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


1

Nuclear Facility Safety Basis  

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

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

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

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.

4

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

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

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

5

Office of Nuclear Facility Safety Programs: Nuclear Facility Training  

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

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

6

Independent Activity Report, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety...  

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

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting - October 2012 Independent Activity Report, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting - October 2012 October...

7

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

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

New Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis and Technical Safety Requirements - December 2, 2014 (EA CRAD 31-07, Rev. 0) CRAD, New Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis...

8

Facility Safety  

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

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

1996-10-24T23:59:59.000Z

9

Facility Safety  

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

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

1995-11-16T23:59:59.000Z

10

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.

11

Nuclear and Facility Safety Policy Rules | Department of Energy  

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

Nuclear and Facility Safety Policy Rules Nuclear and Facility Safety Policy Rules DOE provides safety requirements and guidance in a number of forms. One form in which we publish...

12

Safety of Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2008-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

13

Nuclear and Facility Safety Directives | Department of Energy  

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

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

14

Independent Activity Report, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public  

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

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

15

Independent Activity Report, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public  

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

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

16

Independent Activity Report, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public  

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

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

17

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board's enabling legislation  

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

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

18

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)]

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.

2000-03-28T23:59:59.000Z

19

Facility Safety  

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

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.

2000-11-20T23:59:59.000Z

20

The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board's first decade  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Concern over the safety of the United States' defense nuclear reactors in the late 1980s led to congressional creation of an independent oversight board. The Defense Nuclear Facility Safeties Board (DNFSB) is responsible for overseeing safety issues at the U.S. Department of Energy's nuclear facilities and issuing recommendations on operations and safety at these facilities, which include South Carolina's Savannah River Site, Texas' Pantex facility, Colorado's Rocky Flats Depot, and others. This article provides an historical overview of the DNFSB's first decade and discusses its relationship and interaction with the Department of Energy and congressional oversight committees as well as the recommendations it has issued on nuclear safety. An assessment of DNFSB's future prospects concludes the article.

Bert Chapman

2000-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


21

Facility Safety  

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

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.

2005-12-22T23:59:59.000Z

22

Facility Safety  

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

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.

2005-12-22T23:59:59.000Z

23

Interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board  

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

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.

2001-03-30T23:59:59.000Z

24

Interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board  

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

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.

1996-12-30T23:59:59.000Z

25

Interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board  

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

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.

1999-01-26T23:59:59.000Z

26

Facility Safety  

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

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.

1995-10-13T23:59:59.000Z

27

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. Cancels DOE O 420.1B, DOE G 420.1-2 and DOE G 420.1-3.

2012-12-04T23:59:59.000Z

28

Facility Safety  

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

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.

2002-05-20T23:59:59.000Z

29

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

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

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.

2012-12-04T23:59:59.000Z

30

Facility Safety  

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

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.

2013-06-21T23:59:59.000Z

31

Review and Approval of Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Documents (Documented Safety Analyses and Technical Safety Requirements)  

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

February 1996 February 1996 CHANGE NOTICE NO. 2 Date November 2005 DOE STANDARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF NUCLEAR FACILITY SAFETY BASIS DOCUMENTS (DOCUMENTED SAFETY ANALYSES AND TECHNICAL SAFETY REQUIREMENTS) U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington, DC 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from ES&H Technical Information Services, U.S. Department of Energy, (800) 473-4375, Fax: (301) 903-9823. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Adminis tration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 605-6000.

32

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

33

Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Salt Waste Processing Facility Project  

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

Oversight Assessment of Oversight Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Salt Waste Processing Facility Project May 2011 January 2013 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy Independent Oversight Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Salt Waste Processing Facility Project

34

Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Salt Waste Processing Facility Project  

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

Oversight Assessment of Oversight Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Salt Waste Processing Facility Project May 2011 January 2013 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy Independent Oversight Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Salt Waste Processing Facility Project

35

CRAD, Nuclear Facility Safety System - September 25, 2009 | Department...  

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

Facility Safety System Functionality Inspection Criteria, Inspection Activities, and Lines of Inquiry (HSS CRAD 64-17, Rev 0 ) This document establishes the protocols used by...

36

Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide - November 2002  

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

Oak Ridge Operations Office 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 Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide TABLE OF CONTENTS Acronyms and Abbreviations ......................................................................................... iii List of Figures ....................................................................................................................iv List of Tables......................................................................................................................iv INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................1

37

Office of Nuclear Safety  

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

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

38

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

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

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

39

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

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

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

40

DOE Standard 3009-2014, Preparation of Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis, Roll Out Training  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The Office of Nuclear Safety is performing a series of site visits to provide roll-out training and assistance to Program and Site Offices and their contractors on effective implementation of the new revision to DOE Standard 3009-2014, Preparation of Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis.

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


41

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Not Available

1993-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

42

CRAD, New Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis and Technical Safety Requirements- December 2, 2014 (EA CRAD 31-07, Rev. 0)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

New Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis and Technical Safety Requirements Criteria Review and Approach Document (EA CRAD 31-07, Rev. 0)

43

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Superconducting Magnet Safety Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) facilities present unique hazards or steel reinforced concrete, these ferromagnetic materials may have an effect on the magnetic field environmental temperature control is required (2) Structural support for heavy equipment and vibration control

Maroncelli, Mark

44

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

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

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

45

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Department of Energy (DOE) is approved for use by all components of DOE. It 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 with these guidelines will provide consistency and uniformity in Criticality Safety Evaluations (CSEs) across the complex and will document compliance with DOE Order 5480.24 requirements as they pertain to CSEs.

NONE

1998-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

46

Nuclear Engineer (Criticality Safety)  

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...

47

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Review at the Nevada National Security Site  

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

NNSS-2011-001 NNSS-2011-001 Site: Nevada National Security Site Subject: Office of Independent Oversight's Office of Environment, Safety and Health Evaluations Activity Report for the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Review at the Nevada National Security Site Dates of Activity 02/14/2011 - 02/17/2011 Report Preparer William Macon Activity Description/Purpose: The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Independent Oversight, within the Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS), visited the Nevada Site Office (NSO) and the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) from February 14-17, 2011. The purpose of the visit was to observe the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) review and maintain operational awareness of NNSS activities. Result:

48

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public Meeting on the Status of Integration of Safety Into the Design of the Uranium Processing Facility, October 2012  

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

HSS Independent Activity Report - HSS Independent Activity Report - Rev. 0 Report Number: HIAR-Y-12-2012-10-02 Site: Y-12 UPF Subject: Office of Enforcement and Oversight's Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Activity Report for the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Public Meeting on the Status of Integration of Safety into the Design of the Uranium Processing Facility (UPF) Dates of Activity: October 2, 2012 Report Preparer: Timothy Mengers Activity Description/Purpose: The Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) observed the public hearing of the DNFSB review of the UPF project status for integrating safety into design. The meeting was broken into three parts: a panel discussion and questioning of National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) oversight and execution; a panel discussion and questioning of the B&W Y-12

49

Nuclear Safety Regulatory Framework  

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

Department of Energy Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Regulatory Framework DOE's Nuclear Safety Enabling Legislation Regulatory Enforcement & Oversight Regulatory Governance Atomic Energy Act 1946 Atomic Energy Act 1954 Energy Reorganization Act 1974 DOE Act 1977 Authority and responsibility to regulate nuclear safety at DOE facilities 10 CFR 830 10 CFR 835 10 CFR 820 Regulatory Implementation Nuclear Safety Radiological Safety Procedural Rules ISMS-QA; Operating Experience; Metrics and Analysis Cross Cutting DOE Directives & Manuals DOE Standards Central Technical Authorities (CTA) Office of Health, Safety, and Security (HSS) Line Management SSO/ FAC Reps 48 CFR 970 48 CFR 952 Federal Acquisition Regulations External Oversight *Defense Nuclear Facility

50

Lessons learnt from ITER safety & licensing for DEMO and future nuclear fusion facilities  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

One of the strong motivations for pursuing the development of fusion energy is its potentially low environmental impact and very good safety performance. But this safety and environmental potential can only be fully realized by careful design choices. For DEMO and other fusion facilities that will require nuclear licensing, S&E objectives and criteria should be set at an early stage and taken into account when choosing basic design options and throughout the design process. Studies in recent decades of the safety of fusion power plant concepts give a useful basis on which to build the S&E approach and to assess the impact of design choices. The experience of licensing ITER is of particular value, even though there are some important differences between ITER and DEMO. The ITER project has developed a safety case, produced a preliminary safety report and had it examined by the French nuclear safety authorities, leading to the licence to construct the facility. The key technical issues that arose during ...

Taylor, Neill

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

51

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

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

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

52

Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide Review Questions  

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

Oak Ridge Operations Oak Ridge Operations Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide Review Questions Name: Organization: Directions: This is an open-book evaluation. Complete the questions, and submit your answers (hand-written or electronically) to the Training Center. Someone will check and grade your answers. If you achieve a score of at least 80%, you will receive a completion certificate. Questions: 1. What is safety basis (SB)? 2. How does SB fit with integrated safety management (ISM)? 3. In what primary DOE documents can requirements and guidance for SB be found? 4. What are the "graded approach" factors that DOE takes into account in ensuring that the level of analysis and documentation and the actions used to comply with the requirements are

53

Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide Review Questions  

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

Oak Ridge Operations Oak Ridge Operations Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide Review Questions Name: Organization: Directions: This is an open-book evaluation. Complete the questions, and submit your answers (hand-written or electronically) to the Training Center. Someone will check and grade your answers. If you achieve a score of at least 80%, you will receive a completion certificate. Questions: 1. What is safety basis (SB)? 2. How does SB fit with integrated safety management (ISM)? 3. In what primary DOE documents can requirements and guidance for SB be found? 4. What are the "graded approach" factors that DOE takes into account in ensuring that the level of analysis and documentation and the actions used to comply with the requirements are

54

Letter from Nuclear Energy Institute regarding Integrated Safety Analysis: Why it is Appropropriate for Fuel Recycling Facilities  

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

082 l F: 202.533.0166 l rxm@nei.org l www.nei.org 082 l F: 202.533.0166 l rxm@nei.org l www.nei.org Rod McCullum DIRECTOR FUEL CYCLE PROJECTS NUCLEAR GENERATION DIVISION September 10, 2010 Ms. Catherine Haney Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Subject: Integrated Safety Analysis: Why It Is Appropriate for Fuel Recycling Facilities Project Number: 689 Dear Ms. Haney: 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 intended as an information source for the NRC and should serve as a foundation for discussion with industry representatives on the issue.

55

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

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Frequently Asked Questions Regarding DOE-STD-1195-2011 which provides requirements and guidance for the design, procurement, installation, testing, maintenance, operation, and quality assurance of safety instrumented systems (SIS) that may be used at Department of Energy (DOE) nonreactor nuclear facilities for safety significant (SS) functions.

56

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

NONE

1999-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

57

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

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

DOE-STD-3009-94 July 1994 CHANGE NOTICE NO. 12 January 2000 5 December 24 April 20021 DOE STANDARD PREPARATION GUIDE FOR U.S DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NONREACTOR NUCLEAR FACILITY DOCUMENTED SAFETY ANALYSISANALYSES REPORTS U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington, DC 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. TS This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from ES&H Technical Information Services, U.S. Department of Energy, (800) 473-4375, fax: (301) 903-9823. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161;

58

Preparation Guide for U. S. Department of Energy Nonreator Nuclear Facility Document Safety Analysis  

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

SENSITIVE DOE-STD-3009-94 July 1994 CHANGE NOTICE NO. 1 January 2000 CHANGE NOTICE NO. 2 April 2002 DOE STANDARD PREPARATION GUIDE FOR U.S DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NONREACTOR NUCLEAR FACILITY DOCUMENTED SAFETY ANALYSES U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington, DC 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. TS TS This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from ES&H Technical Information Services, U.S. Department of Energy, (800) 473-4375, fax: (301) 903-9823. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161;

59

Nuclear Facility Design  

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

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

60

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

JACKSON, M.W.

2002-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


61

CRAD, Facility Safety- Documented Safety Analysis  

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 Documented Safety Analysis.

62

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

None

2000-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

63

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...

64

Report to the Secretary of Energy on Beyond Design Basis Event Pilot Evaluations, Results and Recommendations for Improvements to Enhance Nuclear Safety at DOE Nuclear Facilities  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

In the six months after the March 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident in Japan, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) took several actions to review the safety of its nuclear facilities and identify situations where near-term improvements could be made.

65

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

None

2001-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

66

Coordination Meeting with National Nuclear Security Administration Los Alamos Field Office Safety Basis Review Team Leader for Transuranic Waste Facility Preiminary Documented Safety Analysis Report  

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

HIAR-LANL-2013-04-08 HIAR-LANL-2013-04-08 Site: Los Alamos National Laboratory Subject: Office of Enforcement and Oversight's Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Activity Report for Coordination Meeting with National Nuclear Security Administration Los Alamos Field Office Safety Basis Review Team Leader for Transuranic Waste Facility Preliminary Documented Safety Analysis Report Dates of Activity : 04/08/13 Report Preparer: James O. Low Activity Description/Purpose: The Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) staff visited the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) to coordinate with the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Los Alamos Field Office (NA-00-LA) Safety Basis Review Team (SBRT) Leader for review of the revised preliminary documented safety analysis (PDSA) for the Transuranic Waste

67

Coordination Meeting with National Nuclear Security Administration Los Alamos Field Office Safety Basis Review Team Leader for Transuranic Waste Facility Preiminary Documented Safety Analysis Report  

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

HIAR-LANL-2013-04-08 HIAR-LANL-2013-04-08 Site: Los Alamos National Laboratory Subject: Office of Enforcement and Oversight's Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Activity Report for Coordination Meeting with National Nuclear Security Administration Los Alamos Field Office Safety Basis Review Team Leader for Transuranic Waste Facility Preliminary Documented Safety Analysis Report Dates of Activity : 04/08/13 Report Preparer: James O. Low Activity Description/Purpose: The Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) staff visited the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) to coordinate with the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Los Alamos Field Office (NA-00-LA) Safety Basis Review Team (SBRT) Leader for review of the revised preliminary documented safety analysis (PDSA) for the Transuranic Waste

68

FACILITY SAFETY (FS)  

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

FACILITY SAFETY (FS) FACILITY SAFETY (FS) OBJECTIVE FS.1 - (Core Requirement 7) Facility safety documentation in support of SN process operations,is in place and has been implemented that describes the safety envelope of the facility. The, safety documentation should characterize the hazards/risks associated with the facility and should, identify preventive and mitigating measures (e.g., systems, procedures, and administrative, controls) that protect workers and the public from those hazards/risks. (Old Core Requirement 4) Criteria 1. A DSA has been prepared by FWENC, approved by DOE, and implemented to reflect the SN process operations in the WPF. (10 CFR 830.200, DOE-STD-3009-94) 2. A configuration control program is in place and functioning such that the DSA is

69

Criticality safety aspects of decontamination and decommissioning at defense nuclear facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Defense nuclear facilities have operated for forty years with a well-defined mission to produce weapons components for the nation. With the end of the cold war, the facilities` missions have changed to one of decontamination and decommissioning. Off-normal operations and use of new procedures, such as will exist during these activities, have often been among the causal factors in previous criticality accidents at process facilities. This paper explores the similarities in causal factors in previous criticality accidents to the conditions existing in current defense nuclear facilities undergoing the transition to decontamination and decommissioning. Practices to reduce the risk to workers, the public, and the environment are recommended.

Croucher, D.W.

1994-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

70

Nuclear Facilities | Department of Energy  

Energy Savers [EERE]

Nuclear Facilities Nuclear Facilities Nuclear Facilities Locator Map Numerical map data points indicate two or more nuclear facilities in the same geographic location. Nuclear...

71

Nuclear Reactor Safety Design Criteria  

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

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.

1993-01-19T23:59:59.000Z

72

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

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

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

73

Spent nuclear fuel project cold vacuum drying facility safety equipment list  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

IRWIN, J.J.

1999-02-24T23:59:59.000Z

74

October 24, 2003, Criteria and Guidelines For the Assessment of Safety System Software and Firmware at Defense Nuclear Facilities  

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

3.1 3.1 Revision 3 October 24, 2003 U. S. Department of Energy Criteria and Guidelines For the Assessment of Safety System Software and Firmware at Defense Nuclear Facilities October 24, 2003 CRAD - 4.2.3.1 Revision 3 October 24, 2003 i TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS...................................................................................................................................ii GLOSSARY ...................................................................................................................................iii 1.0 INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................1 2.0 BACKGROUND .......................................................................................................................2

75

CRAD, Facility Safety - Unreviewed Safety Question Requirements...  

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

a recommended approach and the types of information to gather to assess elements of a DOE contractor's programs. CRAD, Facility Safety - Unreviewed Safety Question Requirements...

76

Safety of Accelerator Facilities  

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

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.

2001-01-08T23:59:59.000Z

77

Safety of Accelerator Facilities  

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

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.

2004-07-23T23:59:59.000Z

78

Office of Nuclear Safety - Directives  

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

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

79

Report to the Secretary of Energy on Beyond Design Basis Event Pilot Evaluations, Results and Recommendations for Improvements to Enhance Nuclear Safety at DOE Nuclear Facilities, January 2013  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

In the six months after the March 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident in Japan, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) took several actions to review the safety of its nuclear facilities and identify situations where near-term improvements could be made. These actions and recommendations were addressed in an August 2011 report to the Secretary of Energy, Review of Requirements and Capabilities for Analyzing and Responding to Beyond Design Basis Events.

80

Nuclear Safety Management  

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

[6450-01-P] [6450-01-P] DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 10 CFR Part 830 Nuclear Safety Management AGENCY: Department of Energy (DOE). ACTION: Final Rule. SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE) is issuing a final rule regarding Nuclear Safety Management. This Part establishes requirements for the safe management of DOE contractor and subcontractor work at the Department's nuclear facilities. Today's rule adopts the sections that will make up the generally applicable provisions for Part 830. It also adopts the specific section on provisions for developing and implementing a formalized quality assurance program. EFFECTIVE DATE: This regulation becomes effective [insert 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Frank Hawkins, U.S. Department of Energy, Nuclear Safety

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


81

Nuclear Engineering Nuclear Criticality Safety  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Nuclear Engineering Nuclear Criticality Safety The Nuclear Engineering Division (NE) of Argonne National Laboratory is experienced in performing criticality safety and shielding evaluations for nuclear, and neutron spectra. The NE nuclear criticality safety (NCS) capabilities are based on a staff with decades

Kemner, Ken

82

Nuclear Safety Regulatory Framework  

Energy Savers [EERE]

Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Regulatory Framework DOE's Nuclear Safety Enabling Legislation Regulatory Enforcement & Oversight Regulatory Governance Atomic Energy Act 1946...

83

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...

84

Nuclear criticality safety guide  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This technical reference document cites information related to nuclear criticality safety principles, experience, and practice. The document also provides general guidance for criticality safety personnel and regulators.

Pruvost, N.L.; Paxton, H.C. [eds.] [eds.

1996-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

85

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

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

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

86

Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Y-12 National Security Complex Urnaium Processing Facility Project, June 2012  

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

Y-12 National Security Complex Y-12 National Security Complex Uranium Processing Facility Project May 2011 June 2012 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy i Independent Oversight Assessment of Safety Culture at the Y-12 National Security Complex Uranium Processing Facility Project Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Scope and Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 2 3.0 Results and Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 3

87

Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Y-12 National Security Complex Urnaium Processing Facility Project, June 2012  

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

Y-12 National Security Complex Y-12 National Security Complex Uranium Processing Facility Project May 2011 June 2012 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy i Independent Oversight Assessment of Safety Culture at the Y-12 National Security Complex Uranium Processing Facility Project Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Scope and Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 2 3.0 Results and Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 3

88

General Engineer (Nuclear Safety)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The Chief of Nuclear Safety (CNS) reports the US/M&P; in serving as the Central Technical Authority (CTA) for M&P; activities, ensuring the Departments nuclear safety policies and...

89

Nuclear Explosive Safety Manual  

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

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

2009-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

90

Nuclear Safety (Pennsylvania) | Department of Energy  

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

Nuclear Safety (Pennsylvania) Nuclear Safety (Pennsylvania) Nuclear Safety (Pennsylvania) < Back Eligibility Utility Investor-Owned Utility State/Provincial Govt Industrial Construction Municipal/Public Utility Local Government Program Info State Pennsylvania Program Type Environmental Regulations Safety and Operational Guidelines Provider Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection 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 activities associated with management and disposal of a low-level radioactive waste disposal facility in Pennsylvania and provides planning and support for Bureau response to incidents involving nuclear power plants and/or radioactive material in

91

FACILITY SAFETY (FS)  

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

OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE OP.1 - (Core Requirements 4 and 6) Sufficient numbers of qualified personnel are available to conduct and support operations. Adequate facilities and equipment are available to ensure operational support services are adequate for operations. The level of knowledge of managers, operations personnel, and support personnel is adequate based on reviews of examinations and examination results and selected interviews of personnel. (Old Core Requirements 3, 8, 13, and 19) Criteria 1. Minimum staffing requirements for safe operations have been established for operations personnel, supervisors, and managers. These staffing levels are met and are consistent with the safety basis requirements and assumptions. (DOE O 5480.19; WPF DSA) 2. All ES&H matrix support functions are identified for system operations. Adequate

92

Nuclear Engineer (Nuclear Safety Specialist)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

A successful candidate of this position will serve as a Nuclear Engineer (Nuclear Safety Specialist) responsible for day-to-day technical monitoring, and evaluation of aspects of authorization...

93

Nuclear Explosive Safety  

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

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).

2014-07-10T23:59:59.000Z

94

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 452.1E, Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety Program, or successor directive, for routine and planned nuclear explosive operations (NEOs).

2015-01-26T23:59:59.000Z

95

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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).

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

1993-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

96

Estimating Fire Risks at Industrial Nuclear Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Savannah River Site (SRS) has a wide variety of nuclear production facilities that include chemical processing facilities, machine shops, production reactors, and laboratories. Current safety documentation must be maintained for the nuclear facilities at SRS. Fire Risk Analyses (FRAs) are used to support the safety documentation basis. These FRAs present the frequency that specified radiological and chemical consequences will be exceeded. The consequence values are based on mechanistic models assuming specific fire protection features fail to function as designed.

Coutts, D.A.

1999-07-12T23:59:59.000Z

97

Nuclear Criticality Safety | More Science | ORNL  

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

Criticality Safety Criticality Safety SHARE Criticality Safety Nuclear Criticality Safety ORNL is the lead national laboratory responsible for supporting the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) in managing the US Nuclear Criticality Safety Program. NCSP is chartered to maintain the technical infrastructure (integral experiments, computational tools, training, data, etc.) needed to support safe, efficient fissionable material operations. ORNL has extensive expertise in the area of nuclear criticality safety (NCS) based upon years of experience in the following areas: Operations Support: providing fissionable material operations support for enrichment, fabrication, production, and research; Critical Experiments: performing experiments at the Y-12 Critical Experiment Facility;

98

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

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

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.

2003-08-27T23:59:59.000Z

99

Nuclear Power Facilities (2008) | Department of Energy  

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

Nuclear Power Facilities (2008) Nuclear Power Facilities (2008) Nuclear Power Facilities (2008) More Documents & Publications Financial Institution Partnership Program - Commercial...

100

Software Quality Assurance for Nuclear Safety Systems  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The US Department of Energy has undertaken an initiative to improve the quality of software used to design and operate their nuclear facilities across the United States. One aspect of this initiative is to revise or create new directives and guides associated with quality practices for the safety software in its nuclear facilities. Safety software includes the safety structures, systems, and components software and firmware, support software and design and analysis software used to ensure the safety of the facility. DOE nuclear facilities are unique when compared to commercial nuclear or other industrial activities in terms of the types and quantities of hazards that must be controlled to protect workers, public and the environment. Because of these differences, DOE must develop an approach to software quality assurance that ensures appropriate risk mitigation by developing a framework of requirements that accomplishes the following goals: {sm_bullet} Ensures the software processes developed to address nuclear safety in design, operation, construction and maintenance of its facilities are safe {sm_bullet} Considers the larger system that uses the software and its impacts {sm_bullet} Ensures that the software failures do not create unsafe conditions Software designers for nuclear systems and processes must reduce risks in software applications by incorporating processes that recognize, detect, and mitigate software failure in safety related systems. It must also ensure that fail safe modes and component testing are incorporated into software design. For nuclear facilities, the consideration of risk is not necessarily sufficient to ensure safety. Systematic evaluation, independent verification and system safety analysis must be considered for software design, implementation, and operation. The software industry primarily uses risk analysis to determine the appropriate level of rigor applied to software practices. This risk-based approach distinguishes safety-critical software and applies the highest level of rigor for those systems. DOE has further defined a risk approach to nuclear safety system software consistent with the analyses required for operation of nuclear facilities. This requires the grading of software in terms of safety class and safety significant structures, systems and components (SSCs). Safety-class SSCs are related to public safety where as safety-significant SSCs are identified for specific aspects of defense-in-depth and worker safety. Industry standards do not directly categorize nuclear safety software and DOE sites are not consistent in their approach to nuclear safety software quality assurance. DOE is establishing a more detailed graded approach for software associated with safety class and safety significant systems. This paper presents the process and results that DOE utilized to develop a detailed classification scheme for nuclear safety software.

Sparkman, D R; Lagdon, R

2004-05-16T23:59:59.000Z

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


101

Safety of Nuclear Explosive Operations  

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

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.

2001-08-07T23:59:59.000Z

102

Safety of Accelerator Facilities - DOE Directives, Delegations...  

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

Health, Environmental Protection, Facility Authorization, Safety The order defines accelerators and establishes accelerator specific safety requirements and approval authorities...

103

Promulgating Nuclear Safety Requirements  

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

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.

1996-05-15T23:59:59.000Z

104

FACILITY SAFETY (FS)  

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

and effectively implemented, with line management responsibility for control of safety. (Old Core Requirement 11) Criteria 1. Operations and support personnel fully...

105

Safety of Accelerator Facilities  

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

The order defines accelerators and establishes accelerator specific safety requirements and approval authorities which, when supplemented by other applicable safety and health requirements, promote safe operations to ensure protection of workers, the public, and the environment. Cancels DOE O 420.2B.

2011-07-21T23:59:59.000Z

106

June 2010, Risk Assessment in Support of DOE Nuclear Safety  

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

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

107

October 24, 2003, Assessment Criteria and Guidelines for Determining the Adequacy of Software Used in the Safety Analysis and Design of Defense Nuclear Facilities  

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

4.1 4.1 Revision 3 October 24, 2003 U. S. Department of Energy Assessment Criteria and Guidelines for Determining the Adequacy of Software Used in the Safety Analysis and Design of Defense Nuclear Facilities October 24, 2003 CRAD - 4.2.4.1 Revision 3 October 24, 2003 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS ..................................................................................................................................iii GLOSSARY ...................................................................................................................................iv 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................1 2.0 BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................2

108

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, 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.

2009-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

109

Nuclear Explosive Safety  

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

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

2009-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

110

NRC - regulator of nuclear safety  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) was formed in 1975 to regulate the various commercial and institutional uses of nuclear energy, including nuclear power plants. The agency succeeded the Atomic Energy Commission, which previously had responsibility for both developing and regulating nuclear activities. Federal research and development work for all energy sources, as well as nuclear weapons production, is now conducted by the U.S. Department of Energy. Under its responsibility to protect public health and safety, the NRC has three principal regulatory functions: (1) establish standards and regulations, (2) issue licenses for nuclear facilities and users of nuclear materials, and (3) inspect facilities and users of nuclear materials to ensure compliance with the requirements. These regulatory functions relate to both nuclear power plants and to other uses of nuclear materials - like nuclear medicine programs at hospitals, academic activities at educational institutions, research work, and such industrial applications as gauges and testing equipment. The NRC places a high priority on keeping the public informed of its work. The agency recognizes the interest of citizens in what it does through such activities as maintaining public document rooms across the country and holding public hearings, public meetings in local areas, and discussions with individuals and organizations.

NONE

1997-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

111

Guidelines for Evaluation of Nuclear Facility Training Programs  

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

The Guidelines for Evaluation of Nuclear Facility Training Programs establish objectives and criteria for evaluating nuclear facility training programs. The guidance in this standard provides a framework for the systematic evaluation of training programs at nuclear facilities and is based, in part, on established criteria for Technical Safety Appraisals, Tiger Team Assessments, commercial nuclear industry evaluations, and the DOE Training Accreditation Program.

1995-11-22T23:59:59.000Z

112

Code of Federal Regulations NUCLEAR SAFETY MANAGEMENT  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This part governs the conduct of DOE contractors, DOE personnel, and other persons conducting activities (including providing items and services) that affect, or may affect, the safety of DOE nuclear facilities.

113

Nuclear Explosive Safety  

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

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.

2006-06-12T23:59:59.000Z

114

Nuclear Safety Research and Development Annual Report, December 2014  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This document is the first annual report of DOEs Nuclear Safety Research and Development (NSR&D) Program, managed by the Office of Nuclear Safety in the Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security. The report includes a description of the program and summaries of R&D projects related to DOE (including NNSA) nuclear facility and operational safety.

115

CANISTER HANDLING FACILITY CRITICALITY SAFETY CALCULATIONS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This design calculation revises and updates the previous criticality evaluation for the canister handling, transfer and staging operations to be performed in the Canister Handling Facility (CHF) documented in BSC [Bechtel SAIC Company] 2004 [DIRS 167614]. The purpose of the calculation is to demonstrate that the handling operations of canisters performed in the CHF meet the nuclear criticality safety design criteria specified in the ''Project Design Criteria (PDC) Document'' (BSC 2004 [DIRS 171599], Section 4.9.2.2), the nuclear facility safety requirement in ''Project Requirements Document'' (Canori and Leitner 2003 [DIRS 166275], p. 4-206), the functional/operational nuclear safety requirement in the ''Project Functional and Operational Requirements'' document (Curry 2004 [DIRS 170557], p. 75), and the functional nuclear criticality safety requirements described in the ''Canister Handling Facility Description Document'' (BSC 2004 [DIRS 168992], Sections 3.1.1.3.4.13 and 3.2.3). Specific scope of work contained in this activity consists of updating the Category 1 and 2 event sequence evaluations as identified in the ''Categorization of Event Sequences for License Application'' (BSC 2004 [DIRS 167268], Section 7). The CHF is limited in throughput capacity to handling sealed U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste (HLW) canisters, defense high-level radioactive waste (DHLW), naval canisters, multicanister overpacks (MCOs), vertical dual-purpose canisters (DPCs), and multipurpose canisters (MPCs) (if and when they become available) (BSC 2004 [DIRS 168992], p. 1-1). It should be noted that the design and safety analyses of the naval canisters are the responsibility of the U.S. Department of the Navy (Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program) and will not be included in this document. In addition, this calculation is valid for the current design of the CHF and may not reflect the ongoing design evolution of the facility. However, it is anticipated that design changes to the facility layout will have little or no impact on the criticality results and/or conclusions presented in this document. This calculation is subject to the ''Quality Assurance Requirements and Description'' (DOE 2004 [DIRS 171539]) because the CHF is included in the Q-List (BSC 2005 [DIRS 171190], p. A-3) as an item important to safety. This calculation is prepared in accordance with AP-3.12Q, ''Design Calculations and Analyses'' [DIRS 168413].

C.E. Sanders

2005-04-07T23:59:59.000Z

116

Nuclear Explosive Safety  

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

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.

2006-06-12T23:59:59.000Z

117

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...

118

Nuclear Safety Workshop Summary  

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

Workshop Summary Workshop Summary September 19-20, 2012 1 Nuclear Safety Workshop Summary On September 19-20, 2012, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) held a second Nuclear Safety Workshop covering the results of the Department's actions to improve its posture for analyzing and responding to severe accidents in light of lessons learned from the March 2011 nuclear accident in Japan. Sponsored by DOE and championed by Deputy Secretary of Energy Daniel Poneman, the two-day workshop discussed the lessons learned in a national and international context. The workshop's theme

119

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

120

340 waste handling facility interim safety basis  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document presents an interim safety basis for the 340 Waste Handling Facility classifying the 340 Facility as a Hazard Category 3 facility. The hazard analysis quantifies the operating safety envelop for this facility and demonstrates that the facility can be operated without a significant threat to onsite or offsite people.

VAIL, T.S.

1999-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


121

340 Waste handling facility interim safety basis  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document presents an interim safety basis for the 340 Waste Handling Facility classifying the 340 Facility as a Hazard Category 3 facility. The hazard analysis quantifies the operating safety envelop for this facility and demonstrates that the facility can be operated without a significant threat to onsite or offsite people.

Stordeur, R.T.

1996-10-04T23:59:59.000Z

122

CRAD, Nuclear Facility Construction - Mechanical Equipment -...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

123

Facility Disposition Safety Strategy RM | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Facility Disposition Safety Strategy RM Facility Disposition Safety Strategy RM The Facility Disposition Safety Strategy (FDSS) Review Module is a tool that assists DOE federal...

124

10 CFR Part 830 Nuclear Safety Technical Positions  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Technical Positions to directives issued by Nuclear and Facility Safety Policy provide clarification for specific applications of the requirements in DOE orders, rules, and other directives.

125

Facility Disposition Safety Strategy RM  

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

Facility Disposition Safety Strategy Review Module Facility Disposition Safety Strategy Review Module March 2010 CD-0 O 0 OFFICE OF Facilit C CD-1 F ENVIRO Standard R ty Dispos Rev Critical Decis CD-2 M ONMENTAL Review Plan sition Saf view Module sion (CD) Ap CD March 2010 L MANAGE n (SRP) fety Strat e pplicability D-3 EMENT tegy CD-4 Post Ope eration Standard Review Plan, 2 nd Edition, March 2010 i FOREWORD The Standard Review Plan (SRP) 1 provides a consistent, predictable corporate review framework to ensure that issues and risks that could challenge the success of Office of Environmental Management (EM) projects are identified early and addressed proactively. The internal EM project review process encompasses key milestones established by DOE O 413.3A, Change 1, Program and Project Management for the Acquisition of Capital Assets, DOE-STD-1189-2008,

126

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

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

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

127

Nuclear Safety News | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Nuclear Safety News Nuclear Safety News October 4, 2012 Department of Energy Cites Battelle Energy Alliance, LLC for Nuclear Safety and Radiation Protection Violations The U.S....

128

Nuclear Explosive Safety Manual  

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

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.

2009-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

129

Nuclear Explosive Safety Evaluation Processes  

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

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.

2009-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

130

Electrical Safety Assessment Plan--NNSA/NSO IOD Facility Representative,  

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

Electrical Safety Assessment Plan--NNSA/NSO IOD Facility Electrical Safety Assessment Plan--NNSA/NSO IOD Facility Representative, 12/03 Electrical Safety Assessment Plan--NNSA/NSO IOD Facility Representative, 12/03 An assessment of the Electrical Safety (ES) program at XXXX was conducted during the week of December XX-XX, 2003. The assessment team evaluated the program using the programmatic areas and specific Lines of Inquiry (LOI) contained in the approved Assessment plan provided. The team consisted of the Facility Representative from National Nuclear Security Administration, as well as ES, Subject Matter Expert support. The assessment plan identified 5 areas of review for Electrical Safety. An integrated process has been established to ensure electrical safety hazards are identified and that adequate controls are defined and

131

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

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

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

132

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

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

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

133

CRAD, Occupational Safety & Health- Idaho MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility  

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 2006 Commencement of Operations assessment of the Occupational Safety and Industrial Hygiene programs at the MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility at the Idaho National Laboratory Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Project.

134

Management of National Nuclear Power Programs for assured safety  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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).

Connolly, T.J. (ed.)

1985-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

135

Enhancing nuclear power safety  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Through its ClydeUnion Pumps brand, SPX has a long history of providing pumps to the nuclear power industry and is working to help provide solutions that enhance vital safety systems on these plants. Compared with traditional alternatives, its TWL steam turbine driven pump is designed to increase the reliability of systems that provide heat removal from pressurised water reactors and boiling water reactors during extended emergency periods.

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

136

Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear Facilities  

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

The Order defines the safety management program required by 10 CFR 830.204(b)(5) for maintenance and the reliable performance of Structures, Systems and Components (SSCs) that are part of the safety basis required by 10 CFR 830.202.1 at hazard category 1, 2 and 3 Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear facilities. Cancels DOE O 433.1. Canceled by DOE O 433.1B.

2007-02-13T23:59:59.000Z

137

Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear Facilities  

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

The order defines the safety management program required by 10 CFR 830.204(b)(5) for maintenance and the reliable performance of structures, systems and components that are part of the safety basis required by 10 CFR 830.202 at hazard category 1, 2 and 3 DOE nuclear facilities. Admin Chg 1, dated 3-12-2013. Cancels DOE O 433.1A.

2010-04-21T23:59:59.000Z

138

Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear Facilities  

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

The order defines the safety management program required by 10 CFR 830.204(b)(5) for maintenance and the reliable performance of structures, systems and components that are part of the safety basis required by 10 CFR 830.202 at hazard category 1, 2 and 3 DOE nuclear facilities. Cancels DOE O 433.1A. Admin Chg 1, dated 3-12-2013, cancels DOE O 433.1B.

2010-04-21T23:59:59.000Z

139

Radiological Safety Training for Accelerator Facilities  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

HANDBOOK RADIOLOGICAL SAFETY TRAINING FOR ACCELERATOR FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy AREA TRNG Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public...

140

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

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

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

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


141

The Process, Methods and Tool Used To Integrate Safety During Design of a Category 2 Nuclear Facility  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Presenter: Lynn J. Harkey, SDIT Project Engineer, Uranium Processing Facility Project, B&W Y-12 Track 5-2

142

Ris-R-679(EN) Nuclear Safety Research  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

of the nuclear facilities at Risø. The activities include personnel dosimetry, maintenance and calibra- tionRisø-R-679(EN) mil Nuclear Safety Research Department Annual Progress Report 1992 Edited by B March 1993 #12;Nuclear Safety Research K«*«i Department Annual Progress Report 1992 Edited by B

143

Technical safety requirements for the Auxiliary Hot Cell Facility (AHCF).  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

These Technical Safety Requirements (TSRs) identify the operational conditions, boundaries, and administrative controls for the safe operation of the Auxiliary Hot Cell Facility (AHCF) at Sandia National Laboratories, in compliance with 10 CFR 830, 'Nuclear Safety Management.' The bases for the TSRs are established in the AHCF Documented Safety Analysis (DSA), which was issued in compliance with 10 CFR 830, Subpart B, 'Safety Basis Requirements.' The AHCF Limiting Conditions of Operation (LCOs) apply only to the ventilation system, the high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters, and the inventory. Surveillance Requirements (SRs) apply to the ventilation system, HEPA filters, and associated monitoring equipment; to certain passive design features; and to the inventory. No Safety Limits are necessary, because the AHCF is a Hazard Category 3 nuclear facility.

Seylar, Roland F.

2004-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

144

Nuclear Safety and Global Cooperation.  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

??The thesis of is to strengthen the capacity building of nuclear safety and disaster prevention all over the world from a preventive perspective, and to (more)

Chang, Yu-shan

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

145

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

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

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

146

Safety Reports Series No. 11, Developing Safety Culture in Nuclear...  

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

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

147

Fusion Nuclear Science Facility (FNSF)  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Fusion Nuclear Science Facility (FNSF) ­ Motivation, Role, Required Capabilities YK Martin Peng;1 Managed by UT-Battelle for the Department of Energy Example: fusion nuclear-nonnuclear coupling effects-composites; Nano-structure alloy; PFC designs, etc. · Nuclear-nonnuclear coupling in PFC: - Plasma ion flux induces

148

Office of Nuclear Safety and Environmental Assessments  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The Office of Nuclear Safety and Environmental Assessments conducts assessments to provide critical feedback and objective information on programs and performance in protecting our workers, the public and environment from radiological hazards with a focus on hazardous nuclear facilities and operations. This information provides assurance to our stakeholders and identifies areas for improvement to our leadership to support the safe performance of the Departments mission.

149

Office of Nuclear Safety Enforcement | Department of Energy  

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

Enforcement Office of Nuclear Safety Enforcement Office of Nuclear Safety Enforcement MISSION The Office of Nuclear Safety Enforcement implements the Department's nuclear safety...

150

Nuclear Safety Policy, Guidance & Reports | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Nuclear Safety Policy, Guidance & Reports Nuclear Safety Policy, Guidance & Reports The Office of Nuclear Safety establishes and maintains nuclear safety policy, requirements, and...

151

Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee, Facility Subcommittee visit...  

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

Committee, Facility Subcommittee visit to Idaho National Laboratory Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee, Facility Subcommittee visit to Idaho National Laboratory The Nuclear Energy...

152

Nuclear Explosive Safety Evaluation Processes  

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

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.

2009-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

153

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

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

Safety Culture in the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Reactor Safety Culture in the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Reactor Oversight Process Safety Culture in the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Reactor Oversight Process September 19, 2012 Presenter: Undine Shoop, Chief, Health Physics and Human Performance Branch, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Topics covered: Purpose of the Reactor Oversight Process (ROP) ROP Framework Safety Culture within the ROP Safety Culture Assessments Safety Culture in the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Reactor Oversight Process More Documents & Publications A Commissioner's Perspective on USNRC Actions in Response to the Fukushima Nuclear Accident Comparison of Integrated Safety Analysis (ISA) and Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) for Fuel Cycle Facilities, 2/17/11

154

CRAD, Criteria and Guidelines For the Assessment of Safety System Software and Firmware at Defense Nuclear Facilities  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The purpose and scope of this CRAD is to provide a set of consistent assessment criteria and guidelines for the assessment of safety system software and firmware that performs an SC or SS function, as described in the Background section. The scope of the assessment, henceforth, is called "I&C software."

155

Idaho Waste Treatment Facility Improves Worker Safety and Efficiency...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Idaho Waste Treatment Facility Improves Worker Safety and Efficiency, Saves Taxpayer Dollars Idaho Waste Treatment Facility Improves Worker Safety and Efficiency, Saves Taxpayer...

156

Nano Research Facility Lab Safety Manual Nano Research Facility  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

1 Nano Research Facility Lab Safety Manual Nano Research Facility: Weining Wang Office: Brauer rules and procedures (a) Accidents and spills for chemicals Not containing Nano-Materials Spills of non for chemicals Containing Nano-Materials In a fume hood small spills of nano-materials in a liquid may

Subramanian, Venkat

157

Nuclear safety | Princeton Plasma Physics Lab  

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

safety Subscribe to RSS - Nuclear safety Actions taken to prevent nuclear and radiation accidents or to limit their consequences. A farewell to arms? Scientists developing a novel...

158

Nuclear Safety Reporting Criteria | Department of Energy  

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

Reporting Criteria Nuclear Safety Reporting Criteria January 1, 2012 Nuclear Safety Noncompliances Associated With Occurrences (DOE Order 232.2) These tables provide the criteria...

159

Nuclear Safety Regulatory Framework | Department of Energy  

Energy Savers [EERE]

Presentation that outlines the rules, policies and orders that comprise the Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Regulatory Framework. Nuclear Safety Regulatory Framework More...

160

Application of Risk Assessment and Management to Nuclear Safety |  

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

Application of Risk Assessment and Management to Nuclear Safety Application of Risk Assessment and Management to Nuclear Safety Application of Risk Assessment and Management to Nuclear Safety September 20, 2012 Presenter: Commissioner George Apostolakis US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Topics covered: Management of (unquantified at the time) uncertainty was always a concern. Defense-in-depth and safety margins became embedded in the regulations. "Defense-in-Depth is an element of the NRC's safety philosophy that employs successive compensatory measures to prevent accidents or mitigate damage if a malfunction, accident, or naturally caused event occurs at a nuclear facility." [Commission's White Paper, February 1999] Design Basis Accidents are postulated accidents that a nuclear facility must be designed and built to withstand without loss to the

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


161

Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Attachment, Integrated Safety Analysis |  

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

Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Attachment, Integrated Safety Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Attachment, Integrated Safety Analysis Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Attachment, Integrated Safety Analysis This paper addresses why the use of an Integrated Safety Analysis ("ISA") is appropriate for fuel recycling facilities1 which would be licensed under new regulations currently being considered by NRC. The use of the ISA for fuel facilities under Part 70 is described and compared to the use of a Probabilistic Risk Assessment ("PRA") for reactor facilities. A basis is provided for concluding that future recycling facilities - which will possess characteristics similar to today's fuel cycle facilities and distinct from reactors - can best be assessed using established qualitative or semi-quantitative ISA techniques to achieve and

162

Independent Oversight Focus Area Review, DOE Nuclear Facilities - April  

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

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

163

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]

emergencies, Le. , accidents at nuclear facilities, there isas a result of nuclear accidents; these are the Protectiveassociated with a nuclear accident is of greater importance

Nero, A.V.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

164

DOE Cites Washington TRU Solutions for Nuclear Safety Violations |  

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

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

165

Nuclear Safety Specialist Functional Area Qualification Standard  

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

83-2007 83-2007 November 2007 DOE STANDARD NUCLEAR SAFETY SPECIALIST FUNCTIONAL AREA QUALIFICATION STANDARD DOE Defense Nuclear Facilities Technical Personnel U.S. Department of Energy AREA TRNG Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. DOE-STD-1183-2007 ii This document is available on the Department of Energy Technical Standards Program Web Site at http://www.hss.energy.gov/nuclearsafety/techstds/ DOE-STD-1183-2007 iv INTENTIONALLY BLANK DOE-STD-1183-2007 v TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENT ................................................................................................................ vii PURPOSE ....................................................................................................................................9

166

Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard QuickStart Guide  

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

Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard QuickStart Guide September 2012 Office of Analysis (HS-24) Office of Environmental Protection, Sustainability Support and Corporate Safety Analysis Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) Purpose of Nuclear Safety Information (NSI) Dashboard * The NSI Dashboard provides a new user interface to the Occurrence Reporting and Processing System (ORPS) to easily identify, organize, and analyze nuclear safety-related events reported into ORPS. * ORPS reporting criteria associated with events at nuclear facilities have pre-assigned weighting factors according to their relative importance and are placed into groups. * This information can be evaluated to identify trends and, using insights from current events and nature of operations, enable

167

The Fast Flux Test Facility built on safety  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

No other high-tech industry has grown as fast as the nuclear industry. The information available to the general public has not kept pace with the rapid growth of nuclear data---its growth has outpaced its media image and the safety of nuclear facilities has become a highly debated issue. This book is an attempt to bridge the gap between the high-tech information of the nuclear industry and its understanding by the general public. It explains the three levels of defense at the Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) and why these levels provide an acceptable margin to protect the general public and on-site personnel, while achieving FFTF's mission to provide research and development for the US Department of Energy (DOE).

Not Available

1989-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

168

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

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

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

169

Nuclear Safety Basis Program Review Overview and Management Oversight Standard Review Plan  

Broader source: Energy.gov [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 monitoring of DOE nuclear facilities. It provides a primer on the safety basis development and documentation process used by the DOE. It also provides a set of LOIs for the review of safety basis programs and documents of nuclear facilities at various stages of the facility life cycle.

170

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

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

CRAD, Nuclear Safety - Oak Ridge National Laboratory High Flux CRAD, Nuclear Safety - Oak Ridge National Laboratory High Flux Isotope Reactor CRAD, Nuclear Safety - Oak Ridge National Laboratory High Flux Isotope Reactor February 2007 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. CRADs provide a recommended approach and the types of information to gather to assess elements of a DOE contractor's programs. CRAD, Nuclear Safety - Oak Ridge National Laboratory High Flux Isotope Reactor More Documents & Publications CRAD, Engineering - Oak Ridge National Laboratory High Flux Isotope Reactor

171

Independent Oversight Review, DOE Nuclear Facilities - May 2013 |  

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

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

172

Nuclear Plant/Hydrogen Plant Safety: Issues and Approaches  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Steven R. Sherman

2007-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

173

Nuclear and Facility Safety Directives  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

DOE O 252.1A promotes DOE's use of Voluntary Consensus Standards (VCS) as the primary method for application of technical standards and establishes and manages the DOE Technical Standards Program ...

174

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

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

Nuclear Safety » Nuclear Safety Research and Nuclear Safety » Nuclear Safety Research and Development (NSR&D) Program Nuclear Safety Research and Development (NSR&D) Program In 2011, the Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) created the Nuclear Safety Research and Development (NSR&D) Program within the Office of Nuclear Safety to provide corporate-level leadership supporting nuclear safety research and development throughout the Department of Energy (DOE). The NSR&D Program solicits input from the Nuclear Safety Council which includes membership of senior management from each program office. NSR&D Program Objectives: To establish an enduring Departmental commitment and capability to utilize NSR&D in preventing and reducing the hazards and risks posed by DOE/NNSA nuclear facilities;

175

Nuclear Safety: Software Quality Assurance  

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

Nuclear Safety: Software Quality Assurance Nuclear Safety: Software Quality Assurance cd Welcome to the Department of Energy's Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) Software Quality Assurance (SQA) homepage. The purpose of this Web site is to promote continuous improvement and the sharing of knowledge of safety software quality assurance among interested parties across the DOE complex. It consolidates information and contains links to subject matter experts, procedures, training material, program descriptions, good practices, lessons learned and the Central Registry Toolbox Codes. The Portal also provides capabilities for member collaboration in product development and threaded discussions. Central Registry: The Central Registry provides a library of DOE "Toolbox" Codes covering site boundary accident dose consequences, fire accident source terms, leakpath factors, chemical release/dispersion and consequence, and radiological dispersion and consequence.

176

National Ignition Facility Project Site Safety Program  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Safety Program for the National Ignition Facility (NIF) presents safety protocols and requirements that management and workers shall follow to assure a safe and healthful work environment during activities performed on the NIF Project site. The NIF Project Site Safety Program (NPSSP) requires that activities at the NIF Project site be performed in accordance with the ''LLNL ES&H Manual'' and the augmented set of controls and processes described in this NIF Project Site Safety Program. Specifically, this document: (1) Defines the fundamental NIF site safety philosophy. (2) Defines the areas covered by this safety program (see Appendix B). (3) Identifies management roles and responsibilities. (4) Defines core safety management processes. (5) Identifies NIF site-specific safety requirements. This NPSSP sets forth the responsibilities, requirements, rules, policies, and regulations for workers involved in work activities performed on the NIF Project site. Workers are required to implement measures to create a universal awareness that promotes safe practice at the work site and will achieve NIF management objectives in preventing accidents and illnesses. ES&H requirements are consistent with the ''LLNL ES&H Manual''. This NPSSP and implementing procedures (e.g., Management Walkabout, special work procedures, etc.,) are a comprehensive safety program that applies to NIF workers on the NIF Project site. The NIF Project site includes the B581/B681 site and support areas shown in Appendix B.

Dun, C

2003-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

177

Nuclear Facility Construction - Structural Concrete, May 29,...  

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

Nuclear Facility Construction - Structural Concrete, May 29, 2009 (HSS CRAD 64-15, Rev. 0) Nuclear Facility Construction - Structural Concrete, May 29, 2009 (HSS CRAD 64-15, Rev....

178

Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities  

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

The order establishes the requirements for startup of new nuclear facilities and for the restart of existing nuclear facilities that have been shutdown. Cancels DOE 5480.31. Canceled by DOE O 425.1A.

1995-09-29T23:59:59.000Z

179

Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities  

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

To establish the requirements for startup of new nuclear facilities and for the restart of existing nuclear facilities that have been shut down. Cancels DOE O 425.1. Canceled by DOE O 425.1B.

1998-12-28T23:59:59.000Z

180

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

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

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

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


181

Nuclear Safety Information | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Safety Information Nuclear Safety Information Idaho National Laboratory's Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) | April 8, 2009 Idaho National Laboratory's Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) |...

182

Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Attachment, Integrated Safety...  

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

Energy Institute (NEI) Attachment, Integrated Safety Analysis Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Attachment, Integrated Safety Analysis This paper addresses why the use of an...

183

CRAD, Safety Basis - Idaho MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility | Department...  

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

CRAD, Occupational Safety & Health - Idaho MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility CRAD, Conduct of Operations - Idaho MF-628 Drum Treatment Facility CRAD, Management - Idaho...

184

ACCELERATOR TEST FACILITY SAFETY ASSESSMENT DOCUMENT TABLE OF...  

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

Revised: March 1, 2010 i ACCELERATOR TEST FACILITY SAFETY ASSESSMENT DOCUMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION AND DESCRIPTION OF THE FACILITY ......

185

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

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

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

186

Autoclave nuclear criticality safety analysis  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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}.

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

187

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]

of the health and safety impact of fossil fuel emissions.to public health and safety, of any fossil fuel plant areHEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL

Nero, A.V.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

188

Y-12 Removes Nuclear Materials from Two Facilities to Reduce...  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Removes Nuclear Materials from Two Facilities to Reduce Site's Nuclear Footprint (Alpha 5 and 9720-38 No Longer Designated as Nuclear Facilities) | National Nuclear Security...

189

Review of the Los Alamos National Laoratory Nuclear Facility Coonfiguration Management Program - March 2012  

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

Nuclear Facility Nuclear Facility Configuration Management Program March 2012 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy i Table of Contents 1.0 Purpose ................................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Background ............................................................................................................................................ 1 3.0 Scope ...................................................................................................................................................... 2 4.0 Results ................................................................................................................................................... 2

190

Review of the Los Alamos National Laoratory Nuclear Facility Coonfiguration Management Program - March 2012  

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

Nuclear Facility Nuclear Facility Configuration Management Program March 2012 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy i Table of Contents 1.0 Purpose ................................................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Background ............................................................................................................................................ 1 3.0 Scope ...................................................................................................................................................... 2 4.0 Results ................................................................................................................................................... 2

191

2012 Nuclear Safety Workshop | Department of Energy  

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

Nuclear Safety » 2012 Nuclear Safety Workshop Nuclear Safety » 2012 Nuclear Safety Workshop 2012 Nuclear Safety Workshop Glenn Podonsky 1 of 13 Glenn Podonsky Glenn Podonsky (DOE Chief Health, Safety and Security Officer) provides his welcoming remarks. Daniel Poneman 2 of 13 Daniel Poneman DOE Deputy Secretary Daniel Poneman discusses maintaining our focus on nuclear safety. Akira Kawano 3 of 13 Akira Kawano Akira Kawano, Tokyo Electric Power Company, provides lessons learned from the Fukushima nuclear accident. Bill Ostendorff 4 of 13 Bill Ostendorff NRC Commissioner Bill Ostendorff gives his perspective on the NRC's response to the Fukushima nuclear accident. Miroslav Lipar 5 of 13 Miroslav Lipar Miroslav Lipar, IAEA, provides an international perspective on the Fukushima nuclear accident. Dr. Sonja Haber 6 of 13

192

Radiological hazard classification of DOE facilities by DOE STD-1027-92: LANL nuclear facility list  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Los Alamos facilities containing significant radiological hazards have been reclassified according to DOE-SID 1027-92, a recently issued guide for hazard classification. DOE-STD 1027-92 was provided in support of DOE Order 5480.23 to identify which facilities would be governed under DOE 5480.23 requirements; these would presumably be called nuclear facilities. This new classification has affected the original list of 18 LANL nuclear facilities by increasing it to 39. It has also lowered the classification of TA-55-4, the plutonium processing facility containing highest intrinsic hazard at LANL, from the highest classification to an intermediate classification. This presentation addresses the impact of these changes in the nuclear facility list in the areas of radiological health, safety analysis documentation, and risk management.

Elder, J.C.

1993-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

193

Radiological hazard classification of DOE facilities by DOE STD-1027-92: LANL nuclear facility list  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Los Alamos facilities containing significant radiological hazards have been reclassified according to DOE-SID 1027-92, a recently issued guide for hazard classification. DOE-STD 1027-92 was provided in support of DOE Order 5480.23 to identify which facilities would be governed under DOE 5480.23 requirements; these would presumably be called nuclear facilities. This new classification has affected the original list of 18 LANL nuclear facilities by increasing it to 39. It has also lowered the classification of TA-55-4, the plutonium processing facility containing highest intrinsic hazard at LANL, from the highest classification to an intermediate classification. This presentation addresses the impact of these changes in the nuclear facility list in the areas of radiological health, safety analysis documentation, and risk management.

Elder, J.C.

1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

194

Radiological Safety Training for Plutonium Facilities  

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

145-2008 145-2008 April 2008 DOE HANDBOOK Radiological Safety Training for Plutonium Facilities U.S. Department of Energy AREA TRNG Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. NOT MEASUREMENT SENSITIVE This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from ES&H Technical Information Services, U.S. Department of Energy, (800) 473-4375, fax (301) 903-9823. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 605-6000. Radiological Safety Training for Plutonium Facilities DOE-HDBK-1145-2008 Program Management Guide

195

Radiological Safety Training for Plutonium Facilities  

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

NOT MEASUREMENT NOT MEASUREMENT SENSITIVE DOE-HDBK-1145-2013 March 2013 DOE HANDBOOK Radiological Safety Training for Plutonium Facilities U.S. Department of Energy TRNG-0061 Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from ES&H Technical Information Services, U.S. Department of Energy, (800) 473-4375, fax (301) 903-9823. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 605-6000. ii Radiological Safety Training for Plutonium Facilities DOE-HDBK-1145-2013 Program Management Foreword

196

TRANSPORTATION CASK RECEIPT/RETURN FACILITY CRITICALITY SAFETY EVALUATIONS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of this design calculation is to demonstrate that the handling operations of transportation casks performed in the Transportation Cask Receipt and Return Facility (TCRRF) and Buffer Area meet the nuclear criticality safety design criteria specified in the ''Project Design Criteria (PDC) Document'' (BSC [Bechtel SAIC Company] 2004 [DIRS 171599], Section 4.9.2.2), and the functional nuclear criticality safety requirement described in the ''Transportation Cask Receipt/Return Facility Description Document'' (BSC 2004 [DIRS 170217], Section 3.2.3). Specific scope of work contained in this activity consists of the following items: (1) Evaluate criticality effects for both dry and fully flooded conditions pertaining to TCRRF and Buffer Area operations for defense in depth. (2) Evaluate Category 1 and 2 event sequences for the TCRRF as identified in the ''Categorization of Event Sequences for License Application'' (BSC 2004 [DIRS 167268], Section 7). This evaluation includes credible fuel reconfiguration conditions. In addition to the scope of work listed above, an evaluation was also performed of modeling assumptions for commercial spent nuclear fuel (CSNF) regarding inclusion of plenum and end regions of the active fuel. This calculation is limited to CSNF and US Department of Energy (DOE) SNF. it should be mentioned that the latter waste form is evaluated more in depth in the ''Canister Handling Facility Criticality Safety Calculations (BSC 2004 [DIRS 167614]). Further, the design and safety analyses of the naval SNF canisters are the responsibility of the US Department of the Navy (Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program) and will not be included in this document. In addition, this calculation is valid for the current design of the TCRRF and Buffer Area and may not reflect the ongoing design evolution of the facility. However, it is anticipated that design changes to the facility layout will have little or no impact on the criticality results and/or conclusions presented in this document. This calculation is subject to the ''Quality Assurance Requirements and Description'' (DOE 2004 [DIRS 171539]) because the TCRRF is included in the Q-List (BSC 2004 [DIRS 168361], p. A-3) as an item important to safety. This calculation is prepared in accordance with AP-3.12Q, ''Design Calculations and Analyses'' [DIRS 168413].

C.E. Sanders

2005-04-26T23:59:59.000Z

197

Physics of nuclear reactor safety  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Provides a concise review of the physical aspects of safety of nuclear fission reactors. It covers the developments of roughly the last decade. The introductory chapter contains an analysis of the changes in safety philosophy that are characteristic of the last decade and that have given rise to an increased importance of physical aspects because of the emphasis on passive or natural safety. The second chapter focuses on the basics of reactor safety, identifying the main risk sources and the main principles for a safe design. The third chapter concerns a systematic treatment of the physical processes that are fundamental for the properties of fission chain reacting processes and the control of those processes. Because of the rather specialized nature of the field of reactor physics, each paragraph contains a very concise description of the theory of the phenomenon under consideration, before presenting a review of the developments. Chapter 4 contains a short review of the thermal aspects of reactor safety, restricted to those aspects that are characteristic of the nuclear reactor field, because thermal hydraulics of fission reactors is not principally different from that of other physical systems. In chapter 5 the consequences of the physics treated in the preceding chapters for the dynamics and safety of actual reactors are reviewed. The systematics of the treatment is mainly based on a division of reactors into three categories according to the type of coolant, which to a large extent determines the safety properties of the reactors. The last chapter contains a physical analysis of the Chernobyl accident that occurred in 1986. The reason for an attempt to give a review of this accident, as complete as possible within the space limits set by the editors, is twofold: the Chernobyl accident is the most severe accident in history and physical properties of the reactor played a decisive role, thereby serving as an illustration of the material of the preceding chapters.

H van Dam

1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

198

Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard | Department of Energy  

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

Reporting » Analytical Dashboards » Nuclear Safety Reporting » Analytical Dashboards » Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard The Nuclear Safety Information (NSI) Dashboard provides a new user interface to the Occurrence Reporting and Processing System (ORPS) to easily identify, organize, and analyze nuclear safety-related events reported into ORPS. The NSI Dashboard displays information developed from occurrence information reported into DOE's ORPS database. Events or conditions associated with nuclear safety are reported into ORPS, assigned unique ORPS reporting criteria and used for trending. ORPS reporting criteria are assigned a weighted value to indicate their relative importance to nuclear safety; associated ORPS reporting criteria are combined in key groups and charted over time to index trends in nuclear

199

Infrastructure and Facilities Management | National Nuclear Security  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

200

Contained Firing Facility | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

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


201

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

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

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

202

Nuclear Science Research Facilities Nuclear Science User Guide  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

203

Approaches used for Clearance of Lands from Nuclear Facilities among  

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

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

204

Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Safety and Environmental Policy  

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

Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Safety and Environmental Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Safety and Environmental Policy Technical Position NSEP-TP-2007- 1, Technical Position on the Requirement in DOE 0 420.1B to Use National Consensus Industry Standards and the Model Building CodesTechnical Position NS Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Safety and Environmental Policy Technical Position NSEP-TP-2007- 1, Technical Position on the Requirement in DOE 0 420.1B to Use National Consensus Industry Standards and the Model Building CodesTechnical Position NS All new construction required to follow the provisions of Department of Energy (DOE) Order 420. lB, Facility 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 individuals in the fire community requested

205

Chapter 30 - Nuclear Energy and Safety  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Safety in nuclear industries is a very serious topic due to its greater accident consequence as seen in Chernobyl, and also due to the pictorial perceptions of nuclear accidents being similar to the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear explosions. This chapter points out some important safety aspects of the nuclear industry. Beginning with the current laws and regulations of nuclear safety, this chapter reviews different types of nuclear reactors, nuclear waste treatment systems, reliability of nuclear system, operations of reactors, incident reporting, and a short review of previous accident history. Finally, historical Rasmussen reports are reviewed.

Sam Mannan

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

206

Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities  

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

To establish the requirements for the Department of Energy, including the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), for start up of new nuclear facilities and for the restart of existing nuclear facilities that have been shut down. Cancels DOE 5480.31. Canceled by DOE O 425.1A.

1995-10-26T23:59:59.000Z

207

Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities  

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

To establish the requirements for the Department of Energy, including the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), for start up of new nuclear facilities and for the restart of existing nuclear facilities that have been shut down. Cancels DOE O 425.1A. Canceled by DOE O 425.1C.

2000-12-21T23:59:59.000Z

208

Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities  

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

To establish the requirements for the Department of Energy, including the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), for start up of new nuclear facilities and for the restart of existing nuclear facilities that have been shut down. Cancels DOE O 425.1B. Canceled by DOE O 425.1D

2003-03-13T23:59:59.000Z

209

The Office of Nuclear Energy Announces Central Europe Nuclear Safety  

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

The Office of Nuclear Energy Announces Central Europe Nuclear The Office of Nuclear Energy Announces Central Europe Nuclear Safety Workshop in Prague The Office of Nuclear Energy Announces Central Europe Nuclear Safety Workshop in Prague October 3, 2011 - 2:04pm Addthis The Office of Nuclear Energy, in partnership with Czech Republic Ministry of Industry and Trade, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the State Agency for Nuclear Safety of the Czech Republic, and Argonne National Laboratory, is conducting a regional Nuclear Safety Workshop on Trends in Nuclear Power Plant Safety for Robust Civil Nuclear Programs on Oct. 10-13, 2011 in Prague. U.S. Ambassador Norman Eisen and Department of Energy Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy Dr. Pete Lyons will deliver speeches welcoming participants. Representatives from the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Lithuania,

210

Impacts of criticality safety on hot fuel examination facility operations  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Hot Fuel Examination Facility (HFEF) complex comprises four large hot cells. These cells are used to support the nation's nuclear energy program, especially the liquid-metal fast breeder reactor, by providing nondestructive and destructive testing of irradiated reactor fuels and furnishing the hot cell services required for operation of Experimental Breeder Reactor II (EBR-II). Because it is a research rather than a production facility, HFEF assignments are varied and change from time to time to meet the requirements of our experimenters. Such a variety of operations presents many challenges, especially for nuclear criticality safety. The following operations are reviewed to assure that accidental criticality is not possible, and that all rules and regulations are met: transportation, temporary storage, examinations, and disposition.

Garcia, A.S.; Courtney, J.C.; Bacca, J.P.

1985-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

211

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

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

PURPOSE: To document the Department of Energys (DOE) nuclear safety policy.SCOPE: The provisions of this policy apply to all Departmental elements with responsibility for a nuclear facility,...

212

Spent nuclear fuel project - criteria document spent nuclear fuel final safety analysis report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The criteria document provides the criteria and planning guidance for developing the Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). This FSAR will support the US Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office decision to authorize the procurement, installation, installation acceptance testing, startup, and operation of the SNF Project facilities (K Basins, Cold Vacuum Drying Facility, and Canister Storage Building).

MORGAN, R.G.

1999-02-23T23:59:59.000Z

213

Nuclear safety information sharing agreement between NRC and...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Nuclear safety information sharing agreement between NRC and DOE's Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security Nuclear safety information sharing agreement between NRC and...

214

Nuclear fuel cycle facility accident analysis handbook  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1998-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

215

Radiological Safety Training for Accelerator Facilities  

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

TS TS NOT MEASUREMENT SENSITIVE DOE-HDBK-1108-2002 May 2002 Reaffirmation with Change Notice 2 July 2013 DOE HANDBOOK RADIOLOGICAL SAFETY TRAINING FOR ACCELERATOR FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy AREA TRNG Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document is available on the Department of Energy Technical Standards Program Web Site at http://www.hss.energy.gov/nuclearsafety/techstds/ Change Notice No.2 Radiological Training for Accelerator Facilities Page/Section Change Throughout the document: Program Management Guide Instructor's Guide Student's Guide "Shall" and "Must" statements Revised to: Program Management Instructor's Material Student's Material Reworded to non-mandatory language unless associated with a requirement

216

Compressed Gas Safety for Experimental Fusion Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Experimental fusion facilities present a variety of hazards to the operators and staff. There are unique or specialized hazards, including magnetic fields, cryogens, radio frequency emissions, and vacuum reservoirs. There are also more general industrial hazards, such as a wide variety of electrical power, pressurized air, and cooling water systems in use, there are crane and hoist loads, working at height, and handling compressed gas cylinders. This paper outlines the projectile hazard assoicated with compressed gas cylinders and mthods of treatment to provide for compressed gas safety. This information should be of interest to personnel at both magnetic and inertial fusion experiments.

Lee C. Cadwallader

2004-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

217

High Explosives Application Facility | National Nuclear Security  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

218

Safety Plan for County and District Personnel and Facilities  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Safety Plan for County and District Personnel and Facilities Table of Contents Purpose and Scope of the Plan 2 Governance and Safety Committees Defined 2 Part I: Accident Reporting and Investigation 4 Processes 5 · Additional Training Resources 6 Part III: Safety Requirements for WSU Extension Facilities 7

Collins, Gary S.

219

CRAD, Criticality Safety- Los Alamos National Laboratory TA 55 SST Facility  

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 an assessment of the Criticality Safety program at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, TA 55 SST Facility.

220

CRAD, Criticality Safety- Y-12 Enriched Uranium Operations Oxide Conversion Facility  

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 January 2005 assessment of the Criticality Safety program at the Y-12 - Enriched Uranium Facility.

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


221

CRAD, Safety Basis- Los Alamos National Laboratory Waste Characterization, Reduction, and Repackaging Facility  

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 an assessment of the Safety Basis portion of an Operational Readiness Review at the Los Alamos National Laboratory Waste Characterization, Reduction, and Repackaging Facility.

222

CRAD, Occupational Safety & Health- Los Alamos National Laboratory Waste Characterization, Reduction, and Repackaging Facility  

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 an assessment of the Occupational and Industrial Safety and Hygiene Program portion of an Operational Readiness Review at the Los Alamos National Laboratory Waste Characterization, Reduction, and Repackaging Facility.

223

CRAD, Occupational Safety & Health- Y-12 Enriched Uranium Operations Oxide Conversion Facility  

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 January 2005 assessment of Industrial Safety and Industrial Health programs at the Y-12 - Enriched Uranium Operations Oxide Conversion Facility.

224

CRAD, Safety Basis- Y-12 Enriched Uranium Operations Oxide Conversion Facility  

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 January 2005 assessment of the Safety Basis at the Y-12 - Enriched Uranium Operations Oxide Conversion Facility.

225

Inherent safety concepts in nuclear power reactors  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Different inherent safety concepts being considered in fast and thermal reactors are presented after outlining the basic goals of nuclear reactor safety, the defence in depth philosophy to achieve these goal...

O M Pal Singh; R Shankar Singh

1989-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

226

Nuclear Plant Dynamics and Safety - Nuclear Engineering Division (Argonne)  

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

Nuclear Systems Nuclear Systems Modeling and Design Analysis > Nuclear Plant Dynamics and Safety Capabilities Nuclear Systems Modeling and Design Analysis Reactor Physics and Fuel Cycle Analysis Overview Current Projects Software Nuclear Plant Dynamics and Safety Nuclear Data Program Advanced Reactor Development Nuclear Waste Form and Repository Performance Modeling Nuclear Energy Systems Design and Development Other Capabilities Work with Argonne Contact us For Employees Site Map Help Join us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter NE on Flickr Reactor Physics and Fuel Cycle Analysis Nuclear Plant Dynamics and Safety Bookmark and Share Activities in Nuclear Plant Dynamics and Safety research and development fulfill a primary goal of the Nuclear Engineering (NE) Division to promote improvements in safe and reliable operation of present and future

227

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

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

This document is an aid to understanding and meeting the requirements of DOE O 420.2B, Safety of Accelerator Facilities, dated 7/23/04. It does not impose requirements beyond those stated in that Order or any other DOE Order. No cancellation.

2005-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

228

Technical Safety Requirements for the Waste Storage Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Laycak, D T

2008-06-16T23:59:59.000Z

229

DOE Nuclear Criticality Safety Program - Nuclear Engineering Division  

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

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

230

3S (Safeguards, Security, Safety) based pyroprocessing facility safety evaluation plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The big advantage of pyroprocessing for the management of spent fuels against the conventional reprocessing technologies lies in its proliferation resistance since the pure plutonium cannot be separated from the spent fuel. The extracted materials can be directly used as metal fuel in a fast reactor, and pyroprocessing reduces drastically the volume and heat load of the spent fuel. KAERI has implemented the SBD (Safeguards-By-Design) concept in nuclear fuel cycle facilities. The goal of SBD is to integrate international safeguards into the entire facility design process since the very beginning of the design phase. This paper presents a safety evaluation plan using a conceptual design of a reference pyroprocessing facility, in which 3S (Safeguards, Security, Safety)-By-Design (3SBD) concept is integrated from early conceptual design phase. The purpose of this paper is to establish an advanced pyroprocessing hot cell facility design concept based on 3SBD for the successful realization of pyroprocessing technology with enhanced safety and proliferation resistance.

Ku, J.H.; Choung, W.M.; You, G.S.; Moon, S.I.; Park, S.H.; Kim, H.D. [Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute - KAERI, 989-111 Daeduk-daero, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, 305-353 (Korea, Republic of)

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

231

Nuclear Safety Research and Development Committee Charter  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This Nuclear Safety Research & Development (NSR&D) Committee Charter provides the membership, roles, and responsibilities of the NSR&D Committee.

232

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

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

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

233

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

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

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

234

Proceedings of the Nuclear Criticality Technology and Safety Project Workshop  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Sanchez, R.G. [comp.

1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

235

Safety Culture And Best Practices At Japan's Fusion Research Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Safety Monitor Joint Working Group (JWG) is one of the magnetic fusion research collaborations between the US Department of Energy and the government of Japan. Visits by occupational safety personnel are made to participating institutions on a biennial basis. In the 2013 JWG visit of US representatives to Japan, the JWG members noted a number of good safety practices in the safety walkthroughs. These good practices and safety culture topics are discussed in this paper. The JWG hopes that these practices for worker safety can be adopted at other facilities. It is a well-known, but unquantified, safety principle that well run, safe facilities are more productive and efficient than other facilities (Rule, 2009). Worker safety, worker productivity, and high quality in facility operation all complement each other (Mottel, 1995).

Rule, K. [Princeton Plasma Physics Lab., Princeton, NJ (United States); King, M. [General Atomics, San Diego, CA (United States); Takase, Y. [Univ. of Tokyo (Japan); Oshima, Y. [Univ. of Tokyo (Japan); Nishimura, K. [National Institute for Fusion Science, Toki (Japan); Sukegawa, A. [Japan Atomic Energy Agency, Naka (Japan)

2014-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

236

Safety Culture and Best Practices at Japan's Fusion Research Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Safety Monitor Joint Working Group (JWG) is one of the magnetic fusion research collaborations between the US Department of Energy and the government of Japan. Visits by occupational safety personnel are made to participating institutions on a biennial basis. In the 2013 JWG visit of US representatives to Japan, the JWG members noted a number of good safety practices in the safety walkthroughs. These good practices and safety culture topics are discussed in this paper. The JWG hopes that these practices for worker safety can be adopted at other facilities. It is a well-known, but unquantified, safety principle that well run, safe facilities are more productive and efficient than other facilities (Rule, 2009). Worker safety, worker productivity, and high quality in facility operation all complement each other (Mottel, 1995).

Rule, Keith [PPPL

2014-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

237

Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

238

NUCLEAR SAFETY SPECIALIST QUALIFICATION STANDARD REFERENCE GUIDE  

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

Nuclear Nuclear Safety Specialist Qualification Standard Reference Guide AUGUST 2008 This page is intentionally blank. i Table of Contents LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................... iv LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ v ACRONYMS ................................................................................................................................ vi PURPOSE...................................................................................................................................... 1 SCOPE ...........................................................................................................................................

239

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

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

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

240

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

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

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

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


241

IDAHO STATE UNIVERSITY Chad Pope Department of Nuclear Engineering...  

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

of nuclear safety, nuclear criticality safety, nuclear facility operations and pyroprocessing. He teaches courses in reactor physics, nuclear criticality safety, Monte Carlo...

242

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

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

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

243

Office of Nuclear Safety | Department of Energy  

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

and Security Officer regarding concurrence in the final decision to startup or restart a nuclear facility. Serves as the Standards Executive for the Department of Energy and...

244

Radiological Safety Training for Uranium Facilities  

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

DOE HDBK-1113-2008 DOE HDBK-1113-2008 April 2008 DOE HANDBOOK RADIOLOGICAL SAFETY TRAINING FOR URANIUM FACILITIES U.S. Department of Energy FSC 6910 Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. NOT MEASUREMENT SENSITIVE DOE-HDBK-1113-2008 ii This document is available on the Department of Energy Technical Standards Program Web Site at http://www.hss.energy.gov/nuclearsafety/techstds/ DOE-HDBK-1113-2008 iii Foreword This Handbook describes a recommended implementation process for additional training as outlined in DOE-STD-1098-99, Radiological Control (RCS). Its purpose is to assist those individuals, Department of Energy (DOE) employees, Managing and Operating (M&O) contractors, and Managing and Integrating

245

Public Reading Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

246

Nuclear Facility Operations | Department of Energy  

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

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

247

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Operations (NRC)), Jim O'Brien, Director, Office of Nuclear Safety (EHSS DOE), Robert Johnson (Chief, Fuel Manufacturing Branch (NRC)) Front Row: Matt Moury, Associate Under...

248

Nuclear Explosive Safety Study Process  

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

3015-2001 3015-2001 February 2001 Superseding DOE-STD-3015-97 January 1997 DOE STANDARD NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVE SAFETY STUDY PROCESS U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. This document has been reproduced from the best available copy. Available to DOE and DOE contractors from ES&H Technical Information Services, U.S. Department of Energy, (800) 473-4375, fax: (301) 903-9823. Available to the public from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Technology Administration, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161; (703) 605-6000. DOE-STD-3015-2001 iii CONTENTS FOREWORD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v 1. PURPOSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2. SCOPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

249

The history of nuclear weapon safety devices  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The paper presents the history of safety devices used in nuclear weapons from the early days of separables to the latest advancements in MicroElectroMechanical Systems (MEMS). Although the paper focuses on devices, the principles of Enhanced Nuclear Detonation Safety implementation will also be presented.

Plummer, D.W.; Greenwood, W.H.

1998-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

250

DOE Standard on Development and Use of Probabilistic Risk Assessment in DOE Nuclear Safety Applications (draft), December 2010  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

There have been significant developments with regard to the risk assessment and risk informed decision making, as it applies to nuclear and other safety areas, since the Department of Energy (DOE) developed its approach to managing nuclear safety. The developments and associated technical insights may be of use to DOE in its efforts to continuously improve safety performance at its nuclear facilities.

251

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

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

1993-09-20T23:59:59.000Z

252

About the Neutron and Nuclear Science Research (WNR) facility...  

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

About the Neutron and Nuclear Science (WNR) Facility The Neutron and Nuclear Science (WNR) Facility provides neutron and proton beams and detector arrays for basic, applied,...

253

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Nuclear Facility Construction - Piping and Pipe Supports Inspection - March 29, 2012 CRAD, Nuclear Facility Construction - Piping and Pipe Supports Inspection - March 29, 2012...

254

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

Office of Legacy Management (LM)

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

255

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

CRAD, Nuclear Safety Component - June 29, 2011 CRAD, Nuclear Safety Component - June 29, 2011 June 29, 2011 Nuclear Safety Component and Services Procurement (HSS CRAD 45-12, Rev....

256

Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

257

EARTHQUAKE CAUSED RELEASES FROM A NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE FACILITY  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The fuel cycle facility (FCF) at the Idaho National Laboratory is a nuclear facility which must be licensed in order to operate. A safety analysis is required for a license. This paper describes the analysis of the Design Basis Accident for this facility. This analysis involves a model of the transient behavior of the FCF inert atmosphere hot cell following an earthquake initiated breach of pipes passing through the cell boundary. The hot cell is used to process spent metallic nuclear fuel. Such breaches allow the introduction of air and subsequent burning of pyrophoric metals. The model predicts the pressure, temperature, volumetric releases, cell heat transfer, metal fuel combustion, heat generation rates, radiological releases and other quantities. The results show that releases from the cell are minimal and satisfactory for safety. This analysis method should be useful in other facilities that have potential for damage from an earthquake and could eliminate the need to back fit facilities with earthquake proof boundaries or lessen the cost of new facilities.

Charles W. Solbrig; Chad Pope; Jason Andrus

2014-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

258

Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Research and Development manages and oversees the operation of an exceptional suite of science, technology and engineering facilities that support and further the national...

259

OAK RIDGE CERCLA DISPOSAL FACILITY ACHIEVES SAFETY MILESTONE | Department  

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

OAK RIDGE CERCLA DISPOSAL FACILITY ACHIEVES SAFETY MILESTONE OAK RIDGE CERCLA DISPOSAL FACILITY ACHIEVES SAFETY MILESTONE OAK RIDGE CERCLA DISPOSAL FACILITY ACHIEVES SAFETY MILESTONE December 1, 2010 - 12:00pm Addthis OAK RIDGE CERCLA DISPOSAL FACILITY ACHIEVES SAFETY MILESTONE Oak Ridge, TN - The Environmental Management Waste Management Facility (EMWMF) provides the onsite disposal capability for the majority of cleanup-generated wastes on the Oak Ridge Reservation. EMWMF has continued a long-standing pattern of safe, complaint operations with 3,000 days without a lost workday case since operations commenced on May 28, 2002. The EMWMF has placed 1.5 million tons of waste and fill in the facility. The EMWMF receives waste from many Oak Ridge cleanup projects, including American Recovery and Reinvestment Act-funded projects, multiple

260

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

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

Nuclear Safety - Oak Ridge National Laboratory High Flux Isotope Reactor CRAD, Nuclear Safety - Oak Ridge National Laboratory High Flux Isotope Reactor February 2007 A section of...

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


261

Nuclear Safety Enforcement Letter issued to Sandia Corporation...  

Energy Savers [EERE]

Nuclear Safety Enforcement Letter issued to Sandia Corporation Nuclear Safety Enforcement Letter issued to Sandia Corporation 9222014 Enforcement Letter, Sandia Corporation,...

262

Summary Pamphlet, Nuclear Safety at the Department of Energy...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Summary Pamphlet, Nuclear Safety at the Department of Energy Summary Pamphlet, Nuclear Safety at the Department of Energy September 2010 This pamphlet is developed as part of the...

263

Nuclear Safety Research and Development Program Operating Plan...  

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

Program Operating Plan Nuclear Safety Research and Development Program Operating Plan July 5, 2012 Nuclear Safety Research and Development Program Operating Plan This operating...

264

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

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

Research and Development Annual Report, December 2014 Nuclear Safety Research and Development Annual Report, December 2014 December 8, 2014 - 1:22pm Addthis Nuclear Safety Research...

265

Comparison of radiation safety and nuclear explosive safety disciplines  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

In August 1945, U.S. Navy Captain William Parsons served as the weaponeer aboard the Enola Gay for the mission to Hiroshima (Shelton 1988). In view of the fact that four B-29s had crashed and burned on takeoff from Tinian the night before, Captain Parsons made the decision to arm the gun-type weapon after takeoff for safety reasons (15 kilotons of TNT equivalent). Although he had no control over the success of the takeoff, he could prevent the possibility of a nuclear detonation on Tinian by controlling what we now call the nuclear explosive. As head of the Ordnance Division at Los Alamos and a former gunnery officer, Captain Parsons clearly understood the role of safety in his work. The advent of the pre-assembled implosion weapon where the high explosive and nuclear materials are always in an intimate configuration meant that nuclear explosive safety became a reality at a certain point in development and production not just at the time of delivery by the military. This is the only industry where nuclear materials are intentionally put in contact with high explosives. The agency of the U.S. Government responsible for development and production of U.S. nuclear weapons is the Department of Energy (DOE) (and its predecessor agencies). This paper will be limited to nuclear explosive safety as it is currently practiced within the DOE nuclear weapons

Winstanley, J. L.

1998-10-10T23:59:59.000Z

266

Implementation of DOE NPH Requirements at the Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility (TJNAF), a Non-Nuclear DOE Lab  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Implementation of DOE NPH Requirements at the Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility (TJNAF), a Non-Nuclear DOE Lab David Luke, DOE, Thomas Jefferson Site Office Stephen McDuffie, DOE, Office of the Chief of Nuclear Safety

267

Radiological planning and implementation for nuclear-facility decommissioning  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The need and scope of radiological planning required to support nuclear facility decommissioning are issues addressed in this paper. The role of radiation protection engineering and monitoring professionals during project implementation and closeout is also addressed. Most of the discussion focuses on worker protection considerations; however, project support, environmental protection and site release certification considerations are also covered. One objective is to identify radiological safety issues that must be addressed. The importance of the issues will vary depending on the type of facility being decommissioned; however, by giving appropriate attention to these issues difficult decommissioning projects can be accomplished in a safer manner with workers and the public receiving minimal radiation exposures.

Valentine, A.M.

1982-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

268

Receiving Basin for Offsite Fuels and the Resin Regeneration Facility Safety Analysis Report, Executive Summary  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Safety Analysis Report documents the safety authorization basis for the Receiving Basin for Offsite Fuels (RBOF) and the Resin Regeneration Facility (RRF) at the Savannah River Site (SRS). The present mission of the RBOF and RRF is to continue in providing a facility for the safe receipt, storage, handling, and shipping of spent nuclear fuel assemblies from power and research reactors in the United States, fuel from SRS and other Department of Energy (DOE) reactors, and foreign research reactors fuel, in support of the nonproliferation policy. The RBOF and RRF provide the capability to handle, separate, and transfer wastes generated from nuclear fuel element storage. The DOE and Westinghouse Savannah River Company, the prime operating contractor, are committed to managing these activities in such a manner that the health and safety of the offsite general public, the site worker, the facility worker, and the environment are protected.

Shedrow, C.B.

1999-11-29T23:59:59.000Z

269

Training program requirements for remote equipment operators in nuclear facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

One of the most neglected areas in the engineering development of remotely operated equipment applications in nuclear environments is the planning of adequate training programs for the equipment operators. Remote equipment accidents cannot be prevented solely by engineered safety features on the equipment. As a result of the experiences in using remote equipment in the recovery effort at Three Mile Island Unit 2 (TMI-2), guidelines for the development of remote equipment operator training programs have been generated. The result is that a successful education and training program can create an environment favorable to the safe and effective implementation of a remote equipment program in a nuclear facility.

Palau, G.L.; Auclair, K.D.

1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

270

Criticality Safety Evaluation of Hanford Tank Farms Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Data and calculations from previous criticality safety evaluations and analyses were used to evaluate criticality safety for the entire Tank Farms facility to support the continued waste storage mission. This criticality safety evaluation concludes that a criticality accident at the Tank Farms facility is an incredible event due to the existing form (chemistry) and distribution (neutron absorbers) of tank waste. Limits and controls for receipt of waste from other facilities and maintenance of tank waste condition are set forth to maintain the margin subcriticality in tank waste.

WEISS, E.V.

2000-12-15T23:59:59.000Z

271

Nuclear Safety Workshop Summary | Department of Energy  

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

Workshop Summary Workshop Summary Nuclear Safety Workshop Summary September 19-20, 2012 Nuclear Safety Workshop Summary On September 19-20, 2012, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) held a second Nuclear Safety Workshop covering the results of the Department's actions to improve its posture for analyzing and responding to severe accidents in light of lessons learned from the March 2011 nuclear accident in Japan. Sponsored by DOE and championed by Deputy Secretary of Energy Daniel Poneman, the two-day workshop discussed the lessons learned in a national and international context. The workshop's theme was Post Fukushima Initiatives and Results, and included technical breakout sessions focused on beyond design basis events (BDBEs) analysis and response, safety culture, and risk assessment and management.

272

FAQS Reference Guide Nuclear Safety Specialist  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This reference guide has been developed to address the competency statements in the November 2007 edition of DOE Standard DOE-STD-1183-2007, Nuclear Safety Specialist Functional Area Qualification Standard.

273

Nuclear Safety Enforcement Documents | Department of Energy  

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

2001 Issued to CH2M Hill Hanford Group, Inc., related to Nuclear Safety Management at the Hanford Site Tank Farms March 19, 2001 Preliminary Notice of Violation, BNFL, Inc -...

274

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Fisk, Patricia; Rutherford, Lavon

2003-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

275

Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Policy  

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

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.

2011-02-08T23:59:59.000Z

276

FAQS Qualification Card - Nuclear Safety Specialist | Department of  

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

Nuclear Safety Specialist Nuclear Safety Specialist FAQS Qualification Card - Nuclear Safety Specialist 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). For each functional area, the FAQS identify the minimum technical competencies and supporting knowledge and skills for a typical qualified individual working in the area. FAQC-NuclearSafetySpecialist-2007.docx Description Nuclear Safety Specialist Qualification Card - 2007 FAQC-NuclearSafetySpecialist-2004.docx

277

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Safety Research and Development (NSR&D) Program Nuclear Safety Research and Development (NSR&D) Program The Nuclear Safety Research and Development (NSR&D) Program is managed by...

278

Safety assessment of a robotic system handling nuclear material  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This paper outlines the use of a Failure Modes and Effects Analysis for the safety assessment of a robotic system being developed at Sandia National Laboratories. The robotic system, The Weigh and Leak Check System, is to replace a manual process at the Department of Energy facility at Pantex by which nuclear material is inspected for weight and leakage. Failure Modes and Effects Analyses were completed for the robotics process to ensure that safety goals for the system had been meet. These analyses showed that the risks to people and the internal and external environment were acceptable.

Atcitty, C.B.; Robinson, D.G.

1996-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

279

Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear Facilities  

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

To define the program for the management of cost-effective maintenance of Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear facilities. Guidance for compliance with this Order is contained in DOE G 433.1-1, Nuclear Facility Maintenance Management Program Guide for use with DOE O 433.1, which references Federal regulations, DOE directives, and industry best practices using a graded approach to clarify requirements and guidance for maintaining DOE-owned Government property. (Cancels DOE 4330.4B, Chapter II, Maintenance Management Program, dated 2-10-94.) Cancels DOE 4330.4B (in part). Canceled by DOE O 433.1A.

2001-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

280

Nuclear Explosive Safety Study Functional Area Qualification Standard  

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

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.

2010-05-27T23:59:59.000Z

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


281

The Safety and Tritium Applied Research Facility  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Device, Facility, and Operation / Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Tritium Science and Technology Tsukuba, Japan November 12-16, 2001

R. A. Anderl; D. A. Petti; K. A. McCarthy; G. R. Longhurst

282

Nuclear Safety Enforcement Documents | Department of Energy  

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

Enforcement » Nuclear Safety Enforcement Documents Enforcement » Nuclear Safety Enforcement Documents Nuclear Safety Enforcement Documents Documents Available for Download July 22, 2013 Enforcement Letter, NEL-2013-03 Issued to Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC related to Programmatic Deficiencies in the Software Quality Assurance Program at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory February 12, 2013 Enforcement Letter, NEL-2013-02 Issued to Los Alamos National Security, LLC related to a Radiological Contamination Event at the Los Alamos Neutron Science Center at Los Alamos National Laboratory January 7, 2013 Enforcement Letter, NEL-2013-01 Issued to B&W Pantex, LLC related to the Conduct of Nuclear Explosive Operations at the Pantex Plant October 23, 2012 Enforcement Letter, Controlled Power Company - WEL-2012-02

283

Nuclear Explosives Safety Study Functional Area Qualification Standard  

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

85-2007 85-2007 September 2007 DOE STANDARD NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVE SAFETY STUDY FUNCTIONAL AREA QUALIFICATION STANDARD DOE Defense Nuclear Facilities Technical Personnel U.S. Department of Energy AREA TRNG Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. DRAFT DOE-STD-1185-2007 ii This document is available on the Department of Energy Technical Standards Program Web Site at http://www.hss.energy.gov/nuclearsafety/techstds/ DRAFT DOE-STD-1185-2007 iv INTENTIONALLY BLANK DRAFT DOE-STD-1185-2007 v TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENT ................................................................................................................ vii PURPOSE ....................................................................................................................................1

284

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

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

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

285

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

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

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

286

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

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

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

287

CFN Operations and Safety Awareness (COSA) Checklist Proximal Probes Facility  

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

Proximal Probes Facility Proximal Probes Facility Building 735 This COSA form must be completed for all experimenters working in the CFN and must be submitted to the CFN User Office for badge access. CFN Safety Awareness Policy: Each user must be instructed in the safe procedures in CFN related activities. CFN Facility Laboratory personnel shall keep readily available all relevant instructions and safety literature. Employee/Guest Name Life/Guest Number Department/Division ES&H Coordinator/Ext. Facility Manager COSA Trainer Guest User Staff USER ADMINISTRATION Checked in at User Administration and has valid BNL ID badge Safety Approval Form (SAF) approved. Training requirements completed (Indicate additional training specified in SAF or ESR in lines provided below): Select ESRs

288

CFN Operations and Safety Awareness (COSA) Checklist Electronic Nanomaterials Facility  

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

Electronic Nanomaterials Facility Electronic Nanomaterials Facility Building 735 This COSA form must be completed for all experimenters working in the CFN and must be submitted to the CFN User Office for badge access. CFN Safety Awareness Policy: Each user must be instructed in the safe procedures in CFN related activities. CFN Facility Laboratory personnel shall keep readily available all relevant instructions and safety literature. Employee/Guest Name Life/Guest Number Department/Division ES&H Coordinator/Ext. Facility Manager COSA Trainer Guest User Staff USER ADMINISTRATION Checked in at User Administration and has valid BNL ID badge Safety Approval Form (SAF) approved. Training requirements completed (Indicate additional training specified in SAF or ESR in lines provided below):

289

CFN Operations and Safety Awareness (COSA) Checklist Electron Microscopy Facility  

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

Electron Microscopy Facility Electron Microscopy Facility Building 735 This COSA form must be completed for all experimenters working in the CFN and must be submitted to the CFN User Office for badge access. CFN Safety Awareness Policy: Each user must be instructed in the safe procedures in CFN related activities. CFN Facility Laboratory personnel shall keep readily available all relevant instructions and safety literature. Employee/Guest Name Life/Guest Number Department/Division ES&H Coordinator/Ext. Facility Manager COSA Trainer Guest User Staff USER ADMINISTRATION Checked in at User Administration and has valid BNL ID badge Safety Approval Form (SAF) approved. Training requirements completed (Indicate additional training specified in SAF or ESR in lines provided below):

290

2012 Nuclear Safety Workshop Presentations | Department of Energy  

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

2012 Nuclear Safety Workshop Presentations 2012 Nuclear Safety Workshop Presentations 2012 Nuclear Safety Workshop Presentations Wednesday, September 19 - Plenary Session September 19, 2012 Facts and Lessons of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident and Safety Improvement - The Operator Viewpoints Presenter: Akira Kawano, General Manager, Nuclear International Relations and Strategy Group, Nuclear Power and Plant Siting Administrative Department, Tokyo Electric Power Company September 19, 2012 A Commissioner's Perspective on USNRC Actions in Response to the Fukushima Nuclear Accident Presenter: Honorable William C. Ostendorff, Commissioner US Nuclear Regulatory Commission September 19, 2012 International Perspective on Fukushima Accident Presenter: Miroslav Lipár, Head, Operational Safety Section, Department of

291

Hazard classification criteria for non-nuclear facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Sandia National Laboratories` Integrated Risk Management Department has developed a process for establishing the appropriate hazard classification of a new facility or operation, and thus the level of rigor required for the associated authorization basis safety documentation. This process is referred to as the Preliminary Hazard Screen. DOE Order 5481.1B contains the following hazard classification for non-nuclear facilities: high--having the potential for onsite or offsite impacts to large numbers of persons or for major impacts to the environment; moderate--having the potential for considerable onsite impacts but only minor offsite impacts to people or the environment; low--having the potential for only minor onsite and negligible offsite impacts to people or the environment. It is apparent that the application of such generic criteria is more than likely to be fraught with subjective judgment. One way to remove the subjectivity is to define health and safety classification thresholds for specific hazards that are based on the magnitude of the hazard, rather than on a qualitative assessment of possible accident consequences. This paper presents the results of such an approach to establishing a readily usable set of non-nuclear facility hazard classifications.

Mahn, J.A.; Walker, S.A.

1997-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

292

Facilities  

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

Facilities Facilities Facilities LANL's mission is to develop and apply science and technology to ensure the safety, security, and reliability of the U.S. nuclear deterrent; reduce global threats; and solve other emerging national security and energy challenges. Contact Operator Los Alamos National Laboratory (505) 667-5061 Some LANL facilities are available to researchers at other laboratories, universities, and industry. Unique facilities foster experimental science, support LANL's security mission DARHT accelerator DARHT's electron accelerators use large, circular aluminum structures to create magnetic fields that focus and steer a stream of electrons down the length of the accelerator. Tremendous electrical energy is added along the way. When the stream of high-speed electrons exits the accelerator it is

293

Sandia completes major overhaul of key nuclear weapons test facilities...  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

completes major overhaul of key nuclear weapons test facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering...

294

FAQS Qualification Card - Nuclear Explosive Safety Study | Department of  

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

Nuclear Explosive Safety Study Nuclear Explosive Safety Study FAQS Qualification Card - Nuclear Explosive Safety Study 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). For each functional area, the FAQS identify the minimum technical competencies and supporting knowledge and skills for a typical qualified individual working in the area. FAQC-NuclearExplosiveSafetyStudy.docx Description Nuclear Explosive Safety Study Qualification Card More Documents & Publications

295

CRAD, Nuclear Reactor Facility Operations - December 4, 2014...  

Energy Savers [EERE]

Nuclear Reactor Facility Operations - December 4, 2014 (EA CRAD 31-08, Rev. 0) CRAD, Nuclear Reactor Facility Operations - December 4, 2014 (EA CRAD 31-08, Rev. 0) December 4, 2014...

296

Chapter 6 - Nuclear-Powered Payload Safety  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Abstract This chapter introduces the concepts of Space Nuclear Power Systems (SNPSs), describes the history and nature of these ingenious energy-generating machines. The basic principles of the Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (RTG) and the recently developed Stirling Radioisotope Generator (SRG) are explored and an account of their application in several extra-terrestrial missions is presented. Nuclear fission power as a promising alternative for future outer planet and extra-solar explorations is discussed. The flight safety review and launch approval processes for U.S., as well as the failures and accidents for U.S. and U.S.S.R. (Russian) nuclear powered space missions since 1961 are presented chronologically. A comprehensive probabilistic consequence analysis of all conceivable potential hazards associated with nuclear powered space flights is set out. The chapter concludes with how \\{SNPSs\\} must be designed with the built-in safety features to minimize accidents and to prevent radiation exposure.

Firooz A. Allahdadi; Sayavur I. Bakhtiyarov; Gregory D. Wyss; Gary F. Polansky; Joseph A. Sholtis; Curt D. Botts

2013-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

297

Iraq nuclear facility dismantlement and disposal project  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Al Tuwaitha nuclear complex near Baghdad contains a significant number of nuclear facilities from Saddam Hussein's dictatorship. Because of past military operations, lack of upkeep and looting there is now an enormous radioactive waste problem at Al Tuwaitha. Al Tuwaitha contains uncharacterised radioactive wastes, yellow cake, sealed radioactive sources, and contaminated metals. The current security situation in Iraq hampers all aspects of radioactive waste management. Further, Iraq has never had a radioactive waste disposal facility, which means that ever increasing quantities of radioactive waste and material must be held in guarded storage. The Iraq Nuclear Facility Dismantlement and Disposal Program (the NDs Program) has been initiated by the U.S. Department of State (DOS) to assist the Government of Iraq (GOI) in eliminating the threats from poorly controlled radioactive materials, while building human capacities so that the GOI can manage other environmental cleanups in their country. The DOS has funded the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to provide technical assistance to the GOI via a Technical Cooperation Project. Program coordination will be provided by the DOS, consistent with U.S. and GOI policies, and Sandia National Laboratories will be responsible for coordination of participants and for providing waste management support. Texas Tech University will continue to provide in-country assistance, including radioactive waste characterization and the stand-up of the Iraq Nuclear Services Company. The GOI owns the problems in Iraq and will be responsible for the vast majority of the implementation of the NDs Program. (authors)

Cochran, J.R.; Danneels, J. [Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM (United States); Kenagy, W.D. [U.S. Department of State, Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation, Office of Nuclear Energy, Safety and Security, Washington, DC (United States); Phillips, C.J.; Chesser, R.K. [Center for Environmental Radiation Studies, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX (United States)

2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

298

DOE P 420.1 Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Policy  

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

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

299

Idaho Waste Treatment Facility Improves Worker Safety and Efficiency, Saves  

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

Waste Treatment Facility Improves Worker Safety and Waste Treatment Facility Improves Worker Safety and Efficiency, Saves Taxpayer Dollars Idaho Waste Treatment Facility Improves Worker Safety and Efficiency, Saves Taxpayer Dollars August 27, 2013 - 12:00pm Addthis The box retrieval forklift carriage is used to lift a degraded box as retrieval personnel monitor progress. The box retrieval forklift carriage is used to lift a degraded box as retrieval personnel monitor progress. The new soft-sided overpack is placed for shipment for treatment and repackaging. The new soft-sided overpack is placed for shipment for treatment and repackaging. The box retrieval forklift carriage is used to lift a degraded box as retrieval personnel monitor progress. The new soft-sided overpack is placed for shipment for treatment and repackaging.

300

Nuclear criticality safety: 300 Area  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Standard applies to the receipt, processing, storage, and shipment of fissionable material in the 300 Area and in any other facility under the control of the Reactor Materials Project Management Team (PMT). The objective is to establish practices and process conditions for the storage and handling of fissionable material that prevent the accidental assembly of a critical mass and that comply with DOE Orders as well as accepted industry practice.

Not Available

1991-07-31T23:59:59.000Z

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


301

RAON experimental facilities for nuclear science  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

The Rare Isotope Science Project (RISP) was established in December 2011 and has put quite an effort to carry out the design and construction of the accelerator complex facility named RAON. RAON is a rare isotope (RI) beam facility that aims to provide various RI beams of proton-and neutron-rich nuclei as well as variety of stable ion beams of wide ranges of energies up to a few hundreds MeV/nucleon for the researches in basic science and application. Proposed research programs for nuclear physics and nuclear astrophysics at RAON include studies of the properties of exotic nuclei the equation of state of nuclear matter the origin of the universe process of nucleosynthesis super heavy elements etc. Various high performance magnetic spectrometers for nuclear science have been designed which are KOBRA (KOrea Broad acceptance Recoil spectrometer and Apparatus) LAMPS (Large Acceptance Multi-Purpose Spectrometer) and ZDS (Zero Degree Spectrometer). The status of those spectrometers for nuclear science will be presented with a brief report on the RAON.

Y. K. Kwon; Y. K. Kim; T. Komatsubara; J. Y. Moon; T. S. Shin; Y. J. Kim

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

302

Nuclear safety lies in greater transparency  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

... Chinas nuclear expansion relies on generation III reactors, such as the Westinghouse AP1000 and the Areva European Pressurized Reactor (EPR). The industry promises that these models ... work and cost-cutting often flourish, will sacrifice safety for speed. To date, the AP1000 reactors in the Zhejiang and Shandong provinces are the only commercial units worldwide. Of ...

Qiang Wang

2013-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

303

SAFETY AND RELIABILITY ANALYSIS OF NUCLEAR REACTORS  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Abstract A survey of the various aspects of safety and reliability analysis of nuclear reactors is presented with particular emphasis on the interrelation between structural reliability and systems reliability. In reactor design this interrelation is of overriding importance since it is the task of the control, protective and containment systems to protect the mechanical system and the structure from accidental overloading.

T.A. JAEGER

1972-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

304

Safety assessment for the rf Test Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Radio Frequency Test Facility (RFTF) is a part of the Magnetic Fusion Program's rf Heating Experiments. The goal of the Magnetic Fusion Program (MFP) is to develop and demonstrate the practical application of fusion. RFTF is an experimental device which will provide an essential link in the research effort aiming at the realization of fusion power. This report was compiled as a summary of the analysis done to ensure the safe operation of RFTF.

Nagy, A.; Beane, F. (eds.)

1984-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

305

Fuel Storage Facility Final Safety Analysis Report. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Fuel Storage Facility (FSF) is an integral part of the Fast Flux Test Facility. Its purpose is to provide long-term storage (20-year design life) for spent fuel core elements used to provide the fast flux environment in FFTF, and for test fuel pins, components and subassemblies that have been irradiated in the fast flux environment. This Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) and its supporting documentation provides a complete description and safety evaluation of the site, the plant design, operations, and potential accidents.

Linderoth, C.E.

1984-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

306

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.

307

Nuclear Safety Research and Development Status Workshop Summary  

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

NSR&D STATUS WORKSHOP SUMMARIES Caroline Garzon Chief of Nuclear Safety Staff NUCLEAR SAFETY R&D Perform a peer review of Risk Assessment Corporation WTP analysis by a team and...

308

DOE Cites Fluor Fernald Inc. for Nuclear Safety Violations |...  

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

DOE Cites Fluor Fernald Inc. for Nuclear Safety Violations DOE Cites Fluor Fernald Inc. for Nuclear Safety Violations August 25, 2005 - 2:43pm Addthis Washington, D.C. - The...

309

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

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

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 Environment,...

310

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

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

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

311

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Cottrell, W.B.; Passiakos, M.

1982-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

312

Nuclear Safety Research and Development Committee Charter  

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

Research and Development Committee Charter Research and Development Committee Charter I. Purpose The intent of the Nuclear Safety Research and Development (NSR&D) Committee is to identify nuclear safety research needs and opportunities within the Department of Energy (DOE) and National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and their program offices. The Committee promotes communication and coordination among DOE and NNSA program offices to enhance synergy on NSR&D efforts that can benefit the Department. The Committee will foster and facilitate networking and information exchange on NSR&D needs and activities across DOE/NNSA programs and with external national and international organizations. The Committee should not be construed to have any authority to direct DOE and/or NNSA program

313

Nuclear Power Generating Facilities (Maine) | Department of Energy  

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

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

314

China's approach to nuclear safety From the perspective of policy and institutional system  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Abstract Nuclear energy plays an important role in the energy sector in the world. It has achieved a rapid development during the past six decades and contributes to over 11% of the world's electricity supply. On the other side, nuclear accidents have triggered substantial debates with a growing public concern on nuclear facilities. Followed by the Fukushima nuclear accident, some developed countries decided to shut down the existing nuclear power plants or to abandon plans to build new ones. Given this background, accelerating the development of nuclear power on the basis of safety in China will make it a bellwether for other countries. China assigns the top priority to the nuclear safety in nuclear energy development and has maintained a good record in this field. The policy and institutional system provide the necessary guarantee for the nuclear energy development and safety management. Furthermore, China's approach to nuclear safety provides a benchmark for the safe development and utilization of nuclear power. This research draws an overall picture of the nuclear energy development and nuclear safety in China from the policy and institutional perspective.

Ruimin Mu; Jian Zuo; Xueliang Yuan

2015-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

315

Review of the Implementation Verification Rev iew Processes at the Savannah River Site Environmental Management Nuclear Facilities, September 2011  

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

Implementation Verification Review Implementation Verification Review Processes at the Savannah River Site Environmental Management Nuclear Facilities May 2011 September 2011 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy i Independent Oversight Review of the Implementation Verification Review Processes at the Savannah River Site Environmental Management Nuclear Facilities Table of Contents 1.0 Purpose ................................................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Background ........................................................................................................................................... 1

316

Review of the Implementation Verification Rev iew Processes at the Savannah River Site Environmental Management Nuclear Facilities, September 2011  

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

Implementation Verification Review Implementation Verification Review Processes at the Savannah River Site Environmental Management Nuclear Facilities May 2011 September 2011 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy i Independent Oversight Review of the Implementation Verification Review Processes at the Savannah River Site Environmental Management Nuclear Facilities Table of Contents 1.0 Purpose ................................................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Background ........................................................................................................................................... 1

317

Central Technical Authority Responsibilities Regarding Nuclear Safety Requirements  

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

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.

2007-08-28T23:59:59.000Z

318

Preparation of Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety...  

Energy Savers [EERE]

of such hazards might include the generation of flammableexplosive hydrogen gas by electrolysis of uranium in water or a spill of sodium hydroxide used in radioactive waste...

319

Facility Siting and Layout Optimization Based on Process Safety  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

) that identifies potential layouts by minimizing overall costs. This approach gives the coordinates of each facility in a continuous plane, and estimates for the total length of pipes, the land area, and the selection of safety devices. Finally, the 3D...

Jung, Seungho

2012-02-14T23:59:59.000Z

320

2012 Facility Representative/Safety System Oversight/Fire Safety Workshop - Registrants  

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

Facility Representative / Safety System Oversight Workshop Facility Representative / Safety System Oversight Workshop DOE Fire Safety Workshop Federal Technical Capability Panel (FTCP) Meeting May 14 - 18, 2012, at the Alexis park Resort Hotel, Las Vegas, NV Registrants As of 5/15/2012 Total Number: 218 First Name Last Name Government /Contractor Agency Secretarial Office Site Position Training Course FTCP FS 5/15 FS 5/16 FR/SSO Plenary FR Track SSO Track Fire Safety Training Tour Ron Alderson Government Employee DOE NNSA Nevada SSO SAF-271 No No No Yes No Yes No No Josh Allen Government Employee DOE EM Richland FR No No No No Yes Yes No No No Mark Alsdorf Government Employee DOE HSS Headquarters NTC Safety Training Manager SAF-271 Yes No No Yes No No No No Xavier Aponte Government Employee

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


321

Application of Engineering and Technical Requirements for DOE Nuclear Facilities Standard Review Plan (SRP)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This Standard Review Plan (SRP), Application of Engineering and Technical Requirements for DOE Nuclear Facilities, was developed by the Chief of Nuclear Safety (CNS)1, Office of the Under Secretary for Nuclear Security, to help strengthen the technical rigor of line management oversight and federal monitoring of DOE nuclear facilities. This SRP (hereafter refers to as the Engineering SRP) provides consistent review guidance to assure that engineering and technical requirements are appropriately applied for the design, operations and disposition2 of DOE nuclear facilities. It is one of a series of three SRPs developed by the CNS. The other two SRPs address: 1) nuclear safety basis program review; and 2) application of requirements of DOE O 413.3B, Program and Project Management for the Acquisition of Capital Assets, and DOE-STD-1189, Integration of Safety into the Design Process, for DOE Critical Decision (CD) review and approval. These SRPs may be revised in the future to reflect changes in the DOE requirements, lessons learned, and experience/insights from nuclear facility design, operations, and disposition.

322

Groundbreaking at National Ignition Facility | National Nuclear Security  

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

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

323

Defense Nuclear Facilitiets Safety Board Visit and Site Lead Planning Activities at the Los Alamos National Laboratory  

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

HSS Independent Activity Report - HSS Independent Activity Report - Rev. 1 Report Number: HIAR LANL-2012-08-16 Site: Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) Subject: Office of Enforcement and Oversight's Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Activity Report for the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Visit and Site Lead Planning Activities at the Los Alamos National Laboratory Dates of Activity : 08/14/2012 - 08/16/2012 Report Preparer: Robert Freeman Activity Description/Purpose: The purpose of this Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) activity was to maintain site operational awareness of key nuclear safety performance areas of interest to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB), monitor ongoing site oversight and planning activities for Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) nuclear facilities, and identify and initiate

324

Defense Nuclear Facilitiets Safety Board Visit and Site Lead Planning Activities at the Los Alamos National Laboratory  

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

HSS Independent Activity Report - HSS Independent Activity Report - Rev. 1 Report Number: HIAR LANL-2012-08-16 Site: Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) Subject: Office of Enforcement and Oversight's Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Activity Report for the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Visit and Site Lead Planning Activities at the Los Alamos National Laboratory Dates of Activity : 08/14/2012 - 08/16/2012 Report Preparer: Robert Freeman Activity Description/Purpose: The purpose of this Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) activity was to maintain site operational awareness of key nuclear safety performance areas of interest to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB), monitor ongoing site oversight and planning activities for Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) nuclear facilities, and identify and initiate

325

Double-clad nuclear fuel safety rod  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

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.

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

1984-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

326

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

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

Safety and Ecology Corp. for Violating Nuclear Safety Safety and Ecology Corp. for Violating Nuclear Safety Rules DOE Cites Safety and Ecology Corp. for Violating Nuclear Safety Rules June 14, 2005 - 4:53pm Addthis WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The Department of Energy (DOE) today notified Safety and Ecology Corporation, the contractor responsible for radiological safety at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Project in Portsmouth, Ohio, that it will fine the company $55,000 for violating the department's regulations prohibiting retaliation against employees who raise nuclear safety concerns. "We take safety very seriously at the Department of Energy," said Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health John Shaw. "Today's action illustrates the department's commitment to ensuring that any and all valid

327

Nuclear power's threat to health, safety, and freedom  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

Nuclear power's threat to health, safety, and freedom ... In particular, they may differ on whether the nuclear power plants that are the result of the 1953 Atoms for Peace movement help or hinder the control of nuclear weapons. ...

1980-10-13T23:59:59.000Z

328

A Proposed Cost-Benefit Analysis Approach for Evaluating DOE Nuclear Facility Design Options  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Presenter: Dr. Kamiar Jamali, Senior Technical Advisor to the Chief of Defense Nuclear Safety, National Nuclear Security Administration, Office of Nuclear Safety NA-SH

329

The Radiation Safety Information Computational Center (RSICC): A Resource for Nuclear Science Applications  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Radiation Safety Information Computational Center (RSICC) has been in existence since 1963. RSICC collects, organizes, evaluates and disseminates technical information (software and nuclear data) involving the transport of neutral and charged particle radiation, and shielding and protection from the radiation associated with: nuclear weapons and materials, fission and fusion reactors, outer space, accelerators, medical facilities, and nuclear waste management. RSICC serves over 12,000 scientists and engineers from about 100 countries.

Kirk, Bernadette Lugue [ORNL] [ORNL

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

330

A Safeguards Design Strategy for Domestic Nuclear Materials Processing Facilities.  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

?? The outdated and oversized nuclear manufacturing complex within the United States requires its transformation into a smaller, safe, and secure enterprise. Health and safety (more)

Long, Jonathan

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

331

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

332

Nuclear safety information sharing agreement between NRC and DOEs Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Nuclear safety information sharing agreement between NRC and DOEs Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security.

333

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

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

334

The necessity for permanence : making a nuclear waste storage facility  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Stupay, Robert Irving

1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

335

Nuclear Explosive Safety Study Functional Area Qualification Standard  

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

NOT MEASUREMENT SENSITIVE DOE-STD-1185-2007 CHANGE NOTICE No.1 April 2010 DOE STANDARD NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVE SAFETY STUDY FUNCTIONAL AREA QUALIFICATION STANDARD DOE Defense Nuclear Facilities Technical Personnel U.S. Department of Energy AREA TRNG Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. DOE-STD-1185-2007 ii This document is available on the Department of Energy Technical Standards Program Web Site at http://www.hss.energy.gov/nuclearsafety/ns/techstds DOE-STD-1185-2007 iii APPROVAL The Federal Technical Capability Panel consists of senior U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) managers responsible for overseeing the Federal Technical Capability Program. This Panel is

336

Preparation of Safety Basis Documents for Transuranic (TRU) Waste Facilities  

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

5506-2007 5506-2007 April 2007 DOE STANDARD Preparation of Safety Basis Documents for Transuranic (TRU) Waste Facilities U.S. Department of Energy Washington, D.C. 20585 AREA-SAFT DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. DOE-STD-5506-2007 ii Available on the Department of Energy Technical Standards Program Web Site at Http://tis.eh.doe.gov/techstds/ DOE-STD-5506-2007 iii Foreword This Standard provides analytical assumptions and methods, as well as hazard controls to be used when developing Safety Basis (SB) documents for transuranic (TRU) waste facilities in the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Complex. It also provides supplemental technical

337

Personnel Selection, Training, Qualification, and Certification Requirements for DOE Nuclear Facilities  

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

The order establishes selection, training, qualification, and certification requirements for contractor personnel who can impact the safety basis through their involvement in the operation, maintenance, and technical support of Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities. Cancels DOE O 5480.20A. Admin Chg 1, dated 7-29-13.

2010-04-21T23:59:59.000Z

338

Personnel Selection, Training, Qualification, and Certification Requirements for DOE Nuclear Facilities  

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

The order establishes selection, training, qualification, and certification requirements for contractor personnel who can impact the safety basis through their involvement in the operation, maintenance, and technical support of Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities. Cancels DOE O 5480.20A. Admin Chg 1, dated 7-29-13, cancels DOE O 426.2.

2010-04-21T23:59:59.000Z

339

Nuclear Facility Construction- Structural Concrete, May 29, 2009 (HSS CRAD 64-15, Rev. 0)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This Criteria Review and Approach Document (HSS CRAD 64-15) establishes review criteria and lines of inquiry used by the Office of Independent Oversight's Office of Environment, Safety and Health Evaluations to assess the quality of the manufacturing and placement of concrete used in nuclear facility construction at the Department of Energy

340

Enforcement Regulations and Directives - Nuclear Safety | Department of  

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

Nuclear Safety Nuclear Safety Enforcement Regulations and Directives - Nuclear Safety 10 C.F.R. Part 820 and Amendments 10 C.F.R. Part 820 - Procedural Rules for DOE Nuclear Activities 10 C.F.R. Part 820 - Procedural Rules for DOE Nuclear Activities; General Statement of Enforcement Policy; Final rule; amendment of enforcement policy statement and confirmation of interim rule 10 C.F.R. Part 830 10 C.F.R. Part 830 - Nuclear Safety Management; Final Rule Office of General Counsel Interpretation regarding the Application of DOE Technical Standard 1027-92 under 10 C.F.R. Part 830 Office of General Counsel Interpretation regarding Noncompliant Documented Safety Analyses and Exemption Relief (9/28/2011) Related Guidance DOE-STD-1083-2009, Processing Exemptions to Nuclear Safety Rules and

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


341

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

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

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

342

Listing of Defense Nuclear Facilities | Department of Energy  

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

1 - Listing of Defense Nuclear Facilities More Documents & Publications Draft Policy and Planning Guidance for Community Transition Activities Workforce Restructuring Policy The...

343

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

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Lessons Learned from the 2012 Targeted Reviews of Emergency Preparedness for Severe Natural Phenomena Events at Select DOE/NNSA Nuclear Facilities

344

TRAINING THE STAFF OF THE REGULATORY BODY FOR NUCLEAR FACILITIES:  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Training the staff of the regulatory body for nuclear facilities: A competency framework November 2001The originating Section of this publication in the IAEA was:

Wagramer Strasse; A Competency Framework

345

Moratorium on Construction of Nuclear Power Facilities (Connecticut)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

346

2012 Facility Representative/Safety System Oversight/Fire Safety Workshop Agenda  

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

Facility Representative  Safety System Oversight  Fire Safety Facility Representative  Safety System Oversight  Fire Safety Overall Workshop Agenda May 14-18, 2012  Alexis Park Hotel  Las Vegas, Nevada Monday, May 14, 2012 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. SAF-271, SSO Assessments (Day 1) Zeus B Quality Assurance Overview for FR/SSO Personnel Zeus A 5:00 p.m. - 7:00 p.m. Workshop Registration Zeus Foyer Tuesday, May 15, 2012 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Fire Safety Workshop Track Begins (see track agenda) Parthenon 4 SAF-271, SSO Assessments (Day 2) Zeus B . Safety Culture Workshop Zeus A Federal Technical Capability Panel Parthenon 2 5:00 p.m. - 7:00 p.m. Workshop Registration Zeus Foyer Wednesday, May 16, 2012 6:30 a.m. - 7:45 a.m. Workshop Registration Zeus Foyer 8:00 a.m. - 11:30 a.m. FR/SSO Tracks Begin; Plenary session with Fire Safety Track Parthenon 2 & 4

347

Cleanup of Nuclear Licensed Facility 57  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This summary describes the operations to clean up the equipment of the Nuclear Licensed Facility 57 (NLF 57). Due to the diversity of the research and development work carried out on the reprocessing of spent fuel in it, this installation is emblematic of many of the technical and organizational issues liable to be encountered in the final closure of nuclear facilities. The French atomic energy commission's center at Fontenay aux Roses (CEA-FAR) was created in 1946 to house pile ZOE. Laboratories for fuel cycle research were installed in existing buildings at the site. Work was later concentrated on spent fuel reprocessing, in a pilot workshop referred to as the 'Usine Pu'. In the early sixties, after the dismantling of these first generation facilities, a radiochemistry laboratory dedicated to research and development work on reprocessing was constructed, designated Building 18. During the same decade, more buildings were added: Building 54, storehouses and offices, Building 91, a hall and laboratories for chemical engineering research on natural and depleted uranium. Together, these three building constitute NLF 57. Building 18 architecture featured four similar modules. Each module had three levels: a sub-level consisting of technical galleries and rooms for the liquid effluent tanks, a ground floor and roof space in which the ventilation was installed. Offices, change rooms, four laboratories and a hall were situated on the ground floor. The shielded lines were installed in the laboratories and the halls. Construction of the building took place between 1959 and 1962, and its commissioning began in 1961. The research and development programs performed in NLF 57 related to studies of the reprocessing of spent fuel, including dry methods and the Purex process, techniques for the treatment of waste (vitrification, alpha waste decontamination, etc.) as well as studies and production of transuranic elements for industry and research. In addition to this work, the necessary methods of analysis for monitoring it were also developed. The research and development program finally ended on 30 June 1995. The NLF 57 cleanup program was intended to reduce the nuclear and conventional hazards and minimize the quantities of HLW and MLW during the subsequent dismantling work. To facilitate the organization of the cleanup work, it was divided into categories by type: - treatment and removal of nuclear material, - removal of radioactive sources, - treatment and removal of aqueous liquid waste, - treatment and removal of organic effluents, - treatment and removal of solid waste, - pumping out of the PETRUS tank, - flushing and decontamination of the tanks, - cleanup of Buildings 18 and 91/54. To estimate the cost of the operations and to monitor the progress of the work, an indicator system was put in place based on work units representative of the operation. The values of the work units were periodically updated on the basis of experience feedback. The cleanup progress is now 92% complete (06/12/31): - treatment and removal of nuclear material: 100%, - removal of radioactive sources: 100%, - treatment and removal of aqueous liquid waste: 64%, - treatment and removal of organic effluents: 87%, - treatment and removal of solid waste: 99%, - pumping out of the PETRUS tank: 69%, - flushing and decontamination of tank: 75%, - section cleaning of Buildings 18 and 91/: 90%. The DRSN/SAFAR is the delegated Project Owner for cleanup and dismantling operations. It is also the prime contractor for the cleanup and dismantling operations. SAFAR itself is responsible for operations relating to the CEA activity and those with technical risks (Removal of nuclear materials, Removal of radioactive sources, Pumping out plutonium and transuranic contaminated solvent and Flushing and decontamination of tanks and pipes). All other operations are sub-contracted to specialist companies. The NLF57 cleanup program as executed is capable of attaining activity levels compatible with a future dismantling operation using known and mastered techniques and producing a

Jeanjacques, Michel; Bremond, Marie Pierre; Marchand, Carole; Poyau, Cecile; Viallefont, Cecile; Gautier, Laurent; Masure, Frederic [Commissariat a l'Energie Atomique, Direction de l'Energie Nucleaire, Direction deleguee des Activites Nucleaires de Saclay, Departement des Reacteurs et des Services Nucleaires, Service d'Assainissement de Fontenay Aux Roses: 18, route du Panorama, BP6, 92265 Fontenay aux Roses Cedex (France)

2008-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

348

Princeton Plasma Physics Lab - Nuclear safety  

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

safety Actions taken to safety Actions taken to prevent nuclear and radiation accidents or to limit their consequences. en Celebrating the 20th anniversary of the tritium shot heard around the world http://www.pppl.gov/news/2013/12/celebrating-20th-anniversary-tritium-shot-heard-around-world-2

Tensions rose in the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) as the seconds counted down. At stake was the first crucial test of a high-powered mixture of fuel for producing fusion energy. As the control-room clock reached "zero," a flash of light on a closed-circuit television monitor marked a historic achievement:

349

Microsoft Word - Nuclear Safety Pamphlet Final September 1 2010...  

Energy Savers [EERE]

A Basic Overview of NUCLEAR SAFETY AT THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Outreach & Awareness Series Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) U.S. Department of Energy September 2010...

350

Electrical Safety Assessment Plan - Developed By NNSA/NSO IOD Facility Representative  

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

December 2003 December 2003 An assessment of the Electrical Safety (ES) program at XXXX was conducted during the week of December XX-XX, 2003. The assessment team evaluated the program using the programmatic areas and specific Lines of Inquiry (LOI) contained in the approved Assessment plan provided. The team consisted of the Facility Representative from National Nuclear Security Administration, as well as ES, Subject Matter Expert support. The assessment plan identified 5 areas of review for Electrical Safety. An integrated process has been established to ensure electrical safety hazards are identified and that adequate controls are defined and implemented. The M&O contractor and other NTS Users management actively participate in the ES program. An implemented Work Control process is in place that ensures

351

Independent Oversight Lessons Learned from Targeted Reviews of Implementation Verification Review Processes at Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities, May 2013  

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

Lessons Learned from Targeted Reviews of Implementation Verification Review Processes at Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities May 2013 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy Table of Contents Acronyms ......................................................................................................................................................ii Executive Summaiy .....................................................................................................................................iii 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 1

352

Independent Oversight Lessons Learned from Targeted Reviews of Implementation Verification Review Processes at Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities, May 2013  

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

Lessons Learned from Targeted Reviews of Implementation Verification Review Processes at Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities May 2013 Office of Safety and Emergency Management Evaluations Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy Table of Contents Acronyms ......................................................................................................................................................ii Executive Summaiy .....................................................................................................................................iii 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 1

353

MANAGING BERYLLIUM IN NUCLEAR FACILITY APPLICATIONS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Beryllium plays important roles in nuclear facilities. Its neutron multiplication capability and low atomic weight make it very useful as a reflector in fission reactors. Its low atomic number and high chemical affinity for oxygen have led to its consideration as a plasma-facing material in fusion reactors. In both applications, the beryllium and the impurities in it become activated by neutrons, transmuting them to radionuclides, some of which are long-lived and difficult to dispose of. Also, gas production, notably helium and tritium, results in swelling, embrittlement, and cracking, which means that the beryllium must be replaced periodically, especially in fission reactors where dimensional tolerances must be maintained. It has long been known that neutron activation of inherent iron and cobalt in the beryllium results in significant {sup 60}Co activity. In 2001, it was discovered that activation of naturally occurring contaminants in the beryllium creates sufficient {sup 14}C and {sup 94}Nb to render the irradiated beryllium 'Greater-Than-Class-C' for disposal in U.S. radioactive waste facilities. It was further found that there was sufficient uranium impurity in beryllium that had been used in fission reactors up to that time that the irradiated beryllium had become transuranic in character, making it even more difficult to dispose of. In this paper we review the extent of the disposal issue, processes that have been investigated or considered for improving the disposability of irradiated beryllium, and approaches for recycling.

R. Rohe; T. N. Tranter

2011-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

354

Implementation of an Enhanced Measurement Control Program for handling nuclear safety samples at WSRC  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

In the separation and purification of nuclear material, nuclear criticality safety (NCS) is of primary concern. The primary nuclear criticality safety controls utilized by the Savannah River Site (SRS) Separations Facilities involve administrative and process equipment controls. Additional assurance of NCS is obtained by identifying key process hold points where sampling is used to independently verify the effectiveness of production control. Nuclear safety measurements of samples from these key process locations provide a high degree of assurance that processing conditions are within administrative and procedural nuclear safety controls. An enhanced procedure management system aimed at making improvements in the quality, safety, and conduct of operation was implemented for Nuclear Safety Sample (NSS) receipt, analysis, and reporting. All procedures with nuclear safety implications were reviewed for accuracy and adequate detail to perform the analytical measurements safely, efficiently, and with the utmost quality. Laboratory personnel worked in a Deliberate Operating'' mode (a systematic process requiring continuous expert oversight during all phases of training, testing, and implementation) to initiate the upgrades. Thus, the effort to revise and review nuclear safety sample procedures involved a team comprised of a supervisor, chemist, and two technicians for each procedure. Each NSS procedure was upgraded to a Use Every Time'' (UET) procedure with sign-off steps to ensure compliance with each step for every nuclear safety sample analyzed. The upgrade program met and exceeded both the long and short term customer needs by improving measurement reliability, providing objective evidence of rigid adherence to program principles and requirements, and enhancing the system for independent verification of representative sampling from designated NCS points.

Boler-Melton, C.; Holland, M.K.

1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

355

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

356

Tutorial on nuclear thermal propulsion safety for Mars  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Safety is the prime design requirement for nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP). It must be built in at the initiation of the design process. An understanding of safety concerns is fundamental to the development of nuclear rockets for manned missions to Mars and many other applications that will be enabled or greatly enhanced by the use of nuclear propulsion. To provide an understanding of the basic issues, a tutorial has been prepared. This tutorial covers a range of topics including safety requirements and approaches to meet these requirements, risk and safety analysis methodology, NERVA reliability and safety approach, and life cycle risk assessments.

Buden, D.

1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

357

Tutorial on nuclear thermal propulsion safety for Mars  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Safety is the prime design requirement for nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP). It must be built in at the initiation of the design process. An understanding of safety concerns is fundamental to the development of nuclear rockets for manned missions to Mars and many other applications that will be enabled or greatly enhanced by the use of nuclear propulsion. To provide an understanding of the basic issues, a tutorial has been prepared. This tutorial covers a range of topics including safety requirements and approaches to meet these requirements, risk and safety analysis methodology, NERVA reliability and safety approach, and life cycle risk assessments.

Buden, D.

1992-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

358

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Office of Enforcement and Oversight Criteria Review and Approach Document Subject: Nuclear Safety Component and Services Procurement Inspection Criteria, Inspection Activities, and...

359

Development of Probabilistic Risk Assessments for Nuclear Safety...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

OF PROBABILISTIC RISK ASSESSMENTS FOR NUCLEAR SAFETY APPLICATIONS U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington, DC 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release;...

360

Verification of Readiness to Start Up or Restart Nuclear Facilities  

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

The order establishes requirements for verifying readiness for startup of new Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities, activities, and operations, and for restart of existing Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities, activities, and operations that have been shut down. Cancels DOE O 425.1C. Adm Chg 1, dated 4-2-13.

2010-04-16T23:59:59.000Z

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


361

Groundbreaking at National Ignition Facility | National Nuclear...  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Ignition Facility May 29, 1997 Groundbreaking at National Ignition Facility Livermore, CA Secretary Pena participates in the ground breaking ceremony for the National Ignition...

362

Safety Analysis, Hazard and Risk Evaluations [Nuclear Waste Management  

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

Safety Analysis, Hazard Safety Analysis, Hazard and Risk Evaluations Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Waste Management Technologies Overview Modeling and analysis Unit Process Modeling Mass Tracking System Software Waste Form Performance Modeling Safety Analysis, Hazard and Risk Evaluations Development, Design, Operation Overview Systems and Components Development Expertise System Engineering Design Other Major Programs Work with Argonne Contact us For Employees Site Map Help Join us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter NE Division on Flickr Nuclear Waste Management using Electrometallurgical Technology Safety Analysis, Hazard and Risk Evaluations Bookmark and Share NE Division personnel had a key role in the creation of the FCF Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR), FCF Technical Safety Requirements (TSR)

363

NNSA issues Preliminary Notice of Violation to National Security Technologies, LLC, for Nuclear Safety Violations, Fact Sheet  

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

Sheet Sheet NNSA issues Preliminary Notice of Violation to National Security Technologies, LLC, for Nuclear Safety Violations On August 22, 2011, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) issued a Preliminary Notice of Violation (PNOV) to National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec) for violations of Department of Energy's (DOE) nuclear safety regulations. NSTec is the operating contractor of NNSA's Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) located 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, Nevada. The PNOV cites four violations of DOE regulations governing nuclear safety management. The violations are associated with quality assurance (QA) related deficiencies in the inspection and installation of penetration fire seals and other components at the Criticality Experiments Facility

364

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.

365

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1993-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

366

Facilities & Projects | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

Nuclear Security Administration People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure...

367

National Laser User Facilities Program | National Nuclear Security  

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

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

368

National Laser User Facilities Program | National Nuclear Security  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

369

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

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

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

370

Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee Facility Subcommittee visit to Oak Ridge  

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

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

371

Review and Approval of Nuclear Facility Safety Basis and Safety...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

and consequence evaluations. The mean or best estimate calculation is used to provide perspective regarding the degree of conservatism that is imbedded in the consequence...

372

Self-imposed self-assessment program at a DOE Nuclear Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Nuclear Materials and Technology (NMT) Division at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) has implemented a performance-based self-assessment program at the TA-55 plutonium facility. The program was conceptualized and developed by LANL`s internal assessment group, AA-2. The management walkaround program fosters continuous improvement in NMT products and performance of its activities. The program, based on experience from the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations, is endorsed at the site by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Environment, Safety, and Health (ES&H) personnel and by the Defense Nuclear Facility Safety Board. The self-assessment program focuses on how work is actually performed rather than on paperwork or process compliance. Managers critically and continually assess ES&H, conduct of operations, and other functional area requirements.

Geoffrion, R.R.; Loud, J.J.; Walter, E.C. [Los Alamos National Laboratory, NM (United States)

1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

373

Criticality Safety | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

at Department of Energy Non Reactor Nuclear Facilities DOE-STD-1135-99, Guidance for Nuclear Criticality Safety Engineer Training and Qualification Contact Garrett Smith...

374

Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility |  

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

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

375

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 DOEs operation of nuclear facilities.

376

Fast Flux Test Facility final safety analysis report. Amendment 73  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report provides Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) Amendment 73 for incorporation into the Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTR) FSAR set. This page change incorporates Engineering Change Notices (ECNs) issued subsequent to Amendment 72 and approved for incorparoration before May 6, 1993. These changes include: Chapter 3, design criteria structures, equipment, and systems; chapter 5B, reactor coolant system; chapter 7, instrumentation and control systems; chapter 9, auxiliary systems; chapter 11, reactor refueling system; chapter 12, radiation protection and waste management; chapter 13, conduct of operations; chapter 17, technical specifications; chapter 20, FFTF criticality specifications; appendix C, local fuel failure events; and appendix Fl, operation at 680{degrees}F inlet temperature.

Gantt, D.A.

1993-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

377

Chief of Nuclear Safety (CNS) Senior Technical Safety Manager (STSM) Qualification Program Self-Assessment Report - August 2013  

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

Chief of Nuclear Safety (CNS) Chief of Nuclear Safety (CNS) Self-Assessment Report Senior Technical Safety Manager Qualification Program CONTENTS Background ................................................................................................................................ 1 Results ....................................................................................................................................... 1 Assessment Criteria ................................................................................................................... 1 Finding ....................................................................................................................................... 2 Observation ............................................................................................................................... 2

378

Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) Facility 10CFR830 Safety Basis Related to Facility Experiments  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) Advanced Test Reactor (ATR), a DOE Category A reactor, was designed to provide an irradiation test environment for conducting a variety of experiments. The ATR Safety Analysis Report, determined by DOE to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 830, Subpart B, provides versatility in types of experiments that may be conducted. This paper addresses two general types of experiments in the ATR facility and how safety analyses for experiments are related to the ATR safety basis. One type of experiment is more routine and generally represents greater risks; therefore this type of experiment is addressed with more detail in the safety basis. This allows individual safety analyses for these experiments to be more routine and repetitive. The second type of experiment is less defined and is permitted under more general controls. Therefore, individual safety analyses for the second type of experiment tend to be more unique from experiment to experiment. Experiments are also discussed relative to "major modifications" and DOE-STD-1027-92. Application of the USQ process to ATR experiments is also discussed.

Tomberlin, Terry Alan

2002-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

379

Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) Facility 10CFR830 Safety Basis Related to Facility Experiments  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) Advanced Test Reactor (ATR), a DOE Category A reactor, was designed to provide an irradiation test environment for conducting a variety of experiments. The ATR Safety Analysis Report, determined by DOE to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 830, Subpart B, provides versatility in types of experiments that may be conducted. This paper addresses two general types of experiments in the ATR facility and how safety analyses for experiments are related to the ATR safety basis. One type of experiment is more routine and generally represents greater risks; therefore this type of experiment is addressed with more detail in the safety basis. This allows individual safety analyses for these experiments to be more routine and repetitive. The second type of experiment is less defined and is permitted under more general controls. Therefore, individual safety analyses for the second type of experiment tend to be more unique from experiment to experiment. Experiments are also discussed relative to ''major modifications'' and DOE-STD-1027-92. Application of the USQ process to ATR experiments is also discussed.

Tomberlin, T.A.

2002-06-19T23:59:59.000Z

380

Reassignment of boundaries requiring personal dosimetry at a nuclear facility  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

for monitoring in 10CFR20. In fact, one insurer of nuclear facilities recommends that "occupational exposures, no matter how small, should be monitored and documented for claims evaluation purposes" (ANI 1986). This results from the theory that the nuclear... of Advisory Committee: Dr. John W. Poston Although the federal regulations do not require personnel monitoring for external exposure of all radiation workers, many nuclear facilities provide dosimetry to individuals who do not meet the minimum requirements...

Fulmer, Philip Clark

2012-06-07T23:59:59.000Z

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


381

Nuclear Safety 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, Health, Safety and Security  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

On December 15, Matt Moury, Associate Under Secretary, Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security (EHSS DOE) and EHSS Office of Nuclear Safety staff met with the NRC Executive Director for Operations, the Deputy Executive Director for Operations, and the Director, Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards to sign a nuclear safety information exchange agreement between NRC Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards and the Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security.

382

New Research Center to Increase Safety and Power Output of U.S. Nuclear  

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

New Research Center to Increase Safety and Power Output of U.S. New Research Center to Increase Safety and Power Output of U.S. Nuclear Reactors New Research Center to Increase Safety and Power Output of U.S. Nuclear Reactors May 3, 2011 - 3:41pm Addthis Oak Ridge, Tenn. - Today the Department of Energy dedicated the Consortium for Advanced Simulation of Light Water Reactors (CASL), an advanced research facility that will accelerate the advancement of nuclear reactor technology. CASL researchers are using supercomputers to study the performance of light water reactors and to develop highly sophisticated modeling that will help accelerate upgrades at existing U.S. nuclear plants. These upgrades could improve the energy output of our existing reactor fleet by as much as seven reactors' worth at a fraction of the cost of building new reactors, while providing continued improvements in

383

Nuclear proliferation and civilian nuclear power. Report of the Nonproliferation Alternative Systems Assessment Program. Volume VI. Safety and environmental considerations for licensing  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This volume of the Nonproliferation Alternative Systems Assessment Program report addresses safety and environmental considerations in licensing the principal alternative nuclear reactors and fuel cycles in the United States for large-scale commercial nuclear power plants. In addition, this volume examines the safety and environmental considerations for licensing fuel service centers. These centers, which have been proposed for controlling sensitive fuel-cycle facilities and special nuclear materials, would contain a combination of such facilities as reprocessing plants, fabrication plants, and reactors. For this analysis, two fuel service center concepts were selected - one with power - generating capability and one without.

Not Available

1980-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

384

Independent Oversight Review of the Idaho National Laboratory Fuel Conditioning Facility Safety Basis  

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

INDEPENDENT OVERSIGHT INDEPENDENT OVERSIGHT REVIEW OF THE IDAHO NATIONAL LABORATORY FUEL CONDITIONING FACILITY SAFETY BASIS April 2010 U.S. Department of Energy Office of Health, Safety and Security Office of Independent Oversight i INDEPENDENT OVERSIGHT REVIEW OF THE IDAHO NATIONAL LABORATORY FUEL CONDITIONING FACILITY SAFETY BASIS Table of Contents Acronyms ............................................................................................................................ ii Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... iii 1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................1

385

Nuclear Safety Enforcement Documents | Department of Energy  

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

14, 2002 14, 2002 Preliminary Notice of Violation, Fluor Hanford, Incorporated - EA-2002-03 Preliminary Notice of Violation issued to Fluor Hanford, Incorporated, related to Quality Assurance issues at the Hanford Site. June 19, 2002 Enforcement Letter, Kaiser-Hill Company, L.L.C. - June 19, 2002 Enforcement Letter issued to Kaiser-Hill Company, LLC related to Unplanned Radioactive Material Uptakes at the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site October 22, 2001 Special Report Order, CH2M Hill Hanford Group, Inc. - October 22, 2001 Special Report Order issued to CH2M Hill Hanford Group, Inc., related to Multiple Nuclear Safety Issues at the Hanford Site October 9, 2001 Enforcement Letter, LANL - October 9, 2001 Enforcement Letter issued to Los Alamos National Laboratory related to

386

FAQS Job Task Analyses - Nuclear Safety Specialist  

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

JOB / TASK ANALYSIS for JOB / TASK ANALYSIS for Nuclear Safety Specialist (NSS) Functional Area Qualification Standard (FAQS) DOE-STD-1183-2007 Instructions for Step 1: Step 1 Identify and evaluate tasks - Develop a comprehensive list of tasks that define the job. o A great starting point is the list of Duties and Responsibilities from the FAQS. o Give careful thought to additional tasks that could be considered. o Don't worry about deleting tasks at this point - that is a part of the process further down. - List the tasks (and their sources, e.g., Duties and Responsibilities #1) in the chart below. - Discuss each task as a group and come to a consensus pertaining to Importance and Frequency of the task (i.e., each team member can consent to the assigned value, even

387

Newest LANL Facility Receives LEED Gold Certification | National Nuclear  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

388

NNSA Holds Groundbreaking at MOX Facility | National Nuclear Security  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

389

NUCLEAR SAFETY WORKSHOP AGENDA Post Fukushima Initiatives and Results  

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

NUCLEAR SAFETY WORKSHOP AGENDA NUCLEAR SAFETY WORKSHOP AGENDA Post Fukushima Initiatives and Results September 19-20, 2012 - Bethesda North Marriott TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18 - Grand Ballroom, Salons F/G/H 1 9/14/12 6:00 - 8:00 pm Registration WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 19 - Grand Ballroom, Salons F/G/H 7:00 - 8:00 am Registration 8:00 - 8:05 am Logistics Stephen A. Kirchhoff, Office of Health, Safety and Security US Department of Energy 8:05 - 8:15 am Welcoming Remarks and Workshop Objectives Glenn S. Podonsky, Chief Health, Safety and Security Officer US Department of Energy 8:15 - 8:45 am Maintaining Our Focus on Nuclear Safety Daniel B. Poneman, Deputy Secretary US Department of Energy 8:45 - 9:30 am Facts and Lessons of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident and Safety Improvement - the

390

DOE Cites Bechtel Jacobs Company for Nuclear Safety Violations | Department  

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

Jacobs Company for Nuclear Safety Violations Jacobs Company for Nuclear Safety Violations DOE Cites Bechtel Jacobs Company for Nuclear Safety Violations August 4, 2005 - 2:36pm Addthis WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Department of Energy (DOE) today notified the Bechtel Jacobs Company (BJC) that it will fine the company $247,500 for violations of the department's nuclear safety requirements. The company is the department's contractor responsible for environmental cleanup and waste management at its Oak Ridge Reservation in Tennessee. "One of our top safety priorities is to improve the performance of subcontractors, and to do that we need to hold prime contractors responsible," said John Shaw, Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health. "Our goal is to have work conducted in a manner that protects

391

Guide to radiological accident considerations for siting and design of DOE nonreactor nuclear facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This guide was prepared to provide the experienced safety analyst with accident analysis guidance in greater detail than is possible in Department of Energy (DOE) Orders. The guide addresses analysis of postulated serious accidents considered in the siting and selection of major design features of DOE nuclear facilities. Its scope has been limited to radiological accidents at nonreactor nuclear facilities. The analysis steps addressed in the guide lead to evaluation of radiological dose to exposed persons for comparison with siting guideline doses. Other possible consequences considered are environmental contamination, population dose, and public health effects. Choices of models and parameters leading to estimation of source terms, release fractions, reduction and removal factors, dispersion and dose factors are discussed. Although requirements for risk analysis have not been established, risk estimates are finding increased use in siting of major nuclear facilities, and are discussed in the guide. 3 figs., 9 tabs.

Elder, J.C.; Graf, J.M.; Dewart, J.M.; Buhl, T.E.; Wenzel, W.J.; Walker, L.J.; Stoker, A.K.

1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

392

Atmospheric Dispersion and Consequence Analysis at Sandia's TA-V Nuclear Facilities  

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

Atmospheric Dispersion and Atmospheric Dispersion and Consequence Analysis at Sandia's TA-V Nuclear Facilities Jim Dahl Manager, Nuclear Safety Analysis Sandia National Laboratories Office: 505-284-9067 Email: jjdahl@sandia.gov SAND2012-4478P Sandia is a multiprogram laboratory operated by Sandia Corporation, a Lockheed Martin Company, for the United States Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-AC04-94AL85000. 2 Dispersion and Consequence Analysis at Sandia's TA-V Topics: * Site Characteristics * Dispersion Analysis Inputs - Meteorological Data - Stability Class - Dispersion Coefficients - Deposition Velocity

393

Establishing and maintaining a facility representative program at DOE nuclear facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of this DOE standard, (Establishing and Maintaining a Facility Representative Program at DOE Nuclear Facilities), is to help ensure that DOE Facility Representatives are selected based on consistently high standards and from the best qualified candidates available, that they receive the training required for them to function effectively, and that their expected duties, responsibilities, and authorities are well understood and accurately documented. To this end, this guidance provides the following practical information: (1) An approach for use in determining the required facility coverage; (2) The duties, responsibilities and authorities expected of a Facility Representative; and (3) The training and qualification expected of a Facility Representative.

Not Available

1993-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

394

Independent Oversight Assessment, Salt Waste Processing Facility...  

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

Salt Waste Processing Facility Project - January 2013 January 2013 Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Salt Waste Processing Facility Project The U.S. Department of Energy...

395

2012 Nuclear Safety Workshop Photos | Department of Energy  

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

You are here You are here Home » 2012 Nuclear Safety Workshop Photos 2012 Nuclear Safety Workshop Photos Addthis Glenn Podonsky 1 of 13 Glenn Podonsky Glenn Podonsky (DOE Chief Health, Safety and Security Officer) provides his welcoming remarks. Daniel Poneman 2 of 13 Daniel Poneman DOE Deputy Secretary Daniel Poneman discusses maintaining our focus on nuclear safety. Akira Kawano 3 of 13 Akira Kawano Akira Kawano, Tokyo Electric Power Company, provides lessons learned from the Fukushima nuclear accident. Bill Ostendorff 4 of 13 Bill Ostendorff NRC Commissioner Bill Ostendorff gives his perspective on the NRC's response to the Fukushima nuclear accident. Miroslav Lipar 5 of 13 Miroslav Lipar Miroslav Lipar, IAEA, provides an international perspective on the Fukushima nuclear accident.

396

Microsoft Word - Nuclear Safety Reporting Criteria.docx  

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

Safety Noncompliance Reporting Criteria (as of January 1, 2012) Safety Noncompliance Reporting Criteria (as of January 1, 2012) Nuclear Safety Noncompliances Associated With Occurrences (DOE Order 232.2) Consult the DOE Order for the full text of each occurrence criterion 1 Reporting Criteria Group Subgroup Occurrence Category and Summary Description 2 1. Operational Emergencies 3 N/A (1) Operational Emergency (2) Alert (3) Site Area Emergency (4) General Emergency 2. Personnel Safety and Health C. Fires (1) Fire within primary confinement/containment (2d) Self-extinguishing fires D. Explosions (1) Unplanned explosion within primary confinement/containment 3. Nuclear Safety Basis A. Technical Safety Requirement (TSR) Violations (1) Violation of TSR/Operational Safety Requirement (OSR) Safety Limit (2) Violation of other TSR/OSR requirement

397

An Integrated Safety Assessment Methodology for Generation IV Nuclear Systems  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Generation IV International Forum (GIF) Risk and Safety Working Group (RSWG) was created to develop an effective approach for the safety of Generation IV advanced nuclear energy systems. Early work of the RSWG focused on defining a safety philosophy founded on lessons learned from current and prior generations of nuclear technologies, and on identifying technology characteristics that may help achieve Generation IV safety goals. More recent RSWG work has focused on the definition of an integrated safety assessment methodology for evaluating the safety of Generation IV systems. The methodology, tentatively called ISAM, is an integrated toolkit consisting of analytical techniques that are available and matched to appropriate stages of Generation IV system concept development. The integrated methodology is intended to yield safety-related insights that help actively drive the evolving design throughout the technology development cycle, potentially resulting in enhanced safety, reduced costs, and shortened development time.

Timothy J. Leahy

2010-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

398

A framework for nuclear facility safeguard evaluation using probabilistic methods and expert elicitation .  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

??With the advancement of the next generation of nuclear fuel cycle facilities, concerns of the effectiveness of nuclear facility safeguards have been increasing due to (more)

Iamsumang, Chonlagarn

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

399

Mixed Waste Management Facility Preliminary Safety Analysis Report. Chapters 1 to 20  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document provides information on waste management practices, occupational safety, and a site characterization of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. A facility description, safety engineering analysis, mixed waste processing techniques, and auxiliary support systems are included.

Not Available

1994-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

400

Nuclear Safety Reserch and Development Program Operating Plan  

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

Safety Research and Development Safety Research and Development Program Operating Plan Office of Nuclear Safety Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy June 2012 INTENTIONALLY BLANK NSR&D Program Operating Plan June 2012 Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................... 1 3.0 OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................................................... 2 4.0 NSR&D PROGRAM PROCESSES .................................................................................... 3

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


401

Just in Time DSA-The Hanford Nuclear Safety Basis Strategy  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

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

2002-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

402

NSTP 2002-2 Methodology for Final Hazard Categorization for Nuclear Facilities from Category 3 to Radiological (11/13/02).  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

0 CFR 830 Subpart B requires that all DOE nuclear facilities categorized as HC-3 or above have a DOEapproved safety basis compliant with the requirements of Subpart B. The rule requires the use of...

403

Departmental Representative to the Defense Nuclear Facilities...  

Energy Savers [EERE]

to ensure the health, safety, and security of the workers, public, and environment. This web site is an important means to efficiently manage, distribute, and archive information...

404

INTEGRATION OF FACILITY MODELING CAPABILITIES FOR NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION ANALYSIS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2011-07-18T23:59:59.000Z

405

Work for Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Safety Related Applications  

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

Nuclear Regulatory Nuclear Regulatory Commission Capabilities Sensors and Instrumentation and Nondestructive Evaluation Overview Energy System Applications Safety-Related Applications Overview DOE Office of Nuclear Energy, Science, and Technology Nuclear Regulatory Commission National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Homeland Security Applications Biomedical Applications Millimiter Wave Group Papers Other NPNS Capabilities Work with Argonne Contact us For Employees Site Map Help Join us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter NE on Flickr Sensors and Instrumentation and Nondestructive Evaluation Safety Related Applications Bookmark and Share Nuclear Regulatory Commission International Steam Generator Tube Integrity Program Key objectives of the International Steam Generator Tube Integrity Program

406

Safety Related Applications (Sensors and Instrumentation and NDE) - Nuclear  

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

DOE Office of DOE Office of Nuclear Energy, Science, and Technology Capabilities Sensors and Instrumentation and Nondestructive Evaluation Overview Energy System Applications Safety-Related Applications Overview DOE Office of Nuclear Energy, Science, and Technology Nuclear Regulatory Commission National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Homeland Security Applications Biomedical Applications Millimiter Wave Group Papers Other NPNS Capabilities Work with Argonne Contact us For Employees Site Map Help Join us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter NE on Flickr Sensors and Instrumentation and Nondestructive Evaluation Safety Related Applications Bookmark and Share DOE Office of Nuclear Energy, Science, and Technology The objective of this Nuclear Energy Plant Optimization Project is to

407

KCP celebrates production milestone at new facility | National Nuclear  

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

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

408

Massive Cement Pour into Hanford Site Nuclear Facility Underway: Recovery  

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

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

409

Hanford, WA Selected as Plutonium Production Facility | National Nuclear  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

410

Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities  

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

The Guide was developed in support of DOE O 226.1B to provide guidance that may be useful to DOE line management organizations in meeting the provisions of that order when applied to nuclear facilities.

2014-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

411

Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities  

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

The Guide was developed in support of DOE O 226.1B to provide guidance that may be useful to DOE line management organizations in meeting the provisions of that order when applied to nuclear facilities.

2013-04-04T23:59:59.000Z

412

Massive Cement Pour into Hanford Site Nuclear Facility Underway: Recovery  

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

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

413

National Laser Users' Facility Grant Program | National Nuclear Security  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

414

Pantex sets safety record | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

sets safety record | National Nuclear Security Administration sets safety record | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Continuing Management Reform Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Us Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Media Room Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Speeches Events Social Media Video Gallery Photo Gallery NNSA Archive Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Home > NNSA Blog > Pantex sets safety record Pantex sets safety record Posted By Office of Public Affairs Pantex has set a new safety record with the lowest recordable case rate in the plant's history. The record total recordable case rate of 0.26 is a fitting end to an

415

Pantex receives two safety awards | National Nuclear Security  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

two safety awards | National Nuclear Security two safety awards | National Nuclear Security Administration Our Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure Continuing Management Reform Countering Nuclear Terrorism About Us Our Programs Our History Who We Are Our Leadership Our Locations Budget Our Operations Media Room Congressional Testimony Fact Sheets Newsletters Press Releases Speeches Events Social Media Video Gallery Photo Gallery NNSA Archive Federal Employment Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Home > NNSA Blog > Pantex receives two safety awards Pantex receives two safety awards Posted By Office of Public Affairs B&W Pantex was honored last week with a pair of awards for its exemplary safety record. The President's Award for Best Performing Business Unit and the Target

416

DOE Cites University of Chicago for Nuclear Safety Violations | Department  

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

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

417

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

Energy Savers [EERE]

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...

418

High Explosives Application Facility | National Nuclear Security...  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

at the micron scale in its microdetonics laboratory, and utilizing multiple firing tanks for larger scale explosives experiments. No other facility in the world supports such...

419

National Ignition Facility | National Nuclear Security Administration  

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

other ICF high energy density facilities leading to demonstrate fusion ignition and thermonuclear burn in the laboratory. The NIF is also being used to support basic science and...

420

Preliminary safety analysis report for the Auxiliary Hot Cell Facility, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Auxiliary Hot Cell Facility (AHCF) at Sandia National Laboratories, New Mexico (SNL/NM) will be a Hazard Category 3 nuclear facility used to characterize, treat, and repackage radioactive and mixed material and waste for reuse, recycling, or ultimate disposal. A significant upgrade to a previous facility, the Temporary Hot Cell, will be implemented to perform this mission. The following major features will be added: a permanent shield wall; eight floor silos; new roof portals in the hot-cell roof; an upgraded ventilation system; and upgraded hot-cell jib crane; and video cameras to record operations and facilitate remote-handled operations. No safety-class systems, structures, and components will be present in the AHCF. There will be five safety-significant SSCs: hot cell structure, permanent shield wall, shield plugs, ventilation system, and HEPA filters. The type and quantity of radionuclides that could be located in the AHCF are defined primarily by SNL/NM's legacy materials, which include radioactive, transuranic, and mixed waste. The risk to the public or the environment presented by the AHCF is minor due to the inventory limitations of the Hazard Category 3 classification. Potential doses at the exclusion boundary are well below the evaluation guidelines of 25 rem. Potential for worker exposure is limited by the passive design features incorporated in the AHCF and by SNL's radiation protection program. There is no potential for exposure of the public to chemical hazards above the Emergency Response Protection Guidelines Level 2.

OSCAR,DEBBY S.; WALKER,SHARON ANN; HUNTER,REGINA LEE; WALKER,CHERYL A.

1999-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


421

Nuclear Safety Management, Final Rule amending 10 CFR Part 830 (66 FR  

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

Management, Final Rule amending 10 CFR Part 830 (66 Management, Final Rule amending 10 CFR Part 830 (66 FR 1810), Federal Register (Fed Reg), 1/10/2001 Nuclear Safety Management, Final Rule amending 10 CFR Part 830 (66 FR 1810), Federal Register (Fed Reg), 1/10/2001 SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE) adopts, with minor changes, the interim final rule published on October 10, 2000, to amend the DOE Nuclear Safety Management regulations. EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is effective on February 9, 2001. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Black, Director, Office of Nuclear and Facility Safety Policy, 270CC, Department of Energy, 19901 Germantown Road, Germantown, MD 20874; telephone: 301-903-3465; email: Richard.Black@eh.doe.gov SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction and Summary On October 10, 2000, the Department of Energy (DOE) published an

422

Verification of Readiness to Start Up or Restart Nuclear Facilities  

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

The order establishes requirements for verifying readiness for startup of new Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities, activities, and operations, and for restart of existing Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities, activities, and operations that have been shut down. Cancels DOE O 425.1C. Adm Chg 1, dated 4-2-13, cancels DOE O 425.1D.

2010-04-16T23:59:59.000Z

423

Strengthening Line Management Oversight and Federal Monitoring of Nuclear Facilities  

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

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

424

Enforcement handbook: Enforcement of DOE nuclear safety requirements  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1995-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

425

National ignition facility environment, safety, and health management plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The ES&H Management Plan describes all of the environmental, safety, and health evaluations and reviews that must be carried out in support of the implementation of the National Ignition Facility (NIF) Project. It describes the policy, organizational responsibilities and interfaces, activities, and ES&H documents that will be prepared by the Laboratory Project Office for the DOE. The only activity not described is the preparation of the NIF Project Specific Assessment (PSA), which is to be incorporated into the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Stockpile Stewardship and Management (PEIS). This PSA is being prepared by Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) with input from the Laboratory participants. As the independent NEPA document preparers ANL is directly contracted by the DOE, and its deliverables and schedule are agreed to separately with DOE/OAK.

NONE

1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

426

Deputy Secretary Poneman Discusses Nuclear Safety at the IAEA | Department  

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

Discusses Nuclear Safety at the IAEA Discusses Nuclear Safety at the IAEA Deputy Secretary Poneman Discusses Nuclear Safety at the IAEA June 20, 2011 - 12:00am Addthis Washington, D.C. - U.S. Deputy Secretary of Energy Daniel Poneman today addressed the plenary session at the International Atomic Energy Agency's Ministerial Conference on Nuclear Safety. Deputy Secretary Poneman emphasized the importance of international cooperation and information sharing for developing lessons learned from the Fukushima accident. The IAEA is leading the process to develop these international best practices, which will help strengthen the international nuclear regulatory regime. Remarks as prepared for delivery are below. Thank you, Mr. Ambassador, for your work in organizing this important Conference and to Director General Amano and his staff for convening it.

427

Nuclear Safety Research and Development Program Operating Plan | Department  

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

Program Operating Plan Program Operating Plan Nuclear Safety Research and Development Program Operating Plan July 5, 2012 Nuclear Safety Research and Development Program Operating Plan This operating plan outlines the mission, goals, and processes for the Department of Energy's (DOE) Nuclear Safety Research & Development (NSR&D) Program. This first version of the operating plan also discusses the startup phase of the program. NSR&D involves a systematic search for knowledge to advance the fundamental understanding of nuclear safety science and technology through scientific study, analysis, modeling, and experiments. Maintaining an effective NSR&D program will support DOE and the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) in standards development, validation of analytical models and

428

Nuclear Safety Research and Development Committee Charter | Department of  

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

Research and Development Committee Charter Research and Development Committee Charter Nuclear Safety Research and Development Committee Charter July 5, 2012 Nuclear Safety Research and Development Committee Charter The intent of the Nuclear Safety Research and Development (NSR&D) Committee is to identify nuclear safety research needs and opportunities within the Department of Energy (DOE) and National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and their program offices. The Committee promotes communication and coordination among DOE and NNSA program offices to enhance synergy on NSR&D efforts that can benefit the Department. The Committee will foster and facilitate networking and information exchange on NSR&D needs and activities across DOE/NNSA programs and with external national and international organizations. The Committee should not be construed to have

429

April 27, 2010, Department letter transmitting revised Implementation Plan for Recommendation 2009-1, Risk Assessment Methodologies at Defense Nuclear Facilities  

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

April 27, 20 10 April 27, 20 10 The Honorable Peter S. Winokur Chairman Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board 625 Indiana Avenue, NW, Suite 700 Washington, DC 20004-294 1 Dear Mr. Chairman: In a letter to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board dated February 1, 20 10, I reaffirmed our acceptance of Recommendation 2009- 1, Risk Assessment Methodologies at Defense Nuclear Facilities, and committed to several changes to the Department's Plan for implementing the recommendations therein. Enclosed please find the revised Implementation Plan for Defense Nuclear Facilities Safity Board Recommendation 2009-1 that incorporates those changes. I want to express my thanks for your staffs input on this revision and look forward to similar contributions as we revise the Department's Nuclear Safety Policy and implement

430

HYDROGEN IGNITION MECHANISM FOR EXPLOSIONS IN NUCLEAR FACILITY PIPE SYSTEMS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Leishear, R

2010-05-02T23:59:59.000Z

431

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

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

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

2001-07-12T23:59:59.000Z

432

THE RADIATION SAFETY INFORMATION COMPUTATIONAL CENTER (RSICC) - A RESOURCE FOR COMPUTATIONAL TOOLS FOR NUCLEAR APPLICATIONS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Radiation Safety Information Computational Center (RSICC), which has been in existence since 1963, is the principal source and repository in the United States for computational tools for nuclear applications. RSICC collects, organizes, evaluates and distributes nuclear software and data involving the transport of neutral and charged particle radiation, and shielding and protection from radiation associated with: nuclear weapons and materials, fission and fusion reactors, outer space, accelerators, medical facilities, and nuclear waste. RSICC serves over 12,000 scientists and engineers from 94 countries. RSICC software provides in-depth coverage of radiation related topics: the physics of the interaction of radiation with matter, radiation production and sources, criticality safety, radiation protection and shielding, radiation detectors and measurements, shielding materials properties, radiation waste management, atmospheric dispersion and environmental dose, medical applications, macro- and micro-dosimetry calculations.

Kirk, Bernadette Lugue [ORNL] [ORNL

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

433

Nuclear Facility Operations | Department of Energy  

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

applied engineering national laboratory dedicated to meeting the nation's environmental, energy, nuclear technology, and national security needs. INL is a science-based, applied...

434

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

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

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

435

Supplemnental Volume - Independent Oversight Assessment of the Nuclear Safety Culture and Management of Nuclear Safety Concerns at the Hanford Site Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant, January 2012  

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

Volume Volume Independent Oversight Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture and Management of Nuclear Safety Concerns at the Hanford Site Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant January 2012 Office of Enforcement and Oversight Office of Health, Safety and Security U.S. Department of Energy Office of Health, Safety and Security HSS i Independent Oversight Assessment of Safety Culture and Management of Nuclear Safety Concerns at the Hanford Site Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Supplemental Volume Table of Contents Foreword ...................................................................................................................................................... iii Acronyms ...................................................................................................................................................... v

436

Development of the Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard - September 2012 |  

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

Development of the Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard - September Development of the Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard - September 2012 Development of the Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard - September 2012 September 2012 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. The sum of the severity-weighted factors for the sixty-five ORPS Reporting Criteria equals 100%. Paired pairing is an analytical tool used to determine weighted factors. A team evaluated pairs of ORPS reporting criteria and concurred on the relative importance of each pair. Each ORPS reporting criterion in a group was compared with one other ORPS reporting

437

Development of the Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard - September 2012 |  

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

Development of the Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard - September Development of the Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard - September 2012 Development of the Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard - September 2012 September 2012 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. The sum of the severity-weighted factors for the sixty-five ORPS Reporting Criteria equals 100%. Paired pairing is an analytical tool used to determine weighted factors. A team evaluated pairs of ORPS reporting criteria and concurred on the relative importance of each pair. Each ORPS reporting criterion in a group was compared with one other ORPS reporting

438

FAQS Job Task Analyses - Nuclear Explosive Safety Study  

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

Nuclear Explosive Safety Study FAQS Nuclear Explosive Safety Study FAQS STEP 1: Job Task Analysis for Tasks Task (and Number) Source Importance Frequency (1) Serves as a member or chair of the NESSG. FAQS Duties and Responsibilities Paragraph A 5 3 (2) Provides guidance on and interpretation of nuclear explosive safety (NES) requirements and policy. FAQS Duties and Responsibilities Paragraph B 5 4 (3) Drafts policy directives for the DOE/NNSA, Nuclear Explosive Safety Operations Branch (NESB) and reviews DOE/NNSA policies on NES. FAQS Duties and Responsibilities Paragraph D 5 3 (4) Provides instruction and guidance regarding NES to individuals assigned NES responsibilities. FAQS Duties and Responsibilities Paragraph E 5 3-4 (5) Monitors ongoing NEOs to ensure compliance with NES standards and

439

Exelon Statement Regarding Nuclear Safety and 10 CFR 810  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Exelon respectfully submits that the existing 810 rule, as currently interpreted, and the proposed revised rule, both work as deterrents to improving safety in nuclear operations around the world.

440

A probabilistic safety analysis of incidents in nuclear research reactors  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

......System for Research Reactor (IRSRR). Available...System for Research Reactor (IRSRR). Available...76. 7 Manual on reliability data collection for research reactor PSAs. (1992) IAEA...probabilistic safety analysis of incidents in nuclear......

Valdir Maciel Lopes; Gian Maria Agostinho Angelo Sordi; Mauricio Moralles; Tufic Madi Filho

2012-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


441

Evaluation of replacement tritium facility (RTF) compliance with DOE safety goals using probabilistic consequence assessment methodology. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Savannah River Site (SRS), operated by the Westinghouse Savannah River Company (WSRC) for the US Department of Energy (DOE), is a major center for the processing of nuclear materials for national defense, deep-space exploration, and medical treatment applications in the United States. As an integral part of the DOE`s effort to modernize facilities, implement improved handling and processing technology, and reduce operational risk to the general public and onsite workers, transition of tritium processing at SRS from the Consolidated Tritium Facility to the Replacement Tritium Facility (RTF) began in 1993. To ensure that operation of new DOE facilities such as RTF present minimum involuntary and voluntary risks to the neighboring public and workers, indices of risk have been established to serve as target levels or safety goals of performance for assessing nuclear safety. These goals are discussed from a historical perspective in the initial part of this paper. Secondly, methodologies to quantify risk indices are briefly described. Lastly, accident, abnormal event, and normal operation source terms from RTF are evaluated for consequence assessment purposes relative to the safety targets.

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

1993-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

442

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

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

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

443

The unique signal concept for detonation safety in nuclear weapons  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of a unique signal (UQS) in a nuclear weapon system is to provide an unambiguous communication of intent to detonate from the UQS information input source device to a stronglink safety device in the weapon in a manner that is highly unlikely to be duplicated or simulated in normal environments and in a broad range of ill-defined abnormal environments. This report presents safety considerations for the design and implementation of UQSs in the context of the overall safety system.

Spray, S.D.; Cooper, J.A.

1993-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

444

Nuclear Astrophysics in Rare Isotope Facilities  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Nuclear reactions in stars are difficult to measure directly in the laboratory at the small astrophysical energies. In recent years indirect methods with rare isotopes have been developed and applied to extract low-energy astrophysical cross sections.

C. A. Bertulani

2009-11-02T23:59:59.000Z

445

THE IMPACT OF THE GLOBAL NUCLEAR SAFETY REGIME IN BRAZIL  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A turning point of the world nuclear industry with respect to safety occurred due to the accident at Chernobyl, in 1986. A side from the tragic personal losses and the enormous financial damage, the Chernobyl accident has literally demonstrated that ''a nuclear accident anywhere is an accident everywhere''. The impact was felt immediately by the nuclear industry, with plant cancellations (e.g. Austria), elimination of national programs (e.g. Italy) and general construction delays. However, the reaction of the nuclear industry was equally immediate, which led to the proposal and establishment of a Global Nuclear Safety Regime. This regime is composed of biding international safety conventions, globally accepted safety standard, and a voluntary peer review system. In a previous work, the author has presented in detail the components of this Regime, and briefly discussed its impact in the Brazilian nuclear power organizations, including the Regulatory Body. This work, on the opposite, briefly reviews the Global Nuclear Safety Regime, and concentrates in detail in the discussion of its impact in Brazil, showing how it has produced some changes, and where the peer pressure regime has failed to produce real results.

Almeida, C.

2004-10-06T23:59:59.000Z

446

Innovative cement helps DOE safeguard nuclear facilities | Argonne National  

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

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

447

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Morris, Tommy J. [Los Alamos National Laboratory

2012-07-05T23:59:59.000Z

448

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

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

449

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

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

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

450

Criteria for Evaluation of Nuclear Facility Training Programs  

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

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

451

Guide for the Mitigation of Natural Phenomena Hazards for DOE Nuclear Facilities and NonNuclear Facilities  

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

This document provides guidance in implementing the Natural Phenomena Hazard (NPH) mitigation requirements of DOE O 420.1, Facility Safety, Section 4.4, "Natural Phenomena Hazards Mitigation." This Guide does not establish or invoke any new requirements. Any apparent conflicts arising from the NPH guidance would defer to the requirements in DOE O 420.1. No cancellation.

2000-03-28T23:59:59.000Z

452

Energy Department and Catholic University Improve Safety of Nuclear Waste |  

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

Catholic University Improve Safety of Nuclear Catholic University Improve Safety of Nuclear Waste Energy Department and Catholic University Improve Safety of Nuclear Waste January 30, 2013 - 12:51pm Addthis Secretary of Energy Steven Chu participates in a tour of Catholic University's Vitreous State Laboratory. | Photo courtesy of the Office of Environmental Management. Secretary of Energy Steven Chu participates in a tour of Catholic University's Vitreous State Laboratory. | Photo courtesy of the Office of Environmental Management. David Sheeley David Sheeley Editor/Writer What does this project do? Hanford treats and immobilizes significant quantities of legacy nuclear waste left from the manufacture of plutonium during World War II and the Cold War. Secretary Steven Chu recently visited Catholic University's Vitreous

453

Safety - Vulnerability Assessment Team - Nuclear Engineering Division  

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

Safety Safety VAT Projects Introducing the VAT Adversarial Vulnerability Assessments Safety Tags & Product Counterfeiting Election Security Spoofing GPS Defeating Existing Tamper-Indicating Seals Specialty Field Tools & Sampling Tools Insider Threat Mitigation Drug Testing Security Microprocessor Prototypes The Journal of Physical Security Vulnerability Assessments Vulnerability Assessments Insanely Fast µProcessor Shop Insanely Fast µProcessor Shop Seals About Seals Applications of Seals Common Myths about Tamper Indicating Seals Definitions Findings and Lessons Learned New Seals Types of Seals Seals References Selected VAT Papers Selected VAT Papers Selected Invited Talks Self-Assessment Survey Security Maxims Devil's Dictionary of Security Terms Argonne's VAT (brochure)

454

Summary engineering description of underwater fuel storage facility for foreign research reactor spent nuclear fuel  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document is a summary description for an Underwater Fuel Storage Facility (UFSF) for foreign research reactor (FRR) spent nuclear fuel (SNF). A FRR SNF environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is being prepared and will include both wet and dry storage facilities as storage alternatives. For the UFSF presented in this document, a specific site is not chosen. This facility can be sited at any one of the five locations under consideration in the EIS. These locations are the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, Savannah River Site, Hanford, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and Nevada Test Site. Generic facility environmental impacts and emissions are provided in this report. A baseline fuel element is defined in Section 2.2, and the results of a fission product analysis are presented. Requirements for a storage facility have been researched and are summarized in Section 3. Section 4 describes three facility options: (1) the Centralized-UFSF, which would store the entire fuel element quantity in a single facility at a single location, (2) the Regionalized Large-UFSF, which would store 75% of the fuel element quantity in some region of the country, and (3) the Regionalized Small-UFSF, which would store 25% of the fuel element quantity, with the possibility of a number of these facilities in various regions throughout the country. The operational philosophy is presented in Section 5, and Section 6 contains a description of the equipment. Section 7 defines the utilities required for the facility. Cost estimates are discussed in Section 8, and detailed cost estimates are included. Impacts to worker safety, public safety, and the environment are discussed in Section 9. Accidental releases are presented in Section 10. Standard Environmental Impact Forms are included in Section 11.

Dahlke, H.J.; Johnson, D.A.; Rawlins, J.K.; Searle, D.K.; Wachs, G.W.

1994-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

455

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]

quality assurance Standard Review Plan totally dissolvedmore fully in the Standard Review Plan (see Stage 3). Seenuclear power plants: the Standard Review Plan The Nuclear

Nero, A.V.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

457

Nuclear Power - Operation, Safety and Environment  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

as operation, safety, environment and radiation effects. The book is not offering a comprehensive coverage of the material in each area. Instead, selected themes are highlighted by authors of individual chapters representing contemporary interests worldwide...

458

Implementation Evaluation Criteria for January 2001 Amended 10 CFR Part 830 Nuclear Safety Management  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document provides criteria for use in performing gap evaluations of processes and documents relative to the requirements of 10 CFR Part 830, Nuclear Safety Management. The criteria and associated objective evidence statements have been approved by the cognizant interpretative authorities. The criteria have been developed for each section of 10 CFR Part 830. The criteria have been divided into two categories. Criteria and objective evidence have been developed for use in assessing Fluor Hanford (FH) programs and procedures at the company level--programmatic requirements and evidence. Criteria and objective evidence statements have also been developed for FH nuclear facilities and projects.

EVANS, C.B.

2001-02-13T23:59:59.000Z

459

Integrated Safety Analysis: Why It Is Appropriate for Fuel Recycling Facilities  

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

Integrated Safety Analysis: Why It Is Appropriate for Fuel Recycling Facilities Executive Summary This paper addresses why the use of an Integrated Safety Analysis ("ISA") is appropriate for fuel recycling facilities 1 which would be licensed under new regulations currently being considered by NRC. The use of the ISA for fuel facilities under Part 70 is described and compared to the use of a Probabilistic Risk Assessment ("PRA") for reactor facilities. A basis is provided for concluding that future recycling facilities - which will possess characteristics similar to today's fuel cycle facilities and distinct from reactors - can best be assessed using established qualitative or semi-quantitative ISA techniques to achieve and demonstrate safety in an effective and efficient manner.

460

LANSCE nuclear science facilities and activities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Nuclear science activities at the Los Alamos Neutron Science Center (LANSCE) encompass measurements spanning the neutron energy range from thermal to 600 MeV. The neutron sources use spallation of the LANSCE 800 MeV pulsed proton beam with the time-of-flight technique to measure properties of neutron-induced reactions as a function of energy over this large energy range. Current experiments are conducted at the Lujan Center moderated neutron source, the unmoderated WNR target, and with a lead-slowing-down spectrometer. Instruments in use include the DANCE array of BaF{sub 2} scintillators for neutron capture studies, the FIGARO array of liquid scintillator neutron detectors, the GEANIE array of high-resolution HPGe x-ray and gamma-ray detectors, and a number of fission chambers, and other detectors. The LANL capabilities for production and handling of radioactive materials coupled with the neutron sources and detectors at LANSCE are enabling new and challenging measurements for a variety of applications including nuclear energy and nuclear astrophysics. An overview of recent research and examples of results is presented.

Nelson, Ronald O [Los Alamos National Laboratory

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


461

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]

On other hand, accidents at nuclear facilities could nott ed expos ur e from a nuclear accident which would warrantresulting from accidents at nuclear facilities. Average

Nero, A.V.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

462

Facts and Lessons of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident and Safety Improvement  

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

Facts and Lessons of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident and Safety Facts and Lessons of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident and Safety Improvement - The Operator Viewpoints Facts and Lessons of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident and Safety Improvement - The Operator Viewpoints September 19, 2012 Presenter: Akira Kawano, General Manager, Nuclear International Relations and Strategy Group, Nuclear Power and Plant Siting Administrative Department, Tokyo Electric Power Company Topics Covered: How Tsunami Struck Fukushima Sites Tsunami Height Estimation How we responded in the Recovery Process Safety Improvement and Further Enhancement of Nuclear Safety Facts and Lessons of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident and Safety Improvement - The Operator Viewpoints More Documents & Publications January2005 NNSANews Meeting Materials: June 15, 2011

463

NASA Benchmarks Safety Functions Assessment plan - Developed By NNSA/Nevada Site Office Facility Representative Division  

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

SAFETY FUNCTIONS SAFETY FUNCTIONS Assessment Plan Developed By NNSA/Nevada Site Office Facility Representative Division Performance Objective: Management should be proactive in addressing safety-related issues. Management should have an established system to provide a ranking of safety considerations founded upon risk-based priorities. Criteria: A system is in place to provide a ranking of safety considerations founded upon risk-based priorities. (DOE/EH-0135) Procedures clearly define management's responsibility for safety- related decisions and provide for the escalation of matters in an appropriate time frame. (DOE/EH-0135) Management promotes safety programs and the organization's safety culture through sponsoring and attending safety meetings. (DOE/EH- 0135) Management encourages and supports effective programs for reporting

464

Iraq nuclear facility dismantlement and disposal project (NDs Project).  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Al Tuwaitha nuclear complex near Baghdad contains a number of facilities from Saddam Hussan's nuclear weapons program. Past military operations, lack of upkeep and looting have created an enormous radioactive waste problem at the Al Tuwaitha complex, which contains various, uncharacterized radioactive wastes, yellow cake, sealed radioactive sources, and contaminated metals that must be constantly guarded. Iraq has never had a radioactive waste disposal facility and the lack of a disposal facility means that ever increasing quantities of radioactive material must be held in guarded storage. The Iraq Nuclear Facility Dismantlement and Disposal Program (the NDs Program) has been initiated by the U.S. Department of State (DOS) to assist the Government of Iraq (GOI) in eliminating the threats from poorly controlled radioactive materials, while building human capacities so that the GOI can manage other environmental cleanups in their country. The DOS is funding the IAEA to provide technical assistance via Technical Cooperation projects. Program coordination will be provided by the DOS, consistent with GOI policies, and Sandia National Laboratories will be responsible for coordination of participants and waste management support. Texas Tech University will continue to provide in-country assistance, including radioactive waste characterization and the stand-up of the Iraq Nuclear Services Company. The GOI owns the problems in Iraq and will be responsible for implementation of the NDs Program.

Cochran, John Russell

2010-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

465

Support of the Iraq nuclear facility dismantlement and disposal program  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Available in abstract form only. Full text of publication follows: Iraq's former nuclear facilities contain large quantities of radioactive materials and radioactive waste. The Iraq Nuclear Facility Dismantlement and Disposal Program (the Iraq NDs Program) is a new program to decontaminate and permanently dispose of radioactive wastes in Iraq. The NDs Program is led by the Government of Iraq, under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) auspices, with guidance and assistance from a number of countries. The U.S. participants include Texas Tech University and Sandia National Laboratories. A number of activities are ongoing under the broad umbrella of the Iraq NDs Program: drafting a new nuclear law that will provide the legal basis for the cleanup and disposal activities; assembly and analysis of existing data; characterization of soil contamination; bringing Iraqi scientists to the world's largest symposium on radioactive waste management; touring U.S. government and private sector operating radwaste disposal facilities in the U.S., and hosting a planning workshop on the characterization and cleanup of the Al-Tuwaitha Nuclear Facility. (authors)

Coates, Roger [International Atomic Energy Agency - IAEA, Wagramer Strasse 5, P.O. Box 100 - 1400 Vienna (Austria); Cochran, John; Danneels, Jeff [Sandia National Laboratories (United States); Chesser, Ronald; Phillips, Carlton; Rogers, Brenda [Center for Environmental Radiation Studies, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409 (United States)

2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

466

Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

This Guide provides U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) line management organizations with guidance that may be useful to them in effectively and efficiently implementing the requirements of DOE O 226.1B, Implementation of Department of Energy Oversight Policy, dated April 25, 2011, as applied to Federal line management of hazard category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities.

467

Guidance for identifying, reporting and tracking nuclear safety noncompliances  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document provides Department of Energy (DOE) contractors, subcontractors and suppliers with guidance in the effective use of DOE`s Price-Anderson nuclear safety Noncompliance Tracking System (NTS). Prompt contractor identification, reporting to DOE, and correction of nuclear safety noncompliances provides DOE with a basis to exercise enforcement discretion to mitigate civil penalties, and suspend the issuance of Notices of Violation for certain violations. Use of this reporting methodology is elective by contractors; however, this methodology is intended to reflect DOE`s philosophy on effective identification and reporting of nuclear safety noncompliances. To the extent that these expectations are met for particular noncompliances, DOE intends to appropriately exercise its enforcement discretion in considering whether, and to what extent, to undertake enforcement action.

NONE

1995-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

468

Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety Program - DOE Directives...  

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

D, Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety Program by cdornburg Functional areas: Defense Nuclear Facility Safety and Health Requirement, Defense Programs, Nuclear Weapons Programs,...

469

Nuclear Safety Enforcement Documents | Department of Energy  

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

Letter, NEL-2013-01 - January 7, 2013 Issued to B&W Pantex, LLC related to the Conduct of Nuclear Explosive Operations at the Pantex Plant October 4, 2012 Preliminary Notice of...

470

Hazard Evaluation for Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel at the Solid Waste Treatment Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report is prepared as the initial step in the safety assurance process described in 10 CFR 830 Subpart B, Nuclear Safety Management, and HNF-PRO-700, Safety Basis Development.

ERPENBECK, E.G.

2002-11-12T23:59:59.000Z

471

Construction safety program for the National Ignition Facility, Appendix A  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Topics covered in this appendix include: General Rules-Code of Safe Practices; 2. Personal Protective Equipment; Hazardous Material Control; Traffic Control; Fire Prevention; Sanitation and First Aid; Confined Space Safety Requirements; Ladders and Stairways; Scaffolding and Lift Safety; Machinery, Vehicles, and Heavy Equipment; Welding and Cutting-General; Arc Welding; Oxygen/Acetylene Welding and Cutting; Excavation, Trenching, and Shoring; Fall Protection; Steel Erection; Working With Asbestos; Radiation Safety; Hand Tools; Electrical Safety; Nonelectrical Work Performed Near Exposed High-Voltage Power-Distribution Equipment; Lockout/Tagout Requirements; Rigging; A-Cranes; Housekeeping; Material Handling and Storage; Lead; Concrete and Masonry Construction.

Cerruti, S.J.

1997-06-26T23:59:59.000Z

472

Facility Safety Policy, Guidance & Reports | Department of Energy  

Energy Savers [EERE]

criticality safety, natural phenomena hazards (NPH) mitigation, and System Engineer Program. DOE ORDER (O) 252.1A, TECHNICAL STANDARDS PROGRAM DOE O 252.1A promotes...

473

E-Print Network 3.0 - aerospace nuclear safety Sample Search...  

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

and Nuclear Technologies 2 A Systematic Approach to Safety Case Management Dr Tim Kelly Summary: The concept of the safety case' has already been adopted across many...

474

Interim Safety Basis for Fuel Supply Shutdown Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This ISB, in conjunction with the IOSR, provides the required basis for interim operation or restrictions on interim operations and administrative controls for the facility until a SAR is prepared in accordance with the new requirements or the facility is shut down. It is concluded that the risks associated with tha current and anticipated mode of the facility, uranium disposition, clean up, and transition activities required for permanent closure, are within risk guidelines.

BENECKE, M.W.

2000-09-07T23:59:59.000Z

475

Processing Exemptions to Nuclear Safety Rules and Approval of Alternative Methods for Documented Safety Analysis  

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

STD-1083-2009 STD-1083-2009 June 2009 DOE STANDARD PROCESSING EXEMPTIONS TO NUCLEAR SAFETY RULES AND APPROVAL OF ALTERNATIVE METHODS FOR DOCUMENTED SAFETY ANALYSES U.S. Department of Energy AREA SAFT Washington D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. NOT MEASUREMENT SENSITIVE This document is available on the Department of Energy Technical Standards Program Web Page at http://www.hss.energy.gov/nuclearsafety/techstds DOE-STD-1083-2009 iii FOREWORD 1. This Department of Energy (DOE) Standard has been prepared by the Office of Quality Assurance Policy and Assistance to provide acceptable processes for: a. requesting and granting exemptions to DOE nuclear safety rules and b. requesting and approving alternate methodologies for documented safety analyses

476

Construction safety program for the National Ignition Facility, Appendix B  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Appendix contains material from the LLNL Health and Safety Manual as listed below. For sections not included in this list, please refer to the Manual itself. The areas covered are: asbestos, lead, fire prevention, lockout, and tag program confined space traffic safety.

Cerruti, S.J.

1997-06-26T23:59:59.000Z

477

A framework for nuclear facility safeguard evaluation using probabilistic methods and expert elicitation  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

With the advancement of the next generation of nuclear fuel cycle facilities, concerns of the effectiveness of nuclear facility safeguards have been increasing due to the inclusion of highly enriched material and reprocessing ...

Iamsumang, Chonlagarn

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

478

CFN Operations and Safety Awareness (COSA) Checklist Advanced Optical Methods Facility  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

(Indicate additional training specified in SAF or ESR in lines provided below): Select ESRs 20 User AdminCFN Operations and Safety Awareness (COSA) Checklist Advanced Optical Methods Facility Building 735 procedures in CFN related activities. CFN Facility Laboratory personnel shall keep readily available all

Ohta, Shigemi

479

Frequently Asked Questions Regarding DOE Order 420.1C, Facility Safety  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Frequently Asked Questions Regarding DOE Order 420.1C, Facility Safety, and its supporting directives, DOE?STD?1020?2012, Natural Phenomena Hazards Analysis and Design Criteria for DOE Facilities, and DOE?STD?1066?2012, Fire Protection

480

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]

Health and Safety Aspects of Pro- posed Nuclear, Geothermal, and Fossil-FuelHEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUELHealth and Safety Impacts of Nuclear, Geothermal, and Fossil- Fuel

Nero, A.V.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


481

Facility Representative Program: 2010 Facility Representative Workshop  

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

10 Facility Representative Workshop 10 Facility Representative Workshop May 12 - 13, 2010 Las Vegas, NV Facility Rep of the Year Award | Attendees | Summary Report Workshop Agenda and Presentations Day 1: Wednesday, May 12, 2010 8:00 a.m. Opening Remarks James Heffner, Facility Representative Program Manager Earl Hughes, Safety System Oversight Program Manager Office of Nuclear Safety Policy and Assistance Office of Health, Safety and Security 8:15 a.m. Welcome from the Nevada Site Office John Mallin, Deputy Assistant Manager for Site Operations Nevada Site Office 8:30 a.m. Workshop Keynote Address Todd Lapointe Chief of Nuclear Safety Central Technical Authority Staff 9:15 a.m. Facility Representative and Safety System Oversight Award Ceremony James Heffner, Facility Representative Program Manager

482

Improved nuclear safety through international standards  

Science Journals Connector (OSTI)

In this shrinking world what happens in an industry in one country can significantly affect the same industry elsewhere around the globe. In April 1986 a nuclear accident destroyed Unit 4 of Ukraines Chernobyl nuclear power plant focusing worldwide attention on the dozens of Soviet-designed reactors still in operation. The Chemobyl accident led to public concerns about all operating nuclear power plants and in some countries (e.g. Italy and Sweden) to proposals for nationwide plant closures or moratoriums on new construction. However for most former Soviet Union countries plant shutdown was and still is not a viable optionthe plants produce a significant percentage of each nations total electricity and those countries do not have sufficient economic resources to develop alternative power sources. In cooperation with similar programs initiated in Canada Japan and western European countries the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is conducting a comprehensive effort to reduce risks at Soviet-designed nuclear power plants until they can be shut down or brought into compliance with international standards. This paper describes DOE-supported initiatives with participating host countries to: improve reliability and accuracy of nondestructive evaluation equipment used for in-service inspection transfer technologies and infrastructure to improve in-service inspections enhance management systems for training and certifying host-country in-service inspection personnel The goal of these initiatives to enhance the use of international standards (ASME ASNT European Standards EN and ISO) in operating and regulatory practices at Soviet-designed nuclear power plants.

S. R. Doctor; R. L. Moffitt; T. T. Taylor; G. Trosman

2000-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

483

SUMMARY OF REVISED TORNADO, HURRICANE AND EXTREME STRAIGHT WIND CHARACTERISTICS AT NUCLEAR FACILITY SITES  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

Summary of Revised Tornado, Hurricane and Extreme Straight Wind Characteristics at Nuclear Facility Sites BY: John D. Stevenson Consulting Engineer

484

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1994-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

485

Safety system augmentation at Russian nuclear power plants  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This paper describes the design and procurement of a Class IE DC power supply system to upgrade plant safety at the Kola Nuclear Power Plant (NPP). Kola NPP is located above the Arctic circle at Polyarnie Zorie, Murmansk, Russia. Kola NPP consists of four units. Units 1 and 2 have VVER-440/230 type reactors: Units 3 and 4 have VVER-440/213 type reactors. The VVER-440 reactor design is similar to the pressurized water reactor design used in the US. This project provided redundant, Class 1E DC station batteries and DC switchboards for Kola NPP, Units 1 and 2. The new DC power supply system was designed and procured in compliance with current nuclear design practices and requirements. Technical issues that needed to be addressed included reconciling the requirements in both US and Russian codes and satisfying the requirements of the Russian nuclear regulatory authority. Close interface with ATOMENERGOPROEKT (AEP), the Russian design organization, KOLA NPP plant personnel, and GOSATOMNADZOR (GAN), the Russian version of US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, was necessary to develop a design that would assure compliance with current Russian design requirements. Hence, this project was expected to serve as an example for plant upgrades at other similar VVER-440 nuclear plants. In addition to technical issues, the project needed to address language barriers and the logistics of shipping equipment to a remote section of the Former Soviet Union (FSU). This project was executed by Burns and Roe under the sponsorship of the US DOE as part of the International Safety Program (INSP). The INSP is a comprehensive effort, in cooperation with partners in other countries, to improve nuclear safety worldwide. A major element within the INSP is the improvement of the safety of Soviet-designed nuclear reactors.

Scerbo, J.A.; Satpute, S.N.; Donkin, J.Y.; Reister, R.A. [Burns and Roe, Oradell, NJ (United States); [Department of Energy, Germantown, MD (United States)

1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

486

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.

487

SCALE 6: Comprehensive Nuclear Safety Analysis Code System  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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