National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for nuclear facilities safety

  1. Defense Nuclear Facility Safety Board

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

    8, 2014 Defense Nuclear Facility Safety Board Defense Nuclear Facility Safety Board (DNSFB) Vice Chairwoman Jesse Roberson visited and toured the WIPP site this week. While...

  2. CRAD, Facility Safety- Nuclear Facility Safety Basis

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    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. 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...

  5. Preparation Of Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety...

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

    9-2014, Preparation Of Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis by Website Administrator This Department of Energy (DOE) Standard (STD), DOE-STD-3009-2014, describes...

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

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    DOE STANDARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF NUCLEAR FACILITY SAFETY BASIS AND SAFETY DESIGN BASIS ... Neither a reviewer nor the preparer has veto power over ultimate resolution or ...

  7. CRAD, Facility Safety- Nuclear Facility Design

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    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 Design.

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

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

    104-2014, Review and Approval of Nuclear Facility Safety Basis and Safety Design Basis Documents by Website Administrator This Standard describes a framework and the criteria to be...

  9. Facility Safety

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

    1996-10-24

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

  10. Facility Safety

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

    1995-11-16

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

  11. Office of Nuclear Safety Basis and Facility Design

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  12. 2016 Nuclear and Facility Safety Program Workshop | Department of Energy

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

    Nuclear and Facility Safety Program Workshop 2016 Nuclear and Facility Safety Program Workshop March 22, 2016 - 3:48pm Addthis 2016 Nuclear and Facility Safety Program Workshop The Office of Environmental Health, Safety, and Security will sponsor the 2016 Nuclear and Facility Safety Program Workshop which will be held May 2-6, 2016 at the Alexis Park in Las Vegas, Nevada. The Workshop will include meetings for the DOE Safety Culture Improvement Panel, Federal Technical Capability Panel, Facility

  13. 2015 Nuclear & Facility Safety Programs Workshop Agenda | Department...

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

    2015 Nuclear and Facility Safety Programs Workshop agenda outlining following: Training Plenary Session Award Presentations Guest speakers Fire Safety Workshop Facility...

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

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

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

  15. CRAD, Nuclear Facility Safety System- September 25, 2009

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Nuclear Facility Safety System Functionality Inspection Criteria, Inspection Activities, and Lines of Inquiry (HSS CRAD 64-17, Rev 0 )

  16. Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Letters and Recommendations

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    | Department of Energy Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Letters and Recommendations Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Letters and Recommendations Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Letters and Recommendations The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) is an independent organization within the executive branch chartered with the responsibility of providing recommendations and advice to the President and the Secretary of Energy regarding

  17. Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Update - Dale Govan,

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Departmental Representative to the DNFSB | Department of Energy Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Update - Dale Govan, Departmental Representative to the DNFSB Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Update - Dale Govan, Departmental Representative to the DNFSB DNFSB Mission The Board provides independent analysis, advice and recommendations to the Secretary to ensure adequate protection to public health and safety at defense nuclear facilities. Identify Department

  18. NNSA and Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board certifications...

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

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

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

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

    Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Update - Dale Govan, Departmental Representative to the DNFSB DNFSB Mission The Board provides independent analysis, advice and ...

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

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

    2000-03-28

    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.

  1. Facility Safety

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

    2000-11-20

    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.

  2. Facility Safety

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

    2012-12-04

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

  3. Facility Safety

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

    2005-12-22

    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.

  4. Facility Safety

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

    2005-12-22

    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.

  5. Interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board

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

    1996-12-30

    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.

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

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    CHANGE NOTICE NO. 3 Date December 2005 DOE STANDARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF NUCLEAR FACILITY SAFETY ... Neither a reviewer nor the preparer has veto power over ultimate resolution or ...

  7. Interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board

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

    1999-01-26

    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.

  8. Preparation Of Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis

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

    2014-11-12

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

  9. Interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board

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

    2001-03-30

    This Manual presents the process the Department of Energy will use to interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) and its staff. Supersedes DOE M 140.1-1A.

  10. Nuclear and Facility Safety Directives | Department of Energy

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

    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. AU-30 Contact: Jeff Feit DOE Policy (P) 420.1, Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Policy DOE P 420.1,

  11. Facility Safety

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

    2012-12-04

    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.

  12. Facility Safety

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

    1995-10-13

    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.

  13. Facility Safety

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

    2002-05-20

    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.

  14. 2015 Nuclear & Facility Safety Programs Workshop

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    The workshop will feature training opportunities, sharing of best practices and lessons-learned, thought-provoking discussions, and an award ceremony recognizing outstanding performance by DOE safety professionals.

  15. Nuclear and Facility Safety Policy Rules | Department of Energy

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

    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 requirements is through rulemaking. Federal rules and regulations are published in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) and are noticed for review and comment by members of the public in the Federal Register (FR) consistent with the Administrative Procedures Act. Requirements in rules apply to our contractors whether or not they are also

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

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

    2012-12-04

    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. Supersedes DOE G 420.1-1.

  17. Facility Safety

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

    2013-06-21

    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.

  18. 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

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    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

  20. Spent Nuclear Fuel Project path forward: nuclear safety equivalency to comparable NRC-licensed facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Garvin, L.J.

    1995-11-01

    This document includes the Technical requirements which meet the nuclear safety objectives of the NRC regulations for fuel treatment and storage facilities. These include requirements regarding radiation exposure limits, safety analysis, design and construction. This document also includes administrative requirements which meet the objectives of the major elements of the NRC licensing process. These include formally documented design and safety analysis, independent technical review, and oppportunity for public involvement.

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

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

    2007-02-07

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

  2. Facility Safety | Department of Energy

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

    Facility Safety Facility Safety In addition to establishing nuclear safety requirements related to safety management programs that are essential to the safety of DOE nuclear facilities, the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Nuclear Facility Safety works proactively with headquarters and field offices to foster continuous improvement and nuclear safety excellence. In addition, the Office provides high quality, customer-oriented assistance that enables improved DOE program and field

  3. Facility Safety | Department of Energy

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

    Facility Safety Facility Safety In addition to establishing nuclear safety requirements related to safety management programs that are essential to the safety of DOE nuclear facilities, the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Nuclear Facility Safety works proactively with headquarters and field offices to foster continuous improvement and nuclear safety excellence. In addition, the Office provides high quality, customer-oriented assistance that enables improved DOE program and field

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

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    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

  5. Proceedings of the 1984 DOE nuclear reactor and facility safety conference. Volume II

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1984-01-01

    This report is a collection of papers on reactor safety. The report takes the form of proceedings from the 1984 DOE Nuclear Reactor and Facility Safety Conference, Volume II of two. These proceedings cover Safety, Accidents, Training, Task/Job Analysis, Robotics and the Engineering Aspects of Man/Safety interfaces.

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

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

    0.1C Chg 1, Facility Safety by Pranab Guha Functional areas: DNFSB, Defense Nuclear Facility Safety and Health Requirement, Facility Safety, Requires Crosswalk When Revised,...

  7. 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)

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-12-01

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-12-01

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

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

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

    2014-12-19

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

  11. 2015 Nuclear and Facility Safety Programs Workshop Block Agenda

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

    Worthington (AU-10) ISM o Colette Broussard (AU-23) QA and Other Data Trending o Pat Lewis (SC-CH) Lessons From Safety Basis Reviews o Carl Sykes (NA-511) Exemptions * Readiness...

  12. 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 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

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

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

    facility and programmatic safety requirements for DOE and NNSA for nuclear safety design criteria, fire protection, criticality safety, natural phenomena hazards (NPH)...

  14. Nuclear Safety | Department of Energy

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

    Nuclear Safety Nuclear Safety The Nuclear Safety Program mission is to support the design, construction, operation, and deactivation and decommissioning of the Paducah and Portsmouth nuclear facilities in a manner that ensures adequate protection of workers, the public, and the environment. Major Responsibilities: Establish and implement nuclear safety requirements that utilize national consensus (or other government) standards or applicable external agency regulations (Nuclear Regulatory

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    None, None

    2004-02-28

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

  16. Investigation of criticality safety control infraction data at a nuclear facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cournoyer, Michael E.; Merhege, James F.; Costa, David A.; Art, Blair M.; Gubernatis, David C.

    2014-10-27

    Chemical and metallurgical operations involving plutonium and other nuclear materials account for most activities performed at the LANL's Plutonium Facility (PF-4). The presence of large quantities of fissile materials in numerous forms at PF-4 makes it necessary to maintain an active criticality safety program. The LANL Nuclear Criticality Safety (NCS) Program provides guidance to enable efficient operations while ensuring prevention of criticality accidents in the handling, storing, processing and transportation of fissionable material at PF-4. In order to achieve and sustain lower criticality safety control infraction (CSCI) rates, PF-4 operations are continuously improved, through the use of Lean Manufacturing and Six Sigma (LSS) business practices. Employing LSS, statistically significant variations (trends) can be identified in PF-4 CSCI reports. In this study, trends have been identified in the NCS Program using the NCS Database. An output metric has been developed that measures ADPSM Management progress toward meeting its NCS objectives and goals. Using a Pareto Chart, the primary CSCI attributes have been determined in order of those requiring the most management support. Data generated from analysis of CSCI data help identify and reduce number of corresponding attributes. In-field monitoring of CSCI's contribute to an organization's scientific and technological excellence by providing information that can be used to improve criticality safety operation safety. This increases technical knowledge and augments operational safety.

  17. Investigation of criticality safety control infraction data at a nuclear facility

    DOE Public Access Gateway for Energy & Science Beta (PAGES Beta)

    Cournoyer, Michael E.; Merhege, James F.; Costa, David A.; Art, Blair M.; Gubernatis, David C.

    2014-10-27

    Chemical and metallurgical operations involving plutonium and other nuclear materials account for most activities performed at the LANL's Plutonium Facility (PF-4). The presence of large quantities of fissile materials in numerous forms at PF-4 makes it necessary to maintain an active criticality safety program. The LANL Nuclear Criticality Safety (NCS) Program provides guidance to enable efficient operations while ensuring prevention of criticality accidents in the handling, storing, processing and transportation of fissionable material at PF-4. In order to achieve and sustain lower criticality safety control infraction (CSCI) rates, PF-4 operations are continuously improved, through the use of Lean Manufacturing andmore¬†¬Ľ Six Sigma (LSS) business practices. Employing LSS, statistically significant variations (trends) can be identified in PF-4 CSCI reports. In this study, trends have been identified in the NCS Program using the NCS Database. An output metric has been developed that measures ADPSM Management progress toward meeting its NCS objectives and goals. Using a Pareto Chart, the primary CSCI attributes have been determined in order of those requiring the most management support. Data generated from analysis of CSCI data help identify and reduce number of corresponding attributes. In-field monitoring of CSCI's contribute to an organization's scientific and technological excellence by providing information that can be used to improve criticality safety operation safety. This increases technical knowledge and augments operational safety.¬ę¬†less

  18. Risk-Informing Safety Reviews for Non-Reactor Nuclear Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Mubayi, V.; Azarm, A.; Yue, M.; Mukaddam, W.; Good, G.; Gonzalez, F.; Bari, R.A.

    2011-03-13

    This paper describes a methodology used to model potential accidents in fuel cycle facilities that employ chemical processes to separate and purify nuclear materials. The methodology is illustrated with an example that uses event and fault trees to estimate the frequency of a specific energetic reaction that can occur in nuclear material processing facilities. The methodology used probabilistic risk assessment (PRA)-related tools as well as information about the chemical reaction characteristics, information on plant design and operational features, and generic data about component failure rates and human error rates. The accident frequency estimates for the specific reaction help to risk-inform the safety review process and assess compliance with regulatory requirements.

  19. Nuclear Facilities Production Facilities

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Facilities Production Facilities Sandia National Laboratories is a multi-program laboratory managed and operated by Sandia Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Lockheed Martin Corporation, for the U.S. Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-AC04-94AL85000. Sand 2011-4582P. ENERGY U.S. DEPARTMENT OF Gamma Irradiation Facility (GIF) The GIF provides test cells for the irradiation of experiments with high-intensity gamma ray sources. The main features

  20. Facility Safety Policy, Guidance & Reports | Department of Energy

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

    Facility Safety Policy, Guidance & Reports Facility Safety Policy, Guidance & Reports The Office of Nuclear Facility Safety Programs within the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Environment, Health, Safety and Security organization, establishes nuclear safety requirements related to safety management programs that are essential to the safety of DOE nuclear facilities. In addition, establishes requirements for facility design and operation for facility-wide hazards that are not unique to

  1. NNSA and Defense Nuclear Facilities

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

    and Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board certifications free up 47 million in previously allocated funding October 2, 2009 Los Alamos, New Mexico, Oct. 2, 2009 - The Chemistry...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1999-02-01

    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.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2001-03-01

    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.

  6. 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...

  7. Enterprise Assessments Lessons Learned from Targeted Reviews of the Management of Safety Systems at U.S. Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities ¬Ö April 2016

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

    Office of Enterprise Assessments Lessons Learned from Targeted Reviews of the Management of Safety Systems at U.S. Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities April 2016 Office of Nuclear Safety and Environmental Assessments Office of Environment, Safety and Health Assessments Office of Enterprise Assessments U.S. Department of Energy i Table of Contents Acronyms

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

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

    2010-09-23

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

  9. Spent Nuclear Fuel Project Safety Management Plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Garvin, L.J.

    1996-02-01

    The Spent Nuclear Fuel Project Safety Management Plan describes the new nuclear facility regulatory requirements basis for the Spemt Nuclear Fuel (SNF) Project and establishes the plan to achieve compliance with this basis at the new SNF Project facilities.

  10. Emergency preparedness source term development for the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards-Licensed Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sutter, S.L.; Mishima, J.; Ballinger, M.Y.; Lindsey, C.G.

    1984-08-01

    In order to establish requirements for emergency preparedness plans at facilities licensed by the Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) needs to develop source terms (the amount of material made airborne) in accidents. These source terms are used to estimate the potential public doses from the events, which, in turn, will be used to judge whether emergency preparedness plans are needed for a particular type of facility. Pacific Northwest Laboratory is providing the NRC with source terms by developing several accident scenarios for eleven types of fuel cycle and by-product operations. Several scenarios are developed for each operation, leading to the identification of the maximum release considered for emergency preparedness planning (MREPP) scenario. The MREPP scenarios postulated were of three types: fire, tornado, and criticality. Fire was significant at oxide fuel fabrication, UF/sub 6/ production, radiopharmaceutical manufacturing, radiopharmacy, sealed source manufacturing, waste warehousing, and university research and development facilities. Tornadoes were MREPP events for uranium mills and plutonium contaminated facilities, and criticalities were significant at nonoxide fuel fabrication and nuclear research and development facilities. Techniques for adjusting the MREPP release to different facilities are also described.

  11. Safety of Accelerator Facilities

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

    2001-01-08

    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.

  12. Safety of Accelerator Facilities

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

    2004-07-23

    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.

  13. 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.

  14. Nuclear Safety | Department of Energy

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

    Nuclear Safety Nuclear Safety The Office of Nuclear Safety establishes and maintains nuclear safety policy, requirements, and guidance including policy and requirements relating to ...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    P. Calderoni; P. Sharpe; M. Shimada

    2009-09-01

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

  16. Nuclear Reactor Safety Design Criteria

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

    1993-01-19

    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. Supersedes DOE 5480.1, dated 1-19-93. Certified 11-18-10.

  17. Office of Nuclear Safety

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  18. Facility Disposition Safety Strategy RM

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The Facility Disposition Safety Strategy (FDSS) Review Module is a tool that assists DOE federal project review teams in evaluating the adequacy of the facility documentation, preparations or...

  19. Hot Cell Facility (HCF) Safety Analysis Report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2000-11-01

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

  20. 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...

  1. Nuclear Explosive Safety Manual

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

    2009-04-14

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

  2. AGING FACILITY CRITICALITY SAFETY CALCULATIONS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    C.E. Sanders

    2004-09-10

    The purpose of this design calculation is to revise and update the previous criticality calculation for the Aging Facility (documented in BSC 2004a). This design calculation will also demonstrate and ensure that the storage and aging operations to be performed in the Aging Facility meet the criticality safety design criteria in the ''Project Design Criteria Document'' (Doraswamy 2004, Section 4.9.2.2), and the functional nuclear criticality safety requirement described in the ''SNF Aging System Description Document'' (BSC [Bechtel SAIC Company] 2004f, p. 3-12). The scope of this design calculation covers the systems and processes for aging commercial spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and staging Department of Energy (DOE) SNF/High-Level Waste (HLW) prior to its placement in the final waste package (WP) (BSC 2004f, p. 1-1). Aging commercial SNF is a thermal management strategy, while staging DOE SNF/HLW will make loading of WPs more efficient (note that aging DOE SNF/HLW is not needed since these wastes are not expected to exceed the thermal limits form emplacement) (BSC 2004f, p. 1-2). The description of the changes in this revised document is as follows: (1) Include DOE SNF/HLW in addition to commercial SNF per the current ''SNF Aging System Description Document'' (BSC 2004f). (2) Update the evaluation of Category 1 and 2 event sequences for the Aging Facility as identified in the ''Categorization of Event Sequences for License Application'' (BSC 2004c, Section 7). (3) Further evaluate the design and criticality controls required for a storage/aging cask, referred to as MGR Site-specific Cask (MSC), to accommodate commercial fuel outside the content specification in the Certificate of Compliance for the existing NRC-certified storage casks. In addition, evaluate the design required for the MSC that will accommodate DOE SNF/HLW. This design calculation will achieve the objective of providing the criticality safety results to support the preliminary design of the Aging Facility. As the ongoing design evolution remains fluid, the results from this design calculation should be evaluated for applicability to any new or modified design. Consequently, the results presented in this document are limited to the current design. The information contained in this document was developed by Environmental and Nuclear Engineering and is intended for the use of Design and Engineering in its work regarding the various criticality related activities performed in the Aging Facility. Yucca Mountain Project personnel from Environmental and Nuclear Engineering should be consulted before the use of the information for purposes other than those stated herein or use by individuals other than authorized personnel in Design and Engineering.

  3. Nuclear Explosive Safety

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

    2014-07-10

    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).

  4. WIPP Nuclear Facilities Transparency

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

    the safety, security, and legitimate management of nuclear materials." Other Links Yucca Mountain Test Data Carlsbad Environmental Monitoring and Research Center Dimitrovograd...

  5. CRAD, 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 [DOE]

    These guidelines and criteria provide a consistent overall framework for assessment of the processes that are currently in place to ensure that the software being used in the safety analysis and design of the SSCs in defense nuclear facilities is adequate. These reviews will be conducted only on software that is currently in use, not on software that was previously used as part of a safety analysis and design process.

  6. Occupational Safety Review of High Technology Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lee Cadwallader

    2005-01-31

    This report contains reviews of operating experiences, selected accident events, and industrial safety performance indicators that document the performance of the major US DOE magnetic fusion experiments and particle accelerators. These data are useful to form a basis for the occupational safety level at matured research facilities with known sets of safety rules and regulations. Some of the issues discussed are radiation safety, electromagnetic energy exposure events, and some of the more widespread issues of working at height, equipment fires, confined space work, electrical work, and other industrial hazards. Nuclear power plant industrial safety data are also included for comparison.

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

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

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

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

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

    2003-08-27

    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.

  9. Promulgating Nuclear Safety Requirements

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

    1996-05-15

    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.

  10. Nuclear Facilities | Department of Energy

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

    Nuclear Facilities Nuclear Facilities Nuclear Facilities Locator Map Numerical map data points indicate two or more nuclear facilities in the same geographic location. Nuclear Facilities List: Argonne National Laboratory East Tennessee Technology Park Hanford Idaho Site Los Alamos National Laboratory Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Nevada National Security Site New Brunswick Laboratory Oak Ridge National Laboratory cont. Paducah Pantex Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Portsmouth

  11. Safety of Nuclear Explosive Operations

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

    2001-08-07

    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.

  12. Front-end Nuclear Facilities (2008) | Department of Energy

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Significant Safety Instrumented Systems Used at DOE Non-Reactor Nuclear Facilities | Department of Energy Frequently Asked Questions Regarding DOE-STD-1195-2011, Design of Safety Significant Safety Instrumented Systems Used at DOE Non-Reactor Nuclear Facilities Frequently Asked Questions Regarding DOE-STD-1195-2011, Design of Safety Significant Safety Instrumented Systems Used at DOE Non-Reactor Nuclear Facilities January 7, 2015 Frequently Asked Questions regarding DOE-STD-1195-2011 which

  13. Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Salt Waste Processing...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Oversight Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Salt Waste Processing Facility Project ... Commission (NRC), several nuclear power generating utilities, and associated ...

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

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

    of Energy's (DOE) nuclear facilities and identify opportunities for improvement. Nuclear Safety Workshop Agenda - Post Fukushima Initiatives and Results More Documents &...

  15. Safety of Accelerator Facilities

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

    2011-07-21

    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. Supersedes DOE O 420.2B.

  16. Nuclear Explosive Safety

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

    2015-01-26

    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). Supersedes DOE O 452.2D and DOE M 452.2-1A.

  17. Nuclear Explosive Safety

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

    2009-04-14

    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.

  18. Nuclear Explosive Safety

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

    2009-04-14

    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

  19. Office of Nuclear Safety | Department of Energy

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

    Nuclear Safety Office of Nuclear Safety Mission The Office of Nuclear Safety establishes nuclear safety requirements and expectations for the Department to ensure protection of ...

  20. NRC - regulator of nuclear safety

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1997-05-01

    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.

  1. Nuclear Explosive Safety

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

    2006-06-12

    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.

  2. Nuclear Energy Safety Technologies

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

    Safety Technologies - Sandia Energy Energy Search Icon Sandia Home Locations Contact Us Employee Locator Energy & Climate Secure & Sustainable Energy Future Stationary Power Energy Conversion Efficiency Solar Energy Wind Energy Water Power Supercritical CO2 Geothermal Natural Gas Safety, Security & Resilience of the Energy Infrastructure Energy Storage Nuclear Power & Engineering Grid Modernization Battery Testing Nuclear Fuel Cycle Defense Waste Management Programs Advanced

  3. WIPP Documents - Nuclear Safety

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

    Nuclear Safety DOE/WIPP-07-3372, Revision 4 WIPP Documented Safety Analysis Approved November 2013 The Documented Safety Analysis addresses all hazards (both radiological and nonradiological) and the controls necessary to provide adequate protection to the public, workers, and the environment. The WIPP DSA demonstrates the extent to which the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant can be operated safely with respect to workers, the public, and the environment. DOE/WIPP-07-3373, Revision 4 WIPP Technical

  4. 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.

  5. Nuclear Explosive Safety

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

    2006-06-12

    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.

  6. Guidelines for Evaluation of Nuclear Facility Training Programs

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

    1995-11-22

    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.

  7. CANISTER HANDLING FACILITY CRITICALITY SAFETY CALCULATIONS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    C.E. Sanders

    2005-04-07

    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].

  8. Strengthening Line Management Oversight and Federal Monitoring of Nuclear Facilities

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Volume 3 - Nuclear Safety Basis Program Review During Facility Operations and Transitions February 2015 i Standard Review Plan Volume 3 Nuclear Safety Basis Program Review during Facility Operations and Transitions Facility Life Cycle Applicability CD-1 CD-2 CD-3 CD-4 Operations and Transitions Decommissioning & Environmental Restoration February 2015 ii Table of Contents Acronyms

  9. Strengthening Line Management Oversight and Federal Monitoring of Nuclear Facilities

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Strengthening Line Management Oversight and Federal Monitoring of Nuclear Facilities Standard Review Plan Volume 2 -- Nuclear Safety Basis Program Review During Design February 2015 i Standard Review Plan Volume 2 Nuclear Safety Basis Program Review during Design Facility Life Cycle Applicability CD-1 CD-2 CD-3 CD-4 Operations and Transitions Decommissioning & Environmental Restoration February 2015 ii Table of Contents Acronyms

  10. 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‚Äź1, Risk Assessment Methodologies at Defense Nuclear Facilities. Thisrecommendation focused on the...

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

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

    Documented Safety Analysis, Roll Out Training | Department of Energy Standard 3009-2014, Preparation of Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis, Roll Out Training DOE Standard 3009-2014, Preparation of Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis, Roll Out Training February 4, 2015 - 3:08pm Addthis 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

  12. Safety Culture in Nuclear Installations

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  13. Safety and Security at Trident Laser Facility

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

    Safety and Security Safety and Security at Trident Laser Facility Enabling world-class science in high-energy density physics and fundamental laser-matter interactions Contact ...

  14. Nuclear Explosive Safety Manual

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

    2009-04-14

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

  15. Strengthening Line Management Oversight and Federal Monitoring of Nuclear Facilities

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Strengthening Line Management Oversight and Federal Monitoring of Nuclear Facilities Standard Review Plan Volume 4 - Nuclear Safety Basis Program Review During Facility Decommissioning and Environmental Restoration February 2015 i Standard Review Plan Volume 4 Nuclear Safety Basis Program Review during Facility Decommissioning and Environmental Restoration Facility Life Cycle Applicability CD-1 CD-2 CD-3 CD-4 Operations and Transitions Decommissioning & Environmental Restoration February

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

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    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

  17. Nuclear Explosive Safety Evaluation Processes

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

    2009-04-14

    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.

  18. Pilot Project: Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard | Department...

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

    Pilot Project: Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard Pilot Project: Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard The Nuclear Safety Information (NSI) Dashboard provides a new user interface ...

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

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

    Alamos Site Office | National Nuclear Security Administration Facility Representative, Technical Area (TA-55) Plutonium Facility, Los Alamos Site Office John Krepps John Krepps June 2010 U.S. Department of Energy Facility Representative of the Year John Krepps, a facility representative for the National Nuclear Security Administration's (NNSA) Los Alamos Site Office, received the Department of Energy's top award for oversight of nuclear and non-nuclear facilities. Krepps, a Los Alamos

  20. Listing of Defense Nuclear Facilities

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Listing of Defense Nuclear Facilities The facilities listed below are considered DOE defense nuclear facilities for purposes of Section 3161. Kansas City Plant Pinellas Plant Mound Facility Fernald Environmental Management Project Site Pantex Plant Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site, including the Oxnard Facility Savannah River Site Los Alamos National Laboratory Sandia National Laboratory Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Oak Ridge National Laboratory Nevada Test Site 1 Y-12 Plant

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

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

    1B, FACILITY SAFETY Order Module--DOE O 420.1B, FACILITY SAFETY To ensure that new DOE ... To ensure that new DOE nuclear reactors comply with the requirements of DOE O 420.1B and ...

  2. Management of National Nuclear Power Programs for assured safety

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Connolly, T.J.

    1985-01-01

    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).

  3. US nuclear warhead facility profiles

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cochran, T.B.; Arkin, W.A.; Norris, R.S.; Hoenig, M.M.

    1987-01-01

    US Nuclear Warhead Facility Profiles is the third volume of the Nuclear Weapons Databook, a series published by the Natural Resources Defense Council. This volume reviews the different facilities in the US nuclear warhead complex. Because of the linkage between nuclear energy and nuclear weapons, the authors cover not only those facilities associated mainly with nuclear power research, but also those well known for weapons development. They are: the Argonne National Laboratory; the Hanford Reservation; the Oak Ridge National Laboratory; the Pantex plant; the Los Alamos Test Site; the Rocky Flats plant; the Sandia National Laboratories; and a host of others. Information on each facility is organized into a standard format that makes the book easy to use. The reader will find precise information ranging from a facility's address to its mission, management, establishment, budget, and staff. An additional, more in-depth presentation covers the activities and technical process of each facility. Maps, pictures, and figures complement the text.

  4. Nuclear reactor safety device

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Hutter, Ernest (Wilmette, IL)

    1986-01-01

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

  5. 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.

  6. Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear Facilities

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

    2010-04-21

    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.

  7. Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear Facilities

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

    2007-02-13

    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.

  8. Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear Facilities

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

    2010-04-21

    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, supersedes DOE O 433.1B.

  9. 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

  10. Nuclear Explosive Safety Study Process

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Superseding DOE-STD-3015-97 January 1997 DOE STANDARD NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVE SAFETY STUDY PROCESS U.S. ... of high- consequence production, manufacturing, andor power plant operations. ...

  11. DOE-STD-1104-96 CN-1; Review and Approval of Nuclear Facility...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    DOE STANDARD REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF NUCLEAR FACILITY SAFETY BASIS DOCUMENTS (DOCUMENTED SAFETY ... Neither a reviewer nor the preparer has veto power over ultimate resolution or ...

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

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Equipment and Piping Labeling Assessment Plan CRAD, Equipment and Piping Labeling Assessment Plan Performance Objective: To verify that facility equipment and piping are labeled in a manner such that facility personnel are able to positively identify equipment they operate. To ensure that an effective labeling program is in effect to reduce operator and maintenance errors from incorrect identification of equipment, to increase training effectiveness by tracing the actual facility system as

  13. Nuclear reactor safety device

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Hutter, E.

    1983-08-15

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

  14. Technical Safety Requirements for the Waste Storage Facilities May 2014

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Laycak, D. T.

    2014-04-16

    This document contains the Technical Safety Requirements (TSR) for the Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (RHWM) WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES, which include Area 625 (A625) and the Building 693 (B693) Yard Area of the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) at LLNL. The TSRs constitute requirements for safe operation of the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. These TSRs are derived from the Documented Safety Analyses for the Waste Storage Facilities (DSA) (LLNL 2011). The analysis presented therein concluded 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.

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

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

    Energy Nuclear Safety and Environmental Assessments Office of Nuclear Safety and Environmental Assessments MISSION 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

  16. Nuclear Explosive Safety Evaluation Processes

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

    2009-04-14

    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.

  17. 10 CFR Part 830 Nuclear Safety Technical Positions | Department of Energy

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

    10 CFR Part 830 Nuclear Safety Technical Positions 10 CFR Part 830 Nuclear Safety Technical Positions 10 CFR Part 830 Nuclear Safety Technical Positions Nuclear and Facility Safety Policy is the Office of Primary Interest (OPI) responsible for the development, interpretation, and revision of a number of DOE directives. 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

  18. Chief of Nuclear Safety | Department of Energy

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

    Chief of Nuclear Safety Chief of Nuclear Safety Message from Chief of Nuclear Safety Message from Chief of Nuclear Safety The Chief of Nuclear Safety (CNS) is responsible for ensuring that DOE Nuclear Safety Regulations, Standards, Guides, and national/international technical standards are applied in a correct manner in the conduct of DOE's nuclear mission under the purview of the Under Secretary for Management and Performance. Read more Seismic Lessons-Learned Panel Meetings Seismic

  19. Integration of Environment, Safety, and Health into Facility Disposition Activities

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

    1998-05-01

    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 830, Nuclear Safety Management, Subpart B, Safety Basis Requirements. Volume Two contains the appendices that provide additional environment, safety and health (ES&H) information to complement Volume 1 of this Standard. Volume 2 of the Standard is much broader in scope than Volume 1 and satisfies several purposes. Integrated safety management expectations are provided in accordance with facility disposition requirements contained in DOE O 430.1B, Real Property Asset Management.

  20. Sandia Teaches Nuclear Safety Course

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

    Teaches Nuclear Safety Course - Sandia Energy Energy Search Icon Sandia Home Locations Contact Us Employee Locator Energy & Climate Secure & Sustainable Energy Future Stationary Power Energy Conversion Efficiency Solar Energy Wind Energy Water Power Supercritical CO2 Geothermal Natural Gas Safety, Security & Resilience of the Energy Infrastructure Energy Storage Nuclear Power & Engineering Grid Modernization Battery Testing Nuclear Fuel Cycle Defense Waste Management Programs

  1. 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."

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

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

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

  3. Office of Nuclear Safety Enforcement | Department of Energy

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

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

  4. Strengthening Line Management Oversight and Federal Monitoring of Nuclear Facilities

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    1 -- Nuclear Safety Basis Program Review Overview and Management Oversight February 2015 i Standard Review Plan Volume 1 Nuclear Safety Basis Program Review Overview and Management Oversight Facility Life Cycle Applicability CD-1 CD-2 CD-3 CD-4 Operations and Transitions Decommissioning & Environmental Restoration February 2015 ii Table of Contents Acronyms ................................................................................................................................... iii

  5. Strengthening Line Management Oversight and Federal Monitoring of Nuclear Facilities

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    5 - Nuclear Safety Basis Program Review of TSRs, USQs and SERs February 2015 i Standard Review Plan Volume 5 Nuclear Safety Basis Program Review of TSRs, USQs and SERs Facility Life Cycle Applicability CD-1 CD-2 CD-3 CD-4 Operations and Transitions Decommissioning & Environmental Restoration February 2015 ii Table of Contents Acronyms ................................................................................................................................... iii Introduction

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

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    National Nuclear Security Administration Home / Blog Sandia completes major overhaul of key nuclear weapons test facilities Tuesday, May 13, 2014 - 2:46pm Sandia National Laboratories recently completed the renovation of five large-scale test facilities that are crucial to ensuring the safety and reliability of the nation's nuclear weapons systems. The work supports Sandia's ongoing nuclear stockpile modernization work on the B61-12 and W88 Alt, assessments of current stockpile systems, and

  7. 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 ... NSTX Upgrade Like a new passenger jet or power plant, the National Spherical Torus ...

  8. Nuclear Safety Information | Department of Energy

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

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

  9. Nuclear Safety Reporting Criteria | Department of Energy

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

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

  10. Nuclear Safety Enforcement Documents | Department of Energy

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

    Nuclear Safety Enforcement Documents Nuclear Safety Enforcement Documents Documents Available for Download April 28, 2016 Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC, Consent Order NCO-2016-01 Nuclear Safety Enforcement Consent Order issued to Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC relating to nuclear criticality safety infractions that occurred at the Savannah River Site February 19, 2016 Preliminary Notice of Violation, Los Alamos National Security, LLC Nuclear Safety Enforcement Preliminary Notice

  11. CRAD, NNSA- Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities (SNF)

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    CRAD for Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities (SNF). Criteria Review and Approach Documents (CRADs) that can be used to conduct a well-organized and thorough assessment of elements of safety and health programs.

  12. 2012 Nuclear Safety Workshop Photos

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Deputy Secretary Poneman (view announcement memo) convened the second DOE Nuclear Safety Workshop on September 19-20, 2012. The event was held at the Bethesda North Marriott Hotel and Conference Center, 5701 Marinelli Road, Bethesda, MD.

  13. CRAD, Safety Basis- 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 May 2007 readiness assessment of the Safety Basis at the Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Project.

  14. Establishing nuclear facility drill programs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1996-03-01

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

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

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

  16. A safety overview of Sandia National Laboratories' reactor facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Philbin, J.S.

    1989-04-01

    This report provides an overview of Sandia National Laboratories' safety policies and practices supporting the operation of Sandia's nuclear reactor facilities. These policies and practices have evolved from Sandia's 30 years of experience and leadership in the design, construction, and operation of steady-state and pulse research reactors. The report illustrates how Sandia has implemented DOE orders and research reactor standards with the goal of reducing risks to the lowest reasonable levels for its employees, contractors, the public, and the environment. The impact of DOE orders and standards on virtually all aspects of reactor operations and administration is illustrated. Included in the report are descriptions of safety documentation (Technical Specifications and Safety Analysis Reports); the facility safety review system for addressing radiological protection and other environmental, safety and health issues; experiment activities; quality assurance; training and certification; and emergency planning.

  17. Hallam Nuclear Power Facility, NE

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Hallam Nuclear Power Facility, NE 1969 1998 2. Piqua Nuclear Power Facility, OH 1969 1998 3. Bayo Canyon, NM 1982 1998 4. Kellex/Pierpont, NJ 1982 1998 5. University of California, CA 1982 1998 6. Acid/Pueblo Canyons, NM 1984 1999 7. Chupadera Mesa, NM 1984 1999 8. Canonsburg, PA 1986 1999 9.Shiprock, NM 1987 2000 10. Middlesex Municipal Landfill, NJ 1987 2000 11. Niagara Falls Storage Site Vicinity Properties, NY 1987 2001 12. Salt Lake City, UT 1989 2001 13. Spook, WY 1989 2001 14. National

  18. A Look Back at the Nuclear Safety Workshop | Department of Energy

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

    Nuclear Safety Workshop A Look Back at the Nuclear Safety Workshop June 16, 2011 - 2:59pm Addthis Glenn Podonsky Glenn Podonsky Director, Independent Enterprise Assessments As the Department's Chief Health, Safety and Security Officer, my job is to make sure that we continue to enhance and improve the safety of the Energy Department's nuclear facilities. That is why, in response to the March accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear complex, the Department hosted a Nuclear Safety Workshop to

  19. Nuclear Safety Regulatory Framework | Department of Energy

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

    Nuclear Safety Regulatory Framework Nuclear Safety Regulatory Framework February 2012 Presentation that outlines the rules, policies and orders that comprise the Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Regulatory Framework. PDF icon Nuclear Safety Regulatory Framework More Documents & Publications Summary Pamphlet, Nuclear Safety at the Department of Energy Notice of Violation, UChicago Argonne, LLC - WEA-2009-04 Independent Oversight Assessment, Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant -

  20. Nuclear Facility Risk Ranking | Department of Energy

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Facility Risk Ranking Nuclear Facility Risk Ranking Nuclear Facility Risk Ranking The CNS has purview of over ninety EM nuclear facilities across the DOE complex. To ensure that limited resources are applied in a risk-informed and balanced approach, the CNS performed a methodical assessment of the EM nuclear facilities. This risk-informed approach provides a data-driven foundation on which to construct a balanced set of operating plans and staff assignments. 2015 Risk Analysis Methodology.jpg

  1. FUEL HANDLING FACILITY CRITICALITY SAFETY CALCULATIONS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    C.E. Sanders

    2005-06-30

    The purpose of this design calculation is to perform a criticality evaluation of the Fuel Handling Facility (FHF) and the operations and processes performed therein. The current intent of the FHF is to receive transportation casks whose contents will be unloaded and transferred to waste packages (WP) or MGR Specific Casks (MSC) in the fuel transfer bays. Further, the WPs will also be prepared in the FHF for transfer to the sub-surface facility (for disposal). The MSCs will be transferred to the Aging Facility for storage. The criticality evaluation of the FHF features the following: (I) Consider the types of waste to be received in the FHF as specified below: (1) Uncanistered commercial spent nuclear fuel (CSNF); (2) Canistered CSNF (with the exception of horizontal dual-purpose canister (DPC) and/or multi-purpose canisters (MPCs)); (3) Navy canistered SNF (long and short); (4) Department of Energy (DOE) canistered high-level waste (HLW); and (5) DOE canistered SNF (with the exception of MCOs). (II) Evaluate the criticality analyses previously performed for the existing Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)-certified transportation casks (under 10 CFR 71) to be received in the FHF to ensure that these analyses address all FHF conditions including normal operations, and Category 1 and 2 event sequences. (III) Evaluate FHF criticality conditions resulting from various Category 1 and 2 event sequences. Note that there are currently no Category 1 and 2 event sequences identified for FHF. Consequently, potential hazards from a criticality point of view will be considered as identified in the ''Internal Hazards Analysis for License Application'' document (BSC 2004c, Section 6.6.4). (IV) Assess effects of potential moderator intrusion into the fuel transfer bay for defense in depth. The SNF/HLW waste transfer activity (i.e., assembly and canister transfer) that is being carried out in the FHF has been classified as safety category in the ''Q-list'' (BSC 2003, p. A-6). Therefore, this design calculation is subject to the requirements of the ''Quality Assurance Requirements and Description'' (DOE 2004), even though the FHF itself has not yet been classified in the Q-list. Performance of the work scope as described and development of the associated technical product conform to the procedure AP-3.124, ''Design Calculations and Analyses''.

  2. Improving the Safeguardability of Nuclear Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2009-07-01

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

  3. Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee, Facility Subcommittee visit...

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

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

  4. Nuclear Facility Operations | Department of Energy

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

    Nuclear Facility Operations INL is a science-based, applied engineering national laboratory dedicated to meeting the nation's environmental, energy, nuclear technology, and ...

  5. Autoclave nuclear criticality safety analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    D`Aquila, D.M.; Tayloe, R.W. Jr.

    1991-12-31

    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}.

  6. Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities

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

    1995-09-29

    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.

  7. Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities

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

    1998-12-28

    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.

  8. 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.

  9. RADIATION FACILITY FOR NUCLEAR REACTORS

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

    1961-12-12

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

  10. Nuclear Safety Specialist Functional Area Qualification Standard

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    83-2007 November 2007 DOE STANDARD NUCLEAR SAFETY SPECIALIST FUNCTIONAL AREA QUALIFICATION ... Center (NTC) * Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) * American Institute ...

  11. Princeton Plasma Physics Lab - Nuclear safety

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

    safety Actions taken to prevent nuclear and radiation accidents or to limit their consequences. en COLLOQUIUM: Technical Aspects of the Iran Nuclear Agreement http:www.pppl.gov...

  12. Nuclear Safety Research and Development Proposal Review and Prioritiza...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

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

  13. Nuclear Safety Research and Development Committee Charter | Department...

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

    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 ...

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

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

    Nuclear Safety and Environmental Assessments Office of Nuclear Safety and Environmental Assessments MISSION The Office of Nuclear Safety and Environmental Assessments conducts ...

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

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

    Environment, Health, Safety and Security (EHSS DOE), Cathy Haney (Director, Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards (NRC)), Marissa Bailey (Director, Division of Fuel...

  16. Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Dual Axis Radiographic Hydrodynamic Test (DARHT) Facility, Los Alamos National ... Contained Firing Facility Dual Axis Radiographic Hydrodynamic Test Facility High ...

  17. Safety Oversight of Decommissioning Activities at DOE Nuclear Sites

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Zull, Lawrence M.; Yeniscavich, William

    2008-01-15

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

  18. CRAD, Facility Safety- Readiness Review Program

    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 Readiness Review Program.

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

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, and the U.S. ... and nuclear material operations (DOE does not own or operate power reactors). ...

  20. Tank waste remediation system nuclear criticality safety program management review

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BRADY RAAP, M.C.

    1999-06-24

    This document provides the results of an internal management review of the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) criticality safety program, performed in advance of the DOE/RL assessment for closure of the TWRS Nuclear Criticality Safety Issue, March 1994. Resolution of the safety issue was identified as Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) Milestone M-40-12, due September 1999.

  1. WIRELESS FOR A NUCLEAR FACILITY

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shull, D; Joe Cordaro, J

    2007-03-28

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

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

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

    5 Nuclear Safety Delegations for Documented Safety Analysis Approval (EA CRAD 31-09, Rev. 0) This Criteria Review and Approach Document (EA CRAD 31-09, Rev. 0) provides objectives,...

  3. TRANSPORTATION CASK RECEIPT/RETURN FACILITY CRITICALITY SAFETY EVALUATIONS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    C.E. Sanders

    2005-04-26

    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].

  4. Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities

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

    2000-12-21

    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.

  5. Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities

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

    1995-10-26

    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.

  6. Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities

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

    2003-03-13

    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

  7. Nuclear Facilities and Applied Technologies at Sandia

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wheeler, Dave; Kaiser, Krista; Martin, Lonnie; Hanson, Don; Harms, Gary; Quirk, Tom

    2014-11-28

    The Nuclear Facilities and Applied Technologies organization at Sandia National Laboratoriesí Technical Area Five (TA-V) is the leader in advancing nuclear technologies through applied radiation science and unique nuclear environments. This video describes the organizationís capabilities, facilities, and culture.

  8. Nuclear criticality safety: 2-day training course

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Schlesser, J.A.

    1997-02-01

    This compilation of notes is presented as a source reference for the criticality safety course. At the completion of this training course, the attendee will: be able to define terms commonly used in nuclear criticality safety; be able to appreciate the fundamentals of nuclear criticality safety; be able to identify factors which affect nuclear criticality safety; be able to identify examples of criticality controls as used as Los Alamos; be able to identify examples of circumstances present during criticality accidents; have participated in conducting two critical experiments; be asked to complete a critique of the nuclear criticality safety training course.

  9. Infrastructure and Facilities Management | National Nuclear Security

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Administration Home / content Infrastructure and Facilities Management NNSA restores, rebuilds, and revitalizes the physical infrastructure of the nuclear weapons complex to ensure the vitality and readiness of the NNSA's nuclear security enterprise. Mission execution is built upon management of the Facilities and Infrastructure Recapitalization Program (FIRP) that includes reduction of the maintenance backlog of old facilities, reduction of excess facilities and utility construction. The

  10. Nuclear Science Research facility at LANSCE

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

    and industrial research. LANSCE has two spallation neutron sources: the Manuel Lujan Jr. Neutron Scattering Center (Target-1) and the Neutron and Nuclear Science Research facility...

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

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

    Nuclear Facility Construction - Mechanical Equipment Installation, (HSS CRAD 45-53, Rev. 0) This Criteria Review and Approach Document (HSS CRAD 45-53) establishes review criteria...

  12. 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 Energy’s (DOE) nuclear safety policy.SCOPE: The provisions of this policy apply to all Departmental elements with responsibility for a nuclear facility,...

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

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

    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 ...

  14. Nuclear fuel cycle facility accident analysis handbook

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-03-01

    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.

  15. CRAD, NNSA- Nuclear Explosive Safety (NES)

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    CRAD for Nuclear Explosive Safety (NES). Criteria Review and Approach Documents (CRADs) that can be used to conduct a well-organized and thorough assessment of elements of safety and health programs.

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

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

    Nuclear Safety Software & Quality Assurance In support of DOE O 410.1, Central Technical Authority Responsibilities Regarding Nuclear Safety Requirements, the Chief of Nuclear...

  17. Nuclear Explosives Safety Study Functional Area Qualification...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    85-2007 September 2007 DOE STANDARD NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVE SAFETY STUDY FUNCTIONAL AREA QUALIFICATION ... bombs, including: * Radar fuses * Contact fuses * Timer fuses * Power supplies b. ...

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

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

    2005-07-01

    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.

  19. Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Evaluation / Research and Development Facilities Photo: DARHT's Accelerators help create the x-rays at DARHT, the world's most advanced radiography facility. Research and Development Facilities 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

  20. 3S (Safeguards, Security, Safety) based pyroprocessing facility safety evaluation plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ku, J.H.; Choung, W.M.; You, G.S.; Moon, S.I.; Park, S.H.; Kim, H.D.

    2013-07-01

    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.

  1. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. CRAD, Safety Basis- 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 Safety Basis at the Los Alamos National Laboratory TA 55 SST Facility.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

  6. 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.

  7. 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.

  8. Nuclear Explosive Safety Study Functional Area Qualification Standard

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    i 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

  9. Quickstart Guide, Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard - September 2012 |

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Department of Energy Quickstart Guide, Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard - September 2012 Quickstart Guide, Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard - September 2012 September 2012 Quickstart guide on how to use the features of Nuclear Safety Information dashboard tool. PDF icon Quickstart Guide, Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard - September 2012 More Documents & Publications Development of the Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard - September 2012 Responses to Frequently Asked

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rule, K.; King, M.; Takase, Y.; Oshima, Y.; Nishimura, K.; Sukegawa, A.

    2014-04-01

    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).

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rule, Keith

    2014-05-01

    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).

  12. nuclear safety | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response ...

  13. LANL Nuclear Safety Support Services IDIQ Contract

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The scope of this contract will consist of technical support services needed to support the development and implementation of Documented Safety Analysis for EM operations facilities at LANL, such as Technical Area 54 Area G.

  14. Listing of Defense Nuclear Facilities | Department of Energy

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

    Listing of Defense Nuclear Facilities PDF icon Attachment 1 - Listing of Defense Nuclear Facilities More Documents & Publications Draft Policy and Planning Guidance for Community ...

  15. 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 ...

  16. Enterprise Assessments Targeted Review of Nuclear Reactor Facility...

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

    Targeted Review of Nuclear Reactor Facility Operations at Sandia National Laboratories - March 2016 Enterprise Assessments Targeted Review of Nuclear Reactor Facility Operations at ...

  17. Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility...

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

    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 ...

  18. Criticality Safety | Department of Energy

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

    Services ¬Ľ Nuclear Safety ¬Ľ Criticality Safety Criticality Safety Nuclear Safety Basis The Nuclear Facility Safety Program establishes and maintains the DOE requirements for nuclear criticality safety. The DOE detailed requirements for criticality safety are contained in Section 4.3 of the DOE Order 420.1,Facility Safety. Criticality safety requirements are based on the documented safety analysis required by 10 CFR 830, Subpart B. Related Links 10 CFR 830, Nuclear Safety Management American

  19. Nuclear Facility Risk Ranking | Department of Energy

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

    risk-informed and balanced approach, the CNS performed a methodical assessment of the EM nuclear facilities. This risk-informed approach provides a data-driven foundation on which...

  20. Facility Security Officer Contractor Toolcart

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

    Facility Safety Policy, Guidance & Reports Facility Safety Policy, Guidance & Reports The Office of Nuclear Facility Safety Programs within the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Environment, Health, Safety and Security organization, establishes nuclear safety requirements related to safety management programs that are essential to the safety of DOE nuclear facilities. In addition, establishes requirements for facility design and operation for facility-wide hazards that are not unique to

  1. 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.

  2. Enterprise Assessments Targeted Review of Nuclear Reactor Facility Operations at Sandia National Laboratories ¬Ö March 2016

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Targeted Review of Nuclear Reactor Facility Operations at Sandia National Laboratories March 2016 Office of Nuclear Safety and Environmental Assessments Office of Environment, Safety and Health Assessments Office of Enterprise Assessments U.S. Department of Energy i Table of Contents Acronyms ...................................................................................................................................................... ii Executive Summary

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

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Safety and Security HSS Independent Oversight Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture and ... Commission (NRC), several nuclear power generating utilities, and associated ...

  4. Processing Exemptions to Nuclear Safety Rules and Approval of...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    STD-1083-2009 June 2009 DOE STANDARD PROCESSING EXEMPTIONS TO NUCLEAR SAFETY RULES AND ... "Standard Format and Content of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants." ...

  5. Processing Exemptions to Nuclear Safety Rules and Approval of...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    DOE STANDARD PROCESSING EXEMPTIONS TO NUCLEAR SAFETY RULES AND APPROVAL OF ALTERNATIVE ... "Standard Format and Content of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants." ...

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

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    5 Nuclear Safety Research and Development Program Proposal Submittal Instructions for Fiscal Year 2016 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Nuclear Safety Research and Development (NSR&D) Program ...

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

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Nuclear Safety Research and Development Annual Report, December 2014 Nuclear Safety Research and Development Annual Report, December 2014 December 8, 2014 This document is the ...

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

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

  9. Nuclear Safety Research and Development Program Operating Plan...

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

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

  10. Nuclear Safety Research and Development Status Workshop Summary

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Garzon Chief of Nuclear Safety Staff NUCLEAR SAFETY R&D Perform a peer review of Risk Assessment Corporation WTP analysis by a team and identify Using other...

  11. EARTHQUAKE CAUSED RELEASES FROM A NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE FACILITY

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Charles W. Solbrig; Chad Pope; Jason Andrus

    2014-08-01

    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.

  12. Energy Department and Catholic University Improve Safety of Nuclear...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    The center provides support to various nuclear facilities in the United States, Japan and the United Kingdom. Hanford is a nuclear and chemical waste processing facility under ...

  13. FAQS Reference Guide ‚Äď 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.

  14. Nuclear Safety Workshop Summary | Department of Energy

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

    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...

  15. Nuclear Safety at the Department of Energy

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

    2011-12-05

    Nuclear Safety is a core value of the Department of Energy. As our management principle state: "We will pursue our mission in a manner that is safe, secure, legally and ethically sound, and fiscally responsible."

  16. 2012 Nuclear Safety Workshop | Department of Energy

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

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

  17. Safety analysis report for the Waste Storage Facility. Revision 2

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Bengston, S.J.

    1994-05-01

    This safety analysis report outlines the safety concerns associated with the Waste Storage Facility located in the Radioactive Waste Management Complex at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. The three main objectives of the report are: define and document a safety basis for the Waste Storage Facility activities; demonstrate how the activities will be carried out to adequately protect the workers, public, and environment; and provide a basis for review and acceptance of the identified risk that the managers, operators, and owners will assume.

  18. Nuclear Facility Risk Reduction project moves forward at Y-12...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    ... application of nuclear science. NNSA maintains and enhances the safety, security, reliability and performance of the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile without nuclear testing; works ...

  19. Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Policy

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

    2011-02-08

    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. Supersedes SEN-35-91.

  20. Nuclear Criticality Safety Guide for Fire Protection

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    This guide is intended to provide information for use by fire protection professionals in the application of reasonable methods of fire protection in those facilities where there is a potential for nuclear criticality.

  1. Nuclear Safety Research and Development Annual Report, December 2014 |

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

    Department of Energy Nuclear Safety 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 and Development Annual Report, December 2014 This document is the first annual report of DOE's Nuclear Safety Research and Development (NSR&D) Program, managed by the Office of Nuclear Safety in the Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security. The report includes a

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

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Safety Software & Quality Assurance Nuclear Safety Software & Quality Assurance Nuclear Safety Software & Quality Assurance In support of DOE O 410.1, Central Technical Authority Responsibilities Regarding Nuclear Safety Requirements, the Chief of Nuclear Safety (CNS) provides operational awareness, oversight, and assistance to Environmental Management (EM) Headquarters, field offices, and their contractors in the areas of nuclear safety Quality Assurance (QA) and Software Quality

  3. Message from Chief of Nuclear Safety | Department of Energy

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Message from Chief of Nuclear Safety Message from Chief of Nuclear Safety Message from Chief of Nuclear Safety The Chief of Nuclear Safety (CNS) is responsible for ensuring that DOE Nuclear Safety Regulations, Standards, Guides, and national/international technical standards are applied in a correct manner in the conduct of DOE's nuclear mission under the purview of the Under Secretary for Management and Performance. The Secretary of Energy committed the Department to having Central Technical

  4. Independent Oversight Review, DOE Nuclear Facilities- May 2013

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Lessons Learned from Targeted Reviews of Implementation Verification Review Processes at Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities

  5. safety | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS People Mission Managing the Stockpile Preventing Proliferation Powering the Nuclear Navy Emergency Response Recapitalizing Our Infrastructure ...

  6. 2012 Nuclear Safety Workshop Presentations

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Lists workshop presentations from: Wednesday, September 19 - Plenary Session Wednesday, September 19 - Beyond Design Basis Events Analysis and Response Breakout Session Wednesday, September 19 - Safety Culture Breakout Session Wednesday, September 19 - Risk Assessment and Management Breakout Session Thursday, September 20 - Beyond Design Basis Events Analysis and Response Breakout Session Thursday, September 20 - Safety Culture Breakout Session Thursday, September 20 - Risk Assessment and Management Breakout Session Thursday, September 20 - Plenary Session

  7. Criticality Safety Evaluation of Hanford Tank Farms Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    WEISS, E.V.

    2000-12-15

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shedrow, C.B.

    1999-11-29

    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.

  9. Public Reading Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Public Reading Facilities The FOIA and E-FOIA require that specific types of records as well as various other records be maintained in public reading facilities. The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Electronic Reading Room for the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). The FOIA requires certain kinds of documents to be made available to the public for inspection and copying. This is a requirement for agencies of the executive branch of the federal government. The documents that are

  10. Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear Facilities

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

    2001-06-01

    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.

  11. Nuclear Explosive Safety Study Functional Area Qualification Standard

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

    2010-05-27

    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.

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

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Taxpayer Dollars | Department of Energy 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

  13. safety and security | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    safety and security

  14. Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (Project W-296) Safety Assessment

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Armstrong, D.L.

    1994-08-01

    This Safety Assessment is based on information derived from the Conceptual Design Report for the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (DOE/RL 1994) and ancillary documentation developed during the conceptual design phase of Project W-296. The Safety Assessment has been prepared to support the Solid Waste Burial Ground Interim Safety Basis document. The purpose of the Safety Assessment is to provide an evaluation of the design to determine if the process, as proposed, will comply with US Department of Energy (DOE) Limits for radioactive and hazardous material exposures and be acceptable from an overall health and safety standpoint. The evaluation considered affects on the worker, onsite personnel, the public, and the environment.

  15. NNSA Issues Amended Record of Decision to Build Nuclear Facility...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    only support the safety, security, and reliability of existing nuclear weapons but also ... NNSA maintains and enhances the safety, security, reliability, and performance of the U.S. ...

  16. Improved Nuclear Safety Through International Standards

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Doctor, Steven R.; Moffitt, Robert L.; Taylor, Theodore T.; Trosman, Grigory

    1999-12-01

    This paper describes the 1986 Chornobyl accident, notes some of its effects, and reviews the cause. International efforts to improve reactor safety to prevent another such accident are listed. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) program to improve the safety of Soviet-designed nuclear power plants is outlined, followed by a more detailed description of the specific projects related to nondestructive evaluation. Future directions are proposed, and conclusions are provided.

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

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

    Reactors | Department of Energy 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

  18. Nuclear Safety Research and Development Annual Report, December 2014 |

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Reporting Criteria Nuclear Safety Reporting Criteria January 1, 2012 Nuclear Safety Noncompliances Associated With Occurrences (DOE Order 232.2) These tables provide the criteria for reporting nuclear safety noncompliances into the Department of Energy's Noncompliance Tracking System (NTS). A more detailed description of the NTS reporting criteria and expectations can be found in the Office of Health, Safety and Security's Enforcement Coordinator Handbook. PDF icon Nuclear Safety Reporting

  19. Chief of Nuclear Safety (CNS) Staff Assignments & Expertise ...

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

    Chief of Nuclear Safety (CNS) Staff Assignments & Expertise CNS staff maintains adequate technical proficiency, including the timely completion of Senior Technical Safety Manager...

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

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Blog Home Field Offices Welcome to the NNSA Production Office NPO News Releases Y-12 Removes Nuclear Materials from Two Facilities ... Y-12 Removes Nuclear Materials from...

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

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

    Approaches used for Clearance of Lands from Nuclear Facilities among Several Countries: Evaluation for Regulatory Input Approaches used for Clearance of Lands from Nuclear ...

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

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

    of Environment, Health, Safety and Security | Department of Energy 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 DOE's Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security December 2014 agreement between NRC and DOE's Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security to establish a framework for DOE and NRC to exchange information related to safety issues

  3. Enterprise Assessments Targeted Review of the Safety System Management of the Secondary Confinement System and Power Distribution Safety System at the Y-12 National Security Complex Highly Enriched Uranium Materials Facility ¬Ö December 2015

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Targeted Review of the Safety System Management of the Secondary Confinement System and Safety Significant Power Distribution System at the Y-12 National Security Complex Highly Enriched Uranium Materials Facility December 2015 Office of Nuclear Safety and Environmental Assessments Office of Environment, Safety and Health Assessments Office of Enterprise Assessments U.S. Department of Energy i Table of Contents Acronyms

  4. Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee, Facility Subcommittee visit to Idaho

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    National Laboratory | Department of Energy Advisory Committee, Facility Subcommittee visit to Idaho National Laboratory Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee, Facility Subcommittee visit to Idaho National Laboratory The Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee, Facility Subcommittee visited the Idaho National Laboratory on 19-20 May 2010 to tour the nuclear infrastructure and to discuss the INL plans for facility modernization as a dimension of the DOE Office of Nuclear Energy's (NE) mission. This was

  5. Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Idaho Cleanup Project...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    Independent Oversight Assessment of Nuclear Safety Culture at the Idaho Cleanup Project ... Commission (NRC), several nuclear power generating utilities, and associated ...

  6. NNSA Cites Los Alamos National Laboratory For Nuclear Safety...

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

    Cites Los Alamos National Laboratory For Nuclear Safety Violations | National Nuclear Security Administration Facebook Twitter Youtube Flickr RSS People Mission Managing the...

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

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

    A Basic Overview of NUCLEAR SAFETY AT THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Outreach & Awareness Series ... (DOE) is committed to conducting its nuclear operations in a manner that protects the ...

  8. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1990-09-01

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

  9. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1989-09-01

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

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This pamphlet is intended to provide an abbreviated summary of regulatory requirements and processes for ensuring nuclear safety at DOE, which serve as the Department’s overarching regulatory framework for nuclear safety.

  11. Deputy Secretary Poneman Discusses Nuclear Safety at the IAEA...

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

    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 ...

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

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

    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 Department...

  13. Preparation of Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    ......... 21 3.2.4.3 Chemical Source Term and Consequence ... and hazardous materials by mechanical, chemical, or other techniques to achieve a stated ...

  14. Preliminary Safety Design Report for Remote Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Timothy Solack; Carol Mason

    2012-03-01

    A new onsite, remote-handled low-level waste disposal facility has been identified as the highest ranked alternative for providing continued, uninterrupted remote-handled low-level waste disposal for remote-handled low-level waste from the Idaho National Laboratory and for nuclear fuel processing activities at the Naval Reactors Facility. Historically, this type of waste has been disposed of at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex. Disposal of remote-handled low-level waste in concrete disposal vaults at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex will continue until the facility is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the Subsurface Disposal Area (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). This preliminary safety design report supports the design of a proposed onsite remote-handled low-level waste disposal facility by providing an initial nuclear facility hazard categorization, by discussing site characteristics that impact accident analysis, by providing the facility and process information necessary to support the hazard analysis, by identifying and evaluating potential hazards for processes associated with onsite handling and disposal of remote-handled low-level waste, and by discussing the need for safety features that will become part of the facility design.

  15. AUDIT REPORT Follow-up on Nuclear Safety: Safety Basis and Quality...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    ... nuclear facilities-PF-4, the Weapons Engineering Tritium Facility (WETF), and the Radioassay and Nondestructive Testing ... review identified a long history of operational issues that ...

  16. Fuel Storage Facility Final Safety Analysis Report. Revision 1

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Linderoth, C.E.

    1984-03-01

    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.

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

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    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.

  18. Central Technical Authority Responsibilities Regarding Nuclear Safety Requirements

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

    2007-08-28

    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. Does not cancel/supersede other directives.

  19. Financing Strategies for Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    David Shropshire; Sharon Chandler

    2005-12-01

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

  20. Biosafety Facilities - DOE Directives, Delegations, and Requirements

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

    5, Biosafety Facilities by David Freshwater Functional areas: Defense Nuclear Facility Safety and Health Requirement, Safety and Security, The Guide assists DOENNSA field elements...

  1. Double-clad nuclear fuel safety rod

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    McCarthy, William H.; Atcheson, Donald B.; Vaidyanathan, Swaminathan

    1984-01-01

    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.

  2. Conceptual Safety Design Report for the Remote Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boyd D. Christensen

    2010-02-01

    A new onsite, remote-handled LLW disposal facility has been identified as the highest ranked alternative for providing continued, uninterrupted remote-handled LLW disposal for remote-handled LLW from the Idaho National Laboratory and for spent nuclear fuel processing activities at the Naval Reactors Facility. Historically, this type of waste has been disposed of at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex. Disposal of remote-handled LLW in concrete disposal vaults at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex will continue until the facility is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the Subsurface Disposal Area (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). This conceptual safety design report supports the design of a proposed onsite remote-handled LLW disposal facility by providing an initial nuclear facility hazard categorization, by identifying potential hazards for processes associated with onsite handling and disposal of remote-handled LLW, by evaluating consequences of postulated accidents, and by discussing the need for safety features that will become part of the facility design.

  3. Conceptual Safety Design Report for the Remote Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boyd D. Christensen

    2010-05-01

    A new onsite, remote-handled LLW disposal facility has been identified as the highest ranked alternative for providing continued, uninterrupted remote-handled LLW disposal for remote-handled LLW from the Idaho National Laboratory and for spent nuclear fuel processing activities at the Naval Reactors Facility. Historically, this type of waste has been disposed of at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex. Disposal of remote-handled LLW in concrete disposal vaults at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex will continue until the facility is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation of the Subsurface Disposal Area (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). This conceptual safety design report supports the design of a proposed onsite remote-handled LLW disposal facility by providing an initial nuclear facility hazard categorization, by identifying potential hazards for processes associated with onsite handling and disposal of remote-handled LLW, by evaluating consequences of postulated accidents, and by discussing the need for safety features that will become part of the facility design.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cottrell, W.B.; Passiakos, M.

    1982-06-01

    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.

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

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

    Department of Energy 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

  6. Enterprise Assessments Targeted Review of Nuclear Reactor Facility

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

    Operations at Sandia National Laboratories - March 2016 | Department of Energy Nuclear Reactor Facility Operations at Sandia National Laboratories - March 2016 Enterprise Assessments Targeted Review of Nuclear Reactor Facility Operations at Sandia National Laboratories - March 2016 March 2016 Targeted Review of Nuclear Reactor Facility Operations at Sandia National Laboratories The U.S. Department of Energy independent Office of Enterprise Assessments (EA) conducted a review of nuclear

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

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

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

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

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    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

  9. The Safety and Tritium Applied Research (STAR) Facility: Status-2004

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Anderl, R.A.; Longhurst, G.R.; Pawelko, R.J.; Sharpe, J.P.; Schuetz, S.T.; Petti, D.A.

    2005-07-15

    The Safety and Tritium Applied Research (STAR) Facility, a US DOE National User Facility at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), comprises capabilities and infrastructure to support both tritium and non-tritium research activities important to the development of safe and environmentally friendly fusion energy. Research thrusts include (1) interactions of tritium and deuterium with plasma-facing-component (PFC) materials, (2) fusion safety issues [PFC material chemical reactivity and dust/debris generation, activation product mobilization, tritium behavior in fusion systems], and (3) molten salts and fusion liquids for tritium breeder and coolant applications. This paper updates the status of STAR and the capabilities for ongoing research activities, with an emphasis on the development, testing and integration of the infrastructure to support tritium research activities. Key elements of this infrastructure include a tritium storage and assay system, a tritium cleanup system to process glovebox and experiment tritiated effluent gases, and facility tritium monitoring systems.

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

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

    2013-06-21

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

  11. Documented Safety Analysis for the Waste Storage Facilities March 2010

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Laycak, D T

    2010-03-05

    This Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) for the Waste Storage Facilities was developed in accordance with 10 CFR 830, Subpart B, 'Safety Basis Requirements,' and utilizes the methodology outlined in DOE-STD-3009-94, Change Notice 3. The Waste Storage Facilities consist of Area 625 (A625) and the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) Storage Area portion of the DWTF complex. These two areas are combined into a single DSA, as their functions as storage for radioactive and hazardous waste are essentially identical. The B695 Segment of DWTF is addressed under a separate DSA. This DSA provides a description of the Waste Storage Facilities and the operations conducted therein; identification of hazards; analyses of the hazards, including inventories, bounding releases, consequences, and conclusions; and programmatic elements that describe the current capacity for safe operations. The mission of the Waste Storage Facilities is to safely handle, store, and treat hazardous waste, transuranic (TRU) waste, low-level waste (LLW), mixed waste, combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste generated at LLNL (as well as small amounts from other DOE facilities).

  12. Documented Safety Analysis for the Waste Storage Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Laycak, D

    2008-06-16

    This documented safety analysis (DSA) for the Waste Storage Facilities was developed in accordance with 10 CFR 830, Subpart B, 'Safety Basis Requirements', and utilizes the methodology outlined in DOE-STD-3009-94, Change Notice 3. The Waste Storage Facilities consist of Area 625 (A625) and the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) Storage Area portion of the DWTF complex. These two areas are combined into a single DSA, as their functions as storage for radioactive and hazardous waste are essentially identical. The B695 Segment of DWTF is addressed under a separate DSA. This DSA provides a description of the Waste Storage Facilities and the operations conducted therein; identification of hazards; analyses of the hazards, including inventories, bounding releases, consequences, and conclusions; and programmatic elements that describe the current capacity for safe operations. The mission of the Waste Storage Facilities is to safely handle, store, and treat hazardous waste, transuranic (TRU) waste, low-level waste (LLW), mixed waste, combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste generated at LLNL (as well as small amounts from other DOE facilities).

  13. Uranium Processing Facility | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Gallery Photo Gallery Jobs Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Home Uranium Processing Facility Uranium Processing Facility Uranium Processing Facility Site...

  14. Chief of Nuclear Safety (CNS) Staff Assignments & Expertise

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    CNS staff maintains adequate technical proficiency, including the timely completion of Senior Technical Safety Manager (STSM) qualification. Further, CNS staff periodically review and assess whether EM is maintaining adequate numbers of technically competent personnel necessary to fulfill its nuclear safety responsibilities and identify gaps in nuclear safety-related technical human capital.

  15. Seismic requirements for design of nuclear power plants and nuclear test facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1985-02-01

    This standard establishes engineering requirements for the design of nuclear power plants and nuclear test facilities to accommodate vibratory effects of earthquakes.

  16. HANFORD NUCLEAR CRITICALITY SAFETY PROGRAM DATABASE

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    TOFFER, H.

    2005-05-02

    The Hanford Database is a useful information retrieval tool for a criticality safety practitioner. The database contains nuclear criticality literature screened for parameter studies. The entries, characterized with a value index, are segregated into 16 major and six minor categories. A majority of the screened entries have abstracts and a limited number are connected to the Office of Scientific and Technology Information (OSTI) database of full-size documents. Simple and complex searches of the data can be accomplished very rapidly and the end-product of the searches could be a full-size document. The paper contains a description of the database, user instructions, and a number of examples.

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

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

    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 CRAD,...

  18. 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

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  20. Criteria for Evaluation of Nuclear Facility Training Programs

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    ... IAEA-TECHNICAL REPORT SERIES No. 380, NUCLEAR POWER PLANT PERSONNEL TRAINING AND ITS ... be organized Page 15Section 7 Any safety violations observed during the ...

  1. 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

  2. Cleanup of Nuclear Licensed Facility 57

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jeanjacques, Michel; Bremond, Marie Pierre; Marchand, Carole; Poyau, Cecile; Viallefont, Cecile; Gautier, Laurent; Masure, Frederic

    2008-01-15

    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

  3. 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

  4. Nuclear criticality safety evaluation of large cylinder cleaning operations in X-705, Portsmouth Gaseous diffusion Plant

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sheaffer, M.K.; Keeton, S.C.; Lutz, H.F.

    1995-06-01

    This report evaluates nuclear criticality safety for large cylinder cleaning operations in the Decontamination and Recovery Facility, X-705, at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant. A general description of current cleaning procedures and required hardware/equipment is presented, and documentation for large cylinder cleaning operations is identified and described. Control parameters, design features, administrative controls, and safety systems relevant to nuclear criticality are discussed individually, followed by an overall assessment based on the Double Contingency Principle. Recommendations for enhanced safety are suggested, and issues for increased efficiency are presented.

  5. Order Module--DOE O 420.2B, SAFETY OF ACCELERATOR FACILITIES...

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

    Order Module--DOE O 420.2B, SAFETY OF ACCELERATOR FACILITIES This module will discuss the ... PDF icon DOE Order Self Study Modules - DOE O 420.1B Facility Safety More Documents & ...

  6. Construction safety program for the National Ignition Facility Appendix A: Safety Requirements

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cerruti, S.J.

    1997-01-14

    These rules apply to all LLNL employees, non-LLNL employees (including contract labor, supplemental labor, vendors, personnel matrixed/assigned from other National Laboratories, participating guests, visitors and students) and construction contractors/subcontractors. The General Safety and Health rules shall be used by management to promote accident prevention through indoctrination, safety and health training and on-the-job application. As a condition for contracts award, all contractors and subcontractors and their employees must certify on Form S & H A-1 that they have read and understand, or have been briefed and understand, the National Ignition Facility OCIP Project General Safety Rules.

  7. Pre-operational safety appraisal Tritiated Scrap Recovery Facility, Mound facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dauby, J.J.; Flanagan, T.M.; Metcalf, L.W.; Rhinehammer, T.B.

    1996-07-01

    The purpose of this report is to identify, assess, and document the hazards which are associated with the proposed operation of the Tritiated Scrap Recovery Facility at Mound Facility. A Pre-operational Safety Appraisal is a requirement as stated in Department of Energy Order 5481.1, Safety Analysis and Review System. The operations to be conducted in the new Tritiated Scrap Waste Recovery Facility are not new, but a continuation of a prime mission of Mound`s i.e. recovery of tritium from waste produced throughout the DOE complex. The new facility is a replacement of an existing process started in the early 1960`s and incorporates numerous design changes to enhance personnel and environmental safety. This report also documents the safety of a one time operation involving the recovery of tritium from material obtained by the Department of Energy from the State of Arizona. This project will involve the processing of 240,000 curies of tritium contained in glass ampoules that were to be used in items such as luminous dial watches. These were manufactured by the now defunct American Atomics Corporation, Tucson, Arizona.

  8. Preliminary safety assessment for an IFE target fabrication facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Latkowski, J F; Reyes, S; Besenbruch, G E; Goodin, D T

    2000-10-13

    We estimate possible ranges of tritium inventories for an inertial fusion energy (IFE) target fabrication facility producing various types of targets and using various production technologies. Target fill is the key subtask in determining the overall tritium inventory for the plant. By segmenting the inventory into multiple, parallel production lines--each with its own fill canister--and including an expansion tank to limit releases, we are able to ensure that a target fabrication facility would meet the accident dose goals of 10 mSv (1 rem) set forth in the Department of Energy's Fusion Safety Standards. For indirect-drive targets, we calculate release fractions for elements from lithium to bismuth and show that nearly all elements meet the dose goal. Our work suggests directions for future R&D that will help reduce total tritium inventories and increase the flexibility of target fabrication facilities.

  9. DOE Cites Bechtel Jacobs Company for Nuclear Safety Violations | Department

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

    of Energy 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.

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

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

    Department of Energy 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

  11. 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

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

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

    2010-04-21

    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. Admin Chg 1, dated 7-29-13, supersedes DOE O 426.2.

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

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

    2010-04-21

    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.

  14. Sandia Nuclear Power Safety Expert Elected to National Academy...

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

    Nuclear Power Safety Expert Elected to National Academy of Engineering - Sandia Energy Energy Search Icon Sandia Home Locations Contact Us Employee Locator Energy & Climate Secure ...

  15. Spent Nuclear Fuel project integrated safety management plan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Daschke, K.D.

    1996-09-17

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

  16. Request for Naval Reactors Comment on Proposed Prometheus Space Flight Nuclear Reactor High Tier Reactor Safety Requirements and for Naval Reactors Approval to Transmit These Requirements to JPL

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    D. Kokkinos

    2005-04-28

    The purpose of this letter is to request Naval Reactors comments on the nuclear reactor high tier requirements for the PROMETHEUS space flight reactor design, pre-launch operations, launch, ascent, operation, and disposal, and to request Naval Reactors approval to transmit these requirements to Jet Propulsion Laboratory to ensure consistency between the reactor safety requirements and the spacecraft safety requirements. The proposed PROMETHEUS nuclear reactor high tier safety requirements are consistent with the long standing safety culture of the Naval Reactors Program and its commitment to protecting the health and safety of the public and the environment. In addition, the philosophy on which these requirements are based is consistent with the Nuclear Safety Policy Working Group recommendations on space nuclear propulsion safety (Reference 1), DOE Nuclear Safety Criteria and Specifications for Space Nuclear Reactors (Reference 2), the Nuclear Space Power Safety and Facility Guidelines Study of the Applied Physics Laboratory.

  17. Highly Enriched Uranium Materials Facility | National Nuclear...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Gallery Jobs Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Home Highly Enriched Uranium Materials Facility Highly Enriched Uranium Materials Facility Congressmen tour Y-12...

  18. 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.

  19. Enforcement Regulations and Directives - Nuclear Safety | Department of

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

    Energy 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 Enforcement Guidance Supplements 10 C.F.R. Part 830 10 C.F.R. Part 830 - Nuclear Safety Management; Final Rule Office of

  20. Verification of Readiness to Start Up or Restart Nuclear Facilities

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

    2010-04-16

    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.

  1. Verification of Readiness to Start Up or Restart Nuclear Facilities

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

    2010-04-16

    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. Adm Chg 1, dated 4-2-13, supersedes DOE O 425.1D.

  2. 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

  3. Documented Safety Analysis Addendum for the Neutron Radiography Reactor Facility Core Conversion

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Boyd D. Christensen

    2009-05-01

    The Neutron Radiography Reactor Facility (NRAD) is a Training, Research, Isotope Production, General Atomics (TRIGA) reactor which was installed in the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Hot Fuels Examination Facility (HFEF) at the Materials and Fuels Complex (MFC) in the mid 1970s. The facility provides researchers the capability to examine both irradiated and non-irradiated materials in support of reactor fuel and components programs through non-destructive neutron radiography examination. The facility has been used in the past as one facet of a suite of reactor fuels and component examination facilities available to researchers at the INL and throughout the DOE complex. The facility has also served various commercial research activities in addition to the DOE research and development support. The reactor was initially constructed using Fuel Lifetime Improvement Program (FLIP)- type highly enriched uranium (HEU) fuel obtained from the dismantled Puerto Rico Nuclear Center (PRNC) reactor. In accordance with international non-proliferation agreements, the NRAD core will be converted to a low enriched uranium (LEU) fuel and will continue to utilize the PRNC control rods, control rod drives, startup source, and instrument console as was previously used with the HEU core. The existing NRAD Safety Analysis Report (SAR) was created and maintained in the preferred format of the day, combining sections of both DOE-STD-3009 and Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 1.70. An addendum was developed to cover the refueling and reactor operation with the LEU core. This addendum follows the existing SAR format combining required formats from both the DOE and NRC. This paper discusses the project to successfully write a compliant and approved addendum to the existing safety basis documents.

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This document provides the technical basis for the Department of Energy (DOE) Policy (P) 420.1, Nuclear Safety Policy, dated 2-8-2011. It includes an analysis of the revised Policy to determine whether it provides the necessary and sufficient high-level expectations that will lead DOE to establish and implement appropriate requirements to assure protection of the public, workers, and the environment from the hazards of DOE’s operation of nuclear facilities.

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

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

    ("ISA") is appropriate for fuel recycling facilities1 which would be licensed ... A basis is provided for concluding that future recycling facilities - which will possess ...

  6. Destruction of nuclear energy facilities in war: the problem and the implications

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ramberg, B.

    1980-01-01

    This book examines current practices, policies, and regulations concerning nuclear energy in the light of potential sabotage. Dr. Ramberg explains clearly, for both the lay reader and the technical community, the vulnerabilities of different sorts of nuclear facilities. In a case-by-case analysis of countries using or building nuclear power plants, he outlines the strategic hazards of these facilities. The safety of thousands could depend on such volatile factors as the psychological sensitivity of national leaders and the direction of the wind. A combination of engineering changes, use of alternative forms of energy to limit nuclear proliferation, and changes in international law could lessen these risks. Finally, Dr. Ramberg suggests specific national and international guidelines for monitoring nuclear exports.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2009-11-01

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

  8. National Ignition Facility | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    National Ignition Facility Glass amplifiers in Laser Bay 2 at the National Ignition Facility. The construction of the 192-beam 1.8 MJ UV NIF, the world's most energetic laser, was ...

  9. ICF Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Inertial Confinement Fusion ICF Facilities Nike mirror array and lens array 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

  10. Exploratory Nuclear Reactor Safety Analysis and Visualization via

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    Integrated Topological and Geometric Techniques (Technical Report) | SciTech Connect Technical Report: Exploratory Nuclear Reactor Safety Analysis and Visualization via Integrated Topological and Geometric Techniques Citation Details In-Document Search Title: Exploratory Nuclear Reactor Safety Analysis and Visualization via Integrated Topological and Geometric Techniques A recent trend in the nuclear power engineering field is the implementation of heavily computational and time consuming

  11. An Integrated Safety Assessment Methodology for Generation IV Nuclear Systems

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Timothy J. Leahy

    2010-06-01

    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 ďtoolkitĒ 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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-05-01

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

  13. Contained Firing Facility | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Development / Facilities Contained Firing Facility The CFF firing chamber is the largest explosive chamber in the world, used for large-scale experiments using high-explosives with full containment of hazardous materials. The facility provides a combination of capabilities, including wide-angle flash radiography, laser velocimetry, pin-dome measurements, and high-speed optical cameras that are used to measure dynamics during the experiments. CFF is a key component of NNSA's national hydrotest

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

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

    Energy 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 the Office of Nuclear Safety, within the Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security (AU) to provide corporate-level leadership supporting nuclear safety research and development throughout the Department of Energy (DOE). The NSR&D Program also consults with the Nuclear Safety Council,

  15. ICF Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    National Ignition Facility, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory OMEGA and OMEGA EP, University of Rochester Laboratory for Laser Energetics Z Machine, Sandia National ...

  16. Groundbreaking at National Ignition Facility | National Nuclear...

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

    Photo Gallery Jobs Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Home About Us Our History NNSA Timeline Groundbreaking at National Ignition Facility Groundbreaking at...

  17. High Explosives Application Facility | National Nuclear Security...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    No other facility in the world supports such a multidisciplinary mission under one roof. HEAF provides national leadership in the study of chemical high explosives for many ...

  18. Office of Safety | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Gallery Photo Gallery Jobs Apply for Our Jobs Our Jobs Working at NNSA Blog Home Office of Safety Office of Safety NNSA's Asset Management Program Completes First Pilot The...

  19. Nuclear Safety Enforcement Documents | Department of Energy

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

    Exposure at the Hanford Site June 14, 2005 Preliminary Notice of Violation, Safety and Ecology Corporation - EA-2005-03 Issued to Safety and Ecology Corporation related to a 10 CFR...

  20. Enforcement handbook: Enforcement of DOE nuclear safety requirements

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-06-01

    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.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2002-02-26

    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.

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

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

    Appendix B: Rules and Directives Applicable to Nuclear Facilities Line Management Oversight Appendix B to DOE G 226.1-2A "Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy ...

  3. Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities

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

    2013-04-04

    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.

  4. INTEGRATION OF FACILITY MODELING CAPABILITIES FOR NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION ANALYSIS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    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.

    2011-07-18

    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.

  5. Securing Operating Data From Passive Safety Tests at the Fast Flux Test Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wootan, David W.; Omberg, Ronald P.; Makenas, Bruce J.; Nielsen, Deborah L.; Nelson, Joseph V.; Polzin, David L.

    2011-06-01

    The Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) is the most recent Liquid Metal Reactor (LMR) to operate in the United States, from 1982 to 1992. The technologies employed in designing and constructing this reactor, along with information obtained from tests conducted during its operation, are currently being secured and archived by the Department of Energy’s Office of Nuclear Energy Fuel Cycle Research and Development Program. This report is one in a series documenting the overall project efforts to retrieve and preserve critical information related to advanced reactors. A previous report summarized the initial efforts to review, retrieve and preserve the most salient documents related to Passive Safety Testing (PST) in the FFTF. Efforts continue to locate, secure, and retrieve record copies of original plant data tapes for the series of passive safety tests conducted between 1986 and 1991.

  6. Securing Operating Data From Passive Safety Tests at the Fast Flux Test Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wootan, David W.; Omberg, Ronald P.; Makenas, Bruce J.; Nielsen, Deborah L.; Nelson, Joseph V.; Polzin, David L.

    2011-06-01

    The Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) is the most recent Liquid Metal Reactor (LMR) to operate in the United States, from 1982 to 1992. The technologies employed in designing and constructing this reactor, along with information obtained from tests conducted during its operation, are currently being secured and archived by the Department of Energy's Office of Nuclear Energy Fuel Cycle Research and Development Program. This report is one in a series documenting the overall project efforts to retrieve and preserve critical information related to advanced reactors. A previous report summarized the initial efforts to review, retrieve and preserve the most salient documents related to Passive Safety Testing (PST) in the FFTF. Efforts continue to locate, secure, and retrieve record copies of original plant data tapes for the series of passive safety tests conducted between 1986 and 1991.

  7. Deactivation and Storage Issues Shared by Fossil and Nuclear Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thomas S. LaGuardia

    1998-12-31

    The deactivation of a power plant, be it nuclear or fossil fueled, requires that the facility be placed in a safe and stable condition to prevent unacceptable exposure of the public or the environment to hazardous materials until the facility can be decommissioned. The conditions at two Texas plants are examined. These plants are fossil fueled, but their conditions might be duplicated at a nuclear plant.

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

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

    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 ...

  9. HYDROGEN IGNITION MECHANISM FOR EXPLOSIONS IN NUCLEAR FACILITY PIPE SYSTEMS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Leishear, R

    2010-05-02

    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.

  10. Investigation of injury/illness data at a nuclear facility. Part II

    DOE Public Access Gateway for Energy & Science Beta (PAGES Beta)

    Cournoyer, Michael E.; Garcia, Vincent E.; Sandoval, Arnold N.; George, Gerald L.; Gubernatis, David C.; Schreiber, Stephen B.

    2015-07-01

    At Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), there are several nuclear facilities, accelerator facilities, radiological facilities, explosives sites, moderate- and high-hazard non-nuclear facilities, biosciences laboratory, etc. The Plutonium Science and Manufacturing Directorate (ADPSM) provides special nuclear material research, process development, technology demonstration, and manufacturing capabilities. ADPSM manages the LANL Plutonium Facility. Within the Radiological Control Area at TA-55 (PF-4), chemical and metallurgical operations with plutonium and other hazardous materials are performed. LANL Health and Safety Programs investigate injury and illness data. In this study, statistically significant trends have been identified and compared for LANL, ADPSM, and PF-4 injury/illness cases. A previouslymore¬†¬Ľ described output metric is used to measures LANL management progress towards meeting its operational safety objectives and goals. Timelines are used to determine trends in Injury/Illness types. Pareto Charts are used to prioritize causal factors. The data generated from analysis of Injury/Illness data have helped identify and reduce the number of corresponding causal factors.¬ę¬†less

  11. Investigation of injury/illness data at a nuclear facility. Part II

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cournoyer, Michael E.; Garcia, Vincent E.; Sandoval, Arnold N.; George, Gerald L.; Gubernatis, David C.; Schreiber, Stephen B.

    2015-07-01

    At Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), there are several nuclear facilities, accelerator facilities, radiological facilities, explosives sites, moderate- and high-hazard non-nuclear facilities, biosciences laboratory, etc. The Plutonium Science and Manufacturing Directorate (ADPSM) provides special nuclear material research, process development, technology demonstration, and manufacturing capabilities. ADPSM manages the LANL Plutonium Facility. Within the Radiological Control Area at TA-55 (PF-4), chemical and metallurgical operations with plutonium and other hazardous materials are performed. LANL Health and Safety Programs investigate injury and illness data. In this study, statistically significant trends have been identified and compared for LANL, ADPSM, and PF-4 injury/illness cases. A previously described output metric is used to measures LANL management progress towards meeting its operational safety objectives and goals. Timelines are used to determine trends in Injury/Illness types. Pareto Charts are used to prioritize causal factors. The data generated from analysis of Injury/Illness data have helped identify and reduce the number of corresponding causal factors.

  12. Facility Approvals, Security Surveys, and Nuclear Materials Surveys

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

    1992-09-15

    To establish Department of Energy (DOE) requirements for granting facility approvals prior to permitting safeguards and security interests on the premises and the conduct of insite security and/or nuclear material surveys of facilities with safeguards and security interests. Cancels DOE 5634.1A. Canceled by DOE O 470.1 dated 9-28-95.

  13. Facility Approvals, Security Surveys, and Nuclear Materials Surveys

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

    1988-02-03

    To establish the Department of Energy (DOE) requirements for granting facility approvals prior to permitting safeguards and security interests on the premises and the conduct of on-site security and/or nuclear material surveys of facilities with safeguards and security interests. Cancels DOE O 5630.7 and DOE O 5634.1. Canceled by DOE 5634.1B.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-09-01

    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.

  15. National Ignition Facility | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    National Ignition Facility Glass amplifiers in Laser Bay 2 at the National Ignition Facility. The construction of the 192-beam 1.8 MJ UV NIF, the world's most energetic laser, was completed in March 2009. Current experiments are focusing on using the NIF laser and 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 SSP experiments. By the end of FY 2012, the NIF will

  16. Facility Clearance Program | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    nuclear material (SNM), other hazardous material presenting a potential radiological, chemical, or biological sabotage threat, andor DOE property of significant monetary value, ...

  17. Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee Facility Subcommittee visit...

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

    Klein (Oregon State University). Tansel Selekler (Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy) accompanied the Subcommittee. The visit was well-coordinated by Sherrell...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1999-12-01

    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.

  19. Development of the Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard - September...

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

    A working group with nuclear safety expertise used paired pairing computer software to ... A computer program was used to combine the results for each "paired pair" in the group and ...

  20. Exelon Statement Regarding Nuclear Safety and 10 CFR 810

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    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.

  1. Fiscal Year 2016 Call for Nuclear Safety Research and Development...

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

    FROM: SUBJECT: Fiscal Year 2016 Call for Nuclear Safety Research and Development Proposals The purpose of this memorandum is to inform you of the Fiscal Year 2016 Call for ...

  2. Spent nuclear fuel project path forward preliminary safety evaluation

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brehm, J.R.; Crowe, R.D.; Siemer, J.M.; Wojdac, L.F.; Hosler, A.G.

    1995-03-01

    This preliminary safety evaluation (PSE) provides validation of the initial project design criteria for the Spent Nuclear Fuel Project (SNFP) Path Forward for removal of fuel from K Basins.

  3. lasers. National Ignition Facility | National Nuclear Security...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    target shot of fiscal year 2015 WASHINGTON - Last week, the National Ignition Facility (NIF) fired its 300th laser target shot in fiscal year (FY) 2015, meeting the year's goal...

  4. High Explosives Application Facility | National Nuclear Security

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Administration High Explosives Application Facility A Livermore scientist uses a laser spectroscopic method with a diamond anvil DOE/NNSA has identified LLNL's High Explosives Applications Facility (HEAF) as the complex-wide "Center of Excellence" for High-Explosives Research and Development. In this capacity, HEAF is a source of subject matter expertise for high explosives and other energetic materials. Its mission is to provide this expertise to serve multiple government

  5. high explosives pressing facility | National Nuclear Security

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Administration Home high explosives pressing facility Thornberry hosts House Majority Leader at Pantex visit Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, hosted Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-CA, at both Pantex and Bell Helicopter in Amarillo recently to discuss the Texas Panhandle's role in national security. At Pantex, Thornberry and McCarthy viewed the High Explosives Pressing Facility along with the locations...

  6. Method and means of monitoring the effluent from nuclear facilities

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Lattin, Kenneth R.; Erickson, Gerald L.

    1976-01-01

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

  7. EM Issues Amended Decision to Expand Use of Nuclear Facility

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    AIKEN, S.C. ‚Äď EM issued an amended Record of Decision (ROD) to the Savannah River Site (SRS) Spent Nuclear Fuel Environmental Impact Statement to expand the operations of the H-Canyon Facility at SRS to support a major nuclear non-proliferation goal and save taxpayer dollars.

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

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

    2001-07-12

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

  9. Sandia Nuclear Power Safety Expert Elected to National Academy of

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

    Engineering Nuclear Power Safety Expert Elected to National Academy of Engineering - Sandia Energy Energy Search Icon Sandia Home Locations Contact Us Employee Locator Energy & Climate Secure & Sustainable Energy Future Stationary Power Energy Conversion Efficiency Solar Energy Wind Energy Water Power Supercritical CO2 Geothermal Natural Gas Safety, Security & Resilience of the Energy Infrastructure Energy Storage Nuclear Power & Engineering Grid Modernization Battery Testing

  10. 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...

  11. Nuclear Safety Enforcement Documents | Department of Energy

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

    of an Irradiated Pellet at the Test Reactor Area Hot Cell Facility at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory August 18, 1999 Preliminary Notice of Violation,...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brewer, Jeffrey D.

    2014-05-01

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

  13. Construction Cost Growth for New Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kubic, Jr., William L.

    2014-05-25

    Cost growth and construction delays are problems that plague many large construction projects including the construction of new Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear facilities. A study was conducted to evaluate cost growth of large DOE construction projects. The purpose of the study was to compile relevant data, consider the possible causes of cost growth, and recommend measures that could be used to avoid extreme cost growth in the future. Both large DOE and non-DOE construction projects were considered in this study. With the exception of Chemical and Metallurgical Research Building Replacement Project (CMRR) and the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility (MFFF), cost growth for DOE Nuclear facilities is comparable to the growth experienced in other mega construction projects. The largest increase in estimated cost was found to occur between early cost estimates and establishing the project baseline during detailed design. Once the project baseline was established, cost growth for DOE nuclear facilities was modest compared to non-DOE mega projects.

  14. Test facilities for evaluating nuclear thermal propulsion systems

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Beck, D.F.; Allen, G.C.; Shipers, L.R.; Dobranich, D.; Ottinger, C.A.; Harmon, C.D.; Fan, W.C. ); Todosow, M. )

    1992-09-22

    Interagency panels evaluating nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP) development options have consistently recognized the need for constructing a major new ground test facility to support fuel element and engine testing. This paper summarizes the requirements, configuration, and baseline performance of some of the major subsystems designed to support a proposed ground test complex for evaluating nuclear thermal propulsion fuel elements and engines being developed for the Space Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (SNTP) program. Some preliminary results of evaluating this facility for use in testing other NTP concepts are also summarized.

  15. 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

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Supplemental 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

  16. Nuclear Safety Research and Development Proposal Review and Prioritization and Criteria

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Nuclear Safety Research and Development Proposal Review and Prioritization Process and Criteria Nuclear Safety Research and Development Program Office of Nuclear Safety Office of Environment, Health, Safety, and Security U.S. Department of Energy December 2015 NSR&D Proposal Review and Prioritization Process and Criteria 2 | P a g e Nuclear Safety Research and Development Program 1. Introduction Per the Department of Energy (DOE) Nuclear Safety Research and Development (NSR&D) Program

  17. FAQS Qualification Card ‚Äď Nuclear Safety Specialist

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  18. A Web-Based Nuclear Criticality Safety Bibliographic Database

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Koponen, B L; Huang, S

    2007-02-22

    A bibliographic criticality safety database of over 13,000 records is available on the Internet as part of the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Nuclear Criticality Safety Program (NCSP) website. This database is easy to access via the Internet and gets substantial daily usage. This database and other criticality safety resources are available at ncsp.llnl.gov. The web database has evolved from more than thirty years of effort at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), beginning with compilations of critical experiment reports and American Nuclear Society Transactions.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Morris, Tommy J.

    2012-07-05

    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.

  20. Nuclear safety for the space exploration initiative. Final report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dix, T.E.

    1991-11-01

    The results of a study to identify potential hazards arising from nuclear reactor power systems for use on the lunar and Martian surfaces, related safety issues, and resolutions of such issues by system design changes, operating procedures, and other means are presented. All safety aspects of nuclear reactor power systems from prelaunch ground handling to eventual disposal were examined consistent with the level of detail for SP-100 reactor design at the 1988 System Design Review and for launch vehicle and space transport vehicle designs and mission descriptions as defined in the 90-day Space Exploration Initiative (SEI) study. Information from previous aerospace nuclear safety studies was used where appropriate. Safety requirements for the SP-100 space nuclear reactor system were compiled. Mission profiles were defined with emphasis on activities after low earth orbit insertion. Accident scenarios were then qualitatively defined for each mission phase. Safety issues were identified for all mission phases with the aid of simplified event trees. Safety issue resolution approaches of the SP-100 program were compiled. Resolution approaches for those safety issues not covered by the SP-100 program were identified. Additionally, the resolution approaches of the SP-100 program were examined in light of the moon and Mars missions.

  1. Nuclear Safety Specialist FTCP Functional Area Qualification...

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

    ... Discuss the application of the Center for Chemical Process Safety's Guidelines for Hazard ... DOE-STD-1104-2014. Objective B.: Perform reviews and determine the adequacy of the ...

  2. A systematic method for identifying vital areas at complex nuclear facilities.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Beck, David Franklin; Hockert, John

    2005-05-01

    Identifying the areas to be protected is an important part of the development of measures for physical protection against sabotage at complex nuclear facilities. In June 1999, the International Atomic Energy Agency published INFCIRC/225/Rev.4, 'The Physical Protection of Nuclear Material and Nuclear Facilities.' This guidance recommends that 'Safety specialists, in close cooperation with physical protection specialists, should evaluate the consequences of malevolent acts, considered in the context of the State's design basis threat, to identify nuclear material, or the minimum complement of equipment, systems or devices to be protected against sabotage.' This report presents a structured, transparent approach for identifying the areas that contain this minimum complement of equipment, systems, and devices to be protected against sabotage that is applicable to complex nuclear facilities. The method builds upon safety analyses to develop sabotage fault trees that reflect sabotage scenarios that could cause unacceptable radiological consequences. The sabotage actions represented in the fault trees are linked to the areas from which they can be accomplished. The fault tree is then transformed (by negation) into its dual, the protection location tree, which reflects the sabotage actions that must be prevented in order to prevent unacceptable radiological consequences. The minimum path sets of this fault tree dual yield, through the area linkage, sets of areas, each of which contains nuclear material, or a minimum complement of equipment, systems or devices that, if protected, will prevent sabotage. This method also provides guidance for the selection of the minimum path set that permits optimization of the trade-offs among physical protection effectiveness, safety impact, cost and operational impact.

  3. Proceedings of the Nuclear Criticality Technology Safety Workshop

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rene G. Sanchez

    1998-04-01

    This document contains summaries of most of the papers presented at the 1995 Nuclear Criticality Technology Safety Project (NCTSP) meeting, which was held May 16 and 17 at San Diego, Ca. The meeting was broken up into seven sessions, which covered the following topics: (1) Criticality Safety of Project Sapphire; (2) Relevant Experiments For Criticality Safety; (3) Interactions with the Former Soviet Union; (4) Misapplications and Limitations of Monte Carlo Methods Directed Toward Criticality Safety Analyses; (5) Monte Carlo Vulnerabilities of Execution and Interpretation; (6) Monte Carlo Vulnerabilities of Representation; and (7) Benchmark Comparisons.

  4. Nuclear facility licensing, documentaion, and reviews, and the SP-100 test site experience

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cornwell, B.C.; Deobald, T.L.; Bitten, E.J.

    1991-06-01

    The required approvals and permits to test a nuclear facility are extensive. Numerous regulatory requirements result in the preparation of documentation to support the approval process. The principal regulations for the SP-100 Ground Engineering System (GES) include the National Environmental Policy Act, Clean Air Act, and Atomic Energy Act. The documentation prepared for the SP-100 Nuclear Assembly Test (NAT) included an Environmental Assessment, state permit applications, and Safety Analysis Reports. This paper discusses the regulation documentation requirements and the SP-100 NAT Test Site experience. 12 refs., 2 figs., 2 tabs.

  5. Microsoft PowerPoint - Fire Safety workshop NQA-1 CGD 4 29 15...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    v Nuclear and Facility Safety Programs Workshop Fire Safety Track May 5th, 2015 Overview ... of Replacement Items in Nuclear Power Plants" * EPRI 1016157, "Information for ...

  6. Nuclear Science User Facilities (NSUF) Monthly Report March 2015

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Soelberg, Renae

    2015-03-01

    Nuclear Science User Facilities (NSUF) Formerly: Advanced Test Reactor National Scientific User Facility (ATR NSUF) Monthly Report February 2015 Highlights; Jim Cole attended the OECD NEA Expert Group on Innovative Structural Materials meeting in Paris, France; Jim Lane and Doug Copsey of Writers Ink visited PNNL to prepare an article for the NSUF annual report; Brenden Heidrich briefed the Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee-Facilities Subcommittee on the Nuclear Energy Infrastructure Database project and provided them with custom reports for their upcoming visits to Argonne National Laboratory, Idaho National Laboratory, Oak Ridge National Laboratory and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; and University of California-Berkeley Principal Investigator Mehdi Balooch visited PNNL to observe measurements and help finalize plans for completing the desired suite of analyses. His visit was coordinated to coincide with the visit of Jim Lane and Doug Copsey.

  7. Assessment of Space Nuclear Thermal Propulsion Facility and Capability Needs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    James Werner

    2014-07-01

    The development of a Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) system rests heavily upon being able to fabricate and demonstrate the performance of a high temperature nuclear fuel as well as demonstrating an integrated system prior to launch. A number of studies have been performed in the past which identified the facilities needed and the capabilities available to meet the needs and requirements identified at that time. Since that time, many facilities and capabilities within the Department of Energy have been removed or decommissioned. This paper provides a brief overview of the anticipated facility needs and identifies some promising concepts to be considered which could support the development of a nuclear thermal propulsion system. Detailed trade studies will need to be performed to support the decision making process.

  8. Department of Energy Cites Nuclear Waste Partnership, LLC and Los Alamos National Security, LLC for Violations Related to Worker Safety and Health and Nuclear Safety

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today issued a Preliminary Notice of Violation (PNOV) to Nuclear Waste Partnership, LLC (NWP) for violations of DOE worker safety and health and nuclear safety requirements.

  9. Integrated deterministic and probabilistic safety analysis for safety assessment of nuclear power plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Di Maio, Francesco; Zio, Enrico; Smith, Curtis; Rychkov, Valentin

    2015-07-06

    The present special issue contains an overview of the research in the field of Integrated Deterministic and Probabilistic Safety Assessment (IDPSA) of Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs). Traditionally, safety regulation for NPPs design and operation has been based on Deterministic Safety Assessment (DSA) methods to verify criteria that assure plant safety in a number of postulated Design Basis Accident (DBA) scenarios. Referring to such criteria, it is also possible to identify those plant Structures, Systems, and Components (SSCs) and activities that are most important for safety within those postulated scenarios. Then, the design, operation, and maintenance of these ‚Äúsafety-related‚ÄĚ SSCs and activities are controlled through regulatory requirements and supported by Probabilistic Safety Assessment (PSA).

  10. Integrated deterministic and probabilistic safety analysis for safety assessment of nuclear power plants

    DOE Public Access Gateway for Energy & Science Beta (PAGES Beta)

    Di Maio, Francesco; Zio, Enrico; Smith, Curtis; Rychkov, Valentin

    2015-07-06

    The present special issue contains an overview of the research in the field of Integrated Deterministic and Probabilistic Safety Assessment (IDPSA) of Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs). Traditionally, safety regulation for NPPs design and operation has been based on Deterministic Safety Assessment (DSA) methods to verify criteria that assure plant safety in a number of postulated Design Basis Accident (DBA) scenarios. Referring to such criteria, it is also possible to identify those plant Structures, Systems, and Components (SSCs) and activities that are most important for safety within those postulated scenarios. Then, the design, operation, and maintenance of these ‚Äúsafety-related‚ÄĚ SSCs andmore¬†¬Ľ activities are controlled through regulatory requirements and supported by Probabilistic Safety Assessment (PSA).¬ę¬†less

  11. 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)]

    2000-03-28

    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.

  12. Safety Assessment for the Kozloduy National Disposal Facility in Bulgaria - 13507

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Biurrun, E.; Haverkamp, B.; Lazaro, A.; Miralles, A.; Stefanova, I.

    2013-07-01

    Due to the early decommissioning of four Water-Water Energy Reactors (WWER) 440-V230 reactors at the Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) near the city of Kozloduy in Bulgaria, large amounts of low and intermediate radioactive waste will arise much earlier than initially scheduled. In or-der to manage the radioactive waste from the early decommissioning, Bulgaria has intensified its efforts to provide a near surface disposal facility at Radiana with the required capacity. To this end, a project was launched and assigned in international competition to a German-Spanish consortium to provide the complete technical planning including the preparation of the Intermediate Safety Assessment Report. Preliminary results of operational and long-term safety show compliance with the Bulgarian regulatory requirements. The long-term calculations carried out for the Radiana site are also a good example of how analysis of safety assessment results can be used for iterative improvements of the assessment by pointing out uncertainties and areas of future investigations to reduce such uncertainties in regard to the potential radiological impact. The computer model used to estimate the long-term evolution of the future repository at Radiana predicted a maximum total annual dose for members of the critical group, which is carried to approximately 80 % by C-14 for a specific ingestion pathway. Based on this result and the outcome of the sensitivity analysis, existing uncertainties were evaluated and areas for reasonable future investigations to reduce these uncertainties were identified. (authors)

  13. Nuclear Rocket Facility Decommissioning Project: Controlled Explosive Demolition of Neutron Activated Shield Wall

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Michael R. Kruzic

    2007-09-16

    Located in Area 25 of the Nevada Test Site (NTS), the Test Cell A (TCA) Facility was used in the early to mid-1960s for the testing of nuclear rocket engines, as part of the Nuclear Rocket Development Program, to further space travel. Nuclear rocket testing resulted in the activation of materials around the reactors and the release of fission products and fuel particles in the immediate area. Identified as Corrective Action Unit 115, the TCA facility was decontaminated and decommissioned (D&D) from December 2004 to July 2005 using the Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) process, under the ''Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order''. The SAFER process allows environmental remediation and facility closure activities (i.e., decommissioning) to occur simultaneously provided technical decisions are made by an experienced decision maker within the site conceptual site model, identified in the Data Quality Objective process. Facility closure involved a seven-step decommissioning strategy. Key lessons learned from the project included: (1) Targeted preliminary investigation activities provided a more solid technical approach, reduced surprises and scope creep, and made the working environment safer for the D&D worker. (2) Early identification of risks and uncertainties provided opportunities for risk management and mitigation planning to address challenges and unanticipated conditions. (3) Team reviews provided an excellent mechanism to consider all aspects of the task, integrated safety into activity performance, increase team unity and ''buy-in'' and promoted innovative and time saving ideas. (4) Development of CED protocols ensured safety and control. (5) The same proven D&D strategy is now being employed on the larger ''sister'' facility, Test Cell C.

  14. safety

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    contractor at the Nevada National Security Site, has been recognized by the Department of Energy for excellence in occupational safety and health protection. National Nuclear...

  15. Guidance for identifying, reporting and tracking nuclear safety noncompliances

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-12-01

    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.

  16. 340 Waste handling Facility Hazard Categorization and Safety Analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    T. J. Rodovsky

    2010-10-25

    The analysis presented in this document provides the basis for categorizing the facility as less than Hazard Category 3.

  17. Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities

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

    2014-04-14

    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. Supersedes DOE G 226.1-2

  18. Los Alamos Neutron Science Center (LANSCE) Nuclear Science Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Nelson, Ronald Owen; Wender, Steve

    2015-06-19

    The Los Alamos Neutron Science Center (LANSCE) facilities for Nuclear Science consist of a high-energy "white" neutron source (Target 4) with 6 flight paths, three low-energy nuclear science flight paths at the Lujan Center, and a proton reaction area. The neutron beams produced at the Target 4 complement those produced at the Lujan Center because they are of much higher energy and have shorter pulse widths. The neutron sources are driven by the 800-MeV proton beam of the LANSCE linear accelerator. With these facilities, LANSCE is able to deliver neutrons with energies ranging from a milli-electron volt to several hundreds of MeV, as well as proton beams with a wide range of energy, time and intensity characteristics. The facilities, instruments and research programs are described briefly.

  19. DOE Representative to World Institute of Nuclear Safety (WINS) | National

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Nuclear Security Administration DOE Representative to World Institute of Nuclear Safety (WINS) Lisa G. Hilliard Lisa Hilliard August 2009 NNSA Administrator's Silver Award Lisa G. Hilliard has received the NNSA Administrator's Silver Award for her sustained distinguished accomplishments as the Office Director of the DOE office to the U.S. Mission to International Organizations in Vienna from May 1993 to April 2009, serving four Ambassadors, two interim Representatives, and six Secretaries of

  20. ORNL Nuclear Safety Research and Development Program Bimonthly Report for July-August 1968

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cottrell, W.B.

    2001-08-17

    The accomplishments during the months of July and August in the research and development program under way at ORNL as part of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission's Nuclear Safety Program are summarized, Included in this report are work on various chemical reactions, as well as the release, characterization, and transport of fission products in containment systems under various accident conditions and on problems associated with the removal of these fission products from gas streams. Although most of this work is in general support of water-cooled power reactor technology, including LOFT and CSE programs, the work reflects the current safety problems, such as measurements of the prompt fuel element failure phenomena and the efficacy of containment spray and pool-suppression systems for fission-product removal. Several projects are also conducted in support of the high-temperature gas-cooled reactor (HTGR). Other major projects include fuel-transport safety investigations, a series of discussion papers on various aspects of water-reactor technology, antiseismic design of nuclear facilities, and studies of primary piping and steel, pressure-vessel technology. Experimental work relative to pressure-vessel technology includes investigations of the attachment of nozzles to shells and the implementation of joint AEX-PVFX programs on heavy-section steel technology and nuclear piping, pumps, and valves. Several of the projects are directly related to another major undertaking; namely, the AEC's standards program, which entails development of engineering safeguards and the establishment of codes and standards for government-owned or -sponsored reactor facilities. Another task, CHORD-S, is concerned with the establishment of computer programs for the evaluation of reactor design data, The recent activities of the NSIC and the Nuclear Safety journal in behalf of the nuclear community are also discussed.

  1. Nuclear diagnostics for the National Ignition Facility (invited)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Murphy, Thomas J.; Barnes, Cris W.; Berggren, R. R.; Bradley, P.; Caldwell, S. E.; Chrien, R. E.; Faulkner, J. R.; Gobby, P. L.; Hoffman, N.; Jimerson, J. L.

    2001-01-01

    The National Ignition Facility (NIF), currently under construction at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, will provide unprecedented opportunities for the use of nuclear diagnostics in inertial confinement fusion experiments. The completed facility will provide 2 MJ of laser energy for driving targets, compared to the approximately 40 kJ that was available on Nova and the approximately 30 kJ available on Omega. Ignited NIF targets are anticipated to produce up to 10{sup 19} DT neutrons. In addition to a basic set of nuclear diagnostics based on previous experience, these higher NIF yields are expected to allow innovative nuclear diagnostic techniques to be utilized, such as neutron imaging, recoil proton techniques, and gamma-ray-based reaction history measurements.

  2. Description of the OSU APEX test facility to assess AP600 passive safety

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hochreiter, L.E.; Lau, L.K.; Reyes, J.N. Jr.; Groome, J.T.

    1995-12-31

    The objective of this paper is to describe the Advanced Plant Experiment (APEX) test facility, which is a new integral system test facility located at Oregon State University (OSU) specifically scaled, designed, and built to simulate all of the important geometrical details of the Westinghouse AP600. The APEX facility has been designed and constructed to develop a database that can be used to validate the thermal hydraulic safety analysis codes that will be used in the AP600 design certification process. The test facility has been specifically designed and scaled to model small break loss-of-coolant and long-term cooling transients, which utilize the AP600 passive safety systems.

  3. COMPLETION OF THE FIRST INTEGRATED SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL TRANSSHIPMENT/INTERIM STORAGE FACILITY IN NW RUSSIA

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dyer, R.S.; Barnes, E.; Snipes, R.L.; Hoeibraaten, S.; Gran, H.C.; Foshaug, E.; Godunov, V.

    2003-02-27

    Northwest and Far East Russia contain large quantities of unsecured spent nuclear fuel (SNF) from decommissioned submarines that potentially threaten the fragile environments of the surrounding Arctic and North Pacific regions. The majority of the SNF from the Russian Navy, including that from decommissioned nuclear submarines, is currently stored in on-shore and floating storage facilities. Some of the SNF is damaged and stored in an unstable condition. Existing Russian transport infrastructure and reprocessing facilities cannot meet the requirements for moving and reprocessing this amount of fuel. Additional interim storage capacity is required. Most of the existing storage facilities being used in Northwest Russia do not meet health and safety, and physical security requirements. The United States and Norway are currently providing assistance to the Russian Federation (RF) in developing systems for managing these wastes. If these wastes are not properly managed, they could release significant concentrations of radioactivity to these sensitive environments and could become serious global environmental and physical security issues. There are currently three closely-linked trilateral cooperative projects: development of a prototype dual-purpose transport and storage cask for SNF, a cask transshipment interim storage facility, and a fuel drying and cask de-watering system. The prototype cask has been fabricated, successfully tested, and certified. Serial production is now underway in Russia. In addition, the U.S. and Russia are working together to improve the management strategy for nuclear submarine reactor compartments after SNF removal.

  4. Construction safety program for the National Ignition Facility, Appendix A

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cerruti, S.J.

    1997-06-26

    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.

  5. Nuclear Safety Research and Development Program Proposal Submittal Instrustions for Fiscal Year 2016

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Energy 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

  6. Interim Safety Basis for Fuel Supply Shutdown Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    BENECKE, M.W.

    2000-09-07

    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.

  7. OAK RIDGE CERCLA DISPOSAL FACILITY ACHIEVES SAFETY MILESTONE

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    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....

  8. 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.

  9. Automating Nuclear-Safety-Related SQA Procedures with Custom Applications

    DOE Public Access Gateway for Energy & Science Beta (PAGES Beta)

    Freels, James D.

    2016-01-01

    Nuclear safety-related procedures are rigorous for good reason. Small design mistakes can quickly turn into unwanted failures. Researchers at Oak Ridge National Laboratory worked with COMSOL to define a simulation app that automates the software quality assurance (SQA) verification process and provides results in less than 24 hours.

  10. Construction safety program for the National Ignition Facility, Appendix B

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cerruti, S.J.

    1997-06-26

    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.

  11. DOE Standard Integration Of Environment,Safety, and Health Into Facility Disposition Activities

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    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.

  12. Safety

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

    Safety All JLF participants must comply fully with all LLNL safety regulations and procedures by becoming a Registered User of the facility. All JLF participants must complete available LLNL safety training: HS5200-W Laser Safety HS4258-W Beryllium Awareness HS4261-W Lead Awareness HS5220-W Electrical Safety Awareness HS6001-W General Employee Radiological HS4240-W Chemical Safety HS4680-W PPE To access these training modules link here [LTRAIN] from inside LLNL, or here from anywhere. All JLF

  13. Facilities

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

    2 - Sandia Energy Energy Search Icon Sandia Home Locations Contact Us Employee Locator Energy & Climate Secure & Sustainable Energy Future Stationary Power Energy Conversion Efficiency Solar Energy Wind Energy Water Power Supercritical CO2 Geothermal Natural Gas Safety, Security & Resilience of the Energy Infrastructure Energy Storage Nuclear Power & Engineering Grid Modernization Battery Testing Nuclear Fuel Cycle Defense Waste Management Programs Advanced Nuclear Energy Nuclear

  14. Facilities

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

    3 - Sandia Energy Energy Search Icon Sandia Home Locations Contact Us Employee Locator Energy & Climate Secure & Sustainable Energy Future Stationary Power Energy Conversion Efficiency Solar Energy Wind Energy Water Power Supercritical CO2 Geothermal Natural Gas Safety, Security & Resilience of the Energy Infrastructure Energy Storage Nuclear Power & Engineering Grid Modernization Battery Testing Nuclear Fuel Cycle Defense Waste Management Programs Advanced Nuclear Energy Nuclear

  15. Spent nuclear fuel project, Cold Vacuum Drying Facility human factors engineering (HFE) analysis: Results and findings

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Garvin, L.J.

    1998-07-17

    This report presents the background, methodology, and findings of a human factors engineering (HFE) analysis performed in May, 1998, of the Spent Nuclear Fuels (SNF) Project Cold Vacuum Drying Facility (CVDF), to support its Preliminary Safety Analysis Report (PSAR), in responding to the requirements of Department of Energy (DOE) Order 5480.23 (DOE 1992a) and drafted to DOE-STD-3009-94 format. This HFE analysis focused on general environment, physical and computer workstations, and handling devices involved in or directly supporting the technical operations of the facility. This report makes no attempt to interpret or evaluate the safety significance of the HFE analysis findings. The HFE findings presented in this report, along with the results of the CVDF PSAR Chapter 3, Hazards and Accident Analyses, provide the technical basis for preparing the CVDF PSAR Chapter 13, Human Factors Engineering, including interpretation and disposition of findings. The findings presented in this report allow the PSAR Chapter 13 to fully respond to HFE requirements established in DOE Order 5480.23. DOE 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports, Section 8b(3)(n) and Attachment 1, Section-M, require that HFE be analyzed in the PSAR for the adequacy of the current design and planned construction for internal and external communications, operational aids, instrumentation and controls, environmental factors such as heat, light, and noise and that an assessment of human performance under abnormal and emergency conditions be performed (DOE 1992a).

  16. Software reliability and safety in nuclear reactor protection systems

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Lawrence, J.D.

    1993-11-01

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

  17. Nuclear Safety R&D in the Waste Processing Technology Development...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    & Technology 2 Outline Nuclear Safety Research & Development Overview Summary of EM- NSR&D Presentations from February 2009 Evaluating Performance of Nuclear Grade HEPA Filters ...

  18. AUDIT REPORT Follow-up on Nuclear Safety: Safety Basis and Quality Assurance at the Los Alamos National

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Nuclear Safety: Safety Basis and Quality Assurance at the Los Alamos National Laboratory DOE/IG-0941 July 2015 U.S. Department of Energy Office of Inspector General Office of Audits and Inspections Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 July 16, 2015 MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY FROM: Gregory H. Friedman Inspector General SUBJECT: INFORMATION: Audit Report: "Follow-up on Nuclear Safety: Safety Basis and Quality Assurance at the Los Alamos National Laboratory" BACKGROUND A primary

  19. 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

  20. Pyroprocessing of fast flux test facility nuclear fuel

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Westphal, B.R.; Wurth, L.A.; Fredrickson, G.L.; Galbreth, G.G.; Vaden, D.; Elliott, M.D.; Price, J.C.; Honeyfield, E.M.; Patterson, M.N.

    2013-07-01

    Used nuclear fuel from the Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) was recently transferred to the Idaho National Laboratory and processed by pyroprocessing in the Fuel Conditioning Facility. Approximately 213 kg of uranium from sodium-bonded metallic FFTF fuel was processed over a one year period with the equipment previously used for the processing of EBR-II used fuel. The peak burnup of the FFTF fuel ranged from 10 to 15 atom% for the 900+ chopped elements processed. Fifteen low-enriched uranium ingots were cast following the electrorefining and distillation operations to recover approximately 192 kg of uranium. A material balance on the primary fuel constituents, uranium and zirconium, during the FFTF campaign will be presented along with a brief description of operating parameters. Recoverable uranium during the pyroprocessing of FFTF nuclear fuel was greater than 95% while the purity of the final electro-refined uranium products exceeded 99%. (authors)

  1. Pyroprocessing of Fast Flux Test Facility Nuclear Fuel

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    B.R. Westphal; G.L. Fredrickson; G.G. Galbreth; D. Vaden; M.D. Elliott; J.C. Price; E.M. Honeyfield; M.N. Patterson; L. A. Wurth

    2013-10-01

    Used nuclear fuel from the Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) was recently transferred to the Idaho National Laboratory and processed by pyroprocessing in the Fuel Conditioning Facility. Approximately 213 kg of uranium from sodium-bonded metallic FFTF fuel was processed over a one year period with the equipment previously used for the processing of EBR-II used fuel. The peak burnup of the FFTF fuel ranged from 10 to 15 atom% for the 900+ chopped elements processed. Fifteen low-enriched uranium ingots were cast following the electrorefining and distillation operations to recover approximately 192 kg of uranium. A material balance on the primary fuel constituents, uranium and zirconium, during the FFTF campaign will be presented along with a brief description of operating parameters. Recoverable uranium during the pyroprocessing of FFTF nuclear fuel was greater than 95% while the purity of the final electrorefined uranium products exceeded 99%.

  2. 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‚ÄźSTD‚Äź1020‚Äź2012, Natural Phenomena Hazards Analysis and Design Criteria for DOE Facilities, and DOE‚ÄźSTD‚Äź1066‚Äź2012, Fire Protection

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-12-01

    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.

  4. Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities

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

    2011-04-25

    The purpose of this Guide is to provide U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) line management with guidance that may be useful to them in effectively and efficiently implementing the requirements of DOE O 226.1B, Implementation of Department of Energy Oversight Policy, date April 25, 2011, as applied to Federal line management of hazard category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities.

  5. Underground Facility at Nevada National Security Site | National Nuclear

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Security Administration Underground Facility at Nevada National Security Site The U1a Complex is an underground laboratory at the Nevada National Security Site used for dynamic experiments with special nuclear material (SNM) and other weapon materials. The Complex provides an infrastructure of high-bandwidth diagnostics, data acquisition, timing and firing, control and monitor systems capable of supporting experiments designed to acquire information on fundamental materials properties,

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Booker, Paul M.; Brown, Lisa M.

    2005-07-01

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

  7. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: A selected bibliography: Volume 8

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Owen, P.T.; Michelson, D.C.; Knox, N.P.

    1987-09-01

    The 553 abstracted references on nuclear facility decommissioning, uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions constitute the eighth in a series of reports. Foreign and domestic literature of all types - technical reports, progress reports, journal articles, symposia proceedings, theses, books, patents, legislation, and research project descriptions - has been included. The bibliography contains scientific, technical, economic, regulatory, and legal information pertinent to the US Department of energy's remedial action program. Major chapters are Surplus Facilities Management Program, Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning, Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program, Facilities Contaminated with Naturally Occurring Radionuclides, Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program, Uranium Mill Tailings Management, Technical Measurements Center, and General Remedial Action Program Studies. Chapter sections for chapters 1, 2, 5, and 6 include Design, Planning, and Regulations; Environmental Studies and Site Surveys; Health, Safety, and Biomedical Studies; Decontamination Studies; Dismantlement and Demolition; Site Stabilization and Reclamation; Waste Disposal; Remedial Action Experience; and General Studies. Within these categories, references are arranged alphabetically by first author. Those references having no individual author are listed by corporate affiliation or by publication description. Indexes are provided for author, corporate affiliation, title word, publication description, geographic location, and keywords. The appendix contains a list of frequently used acronyms and abbreviations.

  8. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions. Volume 6. A selected bibliography

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Owen, P.T.; Michelson, D.C.; Knox, N.P.

    1985-09-01

    This bibliography of 683 references with abstracts on the subject of nuclear facility decommissioning, uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions is the sixth in a series of annual reports prepared for the US Department of Energy's Remedial Action Programs. Foreign as well as domestic literature of all types - technical reports, progress reports, journal articles, conference papers, symposium proceedings, theses, books, patents, legislation, and research project descriptions - has been included. The bibliography contains scientific (basic research as well as applied technology), economic, regulatory, and legal literature pertinent to the US Department of Energy's remedial action program. Major chapters are: (1) Surplus Facilities Management Program; (2) Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning; (3) Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program; (4) Facilities Contaminated with Natural Radioactivity; (5) Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program; (6) Grand Junction Remedial Action Program; (7) Uranium Mill Tailings Management; (8) Technical Measurements Center; and (9) General Remedial Action Program Studies. Chapter sections for chapters 1, 2, 5, and 7 include Design, Planning, and Regulations; Environmental Studies and Site Surveys; Health, Safety, and Biomedical Studies; Decontamination Studies; Dismantlement and Demolition; Site Stabilization and Reclamation; Waste Disposal; Remedial Action Experience; and General Studies. The references within each chapter or section are arranged alphabetically by leading author. References having no individual author are arranged by corporate affiliation or by publication description.

  9. Accelerator Facility Safety Implementation Guide for DOE Order (0) 420.2C, Safety of Accelerator Facilities

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

    2013-07-17

    The revision will address implementation of roles and responsibilities, improve operational efficiency using operating experience, and clarify the use of program requirements such as the Unreviewed Safety Issue and Accelerator Readiness Review.

  10. Nuclear Rocket Facility Decommissioning Project: Controlled Explosive Demolition of Neutron-Activated Shield Wall

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Michael R. Kruzic

    2008-06-01

    Located in Area 25 of the Nevada Test Site (NTS), the Test Cell A (TCA) Facility (Figure 1) was used in the early to mid-1960s for testing of nuclear rocket engines, as part of the Nuclear Rocket Development Program, to further space travel. Nuclear rocket testing resulted in the activation of materials around the reactors and the release of fission products and fuel particles. The TCA facility, known as Corrective Action Unit 115, was decontaminated and decommissioned (D&D) from December 2004 to July 2005 using the Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration (SAFER) process, under the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order. The SAFER process allows environmental remediation and facility closure activities (i.e., decommissioning) to occur simultaneously, provided technical decisions are made by an experienced decision maker within the site conceptual site model. Facility closure involved a seven-step decommissioning strategy. First, preliminary investigation activities were performed, including review of process knowledge documentation, targeted facility radiological and hazardous material surveys, concrete core drilling and analysis, shield wall radiological characterization, and discrete sampling, which proved to be very useful and cost-effective in subsequent decommissioning planning and execution and worker safety. Second, site setup and mobilization of equipment and personnel were completed. Third, early removal of hazardous materials, including asbestos, lead, cadmium, and oil, was performed ensuring worker safety during more invasive demolition activities. Process piping was to be verified void of contents. Electrical systems were de-energized and other systems were rendered free of residual energy. Fourth, areas of high radiological contamination were decontaminated using multiple methods. Contamination levels varied across the facility. Fixed beta/gamma contamination levels ranged up to 2 million disintegrations per minute (dpm)/100 centimeters squared (cm2) beta/gamma. Removable beta/gamma contamination levels seldom exceeded 1,000 dpm/100 cm2, but, in railroad trenches on the reactor pad containing soil on the concrete pad in front of the shield wall, the beta dose rates ranged up to 120 milli-roentgens per hour from radioactivity entrained in the soil. General area dose rates were less than 100 micro-roentgens per hour. Prior to demolition of the reactor shield wall, removable and fixed contaminated surfaces were decontaminated to the best extent possible, using traditional decontamination methods. Fifth, large sections of the remaining structures were demolished by mechanical and open-air controlled explosive demolition (CED). Mechanical demolition methods included the use of conventional demolition equipment for removal of three main buildings, an exhaust stack, and a mobile shed. The 5-foot (ft), 5-inch (in.) thick, neutron-activated reinforced concrete shield was demolished by CED, which had never been performed at the NTS.

  11. Construction safety program for the National Ignition Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cerruti, S.J.

    1997-06-26

    The Construction Safety Program (CSP) for NIF sets forth the responsibilities, guidelines, rules, policies and regulations for all workers involved in the construction, special equipment installation, acceptance testing, and initial activation and operation of NIF at LLNL during the construction period of NIF.

  12. Office of Safety Infrastructure & Operations | National Nuclear Security

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Administration Safety Infrastructure & Operations NNSA's G2 Management Information System Wins Association for Enterprise Information's (AFEI) "Excellence in Enterprise Information Award" The G2 team and the 2015 Association for Enterprise Information's (AFEI) Excellence in Enterprise Information Award. (WASHINGTON, D.C) - The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) has received the 2015 Association for Enterprise Information's (AFEI) Excellence in Enterprise

  13. Double-clad nuclear-fuel safety rod

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

    1981-12-30

    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.

  14. Safety

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

    - Sandia Energy Energy Search Icon Sandia Home Locations Contact Us Employee Locator Energy & Climate Secure & Sustainable Energy Future Stationary Power Energy Conversion Efficiency Solar Energy Wind Energy Water Power Supercritical CO2 Geothermal Natural Gas Safety, Security & Resilience of the Energy Infrastructure Energy Storage Nuclear Power & Engineering Grid Modernization Battery Testing Nuclear Fuel Cycle Defense Waste Management Programs Advanced Nuclear Energy Nuclear

  15. Adjusting External Doses from the ORNL and Y-12 Facilities for the Oak Ridge Nuclear Facilities Mortality Study

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

    Adjusting External Doses from the ORNL and Y-12 Facilities for the Oak Ridge Nuclear Facilities Mortality Study A Supplemental Report to Data Collection, Validation, and Description for the Oak Ridge Nuclear Facilities Mortality Study J. P. Watkins (1), D. L. Cragle (1), E. L. Frome (2), C. M. West (1), D. J. Crawford- Brown (3), and W. G. Tankersley (1) (1) Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, Environmental and Health Sciences Division, Center for Epidemiologic Research, Oak Ridge, TN

  16. Health and safety impacts related to the management of spent nuclear fuels

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Jilek, D.C.

    1996-06-01

    Under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended, the U.S. Department of Energy is responsible for managing the disposal of spent nuclear fuel from civilian nuclear power plants. Deployment of a multipurpose canister (MPC) system for dry storage of commercial spent nuclear fuel at reactor sites was determined to be an option for managing spent nuclear fuel until either a permanent repository or interim central storage facility (commonly called a Monitored Retrievable Storage Facility, or MRS) becomes available. Routine health and safety impacts to workers from handling and storage operations at nuclear facilities for four separate scenarios were evaluated for the MPC system: an on-time repository with an MRS; an on-time repository with no MRS; a delayed repository with an MRS; and a delayed repository with no MRS. In addition to evaluating the MPC system, five alternatives were analyzed. These included the No Action Alternative (NAA), Current Technology (CTr), the Transposable Storage Cask (TSC), the Dual-Purpose Canister (DPC), and the Small MPC (SmMPC). Health effects are expressed as collective doses in person- rem per year and risks as latent cancer fatalities per year for incident-free operations for each alternative and scenario. Results show that both dose and risks to workers vary as much as 68{percent} among scenarios and alternatives. Although dose estimates and risks fall below limits for radiation dose to workers as specified in Title 10, Part 20, of the Code of Federal Regulations, additional measures could be applied to reduce potential doses and resultant health risk. 5 refs., 2 tabs.

  17. CRAD, Occupational Safety & Health- 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 Industrial Hygiene program at the Los Alamos National Laboratory TA 55 SST Facility.

  18. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: a selected bibliography

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Owen, P.T.; Knox, N.P.; Fielden, J.M.; Johnson, C.A.

    1982-09-01

    This bibliography contains 693 references with abstracts on the subject of nuclear facility decommissioning, uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions. Foreign, as well as domestic, literature of all types - technical reports, progress reports, journal articles, conference papers, symposium proceedings, theses, books, patents, legislation, and research project descriptions - has been included in this publication. The bibliography contains scientific (basic research as well as applied technology), economic, regulatory, and legal literature pertinent to the US Department of Energy's Remedial Action Program. Major chapters are Surplus Facilities Management Program, Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning, Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program, Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program, Grand Junction Remedial Action Program, and Uranium Mill Tailings Management. Chapter sections for chapters 1 and 2 include: Design, Planning, and Regulations; Site Surveys; Decontamination Studies; Dismantlement and Demolition; Land Decontamination and Reclamation; Waste Disposal; and General Studies. The references within each chapter are arranged alphabetically by leading author. References having no individual author are arranged by corporate author or by title. Indexes are provided for (1) author; (2) corporate affiliation; (3) title; (4) publication description; (5) geographic location; and (6) keywords. An appendix of 202 bibliographic references without abstracts or indexes has been included in this bibliography. This appendix represents literature identified but not abstracted due to time constraints.

  19. DECOMMISSIONING OF NUCLEAR FACILITIES IN GERMANY - STATUS AT BMBF SITES

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Papp, R.; Komorowski, K.

    2002-02-25

    In a period of approximately 40 years prior to 1994, the German Federal Government had spent about {approx} 15 billion to promote nuclear technology. These funds were earmarked for R&D projects as well as demonstration facilities which took up operation between 1960 and 1980. These BMBF (Federal Ministry for Research) facilities were mainly located at the sites of the federal research centers at Juelich and Karlsruhe (the research reactors AVR, FR2, FRJ-1, KNK, and MZFR, the pilot reprocessing plant WAK) but included also the pilot plants SNR-300 and THTR-300 for fast breeder and high-temperature gas-cooled reactor development, respectively, and finally the salt mine Asse which had been used for waste emplacement prior to conversion into an underground research laboratory. In the meantime, almost all of these facilities were shut down and are now in a state of decommissioning and dismantling. This is mainly due to the facts that R&D needs are satisfied or do not exist any more and that, secondly, the lack of political consensus led to the cancellation of advanced nuclear technology.

  20. Global Survey of the Concepts and Understanding of the Interfaces Between Nuclear Safety, Security, and Safeguards

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kovacic, Don N.; Stewart, Scott; Erickson, Alexa R.; Ford, Kerrie D.; Mladineo, Stephen V.

    2015-07-15

    There is increasing global discourse on how the elements of nuclear safety, security, and safeguards can be most effectively implemented in nuclear power programs. While each element is separate and unique, they must nevertheless all be addressed in a country’s laws and implemented via regulations and in facility operations. This topic is of particular interest to countries that are currently developing the infrastructure to support nuclear power programs. These countries want to better understand what is required by these elements and how they can manage the interfaces between them and take advantages of any synergies that may exist. They need practical examples and guidance in this area in order to develop better organizational strategies and technical capacities. This could simplify their legal, regulatory, and management structures and avoid inefficient approaches and costly mistakes that may not be apparent to them at this early stage of development. From the perspective of IAEA International Safeguards, supporting Member States in exploring such interfaces and synergies provides a benefit to them because it acknowledges that domestic safeguards in a country do not exist in a vacuum. Instead, it relies on a strong State System of Accounting and Control that is in turn dependent on a capable and independent regulatory body as well as a competent operator and technical staff. These organizations must account for and control nuclear material, communicate effectively, and manage and transmit complete and correct information to the IAEA in a timely manner. This, while in most cases also being responsible for the safety and security of their facilities. Seeking efficiencies in this process benefits international safeguards and nonproliferation. This paper will present the results of a global survey of current and anticipated approaches and practices by countries and organizations with current or future nuclear power programs on how they are implementing, or planning to implement, safety, security, and safeguards in their programs. The idea is to capture current knowledge and thinking on this topic and to identify common themes in organizations and management. It will also document the most commonly held ideas and perception (and misperceptions) of what it means to manage interfaces and take advantage of synergies for operating nuclear facilities and those that are building their infrastructures. It is desired that the results of this paper will inform the current discourse on this topic with some quantitative data and identify any general trends in understanding.

  1. Financing Strategies For A Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    David Shropshire; Sharon Chandler

    2006-07-01

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

  2. Worker Safety and Health and Nuclear Safety Quarterly Performance Analysis (January - March 2008)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Kerr, C E

    2009-10-07

    The DOE Office of Enforcement expects LLNL to 'implement comprehensive management and independent assessments that are effective in identifying deficiencies and broader problems in safety and security programs, as well as opportunities for continuous improvement within the organization' and to 'regularly perform assessments to evaluate implementation of the contractor's processes for screening and internal reporting.' LLNL has a self-assessment program, described in ES&H Manual Document 4.1, that includes line, management and independent assessments. LLNL also has in place a process to identify and report deficiencies of nuclear, worker safety and health and security requirements. In addition, the DOE Office of Enforcement expects LLNL to evaluate 'issues management databases to identify adverse trends, dominant problem areas, and potential repetitive events or conditions' (page 14, DOE Enforcement Process Overview, December 2007). LLNL requires that all worker safety and health and nuclear safety noncompliances be tracked as 'deficiencies' in the LLNL Issues Tracking System (ITS). Data from the ITS are analyzed for worker safety and health (WSH) and nuclear safety noncompliances that may meet the threshold for reporting to the DOE Noncompliance Tracking System (NTS). This report meets the expectations defined by the DOE Office of Enforcement to review the assessments conducted by LLNL, analyze the issues and noncompliances found in these assessments, and evaluate the data in the ITS database to identify adverse trends, dominant problem areas, and potential repetitive events or conditions. The report attempts to answer three questions: (1) Is LLNL evaluating its programs and state of compliance? (2) What is LLNL finding? (3) Is LLNL appropriately managing what it finds? The analysis in this report focuses on data from the first quarter of 2008 (January through March). This quarter is analyzed within the context of information identified in previous quarters to include April 2007 through March 2008. The results from analyzing the deficiencies are presented in accordance with the two primary NTS reporting thresholds for WSH and nuclear safety noncompliances: (1) those related to certain events or conditions and (2) those that are management issues. In addition, WSH noncompliances were also analyzed to determine if any fell under the 'other significant condition' threshold. This report also identifies noncompliance topical areas that may have issues that do not meet the NTS reporting threshold but should remain under observation. These are placed on the 'watch list' for continued analysis.

  3. Los Alamos National Laboratory corregated metal pipe saw facility preliminary safety analysis report. Volume I

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1990-09-19

    This Preliminary Safety Analysis Report addresses site assessment, facility design and construction, and design operation of the processing systems in the Corrugated Metal Pipe Saw Facility with respect to normal and abnormal conditions. Potential hazards are identified, credible accidents relative to the operation of the facility and the process systems are analyzed, and the consequences of postulated accidents are presented. The risk associated with normal operations, abnormal operations, and natural phenomena are analyzed. The accident analysis presented shows that the impact of the facility will be acceptable for all foreseeable normal and abnormal conditions of operation. Specifically, under normal conditions the facility will have impacts within the limits posted by applicable DOE guidelines, and in accident conditions the facility will similarly meet or exceed the requirements of all applicable standards. 16 figs., 6 tabs.

  4. Application of the New Decommissioning Regulation to the Nuclear Licensed Facilities (NLF) at Fontenay-aux-Roses's Nuclear Center (CEA)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Sauret, Josiane; Piketty, Laurence; Jeanjacques, Michel

    2008-01-15

    This abstract describes the application of the new decommissioning regulation on all Nuclear Licensed Facilities (NLF is to say INB in French) at Fontenay-aux-Roses's Center (CEA/FAR). The decommissioning process has been applied in six buildings which are out of the new nuclear perimeter proposed (buildings no 7, no 40, no 94, no 39, no 52/1 and no 32) and three buildings have been reorganized (no 54, no 91 and no 53 instead of no 40 and no 94) in order to increase the space for temporary nuclear waste disposal and to reduce the internal transports of nuclear waste on the site. The advantages are the safety and radioprotection improvements and a lower operating cost. A global safety file was written in 2002 and 2003 and was sent to the French Nuclear Authority on November 2003. The list of documents required is given in the paragraph I of this paper. The main goals were two ministerial decrees (one decree for each NLF) getting the authorization to modify the NLF perimeter and to carry out cleaning and dismantling activities leading to the whole decommissioning of all NLF. Some specific authorizations were necessary to carry out the dismantling program during the decommissioning procedure. They were delivered by the French Nuclear Safety Authority (FNSA) or with limited delegation by the General Executive Director (GED) on the CEA Fontenay-aux-Roses's Center, called internal authorization. Some partial dismantling or decontamination examples are given below: - evaporator for the radioactive liquid waste treatment station (building no 53): FNSA authorization: phase realised in 2002/2003. - disposal tanks for the radioactive liquid waste treatment station (building no 53) FNSA authorization: phase realised in 2004, - incinerator for the radioactive solid waste treatment station (building no 07): FNSA authorization: operation realised in 2004, - research equipments in the building no. 54 and building no. 91: internal authorization ; realised in 2005, - sample-taking to characterize solvent contained in one tank of Petrus installation (NLF 57, building 18) for radiological and chemical analysis needed to prepare the treatment and the evacuation of these wastes : internal authorization ; realised in june 2005. It was possible to plan the whole decommissioning process on the Nuclear Licensed Facilities of Fontenay-aux-Roses's Center (CEA/FAR) taking into account the French new regulation and to plan a coherent and continue program activity for the dismantling process. For the program not to be interrupted during the administrative process (2003-2006), specific authorisations have been delivered by the French Nuclear Safety Authority or by the General Executive Director (GED) on the CEA Fontenay-aux- Roses's Center (internal authorization). The time schedule to complete the entire program is until 2017 for NLF 'Procede' (NLF no 165) and until 2018 for NLF 'Support' (NLF no 166). Since 1999, an annual press meeting has been organised by the Fontenay-aux-Roses's Center Head Executive Manager.

  5. Safety - Radiation Effects Facility / Cyclotron Institute / Texas A&M

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

    University Safety Numerous safety mechanisms in the form of administrative and engineered controls are incorporated into the design of the Radiation Effects Facility. Radiation levels in the surrounding areas were measured while each available beam was brought into the heavily shielded target area at full intensity. It was found that the measured radiation levels would be safe for the beam intensities several orders of magnitude larger than those needed for typical radiation testing

  6. Energy Department Issues Request For Proposal for Nuclear Regulatory Commission Licensed Facilities Procurement

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Cincinnati ‚Äď The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today issued a final Request for Proposal (RFP) for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Licensed Facilities procurement. The NRC Licensed Facilities contract is for managing Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) storage facilities and licenses under NRC regulations.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Clarno, Kevin; Lorber, Alfred Abraham; Pryor, Richard J.; Spotz, William F.; Schmidt, Rodney Cannon; Belcourt, Kenneth; Hooper, Russell Warren; Humphries, Larry LaRon

    2010-02-01

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

  8. Surveys of organizational culture and safety culture in nuclear power

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Brown, Walter S.

    2000-07-30

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

  9. Magnet design considerations for Fusion Nuclear Science Facility

    DOE Public Access Gateway for Energy & Science Beta (PAGES Beta)

    Zhai, Yuhu; Kessel, Chuck; El-guebaly, Laila; Titus, Peter

    2016-02-25

    The Fusion Nuclear Science Facility (FNSF) is a nuclear confinement facility to provide a fusion environment with components of the reactor integrated together to bridge the technical gaps of burning plasma and nuclear science between ITER and the demonstration power plant (DEMO). Compared to ITER, the FNSF is smaller in size but generates much higher magnetic field, 30 times higher neutron fluence with 3 orders of magnitude longer plasma operation at higher operating temperatures for structures surrounding the plasma. Input parameters to the magnet design from system code analysis include magnetic field of 7.5 T at the plasma center withmore¬†¬Ľ plasma major radius of 4.8 m and minor radius of 1.2 m, and a peak field of 15.5 T on the TF coils for FNSF. Both low temperature superconductor (LTS) and high temperature superconductor (HTS) are considered for the FNSF magnet design based on the state-of-the-art fusion magnet technology. The higher magnetic field can be achieved by using the high performance ternary Restack Rod Process (RRP) Nb3Sn strands for toroidal field (TF) magnets. The circular cable-in-conduit conductor (CICC) design similar to ITER magnets and a high aspect ratio rectangular CICC design are evaluated for FNSF magnets but low activation jacket materials may need to be selected. The conductor design concept and TF coil winding pack composition and dimension based on the horizontal maintenance schemes are discussed. Neutron radiation limits for the LTS and HTS superconductors and electrical insulation materials are also reviewed based on the available materials previously tested. As a result, the material radiation limits for FNSF magnets are defined as part of the conceptual design studies for FNSF magnets.¬ę¬†less

  10. DOE Issues Landmark Rule for Risk Insurance for Advanced Nuclear Facilities

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

    | Department of Energy Landmark Rule for Risk Insurance for Advanced Nuclear Facilities DOE Issues Landmark Rule for Risk Insurance for Advanced Nuclear Facilities May 8, 2006 - 10:36am Addthis WASHINGTON, DC - The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) issued on Saturday, the interim final rule required by the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT) for risk insurance to facilitate construction of new advanced nuclear power facilities. The rule establishes the requirements for risk insurance to cover

  11. CRAD, Safety Basis Upgrade Review (DOE-STD-3009-2014) - May 15...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    1) provides objectives, criteria, and approaches for establishing and maintaining the safety basis at nuclear facilities. CRAD, Safety Basis Upgrade Review (DOE-STD-3009-2014)...

  12. DOE-STD-1120-2005; Integration of Environment Safety and Health into Facility Disposition Activities

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    7-92 DOE-STD-1027-92 December 12, 1997 Hazard Categorization and Accident Analysis Techniques for Compliance with DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports Change Notice No. 1 (September 1997) The purpose of this DOE Standard is to establish guidance for the preparation and review of hazard categorization and accident analyses techniques as required in DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports. PDF icon DOE-STD-1027-92, Hazard Categorization and Accident Analysis Techniques For

  13. Renovated Korean nuclear safety and security system: A review and suggestions to successful settlement

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Chung, W. S.; Yun, S. W.; Lee, D. S.; Go, D. Y.

    2012-07-01

    Questions of whether past nuclear regulatory body of Korea is not a proper system to monitor and check the country's nuclear energy policy and utilization have been raised. Moreover, a feeling of insecurity regarding nuclear safety after the nuclear accident in Japan has spread across the public. This has stimulated a renovation of the nuclear safety regime in Korea. The Nuclear Safety and Security Commission (NSSC) was launched on October 26, 2011 as a regulatory body directly under the President in charge of strengthening independence and nuclear safety. This was a meaningful event as the NSSC it is a much more independent regulatory system for Korea. However, the NSSC itself does not guarantee an enhanced public acceptance of the nuclear policy and stable use nuclear energy. This study introduces the new NSSC system and its details in terms of organization structure, appropriateness of specialty, budget stability, and management system. (authors)

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    Nuclear Facility Construction - Piping and Pipe Supports Inspection Criteria, Approach and Lines of Inquiry (HSS CRAD 45-52, Rev. 0)

  15. SWIFT Facility

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

    SWIFT Facility - Sandia Energy Energy Search Icon Sandia Home Locations Contact Us Employee Locator Energy & Climate Secure & Sustainable Energy Future Stationary Power Energy Conversion Efficiency Solar Energy Wind Energy Water Power Supercritical CO2 Geothermal Natural Gas Safety, Security & Resilience of the Energy Infrastructure Energy Storage Nuclear Power & Engineering Grid Modernization Battery Testing Nuclear Fuel Cycle Defense Waste Management Programs Advanced Nuclear

  16. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: A selected bibliography, volume 9

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Owen, P.T.; Knox, N.P.; Michelson, D.C.; Turmer, G.S.

    1988-09-01

    The 604 abstracted references on nuclear facility decommissioning, uranium mill tailings management, and site remedial actions constitute the ninth in a series of reports prepared annually for the US Department of Energy's Remedial Action Programs. Foreign and domestic literature of all types--technical reports, progress reports, journal articles, symposia proceedings, theses, books, patents, legislation, and research project descriptions--has been included. The bibliography contains scientific, technical, economic, regulatory, and legal information pertinent to the US Department of Energy's remedial action programs. Major sections are (1) Surplus Facilities Management Program, (2) Nuclear Facilities Decommissioning, (3) Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program, (4) Facilities Contaminated with Naturally Occurring Radionuclides, (5) Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program, (6) Uranium Mill Tailings Management, (7) Technical Measurements Center, and (8) General Remedial Action Program Studies. Subsections for sections 1, 2, 5, and 6 include: Design, Planning, and Regulations; Environmental Studies and Site Surveys; Health, Safety, and Biomedical Studies; Decontamination Studies; Dismantlement and Demolition; Site Stabilization and Reclamation; Waste Disposal; Remedial Action Experience; and General Studies. Within these categories, references are arranged alphabetically by first author. Those references having no individual author are listed by corporate affiliation or by publication description. Indexes are provided for author, corporate affiliation, title word, publication description, geographic location, and keywords. This report is a product of the Remedial Action Program Information Center (RAPIC), which selects and analyzes information on remedial actions and relevant radioactive waste management technologies. RAPIC staff and resources are available to meet a variety of information needs. Contact the center at (615) 576-0568 or FTS 626-0568.

  17. DOE standard: Integration of environment, safety, and health into facility disposition activities. Volume 1: Technical standard

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-05-01

    This Department of Energy (DOE) technical standard (referred to as the Standard) provides guidance for integrating and enhancing worker, public, and environmental protection during facility disposition activities. It provides environment, safety, and health (ES and H) guidance to supplement the project management requirements and associated guidelines contained within DOE O 430.1A, Life-Cycle Asset Management (LCAM), and amplified within the corresponding implementation guides. In addition, the Standard is designed to support an Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS), consistent with the guiding principles and core functions contained in DOE P 450.4, Safety Management System Policy, and discussed in DOE G 450.4-1, Integrated Safety Management System Guide. The ISMS guiding principles represent the fundamental policies that guide the safe accomplishment of work and include: (1) line management responsibility for safety; (2) clear roles and responsibilities; (3) competence commensurate with responsibilities; (4) balanced priorities; (5) identification of safety standards and requirements; (6) hazard controls tailored to work being performed; and (7) operations authorization. This Standard specifically addresses the implementation of the above ISMS principles four through seven, as applied to facility disposition activities.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2006-07-01

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

  19. Decommissioning and Dismantling of Liquid Waste Storage and Liquid Waste Treatment Facility from Paldiski Nuclear Site, Estonia

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Varvas, M.; Putnik, H.; Johnsson, B.

    2006-07-01

    The Paldiski Nuclear Facility in Estonia, with two nuclear reactors was owned by the Soviet Navy and was used for training the navy personnel to operate submarine nuclear reactors. After collapse of Soviet Union the Facility was shut down and handed over to the Estonian government in 1995. In co-operation with the Paldiski International Expert Reference Group (PIERG) decommission strategy was worked out and started to implement. Conditioning of solid and liquid operational waste and dismantling of contaminated installations and buildings were among the key issues of the Strategy. Most of the liquid waste volume, remained at the Facility, was processed in the frames of an Estonian-Finnish co-operation project using a mobile wastewater purification unit NURES (IVO International OY) and water was discharged prior to the site take-over. In 1999-2002 ca 120 m{sup 3} of semi-liquid tank sediments (a mixture of ion exchange resins, sand filters, evaporator and flocculation slurry), remained after treatment of liquid waste were solidified in steel containers and stored into interim storage. The project was carried out under the Swedish - Estonian co-operation program on radiation protection and nuclear safety. Contaminated installations in buildings, used for treatment and storage of liquid waste (Liquid Waste Treatment Facility and Liquid Waste Storage) were then dismantled and the buildings demolished in 2001-2004. (authors)

  20. AIM-98-3464 RECEIVED THE HISTORY OF NUCLEAR WEAPON SAFETY DEVICES

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    AIM-98-3464 RECEIVED THE HISTORY OF NUCLEAR WEAPON SAFETY DEVICES David W. Plummer and William H. Greenwood Sandia National Laboratories Juri 0 8 8% Surety Components and Instrumentation Center Albuquerque, NM 87185-0329 Abstract 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

  1. DOE Cites Fluor Fernald Inc. for Nuclear Safety Violations | Department of

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

    Energy 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 Department of Energy (DOE) today notified Fluor Fernald, Inc. (Fluor Fernald) that it will fine the company $33,000 for violations of the department's nuclear safety requirements. Fluor Fernald is the department's contractor responsible for environmental cleanup activities at the Fernald Closure Project. The Preliminary

  2. Implementation Guide for Use in Developing Technical Safety Requirements

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

    2010-11-03

    This Guide provides elaboration for the content of TSRs. Section 10 CFR 830.205 of the Nuclear Safety Management rule, requires Department of Energy (DOE) contractors responsible for category 1, 2, and 3 DOE nuclear facilities to develop Technical Safety Requirements (TSRs). These TSRs identify the limitations to each DOE owned, contractor operated nuclear facility based on the documented safety analysis (DSA) and any additional safety requirements established for the facility. Cancels DOE G 423.1-1.

  3. Implementation Guide for Use in Developing Technical Safety Requirements

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

    2010-11-03

    This Guide provides elaboration for the content of TSRs. Section 10 CFR 830.205 of the Nuclear Safety Management rule, requires Department of Energy (DOE) contractors responsible for category 1, 2, and 3 DOE nuclear facilities to develop Technical Safety Requirements (TSRs). These TSRs identify the limitations to each DOE owned, contractor operated nuclear facility based on the documented safety analysis (DSA) and any additional safety requirements established for the facility. Does not cancel other directives.

  4. DOE-STD-1185-2004; Nuclear Explosive Safety Study Functional...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    STD-1185-2004 August 2004 DOE STANDARD NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVE SAFETY STUDY FUNCTIONAL AREA ... gravity bombs, including: * Radars * Contact fuses * Timers * Power supplies b. ...

  5. Nuclear Explosives Safety Evaluation Process (DOE-STD-3015-2004...

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    DOE-STD-3015-2001 DOE STANDARD NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVE SAFETY EVALUATION PROCESS U.S. Department of ... production, manufacturing, andor power plant operations. * Demonstrated ...

  6. CNS names Guess Director of Nuclear Safety Oversight | Y-12 National...

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

    CNS names Guess Director of ... CNS names Guess Director of Nuclear Safety Oversight Posted: ... Guess' most recent position was as Power Ascension Test Director in the ...

  7. Facility Representatives, DOE-STD-1063-2011, Change Notice 1

    Energy Savers [EERE]

    Program Manager Office of Nuclear Facility Safety Programs (HS-32) DOE Headquarters, ... Institute of Nuclear Power Operations, November 2004 Effective Engineering ...

  8. Progress and Status of the Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant's New Solid Waste Management and Storage Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rausch, J.; Henderson, R.W.; Penkov, V.

    2008-07-01

    A considerable amount of dry radioactive waste from former NPP operation has accumulated up to date and is presently stored at the Ignalina NPP site, Lithuania. Current storage capacities are nearly exhausted and more waste is to come from future decommissioning of the two RMBKtype reactors. Additionally, the existing storage facilities does not comply to the state-of-the-art technology for handling and storage of radioactive waste. In 2005, INPP faced this situation of a need for waste processing and subsequent interim storage of these wastes by contracting NUKEM with the design, construction, installation and commissioning of new waste management and storage facilities. The subject of this paper is to describe the scope and the status of the new solid waste management and storage facilities at the Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant. In summary: The turnkey contract for the design, supply and commission of the SWMSF was awarded in December 2005. The realisation of the project was initially planned within 48 month. The basic design was finished in August 2007 and the Technical Design Documentation and Preliminary Safety Analyses Report was provided to Authorities in October 2007. The construction license is expected in July 2008. The procurement phase was started in August 2007, start of onsite activities is expected in November 2007. The start of operation of the SWMSF is scheduled for end of 2009. (authors)

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  10. Enterprise Assessments Review of the Delegation of Safety Basis Approval

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

    Authority for Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 Nuclear Facilities - April 2016 | Department of Energy Delegation of Safety Basis Approval Authority for Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 Nuclear Facilities - April 2016 Enterprise Assessments Review of the Delegation of Safety Basis Approval Authority for Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 Nuclear Facilities - April 2016 April 2016 Enterprise Assessments Review of the Delegation of Safety Basis Approval Authority for Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 Nuclear

  11. Assessment of Safety Culture at the U.S. Departmen to Energy...

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    B-1 Acronyms BARS Behavioral Anchored Rating Scales DNFSB Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board ... Commission (NRC), several nuclear power generating utilities, and associated ...

  12. National Laser User Facilities Program | National Nuclear Security...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    National Laser User Facilities Program National Laser Users' Facility Grant Program Overview The Laboratory for Laser Energetics (LLE) at the University of Rochester (UR) was ...

  13. FLUOR HANFORD SAFETY MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    GARVIN, L J; JENSEN, M A

    2004-04-13

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    J. Blair Briggs; Anatoly Tsibulya; Yevgeniy Rozhikhin

    2012-03-01

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

  15. A historical perspective of remote operations and robotics in nuclear facilities. Robotics and Intelligent Systems Program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Herndon, J.N.

    1992-12-31

    The field of remote technology is continuing to evolve to support man`s efforts to perform tasks in hostile environments. The technology which we recognize today as remote technology has evolved over the last 45 years to support human operations in hostile environments such as nuclear fission and fusion, space, underwater, hazardous chemical, and hazardous manufacturing. The four major categories of approach to remote technology have been (1) protective clothing and equipment for direct human entry, (2) extended reach tools using distance for safety, (3) telemanipulators with barriers for safety, and (4) teleoperators incorporating mobility with distance and/or barriers for safety. The government and commercial nuclear industry has driven the development of the majority of the actual teleoperator hardware available today. This hardware has been developed largely due to the unsatisfactory performance of the protective-clothing approach in many hostile applications. Manipulation systems which have been developed include crane/impact wrench systems, unilateral power manipulators, mechanical master/slaves, and servomanipulators. Viewing systems have included periscopes, shield windows, and television systems. Experience over the past 45 years indicates that maintenance system flexibility is essential to typical repair tasks because they are usually not repetitive, structured, or planned. Fully remote design (manipulation, task provisions, remote tooling, and facility synergy) is essential to work task efficiency. Work for space applications has been primarily research oriented with relatively few successful space applications, although the shuttle`s remote manipulator system has been quite successful. In the last decade, underwater applications have moved forward significantly, with the offshore oil industry and military applications providing the primary impetus.

  16. Facility Safety

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

    2014-06-25

    Changes include invoking DOE-STD-3009 and DOE-STD-1104 as requirements documents. NOTE: The two standards are not final documents but can be found in Technical Standards RevCom at https://www.standards.doe.gov/login.jsp. Login as an SME using your email address.

  17. Frequently Asked Questions Regarding DOE-STD-1195-2011, Design of Safety

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

    Significant Safety Instrumented Systems Used at DOE Non-Reactor Nuclear Facilities | Department of Energy Frequently Asked Questions Regarding DOE-STD-1195-2011, Design of Safety Significant Safety Instrumented Systems Used at DOE Non-Reactor Nuclear Facilities Frequently Asked Questions Regarding DOE-STD-1195-2011, Design of Safety Significant Safety Instrumented Systems Used at DOE Non-Reactor Nuclear Facilities January 7, 2015 Frequently Asked Questions regarding DOE-STD-1195-2011 which

  18. Microsoft PowerPoint - Fire Safety workshop NQA-1 CGD 4 29 15 [Read-Only]

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    v Nuclear and Facility Safety Programs Workshop Fire Safety Track May 5th, 2015 Overview NQA 1 Commercial Grade Dedication Critical Characteristics Department of Energy Nuclear and Facility Safety Programs Workshop Fire Safety Track May 5 th , 2015 Randy P. Lanham PE, CSP Dale Moon, PE Fire Protection Chief Engineer Facility Engineering Depart. Mng. Randy.Lanham@cns.doe.gov Consolidated Nuclear Security Pantex and Y12 2 Overview CGD Definition Safety Function / DSA Requirements Example of CGD

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

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

    Idaho | Department of Energy Loan Guarantee for Front End Nuclear Facility in Idaho DOE Offers Conditional Loan Guarantee for Front End Nuclear Facility in Idaho May 20, 2010 - 12:00am Addthis Washington, DC - As part of a broad effort to expand the use of nuclear power in the United States and reduce carbon pollution, U.S. Secretary of Energy Steven Chu announced today the Department's first conditional commitment for a front-end nuclear facility. The $2 billion loan guarantee will support

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wittenbrock, N. G.

    1982-01-01

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

  1. DOE-STD-1120-2005; Integration of Environment, Safety, and Health into Facility Disposition Activities

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    120-2005 Volume 2 of 2 DOE STANDARD INTEGRATION OF ENVIRONMENT, SAFETY, AND HEALTH INTO FACILITY DISPOSITION ACTIVITIES Volume 2 of 2: Appendices 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 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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Schneider, K.J.

    1982-09-01

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

  3. The Greening of a Plutonium Facility through Personnel Safety, Operational Efficiency, and Infrastructure Improvements - 12108

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dodge, Robert L.; Cournoyer, Michael E.

    2012-07-01

    Chemical and metallurgical operations involving plutonium and other hazardous materials account for most activities performed at the Los Alamos National Laboratory's Plutonium Facility (TA-55). Engineered barriers provide the most effective protection from hazardous materials. These safety features serve to protect workers and provide defense in depth against the hazards associated with operations. Although not designed to specifically meet environmental requirements the safety-based design does meet or exceed the requirements of the environmental regulations enacted during and since its construction. TA-55's Waste Services Group supports this safety methodology by ensuring safe, efficient and compliant management of all radioactive and hazardous wastes generated at the TA-55. A key function of this group is the implementation of measures that lower the overall risk of radiological and hazardous material operations. Processes and procedures that reduce waste generation compared to current, prevalent processes or procedures used for the same purpose are identified. Some of these 'Best Practices' include implementation of a chemical control system, elimination of aerosol cans, reduction in hazardous waste, implementation of zero liquid discharge, and the re-cyclization of nitric acid. P2/WMin opportunities have been implemented in the areas of personnel and facility attributes, environmental compliance, energy conservation, and green focused infrastructure expansion with the overall objective of minimizing raw material and energy consumption and waste generation. This increases technical knowledge and augments operational safety. (authors)

  4. A survey of decontamination processes applicable to DOE nuclear facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1997-05-01

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

  5. Heat barrier for use in a nuclear reactor facility

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Keegan, Charles P.

    1988-01-01

    A thermal barrier for use in a nuclear reactor facility is disclosed herein. Generally, the thermal barrier comprises a flexible, heat-resistant web mounted over the annular space between the reactor vessel and the guard vessel in order to prevent convection currents generated in the nitrogen atmosphere in this space from entering the relatively cooler atmosphere of the reactor cavity which surrounds these vessels. Preferably, the flexible web includes a blanket of heat-insulating material formed from fibers of a refractory material, such as alumina and silica, sandwiched between a heat-resistant, metallic cloth made from stainless steel wire. In use, the web is mounted between the upper edges of the guard vessel and the flange of a sealing ring which surrounds the reactor vessel with a sufficient enough slack to avoid being pulled taut as a result of thermal differential expansion between the two vessels. The flexible web replaces the rigid and relatively complicated structures employed in the prior art for insulating the reactor cavity from the convection currents generated between the reactor vessel and the guard vessel.

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1991-01-01

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

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

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

    ... electric N Number of measurements NDA UK Nuclear Decommissioning Authority SSM ... established a public corporation, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) 25. ...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1983-02-01

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

  9. accreditation | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    NNSA's safety office accredited and recognized for leadership in safe operation of defense nuclear facilities Savannah River Analytical Laboratories Achieve International Standard ...

  10. Real-time graphic display utility for nuclear safety applications

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Yang, S.; Huang, X.; Taylor, J.; Stevens, J.; Gerardis, T.; Hsu, A.; McCreary, T.

    2006-07-01

    With the increasing interests in the nuclear energy, new nuclear power plants will be constructed and licensed, and older generation ones will be upgraded for assuring continuing operation. The tendency of adopting the latest proven technology and the fact of older parts becoming obsolete have made the upgrades imperative. One of the areas for upgrades is the older CRT display being replaced by the latest graphics displays running under modern real time operating system (RTOS) with safety graded modern computer. HFC has developed a graphic display utility (GDU) under the QNX RTOS. A standard off-the-shelf software with a long history of performance in industrial applications, QNX RTOS used for safety applications has been examined via a commercial dedication process that is consistent with the regulatory guidelines. Through a commercial survey, a design life cycle and an operating history evaluation, and necessary tests dictated by the dedication plan, it is reasonably confirmed that the QNX RTOS was essentially equivalent to what would be expected in the nuclear industry. The developed GDU operates and communicates with the existing equipment through a dedicated serial channel of a flat panel controller (FPC) module. The FPC module drives a flat panel display (FPD) monitor. A touch screen mounted on the FPD serves as the normal operator interface with the FPC/FPD monitor system. The GDU can be used not only for replacing older CRTs but also in new applications. The replacement of the older CRT does not disturb the function of the existing equipment. It not only provides modern proven technology upgrade but also improves human ergonomics. The FPC, which can be used as a standalone controller running with the GDU, is an integrated hardware and software module. It operates as a single board computer within a control system, and applies primarily to the graphics display, targeting, keyboard and mouse. During normal system operation, the GDU has two sources of data input: a serial interface with field equipment and a serial input from the FPD touch screen. The mechanism for data collection from the field equipment consists of the regular exchange of the data update request messages and target commands sent to the equipment and the update messages returned to the FPC. The data updates from field equipment control displays presented on the graphic pages. Touch screen contacts are decoded to identify physical position that was contacted. If that position corresponds with one of the buttons on the graphic page, the software uses that input to initiate the function defined for the particular button contacted. In this paper, the FPC will be illustrated as a standalone system as well as a module in a dedicated control system. The GDU design concepts and its design flow will be demonstrated. The dedication process of the QNX RTOS needed for the GDU will be highlighted. Finally, the GDU with a specific application example used in one of the nuclear power plants will be presented. (authors)

  11. Airborne release fractions/rates and respirable fractions for nonreactor nuclear facilities. Volume 1, Analysis of experimental data

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-12-01

    This handbook contains (1) a systematic compilation of airborne release and respirable fraction experimental data for nonreactor nuclear facilities, (2) assessments of the data, and (3) values derived from assessing the data that may be used in safety analyses when the data are applicable. To assist in consistent and effective use of this information, the handbook provides: identification of a consequence determination methodology in which the information can be used; discussion of the applicability of the information and its general technical limits; identification of specific accident phenomena of interest for which the information is applicable; and examples of use of the consequence determination methodology and airborne release and respirable fraction information.

  12. REVIEW OF INDUSTRIES AND GOVERNMENT AGENCIES FOR TECHNOLOGIES APPLICABLE TO DEACTIVATION AND DECOMMISSIONING OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS FACILITIES

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Reilkoff, T. E.; Hetland, M. D.; O'Leary, E. M.

    2002-02-25

    The Deactivation and Decommissioning Focus Area's (DDFA's) mission is to develop, demonstrate, and deploy improved deactivation and decommissioning (D&D) technologies. This mission requires that emphasis be continually placed on identifying technologies currently employed or under development in other nuclear as well as nonnuclear industries and government agencies. In support of DDFA efforts to clean up the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) radiologically contaminated surplus facilities using technologies that improve worker safety, reduce costs, and accelerate cleanup schedules, a study was conducted to identify innovative technologies developed for use in nonnuclear arenas that are appropriate for D&D applications.

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  14. 2015 Call for Proposals for the Department of Energy (DOE) Nuclear Safety Research and Development (NSR&D) Program

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    2015 Call for Proposals for the Department of Energy (DOE) Nuclear Safety Research and Development (NSR&D) Program.

  15. Seismic Safety Guide

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Eagling, D.G.

    1983-09-01

    This guide provides managers with practical guidelines for administering a comprehensive earthquake safety program. The Guide is comprehensive with respect to earthquakes in that it covers the most important aspects of natural hazards, site planning, evaluation and rehabilitation of existing buildings, design of new facilities, operational safety, emergency planning, special considerations related to shielding blocks, non-structural elements, lifelines, fire protection and emergency facilities. Management of risk and liabilities is also covered. Nuclear facilities per se are not dealt with specifically. The principles covered also apply generally to nuclear facilities but the design and construction of such structures are subject to special regulations and legal controls.

  16. SOFTWARE TOOLS THAT ADDRESS HAZARDOUS MATERIAL ISSUES DURING NUCLEAR FACILITY D and D

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    M. COURNOYER; R. GRUNDEMANN

    2001-03-01

    The 49-year-old Chemistry and Metallurgy Research (CMR) Facility is where analytical chemistry and metallurgical studies on samples of plutonium and nuclear materials are conduct in support of the Department of Energy's nuclear weapons program. The CMR Facility is expected to be decontaminated and decommissioned (D and D) over the next ten to twenty years. Over the decades, several hazardous material issues have developed that need to be address. Unstable chemicals must be properly reassigned or disposed of from the workspace during D and D operation. Materials that have critical effects that are primarily chronic in nature, carcinogens, reproductive toxin, and materials that exhibit high chronic toxicity, have unique decontamination requirements, including the decontrolling of areas where these chemicals were used. Certain types of equipment and materials that contain mercury, asbestos, lead, and polychlorinated biphenyls have special provisions that must be addressed. Utilization of commercially available software programs for addressing hazardous material issues during D and D operations such as legacy chemicals and documentation are presented. These user-friendly programs eliminate part of the tediousness associated with the complex requirements of legacy hazardous materials. A key element of this approach is having a program that inventories and tracks all hazardous materials. Without an inventory of chemicals stored in a particular location, many important questions pertinent to D and D operations can be difficult to answer. On the other hand, a well-managed inventory system can address unstable and highly toxic chemicals and hazardous material records concerns before they become an issue. Tapping into the institutional database provides a way to take advantage of the combined expertise of the institution in managing a cost effective D and D program as well as adding a quality assurance element to the program. Using laboratory requirements as a logic flow diagram, quality and cost effective methods are used to provide necessary information of programmatic, quality, and safety issues concerns. In summary, by seamlessly managing non-programmatic issues, chemical software programs allow scientists in nuclear research facilities more time to concentrate on their technical areas of interest.

  17. Y-12's 1958 nuclear criticality accident and increased safety...

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

    accident and increased safety - 1958 brought accidents, more safety The first X-ray machine was brought to Y-12 in February, 1949. It was a 1,000 KV system installed in Building...

  18. Y-12 demos former utilities and maintenance facility | National Nuclear

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Security Administration demos former utilities and maintenance facility Friday, September 26, 2014 - 1:05pm The Y-12 National Security Complex recently completed another improvement in its site infrastructure with the demolition of Building 9744, a former utilities and maintenance facility occupying more than 9,000 square feet. Despite structural issues and waste disposal concerns, the facility was safely demolished nearly two months ahead of schedule. The demolition proved challenging due

  19. Facility Operations and User Support | National Nuclear Security

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Administration Facility Operations and User Support This sub-program provides both necessary physical facility and operational support for reliable, cross-lab production computing and storage environments as well as a suite of user services for effective use of ASC tri-lab computing resources. The scope of the facility operations includes planning, integration and deployment, continuing product support, software license and maintenance fees, procurement of operational equipment and media,

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2009-09-01

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