National Library of Energy BETA

Sample records for nuclear power facility

  1. Nuclear Power Facilities (2008) | Department of Energy

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

    Nuclear Power Facilities (2008) Nuclear Power Facilities (2008) Nuclear Power Facilities (2008) (408.42 KB) More Documents & Publications Front-end Nuclear Facilities (2008) Financial Institution Partnership Program - Commercial Technology Renewable Energy Generation Projects Issued: October 7, 2009 Transmission Infrastructure Investment Projects (2009)

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1985-02-01

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

  3. DOE - Office of Legacy Management -- Piqua Nuclear Power Facility - OH 08

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Piqua Nuclear Power Facility - OH 08 FUSRAP Considered Sites Site: Piqua Nuclear Power Facility (OH.08 ) Designated Name: Alternate Name: Location: Evaluation Year: Site Operations: Site Disposition: Radioactive Materials Handled: Primary Radioactive Materials Handled: Radiological Survey(s): Site Status: Also see Piqua, Ohio, Decommissioned Reactor Site Documents Related to Piqua Nuclear Power Facility

  4. DOE - Office of Legacy Management -- Hallam Nuclear Power Facility - NE 01

    Office of Legacy Management (LM)

    Hallam Nuclear Power Facility - NE 01 FUSRAP Considered Sites Site: Hallam Nuclear Power Facility (NE.01 ) Designated Name: Alternate Name: Location: Evaluation Year: Site Operations: Site Disposition: Radioactive Materials Handled: Primary Radioactive Materials Handled: Radiological Survey(s): Site Status: Also see Hallam, Nebraska, Decommissioned Reactor Site Documents Related to Hallam Nuclear Power Facility U.S. Department of Energy 2009 Annual Inspection - Hallam, Nebraska June 2009 Page 1

  5. Nuclear Facilities

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    The nuclear sites list and map shows how DOE nuclear operations are mostly divided between nuclear weapons stockpile maintenance, research and environmental cleanup. The operations are performed within several different facilities supporting nuclear reactor operations, nuclear research, weapons disassembly, maintenance and testing, hot cell operations, nuclear material storage and processing and waste disposal.

  6. Nuclear Facilities Production Facilities

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

  7. Feasibility study for Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant spent fuel dry storage facility in Ukraine. Export trade information

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1995-12-01

    This document reports the results of a Feasibility Study sponsored by a TDA grant to Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) in Ukraine to study the construction of storage facilities for spent nuclear fuel. It provides pertinent information to U.S. companies interested in marketing spent fuel storage technology and related business to countries of the former Soviet Union or Eastern Europe.

  8. American National Standard: design requirements for light water reactor spent fuel storage facilities at nuclear power plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1983-10-07

    This standard presents necessary design requirements for facilities at nuclear power plants for the storage and preparation for shipment of spent fuel from light-water moderated and cooled nuclear power stations. It contains requirements for the design of fuel storage pool; fuel storage racks; pool makeup, instrumentation and cleanup systems; pool structure and integrity; radiation shielding; residual heat removal; ventilation, filtration and radiation monitoring systems; shipping cask handling and decontamination; building structure and integrity; and fire protection and communication.

  9. US nuclear warhead facility profiles

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1987-01-01

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

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Rausch, J.; Henderson, R.W.; Penkov, V.

    2008-07-01

    A considerable amount of dry radioactive waste from former NPP operation has accumulated up to date and is presently stored at the Ignalina NPP site, Lithuania. Current storage capacities are nearly exhausted and more waste is to come from future decommissioning of the two RMBKtype reactors. Additionally, the existing storage facilities does not comply to the state-of-the-art technology for handling and storage of radioactive waste. In 2005, INPP faced this situation of a need for waste processing and subsequent interim storage of these wastes by contracting NUKEM with the design, construction, installation and commissioning of new waste management and storage facilities. The subject of this paper is to describe the scope and the status of the new solid waste management and storage facilities at the Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant. In summary: The turnkey contract for the design, supply and commission of the SWMSF was awarded in December 2005. The realisation of the project was initially planned within 48 month. The basic design was finished in August 2007 and the Technical Design Documentation and Preliminary Safety Analyses Report was provided to Authorities in October 2007. The construction license is expected in July 2008. The procurement phase was started in August 2007, start of onsite activities is expected in November 2007. The start of operation of the SWMSF is scheduled for end of 2009. (authors)

  11. Occupational radiation exposure at commercial nuclear power reactors and other facilities 1992; Twenty-fifth annual report, Volume 14

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Raddatz, C.T.; Hagemeyer, D.

    1993-12-01

    This report summarizes the occupational radiation exposure information that has been reported to the NRC`s Radiation Exposure Information Reporting System (REIRS) by nuclear power facilities and certain other categories of NRC licensees during the years 1969 through 1992. The bulk of the data presented in the report was obtained from annual radiation exposure reports submitted in accordance with the requirements of 10CFR20.407 and the technical specifications of nuclear power plants. Data on workers terminating their employment at certain NRC licensed facilities were obtained from reports submitted pursuant to 10CFR20.408. The 1992 annual reports submitted by about 364 licensees indicated that approximately 204,365 individuals were monitored, 183,927 of whom were monitored by nuclear power facilities. They incurred an average individual dose of 0.16 rem (cSv) and an average measurable dose of about 0.30 (cSv). Termination radiation exposure reports were analyzed to reveal that about 74,566 individuals completed their employment with one or more of the 364 covered licensees during 1992. Some 71,846 of these individuals terminated from power reactor facilities, and about 9,724 of them were considered to be transient workers who received an average dose of 0.50 rem (cSv).

  12. Defense Nuclear Facility Safety Board

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

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

  13. Defense Nuclear Facility | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Defense Nuclear Facility NNSA's safety office accredited and recognized for leadership in safe operation of defense nuclear facilities Part of NNSA's commitment to maintaining the nation's safe, secure, and effective nuclear deterrent are relentlessly high standards for technically capable nuclear enterprise personnel qualifications for all aspects of Defense Nuclear Facility operations. In December 2015, the Department of Energy

  14. Occupational Radiation Exposure at Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors and Other Facilities 2008

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research

    2009-12-01

    This report summarizes the occupational exposure data that are maintained in the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Radiation Exposure Information and Reporting System (REIRS). The bulk of the information contained in the report was compiled from the 2008 annual reports submitted by five of the seven categories1 of NRC licensees subject to the reporting requirements of 10 CFR 20.2206. The annual reports submitted by these licensees consist of radiation exposure records for each monitored individual. These records are analyzed for trends and presented in this report in terms of collective dose and the distribution of dose among the monitored individuals. Because there are no geologic repositories for high-level waste currently licensed and no low-level waste disposal facilities in operation, only five categories will be considered in this report.

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

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

    Front-end Nuclear Facilities (2008) Front-end Nuclear Facilities (2008) Front-end Nuclear Facilities (2008) (399.4 KB) More Documents & Publications Nuclear Power Facilities (2008) Financial Institution Partnership Program - Commercial Technology Renewable Energy Generation Projects Issued: October 7, 2009 Transmission Infrastructure Investment Projects (2009)

  16. EPRI/NRC-RES fire PRA guide for nuclear power facilities. Volume 1, summary and overview.

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    2004-09-01

    This report documents state-of-the-art methods, tools, and data for the conduct of a fire Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) for a commercial nuclear power plant (NPP) application. The methods have been developed under the Fire Risk Re-quantification Study. This study was conducted as a joint activity between EPRI and the U. S. NRC Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) under the terms of an EPRI/RES Memorandum of Understanding [RS.1] and an accompanying Fire Research Addendum [RS.2]. Industry participants supported demonstration analyses and provided peer review of this methodology. The documented methods are intended to support future applications of Fire PRA, including risk-informed regulatory applications. The documented method reflects state-of-the-art fire risk analysis approaches. The primary objective of the Fire Risk Study was to consolidate recent research and development activities into a single state-of-the-art fire PRA analysis methodology. Methodological issues raised in past fire risk analyses, including the Individual Plant Examination of External Events (IPEEE) fire analyses, have been addressed to the extent allowed by the current state-of-the-art and the overall project scope. Methodological debates were resolved through a consensus process between experts representing both EPRI and RES. The consensus process included a provision whereby each major party (EPRI and RES) could maintain differing technical positions if consensus could not be reached. No cases were encountered where this provision was invoked. While the primary objective of the project was to consolidate existing state-of-the-art methods, in many areas, the newly documented methods represent a significant advancement over previously documented methods. In several areas, this project has, in fact, developed new methods and approaches. Such advances typically relate to areas of past methodological debate.

  17. CRAD, Facility Safety- Nuclear Facility Design

    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 Design.

  18. CRAD, Facility Safety- Nuclear Facility Safety Basis

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

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

  19. Occupational Radiation Exposure at Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors and Other Facilities 2010, Prepared for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, May 2012

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    D. E. Lewis D. A. Hagemeyer Y. U. McCormick

    2012-07-07

    This report summarizes the occupational exposure data that are maintained in the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) Radiation Exposure Information and Reporting System (REIRS). The bulk of the information contained in the report was compiled from the 2010 annual reports submitted by five of the seven categories of NRC licensees subject to the reporting requirements of 10 CFR 20.2206. Because there are no geologic repositories for high-level waste currently licensed and no NRC-licensed low-level waste disposal facilities currently in operation, only five categories will be considered in this report. The annual reports submitted by these licensees consist of radiation exposure records for each monitored individual. These records are analyzed for trends and presented in this report in terms of collective dose and the distribution of dose among the monitored individuals. Annual reports for 2010 were received from a total of 190 NRC licensees. The summation of reports submitted by the 190 licensees indicated that 192,424 individuals were monitored, 81,961 of whom received a measurable dose. When adjusted for transient workers who worked at more than one licensee during the year, there were actually 142,471 monitored individuals and 62,782 who received a measurable dose. The collective dose incurred by these individuals was 10,617 person-rem, which represents a 12% decrease from the 2009 value. This decrease was primarily due to the decrease in collective dose at commercial nuclear power reactors, as well as a decrease in the collective dose for most of the other categories of NRC licensees. The number of individuals receiving a measurable dose also decreased, resulting in an average measurable dose of 0.13 rem for 2010. The average measurable dose is defined as the total effective dose equivalent (TEDE) divided by the number of individuals receiving a measurable dose. In calendar year 2010, the average annual collective dose per reactor for light water reactor

  20. Backup power sources for DOE facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1994-09-01

    This standard establishes fundamental requirements and guidance for backup power sources at DOE facilities. Purpose is to document good engineering practices for installation, testing, and maintenance of these backup power sources, which also covers emergency power sources. Examples are those which supply power to nuclear safety systems, radiation monitors and alarms, fire protection systems, security systems, and emergency lighting.

  1. Kammerer Solar Power Facility | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Power Facility Facility Kammerer Solar Power Facility Sector Solar Facility Type Photovoltaics Facility Status In Service Developer Recurrent Energy Energy Purchaser Sacramento...

  2. Listing of Defense Nuclear Facilities

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

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

  3. Nuclear Science Research facility at LANSCE

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

    Neutron and Nuclear Science (WNR) Facility at LANSCE lansce facility at LANL Introduction ... Neutron Scattering Center (Target-1) and the Neutron and Nuclear Science Research facility ...

  4. NNSA and Defense Nuclear Facilities

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

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

  5. Power Systems Development Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Southern Company Services

    2009-01-31

    In support of technology development to utilize coal for efficient, affordable, and environmentally clean power generation, the Power Systems Development Facility (PSDF), located in Wilsonville, Alabama, has routinely demonstrated gasification technologies using various types of coals. The PSDF is an engineering scale demonstration of key features of advanced coal-fired power systems, including a Transport Gasifier, a hot gas particulate control device, advanced syngas cleanup systems, and high-pressure solids handling systems. This final report summarizes the results of the technology development work conducted at the PSDF through January 31, 2009. Twenty-one major gasification test campaigns were completed, for a total of more than 11,000 hours of gasification operation. This operational experience has led to significant advancements in gasification technologies.

  6. Office of Nuclear Facility Safety Programs

    Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)

    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.

  7. Concentrating Solar Power Facilities | Department of Energy

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

    Facilities Concentrating Solar Power Facilities Florida Hawaii Southwest U.S.

  8. Power Systems Development Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    2003-07-01

    This report discusses Test Campaign TC12 of the Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc. (KBR) Transport Gasifier train with a Siemens Westinghouse Power Corporation (SW) particle filter system at the Power Systems Development Facility (PSDF) located in Wilsonville, Alabama. The Transport Gasifier is an advanced circulating fluidized-bed reactor designed to operate as either a combustor or a gasifier using a particulate control device (PCD). While operating as a gasifier, either air or oxygen can be used as the oxidant. Test run TC12 began on May 16, 2003, with the startup of the main air compressor and the lighting of the gasifier start-up burner. The Transport Gasifier operated until May 24, 2003, when a scheduled outage occurred to allow maintenance crews to install the fuel cell test unit and modify the gas clean-up system. On June 18, 2003, the test run resumed when operations relit the start-up burner, and testing continued until the scheduled end of the run on July 14, 2003. TC12 had a total of 733 hours using Powder River Basin (PRB) subbituminous coal. Over the course of the entire test run, gasifier temperatures varied between 1,675 and 1,850 F at pressures from 130 to 210 psig.

  9. 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...

  10. WIPP Nuclear Facilities Transparency

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

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

  11. Purchasing Renewable Power for Federal Facilities | Department...

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

    Purchasing Renewable Power for Federal Facilities Purchasing Renewable Power for Federal Facilities Federal agencies can purchase renewable power or renewable energy certificates ...

  12. Establishing nuclear facility drill programs

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1996-03-01

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

  13. Nuclear Power & Engineering

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

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

  14. Process Flow Chart for Immobilizing of Radioactive High Concentration Sodium Hydroxide Product from the Sodium Processing Facility at the BN-350 Nuclear power plant in Aktau, Kazakhstan

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Burkitbayev, M.; Omarova, K.; Tolebayev, T.; Galkin, A.; Bachilova, N.; Blynskiy, A.; Maev, V.; Wells, D.; Herrick, A.; Michelbacher, J.

    2008-07-01

    This paper describes the results of a joint research investigations carried out by the group of Kazakhstan, British and American specialists in development of a new material for immobilization of radioactive 35% sodium hydroxide solutions from the sodium coolant processing facility of the BN-350 nuclear power plant. The resulting solid matrix product, termed geo-cement stone, is capable of isolating long lived radionuclides from the environment. The physico-mechanical properties of geo-cement stone have been investigated and the flow chart for its production verified in a full scale experiments. (author)

  15. Nuclear Facility Risk Ranking | Department of Energy

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

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

  16. High-Average Power Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Dowell, David H.; Power, John G.; /Argonne

    2012-09-05

    There has been significant progress in the development of high-power facilities in recent years yet major challenges remain. The task of WG4 was to identify which facilities were capable of addressing the outstanding R&D issues presently preventing high-power operation. To this end, information from each of the facilities represented at the workshop was tabulated and the results are presented herein. A brief description of the major challenges is given, but the detailed elaboration can be found in the other three working group summaries.

  17. Commercial nuclear power 1990

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1990-09-28

    This report presents the status at the end of 1989 and the outlook for commercial nuclear capacity and generation for all countries in the world with free market economies (FME). The report provides documentation of the US nuclear capacity and generation projections through 2030. The long-term projections of US nuclear capacity and generation are provided to the US Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM) for use in estimating nuclear waste fund revenues and to aid in planning the disposal of nuclear waste. These projections also support the Energy Information Administration's annual report, Domestic Uranium Mining and Milling Industry: Viability Assessment, and are provided to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. The foreign nuclear capacity projections are used by the DOE uranium enrichment program in assessing potential markets for future enrichment contracts. The two major sections of this report discuss US and foreign commercial nuclear power. The US section (Chapters 2 and 3) deals with (1) the status of nuclear power as of the end of 1989; (2) projections of nuclear capacity and generation at 5-year intervals from 1990 through 2030; and (3) a discussion of institutional and technical issues that affect nuclear power. The nuclear capacity projections are discussed in terms of two projection periods: the intermediate term through 2010 and the long term through 2030. A No New Orders case is presented for each of the projection periods, as well as Lower Reference and Upper Reference cases. 5 figs., 30 tabs.

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

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

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

  19. Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities

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

    1995-09-29

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

  20. Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities

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

    1998-12-28

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

  1. Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Letters and Recommenda...

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

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

  2. RADIATION FACILITY FOR NUCLEAR REACTORS

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

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

    1961-12-12

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

  3. NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    Carter, J.C.; Armstrong, R.H.; Janicke, M.J.

    1963-05-14

    A nuclear power plant for use in an airless environment or other environment in which cooling is difficult is described. The power plant includes a boiling mercury reactor, a mercury--vapor turbine in direct cycle therewith, and a radiator for condensing mercury vapor. (AEC)

  4. Occupational radiation exposure at commercial nuclear power reactors and other facilities 1996: Twenty-ninth annual report. Volume 18

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thomas, M.L.; Hagemeyer, D.

    1998-02-01

    This report summarizes the occupational exposure data that are maintained in the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission`s (NRC) Radiation Exposure Information and Reporting System (REIRS). The bulk of the information contained in the report was compiled from the 1996 annual reports submitted by six of the seven categories of NRC licensees subject to the reporting requirements of 10 CFR 20.2206. Since there are no geologic repositories for high level waste currently licensed, only six categories will be considered in this report. Annual reports for 1996 were received from a total of 300 NRC licensees, of which 109 were operators of nuclear power reactors in commercial operation. Compilations of the reports submitted by the 300 licensees indicated that 138,310 individuals were monitored, 75,139 of whom received a measurable dose. The collective dose incurred by these individuals was 21,755 person-cSv (person-rem){sup 2} which represents a 13% decrease from the 1995 value. The number of workers receiving a measurable dose also decreased, resulting in the average measurable dose of 0.29 cSv (rem) for 1996. The average measurable dose is defined to be the total collective dose (TEDE) divided by the number of workers receiving a measurable dose. These figures have been adjusted to account for transient reactor workers. Analyses of transient worker data indicate that 22,348 individuals completed work assignments at two or more licensees during the monitoring year. The dose distributions are adjusted each year to account for the duplicate reporting of transient workers by multiple licensees. In 1996, the average measurable dose calculated from reported was 0.24 cSv (rem). The corrected dose distribution resulted in an average measurable dose of 0.29 cSv (rem).

  5. Occupational radiation exposure at commercial nuclear power reactors and other facilities 1994. Twenty-seventh annual report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thomas, M.L.; Hagemeyer, D.

    1996-01-01

    This report summarizes the occupational exposure data that are maintained in the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission`s (NRC) Radiation Exposure Information and Reporting System (REIRS). Annual reports for 1994 were received from a total of 303 NRC licensees, of which 109 were operators of nuclear power reactors in commercial operation. Compilations of the reports submitted by the 303 licensees indicated that 152,028 individuals were monitored, 79,780 of whom received a measurable dose. The collective dose incurred by these individuals was 24,740 person-cSv (person-rem){sup 2} which represents a 15% decrease from the 1993 value. The number of workers receiving a measurable dose also decreased, resulting in the average measurable dose of 0.31 cSv (rem) for 1994. The average measurable dose is defined to be the total collective dose (TEDE) divided by the number of workers receiving a measurable dose. These figures have been adjusted to account for transient reactor workers. In 1994, the annual collective dose per reactor for light water reactor licensees (LWRs) was 198 person-cSv (person-rem). This represents a 18% decrease from the 1993 value of 242 person-cSv (person-rem). The annual collective dose per reactor for boiling water reactors (BWRs) was 327 person-cSv (person-rem) and, for pressurized water reactors (PWRs), it was 131 person-cSv (person-rem). Analyses of transient worker data indicate that 18,178 individuals completed work assignments at two or more licensees during the monitoring year. The dose distributions are adjusted each year to account for the duplicate reporting of transient workers by multiple licensees. In 1994, the average measurable dose calculated from reported data was 0.28 cSv (rem). The corrected dose distribution resulted in an average measurable dose of 0.31 cSv (rem).

  6. EA-1726: Kahuku Wind Power, LLC Wind Power Generation Facility...

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

    6: Kahuku Wind Power, LLC Wind Power Generation Facility, O'ahu, HI EA-1726: Kahuku Wind Power, LLC Wind Power Generation Facility, O'ahu, HI EA-1726: Final Environmental ...

  7. Sandia National Laboratories: Z Pulsed Power Facility

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

    Z-Machine About Z Z Research Z News Contact Us Facebook Twitter YouTube Flickr RSS Z-Machine Z Pulsed Power Facility Science serving the nation Created to validate nuclear weapons models, the Z machine is also in the race for viable fusion energy. Z-Machine From Earth's Core to Black Holes Contributing to discovery science by studying matter at conditions found nowhere else on Earth Center of Z About Z Sandia's Z machine is the world's most powerful and efficient laboratory radiation source. It

  8. Bruceville Road Solar Power Facility | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Power Facility Facility Bruceville Solar Power Facility Sector Solar Facility Type Photovoltaics Facility Status In Service Developer Recurrent Energy Energy Purchaser Sacramento...

  9. American Canyon Power Plant Biomass Facility | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Canyon Power Plant Biomass Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name American Canyon Power Plant Biomass Facility Facility American Canyon Power Plant Sector Biomass Facility Type...

  10. Archbald Power Station Biomass Facility | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Archbald Power Station Biomass Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Archbald Power Station Biomass Facility Facility Archbald Power Station Sector Biomass Facility Type...

  11. WIRELESS FOR A NUCLEAR FACILITY

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Shull, D; Joe Cordaro, J

    2007-03-28

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

  12. Labor and nuclear power

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Logan, R.; Nelkin, D.

    1980-03-01

    The AFL-CIO is officially pro-nuclear, but tensions within unions are taking issue over ideological differences. The Labor movement, having looked to nuclear power development as an economic necessity to avoid unemployment, has opposed efforts to delay construction or close plants. As many as 42% of union members or relatives of members, however, were found to oppose new power plants, some actively working against specific construction projects. The United Mine Workers and Teamsters actively challenged the nuclear industry while the auto workers have been ambivalent. The differences between union orientation reflects the history of unionism in the US and explains the emergence of social unionism with its emphasis on safety and working conditions as well as economic benefits. Business union orientation trends to prevail during periods of prosperity; social unions during recessions. The labor unions and the environmentalists are examined in this conext and found to be hopeful. 35 references. (DCK)

  13. Nuclear Facilities and Applied Technologies at Sandia

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2014-11-28

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

  14. Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities

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

    2000-12-21

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

  15. Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities

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

    1995-10-26

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

  16. Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities

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

    2003-03-13

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

  17. Vermont Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net ...

  18. Connecticut Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net ...

  19. Maryland Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant ...

  20. Georgia Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net ...

  1. Ohio Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Ohio nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net ...

  2. Virginia Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net ...

  3. Minnesota Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Minnesota nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear ...

  4. Alabama Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net ...

  5. Wisconsin Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Wisconsin nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear ...

  6. Texas Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net ...

  7. Tennessee Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Tennessee nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear ...

  8. Illinois Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Illinois nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear ...

  9. Michigan Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net ...

  10. Nebraska Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Nebraska nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear ...

  11. Florida Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Florida nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear ...

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

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

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

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

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

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

  14. Virginia Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal ... Electric & Power Co" "2 Plants 4 Reactors","3,501","26,572",100.0 "Note: ...

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thomas S. LaGuardia

    1998-12-31

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

  16. 6,"Edwin I Hatch","Nuclear","Georgia Power Co",1759 7,"Thomas...

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Power Co",1793 6,"Edwin I Hatch","Nuclear","Georgia Power Co",1759 7,"Thomas A Smith Energy Facility","Natural gas","Oglethorpe Power Corporation",1290 ...

  17. Overview paper on nuclear power

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Spiewak, I.; Cope, D.F.

    1980-09-01

    This paper was prepared as an input to ORNL's Strategic Planning Activity, ORNL National Energy Perspective (ONEP). It is intended to provide historical background on nuclear power, an analysis of the mission of nuclear power, a discussion of the issues, the technology choices, and the suggestion of a strategy for encouraging further growth of nuclear power.

  18. Dillard Road Solar Power Facility | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Facility Facility Dillard Road Solar Power Facility Sector Solar Facility Type Photovoltaics Facility Status In Service Developer Recurrent Energy Energy Purchaser Sacramento...

  19. Sauder Power Plant Biomass Facility | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Sauder Power Plant Biomass Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Sauder Power Plant Biomass Facility Facility Sauder Power Plant Sector Biomass Location Fulton County, Ohio...

  20. Bridgewater Power LP Biomass Facility | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Power LP Biomass Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Bridgewater Power LP Biomass Facility Facility Bridgewater Power LP Sector Biomass Location Grafton County, New Hampshire...

  1. Nuclear Facilities Fire Accident Model

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    1999-09-01

    4. NATURE OF PROBLEM SOLVED FIRAC predicts fire-induced flows, thermal and material transport, and radioactive and nonradioactive source terms in a ventilation system. It is designed to predict the radioactive and nonradioactive source terms that lead to gas dynamic, material transport, and heat transfer transients. FIRAC's capabilities are directed toward nuclear fuel cycle facilities and the primary release pathway, the ventilation system. However, it is applicable to other facilities and can be used to modelmore¬†¬Ľ other airflow pathways within a structure. The basic material transport capability of FIRAC includes estimates of entrainment, convection, deposition, and filtration of material. The interrelated effects of filter plugging, heat transfer, and gas dynamics are also simulated. A ventilation system model includes elements such as filters, dampers, ducts, and blowers connected at nodal points to form networks. A zone-type compartment fire model is incorporated to simulate fire-induced transients within a facility. 5. METHOD OF SOLUTION FIRAC solves one-dimensional, lumped-parameter, compressible flow equations by an implicit numerical scheme. The lumped-parameter method is the basic formulation that describes the gas dynamics system. No spatial distribution of parameters is considered in this approach, but an effect of spatial distribution can be approximated by noding. Network theory, using the lumped parameter method, includes a number of system elements, called branches, joined at certain points, called nodes. Ventilation system components that exhibit flow resistance and inertia, such as dampers, ducts, valves, and filters, and those that exhibit flow potential, such as blowers, are located within the branches of the system. The connection points of branches are nodes for components that have finite volumes, such as rooms, gloveboxes, and plenums, and for boundaries where the volume is practically infinite. All internal nodes, therefore, possess some

  2. Occupational radiation exposure at commercial nuclear power reactors and other facilities 1995: Twenty-eighth annual report. Volume 17

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Thomas, M.L.; Hagemeyer, D.

    1997-01-01

    This report summarizes the occupational exposure data that are maintained in the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission`s (NRC) Radiation Exposure Information and Reporting System (REIRS). The bulk of the information contained in the report was compiled from the 1995 annual reports submitted by six of the seven categories of NRC licensees subject to the reporting requirements of 10 CFR 20.2206. Since there are no geologic repositories for high-level waste currently licensed, only six categories will be considered in this report. In 1995, the annual collective dose per reactor for light water reactor licensees (LWRs) was 199 person-cSv (person-rem). This is the same value that was reported for 1994. The annual collective dose per reactor for boiling water reactors (BWRs) was 256 person-cSv (person-rem) and, for pressurized water reactors (PWRs), it was 170 person-cSv (person-rem). Analyses of transient worker data indicate that 17,153 individuals completed work assignments at two or more licensees during the monitoring year. The dose distributions are adjusted each year to account for the duplicate reporting of transient workers by multiple licensees. In 1995, the average measurable dose calculated from reported data was 0.26 cSv (rem). The corrected dose distribution resulted in an average measurable dose of 0.32 cSv (rem).

  3. Management of National Nuclear Power Programs for assured safety

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Connolly, T.J.

    1985-01-01

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

  4. Safety of Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Batandjieva, B.; Warnecke, E.; Coates, R.

    2008-01-15

    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.

  5. HOMOGENEOUS NUCLEAR POWER REACTOR

    DOE Patents [OSTI]

    King, L.D.P.

    1959-09-01

    A homogeneous nuclear power reactor utilizing forced circulation of the liquid fuel is described. The reactor does not require fuel handling outside of the reactor vessel during any normal operation including complete shutdown to room temperature, the reactor being selfregulating under extreme operating conditions and controlled by the thermal expansion of the liquid fuel. The liquid fuel utilized is a uranium, phosphoric acid, and water solution which requires no gus exhaust system or independent gas recombining system, thereby eliminating the handling of radioiytic gas.

  6. Nuclear Security for Floating Nuclear Power Plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Skiba, James M.; Scherer, Carolynn P.

    2015-10-13

    Recently there has been a lot of interest in small modular reactors. A specific type of these small modular reactors (SMR,) are marine based power plants called floating nuclear power plants (FNPP). These FNPPs are typically built by countries with extensive knowledge of nuclear energy, such as Russia, France, China and the US. These FNPPs are built in one country and then sent to countries in need of power and/or seawater desalination. Fifteen countries have expressed interest in acquiring such power stations. Some designs for such power stations are briefly summarized. Several different avenues for cooperation in FNPP technology are proposed, including IAEA nuclear security (i.e. safeguards), multilateral or bilateral agreements, and working with Russian design that incorporates nuclear safeguards for IAEA inspections in non-nuclear weapons states

  7. Facility Clearance Program | National Nuclear Security Administration |

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    (NNSA) Facility Clearance Program The Facility Clearance (FCL) Program regulates DOE approval of a Federal or contractor facility's eligibility to access, receive, generate, reproduce, store, transmit, or destroy classified information or matter, special nuclear material (SNM), other hazardous material presenting a potential radiological, chemical, or biological sabotage threat, and/or DOE property of significant monetary value, exclusive of facilities and land values (hereinafter referred

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

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Leishear, R

    2010-05-02

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

  9. 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.

  10. NUCLEAR POWER REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS; 05 NUCLEAR FUELS...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    Title list of documents made publicly available, January 1-31, 1998 NONE 21 NUCLEAR POWER REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS; 05 NUCLEAR FUELS; BIBLIOGRAPHIES; NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS;...

  11. Louisiana Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Louisiana nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant NameTotal Reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear ...

  12. Topics in nuclear power (Journal Article) | SciTech Connect

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    NUCLEAR POWER STATION; GAIN; JAPAN; NATURAL DISASTERS; NUCLEAR INDUSTRY; NUCLEAR POWER; NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS; PROBABILISTIC ESTIMATION; REACTOR ACCIDENTS; REACTOR MAINTENANCE;...

  13. Fairhaven Power Biomass Facility | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    2006 Database Retrieved from "http:en.openei.orgwindex.php?titleFairhavenPowerBiomassFacility&oldid397454" Feedback Contact needs updating Image needs updating...

  14. Pinetree Power Biomass Facility | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    NEEDS 2006 Database Retrieved from "http:en.openei.orgwindex.php?titlePinetreePowerBiomassFacility&oldid397941" Feedback Contact needs updating Image needs updating...

  15. Jefferson Power Biomass Facility | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    National Map Retrieved from "http:en.openei.orgwindex.php?titleJeffersonPowerBiomassFacility&oldid397620" Feedback Contact needs updating Image needs updating...

  16. Hallam Nuclear Power Facility, NE

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

    25. Baker and Williams Warehouses, NY 1993 2008 26. Falls City, TX 1994 2009 27. Grand Junction Mill Tailings Site, CO 1994 2009 28. Monument Valley, AZ 1994 2010 29. Salton Sea ...

  17. Washington Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Washington nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State ...

  18. California Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    California nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State ...

  19. Pennsylvania Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Pennsylvania nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State ...

  20. Nuclear Facility Risk Ranking | Department of Energy

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

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

  1. Genesee Power Station Biomass Facility | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Biomass Facility Jump to: navigation, search Name Genesee Power Station Biomass Facility Facility Genesee Power Station Sector Biomass Owner CMSFortistar Location Flint, Michigan...

  2. Penrose Power Station Biomass Facility | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Jump to: navigation, search Name Penrose Power Station Biomass Facility Facility Penrose Power Station Sector Biomass Facility Type Landfill Gas Location Los Angeles County,...

  3. Ridgewood Providence Power Biomass Facility | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    search Name Ridgewood Providence Power Biomass Facility Facility Ridgewood Providence Power Sector Biomass Facility Type Landfill Gas Location Providence County, Rhode Island...

  4. Toyon Power Station Biomass Facility | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Jump to: navigation, search Name Toyon Power Station Biomass Facility Facility Toyon Power Station Sector Biomass Facility Type Landfill Gas Location Los Angeles County,...

  5. KMS Joliet Power Partners LP Biomass Facility | Open Energy Informatio...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    navigation, search Name KMS Joliet Power Partners LP Biomass Facility Facility KMS Joliet Power Partners LP Sector Biomass Facility Type Landfill Gas Location Will County, Illinois...

  6. Marsh Road Power Plant Biomass Facility | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    to: navigation, search Name Marsh Road Power Plant Biomass Facility Facility Marsh Road Power Plant Sector Biomass Facility Type Landfill Gas Location San Mateo County,...

  7. McKenzie Solar Power Facility | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Solar Power Facility Facility McKenzie Solar Plant Sector Solar Facility Type Photovoltaic Facility Status In Service Owner Recurrent Energy Developer Recurrent Energy Energy...

  8. Laboratory instrumentation modernization at the WPI Nuclear Reactor Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1995-01-01

    With partial funding from the Department of Energy (DOE) University Reactor Instrumentation Program several laboratory instruments utilized by students and researchers at the WPI Nuclear Reactor Facility have been upgraded or replaced. Designed and built by General Electric in 1959, the open pool nuclear training reactor at WPI was one of the first such facilities in the nation located on a university campus. Devoted to undergraduate use, the reactor and its related facilities have been since used to train two generations of nuclear engineers and scientists for the nuclear industry. The low power output of the reactor and an ergonomic facility design make it an ideal tool for undergraduate nuclear engineering education and other training. The reactor, its control system, and the associate laboratory equipment are all located in the same room. Over the years, several important milestones have taken place at the WPI reactor. In 1969, the reactor power level was upgraded from 1 kW to 10 kW. The reactor`s Nuclear Regulatory Commission operating license was renewed for 20 years in 1983. In 1988, under DOE Grant No. DE-FG07-86ER75271, the reactor was converted to low-enriched uranium fuel. In 1992, again with partial funding from DOE (Grant No. DE-FG02-90ER12982), the original control console was replaced.

  9. Competitive economics of nuclear power

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hellman, R.

    1981-03-02

    Some 12 components of a valid study of the competitive economics of a newly ordered nuclear power plant are identified and explicated. These are then used to adjust the original cost projections of four authoritative studies of nuclear and coal power economics.

  10. Nuclear Facility Operations | Department of Energy

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

    Operations Nuclear Facility Operations INL is a science-based, applied engineering national laboratory dedicated to meeting the nation's environmental, energy, nuclear technology, and national security needs. INL is a science-based, applied engineering national laboratory dedicated to meeting the nation's environmental, energy, nuclear technology, and national security needs. The Idaho Operations Office oversees these contract activities in accordance with DOE directives. INL is a multi-program

  11. The Fukushima Nuclear Event and its Implications for Nuclear Power

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Golay, Michael

    2011-07-06

    The combined strong earthquake and super tsunami of 12 March 2011 at the Fukushima nuclear power plant imposed the most severe challenges ever experienced at such a facility. Information regarding the plant response and status remains uncertain, but it is clear that severe damage has been sustained, that the plant staff have responded creatively and that the offsite implications are unlikely to be seriously threatening to the health, if not the prosperity, of the surrounding population. Re-examination of the regulatory constraints of nuclear power will occur worldwide, and some changes are likely, particularly concerning reliance upon active systems for achieving critical safety functions and concerning treatments of used reactor fuel. Whether worldwide expansion of the nuclear power economy will be slowed in the long run is perhaps unlikely and worth discussion.

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

  13. Working Group Report on - Space Nuclear Power Systems and Nuclear...

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

    Working Group Report on - Space Nuclear Power Systems and Nuclear Waste Technology R&D Working Group Report on - Space Nuclear Power Systems and Nuclear Waste Technology R&D "Even ...

  14. Siemens Nuclear Power GmbH AREVA Nuclear Power | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Nuclear Power GmbH AREVA Nuclear Power Jump to: navigation, search Name: Siemens Nuclear Power GmbH (AREVA Nuclear Power) Place: Erlangen, Germany Zip: 91058 Sector: Services...

  15. Maryland Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Unit 1, Unit 2","1,705","13,994",100.0,"Calvert Cliffs Nuclear PP Inc" "1 Plant 2 Reactors","1,705","13,994",100.0 "Note: Totals

  16. Massachusetts Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Unit 1",685,"5,918",100.0,"Entergy Nuclear Generation Co" "1 Plant 1 Reactor",685,"5,918",100.0 "Note: Totals may not equal sum of components due to

  17. A Variable Trajectory Plume Segment Model to Assess Ground-Level Air Concentrations and Depositions of Routine Effluent Releases from Nuclear Power Facilities.

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    1986-05-27

    Version: 00 MESODIF-II, which embodies a variable trajectory plume segment atmospheric transport model, is designed to predict normalized air concentrations and deposition of radioactive, but otherwise non-reactive, effluents released from one or two levels over the same position in an xy-plane. In such a model, calculated particle trajectories vary as synoptic scale wind varies. At all sampling times, the particles are connected to form a segmented plume centerline. The lateral and vertical dimensions of themore¬†¬Ľ plume are determined by a parameterization of turbulence scale diffusion. The impetus for the development of this model arose from the need of the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to assess radiological effects resulting from routine nuclear power reactor operations, as outlined in U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Guide 1.111.¬ę¬†less

  18. Electric Power Produced from Nuclear Reactor | National Nuclear...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Electric Power Produced from Nuclear Reactor Electric Power Produced from Nuclear Reactor Arco, ID The Experimental Breeder Reactor No. 1 located at the National Reactor Testing ...

  19. Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear Facilities

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

    2001-06-01

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

  20. Uranium Processing Facility | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Uranium Processing Facility

  1. Facilities | Concentrating Solar Power | NREL

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

    The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) provides industry, government, and university staff who are researching concentrating solar power (CSP) with access to ...

  2. Power Burst Facility (PBF) Reactor Reactor Decommissioning

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

    Click here to view Click here to view Reactor Decommissioning Click on an image to enlarge A crane removes the reactor vessel from the Power Burst Facility (top), then places it ...

  3. Wisconsin Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Wisconsin nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name..."8,291",62.4,"NextEra Energy Point Beach LLC" "2 Plants 3 Reactors","1,584","13,281",100.0

  4. Massachusetts Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Power Station Unit 1",685,"5,918",100.0,"Entergy Nuclear Generation Co" "1 Plant 1 Reactor",685,"5,918",100.0 "Note: Totals may not equal sum of components due to independent ...

  5. Nuclear power reactor instrumentation systems handbook. Volume...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    Nuclear power reactor instrumentation systems handbook. Volume 1 Citation Details In-Document Search Title: Nuclear power reactor instrumentation systems handbook. Volume 1 You ...

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

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

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

  7. Owners of nuclear power plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hudson, C.R.; White, V.S.

    1996-11-01

    Commercial nuclear power plants in this country can be owned by a number of separate entities, each with varying ownership proportions. Each of these owners may, in turn, have a parent/subsidiary relationship to other companies. In addition, the operator of the plant may be a different entity as well. This report provides a compilation on the owners/operators for all commercial power reactors in the United States. While the utility industry is currently experiencing changes in organizational structure which may affect nuclear plant ownership, the data in this report is current as of July 1996. The report is divided into sections representing different aspects of nuclear plant ownership.

  8. Owners of Nuclear Power Plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Reid, R.L.

    2000-01-12

    Commercial nuclear power plants in this country can be owned by a number of separate entities, each with varying ownership proportions. Each of these owners may, in turn, have a parent/subsidiary relationship to other companies. In addition, the operator of the plant may be a different entity as well. This report provides a compilation on the owners/operators for all commercial power reactors in the United States. While the utility industry is currently experiencing changes in organizational structure which may affect nuclear plant ownership, the data in this report is current as of November 1999. The report is divided into sections representing different aspects of nuclear plant ownership.

  9. 2016 Nuclear and Facility Safety Program Workshop | Department of Energy

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

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

  10. Guidelines for Evaluation of Nuclear Facility Training Programs

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

    1995-11-22

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

  11. Ohio Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Ohio nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Davis Besse Unit 1",894,"5,185",32.8,"FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company" "Perry Unit 1","1,240","10,620",67.2,"FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company" "2

  12. DG Fairhaven Power Biomass Facility | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    search Name DG Fairhaven Power Biomass Facility Facility DG Fairhaven Power Sector Biomass Owner Marubeni Sustainable Energy Location Eureka, California Coordinates...

  13. Topics in nuclear power

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Budnitz, Robert J.

    2015-03-30

    The 101 nuclear plants operating in the US today are far safer than they were 20-30 years ago. For example, there's been about a 100-fold reduction in the occurrence of 'significant events' since the late 1970s. Although the youngest of currently operating US plants was designed in the 1970s, all have been significantly modified over the years. Key contributors to the safety gains are a vigilant culture, much improved equipment reliability, greatly improved training of operators and maintenance workers, worldwide sharing of experience, and the effective use of probabilistic risk assessment. Several manufacturers have submitted high quality new designs for large reactors to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for design approval, and several companies are vigorously working on designs for smaller, modular reactors. Although the Fukushima reactor accident in March 2011 in Japan has been an almost unmitigated disaster for the local population due to their being displaced from their homes and workplaces and also due to the land contamination, its 'lessons learned' have been important for the broader nuclear industry, and will surely result in safer nuclear plants worldwide - indeed, have already done so, with more safety improvements to come.

  14. Minnesota Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Minnesota nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Monticello Unit 1",554,"4,695",34.8,"Northern States Power Co - Minnesota" "Prairie Island Unit 1, Unit 2","1,040","8,783",65.2,"Northern States Power Co -

  15. Nebraska Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Nebraska nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Cooper Unit 1",767,"6,793",61.4,"Nebraska Public Power District" "Fort Calhoun Unit 1",478,"4,261",38.6,"Omaha Public Power District" "2 Plants 2

  16. Georgia Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Edwin I Hatch Unit 1, Unit 2","1,759","13,902",41.5,"Georgia Power Co" "Vogtle Unit 1, Unit 2","2,302","19,610",58.5,"Georgia Power Co" "2 Plants 4

  17. 2015 Nuclear & Facility Safety Programs Workshop Agenda | Department...

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

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

  18. (Nuclear power engineering in space)

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cooper, R.H. Jr.

    1990-06-18

    The principal purpose of this trip was to participate in the Anniversary Specialist Conference on Nuclear Power Engineering in Space hosted by the USSR Ministry of Atomic Power Engineering and Industry. The conference was held in Obninsk, USSR. A secondary purpose of the trip was to meet with the French Commissariat A L'Energie Atomique in Paris regarding the status of their space power program.

  19. Dynamic Simulation Nuclear Power Plants

    Energy Science and Technology Software Center (OSTI)

    1992-03-03

    DSNP (Dynamic Simulator for Nuclear Power-Plants) is a system of programs and data files by which a nuclear power plant, or part thereof, can be simulated. The acronym DSNP is used interchangeably for the DSNP language, the DSNP libraries, the DSNP precompiler, and the DSNP document generator. The DSNP language is a special-purpose, block-oriented, digital-simulation language developed to facilitate the preparation of dynamic simulations of a large variety of nuclear power plants. It is amore¬†¬Ľ user-oriented language that permits the user to prepare simulation programs directly from power plant block diagrams and flow charts by recognizing the symbolic DSNP statements for the appropriate physical components and listing these statements in a logical sequence according to the flow of physical properties in the simulated power plant. Physical components of nuclear power plants are represented by functional blocks, or modules. Many of the more complex components are represented by several modules. The nuclear reactor, for example, has a kinetic module, a power distribution module, a feedback module, a thermodynamic module, a hydraulic module, and a radioactive heat decay module. These modules are stored in DSNP libraries in the form of a DSNP subroutine or function, a block of statements, a macro, or a combination of the above. Basic functional blocks such as integrators, pipes, function generators, connectors, and many auxiliary functions representing properties of materials used in nuclear power plants are also available. The DSNP precompiler analyzes the DSNP simulation program, performs the appropriate translations, inserts the requested modules from the library, links these modules together, searches necessary data files, and produces a simulation program in FORTRAN.¬ę¬†less

  20. Security Upgrades Completed at Three Russian Nuclear Facilities | National

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Nuclear Security Administration | (NNSA) Security Upgrades Completed at Three Russian Nuclear Facilities December 10, 2004 NNSA continues work to keep nuclear material out of the hands of terrorists RUSSIA -- The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) commemorated ten years of work securing nuclear and radiological material in Russia and the former Soviet Union by completing security upgrades at two Russian nuclear facilities this week. Upgrades at a third facility were completed in

  1. Improving the Safeguardability of Nuclear Facilities

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2009-07-01

    The application of a Safeguards-by-Design (SBD) process for new nuclear facilities has the potential to reduce security risks and proliferation hazards while improving the synergy of major design features and raising operational efficiency, in a world where significant expansion of nuclear energy use may occur. Correspondingly, the U.S. 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.

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

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

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

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

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

  4. Iraq nuclear facility dismantlement and disposal project

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Cochran, J.R.; Danneels, J.; Kenagy, W.D.; Phillips, C.J.; Chesser, R.K.

    2007-07-01

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

  5. Massachusetts Nuclear Profile - Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station" "Unit","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Summer cpacity factor (percent)","Type","Commercial operation date","License expiration date" 1,685,"5,918",98.7,"BWR","application/vnd.ms-excel","application/vnd.ms-excel" ,685,"5,918",98.7

  6. Klotz visits Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory | National Nuclear Security

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Administration | (NNSA) Klotz visits Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory Wednesday, July 8, 2015 - 1:03pm Lt. Gen. Frank G. Klotz, DOE Undersecretary for Nuclear Security and NNSA Administrator, visited the Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory in West Mifflin, PA on July 2, 2015. NNSA Blog Gen. Klotz toured through several test facilities where Bettis personnel reviewed ongoing development efforts to qualify techniques for in-situ repairs of nuclear powered submarine components, discussed full scale

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

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

    Management Oversight | Department of Energy Appendix B: Rules and Directives Applicable to Nuclear Facilities Line Management Oversight Appendix B: Rules and Directives Applicable to Nuclear Facilities Line Management Oversight Appendix B to DOE G 226.1-2A "Federal Line Management Oversight of Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities". Consists of a list of rules and directives that are applicable to nuclear facilities line management oversight. Appendix B: Rules and Directives

  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 Energy Advisory Committee, Facility Subcommittee visit to Idaho

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

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

  10. Michigan Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Donald C Cook Unit 1, Unit 2","2,069","15,646",52.8,"Indiana Michigan Power Co" "Fermi Unit 2","1,085","7,738",26.1,"Detroit Edison Co" "Palisades Unit

  11. Alabama Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Browns Ferry Unit 1, Unit 2, Unit 3","3,309","24,771",65.3,"Tennessee Valley Authority" "Joseph M Farley Unit 1, Unit 2","1,734","13,170",34.7,"Alabama Power

  12. Florida Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Florida nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Crystal River Unit 3",860,0,"--","Progress Energy Florida Inc" "St Lucie Unit 1, Unit 2","1,678","12,630",52.8,"Florida Power & Light Co" "Turkey Point

  13. Kansas Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Kansas nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Wolf Creek Generating Station Unit 1","1,160","9,556",100.0,"Wolf Creek Nuclear Optg Corp" "1 Plant 1 Reactor","1,160","9,556",100.0

  14. Pennsylvania Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Pennsylvania nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Beaver Valley Unit 1, Unit 2","1,777","14,994",19.3,"FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company" "Limerick Unit 1, Unit 2","2,264","18,926",24.3,"Exelon

  15. Arkansas Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 1, Unit 2","1,835","15,023",100.0,"Entergy Arkansas Inc" "1 Plant 2 Reactors","1,835","15,023",100.0

  16. California Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    California nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Diablo Canyon Unit 1, Unit 2","2,240","18,430",57.2,"Pacific Gas & Electric Co" "San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Unit 2, Unit

  17. Connecticut Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Connecticut nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Millstone Unit 2, Unit 3","2,103","16,750",100.0,"Dominion Nuclear Conn Inc" "1 Plant 2 Reactors","2,103","16,750",100.0

  18. Illinois Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Illinois nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Braidwood Generation Station Unit 1, Unit 2","2,330","19,200",20.0,"Exelon Nuclear" "Byron Generating Station Unit 1, Unit 2","2,300","19,856",20.6,"Exelon

  19. Tennessee Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Tennessee nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Sequoyah Unit 1, Unit 2","2,278","18,001",64.9,"Tennessee Valley Authority" "Watts Bar Nuclear Plant Unit 1","1,123","9,738",35.1,"Tennessee Valley

  20. Texas Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Comanche Peak Unit 1, Unit 2","2,406","20,208",48.9,"Luminant Generation Company LLC" "South Texas Project Unit 1, Unit 2","2,560","21,127",51.1,"STP Nuclear

  1. Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear Facilities

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

    2007-02-13

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

  2. Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear Facilities

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

    2010-04-21

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

  3. Maintenance Management Program for DOE Nuclear Facilities

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

    2010-04-21

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

  4. Listing of Defense Nuclear Facilities | Department of Energy

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

    Listing of Defense Nuclear Facilities Listing of Defense Nuclear Facilities Attachment 1 - Listing of Defense Nuclear Facilities (55.77 KB) More Documents & Publications Draft Policy and Planning Guidance for Community Transition Activities Workforce Restructuring Policy The First Five Years FY 2004-2008

  5. Y-12 Removes Nuclear Materials from Two Facilities to Reduce Site's Nuclear

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Footprint (Alpha 5 and 9720-38 No Longer Designated as Nuclear Facilities) | National Nuclear Security Administration | (NNSA) Removes Nuclear Materials from Two Facilities to Reduce Site's Nuclear Footprint (Alpha 5 and 9720-38 No Longer Designated as Nuclear Facilities) September 03, 2010 Microsoft Office document icon R-9-2

  6. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1990-09-01

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

  7. Nuclear facility decommissioning and site remedial actions

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    1989-09-01

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

  8. EIS-0214: Northwest Regional Power Facility Project

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

    This environmental impact statement analyzes the WA Power LLC proposal to construct and operate a 838 megawatt gas-fired combustion turbine facility near the town of Creston, Washington. The project site is approtiately 1,200 acres, of which less than 140 acres be impacted.

  9. Financing Strategies for Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facility

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    David Shropshire; Sharon Chandler

    2005-12-01

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

  10. New Hampshire Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (nw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net ...

  11. Nuclear power high technology colloquium: proceedings

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1984-12-10

    Reports presenting information on technology advancements in the nuclear industry and nuclear power plant functions have been abstracted and are available on the energy data base.

  12. North Carolina Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Carolina nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear ...

  13. New Jersey Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net ...

  14. New York Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net ...

  15. Helping nuclear power help us

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Schecker, Jay A

    2009-01-01

    After a prolonged absence, the word 'nuclear' has returned to the lexicon of sustainable domestic energy resources. Due in no small part to its demonstrated reliability, nuclear power is poised to playa greater role in the nation's energy future, producing clean, carbon-neutral electricity and contributing even more to our energy security. To nuclear scientists, the resurgence presents an opportunity to inject new technologies into the industry to maximize the benefits that nuclear energy can provide. 'By developing new options for waste management and exploiting new materials to make key technological advances, we can significantly impact the use of nuclear energy in our future energy mix,' says Chris Stanek, a materials scientist at Los Alamos National Laboratory. Stanek approaches the big technology challenges by thinking way small, all the way down to the atoms. He and his colleagues are using cutting edge atomic-scale simulations to address a difficult aspect of nuclear waste -- predicting its behavior far into the future. Their research is part of a broader, coordinated effort on the part of the Laboratory to use its considerable experimental, theoretical, and computational capabilities to explore advanced materials central to not only waste issues, but to nuclear fuels as well.

  16. Global warming and nuclear power

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wood, L., LLNL

    1998-07-10

    Nuclear fission power reactors represent a potential solution to many aspects of global change possibly induced by inputting of either particulate or carbon or sulfur oxides into the Earth`s atmosphere. Of proven technological feasibility, they presently produce high-grade heat for large-scale electricity generation, space heating and industrial process-energizing around the world, without emitting greenhouse gases or atmospheric particulates; importantly, electricity production costs from the best nuclear plants presently are closely comparable with those of the best fossil-fired plants. However, a substantial number of issues currently stand between nuclear power and widespread substitution for large stationary fossil fuel-fired systems. These include perceptual ones regarding both long-term and acute operational safety, plant decommissioning, fuel reprocessing, radwaste disposal, fissile materials diversion to military purposes and - perhaps most seriously- readily quantifiable concerns regarding long-term fuel supply and total unit electrical energy cost. We sketch a road-map for proceeding from the present situation toward a nuclear power-intensive world, addressing along the way each of the concerns which presently impede widespread nuclear substitution for fossil fuels, particularly for coal in the most populous and rapidly developing portions of the world, e.g., China and India. This `design to societal specifications` approach to large-scale nuclear fission power systems may lead to energy sources meeting essentially all stationary demands for high-temperature heat. Such advanced options offer a human population of ten billion the electricity supply levels currently enjoyed by Americans for 10,000 years. Nuclear power systems tailored to local needs-and-interests and having a common advanced technology base could reduce present-day world-wide C0{sub 2} emissions by two-fold, if universally employed. By application to small mobile demands, a second two

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

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

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

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

    Idaho | Department of Energy Loan Guarantee for Front End Nuclear Facility in Idaho DOE Offers Conditional Loan Guarantee for Front End Nuclear Facility in Idaho May 20, 2010 - 12:00am Addthis Washington, DC - As part of a broad effort to expand the use of nuclear power in the United States and reduce carbon pollution, U.S. Secretary of Energy Steven Chu announced today the Department's first conditional commitment for a front-end nuclear facility. The $2 billion loan guarantee will support

  19. Iowa Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Iowa nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Duane Arnold Energy Center Unit 1",601,"4,451",100.0,"NextEra Energy Duane Arnold LLC" "1 Plant 1 Reactor",601,"4,451",100.0

  20. Louisiana Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Louisiana nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant Name/Total Reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (Pprcent)","Owner" "River Bend Unit 1",974,"8,363",44.9,"Entergy Gulf States - LA LLC" "Waterford 3 Unit 3","1,168","10,276",55.1,"Entergy Louisiana Inc" "2 Plants 2

  1. Mississippi Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    Mississippi nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Grand Gulf Unit 1","1,251","9,643",100.0,"System Energy Resources, Inc" "1 Plant 1 Reactor","1,251","9,643",100.0

  2. Missouri Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Callaway Unit 1","1,190","8,996",100.0,"Union Electric Co" "1 Plant 1 Reactor","1,190","8,996",100.0 "Note: Totals may not equal sum of components due to

  3. Arizona Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant name/total reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Palo Verde Unit 1, Unit 2, Unit 3","3,937","31,200",100.0,"Arizona Public Service Co" "1 Plant 3 Reactors","3,937","31,200",100.0 "Note: Totals may not equal sum of

  4. Enterprise Assessments Targeted Review of Nuclear Reactor Facility

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

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

  5. Nuclear Power: High Hopes, Unfulfilled Promise (Conference) ...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    Power: High Hopes, Unfulfilled Promise Citation Details In-Document Search Title: Nuclear Power: High Hopes, Unfulfilled Promise You are accessing a document from the Department ...

  6. Owners of nuclear power plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Not Available

    1982-11-01

    The list indicates percentage ownership of commercial nuclear power plants by utility companies as of September 1, 1982. The list includes all plants licensed to operate, under construction, docketed for NRC safety and environmental reviews, or under NRC antitrust review. Part I lists plants alphabetically with their associated applicants and percentage ownership. Part II lists applicants alphabetically with their associated plants and percentage ownership. Part I also indicates which plants have received operating licenses.

  7. Sabotage at Nuclear Power Plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Purvis, James W.

    1999-07-21

    Recently there has been a noted worldwide increase in violent actions including attempted sabotage at nuclear power plants. Several organizations, such as the International Atomic Energy Agency and the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, have guidelines, recommendations, and formal threat- and risk-assessment processes for the protection of nuclear assets. Other examples are the former Defense Special Weapons Agency, which used a risk-assessment model to evaluate force-protection security requirements for terrorist incidents at DOD military bases. The US DOE uses a graded approach to protect its assets based on risk and vulnerability assessments. The Federal Aviation Administration and Federal Bureau of Investigation conduct joint threat and vulnerability assessments on high-risk US airports. Several private companies under contract to government agencies use formal risk-assessment models and methods to identify security requirements. The purpose of this paper is to survey these methods and present an overview of all potential types of sabotage at nuclear power plants. The paper discusses emerging threats and current methods of choice for sabotage--especially vehicle bombs and chemical attacks. Potential consequences of sabotage acts, including economic and political; not just those that may result in unacceptable radiological exposure to the public, are also discussed. Applicability of risk-assessment methods and mitigation techniques are also presented.

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

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

  9. Nuclear fuel cycle facility accident analysis handbook

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    1998-03-01

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

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

    Office of Environmental Management (EM)

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

  11. Role of nuclear power in the Philippine power development program

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Aleta, C.R.

    1994-12-31

    The reintroduction of nuclear power in the Philippines is favored by several factors such as: the inclusion of nuclear energy in the energy sector of the science and technology agenda for national development (STAND); the Large gap between electricity demand and available local supply for the medium-term power development plan; the relatively lower health risks in nuclear power fuel cycle systems compared to the already acceptable power systems; the lower environmental impacts of nuclear power systems compared to fossil fuelled systems and the availability of a regulatory framework and trained personnel who could form a core for implementing a nuclear power program. The electricity supply gap of 9600 MW for the period 1993-2005 could be partly supplied by nuclear power. The findings of a recent study are described, as well as the issues that have to be addressed in the reintroduction of nuclear power.

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

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

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

  13. Atmospheric discharges from nuclear facilities during decommissioning: German experiences

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Braun, H.; Goertz, R.; Weil, L.

    1997-08-01

    In Germany, a substantial amount of experience is available with planning, licensing and realization of decommissioning projects. In total, a number of 18 nuclear power plants including prototype facilities as well as 6 research reactors and 3 fuel cycle facilities have been shut down finally and are at different stages of decommissioning. Only recently the final {open_quotes}green field{close_quotes} stage of the Niederaichbach Nuclear Power Plant total dismantlement project has been achieved. From the regulatory point of view, a survey of the decommissioning experience in Germany is presented highlighting the aspects of production and retention of airborne radioactivity. Nuclear air cleaning technology, discharge limits prescribed in licences and actual discharges are presented. As compared to operation, the composition of the discharged radioactivity is different as well as the off-gas discharge rate. In practically all cases, there is no significant amount of short-lived radionuclides. The discussion further includes lessons learned, for example inadvertent discharges of radionuclides expected not to be in the plants inventory. It is demonstrated that, as for operation of nuclear power plants, the limits prescribed in the Ordinance on Radiological Protection can be met using existing air cleaning technology, Optimization of protection results in public exposures substantially below the limits. In the frame of the regulatory investigation programme a study has been conducted to assess the airborne radioactivity created during certain decommissioning activities like decontamination, segmentation and handling of contaminated or activated parts. The essential results of this study are presented, which are supposed to support planning for decommissioning, for LWRs, Co-60 and Cs-137 are expected to be the dominant radionuclides in airborne discharges. 18 refs., 2 figs., 1 tab.

  14. Criteria for Evaluation of Nuclear Facility Training Programs

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

    Reaffirmed June 2013 DOE STANDARD CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION OF NUCLEAR FACILITY TRAINING PROGRAMS (Formerly Titled: Guidelines for Evaluation of Nuclear Facility Training Programs) U.S. Department of Energy FSC Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. TS DOE HDBK-1070-94 Errata June 2013 Table of Changes Page/Section Change Cover Criteria for Evaluation of Nuclear Facility Training Programs Page ii This document is available on the

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

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

    Several Countries: Evaluation for Regulatory Input | Department of Energy Approaches used for Clearance of Lands from Nuclear Facilities among Several Countries: Evaluation for Regulatory Input Approaches used for Clearance of Lands from Nuclear Facilities among Several Countries: Evaluation for Regulatory Input The study entitled, "Approaches used for Clearance of Lands from Nuclear Facilities among Several Countries: Evaluation for Regulatory Input," focuses on the issue of

  16. Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility |

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

    Department of Energy Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center Tank Farm Facility The Secretary of Energy signed Section 3116 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 basis of determination for the disposal of grouted residual waste in the tank systems at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC) Tank Farm Facility (TFF) on November 19, 2006. Section 3116 of the

  17. Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration | (NNSA...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Dual Axis Radiographic Hydrodynamic Test (DARHT) Facility, Los Alamos National ... Dual Axis Radiographic Hydrodynamic Test Facility High Explosives Application ...

  18. Cleanup of Nuclear Licensed Facility 57

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2008-01-15

    This summary describes the operations to clean up the equipment of the Nuclear Licensed Facility 57 (NLF 57). Due to the diversity of the research and development work carried out on the reprocessing of spent fuel in it, this installation is emblematic of many of the technical and organizational issues liable to be encountered in the final closure of nuclear facilities. The French atomic energy commission's center at Fontenay aux Roses (CEA-FAR) was created in 1946 to house pile ZOE. Laboratories for fuel cycle research were installed in existing buildings at the site. Work was later concentrated on spent fuel reprocessing, in a pilot workshop referred to as the 'Usine Pu'. In the early sixties, after the dismantling of these first generation facilities, a radiochemistry laboratory dedicated to research and development work on reprocessing was constructed, designated Building 18. During the same decade, more buildings were added: Building 54, storehouses and offices, Building 91, a hall and laboratories for chemical engineering research on natural and depleted uranium. Together, these three building constitute NLF 57. Building 18 architecture featured four similar modules. Each module had three levels: a sub-level consisting of technical galleries and rooms for the liquid effluent tanks, a ground floor and roof space in which the ventilation was installed. Offices, change rooms, four laboratories and a hall were situated on the ground floor. The shielded lines were installed in the laboratories and the halls. Construction of the building took place between 1959 and 1962, and its commissioning began in 1961. The research and development programs performed in NLF 57 related to studies of the reprocessing of spent fuel, including dry methods and the Purex process, techniques for the treatment of waste (vitrification, alpha waste decontamination, etc.) as well as studies and production of transuranic elements for industry and research. In addition to this work, the

  19. EA-1631: Beacon Power Corporation Frequency Regulation Facility in

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

    Stephentown, NY | Department of Energy 1: Beacon Power Corporation Frequency Regulation Facility in Stephentown, NY EA-1631: Beacon Power Corporation Frequency Regulation Facility in Stephentown, NY February 2, 2009 EA-1631: Final Environmental Assessment Loan Guarantee for Beacon Power Corporation Frequency Regulation Facility in Stephentown, New York February 27, 2009 EA-1631: Finding of No Significant Impact Loan Guarantee for Beacon Power Corporation Frequency Regulation Facility in

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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

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

    for Clearance of Lands from Nuclear Facilities among Several Countries: Evaluation for Regulatory Input," focuses on the issue of showing compliance with given clearance levels ...

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

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

    Reactor Facility Operations at Sandia National Laboratories The U.S. Department of Energy independent Office of Enterprise Assessments (EA) conducted a review of nuclear reactor ...

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

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

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

  4. Owners of nuclear power plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wood, R.S.

    1991-07-01

    This report indicates percentage ownership of commercial nuclear power plants by utility companies. The report includes all plants operating, under construction, docketed for NRC safety and environmental reviews, or under NRC antitrust review, but does not include those plants announced but not yet under review or those plants formally cancelled. Part 1 of the report lists plants alphabetically with their associated applicants or licensees and percentage ownership. Part 2 lists applicants or licensees alphabetically with their associated plants and percentage ownership. Part 1 also indicates which plants have received operating licenses (OLS).

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

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

  6. Nuclear power and public acceptance

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Hirschmann, H.

    1989-01-01

    Public acceptance is a decisive factor of growing importance, although economics has been and will remain the most decisive factor in ordering new nuclear capacity. Nuclear energy can make an important contribution toward preventing and reducing the greenhouse effect. Many politicians tend to base their decisions not on facts but rather on so called public opinion and consequently to overreact in particular on environmental issues. The entire debate hinges on public confidence rather than on a lack of information. There is no 100% guarantee that technical facilities will operate completely accident-free. Therefore, standards should be harmonized, plants should be operated safely and consequences of possible accidents should be limited. There needs to be some kind of early information system between countries concerning upcoming issues as a prerequisite for acting instead of reacting, because this is an essential tool in convincing the public that they can have more confidence. Technical information alone does not answer the real questions of the public. Political, technical, and economic matters as well as public opinion are interwoven and cannot be separated from each. Therefore, the exchange of experience gained in all these sectors on an international basis must be improved.

  7. Infrastructure and Facilities Management | National Nuclear Security...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    backlog of old facilities, reduction of excess facilities and utility construction. ... real property), and infrastructure planning and line item construction sub-programs. ...

  8. high explosives pressing facility | National Nuclear Security...

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    pressing facility high explosives pressing facility Thornberry hosts House Majority Leader at Pantex visit Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, hosted Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy,...

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

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

    2010-04-16

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

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

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

    2010-04-16

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

  11. Powering the Nuclear Navy | National Nuclear Security Administration |

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    (NNSA) Programs Powering the Nuclear Navy The Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program provides militarily effective nuclear propulsion plants and ensures their safe, reliable and long-lived operation. This mission requires the combination of fully trained U.S. Navy men and women with ships that excel in endurance, stealth, speed, and independence from supply chains. The Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program provides militarily effective nuclear propulsion plants and ensures their safe, reliable and

  12. Anhui Wuhu Nuclear Power Co | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Wuhu Nuclear Power Co Jump to: navigation, search Name: Anhui Wuhu Nuclear Power Co. Place: Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, China Zip: 518031 Product: JV between Guangdong Nuclear...

  13. Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration | (NNSA)

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Evaluation / Research and Development Facilities Photo: DARHT's Accelerators help create the x-rays at DARHT, the world's most advanced radiography facility. Research and Development Facilities Research and Development manages and oversees the operation of an exceptional suite of science, technology and engineering facilities that support and further the national stockpile stewardship agenda. Of varying size, scope and capabilities, the facilities work in a concert to accomplish the following

  14. South Carolina Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    South Carolina nuclear power plants, summer capacity and net generation, 2010" "Plant nametotal reactors","Summer capacity (mw)","Net generation (thousand mwh)","Share of State ...

  15. Underground collocation of nuclear power plant reactors and repository to facilitate the post-renaissance expansion of nuclear power

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Myers, Carl W; Elkins, Ned Z

    2008-01-01

    Underground collocation of nuclear power reactors and the nuclear waste management facilities supporting those reactors, termed an underground nuclear park (UNP), appears to have several advantages compared to the conventional approach to siting reactors and waste management facilities. These advantages include the potential to lower reactor capital and operating cost, lower nuclear waste management cost, and increase margins of physical security and safety. Envirorunental impacts related to worker health, facility accidents, waste transportation, and sabotage and terrorism appear to be lower for UNPs compared to the current approach. In-place decommissioning ofUNP reactors appears to have cost, safety, envirorunental and waste disposal advantages. The UNP approach has the potential to lead to greater public acceptance for the deployment of new power reactors. Use of the UNP during the post-nuclear renaissance time frame has the potential to enable a greater expansion of U.S. nuclear power generation than might otherwise result. Technical and economic aspects of the UNP concept need more study to determine the viability of the concept.

  16. Replacement Power Facility site selection report

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Wike, L.D.; Toole, G.L.; Specht, W.L.

    1992-06-01

    The Department of Energy (DOE) has proposed the construction and operation of a Replacement Power Facility (RPF) for supplementing and replacing existing sources of steam and possibly electricity at the Savannah River Site (SRS). DOE is preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for this project As part of the impact analysis of the proposed action, the EIS will include a detailed description of the environment where the RPF will be constructed. This description must be specific to the recommended site at SRS, which contains more than 300 square miles of land including streams, lakes, impoundments, wetlands, and upland areas. A formal site-selection process was designed and implemented to identify the preferred RPF site.

  17. Nuclear power in the Soviet Union

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Ponomarev-Stepnoi, N.N.

    1989-01-01

    The pros and cons of nuclear power are similar in many countries, but the following pro factors are specific to the Soviet Union: the major sources of conventional fuel are in one area of the country, but energy consumption is concentrated in another; and a large portion of energy is generated using oil and gas. The arguments against nuclear power are as follows: safety requirements and expectations have been increased; and public opinion is negative. A program of nuclear power generation has been developed. New techniques are being implemented to increase safety and enhance operations of different types of nuclear power plants. Its should be obvious in the future that a nuclear power plant has better economic and environmental parameters than existing methods of power generation.

  18. Section E Nuclear Facility D&D, Remainder of Hanford

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

    months Completed annual surveillance of Redox facilities. Completed replacement of PUREX uninterruptible power supply (UPS) battery cell. EMS Objectives and Target Status...

  19. KiloPower Project - KRUSTY Experiment Nuclear Design (Technical...

    Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI)

    KiloPower Project - KRUSTY Experiment Nuclear Design Citation Details In-Document Search Title: KiloPower Project - KRUSTY Experiment Nuclear Design This PowerPoint presentation ...

  20. National Ignition Facility | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

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

  1. ICF Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration | (NNSA)

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    Facilities Nike mirror array and lens array ICF operates a set of world-class experimental facilities to create HEDP conditions and to obtain quantitative data in support of its numerous stockpile stewardship-related activities. To learn about three high energy experimental facilities and two small lasers that provide ICF capabilities, select the links below. National Ignition Facility, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory OMEGA and OMEGA EP, University of Rochester Laboratory for Laser

  2. EA-1726: Kahuku Wind Power, LLC Wind Power Generation Facility, O'ahu, HI

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

    | Department of Energy 6: Kahuku Wind Power, LLC Wind Power Generation Facility, O'ahu, HI EA-1726: Kahuku Wind Power, LLC Wind Power Generation Facility, O'ahu, HI May 3, 2010 EA-1726: Final Environmental Assessment Loan Guarantee to Kahuku Wind Power, LLC for Construction of the Kahuku Wind Power Facility in Kahuku, O'ahu, Hawai'i May 13, 2010 Kahuku Wind Power Biological Opinion Kahuku Wind Power, LLC, Construction of the Kahuku Wind Power Facility in Kahuku, O'ahu, Hawaii May 27, 2010

  3. Powering the Nuclear Navy | National Nuclear Security Administration |

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    (NNSA) Powering the Nuclear Navy The Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program provides militarily effective nuclear propulsion plants and ensures their safe, reliable and long-lived operation. NNSA's Naval Reactors Program provides the design, development and operational support required to provide militarily effective nuclear propulsion plants and ensure their safe, reliable and long-lived operation. Learn More USS George H.W. Bush conducts flight operations USS George H.W. Bush conducts flight

  4. U.S. Forward Operating Base Applications of Nuclear Power

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Griffith, George W.

    2015-01-01

    This paper provides a high level overview of current nuclear power technology and the potential use of nuclear power at military bases. The size, power ranges, and applicability of nuclear power units for military base power are reviewed. Previous and current reactor projects are described to further define the potential for nuclear power for military power.

  5. WWTP Power Generation Station Biomass Facility | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    WWTP Power Generation Station Sector Biomass Facility Type Non-Fossil Waste Location Alameda County, California Coordinates 37.6016892, -121.7195459 Show Map Loading map......

  6. Snowflake White Mountain Power Biomass Facility | Open Energy...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Map Retrieved from "http:en.openei.orgwindex.php?titleSnowflakeWhiteMountainPowerBiomassFacility&oldid398118" Feedback Contact needs updating Image needs updating...

  7. Guadalupe Power Plant Biomass Facility | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Database Retrieved from "http:en.openei.orgwindex.php?titleGuadalupePowerPlantBiomassFacility&oldid397533" Feedback Contact needs updating Image needs updating...

  8. Nove Power Plant Biomass Facility | Open Energy Information

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    2006 Database Retrieved from "http:en.openei.orgwindex.php?titleNovePowerPlantBiomassFacility&oldid397862" Feedback Contact needs updating Image needs updating...

  9. EA-1631: Beacon Power Corporation Frequency Regulation Facility...

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

    Frequency Regulation Facility in Stephentown, New York February 27, 2009 EA-1631: Finding of No Significant Impact Loan Guarantee for Beacon Power Corporation Frequency Regulation ...

  10. Stowe Power Production Plant Biomass Facility | Open Energy Informatio...

    Open Energy Info (EERE)

    Stowe Power Production Plant Sector Biomass Facility Type Landfill Gas Location Montgomery County, Pennsylvania Coordinates 40.2290075, -75.3878525 Show Map Loading map......

  11. Kansas Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Wolf Creek Generating Station Unit 1","1,160","9,556",100.0,"Wolf Creek Nuclear Optg Corp" "1 Plant 1 Reactor","1,160","9,556",100.0

  12. Vermont Nuclear Profile - Power Plants

    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) Indexed Site

    mwh)","Share of State nuclear net generation (percent)","Owner" "Vermont Yankee Unit 1",620,"4,782",100.0,"Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee" "1 Plant 1 Reactor",620,"4,782",100.0

  13. Seismic risk management solution for nuclear power plants

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Coleman, Justin; Sabharwall, Piyush

    2014-12-01

    Nuclear power plants should safely operate during normal operations and maintain core-cooling capabilities during off-normal events, including external hazards (such as flooding and earthquakes). Management of external hazards to expectable levels of risk is critical to maintaining nuclear facility and nuclear power plant safety. Seismic risk is determined by convolving the seismic hazard with seismic fragilities (capacity of systems, structures, and components). Seismic isolation (SI) is one protective measure showing promise to minimize seismic risk. Current SI designs (used in commercial industry) reduce horizontal earthquake loads and protect critical infrastructure from the potentially destructive effects of large earthquakes. The benefit of SI application in the nuclear industry is being recognized and SI systems have been proposed in American Society of Civil Engineer Standard 4, ASCE-4, to be released in the winter of 2014, for light water reactors facilities using commercially available technology. The intent of ASCE-4 is to provide criteria for seismic analysis of safety related nuclear structures such that the responses to design basis seismic events, computed in accordance with this standard, will have a small likelihood of being exceeded. The U.S. nuclear industry has not implemented SI to date; a seismic isolation gap analysis meeting was convened on August 19, 2014, to determine progress on implementing SI in the U.S. nuclear industry. The meeting focused on the systems and components that could benefit from SI. As a result, this article highlights the gaps identified at this meeting.

  14. Seismic risk management solution for nuclear power plants

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

    Coleman, Justin; Sabharwall, Piyush

    2014-12-01

    Nuclear power plants should safely operate during normal operations and maintain core-cooling capabilities during off-normal events, including external hazards (such as flooding and earthquakes). Management of external hazards to expectable levels of risk is critical to maintaining nuclear facility and nuclear power plant safety. Seismic risk is determined by convolving the seismic hazard with seismic fragilities (capacity of systems, structures, and components). Seismic isolation (SI) is one protective measure showing promise to minimize seismic risk. Current SI designs (used in commercial industry) reduce horizontal earthquake loads and protect critical infrastructure from the potentially destructive effects of large earthquakes. The benefitmore¬†¬Ľ of SI application in the nuclear industry is being recognized and SI systems have been proposed in American Society of Civil Engineer Standard 4, ASCE-4, to be released in the winter of 2014, for light water reactors facilities using commercially available technology. The intent of ASCE-4 is to provide criteria for seismic analysis of safety related nuclear structures such that the responses to design basis seismic events, computed in accordance with this standard, will have a small likelihood of being exceeded. The U.S. nuclear industry has not implemented SI to date; a seismic isolation gap analysis meeting was convened on August 19, 2014, to determine progress on implementing SI in the U.S. nuclear industry. The meeting focused on the systems and components that could benefit from SI. As a result, this article highlights the gaps identified at this meeting.¬ę¬†less

  15. Novel Nuclear Powered Photocatalytic Energy Conversion

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    White,John R.; Kinsmen,Douglas; Regan,Thomas M.; Bobek,Leo M.

    2005-08-29

    The University of Massachusetts Lowell Radiation Laboratory (UMLRL) is involved in a comprehensive project to investigate a unique radiation sensing and energy conversion technology with applications for in-situ monitoring of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) during cask transport and storage. The technology makes use of the gamma photons emitted from the SNF as an inherent power source for driving a GPS-class transceiver that has the ability to verify the position and contents of the SNF cask. The power conversion process, which converts the gamma photon energy into electrical power, is based on a variation of the successful dye-sensitized solar cell (DSSC) design developed by Konarka Technologies, Inc. (KTI). In particular, the focus of the current research is to make direct use of the high-energy gamma photons emitted from SNF, coupled with a scintillator material to convert some of the incident gamma photons into photons having wavelengths within the visible region of the electromagnetic spectrum. The high-energy gammas from the SNF will generate some power directly via Compton scattering and the photoelectric effect, and the generated visible photons output from the scintillator material can also be converted to electrical power in a manner similar to that of a standard solar cell. Upon successful implementation of an energy conversion device based on this new gammavoltaic principle, this inherent power source could then be utilized within SNF storage casks to drive a tamper-proof, low-power, electronic detection/security monitoring system for the spent fuel. The current project has addressed several aspects associated with this new energy conversion concept, including the development of a base conceptual design for an inherent gamma-induced power conversion unit for SNF monitoring, the characterization of the radiation environment that can be expected within a typical SNF storage system, the initial evaluation of Konarka's base solar cell design, the design and

  16. Magnet design considerations for Fusion Nuclear Science Facility

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

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

    2016-02-25

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

  17. ICF Facilities | National Nuclear Security Administration

    National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA)

    ICF operates a set of world-class experimental facilities to create HEDP conditions and to obtain quantitative data in support of its numerous stockpile stewardship-related ...

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

    Broader source: Energy.gov [DOE]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  1. Interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board

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

    1999-01-26

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

  2. Interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board

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

    2001-03-30

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

  3. Preparation Of Nonreactor Nuclear Facility Documented Safety Analysis

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

    2014-11-12

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

  4. Interface with the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board

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

    1996-12-30

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

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

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

    2013-04-04

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

  6. Integration of facility modeling capabilities for nuclear nonproliferation analysis

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

    Garcia, Humberto; Burr, Tom; Coles, Garill A; Edmunds, Thomas A.; Garrett, Alfred; Gorensek, Maximilian; Hamm, Luther; Krebs, John; Kress, Reid L; Lamberti, Vincent; Schoenwald, David; Tzanos, Constantine P; Ward, Richard C

    2012-01-01

    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.

  7. INTEGRATION OF FACILITY MODELING CAPABILITIES FOR NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION ANALYSIS

    SciTech Connect (OSTI)

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

    2011-07-18

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

  8. Criteria for Evaluation of Nuclear Facility Training Programs

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

    Reaffirmed July 2014 DOE STANDARD CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION OF NUCLEAR FACILITY TRAINING PROGRAMS (Formerly Titled: Guidelines for Evaluation of Nuclear Facility Training Programs) U.S. Department of Energy FSC-6910 Washington, D.C. 20585 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. TS DOE-STD-1070-94 This document is available on the Department of Energy Technical Standards Program Web page at http://www.hss.doe.gov/nuclearsafety/ns/techstds/ DOE-STD-1070-94

  9. Report of the Facilities Subcommittee Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee

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

    Facilities Subcommittee Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee Presented June 17, 2016 Washington DC John I Sackett Charge to the Facilities Subcommittee * "..request that NEAC now undertake a forward looking review of where you believe the Idaho National Laboratory should be ten years from now to maintain overall world-class status in nuclear energy research, development, and demonstration, and considering its role as a maturing multi-program national laboratory." * "The review should

  10. Departmental Representative to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board

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

    (DNFSB) | Department of Energy Departmental Representative to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Departmental Representative to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) The Office of the Departmental Representative ensures effective cross-organizational leadership and coordination to resolve DNFSB-identified technical and management issues as we work to ensure the health, safety, and security of the workers, public, and environment. This web site is an important