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


1

CRAD, Facility Safety- Nuclear Facility Safety Basis  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

A section of Appendix C to DOE G 226.1-2 "Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities." Consists of Criteria Review and Approach Documents (CRADs) that can be used for assessment of a contractor's Nuclear Facility Safety Basis.

2

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.

3

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...

4

Facility Safety  

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

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

1996-10-24T23:59:59.000Z

5

Facility Safety  

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

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

1995-11-16T23:59:59.000Z

6

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.

7

Safety of Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2008-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

8

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 )

9

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

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

Oak Ridge Operations Nuclear Facility Safety Basis Fundamentals Self-Study Guide Review Questions Name: Organization: Directions: This is an open-book evaluation. Complete the...

10

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

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

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

2000-03-28T23:59:59.000Z

11

Facility Safety  

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

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

2000-11-20T23:59:59.000Z

12

Facility Safety  

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

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

2005-12-22T23:59:59.000Z

13

Facility Safety  

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

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

2005-12-22T23:59:59.000Z

14

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

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

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

15

Interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board  

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

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

1996-12-30T23:59:59.000Z

16

Interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board  

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

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

2001-03-30T23:59:59.000Z

17

Interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board  

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

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

1999-01-26T23:59:59.000Z

18

Facility Safety  

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

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

2012-12-04T23:59:59.000Z

19

Facility Safety  

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

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

1995-10-13T23:59:59.000Z

20

Facility Safety  

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

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

2002-05-20T23:59:59.000Z

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


21

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

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

This Guide provides an acceptable approach for safety design of DOE hazard category 1, 2 and 3 nuclear facilities for satisfying the requirements of DOE O 420.1C. Cancels DOE G 420.1-1.

2012-12-04T23:59:59.000Z

22

Facility Safety  

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

DOE-STD-1104 contains the Department's method and criteria for reviewing and approving nuclear facility's documented safety analysis (DSA). This review and approval formally document the basis for DOE, concluding that a facility can be operated safely in a manner that adequately protects workers, the public, and the environment. Therefore, it is appropriate to formally require implementation of the review methodology and criteria contained in DOE-STD-1104.

2013-06-21T23:59:59.000Z

23

Nuclear space power safety and facility guidelines study  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Mehlman, W.F.

1995-09-11T23:59:59.000Z

24

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

25

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Garvin, L.J.

1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

26

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

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

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.

2007-02-07T23:59:59.000Z

27

Nuclear Safety Regulatory Framework  

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

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

28

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1993-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

29

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The report strongly recommends that, with the end of the Cold War, safety and health at DOE facilities should be regulated by outside agencies rather than by 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.

NONE

1995-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

30

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1995-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

31

Facility Safety - DOE Directives, Delegations, and Requirements  

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

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

32

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

VINCENT, Andrew

2005-07-14T23:59:59.000Z

33

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Superconducting Magnet Safety Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) facilities present unique hazards not found in most laboratory environments. The NMR facilities maintain superconducting magnets which have for asphyxiation. Once energized the field of the superconducting magnet of the spectrometer is always present

Maroncelli, Mark

34

Nuclear Engineer (Criticality Safety)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

35

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

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

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

36

Nuclear and Facility Safety Directives | Department of Energy  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE:Year in3.pdfEnergyDepartment of Energy Advanced1, 2014NuclearCommission,ScienceWasteand

37

Preparation Of Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis -  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security Administration the1 - SeptemberMicroneedles for medical point07.06 Agenda 2006UptakeDOE Directives,

38

Risk-Informing Safety Reviews for Non-Reactor Nuclear Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

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

2011-03-13T23:59:59.000Z

39

FACILITY SAFETY (FS)  

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

FACILITY SAFETY (FS) OBJECTIVE FS.1 - (Core Requirement 7) Facility safety documentation in support of SN process operations,is in place and has been implemented that describes the...

40

Nuclear Explosive Safety Evaluation Processes - DOE Directives...  

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

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

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


41

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1999-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

42

CRAD, Facility Safety- Unreviewed Safety Question Requirements  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

A section of Appendix C to DOE G 226.1-2 "Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities." Consists of Criteria Review and Approach Documents (CRADs) that can be used for assessment of a contractor's Unreviewed Safety Question (USQ) process.

43

CRAD, Facility Safety- Technical Safety Requirements  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

A section of Appendix C to DOE G 226.1-2 "Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities." Consists of Criteria Review and Approach Documents (CRADs) that can be used for assessment of a contractor's Technical Safety Requirments (TSA).

44

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

JACKSON, M.W.

2002-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

45

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

None

2000-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

46

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...

47

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

None

2001-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

48

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

Nuclear Safety Basis Program Review During Facility Operations and Transitions Volume 4 - Nuclear Safety Basis Program Review During Facility Decommissioning and Environmental...

49

Review and Approval of Nuclear Facility Safety Basis and Safety Design  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security Administration the1 -the Mid-Infrared0 Resource Program September 2010 B O N NReversing

50

Nuclear Reactor Safety Design Criteria  

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

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

1993-01-19T23:59:59.000Z

51

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

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

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

2010-09-23T23:59:59.000Z

52

Spent nuclear fuel project cold vacuum drying facility safety equipment list  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

IRWIN, J.J.

1999-02-24T23:59:59.000Z

53

Safety of Accelerator Facilities  

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

To establish accelerator-specific safety requirements which, when supplemented by other applicable safety and health requirements, will serve to prevent injuries and illnesses associated with Department of Energy (DOE) or National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) accelerator operations. Cancels DOE O 420.2A. Certified 5-13-08. Canceled by DOE O 420.2C.

2004-07-23T23:59:59.000Z

54

Safety of Accelerator Facilities  

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

To establish accelerator-specific safety requirements which, when supplemented by other applicable safety and health requirements, will serve to prevent injuries and illnesses associated with Department of Energy (DOE) or National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) accelerator operations. Cancels DOE O 420.2. Canceled by DOE O 420.2B.

2001-01-08T23:59:59.000Z

55

Nuclear Engineering Nuclear Criticality Safety  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Kemner, Ken

56

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

P. Calderoni; P. Sharpe; M. Shimada

2009-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

57

Hot Cell Facility (HCF) Safety Analysis Report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

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

2000-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

58

Nuclear Safety  

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

and Management Services Department at INL involves providing advanced risk and reliability analytical capabilities to support complex engineered facilities and processes. The...

59

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...

60

Nuclear criticality safety guide  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1996-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


61

Nuclear Safety Research and Development...  

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...

62

General Engineer (Nuclear Safety)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

63

Nuclear Explosive Safety Manual  

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

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

2009-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

64

Nuclear Engineer (Nuclear Safety Specialist)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

65

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.

66

Occupational Safety Review of High Technology Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Lee Cadwallader

2005-01-31T23:59:59.000Z

67

Nuclear Explosive Safety  

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

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

2015-01-26T23:59:59.000Z

68

Nuclear Explosive Safety  

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

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

2014-07-10T23:59:59.000Z

69

Nuclear Safety (Pennsylvania)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

70

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1993-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

71

Report on the American Nuclear Society International Topical Meeting: {open_quotes}The safety, status, and future of non-commercial reactors and irradiation Facilities{close_quotes}  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The American Nuclear Society`s International Topical Meeting, The Safety, Status, and Future of Non-Commercial Reactors and Irradiation Facilities, also known as SAFOR 90, was held in Boise, Idaho, September 30 to October 4, 1990. In 19 half-day sessions, 102 papers were presented which covered operating research reactors, production reactors, the use of reactors for training and research, probabilistic risk assessments applied to research reactors, plans for new facilities, and new fuels and reactor types. A special session on space reactor safety was also presented. 11 refs., 1 tab.

Silver, E.G. [Oak Ridge National Laboratory, TN (United States)

1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

72

Safety of Nuclear Explosive Operations  

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

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

2001-08-07T23:59:59.000Z

73

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

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

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

2003-08-27T23:59:59.000Z

74

Promulgating Nuclear Safety Requirements  

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

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

1996-05-15T23:59:59.000Z

75

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

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

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

76

NNSA and Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board certifications free up $47  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May JunDatastreamsmmcrcalgovInstrumentsrucLas Conchas recoveryLaboratory | National Nuclear Security Administration Weaponsmillion in

77

FACILITY SAFETY (FS)  

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

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

78

Nuclear Power Generating Facilities (Maine)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The first subchapter of the statute concerning Nuclear Power Generating Facilities provides for direct citizen participation in the decision to construct any nuclear power generating facility in...

79

FACILITY SAFETY (FS)  

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

- (Core Requirements 4 and 6) Sufficient numbers of qualified personnel are available to conduct and support operations. Adequate facilities and equipment are available to ensure...

80

Safety of Accelerator Facilities  

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

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

2011-07-21T23:59:59.000Z

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


81

Nuclear Explosive Safety  

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

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

2009-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

82

Nuclear Explosive Safety  

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

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

2009-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

83

Mechanistic facility safety and source term analysis  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A PC-based computer program was created for facility safety and source term analysis at Hanford The program has been successfully applied to mechanistic prediction of source terms from chemical reactions in underground storage tanks, hydrogen combustion in double contained receiver tanks, and proccss evaluation including the potential for runaway reactions in spent nuclear fuel processing. Model features include user-defined facility room, flow path geometry, and heat conductors, user-defined non-ideal vapor and aerosol species, pressure- and density-driven gas flows, aerosol transport and deposition, and structure to accommodate facility-specific source terms. Example applications are presented here.

PLYS, M.G.

1999-06-09T23:59:59.000Z

84

NRC - regulator of nuclear safety  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1997-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

85

Nuclear safety information sharing agreement between NRC and...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

for DOE and NRC to exchange information related to safety issues associated with non-reactor nuclear facilities. The NRC-DOE Inter-Agency nuclear safety information sharing...

86

Nuclear Explosive Safety  

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

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

2006-06-12T23:59:59.000Z

87

Guidelines for Evaluation of Nuclear Facility Training Programs  

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

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

1995-11-22T23:59:59.000Z

88

Nonreactor Nuclear Safety Design Guide for use with DOE O 420...  

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

CURRENT DOE G 420.1-1A, Nonreactor Nuclear Safety Design Guide for use with DOE O 420.1C, Facility Safety by Pranab Guha Functional areas: Facility Safety, Nonreactor Nuclear...

89

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1991-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

90

CANISTER HANDLING FACILITY CRITICALITY SAFETY CALCULATIONS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

C.E. Sanders

2005-04-07T23:59:59.000Z

91

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

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

92

Nuclear Explosive Safety  

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

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

2006-06-12T23:59:59.000Z

93

340 waste handling facility interim safety basis  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

VAIL, T.S.

1999-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

94

340 Waste handling facility interim safety basis  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Stordeur, R.T.

1996-10-04T23:59:59.000Z

95

Ris-R-1104(EN) Nuclear Safety Research  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

96

Ris-R-1162(EN) Nuclear Safety Research  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

97

Ris-R-1019(EN) Nuclear Safety Research  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

98

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

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

CRAD, Nuclear Facility Construction - Structural Concrete, May 29, 2009 CRAD, Nuclear Facility Construction - Structural Concrete, May 29, 2009 May 29, 2009 Nuclear Facility...

99

Ris-R-984(EN) Nuclear Safety Research  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

, Roskilde April 1997 #12;Abstract The report presents a summary of the work of the Nuclear Safety Re- search programmes and the Nordic Nuclear Safety Research Programme. This report describes the work of the departmentRisø-R-984(EN) Nuclear Safety Research and Facilities Department Annual Report 1996 Edited by B

100

Nuclear Safety Information Dashboard | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

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


101

Nuclear Safety News | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

102

Nuclear Explosive Safety Manual  

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

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

2009-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

103

Nuclear Explosive Safety Evaluation Processes  

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

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

2009-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

104

Safety of magnetic fusion facilities: Requirements  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Standard identifies safety requirements for magnetic fusion facilities. Safety functions are used to define outcomes that must be achieved to ensure that exposures to radiation, hazardous materials, or other hazards are maintained within acceptable limits. Requirements applicable to magnetic fusion facilities have been derived from Federal law, policy, and other documents. In addition to specific safety requirements, broad direction is given in the form of safety principles that are to be implemented and within which safety can be achieved.

NONE

1996-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

105

Management of National Nuclear Power Programs for assured safety  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Connolly, T.J. (ed.)

1985-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

106

Nuclear Criticality Safety Application Guide: Safety Analysis Report Update Program  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1994-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

107

Facility Safety Plan CMS Complexes CMS410  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Laboratory management requires that the controls specified in this Facility Safety Plan (FSP) be applied to efficiently and safely perform operations within these facilities. Any operation conducted in these facilities that involves activities not commonly performed by the public, requires an Integrated Work Sheet to determine the appropriate level of safety documentation.

Cooper, G

2007-06-14T23:59:59.000Z

108

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.

109

Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear Facilities  

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

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

2007-02-13T23:59:59.000Z

110

Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear Facilities  

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

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

2010-04-21T23:59:59.000Z

111

Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear Facilities  

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

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

2010-04-21T23:59:59.000Z

112

Nuclear reactor safety device  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

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.

Hutter, Ernest (Wilmette, IL)

1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

113

Ris-R-679(EN) Nuclear Safety Research  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

114

Ris-R-1318(EN) Nuclear Safety Research  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

115

Nuclear Safety and Global Cooperation.  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Chang, Yu-shan

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

116

SHSD Manager Safety Engineering Group Manager  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

117

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Seylar, Roland F.

2004-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

118

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

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

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.

1998-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

119

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

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

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

120

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

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


121

Nuclear reactor safety device  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

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.

Hutter, E.

1983-08-15T23:59:59.000Z

122

Nuclear Explosive Safety Evaluation Processes  

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

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

2009-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

123

Fusion Nuclear Science Facility (FNSF)  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

124

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

125

Nano Research Facility Lab Safety Manual Nano Research Facility  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Subramanian, Venkat

126

Establishing nuclear facility drill programs  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1996-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

127

Safety of magnetic fusion facilities: Guidance  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document provides guidance for the implementation of the requirements identified in DOE-STD-6002-96, Safety of Magnetic Fusion Facilities: Requirements. This guidance is intended for the managers, designers, operators, and other personnel with safety responsibilities for facilities designated as magnetic fusion facilities. While the requirements in DOE-STD-6002-96 are generally applicable to a wide range of fusion facilities, this Standard, DOE-STD-6003-96, is concerned mainly with the implementation of those requirements in large facilities such as the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER). Using a risk-based prioritization, the concepts presented here may also be applied to other magnetic fusion facilities. This Standard is oriented toward regulation in the Department of Energy (DOE) environment as opposed to regulation by other regulatory agencies. As the need for guidance involving other types of fusion facilities or other regulatory environments emerges, additional guidance volumes should be prepared. The concepts, processes, and recommendations set forth here are for guidance only. They will contribute to safety at magnetic fusion facilities.

NONE

1996-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

128

METHODOLOGIES FOR REVIEW OF THE HEALTH AND SAFETY ASPECTS OF PROPOSED NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL SITES AND FACILITIES. VOLUME 9 OF THE FINAL REPORT ON HEALTH AND SAFETY IMPACTS OF NUCLEAR, GEOTHERMAL, AND FOSSIL-FUEL ELECTRIC GENERATION IN CALIFORNIA  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Nero, A.V.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

129

Nuclear Facilities | Department of Energy  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE:Year in3.pdfEnergyDepartment of Energy Advanced1, 2014Nuclear Facilities Nuclear Facilities

130

Microsoft Word - 11-21605_Nuclear_Facility_Boundary_White_Paper...  

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

those specified for the nuclear - industrial facility boundary. g. Functions from NGNP white paper, INLEXT-10-19509, "Structures, Systems, and Components Safety Classification,"...

131

Nuclear Plant/Hydrogen Plant Safety: Issues and Approaches  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Steven R. Sherman

2007-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

132

Improving the Safeguardability of Nuclear Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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. DOE’s Next Generation Safeguards Initiative (NGSI) includes objectives to contribute to international efforts to develop SBD, and to apply SBD in the development of new U.S. nuclear infrastructure. Here, SBD is defined as a structured approach to ensure the timely, efficient and cost effective integration of international safeguards and other nonproliferation barriers with national material control and accountability, physical protection, and safety objectives into the overall design process for a nuclear facility, from initial planning through design, construction and operation. The SBD process, in its simplest form, may be applied usefully today within most national regulatory environments. Development of a mature approach to implementing SBD requires work in the areas of requirements definition, design processes, technology and methodology, and institutionalization. The U.S. efforts described in this paper are supportive of SBD work for international safeguards that has recently been initiated by the IAEA with the participation of many stakeholders including member States, the IAEA, nuclear technology suppliers, nuclear utilities, and the broader international nonproliferation community.

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

2009-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

133

WIPP Nuclear Facilities Transparency  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear SecurityTensile Strain Switched Ferromagnetism inS-4500IIVasudhaSurface.Laboratory inApprovedRegionalDOE

134

The Fast Flux Test Facility built on safety  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1989-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

135

Nuclear reactor safety heat transfer  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Jones, O.C.

1982-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

136

Defense Nuclear Facility Safety Board  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmospheric Optical Depth7-1D: Vegetation Proposed Newcatalyst phasesData Files Data Files 1B&W Y-12studies in ionand Minor8, 2014

137

Facility Safety | Department of Energy  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of EnergyEnergyENERGYWomentheATLANTA, GA5 &of EnergyOrganizationtotalFacility Representative AwardIn

138

National Ignition Facility Project Site Safety Program  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Dun, C

2003-09-30T23:59:59.000Z

139

Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities  

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

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

1995-09-29T23:59:59.000Z

140

Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities  

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

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

1998-12-28T23:59:59.000Z

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


141

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

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

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

142

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

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

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

143

Autoclave nuclear criticality safety analysis  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1991-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

144

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1995-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

145

Safety Oversight of Decommissioning Activities at DOE Nuclear Sites  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2008-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

146

TRANSPORTATION CASK RECEIPT/RETURN FACILITY CRITICALITY SAFETY EVALUATIONS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

C.E. Sanders

2005-04-26T23:59:59.000Z

147

Technical Safety Requirements for the Waste Storage Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document contains Technical Safety Requirements (TSR) for the Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (RHWM) WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES, which include Area 612 (A612) and the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) Storage Area at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The TSRs constitute requirements regarding the safe operation of the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. These TSRs are derived from the Documented Safety Analysis for the Waste Storage Facilities (DSA) (LLNL 2006). The analysis presented therein determined that the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are low-chemical hazard, Hazard Category 2 non-reactor nuclear facilities. The TSRs consist primarily of inventory limits and controls to preserve the underlying assumptions in the hazard and accident analyses. Further, appropriate commitments to safety programs are presented in the administrative controls sections of the TSRs. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are used by RHWM to handle and store hazardous waste, TRANSURANIC (TRU) WASTE, LOW-LEVEL WASTE (LLW), mixed waste, California combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste generated at LLNL as well as small amounts from other U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facilities, as described in the DSA. In addition, several minor treatments (e.g., drum crushing, size reduction, and decontamination) are carried out in these facilities. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are located in two portions of the LLNL main site. A612 is located in the southeast quadrant of LLNL. The A612 fenceline is approximately 220 m west of Greenville Road. The DWTF Storage Area, which includes Building 693 (B693), Building 696 Radioactive Waste Storage Area (B696R), and associated yard areas and storage areas within the yard, is located in the northeast quadrant of LLNL in the DWTF complex. The DWTF Storage Area fenceline is approximately 90 m west of Greenville Road. A612 and the DWTF Storage Area are subdivided into various facilities and storage areas, consisting of buildings, tents, other structures, and open areas as described in Chapter 2 of the DSA. Section 2.4 of the DSA provides an overview of the buildings, structures, and areas in the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES, including construction details such as basic floor plans, equipment layout, construction materials, controlling dimensions, and dimensions significant to the hazard and accident analysis. Chapter 5 of the DSA documents the derivation of the TSRs and develops the operational limits that protect the safety envelope defined for the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. This TSR document is applicable to the handling, storage, and treatment of hazardous waste, TRU WASTE, LLW, mixed waste, California combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste received or generated in the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. Section 5, Administrative Controls, contains those Administrative Controls necessary to ensure safe operation of the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. Programmatic Administrative Controls are in Section 5.6. This Introduction to the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES TSRs is not part of the TSR limits or conditions and contains no requirements related to WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES operations or to the safety analyses of the DSA.

Larson, H L

2007-09-07T23:59:59.000Z

148

WIRELESS FOR A NUCLEAR FACILITY  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Shull, D; Joe Cordaro, J

2007-03-28T23:59:59.000Z

149

Impacts of criticality safety on hot fuel examination facility operations  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1985-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

150

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

MORGAN, R.G.

1999-02-23T23:59:59.000Z

151

Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities  

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

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

1995-10-26T23:59:59.000Z

152

Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities  

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

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

2000-12-21T23:59:59.000Z

153

Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities  

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

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

2003-03-13T23:59:59.000Z

154

Elements of a nuclear criticality safety program  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Hopper, C.M.

1995-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

155

Nuclear criticality safety: 2-day training course  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Schlesser, J.A. [ed.] [comp.

1997-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

156

A philosophy for space nuclear systems safety  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Marshall, A.C.

1992-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

157

Compressed Gas Safety for Experimental Fusion Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Cadwallader, L.C. [Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (United States)

2005-05-15T23:59:59.000Z

158

Compressed Gas Safety for Experimental Fusion Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Lee C. Cadwallader

2004-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

159

KRS Chapter 278: Nuclear Power Facilities (Kentucky)  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

No construction shall commence on a nuclear power facility in the Commonwealth until the Public Service Commission finds that the United States government, through its authorized agency, has...

160

Safety Plan for County and District Personnel and Facilities  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Collins, Gary S.

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


161

Nuclear fuel cycle facility accident analysis handbook  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1998-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

162

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.

163

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.

164

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.

165

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.

166

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.

167

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1997-04-09T23:59:59.000Z

168

Technical Safety Requirements for the Waste Storage Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document contains Technical Safety Requirements (TSR) for the Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (RHWM) WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES, which include Area 625 (A625) and the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) Storage Area at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The TSRs constitute requirements regarding the safe operation of the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. These TSRs are derived from the 'Documented Safety Analysis for the Waste Storage Facilities' (DSA) (LLNL 2008). The analysis presented therein determined that the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are low-chemical hazard, Hazard Category 2 non-reactor nuclear facilities. The TSRs consist primarily of inventory limits and controls to preserve the underlying assumptions in the hazard and accident analyses. Further, appropriate commitments to safety programs are presented in the administrative controls sections of the TSRs. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are used by RHWM to handle and store hazardous waste, TRANSURANIC (TRU) WASTE, LOW-LEVEL WASTE (LLW), mixed waste, California combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste generated at LLNL as well as small amounts from other U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facilities, as described in the DSA. In addition, several minor treatments (e.g., size reduction and decontamination) are carried out in these facilities. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are located in two portions of the LLNL main site. A625 is located in the southeast quadrant of LLNL. The A625 fenceline is approximately 225 m west of Greenville Road. The DWTF Storage Area, which includes Building 693 (B693), Building 696 Radioactive Waste Storage Area (B696R), and associated yard areas and storage areas within the yard, is located in the northeast quadrant of LLNL in the DWTF complex. The DWTF Storage Area fenceline is approximately 90 m west of Greenville Road. A625 and the DWTF Storage Area are subdivided into various facilities and storage areas, consisting of buildings, tents, other structures, and open areas as described in Chapter 2 of the DSA. Section 2.4 of the DSA provides an overview of the buildings, structures, and areas in the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES, including construction details such as basic floor plans, equipment layout, construction materials, controlling dimensions, and dimensions significant to the hazard and accident analysis. Chapter 5 of the DSA documents the derivation of the TSRs and develops the operational limits that protect the safety envelope defined for the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. This TSR document is applicable to the handling, storage, and treatment of hazardous waste, TRU WASTE, LLW, mixed waste, California combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste received or generated in the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. Section 5, Administrative Controls, contains those Administrative Controls necessary to ensure safe operation of the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. Programmatic Administrative Controls are in Section 5.6.

Laycak, D T

2008-06-16T23:59:59.000Z

169

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

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

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

2005-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

170

Standard Guide for Preparing Characterization Plans for Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

American Society for Testing and Materials. Philadelphia

2009-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

171

Proceedings of the Nuclear Criticality Technology and Safety Project Workshop  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Sanchez, R.G. [comp.

1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

172

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2014-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

173

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Rule, Keith [PPPL

2014-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

174

Reactor Accident Analysis Methodology for the Advanced Test Reactor Critical Facility Documented Safety Analysis Upgrade  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The regulatory requirement to develop an upgraded safety basis for a DOE nuclear facility was realized in January 2001 by issuance of a revision to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Section 830 (10 CFR 830).1 Subpart B of 10 CFR 830, “Safety Basis Requirements,” requires a contractor responsible for a DOE Hazard Category 1, 2, or 3 nuclear facility to either submit by April 9, 2001 the existing safety basis which already meets the requirements of Subpart B, or to submit by April 10, 2003 an upgraded facility safety basis that meets the revised requirements.1 10 CFR 830 identifies Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Regulatory Guide 1.70, “Standard Format and Content of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants”2 as a safe harbor methodology for preparation of a DOE reactor documented safety analysis (DSA). The regulation also allows for use of a graded approach. This report presents the methodology that was developed for preparing the reactor accident analysis portion of the Advanced Test Reactor Critical Facility (ATRC) upgraded DSA. The methodology was approved by DOE for developing the ATRC safety basis as an appropriate application of a graded approach to the requirements of 10 CFR 830.

Gregg L. Sharp; R. T. McCracken

2003-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

175

Reactor Accident Analysis Methodology for the Advanced Test Reactor Critical Facility Documented Safety Analysis Upgrade  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The regulatory requirement to develop an upgraded safety basis for a DOE Nuclear Facility was realized in January 2001 by issuance of a revision to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Section 830 (10 CFR 830). Subpart B of 10 CFR 830, ''Safety Basis Requirements,'' requires a contractor responsible for a DOE Hazard Category 1, 2, or 3 nuclear facility to either submit by April 9, 2001 the existing safety basis which already meets the requirements of Subpart B, or to submit by April 10, 2003 an upgraded facility safety basis that meets the revised requirements. 10 CFR 830 identifies Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Regulatory Guide 1.70, ''Standard Format and Content of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants'' as a safe harbor methodology for preparation of a DOE reactor documented safety analysis (DSA). The regulation also allows for use of a graded approach. This report presents the methodology that was developed for preparing the reactor accident analysis portion of the Advanced Test Reactor Critical Facility (ATRC) upgraded DSA. The methodology was approved by DOE for developing the ATRC safety basis as an appropriate application of a graded approach to the requirements of 10 CFR 830.

Sharp, G.L.; McCracken, R.T.

2003-05-13T23:59:59.000Z

176

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

177

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1993-09-20T23:59:59.000Z

178

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

179

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

Energy Savers [EERE]

Construction - Structural Steel, May 29, 2009 CRAD, Nuclear Facility Construction - Mechanical Equipment - June 26, 2012 Nuclear Facility Construction - Structural Concrete, May...

180

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

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

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

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


181

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

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

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

182

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...

183

Nuclear Safety Research and Development Program Proposal Submittal...  

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

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

184

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

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

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

185

Safety analysis report for the Waste Storage Facility. Revision 2  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Bengston, S.J.

1994-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

186

EARTHQUAKE CAUSED RELEASES FROM A NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE FACILITY  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Charles W. Solbrig; Chad Pope; Jason Andrus

2014-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

187

Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

188

FUSION NUCLEAR SCIENCE PROGRAM & SUPPORTING FUSION NUCLEAR SCIENCE FACILITY (FNSF)  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

FUSION NUCLEAR SCIENCE PROGRAM & SUPPORTING FUSION NUCLEAR SCIENCE FACILITY (FNSF): UPDATE · It was well recognized there were also critical materials and technology issues that needed to be addressed in order to apply the knowledge we gained about burning plasma state #12;FUSION NUCLEAR SCIENCE PROGRAM

189

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Shedrow, C.B.

1999-11-29T23:59:59.000Z

190

Nuclear Safety at the Department of Energy  

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

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."

2011-12-05T23:59:59.000Z

191

Criticality Safety Evaluation of Hanford Tank Farms Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

WEISS, E.V.

2000-12-15T23:59:59.000Z

192

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Fisk, Patricia; Rutherford, Lavon

2003-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

193

Training program requirements for remote equipment operators in nuclear facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

194

Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Policy  

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

It is the policy of the Department of Energy to design, construct, operate, and decommission its nuclear facilities in a manner that ensures adequate protection of workers, the public, and the environment. Cancels SEN-35-91.

2011-02-08T23:59:59.000Z

195

Application of Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulation Equivalency to Construction of New Nuclear Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Spent Nuclear Fuels Project (SNFP) Office of the Department of Energy (DOE), Richland Operations Office, is charged with moving 2.100 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel elements left over from plutonium production into semi-permanent storage at DOE'S Hanford site in Washington state. In anticipation of eventual NRC regulation, the DOE decided to impose NRC requirements on new SNFP facility design and construction, specifically for the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility (CVDF) and the Canister Storage Building (CSB). The SNFP implemented this policy of ''NRC equivalency'' with the goal of achieving a level of nuclear safety equivalent to that of NRC-licensed fuel processing facilities. Appropriate features of the NRC licensing process were adopted. However, the SNFP maintained applicable DOE requirements in tandem with the NRC regulations. Project work is continuing, with the first fuel movement scheduled for November, 2000.

BISHOP, G.E.

1999-06-02T23:59:59.000Z

196

NNSA and Defense Nuclear Facilities  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security Administration the Contributions and Achievements of Women | NationalNuclearThailand | National

197

Safety of magnetic fusion facilities: Volume 2, Guidance  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document provides guidance for the implementation of the requirements identified in Vol. 1 of this Standard. This guidance is intended for the managers, designers, operators, and other personnel with safety responsibilities for facilities designated as magnetic fusion facilities. While Vol. 1 is generally applicable in that requirements there apply to a wide range of fusion facilities, this volume is concerned mainly with large facilities such as the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER). Using a risk-based prioritization, the concepts presented here may also be applied to other magnetic fusion facilities. This volume is oriented toward regulation in the Department of Energy (DOE) environment.

NONE

1995-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

198

Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear Facilities  

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

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

2001-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

199

Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May JunDatastreamsmmcrcalgovInstrumentsruc DocumentationP-Series toESnet4:Epitaxial ThinFOR IMMEDIATE5Facilities Some of the nation's|

200

Facility Safety - DOE Directives, Delegations, and Requirements  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May JunDatastreamsmmcrcalgovInstrumentsruc DocumentationP-Series toESnet4:Epitaxial ThinFOR IMMEDIATE5Facilities SomeFacilitiesFacility0.1C

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


201

Item No. 3 process facilities cost estimates and schedules for facilities capability assurance program nuclear facilities modernization - FY 1989 line item, authorization No. D79  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Data is presented concerning cost estimates and schedules for process facilities and nuclear facilities modernization.

NONE

1989-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

202

Preparation of SARs for nonreactor nuclear facilities at the Savannah River Plant  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Safety Analysis Reports for designated nonreactor nuclear facilities at the Savannah River Plant are prepared in accordance with the DOE Savannah River Manual Chapter 52X1. The accident analysis section is based on the Integrated Risk Assessment Plan, a methodology developed by the Savannah River Laboratory for reprocessing facilities. In general, designated facilities contain radioactive, chemical, or other materials to the extent that a credible accident could have a significant detrimental effect on health and safety. The responsibility for specifying which facilities are designated rests with the manager, Savannah River Operations Office.

Durant, W.S.

1981-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

203

Hazard classification criteria for non-nuclear facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1997-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

204

Treatment of gaseous effluents at nuclear facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Airborne effluents from nuclear facilities represent the major environmental impact from such plants both under routine conditions or after plant accidents. Effective control of such emissions, therefore, constitutes a major aspect of plant design for nuclear power plants and other facilities in the nuclear fuel cycle. This volume brings together a number of review articles by experts in the various areas of concern and describes some of the removal systems that have been designed for power plants and, particularly, for reprocessing plants. Besides controlling the release of radionuclides, other potentially hazardous effluents, such as nitrous oxides, must be minimized, and these are included in some of the systems described. The various chapters deal with historic developments and current technology in reducing emission of fission products, noble gases, iodine, and tritium, and consider design requirements for practical installations.

Goossen, W.R.A. [Studiecentrum voor Kernenergie, Mol (Belgium). Dept. of Chemical Engineering] [ed.; Eichholz, G.G.; Tedder, D.W. [eds.] [Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA (United States)

1991-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

205

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Timothy Solack; Carol Mason

2012-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

206

Remote machine engineering applications for nuclear facilities decommissioning  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Decontamination and decommissioning of a nuclear facility require the application of techniques that protect the worker and the enviroment from radiological contamination and radiation. Remotely operated portable robotic arms, machines, and devices can be applied. The use of advanced systems should enhance the productivity, safety, and cost facets of the efforts; remote automatic tooling and systems may be used on any job where job hazard and other factors justify application. Many problems based on costs, enviromental impact, health, waste generation, and political issues may be mitigated by use of remotely operated machines. The work that man can not do or should not do will have to be done by machines.

Toto, G.; Wyle, H.R.

1983-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

207

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

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

4, 2014 CRAD, Nuclear Reactor Facility Operations - December 4, 2014 (EA CRAD 31-08, Rev. 0) Nuclear Reactor Faclity Operations Criteria Review and Approach Document (EA CRAD...

208

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

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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...

209

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

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

A section of Appendix C to DOE G 226.1-2 "Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities." Consists of Criteria Review and Approach Documents (CRADs) used for a February 2007 assessment of the Nuclear Safety Program in preparation for restart of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory High Flux Isotope Reactor.

210

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Cottrell, W.B.; Passiakos, M.

1982-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

211

Fuel Storage Facility Final Safety Analysis Report. Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Linderoth, C.E.

1984-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

212

359-06/RDS/ Fusion Nuclear Science Facility and Program  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

359-06/RDS/ rs Fusion Nuclear Science Facility and Program by R.D. Stambaugh Fusion Power, DC #12;359-06/RDS/ rs Mission of a Fusion Nuclear Science Facility (FNSF) Two Candidates: FNSF That Must Be Filled Between ITER and a DEMO * A Fusion Nuclear Science Program and Facility Fills Nearly All

213

Nuclear Safety | Department of Energy  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE:Year in3.pdfEnergyDepartment of Energy Advanced1, 2014NuclearCommission,

214

Nuclear Power Facilities (2008) | Department of Energy  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE:Year in3.pdfEnergyDepartment of Energy Advanced1, 2014Nuclear FacilitiesNuclearNavy

215

Central Technical Authority Responsibilities Regarding Nuclear Safety Requirements  

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

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

2007-08-28T23:59:59.000Z

216

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Boyd D. Christensen

2010-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

217

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Boyd D. Christensen

2010-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

218

Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1989-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

219

Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1990-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

220

Facility Safety - DOE Directives, Delegations, and Requirements  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmospheric Optical Depth7-1D: Vegetation ProposedUsing ZirconiaPolicy andExsolutionFES6FY 2011Facility Engineering

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


221

Facility Siting and Layout Optimization Based on Process Safety  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Jung, Seungho

2012-02-14T23:59:59.000Z

222

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2007-04-30T23:59:59.000Z

223

Financing Strategies for Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

David Shropshire; Sharon Chandler

2005-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

224

Double-clad nuclear fuel safety rod  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

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

1984-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

225

Management of radioactive material safety programs at medical facilities. Final report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A Task Force, comprising eight US Nuclear Regulatory Commission and two Agreement State program staff members, developed the guidance contained in this report. This report describes a systematic approach for effectively managing radiation safety programs at medical facilities. This is accomplished by defining and emphasizing the roles of an institution`s executive management, radiation safety committee, and radiation safety officer. Various aspects of program management are discussed and guidance is offered on selecting the radiation safety officer, determining adequate resources for the program, using such contractual services as consultants and service companies, conducting audits, and establishing the roles of authorized users and supervised individuals; NRC`s reporting and notification requirements are discussed, and a general description is given of how NRC`s licensing, inspection and enforcement programs work.

Camper, L.W.; Schlueter, J.; Woods, S. [and others

1997-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

226

Documented Safety Analysis for the Waste Storage Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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).

Laycak, D

2008-06-16T23:59:59.000Z

227

Documented Safety Analysis for the Waste Storage Facilities March 2010  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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).

Laycak, D T

2010-03-05T23:59:59.000Z

228

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

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

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

229

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

230

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

231

Human factors methods in DOE nuclear facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The US Department of Energy (DOE) is in the process of developing a series of guidelines for the use of human factors standards, procedures, and methods to be used in nuclear facilities. This paper discusses the philosophy and process being used to develop a DOE human factors methods handbook to be used during the design cycle. The following sections will discuss: (1) basic justification for the project; (2) human factors design objectives and goals; and (3) role of human factors engineering (HFE) in the design cycle.

Bennett, C.T.; Banks, W.W. (Lawrence Livermore National Lab., CA (United States)); Waters, R.J. (Department of Energy, Washington, DC (United States))

1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

232

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

233

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Cerruti, S.J.

1997-01-14T23:59:59.000Z

234

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

235

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

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

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

2010-04-21T23:59:59.000Z

236

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

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

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

2010-04-21T23:59:59.000Z

237

Safety program considerations for space nuclear reactor systems  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Cropp, L.O.

1984-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

238

The necessity for permanence : making a nuclear waste storage facility  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Stupay, Robert Irving

1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

239

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1985-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

240

Ris-M-2944(EN) Nuclear Safety Research  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

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


241

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

242

Nuclear Safety Workshop Summary | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of EnergyEnergyENERGY TAXBalanced ScorecardReactor Technology Subcommittee of NEACSummary Nuclear Safety

243

Nuclear Safety Policy - DOE Directives, Delegations, and Requirements  

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

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

244

TRAINING THE STAFF OF THE REGULATORY BODY FOR NUCLEAR FACILITIES:  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Wagramer Strasse; A Competency Framework

245

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

246

Tutorial on nuclear thermal propulsion safety for Mars  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Buden, D.

1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

247

Tutorial on nuclear thermal propulsion safety for Mars  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Buden, D.

1992-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

248

Cleanup of Nuclear Licensed Facility 57  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2008-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

249

Spent Nuclear Fuel project integrated safety management plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Daschke, K.D.

1996-09-17T23:59:59.000Z

250

Nuclear Safety Enforcement Letter issued to Sandia Corporation...  

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

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

251

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.

252

MANAGING BERYLLIUM IN NUCLEAR FACILITY APPLICATIONS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

R. Rohe; T. N. Tranter

2011-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

253

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Boyd D. Christensen

2009-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

254

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.

255

CRAD, New Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis and Technical Safety  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE:YearRound-Up fromDepartmentTie Ltd:June 2015 <Ones |Laboratory, JuneDid yRequirements - December

256

Verification of Readiness to Start Up or Restart Nuclear Facilities  

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

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

2010-04-16T23:59:59.000Z

257

Status and Value of International Standards for Nuclear Criticality Safety  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Hopper, Calvin Mitchell [ORNL] [ORNL

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

258

Part of the National Nuclear User Facility Culham Materials  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Part of the National Nuclear User Facility Culham Materials Research Facility #12;Introduction from Professor Steve Cowley Culham's Materials Research Facility (MRF) is a valuable addition to the UK's suite and fusion ­ with equipment for the processing and micro-characterisation of radioactive materials, for on

259

Modern tornado design of nuclear and other potentially hazardous facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Tornado wind loads and other tornado phenomena, including tornado missiles and differential pressure effects, have not usually been considered in the design of conventional industrial, commercial, or residential facilities in the United States; however, tornado resistance has often become a design requirement for certain hazardous facilities, such as large nuclear power plants and nuclear materials and waste storage facilities, as well as large liquefied natural gas storage facilities. This article provides a review of current procedures for the design of hazardous industrial facilities to resist tornado effects. 23 refs., 19 figs., 13 tabs.

Stevenson, J.D. [J.D. Stevenson Consulting Engineer, Cleveland, OH (United States); Zhao, Y. [Battele Energy Systems Group, Columbus, OH (United States)

1996-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

260

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1996-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

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


261

Fast Flux Test Facility final safety analysis report. Amendment 73  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Gantt, D.A.

1993-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

262

Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) Project Cold Vacuum Drying (CVD) Facility Operations Manual  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document provides the Operations Manual for the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility (CVDF). The Manual was developed in conjunction with HNF-SD-SNF-SAR-002, Safety Analysis Report for the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility, Phase 2, Supporting Installation of the Processing Systems (Garvin 1998) and, the HNF-SD-SNF-DRD-002, 1997, Cold Vacuum Drying Facility Design Requirements, Rev. 3a. The Operations Manual contains general descriptions of all the process, safety and facility systems in the CVDF, a general CVD operations sequence, and has been developed for the spent nuclear fuel project (SNFP) Operations Organization and shall be updated, expanded, and revised in accordance with future design, construction and startup phases of the CVDF until the CVDF final ORR is approved.

IRWIN, J.J.

2000-02-03T23:59:59.000Z

263

Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) Cold Vacuum Drying (CVD) Facility Operations Manual  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document provides the Operations Manual for the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility (CVDF). The Manual was developed in conjunction with HNF-553, Spent Nuclear Fuel Project Final Safety Analysis Report Annex B--Cold Vacuum Drying Facility. The HNF-SD-SNF-DRD-002, 1999, Cold Vacuum Drying Facility Design Requirements, Rev. 4, and the CVDF Final Design Report. The Operations Manual contains general descriptions of all the process, safety and facility systems in the CVDF, a general CVD operations sequence and references to the CVDF System Design Descriptions (SDDs). This manual has been developed for the SNFP Operations Organization and shall be updated, expanded, and revised in accordance with future design, construction and startup phases of the CVDF until the CVDF final ORR is approved.

IRWIN, J.J.

1999-07-02T23:59:59.000Z

264

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Tomberlin, Terry Alan

2002-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

265

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Tomberlin, T.A.

2002-06-19T23:59:59.000Z

266

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

D. i3 Risø-R-739(p*tf Nuclear Safety Research Department Annual Progress Report 1993 Edited by B 1994 #12;Nuclear Safety Research ****-mp, Risø, 1994 #12;Contents 1 latmfcKtioa 5 2 HcafchPhysics 5 2.1 Dosimetry 5 22 Development of Instruments

267

Ris-R-1232(EN) Nuclear Safety Research Department  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Risø-R-1232(EN) Nuclear Safety Research Department Annual Report 2000 Edited by B. Majborn, S This report presents a summary of the work of the Nuclear Safety Re- search Department in 2000. The department for the tasks "Applied Health Physics and Emergency Preparedness", "Dosimetry", "Environmental Monitoring

268

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

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

AND APPROVAL OF NUCLEAR FACILITY SAFETY BASIS AND SAFETY DESIGN BASIS DOCUMENTS Order Module--DOE-STD-1104-2009, REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF NUCLEAR FACILITY SAFETY BASIS AND SAFETY...

269

Reassignment of boundaries requiring personal dosimetry at a nuclear facility  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Fulmer, Philip Clark

2012-06-07T23:59:59.000Z

270

Providing Nuclear Criticality Safety Analysis Education through Benchmark Experiment Evaluation  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

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

2009-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

271

An Integrated Safety Assessment Methodology for Generation IV Nuclear Systems  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Timothy J. Leahy

2010-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

272

Independent Oversight Assessment, Salt Waste Processing Facility...  

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

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

273

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

274

Fusion Nuclear Science and Technology (FNST) Challenges and Facilities  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Fusion Nuclear Science and Technology (FNST) Challenges and Facilities on the Pathway to DEMO Princeton,NJ 7-10 September 2011 1 #12;Fusion Nuclear Science and Technology (FNST) must be the Central Mountain to climb Since we have never done any experiments on FNST in a real fusion nuclear environment, we

275

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1994-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

276

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...

277

Enforcement handbook: Enforcement of DOE nuclear safety requirements  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1995-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

278

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1987-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

279

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1999-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

280

Licensed reactor nuclear safety criteria applicable to DOE reactors  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1993-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


281

INTEGRATION OF FACILITY MODELING CAPABILITIES FOR NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION ANALYSIS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2011-07-18T23:59:59.000Z

282

National ignition facility environment, safety, and health management plan  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

NONE

1995-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

283

Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities  

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

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

2014-04-14T23:59:59.000Z

284

Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities  

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

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

2013-04-04T23:59:59.000Z

285

National Ignition Facility | National Nuclear Security Administration  

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

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

286

High Explosives Application Facility | National Nuclear Security...  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

287

Licensed reactor nuclear safety criteria applicable to DOE reactors  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1991-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

288

Verification of Readiness to Start Up or Restart Nuclear Facilities  

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

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

2010-04-16T23:59:59.000Z

289

Facility Approvals, Security Surveys, and Nuclear Materials Surveys  

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

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.

1992-09-15T23:59:59.000Z

290

Facility Approvals, Security Surveys, and Nuclear Materials Surveys  

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

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.

1988-02-03T23:59:59.000Z

291

ICF Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

292

HYDROGEN IGNITION MECHANISM FOR EXPLOSIONS IN NUCLEAR FACILITY PIPE SYSTEMS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Leishear, R

2010-05-02T23:59:59.000Z

293

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

Energy Savers [EERE]

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

294

Spent nuclear fuel project cold vacuum drying facility operations manual  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document provides the Operations Manual for the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility (CVDF). The Manual was developed in conjunction with HNF-SD-SNF-SAR-002, Safety Analysis Report for the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility, Phase 2, Supporting Installation of Processing Systems (Garvin 1998) and, the HNF-SD-SNF-DRD-002, 1997, Cold Vacuum Drying Facility Design Requirements, Rev. 3a. The Operations Manual contains general descriptions of all the process, safety and facility systems in the CVDF, a general CVD operations sequence, and has been developed for the SNFP Operations Organization and shall be updated, expanded, and revised in accordance with future design, construction and startup phases of the CVDF until the CVDF final ORR is approved.

IRWIN, J.J.

1999-05-12T23:59:59.000Z

296

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

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

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

2001-07-12T23:59:59.000Z

297

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Beck, David Franklin; Hockert, John

2005-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

298

THE IMPACT OF THE GLOBAL NUCLEAR SAFETY REGIME IN BRAZIL  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A turning point of the world nuclear industry with respect to safety occurred due to the accident at Chernobyl, in 1986. A side from the tragic personal losses and the enormous financial damage, the Chernobyl accident has literally demonstrated that ''a nuclear accident anywhere is an accident everywhere''. The impact was felt immediately by the nuclear industry, with plant cancellations (e.g. Austria), elimination of national programs (e.g. Italy) and general construction delays. However, the reaction of the nuclear industry was equally immediate, which led to the proposal and establishment of a Global Nuclear Safety Regime. This regime is composed of biding international safety conventions, globally accepted safety standard, and a voluntary peer review system. In a previous work, the author has presented in detail the components of this Regime, and briefly discussed its impact in the Brazilian nuclear power organizations, including the Regulatory Body. This work, on the opposite, briefly reviews the Global Nuclear Safety Regime, and concentrates in detail in the discussion of its impact in Brazil, showing how it has produced some changes, and where the peer pressure regime has failed to produce real results.

Almeida, C.

2004-10-06T23:59:59.000Z

299

FAQS Qualification Card – Nuclear Explosive Safety Study  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

300

Proceedings of the Nuclear Criticality Technology Safety Workshop  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Rene G. Sanchez

1998-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


301

FACILITY SAFETY PLAN Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Glover Building SAFETY OFFICE: ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE ROOM 100 GLOVER PHONE 491-5252 Emergency Numbers

302

Dismantlement and Radioactive Waste Management of DPRK Nuclear Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

One critical aspect of any denuclearization of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) involves dismantlement of its nuclear facilities and management of their associated radioactive wastes. The decommissioning problem for its two principal operational plutonium facilities at Yongbyun, the 5MWe nuclear reactor and the Radiochemical Laboratory reprocessing facility, alone present a formidable challenge. Dismantling those facilities will create radioactive waste in addition to existing inventories of spent fuel and reprocessing wastes. Negotiations with the DPRK, such as the Six Party Talks, need to appreciate the enormous scale of the radioactive waste management problem resulting from dismantlement. The two operating plutonium facilities, along with their legacy wastes, will result in anywhere from 50 to 100 metric tons of uranium spent fuel, as much as 500,000 liters of liquid high-level waste, as well as miscellaneous high-level waste sources from the Radiochemical Laboratory. A substantial quantity of intermediate-level waste will result from disposing 600 metric tons of graphite from the reactor, an undetermined quantity of chemical decladding liquid waste from reprocessing, and hundreds of tons of contaminated concrete and metal from facility dismantlement. Various facilities for dismantlement, decontamination, waste treatment and packaging, and storage will be needed. The shipment of spent fuel and liquid high level waste out of the DPRK is also likely to be required. Nuclear facility dismantlement and radioactive waste management in the DPRK are all the more difficult because of nuclear nonproliferation constraints, including the call by the United States for “complete, verifiable and irreversible dismantlement,” or “CVID.” It is desirable to accomplish dismantlement quickly, but many aspects of the radioactive waste management cannot be achieved without careful assessment, planning and preparation, sustained commitment, and long completion times. The radioactive waste management problem in fact offers a prospect for international participation to engage the DPRK constructively. DPRK nuclear dismantlement, when accompanied with a concerted effort for effective radioactive waste management, can be a mutually beneficial goal.

Jooho, W.; Baldwin, G. T.

2005-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

303

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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)

Biurrun, E.; Haverkamp, B. [DBE TECHNOLOGY GmbH, Eschenstr. 55, D-31224 Peine (Germany)] [DBE TECHNOLOGY GmbH, Eschenstr. 55, D-31224 Peine (Germany); Lazaro, A.; Miralles, A. [Westinghouse Electric Spain SAR, Padilla 17, E-28006 Madrid (Spain)] [Westinghouse Electric Spain SAR, Padilla 17, E-28006 Madrid (Spain); Stefanova, I. [SERAW, 52 A Dimitrov Blvd, 6 Fl., 1797 Sofia (Bulgaria)] [SERAW, 52 A Dimitrov Blvd, 6 Fl., 1797 Sofia (Bulgaria)

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

304

Nuclear Power - Operation, Safety and Environment  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

as operation, safety, environment and radiation effects. The book is not offering a comprehensive coverage of the material in each area. Instead, selected themes are highlighted by authors of individual chapters representing contemporary interests worldwide...

305

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Michael R. Kruzic

2007-09-16T23:59:59.000Z

306

Implementation Evaluation Criteria for January 2001 Amended 10 CFR Part 830 Nuclear Safety Management  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document provides criteria for use in performing gap evaluations of processes and documents relative to the requirements of 10 CFR Part 830, Nuclear Safety Management. The criteria and associated objective evidence statements have been approved by the cognizant interpretative authorities. The criteria have been developed for each section of 10 CFR Part 830. The criteria have been divided into two categories. Criteria and objective evidence have been developed for use in assessing Fluor Hanford (FH) programs and procedures at the company level--programmatic requirements and evidence. Criteria and objective evidence statements have also been developed for FH nuclear facilities and projects.

EVANS, C.B.

2001-02-13T23:59:59.000Z

307

CRAD, Criteria and Guidelines For the Assessment of Safety System...  

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

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

308

Guide for the Mitigation of Natural Phenomena Hazards for DOE Nuclear Facilities and NonNuclear Facilities  

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

This document provides guidance in implementing the Natural Phenomena Hazard (NPH) mitigation requirements of DOE O 420.1, Facility Safety, Section 4.4, "Natural Phenomena Hazards Mitigation." This Guide does not establish or invoke any new requirements. Any apparent conflicts arising from the NPH guidance would defer to the requirements in DOE O 420.1. No cancellation.

2000-03-28T23:59:59.000Z

309

Summary engineering description of underwater fuel storage facility for foreign research reactor spent nuclear fuel  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document is a summary description for an Underwater Fuel Storage Facility (UFSF) for foreign research reactor (FRR) spent nuclear fuel (SNF). A FRR SNF environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is being prepared and will include both wet and dry storage facilities as storage alternatives. For the UFSF presented in this document, a specific site is not chosen. This facility can be sited at any one of the five locations under consideration in the EIS. These locations are the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, Savannah River Site, Hanford, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and Nevada Test Site. Generic facility environmental impacts and emissions are provided in this report. A baseline fuel element is defined in Section 2.2, and the results of a fission product analysis are presented. Requirements for a storage facility have been researched and are summarized in Section 3. Section 4 describes three facility options: (1) the Centralized-UFSF, which would store the entire fuel element quantity in a single facility at a single location, (2) the Regionalized Large-UFSF, which would store 75% of the fuel element quantity in some region of the country, and (3) the Regionalized Small-UFSF, which would store 25% of the fuel element quantity, with the possibility of a number of these facilities in various regions throughout the country. The operational philosophy is presented in Section 5, and Section 6 contains a description of the equipment. Section 7 defines the utilities required for the facility. Cost estimates are discussed in Section 8, and detailed cost estimates are included. Impacts to worker safety, public safety, and the environment are discussed in Section 9. Accidental releases are presented in Section 10. Standard Environmental Impact Forms are included in Section 11.

Dahlke, H.J.; Johnson, D.A.; Rawlins, J.K.; Searle, D.K.; Wachs, G.W.

1994-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

310

Assessment of Space Nuclear Thermal Propulsion Facility and Capability Needs  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

James Werner

2014-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

311

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1996-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

312

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

On other hand, accidents at nuclear facilities could nott ed expos ur e from a nuclear accident which would warrantresulting from accidents at nuclear facilities. Average

Nero, A.V.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

313

Nuclear Facility Risk Ranking | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProvedDecemberInitiativesNational Environmental PolicySky |NewsFacility Risk Ranking

314

ICF Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmospheric Optical Depth7-1D: Vegetation ProposedUsingFun withconfinementEtching. | EMSL Bubblesstructure theby J. StöhrFacilities

315

Facilities & Capabilities | Nuclear Science | ORNL  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May JunDatastreamsmmcrcalgovInstrumentsruc DocumentationP-Series toESnet4:Epitaxial ThinFOR IMMEDIATE5 BudgetNateFacilities and

316

Facilities & Projects | National Nuclear Security Administration  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May JunDatastreamsmmcrcalgovInstrumentsruc DocumentationP-Series toESnet4:Epitaxial ThinFOR IMMEDIATE5 BudgetNateFacilities and&

317

Guidance for identifying, reporting and tracking nuclear safety noncompliances  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document provides Department of Energy (DOE) contractors, subcontractors and suppliers with guidance in the effective use of DOE`s Price-Anderson nuclear safety Noncompliance Tracking System (NTS). Prompt contractor identification, reporting to DOE, and correction of nuclear safety noncompliances provides DOE with a basis to exercise enforcement discretion to mitigate civil penalties, and suspend the issuance of Notices of Violation for certain violations. Use of this reporting methodology is elective by contractors; however, this methodology is intended to reflect DOE`s philosophy on effective identification and reporting of nuclear safety noncompliances. To the extent that these expectations are met for particular noncompliances, DOE intends to appropriately exercise its enforcement discretion in considering whether, and to what extent, to undertake enforcement action.

NONE

1995-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

318

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Nero, A.V.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

319

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Nero, A.V.

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

320

Nuclear power safety in central and eastern Europe  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1995-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


321

Lessons Learned from the Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities and the Safe Termination of Nuclear Activities. Outcomes of the International Conference, 11-15 December 2006, Athens, Greece  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Full text of publication follows: decommissioning activities are increasing worldwide covering wide range of facilities - from nuclear power plant, through fuel cycle facilities to small laboratories. The importance of these activities is growing with the recognition of the need for ensuring safe termination of practices and reuse of sites for various purposes, including the development of new nuclear facilities. Decommissioning has been undertaken for more than forty years and significant knowledge has been accumulated and lessons have been learned. However the number of countries encountering decommissioning for the first time is increasing with the end of the lifetime of the facilities around the world, in particular in countries with small nuclear programmes (e.g. one research reactor) and limited human and financial resources. In order to facilitate the exchange of lessons learned and good practices between all Member States and to facilitate and improve safety of the planned, ongoing and future decommissioning projects, the IAEA in cooperation with the Nuclear Energy Agency to OECD, European Commission and World Nuclear Association organised the international conference on Lessons Learned from the Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities and the Safe Termination of Nuclear Activities, held in Athens, Greece. The conference also highlighted areas where future cooperation at national and international level is required in order to improve decommissioning planning and safety during decommissioning and to facilitate decommissioning by selecting appropriate strategies and technologies for decontamination, dismantling and management of waste. These and other aspects discussed at the conference are presented in this paper, together with the planned IAEA measures for amendment and implementation of the International Action Plan on Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities and its future programme on decommissioning.

Batandjieva, B.; Laraia, M. [International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna (Austria)

2008-01-15T23:59:59.000Z

322

Systems Issues in Nuclear Reactor Safety  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

regulations 2 Traditional regulations Probabilistic Risk Assessment Risk-informed decision making Human-in-Depth is an element of the NRC's safety philosophy that employs successive compensatory measures 6 philosophy in the worst possible place. #12;Technological Risk Assessment (Reactors) · Study the system as an integrated

de Weck, Olivier L.

323

340 Waste handling Facility Hazard Categorization and Safety Analysis  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

T. J. Rodovsky

2010-10-25T23:59:59.000Z

324

Adapting Dismantling and Decommissioning Strategies to a Variety of Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facilities - 12237  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

AREVA has accumulated over 20 years of experience in managing and operating fuel cycle facilities Decontamination and Decommissioning (D and D) projects of many different types and a variety of scales, both as facility owner (at La Hague for example) and as prime contractor to external customers such as the French Atomic Energy Commission (at Marcoule). A specific Business Unit was created in 2008 to capitalize on this experience and to concentrate - in one division - the specific skills required to be successful and cost effective in decommissioning projects. Indeed one of the key lessons learned in the past decades is that decommissioning is a significantly different business as compared to normal operations of a nuclear facility. Almost all the functions of a project need to be viewed from a different angle, challenged and adapted consequently in order to optimize costs and schedule. Three examples follow to illustrate the point: Safety management needs to take into account the ever changing configuration of a plant under D and D (a quite new situation for the authorities). Production of waste is significantly different in term of volume, activities, conditioning and disposal path. Technology is important but technical issues are often less critical than good management and planning. Further examples and lessons learned are developed through reviewing the projects experience basis. AREVA has a long and vast experience in the cleanup and dismantling of a number of very large and complex nuclear facilities. This effort focused initially on AREVA's own plants and is expanding now to other customers. The setup of a specific Business Unit in 2008 to takeover this business allowed concentration of the skills and the lessons learned in a dedicated division so as to provide the best means to optimize safety, performance, costs and schedules. Indeed transitioning from operations to D and D of a nuclear facility is a quantum leap. The assistance from specialized teams can bring significant cost savings. (authors)

Chambon, Frederic [AREVA Federal Services LLC (United States); Clement, Gilles [AREVA NC (France)

2012-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

325

Chemical Waste Guide for Facilities Services UW Environmental Health and Safety  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

CChemmical Fa Was aciliti Au te G ies S ugust uide Servic t 24, 2 for ces 2011 #12;Chemical Waste Guide for Facilities Services UW Environmental Health and Safety Page 2 Chemical Waste Guide ........................................................................................................... 3 Chemical Hazards

Wilcock, William

326

Safety Analysis Report: X17B2 beamline Synchrotron Medical Research Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report contains a safety analysis for the X17B2 beamline synchrotron medical research facility. Health hazards, risk assessment and building systems are discussed. Reference is made to transvenous coronary angiography. (LSP)

Gmuer, N.F.; Thomlinson, W.

1990-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

327

Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety Program - DOE Directives...  

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

1E, Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety Program by Angela Chambers Functional areas: Defense Nuclear Facility Safety and Health Requirement, Defense Programs, Nuclear Weapons...

328

Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety Program - DOE Directives...  

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

D, Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety Program by cdornburg Functional areas: Defense Nuclear Facility Safety and Health Requirement, Defense Programs, Nuclear Weapons Programs,...

329

Nuclear criticality safety tools in the Chernobyl-4 accident analysis  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Landeyro, P.A.

1988-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

330

E-Print Network 3.0 - aerospace nuclear safety Sample Search...  

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

and Nuclear Technologies 2 A Systematic Approach to Safety Case Management Dr Tim Kelly Summary: The concept of the safety case' has already been adopted across many...

331

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

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

2003-02-27T23:59:59.000Z

332

Contained Firing Facility | National Nuclear Security Administration  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "ofEarlyEnergyDepartment ofDepartmentStewardshipAdministration| National Nuclear SecurityContained Firing

333

Support of the Iraq nuclear facility dismantlement and disposal program  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Available in abstract form only. Full text of publication follows: Iraq's former nuclear facilities contain large quantities of radioactive materials and radioactive waste. The Iraq Nuclear Facility Dismantlement and Disposal Program (the Iraq NDs Program) is a new program to decontaminate and permanently dispose of radioactive wastes in Iraq. The NDs Program is led by the Government of Iraq, under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) auspices, with guidance and assistance from a number of countries. The U.S. participants include Texas Tech University and Sandia National Laboratories. A number of activities are ongoing under the broad umbrella of the Iraq NDs Program: drafting a new nuclear law that will provide the legal basis for the cleanup and disposal activities; assembly and analysis of existing data; characterization of soil contamination; bringing Iraqi scientists to the world's largest symposium on radioactive waste management; touring U.S. government and private sector operating radwaste disposal facilities in the U.S., and hosting a planning workshop on the characterization and cleanup of the Al-Tuwaitha Nuclear Facility. (authors)

Coates, Roger [International Atomic Energy Agency - IAEA, Wagramer Strasse 5, P.O. Box 100 - 1400 Vienna (Austria); Cochran, John; Danneels, Jeff [Sandia National Laboratories (United States); Chesser, Ronald; Phillips, Carlton; Rogers, Brenda [Center for Environmental Radiation Studies, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409 (United States)

2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

334

Hazard Evaluation for Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel at the Solid Waste Treatment Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report is prepared as the initial step in the safety assurance process described in 10 CFR 830 Subpart B, Nuclear Safety Management, and HNF-PRO-700, Safety Basis Development.

ERPENBECK, E.G.

2002-11-12T23:59:59.000Z

335

Construction safety program for the National Ignition Facility, Appendix A  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Topics covered in this appendix include: General Rules-Code of Safe Practices; 2. Personal Protective Equipment; Hazardous Material Control; Traffic Control; Fire Prevention; Sanitation and First Aid; Confined Space Safety Requirements; Ladders and Stairways; Scaffolding and Lift Safety; Machinery, Vehicles, and Heavy Equipment; Welding and Cutting-General; Arc Welding; Oxygen/Acetylene Welding and Cutting; Excavation, Trenching, and Shoring; Fall Protection; Steel Erection; Working With Asbestos; Radiation Safety; Hand Tools; Electrical Safety; Nonelectrical Work Performed Near Exposed High-Voltage Power-Distribution Equipment; Lockout/Tagout Requirements; Rigging; A-Cranes; Housekeeping; Material Handling and Storage; Lead; Concrete and Masonry Construction.

Cerruti, S.J.

1997-06-26T23:59:59.000Z

336

Office of Nuclear Safety | Department of Energy  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of EnergyEnergyENERGYWomen OwnedofDepartment ofJaredOakscience-based,OHAGasand FunctionheldNuclearNuclear

337

Operation technology of air treatment system in nuclear facilities  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Effective operation techniques were reviewed on the air treatment system to protect the personnel in nuclear facilities from the contamination of radio-active particles and to keep the environment clear. Nuclear air treatment system consisted of the ventilation and filtering system was characterized by some test. Measurement of air velocity of blowing/exhaust fan in the ventilation system, leak tests of HEPA filters in the filtering, and measurement of pressure difference between the areas defined by radiation level were conducted. The results acquired form the measurements were reflected directly for the operation of air treatment. In the abnormal state of virus parts of devices composted of the system, the repairing method, maintenance and performance test were also employed in operating effectively the air treatment system. These measuring results and techniques can be available to the operation of air treatment system of PIEF as well as the other nuclear facilities in KAERI.

Chun, Y B; Hwong, Y H; Lee, H K; Min, D K; Park, K J; Uom, S H; Yang, S Y

2001-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

338

Construction safety program for the National Ignition Facility, Appendix B  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This Appendix contains material from the LLNL Health and Safety Manual as listed below. For sections not included in this list, please refer to the Manual itself. The areas covered are: asbestos, lead, fire prevention, lockout, and tag program confined space traffic safety.

Cerruti, S.J.

1997-06-26T23:59:59.000Z

339

SCALE 6: Comprehensive Nuclear Safety Analysis Code System  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Bowman, Stephen M [ORNL

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

340

Floating nuclear power plant safety assurance principles  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1993-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

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


341

Nuclear Safety Enforcement Documents | Department of Energy  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE:Year in3.pdfEnergyDepartment of Energy Advanced1, 2014Nuclear

342

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

With the advancement of the next generation of nuclear fuel cycle facilities, concerns of the effectiveness of nuclear facility safeguards have been increasing due to the inclusion of highly enriched material and reprocessing ...

Iamsumang, Chonlagarn

2010-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

343

Software reliability and safety in nuclear reactor protection systems  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

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

1993-11-01T23:59:59.000Z

344

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Booker, Paul M.; Brown, Lisa M.

2005-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

345

Nuclear Criticality Safety | More Science | ORNL  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security Administration the ContributionsArms Control R&D Consortium includes Los Alamos April 7,Criticality

346

Nuclear safety | Princeton Plasma Physics Lab  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May JunDatastreamsmmcrcalgovInstrumentsrucLas Conchas recoveryLaboratory | NationalJohnSecurityControls |NavyNuclearLife Cycleenergysafety

347

Nuclear Safety Regulatory Framework | Department of Energy  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious Rank EERE:Year in3.pdfEnergyDepartment of Energy Advanced1, 2014NuclearCommission, Office of

348

Sandia National Laboratories: Nuclear Energy Safety Technologies  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security Administration the1 -theErik Spoerke SSLSMolten-Salt StorageNo More Green WasteThe

349

Princeton Plasma Physics Lab - Nuclear safety  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security Administration the1 - SeptemberMicroneedles for4-16 FOR Primary Author Lastenergy Energy that

350

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

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

1987-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

351

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

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

1985-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

352

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

353

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

A Domain-Specific Safety Analysis for Digital Nuclear Plant Protection Systems Sanghyun Yoon through safety analy- sis is strongly mandated for safety-critical systems. Nuclear plant protection, NuFTA, for nuclear plant protection systems. NuFTA mechanically constructs a software fault tree

354

PLC-Based Safety Critical Software Development for Nuclear Power Plants  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

355

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Michael R. Kruzic

2008-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

356

Pyroprocessing of Fast Flux Test Facility Nuclear Fuel  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2013-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

357

Pyroprocessing of fast flux test facility nuclear fuel  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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)

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. [Idaho National Laboratory, P.O. Box 1625, Idaho Falls, ID, 83415 (United States)

2013-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

358

Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities  

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

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.

2011-04-25T23:59:59.000Z

359

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)]

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.

2013-07-17T23:59:59.000Z

360

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.

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


361

Cold vacuum drying facility design requirements  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document provides the detailed design requirements for the Spent Nuclear Fuel Project Cold Vacuum Drying Facility. Process, safety, and quality assurance requirements and interfaces are specified.

IRWIN, J.J.

1999-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

362

Double-clad nuclear-fuel safety rod  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

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

1981-12-30T23:59:59.000Z

363

NSPWG-recommended safety requirements and guidelines for SEI nuclear propulsion  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1992-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

364

NSPWG-recommended safety requirements and guidelines for SEI nuclear propulsion  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1992-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

365

NSPWG-recommended safety requirements and guidelines for SEI nuclear propulsion  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1992-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

366

Evaluation of the US Department of Energy's occupational safety and health program for its government-owned contractor-operated facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of this report is to present to Secretary of Energy James Watkins the findings and recommendations of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA) evaluation of the Department of Energy's (DOE) programs for worker safety and health at DOE's government-owned contractor-operated (GOCO) nuclear facilities. The OSHA evaluation is based on an intensive and comprehensive review and analysis of DOE's worker safety and health programs including: written programs; safety and health inspection programs; and the adequacy of resource, training, and management controls. The evaluation began on April 10, 1990 and involved over three staff years before its conclusion. The evaluation was initiated by former Secretary of Labor Elizabeth Dole in response to Secretary of Energy James Watkins' request that OSHA assist him in determining the actions needed to assure that DOE has an exemplary safety and health program in place at its GOCOs. 6 figs.

Not Available

1990-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

367

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

NONE

1990-09-19T23:59:59.000Z

368

Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: a selected bibliography  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1982-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

369

Implementation Guide for Use in Developing Technical Safety Requirements  

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

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.

2010-11-03T23:59:59.000Z

370

Implementation Guide for Use in Developing Technical Safety Requirements  

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

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.

2010-11-03T23:59:59.000Z

371

Nuclear power plant simulation facility evaluation methodology: handbook. Volume 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report is Volume 1 of a two-part document which describes a project conducted to develop a methodology to evaluate the acceptability of nuclear power plant (NPP) simulation facilities for use in the simulator-based portion of NRC's operator licensing examination. The proposed methodology is to be utilized during two phases of the simulation facility life-cycle, initial simulator acceptance and recurrent analysis. The first phase is aimed at ensuring that the simulator provides an accurate representation of the reference NPP. There are two components of initial simulator evaluation: fidelity assessment and a direct determination of the simulation facility's adequacy for operator testing. The second phase is aimed at ensuring that the simulation facility continues to accurately represent the reference plant throughout the life of the simulator. Recurrent evaluation is comprised of three components: monitoring reference plant changes, monitoring the simulator's hardware, and examining the data from actual plant transients as they occur. Volume 1 is a set of guidelines which details the steps involved in the two life-cycle phases, presents an overview of the methodology and data collection requirements, and addresses the formation of the evaluation team and the preparation of the evaluation plan. 29 figs.

Laughery, K.R. Jr.; Carter, R.J.; Haas, P.M.

1986-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

372

Financing Strategies For A Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

David Shropshire; Sharon Chandler

2006-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

373

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Hopper, Calvin Mitchell [ORNL] [ORNL

2011-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

374

Facility Safety Policy, Guidance & Reports | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProvedDecember 2005DepartmentDecember U.S. Department-5 METRIC SUMMARYFacility Safety

375

Nuclear safety procedure upgrade project at USEC/MMUS gaseous diffusion plants  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Martin Marietta Utility Services has embarked on a program to upgrade procedures at both of its Gaseous Diffusion Plant sites. The transition from a U.S. Department of Energy government-operated facility to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulated has necessitated a complete upgrade of plant operating procedures and practices incorporating human factors as well as a philosophy change in their use. This program is designed to meet the requirements of the newly written 10CFR76, {open_quotes}The Certification of Gaseous Diffusion Plants,{close_quotes} and aid in progression toward NRC certification. A procedures upgrade will help ensure increased nuclear safety, enhance plant operation, and eliminate personnel procedure errors/occurrences.

Kocsis, F.J. III

1994-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

376

Observation challenges in a glovebox environment : behavior based safety at a plutonium facility.  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) is one of the Nation's leading scientific and defense laboratories, owned by the Department of Energy and managed by the University of California. LANL is one of the original weapons complex labs dating back to the days of the Manhattan Project during World War II. Since then, radioactive materials research has continued at LANLs Plutonium Facility, and remains a primary responsibility of the Laboratory. The Nuclear Materials Technology Division (NMT) is a multidisciplinary organization responsible for daily operations of the Plutonium Facility and the Chemistry Research Metallurgy Facility. NMT Division is responsible for the saence, engineering and technology of plutonium and other actinides in support of the Nation's nuclear weapons stockpile, nuclear materials disposition, and nuclear energy programs. A wide amy of activities are performed within NMT Division, such as analytical chemistry, metallurgical operations, actinide processes, waste operations, radioactive materials research and related administrative tasks.

Montalvo, M. L. (Maryrose L.)

2002-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

377

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

A Domain-Specific Safety Analysis for Digital Nuclear Plant Protection Systems Sanghyun Yoon tries to assure the systems' safety through performing various safety analysis techniques ­ FTA (Fault was KNICS(Korea Nuclear Instrumentation and Control System) RPS(Reactor Protection System). · Prototype

378

FLUOR HANFORD SAFETY MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

GARVIN, L J; JENSEN, M A

2004-04-13T23:59:59.000Z

379

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

Energy Savers [EERE]

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Office of Inspector GeneralDepartment of Energy fromComments onReplyofRetiring ProcurementReturn onRevenueNOT

380

Foundational development of an advanced nuclear reactor integrated safety code.  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

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

2010-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


381

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Chen, Sheng

382

ME 379M-Nuclear Safety and Security ABET EC2000 syllabus  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Ben-Yakar, Adela

383

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Ajo-Franklin, Jonathan

384

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Heljanko, Keijo

385

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

NONE

1998-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

386

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Reliability Engineering and System Safety 92 (2007) 609­618 The nuclear industry's transition a Nuclear Science and Engineering Department, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA b Nuclear Power Engineering, Quality and Safety Management Department, Tokyo Electric Power

387

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

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

applicable) quality assurance, procedures, maintenance, personnel training, conduct of operations, emergency preparedness, fire protection, waste management, and radiation...

388

2015 Nuclear & Facility Safety Programs Workshop | Department of Energy  

Energy Savers [EERE]

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious RankCombustion |Energy UsageAUDITVehiclesTankless or Demand-TypeWelcome6

389

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Letters and Recommendations  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProvedDecember 2005Department ofDOE AccidentWasteZone Modeling | DepartmentDeep Vadose|

390

Departmental Representative to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) " ,"ClickPipelinesProvedDecember 2005Department ofDOE AccidentWasteZone

391

Independent Activity Report, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Public  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "ofEarly Career Scientists'Montana.ProgramJulietipDepartment ofThe full text of what isAnalysisMeeting - October

392

Nuclear and Facility Safety Policy Rules | Department of Energy  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of EnergyEnergyENERGY TAXBalanced ScorecardReactor Technology Subcommittee of NEACSummary

393

2015 Nuclear and Facility Safety Programs Workshop Block Agenda  

Energy Savers [EERE]

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious RankCombustionImprovement3 Beryllium-Associated Worker2014 HouseCoveredAirDepartment of

394

Preparation of Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "ofEarly Careerlumens_placard-green.epsEnergy1.pdfMarket |21,- EA-1999-07Disposition Project VolumecoolingThe

395

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

Energy Savers [EERE]

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Office of Inspector General Office of Audit Services Audit Report Department ofDecoupling and UtilityDeepwater

396

2015 Nuclear & Facility Safety Programs Workshop Agenda | Department of  

Energy Savers [EERE]

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Delicious RankCombustion |Energyon ArmedWaste and Materials2014 Chief Freedom ofDepartment ofNational Indian

397

Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety Program - DOE Directives...  

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

1D Admin Chg 1, Nuclear Explosive and Weapon Surety Program by Carl Sykes Functional areas: Administrative Change, Defense Nuclear Facility Safety and Health Requirement, Defense...

398

Office of Nuclear Safety Enforcement | Department of Energy  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of EnergyEnergyENERGYWomen OwnedofDepartment ofJaredOakscience-based,OHAGasand FunctionheldNuclear Safety

399

Pantex sets safety record | National Nuclear Security Administration  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear Security Administration the1 - September 2006 TheSteven Ashby Dr. StevenPanoramicfirefighterssets safety record |

400

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Alexander, Erin L

2004-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

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


401

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

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

1988-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

402

Safety aspects related to the operation of the Cabril L/ILW disposal facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

In October 1992 the Spanish Ministry of Industry granted the operating permit to the Centro de Almacenamiento de El Cabril (C.A. El Cabril). The Annex 1 to this permit contains the limits and conditions related to safety and to radiological health protection, set by nuclear regulatory authority, the Consejo de Seguridad Nuclear (CSN). The main aspects of the operation regulated in the permit as well as their technical basis and practical meaning are discussed in this paper.

Ruiz, M.C. [Consejo de Seguridad Nuclear, Madrid (Spain); Alonso, J.A. [ENRESA, Madrid (Spain). Safety and Licensing Dept.

1993-12-31T23:59:59.000Z

403

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

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

The study entitled, “Approaches used for Clearance of Lands from Nuclear Facilities among Several Countries: Evaluation for Regulatory Input,” focuses on the issue of showing compliance with given...

404

Progress and Status of the Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant's New Solid Waste Management and Storage Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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)

Rausch, J.; Henderson, R.W. [NUKEM Technologies GmbH, Alzenau (Germany); Penkov, V. [State Enterprise Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant, Visaginas (Lithuania)

2008-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

405

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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)

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

2006-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

406

Development of a Societal-Risk Goal for Nuclear Power Safety  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2014-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

407

The dual axis radiographic hydrodynamic test (DARHT) facility personnel safety system (PSS) control system  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The mission of the Dual Axis Radiograph Hydrodynamic Test (DARHT) Facility is to conduct experiments on dynamic events of extremely dense materials. The PSS control system is designed specifically to prevent personnel from becoming exposed to radiation and explosive hazards during machine operations and/or the firing site operation. This paper will outline the Radiation Safety System (RSS) and the High Explosive Safety System (HESS) which are computer-controlled sets of positive interlocks, warning devices, and other exclusion mechanisms that together form the PSS.

Jacquez, Edward B [Los Alamos National Laboratory

2008-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

408

Radioactive Iodine and Krypton Control for Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Nuclear fission results in the production of fission products and activation products, some of which tend to be volatile during used fuel reprocessing. These can evolve in volatile species in the reprocessing facility off-gas streams, depending on the separations and reprocessing technologies that are used. Radionuclides that have been identified as “volatile radionuclides” are noble gases (most notably isotopes of Kr and Xe); 3H; 14C; and 129I. Radionuclides that tend to form volatile species that evolve into reprocessing facility off-gas systems are more challenging to efficiently control compared to radionuclides that tend to stay in solid or liquid phases. Future used fuel reprocessing facilities in the United States can require efficient capture of some volatile radionuclides in their off-gas streams to meet regulatory emission requirements. In aqueous reprocessing, these radionuclides are most commonly expected to evolve into off-gas streams in tritiated water [3H2O (T2O) and 3HHO (THO)], radioactive CO2, noble gases, and gaseous HI, I2, or volatile organic iodides. The fate and speciation of these radionuclides from a non-aqueous fuel reprocessing facility is less well known at this time, but active investigations are in progress. An Off-Gas Sigma Team was formed in late FY 2009 to integrate and coordinate the Fuel Cycle Research and Development (FCR&D) activities directed towards the capture and sequestration of the these volatile radionuclides (Jubin 2012a). The Sigma Team concept was envisioned to bring together multidisciplinary teams from across the DOE complex that would work collaboratively to solve the technical challenges and to develop the scientific basis for the capture and immobilization technologies such that the sum of the efforts was greater than the individual parts. The Laboratories currently participating in this effort are Argonne National Laboratory (ANL), Idaho National Laboratory (INL), Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), and Sandia National Laboratories (SNL). This article focuses on control of volatile radionuclides that evolve during aqueous reprocessing of UNF. In particular, most of the work by the Off-gas Sigma Team has focused on the capture and sequestration of 129I and 85Kr, mainly because, as discussed below, control of 129I can require high efficiencies to meet regulatory requirements, and control of 85Kr using cryogenic processing, which has been the technology demonstrated and used commercially to date, can add considerable cost to a reprocessing facility.

Soelberg, Nicolas R. [Idaho National Laboratory, Idaho Falls, ID (United States); Garn, Troy [Idaho National Laboratory, Idaho Falls, ID (United States); Greenhalgh, Mitchell [Idaho National Laboratory, Idaho Falls, ID (United States); Law, Jack [Idaho National Laboratory, Idaho Falls, ID (United States); Jubin, Robert T. [Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN (United States); Strachan, Denis M. [Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States); Thallapally, Praveen K. [Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Richland, WA (United States)

2013-07-22T23:59:59.000Z

409

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2014-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

410

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...

411

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

J. Blair Briggs; Anatoly Tsibulya; Yevgeniy Rozhikhin

2012-03-01T23:59:59.000Z

412

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Schneider, K.J.

1982-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

413

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

Energy Savers [EERE]

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Deliciouscritical_materials_workshop_presentations.pdf MoreProgram |DOEInfrastructure Working420.1B FACILITY SAFETY

414

Mission and Readiness Assessment for Fusion Nuclear Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Magnetic fusion development toward DEMO will most likely require a number of fusion nuclear facilities (FNF), intermediate between ITER and DEMO, to test and validate plasma and nuclear technologies and to advance the level of system integration. The FNF mission space is wide, ranging from basic materials research to net electricity demonstration, so there is correspondingly a choice among machine options, scope, and risk in planning such a step. Readiness requirements to proceed with a DEMO are examined, and two FNF options are assessed in terms of the contributions they would make to closing DEMO readiness gaps, and their readiness to themselves proceed with engineering design about ten years from now. An advanced tokamak (AT) pilot plant with superconducting coils and a mission to demonstrate net electricity generation would go a long way toward DEMO. As a next step, however, a pilot plant would entail greater risk than a copper-coil FNSF-AT with its more focussed mission and technology requirements. The stellarator path to DEMO is briefly discussed. Regardless of the choice of FNF option, an accompanying science and technology development program, also aimed at DEMO readiness, is absolutely essential.

G.H. Neilson, et. al.

2012-12-12T23:59:59.000Z

415

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1997-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

416

Analysis of the formation, expression, and economic impacts of risk perceptions associated with nuclear facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report investigates how communities hosting nuclear facilities form and express perceptions of risk and how these risk perceptions affect local economic development. Information was collected from site visits and interviews with plant personnel, officials of local and state agencies, and community activists in the hosting communities. Six commercial nuclear fuel production facilities and five nuclear facilities operated for the US Department of Energy by private contractors were chosen for analysis. The results presented in the report indicate that the nature of risk perceptions depends on a number of factors. These factors are (1) level of communication by plant officials within the local community, (2) track record of the facility. operator, (3) process through which community and state officials receive information and form opinions, (4) level of economic links each plant has with the local community, and (15) physical characteristics of the facility itself. This report finds that in the communities studied, adverse ask perceptions have not affected business location decisions, employment levels in the local community, tourism, or agricultural development. On the basis of case-study findings, this report recommends that nuclear facility siting programs take the following observations into account when addressing perceptions of risk. First, the quality of a facility`s participation with community activists, interest groups, and state agencies helps to determine the level of perceived risk within a community. Second, the development of strong economic links between nuclear facilities and their host communities will produce a higher level of acceptance of the nuclear facilities.

Allison, T.; Hunter, S.; Calzonetti, F.J.

1992-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

417

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Wittenbrock, N. G.

1982-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

418

Seismic Safety Guide  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Eagling, D.G. (ed.)

1983-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

419

Advanced Modeling and Evaluation of the Response of Base-Isolated Nuclear Facility Structures to Vertical Earthquake Excitation  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Structures . iii 3 Nuclear Power Plants 3.1 Nuclear FacilityKashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant 3.3.1 2004 ChŻ uetsuno seismically-isolated nuclear plant has been constructed

Keldrauk, Eric Scott

2012-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

420

Fusion Nuclear Science and Technology ProgramFusion Nuclear Science and Technology Program Issues and Strategy for Fusion Nuclear Science Facility (FNSF)  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Need for Fusion Nuclear Science and Technology ProgramFusion Nuclear Science and Technology Program ­Issues and Strategy for Fusion Nuclear Science Facility (FNSF) ­Key R&D Areas to begin NOW (modeling 12, 2010 #12;Fusion Nuclear Science and Technology (FNST) FNST is the science engineering technology

Abdou, Mohamed

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


421

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

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

of Energy (DOE) approved methodology for preparing a Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) for decommissioning of nuclear facilities, as well as environmental restoration activities...

422

Facility Safety  

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

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.

2014-06-25T23:59:59.000Z

423

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

none,

1983-02-01T23:59:59.000Z

424

Safety Culture in Nuclear Installations | Department of Energy  

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

Guidance for Use in the Enhancement of Safety Culture, International Atomic Energy Agency IAEA, December 2002. Developed for use in the IAEA's Safety Culture Services....

425

On the quantification of safety margins  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

The nuclear industry has relied on the concept of Defense in Depth (DID) and traditional safety margins to deal with the uncertainties associated with the design and operation of nuclear facilities. These concepts were ...

Pagani, Lorenzo P

2004-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

426

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Not Available

1991-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

427

REVIEW OF INDUSTRIES AND GOVERNMENT AGENCIES FOR TECHNOLOGIES APPLICABLE TO DEACTIVATION AND DECOMMISSIONING OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS FACILITIES  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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.

Reilkoff, T. E.; Hetland, M. D.; O'Leary, E. M.

2002-02-25T23:59:59.000Z

428

Heat barrier for use in a nuclear reactor facility  

DOE Patents [OSTI]

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.

Keegan, Charles P. (South Huntingdon Twp., Westmoreland County, PA)

1988-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

429

Radioactive Iodine and Krypton Control for Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The removal of volatile radionuclides generated during used nuclear fuel reprocessing in the US is almost certain to be necessary for the licensing of a reprocessing facility in the US. Various control technologies have been developed, tested, or used over the past 50 years for control of volatile radionuclide emissions from used fuel reprocessing plants. The US DOE has sponsored, since 2009, an Off-gas Sigma Team to perform research and development focused on the most pressing volatile radionuclide control and immobilization problems. In this paper, we focus on the control requirements and methodologies for 85Kr and 129I. Numerous candidate technologies have been studied and developed at laboratory and pilot-plant scales in an effort to meet the need for high iodine control efficiency and to advance alternatives to cryogenic separations for krypton control. Several of these show promising results. Iodine decontamination factors as high as 105, iodine loading capacities, and other adsorption parameters including adsorption rates have been demonstrated under some conditions for both silver zeolite (AgZ) and Ag-functionalized aerogel. Sorbents, including an engineered form of AgZ and selected metal organic framework materials (MOFs), have been successfully demonstrated to capture Kr and Xe without the need for separations at cryogenic temperatures.

N. R. Soelberg; J. D. Law; T. G. Garn; M. Greenhalgh; R. T. Jubin; P. Thallapally; D. M. Strachan

2013-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

430

A survey of decontamination processes applicable to DOE nuclear facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1997-05-01T23:59:59.000Z

431

SWAMI: An Autonomous Mobile Robot for Inspection of Nuclear Waste Storage Facilities  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

SWAMI: An Autonomous Mobile Robot for Inspection of Nuclear Waste Storage Facilities Ron Fulbright Inspector (SWAMI) is a prototype mobile robot designed to perform autonomous inspection of nuclear waste user interface building tool called UIM/X. Introduction Safe disposal of nuclear waste is a difficult

Stephens, Larry M.

432

1Mechanical, Aerospace and Nuclear Engineering nacThe Gaerttner Laboratory RPI LINAC Facility  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

1Mechanical, Aerospace and Nuclear Engineering nacThe Gaerttner Laboratory RPI LINAC Facility and Nuclear Engineering nacThe Gaerttner Laboratory Capabilities of the RPI LINAC · Pulsed Electron Beam ­ 7ns;4Mechanical, Aerospace and Nuclear Engineering nacThe Gaerttner Laboratory Capabilities of the RPI LINAC

Danon, Yaron

433

Global nuclear energy partnership fuels transient testing at the Sandia National Laboratories nuclear facilities : planning and facility infrastructure options.  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Global Nuclear Energy Partnership fuels development program is currently developing metallic, oxide, and nitride fuel forms as candidate fuels for an Advanced Burner Reactor. The Advance Burner Reactor is being designed to fission actinides efficiently, thereby reducing the long-term storage requirements for spent fuel repositories. Small fuel samples are being fabricated and evaluated with different transuranic loadings and with extensive burnup using the Advanced Test Reactor. During the next several years, numerous fuel samples will be fabricated, evaluated, and tested, with the eventual goal of developing a transmuter fuel database that supports the down selection to the most suitable fuel type. To provide a comparative database of safety margins for the range of potential transmuter fuels, this report describes a plan to conduct a set of early transient tests in the Annular Core Research Reactor at Sandia National Laboratories. The Annular Core Research Reactor is uniquely qualified to perform these types of tests because of its wide range of operating capabilities and large dry central cavity which extents through the center of the core. The goal of the fuels testing program is to demonstrate that the design and fabrication processes are of sufficient quality that the fuel will not fail at its design limit--up to a specified burnup, power density, and operating temperature. Transient testing is required to determine the fuel pin failure thresholds and to demonstrate that adequate fuel failure margins exist during the postulated design basis accidents.

Kelly, John E.; Wright, Steven Alan; Tikare, Veena; MacLean, Heather J. (Idaho National Laboratory, Idaho Falls, ID); Parma, Edward J., Jr.; Peters, Curtis D.; Vernon, Milton E.; Pickard, Paul S.

2007-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

434

"Defense-in-Depth" Laser Safety and the National Ignition Facility  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The National Ignition Facility (NIF) is the largest and most energetic laser in the world contained in a complex the size of a football stadium. From the initial laser pulse, provided by telecommunication style infrared nanoJoule pulsed lasers, to the final 192 laser beams (1.8 Mega Joules total energy in the ultraviolet) converging on a target the size of a pencil eraser, laser safety is of paramount concern. In addition to this, there are numerous high-powered (Class 3B and 4) diagnostic lasers in use that can potentially send their laser radiation travelling throughout the facility. With individual beam paths of up to 1500 meters and a workforce of more than one thousand, the potential for exposure is significant. Simple laser safety practices utilized in typical laser labs just don't apply. To mitigate these hazards, NIF incorporates a multi layered approach to laser safety or 'Defense in Depth.' Most typical high-powered laser operations are contained and controlled within a single room using relatively simplistic controls to protect both the worker and the public. Laser workers are trained, use a standard operating procedure, and are required to wear Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) such as Laser Protective Eyewear (LPE) if the system is not fully enclosed. Non-workers are protected by means of posting the room with a warning sign and a flashing light. In the best of cases, a Safety Interlock System (SIS) will be employed which will 'safe' the laser in the case of unauthorized access. This type of laser operation is relatively easy to employ and manage. As the operation becomes more complex, higher levels of control are required to ensure personnel safety. Examples requiring enhanced controls are outdoor and multi-room laser operations. At the NIF there are 192 beam lines and numerous other Class 4 diagnostic lasers that can potentially deliver their hazardous energy to locations far from the laser source. This presents a serious and complex potential hazard to personnel. Because of this, a multilayered approach to safety is taken. This paper presents the philosophy and approach taken at the NIF in the multi-layered 'defense-in-depth' approach to laser safety.

King, J J

2010-12-02T23:59:59.000Z

435

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Paris-Sud XI, Université de

436

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

Paris-Sud XI, Université de

437

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

International Symposium on Fusion Nuclear Technology (ISFNT-5) SAFETY ISSUES ASSOCIATED;International Symposium on Fusion Nuclear Technology (ISFNT-5) heat from in-vessel systems with high neutron Symposium on Fusion Nuclear Technology (ISFNT-5) A design must adequately transfer heat from plasma

California at Los Angeles, University of

438

Safety and licensing issues that are being addressed by the Power Burst Facility test programs. [PWR; BWR  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This paper presents an overview of the results of the experimental program being conducted in the Power Burst Facility and the relationship of these results to certain safety and licensing issues. The safety issues that were addressed by the Power-Cooling-Mismatch, Reactivity Initiated Accident, and Loss of Coolant Accident tests, which comprised the original test program in the Power Burst Facility, are discussed. The resolution of these safety issues based on the results of the thirty-six tests performed to date, is presented. The future resolution of safety issues identified in the new Power Burst Facility test program which consists of tests which simulate BWR and PWR operational transients, anticipated transients without scram, and severe fuel damage accidents, is described.

McCardell, R.K.; MacDonald, P.E.

1980-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

439

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1997-04-01T23:59:59.000Z

440

FAST FLUX TEST FACILITY (FFTF) A HISTORY OF SAFETY & OPERATIONAL EXCELLENCE  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) is a 400-megawatt (thermal) sodium-cooled, high temperature, fast neutron flux, loop-type test reactor. The facility was constructed to support development and testing of fuels, materials and equipment for the Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor program. FFTF began operation in 1980 and over the next 10 years demonstrated its versatility to perform experiments and missions far beyond the original intent of its designers. The reactor had several distinctive features including its size, flux, core design, extensive instrumentation, and test features that enabled it to simultaneously carry out a significant array of missions while demonstrating its features that contributed to a high level of plant safety and availability. FFTF is currently being deactivated for final closure.

NIELSEN, D L

2004-02-26T23:59:59.000Z

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


441

Cold Vacuum Drying Facility hazard analysis report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report describes the methodology used in conducting the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility (CVDF) hazard analysis to support the CVDF phase 2 safety analysis report (SAR), and documents the results. The hazard analysis was performed in accordance with DOE-STD-3009-94, Preparation Guide for US Department of Energy Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Safety Analysis Reports, and implements the requirements of US Department of Energy (DOE) Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports.

Krahn, D.E.

1998-02-23T23:59:59.000Z

442

Safety Basis Requirements for Nonnuclear Facilities at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Site-Specific Work Smart Standards Revision 1  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This standard establishes requirements that, when coupled with Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory's (LLNL's) Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS) methods and other Work Smart Standards for assuring worker safety, assure that the impacts of nonnuclear operations authorized in LLNL facilities are well understood and controlled in a manner that protects the health of workers, the public, and the environment. All LLNL facilities shall be classified based on potential for adverse impact of operations to the health of co-located (i.e., nearby) workers and the public in accordance with this standard, Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 830, Subpart B, and Department of Energy Order (DOE O) 420.2A. This standard provides information on: Objectives; Applicability; Safety analysis requirements; Control selection and maintenance; Documentation requirements; Safety basis review, approval, and renewal; and Safety basis implementation.

Beach, R; Brereton, S; Failor, R; Hildum, S; Spagnolo, S; Van Warmerdam, C

2003-02-24T23:59:59.000Z

443

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

Energy Savers [EERE]

operation, deactivation, decontamination, decommissioning and environmental restoration. Conduct assessments of changes to operations, safety basis and modifications. Conducts...

444

Environmental Management Waste Management Facility (EMWMF) Site-Specific Health and Safety Plan, Oak Ridge, Tennessee  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The Bechtel Jacobs Company LLC (BJC) policy is to provide a safe and healthy workplace for all employees and subcontractors. The implementation of this policy requires that operations of the Environmental Management Waste Management Facility (EMWMF), located one-half mile west of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Y-12 National Security Complex, be guided by an overall plan and consistent proactive approach to environment, safety and health (ES&H) issues. The BJC governing document for worker safety and health, BJC/OR-1745, 'Worker Safety and Health Program', describes the key elements of the BJC Safety and Industrial Hygiene (IH) programs, which includes the requirement for development and implementation of a site-specific Health and Safety Plan (HASP) where required by regulation (refer also to BJC-EH-1012, 'Development and Approval of Safety and Health Plans'). BJC/OR-1745, 'Worker Safety and Health Program', implements the requirements for worker protection contained in Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 851. The EMWMF site-specific HASP requirements identifies safe operating procedures, work controls, personal protective equipment, roles and responsibilities, potential site hazards and control measures, site access requirements, frequency and types of monitoring, site work areas, decontamination procedures, and outlines emergency response actions. This HASP will be available on site for use by all workers, management and supervisors, oversight personnel and visitors. All EMWMF assigned personnel will be briefed on the contents of this HASP and will be required to follow the procedures and protocols as specified. The policies and procedures referenced in this HASP apply to all EMWMF operations activities. In addition the HASP establishes ES&H criteria for the day-to-day activities to prevent or minimize any adverse effect on the environment and personnel safety and health and to meet standards that define acceptable waste management practices. The HASP is written to make use of past experience and best management practices to eliminate or minimize hazards to workers or the environment from events such as fires, falls, mechanical hazards, or any unplanned release to the environment.

Flynn, N.C. Bechtel Jacobs

2008-04-21T23:59:59.000Z

445

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2009-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

446

Certification of U.S. instrumentation in Russian nuclear processing facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Agreements between the United States (U.S.) and the Russian Federation (R.F.) require the down-blending of highly enriched uranium (HEU) from dismantled Russian Federation nuclear weapons. The Blend Down Monitoring System (BDMS) was jointly developed by the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) and the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) to continuously monitor the enrichments and flow rates in the HEU blending operations at the R.F. facilities. A significant requirement of the implementation of the BDMS equipment in R.F. facilities concerned the certification of the BDMS equipment for use in a Russian nuclear facility. This paper discusses the certification of the BDMS for installation in R.F. facilities, and summarizes the lessons learned from the process that can be applied to the installation of other U.S. equipment in Russian nuclear facilities.

D.H. Powell; J.N. Sumner

2000-07-12T23:59:59.000Z

447

Hanford safety analysis and risk assessment handbook (SARAH)  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The purpose of the Hanford Safety Analysis and Risk Assessment Handbook (SARAH) is to support the development of safety basis documentation for Hazard Category 1,2, and 3 U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear facilities. SARAH describes currently acceptable methodology for development of a Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) and derivation of technical safety requirements (TSR) based on 10 CFR 830, ''Nuclear Safety Management,'' Subpart B, ''Safety Basis Requirements,'' and provides data to ensure consistency in approach.

GARVIN, L.J.

2003-01-20T23:59:59.000Z

448

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1982-05-20T23:59:59.000Z

449

Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions: A selected bibliography, Volume 13: Part 2, Indexes  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This is part 2 of a bibliography on nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial action. This report contains indexes on the following: authors, corporate affiliation, title words, publication description, geographic location, subject category, and key word.

Goins, L.F.; Webb, J.R.; Cravens, C.D.; Mallory, P.K.

1992-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

450

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

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

"The familiar level of this module is designed to summarize the basic information in DOE O 433.1B, Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear Facilities. This Order canceled DOE O 433.1A. This...

451

Surface water transport and distribution of uranium in contaminated sediments near a nuclear weapons processing facility  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

The extent of remobilization of uranium from contaminated soils adjacent to a nuclear weapons processing facility during episodic rain events was investigated. In addition, information on the solid phase associations of U in floodplain and suspended...

Batson, Vicky Lynn

1994-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

452

Safety and Nonsafety Communications and Interactions in International Nuclear Power Plants  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

2007-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

453

Toolbox Safety Talk Safety Data Sheets (SDS)  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

Toolbox Safety Talk Safety Data Sheets (SDS) Environmental Health & Safety Facilities Safety-in sheet to Environmental Health & Safety for recordkeeping. Chemical manufacturers are required to produce Safety Data Sheets (SDS) for all chemicals produced. "Safety Data Sheets", previously referred

Pawlowski, Wojtek

454

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Not Available

1994-10-15T23:59:59.000Z

455

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Robert Bean; Casey Durst

2009-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

456

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

457

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

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

458

2011 Annual Workforce Analysis and Staffing Plan Report- Chief of Nuclear Safety  

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

459

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

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

460

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

Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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


461

Summary and bibliography of safety-related events at pressurized-water nuclear power plants as reported in 1979  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report summarizes the data contained in reports submitted by licensees to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission concerning safety-related operational events that occurred at pressurized-water-reactor nuclear power plants in 1979. A bibliography containing 100-word abstracts of the event reports is included. The 2064 abstracts included in the bibliography describe incidents, failures, and design or construction deficiencies experienced at the facilities. They are arranged alphabetically by reactor name and then chronologically for each reactor. Keyword and permuted-title indexes are provided to facilitate location of the abstracts of interest. Tables summarizing the information contained in the bibliography are also presented and discussed. Information listed in the tables includes instrument failures, equipment failures, system failures, causes of failures, deficiencies noted, and time of occurrence (i.e., during refueling, operation, testing, or construction). Some of the more interesting events that occurred during the year are reviewed in detail. 33 refs.

Scott, R.L.; Gallaher, R.B.

1981-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

462

REPORT OF THE WORKSHOP ON NUCLEAR FACILITY DESIGN INFORMATION EXAMINATION AND VERIFICATION FOR SAFEGUARDS  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

Executive Summary The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) implements nuclear safeguards and verifies countries are compliant with their international nuclear safeguards agreements. One of the key provisions in the safeguards agreement is the requirement that the country provide nuclear facility design and operating information to the IAEA relevant to safeguarding the facility, and at a very early stage. , This provides the opportunity for the IAEA to verify the safeguards-relevant features of the facility and to periodically ensure that those features have not changed. The national authorities (State System of Accounting for and Control of Nuclear Material - SSAC) provide the design information for all facilities within a country to the IAEA. The design information is conveyed using the IAEA’s Design Information Questionnaire (DIQ) and specifies: (1) Identification of the facility’s general character, purpose, capacity, and location; (2) Description of the facility’s layout and nuclear material form, location, and flow; (3) Description of the features relating to nuclear material accounting, containment, and surveillance; and (4) Description of existing and proposed procedures for nuclear material accounting and control, with identification of nuclear material balance areas. The DIQ is updated as required by written addendum. IAEA safeguards inspectors examine and verify this information in design information examination (DIE) and design information verification (DIV) activities to confirm that the facility has been constructed or is being operated as declared by the facility operator and national authorities, and to develop a suitable safeguards approach. Under the Next Generation Safeguards Initiative (NGSI), the National Nuclear Security Administrations (NNSA) Office of Non-Proliferation and International Security identified the need for more effective and efficient verification of design information by the IAEA for improving international safeguards in the future. Consequently, the NNSA Office of International Regimes and Agreements (NA-243) sponsored a team of U.S. Department of Energy National Laboratory nuclear safeguards experts and technologists to conduct a workshop on methods and technologies for improving this activity, under the ASA-100 Advanced Safeguards Approaches Project. The workshop focused on reviewing and discussing the fundamental safeguards needs, and presented technology and/or methods that could potentially address those needs more effectively and efficiently. Conclusions and Recommendations for technology to enhance the performance of DIV inspections are presented by the workshop team.

Richard Metcalf; Robert Bean

2009-10-01T23:59:59.000Z

463

Hot particle laundry monitoring at a nuclear power facility  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

by adjusting a knob on the control console. The control console contains the control unit, the upper detector control system and the nuclear electronics. The ACM-120 uses a microprocessor to analyze the data and monitor for various system malfunctions..., monitoring method, detector type, alarm levels and the storage and disposal limits. In the second part, a detailed evaluation was conducted on three automated laundry monitors; National Nuclear LCM-15A, I. R. T. ACM-120, Interstate Nuclear Services ALM...

Farver, Douglas Floyd

2012-06-07T23:59:59.000Z

464

Project Title: Nuclear Astrophysics Data from Radioactive Beam Facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The scientific aims of this project have been the evaluation and dissemination of key nuclear reactions in nuclear astrophysics, with a focus on ones to be studied at new radioactive beam facilities worldwide. These aims were maintained during the entire funding period from 2003 - 2006. In the following, a summary of the reactions evaluated during this period is provided. Year 1 (2003-04): {sup 21}Na(p,{gamma}){sup 22}Mg and {sup 18}Ne({alpha},p){sup 21}Na - The importance of the {sup 21}Na(p,{gamma}){sup 22}Mg and the {sup 18}Ne({alpha},p){sup 21}Na reactions in models of exploding stars has been well documented: the first is connected to the production of the radioisotope {sup 22}Na in nova nucleosynthesis, while the second is a key bridge between the Hot-CNO cycles and the rp-process in X-ray bursts. By the end of Summer 2004, our group had updated these reaction rates to include all published data up to September 2004, and cast the reaction rates into standard analytical and tabular formats with the assistance of Oak Ridge National Laboratory's computational infrastructure for reaction rates. Since September 2004, ongoing experiments on these two reactions have been completed, with our group's participation in both: {sup 21}Na(p,{gamma}){sup 22}Mg at the TRIUMF-ISAC laboratory (DRAGON collaboration), and 18Ne({alpha},p){sup 21}Na at Argonne National Laboratory (collaboration with Ernst Rehm, Argonne). The data from the former was subsequently published and included in our evaluation. Publication from the latter still awaits independent confirmation of the experimental results. Year 2 (2004-05): The 25Al(p,{gamma}){sup 26}Si and {sup 13}N(p,{gamma})14O reactions - For Year 2, we worked on evaluations of the {sup 25}Al(p,{gamma}){sup 26}Si and {sup 13}N(p,{gamma}){sup 14}O reactions, in accordance with our proposed deliverables and following similar standard procedures to those used in Year 1. The {sup 25}Al(p,{gamma}){sup 26}Si reaction is a key uncertainty in the understanding the origin of galactic {sup 26}Al, a target radioisotope for gamma ray astronomy; the {sup 13}N(p,{gamma}){sup 14}O reaction in turn is the trigger reaction for the transition into the Hot-CNO cycles in novae and X-ray bursts. A graduate student of mine, who has been supported part-time by this grant, completed the evaluation of the {sup 25}Al(p,{gamma}){sup 26}Si reaction as part of his plans to measure this reaction at TRIUMF for his Ph.D. thesis project. I also hired a part-time undergraduate student for the 2004-05 academic year to assist with the evaluations, including that of the {sup 13}N(p,{gamma}){sup 14}O reaction. Year 3 (2005-06): The {sup 40}Ca({alpha},{gamma}){sup 44}Ti and {sup 26}Al(p,{gamma}){sup 27}Si reactions - This year's progress was closely coupled to new results coming from our collaboration on the DRAGON spectrometer team at TRIUMF. The {sup 40}Ca({alpha},{gamma}){sup 44}Ti and {sup 26}Al(p,{gamma}){sup 27}Si reactions were both measured, and significant modifications to their respective reaction rates were required. Both are required input toward predicting the respective amounts of Titanium-44 and Aluminum-26 produced in our galaxy, in supernovae, massive stars, and nova explosions. The {sup 26}Al(p,{gamma}){sup 27}Si reaction rate was successfully completed. The {sup 40}Ca({alpha},{gamma}){sup 44}Ti reaction in particular served as the Ph.D. thesis for Christian Ouellet, and therefore the evaluation of this rate fell naturally within his thesis project. Christian successfully defended his thesis in 2007 and is now working for me on the McMaster DOE-funded Nuclear Data Project. In light of the recent data from his thesis, Christian is now putting the final touches on this evaluation, and will disseminate it through the Oak Ridge National Laboratory reaction rate database.

Alan A. Chen

2008-03-27T23:59:59.000Z

465

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

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

2006-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

466

Safety of nuclear power reactors in the former Eastern European countries  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

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

1995-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

467

Safety requirements, facility user needs, and reactor concepts for a new Broad Application Test Reactor  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report describes the EG&G Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program (LDRD) Broad Application Test Reactor (BATR) Project that was conducted in fiscal year 1991. The scope of this project was divided into three phases: a project process definition phase, a requirements development phase, and a preconceptual reactor design and evaluation phase. Multidisciplinary teams of experts conducted each phase. This report presents the need for a new test reactor, the project process definition, a set of current and projected regulatory compliance and safety requirements, a set of facility user needs for a broad range of projected testing missions, and descriptions of reactor concepts capable of meeting these requirements. This information can be applied to strategic planning to provide the Department of Energy with management options.

Ryskamp, J.M. [ed.; Liebenthal, J.L.; Denison, A.B.; Fletcher, C.D.

1992-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

468

Safety requirements, facility user needs, and reactor concepts for a new Broad Application Test Reactor  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report describes the EG G Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program (LDRD) Broad Application Test Reactor (BATR) Project that was conducted in fiscal year 1991. The scope of this project was divided into three phases: a project process definition phase, a requirements development phase, and a preconceptual reactor design and evaluation phase. Multidisciplinary teams of experts conducted each phase. This report presents the need for a new test reactor, the project process definition, a set of current and projected regulatory compliance and safety requirements, a set of facility user needs for a broad range of projected testing missions, and descriptions of reactor concepts capable of meeting these requirements. This information can be applied to strategic planning to provide the Department of Energy with management options.

Ryskamp, J.M. (ed.); Liebenthal, J.L.; Denison, A.B.; Fletcher, C.D.

1992-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

469

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Fellinger, A.

2009-10-15T23:59:59.000Z

470

Safety of Department of Energy-Owned Nuclear Reactors  

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

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

1986-09-23T23:59:59.000Z

471

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

Energy Savers [EERE]

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Office of Inspector GeneralDepartment of Energy fromComments onReplyofRetiring ProcurementReturn onRevenueNOTNOT

472

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

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "of Energy Power.pdf11-161-LNG |September 15,2015Department ofRequirementsEnergyJ u lReturn onRevegetation

473

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

Energy Savers [EERE]

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Google Bookmark EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Office of Inspector General Office of Audit Services AuditTransatlantic Relations & the196-2011WasteDesign

474

Facility Operations and User Support | National Nuclear Security  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May JunDatastreamsmmcrcalgovInstrumentsruc DocumentationP-Series toESnet4:Epitaxial ThinFOR IMMEDIATE5Facilities SomeFacilities

475

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Schultz, Peter Andrew

2011-12-01T23:59:59.000Z

476

Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) Project Cold Vacuum Drying (CVD) Facility Master Equipment List  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This document provides the master equipment list (MEL) for the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility (CVDF). The MEL was prepared to comply with DOE Standard 3024-98, Content of System Design Descriptions. The MEL was developed in conjunction with HNF-SD-SNF-SAR-002, Safety Analysis Report for the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility, Phase 2, Supporting Installation of Processing Systems and the CVDF System Design Descriptions (SDD). The MEL identifies the SSCs and their safety functions, the design criteria, codes and standards, and quality assurance requirements that are required for establishing the safety design basis of the SSCs. The MEL also includes operating parameters, manufacturer information, and references the procurement specifications for the SSCs. This MEL shall be updated, expanded, and revised in accordance with future phases of the CVDF SAR, the SDD's, and CVDF operations.

IRWIN, J.J.

1999-09-21T23:59:59.000Z

477

Facility Effluent Monitoring Plan for the Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) Project  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

A facility effluent monitoring plan is required by the US. Department of Energy in DOE Order 5400.1 for any operations that involve hazardous materials and radioactive substances that could impact employee or public safety or the environment. This document was prepared using the specific guidelines identified in Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC)-EP-0438-1, ''A Guide for Preparing Hanford Site Facility Effluent Monitoring Plans'', and assesses effluent monitoring systems and evaluates whether they are adequate to ensure the public health and safety as specified in applicable federal, state, and local requirements. This facility effluent monitoring plan is the third revision to the original annual report. This document is reviewed annually even if there are no operational changes, and it is updated as necessary.

HUNACEK, G.S.

2000-08-01T23:59:59.000Z

478

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

E-Print Network [OSTI]

construction at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The NIF project is now more than 80% complete. Song, R. Tommasini, and B. K. Young Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California 94550 July 2006; published online 5 October 2006 The National Ignition Facility NIF will provide up to 1.8 MJ

479

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

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

Marshall, A.C.

1993-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

480

Independent Oversight Assessment of the Nuclear Safety Culture...  

Office of Environmental Management (EM)

has also been effectively implemented in non-nuclear organizations, such as mining, health care, research, engineering, and transportation. The methodology entails collecting...

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


481

Guideline to good practices for seasonal facility preservation at DOE nuclear facilities  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This guide is intended to assist facility maintenance organizations in the review of existing methods and in the development of new methods for establishing a maintenance Seasonal Facility Preservation program. It is expected that each DOE facility may use approaches or methods different from those defined in this guide. The specific guidelines that follow reflect generally accepted industry practices. Therefore, deviation from any particular guideline would not, in itself, indicate a problem. If substantive differences exist between the intent of this guideline and actual practice, management should evaluate current practice to determine the need to include/exclude proposed features. A change in maintenance practice would be appropriate if a performance weakness were determined to exist. The development, documentation, and implementation of other features that further enhance these guidelines for specific applications are encouraged.

Not Available

1994-06-01T23:59:59.000Z

482

A new DOE standard for transuranic waste nuclear safety analysis  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

The DOE Office of Environmental Management (EM) observed through onsite assessments and a review of site-specific lessons learned that transuranic (TRU) waste operations could benefit from standardization of assumptions and approaches used to analyze hazards and select controls. EM collected and compared safety analysis information from DOE sites, including a comparison of the type of TRU waste accidents evaluated and controls selected, as well as specific Airborne Release Fractions (ARFs), Respirable Fractions (RFs), and Damage Ratios (DRs) assumed in accident analyses. This paper recounts the efforts by the DOE and its contractors to bring consistency to the safety analysis process supporting TRU waste operations through an integrated re-engineering effort. EM embarked on a process to re-engineer and standardize TRU safety analysis activities complex-wide. The effort involved DOE headquarters, field offices, and contractors. Five teams were formed to analyze and develop the necessary technical basis for a DOE Technical Standard. The teams looked at general issues including Safety Basis (SB), drum integrity and inspection criteria, hazard controls and analysis, safety analysis review and approval process, and implementation of hazard controls. (authors)

Triay, I.; Chung, D. [U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C. (United States); Woody, J. [Atlas Consulting, Knoxville, TN (United States); Foppe, T. [Carlsbad Technical Assistance Contractor, Carlsbad, NM (United States); Mewhinney, C. [Sandia National Laboratories, Carlsbad, NM (United States); Jennings, S. [Los Alamos National Laboratories, Carlsbad, NM (United States)

2007-07-01T23:59:59.000Z

483

Determination of dilution factors in a nuclear facility  

E-Print Network [OSTI]

location was found to be 909. From the results of this study it was determined that the described method can be used to determine dilu- tion factors in any facility effectively. ACKNOWLEDGENENTS I wish to express my sincere appreciation to Dr. R. D... and diverse studies. Atmospheric dispersion of particles and gases from the atomic energy field is constantly being studied. Emperical dispersion calculations for aerosol releases into the atmosphere are well known ' . In addition, (1, 2) studies...

Sandel, Philip Sidney

1972-01-01T23:59:59.000Z

484

Underground Facility at Nevada National Security Site | National Nuclear  

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

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr MayAtmosphericNuclear SecurityTensile Strain Switched Ferromagnetism in Layeredof2014National Nuclear SecuritySalaryand Astrophysics

485

KCP celebrates production milestone at new facility | National Nuclear  

National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

AFDC Printable Version Share this resource Send a link to EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page to someone by E-mail Share EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Facebook Tweet about EERE: Alternative Fuels Data Center Home Page on Twitter Bookmark EERE:1 First Use of Energy for All Purposes (Fuel and Nonfuel),Feet) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul(Summary) "ofEarlyEnergyDepartmentNational Nuclear SecurityNationalApply for Our Jobs / How toNuclearSecurity

486

Chemical Safety Vulnerability Working Group Report  

SciTech Connect (OSTI)

This report marks the culmination of a 4-month review conducted to identify chemical safety vulnerabilities existing at DOE facilities. This review is an integral part of DOE's efforts to raise its commitment to chemical safety to the same level as that for nuclear safety.

Not Available

1994-09-01T23:59:59.000Z

487