, January- Power-Plant Sites. 1i February 1975,~ ties Surrounding Nuclear Power Plants. LBlr5921, LawrenceS. Commercial Nuclear Power Plants. WASH-1400. October 1975.

  18. ANS 2006 WINTER MEETING & Nuclear Technology Expo

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Krings, Axel W.

    Development Workshop: Digital Instrumentation Upgrades 52 DOE Nuclear Criticality Safety Program 53ANS 2006 WINTER MEETING & Nuclear Technology Expo "Ensuringthe (TOFE) 5th International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Plant Instrumentation, Controls, and Human Machine

  19. Environmental Challenges of Climate-Nuclear Fusion: A Case Study of India

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Badrinarayan, Deepa

    2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    safety risks, but key nuclear agreements pay lip service tohas concluded bilateral nuclear agreements or committed tothe U.S. -India Civil Nuclear Agreement, 125 failed to sway

  20. Recent developments in Topaz II reactor safety assessments

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Marshall, A.C.

    1993-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    In December 1991, the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization (SDIO) decided to investigate the possibility of a US launch of a Russian Topaz II space nuclear power system. The primary mission goal would be to demonstrate and evaluate Nuclear Electric Propulsion technology to establish a capability for future civilian and military missions. A preliminary nuclear safety assessment, involving selected safety analyses, was initiated to determine whether or not a space mission could be conducted safely and within budget constraints. This paper describes the preliminary safety assessment results and the nuclear safety program now being established for the Nuclear Electric Propulsion Space Test Program (NEPSTP).

  1. Adventures in scientific nuclear diplomacy

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hecker, Siegfried S. [Center for International Security and Cooperation, Stanford University, Stanford, California (United States)

    2014-05-09T23:59:59.000Z

    A former director of Los Alamos National Laboratory offers a first-person perspective on the important contributions scientists can make toward improving the safety and security of nuclear materials and reducing the global nuclear dangers in an evolving world.

  2. Biological Safety

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The DOE's Biological Safety Program provides a forum for the exchange of best practices, lessons learned, and guidance in the area of biological safety. This content is supported by the Biosurety Executive Team. The Biosurety Executive Team is a DOE-chartered group. The DOE Office of Worker Safety and Health Policy provides administrative support for this group. The group identifies biological safety-related issues of concern to the DOE and pursues solutions to issues identified.

  3. A REVIEW OF LIGHT-WATER REACTOR SAFETY STUDIES. VOLUME 3 OF THE FINAL REPORT ON HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Nero, A.V.

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    and calculation of population exposures (resulting These were the largest reactorsreactor, cannot be since, the definitive, particularly ably contain many of the calculationsreactor safety study, WASH-1400 of General background and objective Summary of methodology and results WASH-1400 Accident sequence identification and calculation

  4. Spent Fuel Working Group report on inventory and storage of the Department`s spent nuclear fuel and other reactor irradiated nuclear materials and their environmental, safety and health vulnerabilities. Volume 2, Working Group Assessment Team reports; Vulnerability development forms; Working group documents

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The Secretary of Energy`s memorandum of August 19, 1993, established an initiative for a Department-wide assessment of the vulnerabilities of stored spent nuclear fuel and other reactor irradiated nuclear materials. A Project Plan to accomplish this study was issued on September 20, 1993 by US Department of Energy, Office of Environment, Health and Safety (EH) which established responsibilities for personnel essential to the study. The DOE Spent Fuel Working Group, which was formed for this purpose and produced the Project Plan, will manage the assessment and produce a report for the Secretary by November 20, 1993. This report was prepared by the Working Group Assessment Team assigned to the Hanford Site facilities. Results contained in this report will be reviewed, along with similar reports from all other selected DOE storage sites, by a working group review panel which will assemble the final summary report to the Secretary on spent nuclear fuel storage inventory and vulnerability.

  5. Safety from the Operator's Perspective: We are All in this Together...

    Broader source: Energy.gov (indexed) [DOE]

    Ellis President and CEO Institute of Nuclear Power Operations Jim Ellis President and CEO Institute of Nuclear Power Operations Safety from the Operator's Perspective: We are All...

  6. Implementation Guide for Use in Addressing Unreviewed Safety Question Requirements

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2001-10-24T23:59:59.000Z

    This Guide provides information to assist in the implementation and interpretation of Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 830.203, Unreviewed Safety Question Process, of the Nuclear Safety Management Rules for applicable nuclear facilities owned or operated by the Department of Energy (DOE), including the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). Canceled by DOE N 251.93.

  7. Implementation Guide for Use in Addressing Unreviewed Safety Question Requirements

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2006-07-24T23:59:59.000Z

    This Guide provides information to assist in implementation of Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 830.203, "Unreviewed Safety Question Process," of the Nuclear Safety Management Rules for Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities owned or operated by the Department of Energy, including the National Nuclear Security Administration. Cancels DOE G 424.1-1.

  8. Safety Activities on Safety-Critical Software for Reactor Protection System Gee-Yong Park1

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Jee, Eunkyoung

    of nuclear power plants. The various techniques applied to a safety analysis on the structures and systemsSafety Activities on Safety-Critical Software for Reactor Protection System Gee-Yong Park1 , Kee Institute, P.O.Box 105 Yuseong, Daejeon, 305-353 KOREA 2: Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology

  9. METHODOLOGIES FOR REVIEW OF THE HEALTH AND SAFETY ASPECTS OF PROPOSED NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL SITES AND FACILITIES. VOLUME 9 OF THE FINAL REPORT ON HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA

    E-Print Network [OSTI]

    Nero, A.V.

    2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

    IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA Energy and Environment

  10. Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation (NEAMS) waste Integrated Performance and Safety Codes (IPSC) : gap analysis for high fidelity and performance assessment code development.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lee, Joon H.; Siegel, Malcolm Dean; Arguello, Jose Guadalupe, Jr.; Webb, Stephen Walter; Dewers, Thomas A.; Mariner, Paul E.; Edwards, Harold Carter; Fuller, Timothy J.; Freeze, Geoffrey A.; Jove-Colon, Carlos F.; Wang, Yifeng

    2011-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    This report describes a gap analysis performed in the process of developing the Waste Integrated Performance and Safety Codes (IPSC) in support of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation (NEAMS) Campaign. The goal of the Waste IPSC is to develop an integrated suite of computational modeling and simulation capabilities to quantitatively assess the long-term performance of waste forms in the engineered and geologic environments of a radioactive waste storage or disposal system. The Waste IPSC will provide this simulation capability (1) for a range of disposal concepts, waste form types, engineered repository designs, and geologic settings, (2) for a range of time scales and distances, (3) with appropriate consideration of the inherent uncertainties, and (4) in accordance with rigorous verification, validation, and software quality requirements. The gap analyses documented in this report were are performed during an initial gap analysis to identify candidate codes and tools to support the development and integration of the Waste IPSC, and during follow-on activities that delved into more detailed assessments of the various codes that were acquired, studied, and tested. The current Waste IPSC strategy is to acquire and integrate the necessary Waste IPSC capabilities wherever feasible, and develop only those capabilities that cannot be acquired or suitably integrated, verified, or validated. The gap analysis indicates that significant capabilities may already exist in the existing THC codes although there is no single code able to fully account for all physical and chemical processes involved in a waste disposal system. Large gaps exist in modeling chemical processes and their couplings with other processes. The coupling of chemical processes with flow transport and mechanical deformation remains challenging. The data for extreme environments (e.g., for elevated temperature and high ionic strength media) that are needed for repository modeling are severely lacking. In addition, most of existing reactive transport codes were developed for non-radioactive contaminants, and they need to be adapted to account for radionuclide decay and in-growth. The accessibility to the source codes is generally limited. Because the problems of interest for the Waste IPSC are likely to result in relatively large computational models, a compact memory-usage footprint and a fast/robust solution procedure will be needed. A robust massively parallel processing (MPP) capability will also be required to provide reasonable turnaround times on the analyses that will be performed with the code. A performance assessment (PA) calculation for a waste disposal system generally requires a large number (hundreds to thousands) of model simulations to quantify the effect of model parameter uncertainties on the predicted repository performance. A set of codes for a PA calculation must be sufficiently robust and fast in terms of code execution. A PA system as a whole must be able to provide multiple alternative models for a specific set of physical/chemical processes, so that the users can choose various levels of modeling complexity based on their modeling needs. This requires PA codes, preferably, to be highly modularized. Most of the existing codes have difficulties meeting these requirements. Based on the gap analysis results, we have made the following recommendations for the code selection and code development for the NEAMS waste IPSC: (1) build fully coupled high-fidelity THCMBR codes using the existing SIERRA codes (e.g., ARIA and ADAGIO) and platform, (2) use DAKOTA to build an enhanced performance assessment system (EPAS), and build a modular code architecture and key code modules for performance assessments. The key chemical calculation modules will be built by expanding the existing CANTERA capabilities as well as by extracting useful components from other existing codes.

  11. Safety for Users

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOnItemResearch > TheNuclear Press ReleasesIn theTreatmentSRSSafety The NuclearSafety for

  12. Safety for Users

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel), 2002; Level: National5Sales for4,645 3,625 1,006 492 742EnergyOnItemResearch > TheNuclear Press ReleasesIn theTreatmentSRSSafety The NuclearSafety for

  13. Implementation Guide for Use in Developing Technical Safety Requirements

    Broader source: Directives, Delegations, and Requirements [Office of Management (MA)]

    2014-09-08T23:59:59.000Z

    The guide was developed in support of Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 830, Nuclear Safety Management. It provides guidance for the requirements defined in 10 CFR §830.205, Technical Safety Requirements.

  14. Physics-based multiscale coupling for full core nuclear reactor...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    multiscale coupling for full core nuclear reactor simulation Numerical simulation of nuclear reactors is a key technology in the quest for improvements in efficiency, safety,...

  15. advanced nuclear precleaner: Topics by E-print Network

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    of nuclear energy research, the element thorium (Th) has been considered the superior fuel for nuclear reactions because of its potency, safety, abundance and reduced waste. Cold...

  16. Report to the DOE Nuclear Data Committee, 1982

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Haght, R.C.; Struble, G.L.

    1982-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

    The report includes summaries of measurements and calculations of nuclear data applications, and use of nuclear data for reactor safety. (GHT)

  17. Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety Program - DOE Directives...

    Broader source: All U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office Webpages (Extended Search)

    1D Admin Chg 1, Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety Program by Carl Sykes Functional areas: Administrative Change, Defense Nuclear Facility Safety and Health Requirement, Defense...

  18. IMPORTANCE OF SAFETY CULTURE ASSESSMENT

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Spitalnik, J.

    2004-10-06T23:59:59.000Z

    Safety Management has lately been considered by some Nuclear Regulatory agencies as the tool on which to concentrate their efforts to implement modern regulation structures, because Safety Culture was said to be difficult to monitor. However, Safety Culture can be assessed and monitored even if it is problematical to make Safety Culture the object of regulation. This paper stresses the feasibility and importance of Safety Culture Assessment based on self-assessment applications performed in several nuclear organizations in Latin America. Reasons and ownership for assessing Safety Culture are discussed, and relevant aspects considered for setting up and programming such an assessment are shown. Basic principles that were taken into account, as well as financial and human resources used in actual self-assessments are reviewed, including the importance of adequate statistical analyses and the necessity of proper feed-back of results. The setting up of action plans to enhance Safety Culture is the final step of the assessment program that once implemented will enable to establish a Safety Culture monitoring process within the organization.

  19. Presentation, Safety from the Operator's Perspective: We are All in This Together, Safety Culture in All We Do

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    A presentation by Jim Ellis, President and CEO, Institute of Nuclear Power Operators (INPO), Safety from the Operator’s Perspective: We Are All in this Together, Safety Culture in All We Do.

  20. Safety study application guide. Safety Analysis Report Update Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1993-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

    Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., (Energy Systems) is committed to performing and documenting safety analyses for facilities it manages for the Department of Energy (DOE). Included are analyses of existing facilities done under the aegis of the Safety Analysis Report Upgrade Program, and analyses of new and modified facilities. A graded approach is used wherein the level of analysis and documentation for each facility is commensurate with the magnitude of the hazard(s), the complexity of the facility and the stage of the facility life cycle. Safety analysis reports (SARs) for hazard Category 1 and 2 facilities are usually detailed and extensive because these categories are associated with public health and safety risk. SARs for Category 3 are normally much less extensive because the risk to public health and safety is slight. At Energy Systems, safety studies are the name given to SARs for Category 3 (formerly {open_quotes}low{close_quotes}) facilities. Safety studies are the appropriate instrument when on-site risks are limited to irreversible consequences to a few people, and off-site consequences are limited to reversible consequences to a few people. This application guide provides detailed instructions for performing safety studies that meet the requirements of DOE Orders 5480.22, {open_quotes}Technical Safety Requirements,{close_quotes} and 5480.23, {open_quotes}Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports.{close_quotes} A seven-chapter format has been adopted for safety studies. This format allows for discussion of all the items required by DOE Order 5480.23 and for the discussions to be readily traceable to the listing in the order. The chapter titles are: (1) Introduction and Summary, (2) Site, (3) Facility Description, (4) Safety Basis, (5) Hazardous Material Management, (6) Management, Organization, and Institutional Safety Provisions, and (7) Accident Analysis.