IAEA safety requirements for safety assessment of fuel cycle facilities and activities

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Jones, G.

2013-01-01

assessment of these aspects will, in general, have many commonalities with the safety assessment that is carried out to address associated radiation risks. However, it should be noted that the Safety Requirements publication, does not establish requirements for combining these non-radiological assessments with the radiological safety assessment, or make recommendations for how to assess non-radiological hazards; consequently these aspects are not addressed in the paper. The requirements of the safety assessment Safety Requirements publication are discussed below. (authors)

DOE Handbook: Supplementary guidance and design experience for the fusion safety standards DOE-STD-6002-96 and DOE-STD-6003-96

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

None

1999-01-01

Two standards have been developed that pertain to the safety of fusion facilities. These are DOE- STD-6002-96, Safety of Magnetic Fusion Facilities: Requirements, and DOE-STD-6003-96, Safety of Magnetic Fusion Facilities: Guidance. The first of these standards identifies requirements that subscribers to that standard must meet to achieve safety in fusion facilities. The second standard contains guidance to assist in meeting the requirements identified in the first This handbook provides additional documentation on good operations and design practices as well as lessons learned from the experiences of designers and operators of previous fusion facilities and related systems. It is intended to capture the experience gained in the various fields and pass it on to designers of future fusion facilities as a means of enhancing success and safety. The sections of this document are presented according to the physical location of the major systems of a fusion facility, beginning with the vacuum vessel and proceeding to those systems and components outside the vacuum vessel (the "Ex-vessel Systems"). The last section describes administrative procedures that cannot be localized to specific components. It has been tacitly assumed that the general structure of the fusion facilities addressed is that of a tokamak though the same principles would apply to other magnetic confinement options.

Nuclear health and safety. Status of GAO's environmental, safety, and health recommendations to DOE

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

England-Joseph, Judy; Bannerman, Carl J.; Fenzel, William F.; Brack, David L.; Harter, Frederick A.

1990-04-01

DOE's operations are carried out at many contractor-operated sites around the country, including major sites within the nuclear weapons complex that are involved in the production of nuclear material for weapons and naval fuel. At these sites DOE contractors routinely use and generate large quantities of a wide range of hazardous and radioactive materials. Because these materials require special handling by workers. Also pursuant to Mar. 15, 1989, request, we provided you a report entitled Nuclear Health and Safety: Need for Improved Responsiveness to Problems at DOE Sites (GAO/RCED-90-101, Mar. 28, 1990). to prevent exposure to themselves or releases into the environment, DOE's weapons complex, considered in its entirety, is among the potentially more dangerous industrial operations in the world. Over the last decade, at the request of the Congress, we have carried out a series of assessments and evaluations of various aspects of the complex. In over 60 reports and testimonies published since 1990, we have called attention to the mounting problems facing DOE's nuclear weapons complex. This body of work includes (1) identifying serious, costly, and widespread environmental, safety, and health problems at DOE facilities, (2) calling for outside independent oversight of DOE's nuclear operations, and (3) making recommendations to DOE to strengthen its oversight, providing more detailed information and plans to the Congress, and improving its management and accounting practices. In total, our reports and testimonies have included 54 recommendations to DOE, in addition to recommendations to the Congress, concerning environmental, safety, and health matters at the complex. We consider 23 of the 54 recommendations to be still open. The open recommendations call for improvements such as tighter program controls and clearer standards and policies related to environmental, safety, and health matters

Does competition influence safety?

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Pamme, H.

2000-01-01

Competition in the deregulated electricity market does not leave nuclear power plants unaffected. Operators seek to run their plants at maximum availability and with optimized cost structures so that specific generating costs are minimized. The 'costs of safety', with their fixed-cost character, are elements of this cost structure. Hence the question whether safety is going to suffer under the cost pressure on the market. The study shows that the process of economic optimization does not permit cost minimization for its own sake in the area of operating costs which can be influenced by management or are 'avoidable'. The basis of assessment rather must be potential risks which could entail losses of availability. Prophylactic investments made in order to avoid losses of availability to a large extent also imply unchanged or even higher levels of safety. Economic viability and safety thus are closely correlated. Competition in a deregulated marekt so far has not done any direct harm to plant safety. An even more efficient use of scarce funds and, hopefully, a tolerable political environment should allow the safety level of nuclear power plants to be upheld, and safety culture to be maintained, also in the future. (orig.) [de

Site evaluation for nuclear installations. Safety requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2003-01-01

This Safety Requirements publication supersedes the Code on the Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Siting, which was issued in 1988 as Safety Series No. 50-C-S (Rev. 1). It takes account of developments relating to site evaluations for nuclear installations since the Code on Siting was last revised. These developments include the issuing of the Safety Fundamentals publication on The Safety of Nuclear Installations, and the revision of various safety standards and other publications relating to safety. Requirements for site evaluation are intended to ensure adequate protection of site personnel, the public and the environment from the effects of ionizing radiation arising from nuclear installations. It is recognized that there are steady advances in technology and scientific knowledge, in nuclear safety and in what is considered adequate protection. Safety requirements change with these advances and this publication reflects the present consensus among States. This Safety Requirements publication was prepared under the IAEA programme on safety standards for nuclear installations. It establishes requirements and provides criteria for ensuring safety in site evaluation for nuclear installations. The Safety Guides on site evaluation listed in the references provide recommendations on how to meet the requirements established in this Safety Requirements publication. The objective of this publication is to establish the requirements for the elements of a site evaluation for a nuclear installation so as to characterize fully the site specific conditions pertinent to the safety of a nuclear installation. The purpose is to establish requirements for criteria, to be applied as appropriate to site and site-installation interaction in operational states and accident conditions, including those that could lead to emergency measures for: (a) Defining the extent of information on a proposed site to be presented by the applicant; (b) Evaluating a proposed site to ensure that the site

DOE Handbook: Supplementary guidance and design experience for the fusion safety standards DOE-STD-6002-96 and DOE-STD-6003-96

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1999-01-01

Two standards have been developed that pertain to the safety of fusion facilities. These are DOE- STD-6002-96, Safety of Magnetic Fusion Facilities: Requirements, and DOE-STD-6003-96, Safety of Magnetic Fusion Facilities: Guidance. The first of these standards identifies requirements that subscribers to that standard must meet to achieve safety in fusion facilities. The second standard contains guidance to assist in meeting the requirements identified inthefirst This handbook provides additional documentation on good operations and design practices as well as lessons learned from the experiences of designers and operators of previous fusion facilities and related systems. It is intended to capture the experience gained in the various fields and pass it on to designers of future fusion facilities as a means of enhancing success and safeiy. The sections of this document are presented according to the physical location of the major systems of a t%sion facility, beginning with the vacuum vessel and proceeding to those systems and components outside the vacuum vessel (the ''Ex-vessel Systems''). The last section describes administrative procedures that cannot be localized to specific components. It has been tacitly assumed that the general structure of the fusion facilities addressed is that of a tokamak though the same principles would apply to other magnetic confinement options

DARHT: INTEGRATION OF AUTHORIZATION BASIS REQUIREMENTS AND WORKER SAFETY

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

MC CLURE, D. A.; NELSON, C. A.; BOUDRIE, R. L.

2001-01-01

This document describes the results of consensus agreements reached by the DARHT Safety Planning Team during the development of the update of the DARHT Safety Analysis Document (SAD). The SAD is one of the Authorization Basis (AB) Documents required by the Department prior to granting approval to operate the DARHT Facility. The DARHT Safety Planning Team is lead by Mr. Joel A. Baca of the Department of Energy Albuquerque Operations Office (DOE/AL). Team membership is drawn from the Department of Energy Albuquerque Operations Office, the Department of Energy Los Alamos Area Office (DOE/LAAO), and several divisions of the Los Alamos National Laboratory. Revision 1 of the DARHT SAD had been written as part of the process for gaining approval to operate the Phase 1 (First Axis) Accelerator. Early in the planning stage for the required update of the SAD for the approval to operate both Phase 1 and Phase 2 (First Axis and Second Axis) DARHT Accelerator, it was discovered that a conflict existed between the Laboratory approach to describing the management of facility and worker safety

ORNL implementation of new health and safety requirements (DOE Order 5480.11)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Abercrombie, J.S.

1988-01-01

New mandates in radiological protection outlined in DOE Order 5480. 11, include changes in the methodology for determining total radiation dose, ALARA program accountability, monitoring requirements, and standards for public entrance into controlled areas. The new order places distinct requirements concerning training at all DOE facilities. Radiation protection training requirements are addressed, including the effective communication of operations changes to all employees. This paper details the endeavors underway at ORNL in designing, developing, and delivering the training required by the new mandates. Strategies taken to reach the intended goals are explained. Efforts involve the design and implementation of the above mentioned radiation protection programs, a job-specific ALARA instructional package, and a Risk-Based Philosophy program matched to operational changes. 4 refs., 5 tabs

Technical safety requirements control level verification

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

STEWART, J.L.

1999-01-01

A Technical Safety Requirement (TSR) control level verification process was developed for the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) TSRs at the Hanford Site in Richland, WA, at the direction of the US. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office (RL). The objective of the effort was to develop a process to ensure that the TWRS TSR controls are designated and managed at the appropriate levels as Safety Limits (SLs), Limiting Control Settings (LCSs), Limiting Conditions for Operation (LCOs), Administrative Controls (ACs), or Design Features. The TSR control level verification process was developed and implemented by a team of contractor personnel with the participation of Fluor Daniel Hanford, Inc. (FDH), the Project Hanford Management Contract (PHMC) integrating contractor, and RL representatives. The team was composed of individuals with the following experience base: nuclear safety analysis; licensing; nuclear industry and DOE-complex TSR preparation/review experience; tank farm operations; FDH policy and compliance; and RL-TWRS oversight. Each TSR control level designation was completed utilizing TSR control logic diagrams and TSR criteria checklists based on DOE Orders, Standards, Contractor TSR policy, and other guidance. The control logic diagrams and criteria checklists were reviewed and modified by team members during team meetings. The TSR control level verification process was used to systematically evaluate 12 LCOs, 22 AC programs, and approximately 100 program key elements identified in the TWRS TSR document. The verification of each TSR control required a team consensus. Based on the results of the process, refinements were identified and the TWRS TSRs were modified as appropriate. A final report documenting key assumptions and the control level designation for each TSR control was prepared and is maintained on file for future reference. The results of the process were used as a reference in the RL review of the final TWRS TSRs and control suite. RL

Safety of Research Reactors. Safety Requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2010-01-01

The main objective of this Safety Requirements publication is to provide a basis for safety and a basis for safety assessment for all stages in the lifetime of a research reactor. Another objective is to establish requirements on aspects relating to regulatory control, the management of safety, site evaluation, design, operation and decommissioning. Technical and administrative requirements for the safety of research reactors are established in accordance with these objectives. This Safety Requirements publication is intended for use by organizations engaged in the site evaluation, design, manufacturing, construction, operation and decommissioning of research reactors as well as by regulatory bodies

Nuclear Data Activities in Support of the DOE Nuclear Criticality Safety Program

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Westfall, R.M.; McKnight, R.D.

2005-01-01

The DOE Nuclear Criticality Safety Program (NCSP) provides the technical infrastructure maintenance for those technologies applied in the evaluation and performance of safe fissionable-material operations in the DOE complex. These technologies include an Analytical Methods element for neutron transport as well as the development of sensitivity/uncertainty methods, the performance of Critical Experiments, evaluation and qualification of experiments as Benchmarks, and a comprehensive Nuclear Data program coordinated by the NCSP Nuclear Data Advisory Group (NDAG).The NDAG gathers and evaluates differential and integral nuclear data, identifies deficiencies, and recommends priorities on meeting DOE criticality safety needs to the NCSP Criticality Safety Support Group (CSSG). Then the NDAG identifies the required resources and unique capabilities for meeting these needs, not only for performing measurements but also for data evaluation with nuclear model codes as well as for data processing for criticality safety applications. The NDAG coordinates effort with the leadership of the National Nuclear Data Center, the Cross Section Evaluation Working Group (CSEWG), and the Working Party on International Evaluation Cooperation (WPEC) of the OECD/NEA Nuclear Science Committee. The overall objective is to expedite the issuance of new data and methods to the DOE criticality safety user. This paper describes these activities in detail, with examples based upon special studies being performed in support of criticality safety for a variety of DOE operations

Codes, standards, and requirements for DOE facilities: natural phenomena design

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Webb, A.B.

1985-01-01

The basic requirements for codes, standards, and requirements are found in DOE Orders 5480.1A, 5480.4, and 6430.1. The type of DOE facility to be built and the hazards which it presents will determine the criteria to be applied for natural phenomena design. Mandatory criteria are established in the DOE orders for certain designs but more often recommended guidance is given. National codes and standards form a great body of experience from which the project engineer may draw. Examples of three kinds of facilities and the applicable codes and standards are discussed. The safety program planning approach to project management used at Westinghouse Hanford is outlined. 5 figures, 2 tables

Technical safety requirements control level verification; TOPICAL

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

STEWART, J.L.

1999-01-01

A Technical Safety Requirement (TSR) control level verification process was developed for the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) TSRs at the Hanford Site in Richland, WA, at the direction of the US. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office (RL). The objective of the effort was to develop a process to ensure that the TWRS TSR controls are designated and managed at the appropriate levels as Safety Limits (SLs), Limiting Control Settings (LCSs), Limiting Conditions for Operation (LCOs), Administrative Controls (ACs), or Design Features. The TSR control level verification process was developed and implemented by a team of contractor personnel with the participation of Fluor Daniel Hanford, Inc. (FDH), the Project Hanford Management Contract (PHMC) integrating contractor, and RL representatives. The team was composed of individuals with the following experience base: nuclear safety analysis; licensing; nuclear industry and DOE-complex TSR preparation/review experience; tank farm operations; FDH policy and compliance; and RL-TWRS oversight. Each TSR control level designation was completed utilizing TSR control logic diagrams and TSR criteria checklists based on DOE Orders, Standards, Contractor TSR policy, and other guidance. The control logic diagrams and criteria checklists were reviewed and modified by team members during team meetings. The TSR control level verification process was used to systematically evaluate 12 LCOs, 22 AC programs, and approximately 100 program key elements identified in the TWRS TSR document. The verification of each TSR control required a team consensus. Based on the results of the process, refinements were identified and the TWRS TSRs were modified as appropriate. A final report documenting key assumptions and the control level designation for each TSR control was prepared and is maintained on file for future reference. The results of the process were used as a reference in the RL review of the final TWRS TSRs and control suite. RL

DOE Defense Program (DP) safety programs. Final report, Task 003

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1998-01-01

The overall objective of the work on Task 003 of Subcontract 9-X52-W7423-1 was to provide LANL with support to the DOE Defense Program (DP) Safety Programs. The effort included the identification of appropriate safety requirements, the refinement of a DP-specific Safety Analysis Report (SAR) Format and Content Guide (FCG) and Comprehensive Review Plan (CRP), incorporation of graded approach instructions into the guidance, and the development of a safety analysis methodologies document. All tasks which were assigned under this Task Order were completed. Descriptions of the objectives of each task and effort performed to complete each objective is provided here

Identifying environmental safety and health requirements for the Fernald Environmental Restoration Management Corporation

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Beckman, W.H.; Cossel, S.C.; Alhadeff, N.; Lindamood, S.B.; Beers, J.A.

1994-01-01

This presentation will describe the Fernald Environmental Restoration Management Corporation's (FERMCO) Standards/Requirements Identification Documents (S/RlDs) Program, the unique process used to implement it, and the status of the program. We will also discuss the lessons learned as the program was implemented. The Department of Energy (DOE) established the Fernald site to produce uranium metals for the nation's defense programs in 1953. In 1989, DOE suspended production and, in 1991, the mission of the site was formally changed to one of environmental cleanup and restoration. The site was renamed the Fernald Environmental Management Project (FEMP). FERMCO's mission is to provide safe, early, and least-cost final clean-up of the site in compliance with all regulations and commitments. DOE has managed nuclear facilities primarily through its oversight of Management and Operating contractors. Comprehensive nuclear industry standards were absent when most DOE sites were first established, Management and Operating contractors had to apply existing non-nuclear industry standards and, in many cases, formulate new technical standards. Because it was satisfied with the operation of its facilities, DOE did not incorporate modern practices and standards as they became available. In March 1990, the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board issued Recommendation 90-2, which called for DOE to identify relevant standards and requirements, conduct adequacy assessments of requirements in protecting environmental, public, and worker health and safety, and determine the extent to which the requirements are being implemented. The Environmental Restoration and Waste Management Office of DOE embraced the recommendation for facilities under its control. Strict accountability requirements made it essential that FERMCO and DOE clearly identify applicable requirements necessary, determine the requirements' adequacy, and assess FERMCO's level of compliance

Safety Oversight of Decommissioning Activities at DOE Nuclear Sites

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Zull, Lawrence M.; Yeniscavich, William

2008-01-01

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

DOE standard: Integration of environment, safety, and health into facility disposition activities. Volume 1 of 2: Technical standard

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1998-05-01

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

Safety of nuclear power plants: Operation. Safety requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2004-01-01

The safety of a nuclear power plant is ensured by means of its proper siting, design, construction and commissioning, followed by the proper management and operation of the plant. In a later phase, proper decommissioning is required. This Safety Requirements publication supersedes the Code on the Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Operation, which was issued in 1988 as Safety Series No. 50-C-O (Rev. 1). The purpose of this revision was: to restructure Safety Series No. 50-C-O (Rev. 1) in the light of the basic objectives, concepts and principles in the Safety Fundamentals publication The Safety of Nuclear Installations. To be consistent with the requirements of the International Basic Safety Standards for Protection against Ionizing Radiation and for the Safety of Radiation Sources. And to reflect current practice and new concepts and technical developments. Guidance on fulfillment of these Safety Requirements may be found in the appropriate Safety Guides relating to plant operation. The objective of this publication is to establish the requirements which, in the light of experience and the present state of technology, must be satisfied to ensure the safe operation of nuclear power plants. These requirements are governed by the basic objectives, concepts and principles that are presented in the Safety Fundamentals publication The Safety of Nuclear Installations. This publication deals with matters specific to the safe operation of land based stationary thermal neutron nuclear power plants, and also covers their commissioning and subsequent decommissioning

Safety of nuclear power plants: Operation. Safety requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2003-01-01

The safety of a nuclear power plant is ensured by means of its proper siting, design, construction and commissioning, followed by the proper management and operation of the plant. In a later phase, proper decommissioning is required. This Safety Requirements publication supersedes the Code on the Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Operation, which was issued in 1988 as Safety Series No. 50-C-O (Rev. 1). The purpose of this revision was: to restructure Safety Series No. 50-C-O (Rev. 1) in the light of the basic objectives, concepts and principles in the Safety Fundamentals publication The Safety of Nuclear Installations. To be consistent with the requirements of the International Basic Safety Standards for Protection against Ionizing Radiation and for the Safety of Radiation Sources. And to reflect current practice and new concepts and technical developments. Guidance on fulfillment of these Safety Requirements may be found in the appropriate Safety Guides relating to plant operation. The objective of this publication is to establish the requirements which, in the light of experience and the present state of technology, must be satisfied to ensure the safe operation of nuclear power plants. These requirements are governed by the basic objectives, concepts and principles that are presented in the Safety Fundamentals publication The Safety of Nuclear Installations. This publication deals with matters specific to the safe operation of land based stationary thermal neutron nuclear power plants, and also covers their commissioning and subsequent decommissioning

Safety of nuclear power plants: Operation. Safety requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2000-01-01

The safety of a nuclear power plant is ensured by means of its proper siting, design, construction and commissioning, followed by the proper management and operation of the plant. In a later phase, proper decommissioning is required. This Safety Requirements publication supersedes the Code on the Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Operation, which was issued in 1988 as Safety Series No. 50-C-O (Rev. 1). The purpose of this revision was: to restructure Safety Series No. 50-C-O (Rev. 1) in the light of the basic objectives, concepts and principles in the Safety Fundamentals publication The Safety of Nuclear Installations; to be consistent with the requirements of the International Basic Safety Standards for Protection against Ionizing Radiation and for the Safety of Radiation Sources; and to reflect current practice and new concepts and technical developments. Guidance on fulfillment of these Safety Requirements may be found in the appropriate Safety Guides relating to plant operation. The objective of this publication is to establish the requirements which, in the light of experience and the present state of technology, must be satisfied to ensure the safe operation of nuclear power plants. These requirements are governed by the basic objectives, concepts and principles that are presented in the Safety Fundamentals publication The Safety of Nuclear Installations. This publication deals with matters specific to the safe operation of land based stationary thermal neutron nuclear power plants, and also covers their commissioning and subsequent decommissioning

Linking Safety Analysis to Safety Requirements

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Hansen, Kirsten Mark

Software for safety critical systems must deal with the hazards identified by safety analysistechniques: Fault trees, event trees,and cause consequence diagrams can be interpreted as safety requirements and used in the design activity. We propose that the safety analysis and the system design use...

Traceability of Software Safety Requirements in Legacy Safety Critical Systems

Science.gov (United States)

Hill, Janice L.

2007-01-01

How can traceability of software safety requirements be created for legacy safety critical systems? Requirements in safety standards are imposed most times during contract negotiations. On the other hand, there are instances where safety standards are levied on legacy safety critical systems, some of which may be considered for reuse for new applications. Safety standards often specify that software development documentation include process-oriented and technical safety requirements, and also require that system and software safety analyses are performed supporting technical safety requirements implementation. So what can be done if the requisite documents for establishing and maintaining safety requirements traceability are not available?

Technical Safety Requirements for the Gamma Irradiation Facility (GIF)

CERN Document Server

Mahn, J A E M J G

2003-01-01

This document provides the Technical Safety Requirements (TSR) for the Sandia National Laboratories Gamma Irradiation Facility (GIF). The TSR is a compilation of requirements that define the conditions, the safe boundaries, and the administrative controls necessary to ensure the safe operation of a nuclear facility and to reduce the potential risk to the public and facility workers from uncontrolled releases of radioactive or other hazardous materials. These requirements constitute an agreement between DOE and Sandia National Laboratories management regarding the safe operation of the Gamma Irradiation Facility.

Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Design. Specific Safety Requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2012-01-01

On the basis of the principles included in the Fundamental Safety Principles, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SF-1, this Safety Requirements publication establishes requirements applicable to the design of nuclear power plants. It covers the design phase and provides input for the safe operation of the power plant. It elaborates on the safety objective, safety principles and concepts that provide the basis for deriving the safety requirements that must be met for the design of a nuclear power plant. Contents: 1. Introduction; 2. Applying the safety principles and concepts; 3. Management of safety in design; 4. Principal technical requirements; 5. General plant design; 6. Design of specific plant systems.

Overview of DOE/ONS criticality safety projects

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Barber, R.W.; Brown, B.P.; Hopper, C.M.

1985-01-01

The evolution of Federal involvement with nuclear criticality safety has traversed through the 1940's and early 1950's with the Manhattan Engineering District, the 1950's and 1960's with the Atomic Energy Commission, the early 1970's with the Energy Research and Development Administration, and the late 1970's to date with the US Department of Energy. The importance of nuclear criticality safety has been maintained throughout these periods; however, criticality safety has received shifting emphases in research/applications, promulgations of regulations/standards, origins of fiscal support and organization. In June 1981 the Office of Nuclear Safety was established in response to a Department of Energy study of the impact of the March 1979 Three Mile Island accident. The organizational structure of the ONS, its program for establishing and maintaining a progressive nuclear criticality safety program, and associated projects, and current history of ONS's fiscal support of program projects is presented. With the establishment of the ONS came concomitant missions to develop and maintain nuclear safety policy and requirements, to provide independent assurance that nuclear operations are performed safely, to provide resources and management for DOE responses to nuclear accidents, and to provide technical support. In the past four years, ONS has developed and initiated a continuing Department Nuclear Criticality Safety Program in such areas as communications and information, physics of criticality, knowledge of factors affecting criticality, and computational capability

A review of the safety features of 6M packagings for DOE programs

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1988-12-01

This report, prepared by a US Department of Energy (DOE) Task Force and organized for clarity into two-page modules, argues that the US Department of Transportation (DOT) Specification-6M packagings (hereafter referred to as 6M packaging, or simply 6M) merit continued DOE use and, if necessary, DOE certification. This report is designed to address the specific requirements of a Safety Analysis Report for Packaging (SARP). While not a SARP, this report constitutes a compilation of all available documentation on 6M packagings. The authors individually, and the Task Force collectively, believe their investigation provides justification for the continued use of 6M packagings because they meet criteria for quality assurance and for safety under normal and accident conditions as defined by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations. This report may be used by DOE managers to assist in deliberations on future requirements for 6M packagings as they are required to support DOE programs. For the purpose of ready evaluation, this report includes categorical topics found in Nuclear Regulatory Guide 7.9, the topical guideline for SARPs. The format, however, will (it is hoped) pleasantly surprise customary reader expectations. For, while maintaining categorical headings and subheadings found in SARPs as a skeleton, the Task Force chose to adopt the document design principles developed by Hughes Aircraft in the 1960s, ''Sequential Thematic Organization of Publications'' (STOP). 37 figs

Licensed reactor nuclear safety criteria applicable to DOE reactors

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1993-11-01

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

Safety of Research Reactors. Specific Safety Requirements (French Edition)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2017-01-01

This Safety Requirements publication establishes requirements for all main areas of safety for research reactors, with particular emphasis on requirements for design and operation. It explains the safety objectives and concepts that form the basis for safety and safety assessment for all stages in the lifetime of a research reactor. Technical and administrative requirements for the safety of new research reactors are established in accordance with these objectives and concepts, and they are to be applied to the extent practicable for existing research reactors. The safety requirements established in this publication for the management of safety and regulatory supervision apply to site evaluation, design, manufacturing, construction, commissioning, operation (including utilization and modification), and planning for decommissioning of research reactors (including critical assemblies and subcritical assemblies). The publication is intended for use by regulatory bodies and other organizations with responsibilities in these areas and in safety analysis, verification and review, and the provision of technical support.

Guide for reviewing safety analysis reports for packaging: Review of quality assurance requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Moon, D.W.

1988-10-01

This review section describes quality assurance requirements applying to design, purchase, fabrication, handling, shipping, storing, cleaning, assembly, inspection, testing, operation, maintenance, repair, and modification of components of packaging which are important to safety. The design effort, operation's plans, and quality assurance requirements should be integrated to achieve a system in which the independent QA program is not overly stringent and the application of QA requirements is commensurate with safety significance. The reviewer must verify that the applicant's QA section in the SARP contains package-specific QA information required by DOE Orders and federal regulations that demonstrate compliance. 8 refs

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

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1995-12-01

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

A Safety Case Approach for Deep Geologic Disposal of DOE HLW and DOE SNF in Bedded Salt - 13350

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Sevougian, S. David [Advanced Nuclear Energy Programs Group, Sandia National Laboratories, P.O. Box 5800, Albuquerque, NM 87185 (United States); MacKinnon, Robert J. [Advanced Nuclear Energy Programs Group, Sandia National Laboratories, P.O. Box 5800, Albuquerque, NM 87185 (United States); Leigh, Christi D. [Defense Waste Management Programs Group, Sandia National Laboratories, P.O. Box 5800, Albuquerque, NM 87185 (United States); Hansen, Frank D. [Geoscience Research and Applications Group, Sandia National Laboratories, P.O. Box 5800, Albuquerque, NM 87185 (United States)

2013-07-01

The primary objective of this study is to investigate the feasibility and utility of developing a defensible safety case for disposal of United States Department of Energy (U.S. DOE) high-level waste (HLW) and DOE spent nuclear fuel (SNF) in a conceptual deep geologic repository that is assumed to be located in a bedded salt formation of the Delaware Basin [1]. A safety case is a formal compilation of evidence, analyses, and arguments that substantiate and demonstrate the safety of a proposed or conceptual repository. We conclude that a strong initial safety case for potential licensing can be readily compiled by capitalizing on the extensive technical basis that exists from prior work on the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), other U.S. repository development programs, and the work published through international efforts in salt repository programs such as in Germany. The potential benefits of developing a safety case include leveraging previous investments in WIPP to reduce future new repository costs, enhancing the ability to effectively plan for a repository and its licensing, and possibly expediting a schedule for a repository. A safety case will provide the necessary structure for organizing and synthesizing existing salt repository science and identifying any issues and gaps pertaining to safe disposal of DOE HLW and DOE SNF in bedded salt. The safety case synthesis will help DOE to plan its future R and D activities for investigating salt disposal using a risk-informed approach that prioritizes test activities that include laboratory, field, and underground investigations. It should be emphasized that the DOE has not made any decisions regarding the disposition of DOE HLW and DOE SNF. Furthermore, the safety case discussed herein is not intended to either site a repository in the Delaware Basin or preclude siting in other media at other locations. Rather, this study simply presents an approach for accelerated development of a safety case for a potential

A Safety Case Approach for Deep Geologic Disposal of DOE HLW and DOE SNF in Bedded Salt - 13350

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Sevougian, S. David; MacKinnon, Robert J.; Leigh, Christi D.; Hansen, Frank D.

2013-01-01

The primary objective of this study is to investigate the feasibility and utility of developing a defensible safety case for disposal of United States Department of Energy (U.S. DOE) high-level waste (HLW) and DOE spent nuclear fuel (SNF) in a conceptual deep geologic repository that is assumed to be located in a bedded salt formation of the Delaware Basin [1]. A safety case is a formal compilation of evidence, analyses, and arguments that substantiate and demonstrate the safety of a proposed or conceptual repository. We conclude that a strong initial safety case for potential licensing can be readily compiled by capitalizing on the extensive technical basis that exists from prior work on the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), other U.S. repository development programs, and the work published through international efforts in salt repository programs such as in Germany. The potential benefits of developing a safety case include leveraging previous investments in WIPP to reduce future new repository costs, enhancing the ability to effectively plan for a repository and its licensing, and possibly expediting a schedule for a repository. A safety case will provide the necessary structure for organizing and synthesizing existing salt repository science and identifying any issues and gaps pertaining to safe disposal of DOE HLW and DOE SNF in bedded salt. The safety case synthesis will help DOE to plan its future R and D activities for investigating salt disposal using a risk-informed approach that prioritizes test activities that include laboratory, field, and underground investigations. It should be emphasized that the DOE has not made any decisions regarding the disposition of DOE HLW and DOE SNF. Furthermore, the safety case discussed herein is not intended to either site a repository in the Delaware Basin or preclude siting in other media at other locations. Rather, this study simply presents an approach for accelerated development of a safety case for a potential

Safety of nuclear fuel cycle facilities. Safety requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2008-01-01

This publication covers the broad scope of requirements for fuel cycle facilities that, in light of the experience and present state of technology, must be satisfied to ensure safety for the lifetime of the facility. Topics of specific reference include aspects of nuclear fuel generation, storage, reprocessing and disposal. Contents: 1. Introduction; 2. The safety objective, concepts and safety principles; 3. Legal framework and regulatory supervision; 4. The management system and verification of safety; 5. Siting of the facility; 6. Design of the facility; 7. Construction of the facility; 8. Commissioning of the facility; 9. Operation of the facility; 10. Decommissioning of the facility; Appendix I: Requirements specific to uranium fuel fabrication facilities; Appendix II: Requirements specific to mixed oxide fuel fabrication facilities; Appendix III: Requirements specific to conversion facilities and enrichment facilities

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

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

NONE

1995-12-01

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

Leadership and Management for Safety. General Safety Requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2016-01-01

This Safety Requirements publication establishes requirements that support Principle 3 of the Fundamental Safety Principles in relation to establishing, sustaining and continuously improving leadership and management for safety and an integrated management system. It emphasizes that leadership for safety, management for safety, an effective management system and a systemic approach (i.e. an approach in which interactions between technical, human and organizational factors are duly considered) are all essential to the specification and application of adequate safety measures and to the fostering of a strong safety culture. Leadership and an effective management system will integrate safety, health, environmental, security, quality, human-and-organizational factor, societal and economic elements. The management system will ensure the fostering of a strong safety culture, regular assessment of performance and the application of lessons from experience. The publication is intended for use by regulatory bodies, operating organizations (registrants and licensees) and other organizations concerned with facilities and activities that give rise to radiation risks

Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Design. Specific Safety Requirements (Chinese Ed.)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2012-01-01

On the basis of the principles included in the Fundamental Safety Principles, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SF-1, this Safety Requirements publication establishes requirements applicable to the design of nuclear power plants. It covers the design phase and provides input for the safe operation of the power plant. It elaborates on the safety objective, safety principles and concepts that provide the basis for deriving the safety requirements that must be met for the design of a nuclear power plant. Contents: 1. Introduction; 2. Applying the safety principles and concepts; 3. Management of safety in design; 4. Principal technical requirements; 5. General plant design; 6. Design of specific plant systems.

Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Design. Specific Safety Requirements (French Ed.)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2012-01-01

On the basis of the principles included in the Fundamental Safety Principles, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SF-1, this Safety Requirements publication establishes requirements applicable to the design of nuclear power plants. It covers the design phase and provides input for the safe operation of the power plant. It elaborates on the safety objective, safety principles and concepts that provide the basis for deriving the safety requirements that must be met for the design of a nuclear power plant. Contents: 1. Introduction; 2. Applying the safety principles and concepts; 3. Management of safety in design; 4. Principal technical requirements; 5. General plant design; 6. Design of specific plant systems.

Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Design. Specific Safety Requirements (Arabic Ed.)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2012-01-01

On the basis of the principles included in the Fundamental Safety Principles, IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SF-1, this Safety Requirements publication establishes requirements applicable to the design of nuclear power plants. It covers the design phase and provides input for the safe operation of the power plant. It elaborates on the safety objective, safety principles and concepts that provide the basis for deriving the safety requirements that must be met for the design of a nuclear power plant. Contents: 1. Introduction; 2. Applying the safety principles and concepts; 3. Management of safety in design; 4. Principal technical requirements; 5. General plant design; 6. Design of specific plant systems.

Supplement to safety analysis report. 306-W building operations safety requirement

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Richey, C.R.

1979-08-01

The operations safety requirements (OSRs) presented in this report define the conditions, safe boundaries, and management control needed for safely conducting operations with radioactive materials in the Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL) 306-W building. The safety requirements are organized in five sections. Safety limits are safety-related process variables that are observable and measurable. Limiting conditions cover: equipment and technical conditions and characteristics of the facility and operations necessary for continued safe operation. Surveillance requirements prescribe the requirements for checking systems and components that are essential to safety. Equipment design controls require that changes to process equipment and systems be independently checked and approved to assure that the changes will have no adverse effect on safety. Administrative controls describe and discuss the organization and administrative systems and procedures to be used for safe operation of the facility. Details of the implementation of the operations safety requirements are prescribed by internal PNL documents such as criticality safety specifications and radiation work procedures

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

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1995-12-01

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

Safety of magnetic fusion facilities: Requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1996-05-01

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

Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Design. Specific Safety Requirements (Spanish Edition)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2012-01-01

This publication is a revision of Safety Requirements No. NS-R-1, Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Design. It establishes requirements applicable to the design of nuclear power plants and elaborates on the safety objective, safety principles and concepts that provide the basis for deriving the safety requirements that must be met for the design of a nuclear power plant. It will be useful for organizations involved in the design, manufacture, construction, modification, maintenance, operation and decommissioning of nuclear power plants, as well as for regulatory bodies. Contents: 1. Introduction; 2. Applying the safety principles and concepts; 3. Management of safety in design; 4. Principal technical requirements; 5. General plant design; 6. Design of specific plant systems.

Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Design. Specific Safety Requirements (Russian Edition)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2012-01-01

This publication is a revision of Safety Requirements No. NS-R-1, Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Design. It establishes requirements applicable to the design of nuclear power plants and elaborates on the safety objective, safety principles and concepts that provide the basis for deriving the safety requirements that must be met for the design of a nuclear power plant. It will be useful for organizations involved in the design, manufacture, construction, modification, maintenance, operation and decommissioning of nuclear power plants, as well as for regulatory bodies. Contents: 1. Introduction; 2. Applying the safety principles and concepts; 3. Management of safety in design; 4. Principal technical requirements; 5. General plant design; 6. Design of specific plant systems.

Modeling the Non-functional Requirements in the Context of Usability, Performance, Safety and Security

OpenAIRE

Sadiq, Mazhar

2007-01-01

Requirement engineering is the most significant part of the software development life cycle. Until now great emphasis has been put on the maturity of the functional requirements. But with the passage of time it reveals that the success of software development does not only pertain to the functional requirements rather non-functional requirements should also be taken into consideration. Among the non-functional requirements usability, performance, safety and security are considered important. ...

Safety design requirements for safety systems and components of JSFR

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Kubo, Shigenobu; Shimakawa, Yoshio; Yamano, Hidemasa; Kotake, Shoji

2011-01-01

Safety design requirements for JSFR were summarized taking the development targets of the FaCT project and design feature of JSFR into account. The related safety principle and requirements for Monju, CRBRP, PRISM, SPX, LWRs, IAEA standards, goals of GIF, basic principle of INPRO etc. were also taken into account so that the safety design requirements can be a next-generation global standard. The development targets for safety and reliability are set based on those of FaCT, namely, ensuring safety and reliability equal to future LWR and related fuel cycle facilities. In order to achieve these targets, the defence-in-depth concept is used as the basic safety design principle. General features of the safety design requirements are 1) Achievement of higher reliability, 2) Achievement of higher inspectability and maintainability, 3) Introduction of passive safety features, 4) Reduction of operator action needs, 5) Design consideration against Beyond Design Basis Events, 6) In-Vessel Retention of degraded core materials, 7) Prevention and mitigation against sodium chemical reactions, and 8) Design against external events. The current specific requirements for each system and component are summarized taking the basic design concept of JSFR into account, which is an advanced loop-type large-output power plant with a mixed-oxide-fuelled core. (author)

Request for Naval Reactors Comment on Proposed PROMETHEUS Space Flight Nuclear Reactor High Tier Reactor Safety Requirements and for Naval Reactors Approval to Transmit These Requirements to Jet Propulsion Laboratory

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

D. Kokkinos

2005-01-01

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

US DOE Pipeline Unplugging Requirements Development

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Rivera, J.; McDaniel, D.

2009-01-01

Department of Energy (DOE) sites around the country have an ongoing effort to transport and process several tons of radioactive waste in the form of slurry (liquids and solids) from storage tanks to processing facilities. The system of pipes used for the transportation of this waste needs technology for maintenance and for the prevention (and correction) of pipeline plugging. The unplugging technologies that have been tested and evaluated at Florida International University include ones from NuVision Engineering, AIMM and AquaMiser. NuVision's technology acts as an ocean wave does on beach erosion. It can operate on a long pipeline that has drained down below a blockage. AIMM Technology's Hydrokinetic TM process uses a sonic resonance with a cleaning water stream. This sonic resonance travels through the water stream and transfers vibration to both the pipe and the blockage. The AquaMiser line of water blasting equipment combines 15,000- to 40,000-psi water injection technology to unplug pipelines. Some sites cannot allow this level of pressure in their pipes. After reviewing the results of every test, including the benefits, advantages and disadvantages of each technology, requirements were developed for pressure, personnel training, environmental concerns, safety, and compatibility with current systems, operability, reliability, maintainability and cost. (authors)

Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Commissioning and Operation. Specific Safety Requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2016-01-01

This publication describes the requirements to be met to ensure the safe operation of nuclear power plants. It takes into account developments in areas such as long term operation of nuclear power plants, plant ageing, periodic safety review, probabilistic safety analysis and risk informed decision making processes. In addition, the requirements are governed by, and must apply, the safety objective and safety principles that are established in the IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SF-1, Fundamental Safety Principles. A review of Safety Requirements publications was commenced in 2011 following the accident in the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan. The review revealed no significant areas of weakness and resulted in just a small set of amendments to strengthen the requirements and facilitate their implementation, which are contained in the present publication

Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Commissioning and Operation. Specific Safety Requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2017-01-01

This publication is a revision of IAEA Safety Standards Series No. NS-R-2, Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Operation, and has been extended to cover the commissioning stage. It describes the requirements to be met to ensure the safe commissioning, operation, and transition from operation to decommissioning of nuclear power plants. Over recent years there have been developments in areas such as long term operation of nuclear power plants, plant ageing, periodic safety review, probabilistic safety analysis review and risk informed decision making processes. It became necessary to revise the IAEA’s Safety Requirements in these areas and to correct and/or improve the publication on the basis of feedback from its application by both the IAEA and its Member States. In addition, the requirements are governed by, and must apply, the safety objective and safety principles that are established in the IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SF-1, Fundamental Safety Principles. A review of Safety Requirements publications, initiated in 2011 following the accident in the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan, revealed no significant areas of weakness but resulted in a small set of amendments to strengthen the requirements and facilitate their implementation. These are contained in the present publication.

Preparation of Phased and Merged Safety Analysis Reports for New DOE Nuclear Facilities

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

BISHOP, G.E.

2000-01-01

The Spent Nuclear Fuels Project (SNFP) is charged with moving to storage 2,100 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel elements left over from plutonium production at DOE'S Hanford site in Washington state. Two new facilities, the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility (CVDF) and the Canister Storage Building (CSB) are in final construction. In order to meet aggressive schedule commitments, the SNFP chose to prepare the safety analysis reports (SAR's) in phases that covered only specific portions of each facility's design as it was built. Each SAR also merged the preliminary and final safety analysis reports into a single SAR, thereby covering all aspects of design, construction, and operation for that portion (phase) of the facility. A policy of ''NRC equivalency'' was also implemented in parallel with this effort, with the goal of achieving a rigor of safety analysis equivalent to that of NRC-licensed fuel processing facilities. DOE Order 5480.23. ''Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports'' allows preparation of both a phased and a merged SAR to accelerate construction schedules. However, project managers must be aware that such acceleration is not guaranteed. Managers considering this approach for their project should be cognizant of numerous obstacles that will be encountered. Merging and phasing SAR's will create new, unique, and unanticipated difficulties which may actually slow construction unless expeditiously and correctly managed. Pitfalls to be avoided and good practices to be implemented in preparing phased and merged SAR's are presented. The value of applying NRC requirements to the DOE safety analysis process is also discussed. As of December, 1999, the SNFP has completed and approved a SAR for the CVDF. Approval of the SAR for the CSB is pending

Range Flight Safety Requirements

Science.gov (United States)

Loftin, Charles E.; Hudson, Sandra M.

2018-01-01

The purpose of this NASA Technical Standard is to provide the technical requirements for the NPR 8715.5, Range Flight Safety Program, in regards to protection of the public, the NASA workforce, and property as it pertains to risk analysis, Flight Safety Systems (FSS), and range flight operations. This standard is approved for use by NASA Headquarters and NASA Centers, including Component Facilities and Technical and Service Support Centers, and may be cited in contract, program, and other Agency documents as a technical requirement. This standard may also apply to the Jet Propulsion Laboratory or to other contractors, grant recipients, or parties to agreements to the extent specified or referenced in their contracts, grants, or agreements, when these organizations conduct or participate in missions that involve range flight operations as defined by NPR 8715.5.1.2.2 In this standard, all mandatory actions (i.e., requirements) are denoted by statements containing the term “shall.”1.3 TailoringTailoring of this standard for application to a specific program or project shall be formally documented as part of program or project requirements and approved by the responsible Technical Authority in accordance with NPR 8715.3, NASA General Safety Program Requirements.

Disposal of Radioactive Waste. Specific Safety Requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2011-01-01

This publication establishes requirements applicable to all types of radioactive waste disposal facility. It is linked to the fundamental safety principles for each disposal option and establishes a set of strategic requirements that must be in place before facilities are developed. Consideration is also given to the safety of existing facilities developed prior to the establishment of present day standards. The requirements will be complemented by Safety Guides that will provide guidance on good practice for meeting the requirements for different types of waste disposal facility. Contents: 1. Introduction; 2. Protection of people and the environment; 3. Safety requirements for planning for the disposal of radioactive waste; 4. Requirements for the development, operation and closure of a disposal facility; 5. Assurance of safety; 6. Existing disposal facilities; Appendices.

Technical Safety Requirements for the Waste Storage Facilities May 2014

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Laycak, D. T. [Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (LLNL), Livermore, CA (United States)

2014-04-16

This document contains the Technical Safety Requirements (TSR) for the Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (RHWM) WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES, which include Area 625 (A625) and the Building 693 (B693) Yard Area of the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) at LLNL. The TSRs constitute requirements for safe operation of the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. These TSRs are derived from the Documented Safety Analyses for the Waste Storage Facilities (DSA) (LLNL 2011). The analysis presented therein concluded that the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are low-chemical hazard, Hazard Category 2 non-reactor nuclear facilities. The TSRs consist primarily of inventory limits and controls to preserve the underlying assumptions in the hazard and accident analyses. Further, appropriate commitments to safety programs are presented in the administrative controls sections of the TSRs. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are used by RHWM to handle and store hazardous waste, TRANSURANIC (TRU) WASTE, LOW-LEVEL WASTE (LLW), mixed waste, California combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste generated at LLNL as well as small amounts of waste from other DOE facilities, as described in the DSA. In addition, several minor treatments (e.g., size reduction and decontamination) are carried out in these facilities.

Technical Safety Requirements for the Waste Storage Facilities May 2014

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Laycak, D. T.

2014-01-01

This document contains the Technical Safety Requirements (TSR) for the Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (RHWM) WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES, which include Area 625 (A625) and the Building 693 (B693) Yard Area of the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) at LLNL. The TSRs constitute requirements for safe operation of the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. These TSRs are derived from the Documented Safety Analyses for the Waste Storage Facilities (DSA) (LLNL 2011). The analysis presented therein concluded that the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are low-chemical hazard, Hazard Category 2 non-reactor nuclear facilities. The TSRs consist primarily of inventory limits and controls to preserve the underlying assumptions in the hazard and accident analyses. Further, appropriate commitments to safety programs are presented in the administrative controls sections of the TSRs. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are used by RHWM to handle and store hazardous waste, TRANSURANIC (TRU) WASTE, LOW-LEVEL WASTE (LLW), mixed waste, California combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste generated at LLNL as well as small amounts of waste from other DOE facilities, as described in the DSA. In addition, several minor treatments (e.g., size reduction and decontamination) are carried out in these facilities.

Construction safety in DOE. Part 1, Students guide

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Handwerk, E C

1993-08-01

This report is the first part of a compilation of safety standards for construction activities on DOE facilities. This report covers the following areas: general safety and health provisions; occupational health and environmental control/haz mat; personal protective equipment; fire protection and prevention; signs, signals, and barricades; materials handling, storage, use, and disposal; hand and power tools; welding and cutting; electrical; and scaffolding.

Leadership and Management for Safety. General Safety Requirements (Arabic Edition)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2016-01-01

This Safety Requirements publication establishes requirements that support Principle 3 of the Fundamental Safety Principles in relation to establishing, sustaining and continuously improving leadership and management for safety and an integrated management system. It emphasizes that leadership for safety, management for safety, an effective management system and a systemic approach (i.e. an approach in which interactions between technical, human and organizational factors are duly considered) are all essential to the specification and application of adequate safety measures and to the fostering of a strong safety culture. Leadership and an effective management system will integrate safety, health, environmental, security, quality, human-and-organizational factors, societal and economic elements. The management system will ensure the fostering of a strong safety culture, regular assessment of performance and the application of lessons from experience. The publication is intended for use by regulatory bodies, operating organizations and other organizations concerned with facilities and activities that give rise to radiation risks.

Leadership and Management for Safety. General Safety Requirements (Chinese Edition)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2016-01-01

This Safety Requirements publication establishes requirements that support Principle 3 of the Fundamental Safety Principles in relation to establishing, sustaining and continuously improving leadership and management for safety and an integrated management system. It emphasizes that leadership for safety, management for safety, an effective management system and a systemic approach (i.e. an approach in which interactions between technical, human and organizational factors are duly considered) are all essential to the specification and application of adequate safety measures and to the fostering of a strong safety culture. Leadership and an effective management system will integrate safety, health, environmental, security, quality, human-and-organizational factors, societal and economic elements. The management system will ensure the fostering of a strong safety culture, regular assessment of performance and the application of lessons from experience. The publication is intended for use by regulatory bodies, operating organizations and other organizations concerned with facilities and activities that give rise to radiation risks.

Leadership and Management for Safety. General Safety Requirements (French Edition)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2016-01-01

This Safety Requirements publication establishes requirements that support Principle 3 of the Fundamental Safety Principles in relation to establishing, sustaining and continuously improving leadership and management for safety and an integrated management system. It emphasizes that leadership for safety, management for safety, an effective management system and a systemic approach (i.e. an approach in which interactions between technical, human and organizational factors are duly considered) are all essential to the specification and application of adequate safety measures and to the fostering of a strong safety culture. Leadership and an effective management system will integrate safety, health, environmental, security, quality, human-and-organizational factors, societal and economic elements. The management system will ensure the fostering of a strong safety culture, regular assessment of performance and the application of lessons from experience. The publication is intended for use by regulatory bodies, operating organizations and other organizations concerned with facilities and activities that give rise to radiation risks.

Leadership and Management for Safety. General Safety Requirements (Spanish Edition)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2017-01-01

his Safety Requirements publication establishes requirements that support Principle 3 of the Fundamental Safety Principles in relation to establishing, sustaining and continuously improving leadership and management for safety and an integrated management system. It emphasizes that leadership for safety, management for safety, an effective management system and a systemic approach (i.e. an approach in which interactions between technical, human and organizational factors are duly considered) are all essential to the specification and application of adequate safety measures and to the fostering of a strong safety culture. Leadership and an effective management system will integrate safety, health, environmental, security, quality, human-and-organizational factors, societal and economic elements. The management system will ensure the fostering of a strong safety culture, regular assessment of performance and the application of lessons from experience. The publication is intended for use by regulatory bodies, operating organizations and other organizations concerned with facilities and activities that give rise to radiation risks.

Safety class methodology

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Donner, E.B.; Low, J.M.; Lux, C.R.

1992-01-01

DOE Order 6430.1A, General Design Criteria (GDC), requires that DOE facilities be evaluated with respect to ''safety class items.'' Although the GDC defines safety class items, it does not provide a methodology for selecting safety class items. The methodology described in this paper was developed to assure that Safety Class Items at the Savannah River Site (SRS) are selected in a consistent and technically defensible manner. Safety class items are those in the highest of four categories determined to be of special importance to nuclear safety and, merit appropriately higher-quality design, fabrication, and industrial test standards and codes. The identification of safety class items is approached using a cascading strategy that begins at the 'safety function' level (i.e., a cooling function, ventilation function, etc.) and proceeds down to the system, component, or structure level. Thus, the items that are required to support a safety function are SCls. The basic steps in this procedure apply to the determination of SCls for both new project activities, and for operating facilities. The GDC lists six characteristics of SCls to be considered as a starting point for safety item classification. They are as follows: 1. Those items whose failure would produce exposure consequences that would exceed the guidelines in Section 1300-1.4, ''Guidance on Limiting Exposure of the Public,'' at the site boundary or nearest point of public access 2. Those items required to maintain operating parameters within the safety limits specified in the Operational Safety Requirements during normal operations and anticipated operational occurrences. 3. Those items required for nuclear criticality safety. 4. Those items required to monitor the release of radioactive material to the environment during and after a Design Basis Accident. Those items required to achieve, and maintain the facility in a safe shutdown condition 6. Those items that control Safety Class Item listed above

Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Design. Specific Safety Requirements (French Edition)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2017-01-01

This publication establishes requirements applicable to the design of nuclear power plants and elaborates on the safety objective, safety principles and concepts that provide the basis for deriving the safety requirements that must be met for the design of a nuclear power plant. It will be useful for organizations involved in design, manufacture, construction, modification, maintenance, operation and decommissioning of nuclear power plants, as well as for regulatory bodies. A review of Safety Requirements publications was commenced in 2011 following the accident in the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan. The review revealed no significant areas of weakness and resulted in just a small set of amendments to strengthen the requirements and facilitate their implementation, which are contained in the present publication.

Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Design. Specific Safety Requirements (Russian Edition)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2016-01-01

This publication establishes requirements applicable to the design of nuclear power plants and elaborates on the safety objective, safety principles and concepts that provide the basis for deriving the safety requirements that must be met for the design of a nuclear power plant. It will be useful for organizations involved in design, manufacture, construction, modification, maintenance, operation and decommissioning of nuclear power plants, as well as for regulatory bodies. A review of Safety Requirements publications was commenced in 2011 following the accident in the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan. The review revealed no significant areas of weakness and resulted in just a small set of amendments to strengthen the requirements and facilitate their implementation, which are contained in the present publication.

Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Design. Specific Safety Requirements (Arabic Edition)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2017-01-01

This publication establishes requirements applicable to the design of nuclear power plants and elaborates on the safety objective, safety principles and concepts that provide the basis for deriving the safety requirements that must be met for the design of a nuclear power plant. It will be useful for organizations involved in design, manufacture, construction, modification, maintenance, operation and decommissioning of nuclear power plants, as well as for regulatory bodies. A review of Safety Requirements publications was commenced in 2011 following the accident in the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan. The review revealed no significant areas of weakness and resulted in just a small set of amendments to strengthen the requirements and facilitate their implementation, which are contained in the present publication.

Why does Safety Culture Matter?

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Dahlgren-Persson, Kerstin

2008-01-01

Dr. Kerstin Dahlgren-Persson, from the IAEA presented a plenary paper on 'Why does safety culture matter?'. The paper discussed the main conclusions of a 1998 IAEA conference on shortcomings in safety management. The conference included case studies of TVA, Cooper, Peach Bottom, Millstone, Ontario Hydro, Barsebaeck and Oskarshamn. Common symptoms included insularity; disproportionate focus on technical issues, high initial performance, lack of corporate oversight, changing management direction and cost cutting, repeat problems, and regulatory dissatisfaction. Behind these symptoms was lack of senior utility leadership with the insight, knowledge and ability to manage the unique interaction between the technology, economics, human factors and safety in a changing nuclear environment. Shortcomings relating to the regulator included lack of criteria for when regulatory actions should be taken in response to degradations in safety management, and the inability of some regulators to influence at the senior utility management level. The paper also made the following key points: - Human error is not always symptomatic of a poor safety culture. Effective root cause analysis (such as that carried out for the Columbia accident investigation) is essential to correctly differentiate between situational issues at a point in time and those rooted in organizational culture. - Leaders change culture by holding different assumptions and by making them visible through their words and action. - Regulators should consider how their regulatory strategy influences licensees. For example, a prescriptive strategy can foster a compliance based approach

Compilation of nuclear safety criteria potential application to DOE nonreactor facilities

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1992-03-01

This bibliographic document compiles nuclear safety criteria applied to the various areas of nuclear safety addressed in a Safety Analysis Report for a nonreactor nuclear facility (NNF). The criteria listed are derived from federal regulations, Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) guides and publications, DOE and DOE contractor publications, and industry codes and standards. The titles of the chapters and sections of Regulatory Guide 3.26, ''Standard Format and Content of Safety Analysis Reports for Fuel Reprocessing Plants'' were used to format the chapters and sections of this compilation. In each section the criteria are compiled in four groups, namely: (1) Code of Federal Regulations, (2) USNRC Regulatory Guides, (3) Codes and Standards, and (4) Supplementary Information

DOE standard: Radiological control

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1999-07-01

The Department of Energy (DOE) has developed this Standard to assist line managers in meeting their responsibilities for implementing occupational radiological control programs. DOE has established regulatory requirements for occupational radiation protection in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 835 (10 CFR 835), ''Occupational Radiation Protection''. Failure to comply with these requirements may lead to appropriate enforcement actions as authorized under the Price Anderson Act Amendments (PAAA). While this Standard does not establish requirements, it does restate, paraphrase, or cite many (but not all) of the requirements of 10 CFR 835 and related documents (e.g., occupational safety and health, hazardous materials transportation, and environmental protection standards). Because of the wide range of activities undertaken by DOE and the varying requirements affecting these activities, DOE does not believe that it would be practical or useful to identify and reproduce the entire range of health and safety requirements in this Standard and therefore has not done so. In all cases, DOE cautions the user to review any underlying regulatory and contractual requirements and the primary guidance documents in their original context to ensure that the site program is adequate to ensure continuing compliance with the applicable requirements. To assist its operating entities in achieving and maintaining compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 835, DOE has established its primary regulatory guidance in the DOE G 441.1 series of Guides. This Standard supplements the DOE G 441.1 series of Guides and serves as a secondary source of guidance for achieving compliance with 10 CFR 835

DOE standard: Radiological control

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

1999-07-01

The Department of Energy (DOE) has developed this Standard to assist line managers in meeting their responsibilities for implementing occupational radiological control programs. DOE has established regulatory requirements for occupational radiation protection in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 835 (10 CFR 835), ``Occupational Radiation Protection``. Failure to comply with these requirements may lead to appropriate enforcement actions as authorized under the Price Anderson Act Amendments (PAAA). While this Standard does not establish requirements, it does restate, paraphrase, or cite many (but not all) of the requirements of 10 CFR 835 and related documents (e.g., occupational safety and health, hazardous materials transportation, and environmental protection standards). Because of the wide range of activities undertaken by DOE and the varying requirements affecting these activities, DOE does not believe that it would be practical or useful to identify and reproduce the entire range of health and safety requirements in this Standard and therefore has not done so. In all cases, DOE cautions the user to review any underlying regulatory and contractual requirements and the primary guidance documents in their original context to ensure that the site program is adequate to ensure continuing compliance with the applicable requirements. To assist its operating entities in achieving and maintaining compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 835, DOE has established its primary regulatory guidance in the DOE G 441.1 series of Guides. This Standard supplements the DOE G 441.1 series of Guides and serves as a secondary source of guidance for achieving compliance with 10 CFR 835.

The development of safety requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Jorel, M.

2009-01-01

This document describes the safety approach followed in France for the design of nuclear reactors. This safety approach is based on safety principles from which stem safety requirements that set limiting values for specific parameters. The improvements in computerized simulation, the use of more adequate new materials, a better knowledge of the concerned physical processes, the changes in the reactor operations (higher discharge burnups for instance) have to be taken into account for the definition of safety criteria and the setting of limiting values. The developments of the safety criteria linked to the risks of cladding failure and loss of primary coolant are presented. (A.C.)

Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Commissioning and Operation. Specific Safety Requirements (French Edition)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2016-01-01

This publication describes the requirements to be met to ensure the safe operation of nuclear power plants. It takes into account developments in areas such as long term operation of nuclear power plants, plant ageing, periodic safety review, probabilistic safety analysis and risk informed decision making processes. In addition, the requirements are governed by, and must apply, the safety objective and safety principles that are established in the IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SF-1, Fundamental Safety Principles. A review of Safety Requirements publications was commenced in 2011 following the accident in the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan. The review revealed no significant areas of weakness and resulted in just a small set of amendments to strengthen the requirements and facilitate their implementation, which are contained in the present publication.

Safety Design Approach for the Development of Safety Requirements for Design of Commercial HTGR

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Ohashi, Hirofumi; Sato, Hiroyuki; Nakagawa, Shigeaki; Tachibana, Yukio; Nishihara, Tetsuo; Yan, Xing; Sakaba, Nariaki; Kunitomi, Kazuhiko

2014-01-01

The research committee on “Safety requirements for HTGR design” was established in 2013 under the Atomic Energy Society of Japan to develop the draft safety requirements for the design of commercial High Temperature Gas-cooled Reactors (HTGRs), which incorporate the HTGR safety features demonstrated using the High Temperature Engineering Test Reactor (HTTR), lessons learned from the accident of Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station and requirements for the integration of the hydrogen production plants. The safety design approach for the commercial HTGRs which is a basement of the safety requirements is determined prior to the development of the safety requirements. The safety design approaches for the commercial HTGRs are to confine the radioactive materials within the coated fuel particles not only during normal operation but also during accident conditions, and the integrity of the coated fuel particles and other requiring physical barriers are protected by the inherent and passive safety features. This paper describes the main topics of the research committee, the safety design approaches and the safety functions of the commercial HTGRs determined in the research committee. (author)

Safety assessment for facilities and activities. General safety requirements. Pt. 4

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2009-01-01

The Safety Fundamentals publication, Fundamental Safety Principles, establishes principles for ensuring the protection of workers, the public and the environment, now and in the future, from harmful effects of ionizing radiation. The objective of this Safety Requirements publication is to establish the generally applicable requirements to be fulfilled in safety assessment for facilities and activities, with special attention paid to defence in depth, quantitative analyses and the application of a graded approach to the ranges of facilities and of activities that are addressed. The publication also addresses the independent verification of the safety assessment that needs to be carried out by the originators and users of the safety assessment. This publication is intended to provide a consistent and coherent basis for safety assessment across all facilities and activities, which will facilitate the transfer of good practices between organizations conducting safety assessments and will assist in enhancing the confidence of all interested parties that an adequate level of safety has been achieved for facilities and activities. The requirements, which are derived from the Fundamental Safety Principles, relate to any human activity that may cause people to be exposed to radiation risks arising from facilities and activities, as follows: Facilities includes: (a) Nuclear power plants; (b) Other reactors (such as research reactors and critical assemblies); (c) Enrichment facilities and fuel fabrication facilities; (d) Conversion facilities used to generate UF 6 ; (e) Storage and reprocessing plants for irradiated fuel; (f) Facilities for radioactive waste management where radioactive waste is treated, conditioned, stored or disposed of; (g) Any other places where radioactive materials are produced, processed, used, handled or stored; (h) Irradiation facilities for medical, industrial, research and other purposes, and any places where radiation generators are installed; (i

Safety Assessment for Facilities and Activities. General Safety Requirements. Pt. 4

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2009-01-01

The Safety Fundamentals publication, Fundamental Safety Principles, establishes principles for ensuring the protection of workers, the public and the environment, now and in the future, from harmful effects of ionizing radiation. The objective of this Safety Requirements publication is to establish the generally applicable requirements to be fulfilled in safety assessment for facilities and activities, with special attention paid to defence in depth, quantitative analyses and the application of a graded approach to the ranges of facilities and of activities that are addressed. The publication also addresses the independent verification of the safety assessment that needs to be carried out by the originators and users of the safety assessment. This publication is intended to provide a consistent and coherent basis for safety assessment across all facilities and activities, which will facilitate the transfer of good practices between organizations conducting safety assessments and will assist in enhancing the confidence of all interested parties that an adequate level of safety has been achieved for facilities and activities. The requirements, which are derived from the Fundamental Safety Principles, relate to any human activity that may cause people to be exposed to radiation risks arising from facilities and activities, as follows: Facilities includes: (a) Nuclear power plants; (b) Other reactors (such as research reactors and critical assemblies); (c) Enrichment facilities and fuel fabrication facilities; (d) Conversion facilities used to generate UF6; (e) Storage and reprocessing plants for irradiated fuel; (f) Facilities for radioactive waste management where radioactive waste is treated, conditioned, stored or disposed of; (g) Any other places where radioactive materials are produced, processed, used, handled or stored; (h) Irradiation facilities for medical, industrial, research and other purposes, and any places where radiation generators are installed; (i

Safety Assessment for Facilities and Activities. General Safety Requirements. Pt. 4

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2010-01-01

The Safety Fundamentals publication, Fundamental Safety Principles, establishes principles for ensuring the protection of workers, the public and the environment, now and in the future, from harmful effects of ionizing radiation. The objective of this Safety Requirements publication is to establish the generally applicable requirements to be fulfilled in safety assessment for facilities and activities, with special attention paid to defence in depth, quantitative analyses and the application of a graded approach to the ranges of facilities and of activities that are addressed. The publication also addresses the independent verification of the safety assessment that needs to be carried out by the originators and users of the safety assessment. This publication is intended to provide a consistent and coherent basis for safety assessment across all facilities and activities, which will facilitate the transfer of good practices between organizations conducting safety assessments and will assist in enhancing the confidence of all interested parties that an adequate level of safety has been achieved for facilities and activities. The requirements, which are derived from the Fundamental Safety Principles, relate to any human activity that may cause people to be exposed to radiation risks arising from facilities and activities, as follows: Facilities includes: (a) Nuclear power plants; (b) Other reactors (such as research reactors and critical assemblies); (c) Enrichment facilities and fuel fabrication facilities; (d) Conversion facilities used to generate UF6; (e) Storage and reprocessing plants for irradiated fuel; (f) Facilities for radioactive waste management where radioactive waste is treated, conditioned, stored or disposed of; (g) Any other places where radioactive materials are produced, processed, used, handled or stored; (h) Irradiation facilities for medical, industrial, research and other purposes, and any places where radiation generators are installed; (i

Safety Assessment for Facilities and Activities. General Safety Requirements. Pt. 4

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2009-01-01

The Safety Fundamentals publication, Fundamental Safety Principles, establishes principles for ensuring the protection of workers, the public and the environment, now and in the future, from harmful effects of ionizing radiation.? read more The objective of this Safety Requirements publication is to establish the generally applicable requirements to be fulfilled in safety assessment for facilities and activities, with special attention paid to defence in depth, quantitative analyses and the application of a graded approach to the ranges of facilities and of activities that are addressed. The publication also addresses the independent verification of the safety assessment that needs to be carried out by the originators and users of the safety assessment. This publication is intended to provide a consistent and coherent basis for safety assessment across all facilities and activities, which will facilitate the transfer of good practices between organizations conducting safety assessments and will assist in enhancing the confidence of all interested parties that an adequate level of safety has been achieved for facilities and activities. The requirements, which are derived from the Fundamental Safety Principles, relate to any human activity that may cause people to be exposed to radiation risks arising from facilities and activities, as follows: Facilities includes: (a) Nuclear power plants; (b) Other reactors (such as research reactors and critical assemblies); (c) Enrichment facilities and fuel fabrication facilities; (d) Conversion facilities used to generate UF6; (e) Storage and reprocessing plants for irradiated fuel; (f) Facilities for radioactive waste management where radioactive waste is treated, conditioned, stored or disposed of; (g) Any other places where radioactive materials are produced, processed, used, handled or stored; (h) Irradiation facilities for medical, industrial, research and other purposes, and any places where radiation generators are

Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Commissioning and Operation. Specific Safety Requirements (Arabic Edition)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2017-01-01

This publication is a revision of IAEA Safety Standards Series No. NS-R-2, Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Operation, and has been extended to cover the commissioning stage. It describes the requirements to be met to ensure the safe commissioning, operation, and transition from operation to decommissioning of nuclear power plants. Over recent years there have been developments in areas such as long term operation of nuclear power plants, plant ageing, periodic safety review, probabilistic safety analysis review and risk informed decision making processes. It became necessary to revise the IAEA’s Safety Requirements in these areas and to correct and/or improve the publication on the basis of feedback from its application by both the IAEA and its Member States. In addition, the requirements are governed by, and must apply, the safety objective and safety principles that are established in the IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SF-1, Fundamental Safety Principles. A review of Safety Requirements publications, initiated in 2011 following the accident in the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan, revealed no significant areas of weakness but resulted in a small set of amendments to strengthen the requirements and facilitate their implementation. These are contained in the present publication.

Radiation safety requirements for radionuclide laboratories

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1993-01-01

In accordance with the section 26 of the Finnish Radiation Act (592/91) the safety requirements to be taken into account in planning laboratories and other premises, which affect safety in the use of radioactive materials, are confirmed by the Finnish Centre for Radiation and Nuclear Safety. The guide specifies the requirements for laboratories and storage rooms in which radioactive materials are used or stored as unsealed sources. There are also some general instructions concerning work procedures in a radionuclide laboratory

DOE enforcement program roles and responsibilities: DOE handbook

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1995-08-01

The Price-Anderson Act provides indemnification to DOE contractors who manage and conduct nuclear activities in the DOE complex. The government acts as an insurer for these contractors against any findings of liability from the nuclear activities of the contractor within the scope of its contract. 10 CFR Part 820 establishes the legal framework for implementing DOE's Nuclear Safety Enforcement Program. Integration with other DOE organizations and programs would assure that the enforcement process properly considers the actual or potential safety significance of a violation when determining an appropriate enforcement sanction. Achieving a proactive contractor compliance assurance rather than a heavy enforcement hand, will require a foundation of cooperation and teamwork across DOE organizations. This handbook identifies the areas of interface for the DOE Enforcement Program and provides guidance on roles and responsibilities for the key DOE organizational areas. It complements DOE-HDBK-1087-95 and 1089-95

Student manual, Book 2: Orientation to occupational safety compliance in DOE

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Colley, D.L.

1993-10-01

This is a student hand-book an Occupational Safety Compliance in DOE. Topics include the following: Electrical; materials handling & storage; inspection responsibilities & procedures; general environmental controls; confined space entry; lockout/tagout; office safety, ergonomics & human factors; medical & first aid, access to records; construction safety; injury/illness reporting system; and accident investigation procedures.

Safety Analysis Report for Packaging (SARP) for USA/5790/BLF (DOE-AL) and USA/5791/BLF (DOE-AL)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Roome, L.G.; Watkins, R.A.; Bertram, R.E.; Kreider, H.B.

1980-01-01

This revised Safety Analysis Report for Packaging (SARP) includes discussions of structural integrity, thermal resistance, radiation shielding and radiological safety, nuclear criticality safety, and quality control of shipping containers. Much of the information was previously submitted to AEC/OSD/ALO and the Department of Transportation (DOT) and provided the basis for obtaining special permits DOT-SP-5790 and DOT-SP-5791 as well as the Interim Certificates of Compliance until the original SARP could be prepared and Certificates of Compliance issued by ERDA. This SARP revision incorporates information on certain design changes, the most significant of which relate to the inner container for the type 5790 package. Complete physical and technical descriptions of the packages are presented. Each package consists of a cylindrical steel inner container centered within an insulating steel drum assembly. The contents may be any radioactive materials which satisfy the requirements established in this SARP. A shipment of plutonium-238 in the form of a solid oxide is evaluated in this SARP as an example. The results of the nuclear criticality safety analysis show how much of the fissile isotopes may be shipped as Fissile Class I, II, or III for each container. Design and development considerations, the tests and evaluations required to prove the ability of the containers to withstand normal transportation conditions, and the sequence of four hypothetical accident conditions (free drop, puncture, thermal, and water immersion) are discussed. Tables, graphs, dimensional sketches, photographs, technical references, loading and shipping procedures, Mound Facility experience in using the containers, and copies of the DOE Certificates of Compliance are included. Internal reviews of the original and revised SARP's have been performed in compliance with the requirement of DOEM 5201-Part V

Investigation on regulatory requirements for radiation safety management

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Han, Eun Ok; Choi, Yoon Seok; Cho, Dae Hyung

2013-01-01

NRC recognizes that efficient management of radiation safety plan is an important factor to achieve radiation safety service. In case of Korea, the contents to perform the actual radiation safety management are legally contained in radiation safety management reports based on the Nuclear Safety Act. It is to prioritize the importance of safety regulations in each sector in accordance with the current situation of radiation and radioactive isotopes-used industry and to provide a basis for deriving safety requirements and safety regulations system maintenance by the priority of radiation safety management regulations. It would be helpful to achieve regulations to conform to reality based on international standards if consistent safety requirements is developed for domestic users, national standards and international standards on the basis of the results of questions answered by radiation safety managers, who lead on-site radiation safety management, about the priority of important factors in radioactive sources use, sales, production, moving user companies, to check whether derived configuration requirements for radiation safety management are suitable for domestic status

American National Standards and the DOE - A cooperative effort to promote nuclear criticality safety

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Rothleder, B.M.

1996-01-01

The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) new criticality safety order, DOE Order 420.1 (open-quotes Facility Safety,close quotes October 13, 1995), Sec. 4.3 (open-quotes Nuclear Criticality Safetyclose quotes), invokes, as an integral part, 12 appropriate American National Standards Institute/American Nuclear Society (ANSI/ANS) Series-8 standards for nuclear criticality safety, but with modifications. (The order that 420.1/4.3 replaced also invoked some ANSI/ANS Series-8 standards.) These modifications include DOE operation-specific exceptions to the standards and elaborations on some of the wording in the standards

Development of safety-related regulatory requirements for nuclear power in developing countries. Key issue paper no. 4

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Han, K.I.

2000-01-01

In implementing a national nuclear power program, balanced regulatory requirements are necessary to ensure nuclear safety and cost competitive nuclear power, and to help gain public acceptance. However, this is difficult due to the technology-intensive nature of the nuclear regulatory requirements, the need to reflect evolving technology and the need for cooperation among multidisciplinary technical groups. This paper suggests approaches to development of balanced nuclear regulatory requirements in developing countries related to nuclear power plant safety, radiation protection and radioactive waste management along with key technical regulatory issues. It does not deal with economic or market regulation of electric utilities using nuclear power. It suggests that national regulatory requirements be developed using IAEA safety recommendations as guidelines and safety requirements of the supplier country as a main reference after careful planning, manpower buildup and thorough study of international and supplier country's regulations. Regulation making is not recommended before experienced manpower has been accumulated. With an option that the supplier country's regulations may be used in the interim, the lack of complete national regulatory requirements should not deter introduction of nuclear power in developing countries. (author)

Development of fusion safety standards

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Longhurst, G.R.; Petti, D.A.; Dinneen, G.A.; Herring, J.S.; DeLooper, J.; Levine, J.D.; Gouge, M.J.

1996-01-01

Two new U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) standards have been prepared to assist in the design and regulation of magnetic fusion facilities. They are DOE-STD-6002-96, 'Safety of Magnetic Fusion Facilities - Requirements,' and DOE-STD-6003-96 'Safety of Magnetic Fusion Facilities - Guidance.' The first standard sets forth requirements, mostly based on the Code of Federal Regulations, deemed necessary for the safe design and operation of fusion facilities and a set of safety principles to use in the design. The second standard provides guidance on how to meet the requirements identified in DOE-STD-6002-96. It is written specifically for a facility such as the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) in the DOE regulatory environment. As technical standards, they are applicable only to the extent that compliance with these standards is included in the contracts of the developers. 7 refs., 1 fig

Safety requirements applicable to the SMART design

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Seul, Kwang Won; Kim, Wee Kyong; Kim, Hho Jung

1999-01-01

The 330 MW thermal power of integral reactor, named SMART (System integrated Modular Advanced ReacTor), is under development at KAERI for seawater desalination application and electricity generation. The final product of nuclear desalination plant (NDP) is electricity and fresh water. Thus, in addition to the protection of the public around the plant facility from the possible release of radioactive materials, the fresh water should be prevented from radioactivity contamination. In this study, to ensure the safety of SMART reactor in the early stage of design development, the safety requirements applicable to the SMART design were investigated, based on the current regulatory requirements for the existing NPPs and the advanced light water reactor (LWR) designs. The interface requirements related to the desalination facility were also investigated, based on the recent IAEA research activities pertaining to the NDP. As a result, it was found that the current regulatory requirements and guidance for the existing NPPs and advanced LWR designs are applicable to the SMART design and its safety evaluation. However, the safety requirements related to the SMART-specific design and the desalination plant are needed to develop in the future to assure the safety of the SMART reactor

HTR-PM Safety requirement and Licensing experience

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Li Fu; Zhang Zuoyi; Dong Yujie; Wu Zongxin; Sun Yuliang

2014-01-01

HTR-PM is a 200MWe modular pebble bed high temperature reactor demonstration plant which is being built in Shidao Bay, Weihai, Shandong, China. The main design parameters of HTR-PM were fixed in 2006, the basic design was completed in 2008. The review of Preliminary Safety Analysis Report (PSAR) of HTR-PM was started in April 2008, completed in September 2009. In general, HTR- PM design complies with the current safety requirement for nuclear power plant in China, no special standards are developed for modular HTR. Anyway, Chinese Nuclear Safety Authority, together with the designers, developed some dedicated design criteria for key systems and components and published the guideline for the review of safety analysis report of HTR-PM, based on the experiences from licensing of HTR-10 and new development of nuclear safety. The probabilistic safety goal for HTR-PM was also defined by the safety authority. The review of HTR-PM PSAR lasted for one and a half years, with 3 dialogues meetings and 8 topics meetings, with more than 2000 worksheets and answer sheets. The heavily discussed topics during the PSAR review process included: the requirement for the sub-atmospheric ventilation system, the utilization of PSA in design process, the scope of beyond design basis accidents, the requirement for the qualification of TRISO coating particle fuel, and etc. Because of the characteristics of first of a kind for the demonstration plant, the safety authority emphasized the requirement for the experiment and validation, the PSAR was licensed with certain licensing conditions. The whole licensing process was under control, and was re-evaluated again after Fukushima accident to be shown that the design of HTR-PM complies with current safety requirement. This is a good example for how to license a new reactor. (author)

Student manual, Book 2: Orientation to occupational safety compliance in DOE

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Colley, D.L.

1993-01-01

This is a student hand-book an Occupational Safety Compliance in DOE. Topics include the following: Electrical; materials handling ampersand storage; inspection responsibilities ampersand procedures; general environmental controls; confined space entry; lockout/tagout; office safety, ergonomics ampersand human factors; medical ampersand first aid, access to records; construction safety; injury/illness reporting system; and accident investigation procedures

IEEE Std 600: IEEE trial-use standard requirements for organizations that conduct qualification testing of safety systems equipment for use in nuclear power generating stations

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Anon.

1992-01-01

The purpose of this standard is to provide requirements for establishing a program for conducting qualification tests of safety systems equipment used in nuclear power generating stations. Compliance with the requirements of this standard does not assure the adequacy of the qualification tests performed. This standard applies to organizations that conduct qualification tests on equipment that has a definable safety function and is an identifiable part of a safety system for use in nuclear power generating stations. It requires a technical program, a quality assurance program, and a demonstrated ability to meet specified technical requirements. It does not apply to materials tests, production tests, normal performance testing, qualification by analysis, qualification by operating experience, or reliability tests such as diesel-generator multiple start tests. The intent of this standard is to achieve greater consistency, reliability, and reproducibility of test results and to provide adequate control of qualification testing of safety systems equipment

DOE Safety Metrics Indicator Program (SMIP) Fiscal Year 2000 Annual Report of Packaging- and Transportation-related Occurrences

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Dickerson, L.S.

2001-01-01

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Occurrence Reporting and Processing System (ORPS) is an interactive computer system designed to support DOE-owned or -operated facilities in reporting and processing information concerning occurrences related to facility operations. The Oak Ridge National Laboratory has been charged by the DOE National Transportation Program Albuquerque (NTPA) with the responsibility of retrieving reports and information pertaining to packaging and transportation (P and T) incidents from the centralized ORPS database. These selected reports are analyzed for safety concerns, trends, potential impact on P and T operations, and ''lessons learned'' in P and T safety. To support this analysis and trending, the Safety Metrics Indicator Program (SMIP) was established by the NTPA in fiscal year (FY) 1998. Its chief goal is to augment historical reporting of occurrence-based information by providing (1) management notification of those incidents that require attention, (2) an accurate picture of contractors' P and T-related performance, and (3) meaningful statistics on occurrences at particular sites, including comparisons among different contractor sites and between DOE and the private sector. This annual report contains information on those P and T-related occurrences reported to the ORPS during the period from October 1, 1999, through September 30, 2000. Only those incidents that occur in preparation for transport, during transport, and during unloading of hazardous material are considered as packaging- or transportation-related occurrences

Geological disposal of radioactive waste. Safety requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2006-01-01

This Safety Requirements publication is concerned with providing protection to people and the environment from the hazards associated with waste management activities related to disposal, i.e. hazards that could arise during the operating period and following closure. It sets out the protection objectives and criteria for geological disposal and establishes the requirements that must be met to ensure the safety of this disposal option, consistent with the established principles of safety for radioactive waste management. It is intended for use by those involved in radioactive waste management and in making decisions in relation to the development, operation and closure of geological disposal facilities, especially those concerned with the related regulatory aspects. This publication contains 1. Introduction; 2. Protection of human health and the environment; 3. The safety requirements for geological disposal; 4. Requirements for the development, operation and closure of geological disposal facilities; Appendix: Assurance of compliance with the safety objective and criteria; Annex I: Geological disposal and the principles of radioactive waste management; Annex II: Principles of radioactive waste management

Technical Safety Requirements for the B695 Segment

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Laycak, D

2008-09-11

Ci/g). Wastes processed often contain only depleted uranium and beta- and gamma-emitting nuclides, e.g., {sup 90}Sr, {sup 137}Cs, {sup 3}H. Chapter 5 of the DSA documents the derivation of TSRs and develops the operational limits that protect the safety envelope defined for this facility. The DSA is applicable to the handling of radioactive waste stored and treated in the B695 Segment. Section 5 of the TSR, Administrative Controls, contains those Administrative Controls necessary to ensure safe operation of the B695 Segment. A basis explanation for each of the requirements described in Section 5.5, Specific Administrative Controls is provided in Appendix B. The basis explanation does not constitute an additional requirement, but is intended as an expansion of the logic and reasoning behind development of the requirement. Programmatic Administrative Controls are addressed in Section 5.6. This introduction to the B695 Segment TSRs is not part of the TSR limits or conditions and contains no requirements related to B695 Segment operations or to the safety analyses in the DSA.

Technical Safety Requirements for the B695 Segment

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Laycak, D.

2008-01-01

Ci/g). Wastes processed often contain only depleted uranium and beta- and gamma-emitting nuclides, e.g., 90 Sr, 137 Cs, 3 H. Chapter 5 of the DSA documents the derivation of TSRs and develops the operational limits that protect the safety envelope defined for this facility. The DSA is applicable to the handling of radioactive waste stored and treated in the B695 Segment. Section 5 of the TSR, Administrative Controls, contains those Administrative Controls necessary to ensure safe operation of the B695 Segment. A basis explanation for each of the requirements described in Section 5.5, Specific Administrative Controls is provided in Appendix B. The basis explanation does not constitute an additional requirement, but is intended as an expansion of the logic and reasoning behind development of the requirement. Programmatic Administrative Controls are addressed in Section 5.6. This introduction to the B695 Segment TSRs is not part of the TSR limits or conditions and contains no requirements related to B695 Segment operations or to the safety analyses in the DSA

Technical Support Section Instrument Support Program for nuclear and nonnuclear facilities with safety requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Adkisson, B.P.; Allison, K.L.

1995-01-01

This document describes requirements, procedures, and supervisory responsibilities of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Instrumentation and Controls (I ampersand C) Division's Technical Support Section (TSS) for instrument surveillance and maintenance in nonreactor nuclear facilities having identified Operational Safety Requirements (OSRs) or Limiting Conditions Document (LCDs). Implementation of requirements comply with the requirements of U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Orders 5480.5, 5480.22, and 5481.1B; Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. (Energy Systems), Policy Procedure ESS-FS-201; and ORNL SPP X-ESH-15. OSRs and LCDs constitute an agreement or contract between DOE and the facility operating management regarding the safe operation of the facility. One basic difference between OSRs and LCDs is that violation of an OSR is considered a Category II occurrence, whereas violation of an LCD requirement is considered a Category III occurrence (see Energy Systems Standard ESS-OP-301 and ORNL SPP X-GP-13). OSRs are required for high- and moderate-hazard nuclear facilities, whereas the less-rigorous LCDs are required for low-hazard nuclear facilities and selected open-quotes generally acceptedclose quotes operations. Hazard classifications are determined through a hazard screening process, which each division conducts for its facilities

Site safety requirements for high level waste disposal

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Chen Weiming; Wang Ju

2006-01-01

This paper outlines the content, status and trend of site safety requirements of International Atomic Energy Agency, America, France, Sweden, Finland and Japan. Site safety requirements are usually represented as advantageous vis-a-vis disadvantagous conditions, and potential advantage vis-a-vis disadvantage conditions, respectively in aspects of geohydrology, geochemistry, lithology, climate and human intrusion etc. Study framework and steps of site safety requirements for China are discussed under the view of systems science. (authors)

New requirements on safety of nuclear power plants according to the IAEA safety standards

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Misak, J.

2005-01-01

In this presentation author presents new requirements on safety of nuclear power plants according to the IAEA safety standards. It is concluded that: - New set of IAEA Safety Standards is close to completion: around 40 standards for NPPs; - Different interpretation of IAEA Safety Standards at present: best world practices instead of previous 'minimum common denominator'; - A number of safety improvements required for NPPs; - Requirements related to BDBAs and severe accidents are the most demanding due to degradation of barriers: hardware modifications and accident management; - Large variety between countries in implementation of accident management programmes: from minimum to major hardware modifications; -Distinction between existing and new NPPs is essential from the point of view of the requirements; WWER 440 reactors have potential to reflect IAEA Safety Standards for existing NPPs; relatively low reactor power offers broader possibilities

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

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

1984-01-01

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

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

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1984-01-01

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

NSPWG-recommended safety requirements and guidelines for SEI nuclear propulsion

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Marshall, A.C.; Lee, J.H.; McCulloch, W.H.; Sawyer, J.C. Jr.; Bari, R.A.; Brown, N.W.; Cullingford, H.S.; Hardy, A.C.; Remp, K.; Sholtis, J.A.

1992-01-01

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

2011 Annual Criticality Safety Program Performance Summary

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Andrea Hoffman

2011-12-01

TSR limits fuel plate bundles to 1085 grams U-235, which is the maximum loading of an ATR fuel element. The overloaded fuel plate bundle contained 1097 grams U-235 and was assembled under an 1100 gram U-235 limit in 1982. In 2003, the limit was reduced to 1085 grams citing a new criticality safety evaluation for ATR fuel elements. The fuel plate bundle inventories were not checked for compliance prior to implementing the reduced limit. A subsequent review of the NMIS inventory did not identify further violations. Requirements Management - The INL Criticality Safety program is organized and well documented. The source requirements for the INL Criticality Safety Program are from 10 CFR 830.204, DOE Order 420.1B, Chapter III, 'Nuclear Criticality Safety,' ANSI/ANS 8-series Industry Standards, and DOE Standards. These source requirements are documented in LRD-18001, 'INL Criticality Safety Program Requirements Manual.' The majority of the criticality safety source requirements are contained in DOE Order 420.1B because it invokes all of the ANSI/ANS 8-Series Standards. DOE Order 420.1B also invokes several DOE Standards, including DOE-STD-3007, 'Guidelines for Preparing Criticality Safety Evaluations at Department of Energy Non-Reactor Nuclear Facilities.' DOE Order 420.1B contains requirements for DOE 'Heads of Field Elements' to approve the criticality safety program and specific elements of the program, namely, the qualification of criticality staff and the method for preparing criticality safety evaluations. This was accomplished by the approval of SAR-400, 'INL Standardized Nuclear Safety Basis Manual,' Chapter 6, 'Prevention of Inadvertent Criticality.' Chapter 6 of SAR-400 contains sufficient detail and/or reference to the specific DOE and contractor documents that adequately describe the INL Criticality Safety Program per the elements specified in DOE Order 420.1B. The Safety Evaluation Report for SAR-400

Documentation of Hanford Site independent review of the Hanford Waste Vitrification Plant Preliminary Safety Analysis Report

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Herborn, D.I.

1993-11-01

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

HANFORD SAFETY ANALYSIS & RISK ASSESSMENT HANDBOOK (SARAH)

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

EVANS, C B

2004-12-21

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

HANFORD SAFETY ANALYSIS and RISK ASSESSMENT HANDBOOK (SARAH)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

EVANS, C.B.

2004-01-01

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

Analyzing Software Requirements Errors in Safety-Critical, Embedded Systems

Science.gov (United States)

Lutz, Robyn R.

1993-01-01

This paper analyzes the root causes of safety-related software errors in safety-critical, embedded systems. The results show that software errors identified as potentially hazardous to the system tend to be produced by different error mechanisms than non- safety-related software errors. Safety-related software errors are shown to arise most commonly from (1) discrepancies between the documented requirements specifications and the requirements needed for correct functioning of the system and (2) misunderstandings of the software's interface with the rest of the system. The paper uses these results to identify methods by which requirements errors can be prevented. The goal is to reduce safety-related software errors and to enhance the safety of complex, embedded systems.

Meeting the maglev system's safety requirements

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Pierick, K

1983-12-01

The author shows how the safety requirements of the maglev track system derive from the general legal conditions for the safety of tracked transport. It is described how their compliance beyond the so-called ''development-accompanying'' and ''acceptance-preparatory'' safety work can be assured for the Transrapid test layout (TVE) now building in Emsland and also for later application as public transport system in Germany within the meaning of the General Railway Act.

Generic Safety Requirements for Developing Safe Insulin Pump Software

Science.gov (United States)

Zhang, Yi; Jetley, Raoul; Jones, Paul L; Ray, Arnab

2011-01-01

Background The authors previously introduced a highly abstract generic insulin infusion pump (GIIP) model that identified common features and hazards shared by most insulin pumps on the market. The aim of this article is to extend our previous work on the GIIP model by articulating safety requirements that address the identified GIIP hazards. These safety requirements can be validated by manufacturers, and may ultimately serve as a safety reference for insulin pump software. Together, these two publications can serve as a basis for discussing insulin pump safety in the diabetes community. Methods In our previous work, we established a generic insulin pump architecture that abstracts functions common to many insulin pumps currently on the market and near-future pump designs. We then carried out a preliminary hazard analysis based on this architecture that included consultations with many domain experts. Further consultation with domain experts resulted in the safety requirements used in the modeling work presented in this article. Results Generic safety requirements for the GIIP model are presented, as appropriate, in parameterized format to accommodate clinical practices or specific insulin pump criteria important to safe device performance. Conclusions We believe that there is considerable value in having the diabetes, academic, and manufacturing communities consider and discuss these generic safety requirements. We hope that the communities will extend and revise them, make them more representative and comprehensive, experiment with them, and use them as a means for assessing the safety of insulin pump software designs. One potential use of these requirements is to integrate them into model-based engineering (MBE) software development methods. We believe, based on our experiences, that implementing safety requirements using MBE methods holds promise in reducing design/implementation flaws in insulin pump development and evolutionary processes, therefore improving

Cold Vacuum Drying (CVD) Facility Technical Safety Requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

KRAHN, D.E.

2000-01-01

The Technical Safety Requirements (TSRs) for the Cold Vacuum Drying Facility define acceptable conditions, safe boundaries, bases thereof, and management or administrative controls required to ensure safe operation during receipt of multi-canister overpacks (MCOs) containing spent nuclear fuel. removal of free water from the MCOs using the cold vacuum drying process, and inerting and testing of the MCOs before transport to the Canister Storage Building. Controls required for public safety, significant defense in depth, significant worker safety, and for maintaining radiological and toxicological consequences below risk evaluation guidelines are included

78 FR 46560 - Pipeline Safety: Class Location Requirements

Science.gov (United States)

2013-08-01

... DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 49 CFR Part... class location requirements for gas transmission pipelines. Section 5 of the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory... and, with respect to gas transmission pipeline facilities, whether applying IMP requirements to...

Hanford Generic Interim Safety Basis

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Lavender, J.C.

1994-01-01

The purpose of this document is to identify WHC programs and requirements that are an integral part of the authorization basis for nuclear facilities that are generic to all WHC-managed facilities. The purpose of these programs is to implement the DOE Orders, as WHC becomes contractually obligated to implement them. The Hanford Generic ISB focuses on the institutional controls and safety requirements identified in DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports

Hanford Generic Interim Safety Basis

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Lavender, J.C.

1994-09-09

The purpose of this document is to identify WHC programs and requirements that are an integral part of the authorization basis for nuclear facilities that are generic to all WHC-managed facilities. The purpose of these programs is to implement the DOE Orders, as WHC becomes contractually obligated to implement them. The Hanford Generic ISB focuses on the institutional controls and safety requirements identified in DOE Order 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports.

Proposed risk evaluation guidelines for use by the DOE-AL Nuclear Explosive Safety Division in evaluating proposed shipments of nuclear components

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Just, R.A.; Love, A.F.

1997-10-01

The licensing requirements of 10 CFR 71 (US Code of Federal Regulations) are the primary criteria used to license proposed US Department of Energy (DOE) shipments of nuclear components. However, if a shipment cannot meet 10 CFR 71 requirements, a Transportation System Risk Assessment (TSRA) is prepared to document: (1) the degree of compliance of proposed DOE shipments of nuclear components with applicable federal regulations, and (2) the risk associated with the proposed shipments. The Nuclear Explosive Safety Division (NESD) of the Department of Energy, Albuquerque Area Office (DOE-AL) is responsible for evaluating TSRAs and for preparing Safety Evaluation Reports (SERs) to authorize the off-site transport. Hazards associated with the transport may include the presence of fissile material, chemically and radiologically toxic uranium, and ionizing radiation. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has historically considered only radiological hazards in licensing the transport of radiological material because the US Department of Transportation considers licensing requirements of nonradiological (i.e., chemically toxic) hazards. The requirements of 10 CFR 71 are based primarily on consideration of radiological hazards. For completeness, this report provides information for assessing the effects of chemical toxicity. Evaluating the degree of compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 71 is relatively straightforward. However, there are few precedents associated with developing TSRA risk assessments for packages that do not comply with all of the requirements of 10 CFR 71. The objective of the task is to develop Risk Evaluation Guidelines for DOE-AL to use when evaluating a TSRA. If the TSRA shows that the Risk Evaluation Guidelines are not exceeded, then from a risk perspective the TSRA should be approved if there is evidence that the ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) principle has been applied

Oversight and enforcement at DOE

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Fergus, I.E., Christopher, R.K.

1996-01-01

This paper addresses recent changes to the independent oversight and enforcement programs within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and applications to criticality safety. DOE's Office of Oversight (Oversight hereafter), in the Office of Environment, Safety, and Health (EH), independently evaluates whether management systems ensure adequate protection of the worker, public, and environment. Oversight has adopted a new approach to performing evaluations based on the guiding principles for safety management identified by the Secretary of Energy. The principles Oversight evaluates are line management responsibility for safety and health, comprehensive requirements, and competence commensurate with responsibilities. Recently, the DOE codified the implementation of integrated safety management, further expounding on these basic guiding principles and Oversight's role. The Office of Enforcement and Investigations in EH (Enforcement hereafter) is responsible for enforcement, and relevant documents describe its role. This paper briefly discusses criticality safety aspects of the twin initiatives of Oversight and Enforcement

DOE high-level waste tank safety program Final report, Task 002

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1998-01-01

The overall objective of the work on Task 002 was to provide LANL with support to the DOE High-Level Waste Tank Safety program. The objective of the work was to develop safety documentation in support of the unsafe tank mitigation activities at Hanford. The work includes the development of safety assessment and an environmental assessment. All tasks which were assigned under this Task Order were completed. Descriptions of the objectives of each task and effort performed to complete each objective are provided. The two tasks were: Task 2.1--safety assessment for instrumentation insertion; and Task 2.2--environmental assessment

Implications of safety requirements for the treatment of THMC processes in geological disposal systems for radioactive waste

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Frédéric Bernier

2017-06-01

Full Text Available The mission of nuclear safety authorities in national radioactive waste disposal programmes is to ensure that people and the environment are protected against the hazards of ionising radiations emitted by the waste. It implies the establishment of safety requirements and the oversight of the activities of the waste management organisation in charge of implementing the programme. In Belgium, the safety requirements for geological disposal rest on the following principles: defence-in-depth, demonstrability and the radiation protection principles elaborated by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP. Applying these principles requires notably an appropriate identification and characterisation of the processes upon which the safety functions fulfilled by the disposal system rely and of the processes that may affect the system performance. Therefore, research and development (R&D on safety-relevant thermo-hydro-mechanical-chemical (THMC issues is important to build confidence in the safety assessment. This paper points out the key THMC processes that might influence radionuclide transport in a disposal system and its surrounding environment, considering the dynamic nature of these processes. Their nature and significance are expected to change according to prevailing internal and external conditions, which evolve from the repository construction phase to the whole heating–cooling cycle of decaying waste after closure. As these processes have a potential impact on safety, it is essential to identify and to understand them properly when developing a disposal concept to ensure compliance with relevant safety requirements. In particular, the investigation of THMC processes is needed to manage uncertainties. This includes the identification and characterisation of uncertainties as well as for the understanding of their safety-relevance. R&D may also be necessary to reduce uncertainties of which the magnitude does not allow

International standardization of safety requirements for fast reactors

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2011-06-01

Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA) is conducting the FaCT (Fast Reactor Cycle Technology Development) project in cooperation with Japan Atomic Power Company (JAPC) and Mitsubishi FBR systems inc. (MFBR), where an advanced loop-type fast reactor named JSFR (Japan Sodium-cooled Fast Reactor) is being developed. It is important to develop software technologies (a safety guideline, safety design criteria, safety design standards etc.) of FBRs as well as hardware ones (a reactor plant itself) in order to address prospective worldwide utilization of FBR technology. Therefore, it is expected to establish a rational safety guideline applicable to the JSFR and harmonized with national nuclear-safety regulations as well, including Japan, the United States and the European Union. This report presents domestic and international status of safety guideline development for sodium-cooled fast reactors (SFRs), results of comparative study for safety requirements provided in existing documents and a proposal for safety requirements of future SFRs with a roadmap for their refinement and worldwide utilization. (author)

Safety design guides for seismic requirements for CANDU 9

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Lee, Duk Su; Chang, Woo Hyun; Lee, Nam Young; A. C. D. Wright

1996-03-01

This safety design guide for seismic requirements for CANDU 9 describes the seismic design philosophy, defines the applicable earthquakes and identifies the structures and systems requiring seismic qualification to ensure that the essential safety function can be adequately satisfied following earthquake. The detailed requirements for structures, systems and components which must be seismically qualified are specified in the Appendix. The change status of the regulatory requirements, code and standards should be traced and this safety design guide shall be updated accordingly. 1 fig., (Author) .new

Disposal of Radioactive Waste. Specific Safety Requirements (Spanish Edition)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2012-01-01

This Safety Requirements publication applies to the disposal of radioactive waste of all types by means of emplacement in designed disposal facilities, subject to the necessary limitations and controls being placed on the disposal of the waste and on the development, operation and closure of facilities. The classification of radioactive waste is discussed. This Safety Requirements publication establishes requirements to provide assurance of the radiation safety of the disposal of radioactive waste, in the operation of a disposal facility and especially after its closure. The fundamental safety objective is to protect people and the environment from harmful effects of ionizing radiation. This is achieved by setting requirements on the site selection and evaluation and design of a disposal facility, and on its construction, operation and closure, including organizational and regulatory requirements.

Fire safety requirements for electrical cables towards nuclear reactor safety

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Raju, M.R.

2002-01-01

Full text: Electrical power supply forms a very important part of any nuclear reactor. Power supplies have been categorized in to class I, II, III and IV from reliability point. The safety related equipment are provided with highly reliable power supply to achieve the safety of very high order. Vast network of cables in a nuclear reactor are grouped and segregated to ensure availability of power to at least one group under all anticipated occurrences. Since fire can result in failures leading to unavailability of power caused by common cause, both passive and active fire protection methods are adopted in addition to fire detection system. The paper describes the requirement for passive fire protection to electrical cables viz. fire barrier and fire breaks. The paper gives an account of the tests required to standardize the products. Fire safety implementation for cables in research reactors is described

Tank farms criticality safety manual

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

FORT, L.A.

2003-01-01

This document defines the Tank Farms Contractor (TFC) criticality safety program, as required by Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR-), Subpart 830.204(b)(6), ''Documented Safety Analysis'' (10 CFR- 830.204 (b)(6)), and US Department of Energy (DOE) 0 420.1A, Facility Safety, Section 4.3, ''Criticality Safety.'' In addition, this document contains certain best management practices, adopted by TFC management based on successful Hanford Site facility practices. Requirements in this manual are based on the contractor requirements document (CRD) found in Attachment 2 of DOE 0 420.1A, Section 4.3, ''Nuclear Criticality Safety,'' and the cited revisions of applicable standards published jointly by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and the American Nuclear Society (ANS) as listed in Appendix A. As an informational device, requirements directly imposed by the CRD or ANSI/ANS Standards are shown in boldface. Requirements developed as best management practices through experience and maintained consistent with Hanford Site practice are shown in italics. Recommendations and explanatory material are provided in plain type

Does unbelted safety requirement affect protection for belted occupants?

Science.gov (United States)

Hu, Jingwen; Klinich, Kathleen D; Manary, Miriam A; Flannagan, Carol A C; Narayanaswamy, Prabha; Reed, Matthew P; Andreen, Margaret; Neal, Mark; Lin, Chin-Hsu

2017-05-29

Federal regulations in the United States require vehicles to meet occupant performance requirements with unbelted test dummies. Removing the test requirements with unbelted occupants might encourage the deployment of seat belt interlocks and allow restraint optimization to focus on belted occupants. The objective of this study is to compare the performance of restraint systems optimized for belted-only occupants with those optimized for both belted and unbelted occupants using computer simulations and field crash data analyses. In this study, 2 validated finite element (FE) vehicle/occupant models (a midsize sedan and a midsize SUV) were selected. Restraint design optimizations under standardized crash conditions (U.S.-NCAP and FMVSS 208) with and without unbelted requirements were conducted using Hybrid III (HIII) small female and midsize male anthropomorphic test devices (ATDs) in both vehicles on both driver and right front passenger positions. A total of 10 to 12 design parameters were varied in each optimization using a combination of response surface method (RSM) and genetic algorithm. To evaluate the field performance of restraints optimized with and without unbelted requirements, 55 frontal crash conditions covering a greater variety of crash types than those in the standardized crashes were selected. A total of 1,760 FE simulations were conducted for the field performance evaluation. Frontal crashes in the NASS-CDS database from 2002 to 2012 were used to develop injury risk curves and to provide the baseline performance of current restraint system and estimate the injury risk change by removing the unbelted requirement. Unbelted requirements do not affect the optimal seat belt and airbag design parameters in 3 out of 4 vehicle/occupant position conditions, except for the SUV passenger side. Overall, compared to the optimal designs with unbelted requirements, optimal designs without unbelted requirements generated the same or lower total injury risks for

Southern Great Plains Safety Orientation

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Schatz, John

2014-05-01

Welcome to the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Climate Research Facility (ARM) Southern Great Plains (SGP) site. This U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) site is managed by Argonne National Laboratory (ANL). It is very important that all visitors comply with all DOE and ANL safety requirements, as well as those of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the National Fire Protection Association, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and with other requirements as applicable.

Safety of magnetic fusion facilities: Guidance

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1996-05-01

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

The main requirements of the International Basic Safety Standards

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Webb, G.A.M.

1998-01-01

The main requirements of the new international basic safety standards are discussed, including such topics as health effects of ionizing radiations, the revision of basic safety standards, the requirements for radiation protection practices, the requirements for intervention,and the field of regulatory infrastructures. (A.K.)

Safety First

Science.gov (United States)

Taft, Darryl

2011-01-01

Ned Miller does not take security lightly. As director of campus safety and emergency management at the Des Moines Area Community College (DMACC), any threat requires serious consideration. As community college administrators adopt a more proactive approach to campus safety, many institutions are experimenting with emerging technologies, including…

Regulatory Safety Requirements for Operating Nuclear Installations

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Gubela, W.

2017-01-01

The National Nuclear Regulator (NNR) is established in terms of the National Nuclear Regulator Act (Act No 47 of 1999) and its mandate and authority are conferred through sections 5 and 7 of this Act, setting out the NNR's objectives and functions, which include exercising regulatory control over siting, design, construction etc of nuclear installations through the granting of nuclear authorisations. The NNR's responsibilities embrace all those actions aimed at providing the public with confidence and assurance that the risks arising from the production of nuclear energy remain within acceptable safety limits -> Therefore: Set fundamental safety standards, conducting pro-active safety assessments, determining licence conditions and obtaining assurance of compliance. The promotional aspects of nuclear activities in South Africa are legislated by the Nuclear Energy Act (Act No 46 of 1999). The NNR approach to regulations of nuclear safety and security take into consideration, amongst others, the potential hazards associated with the facility or activity, safety related programmes, the importance of the authorisation holder's safety related processes as well as the need to exercise regulatory control over the technical aspects such as of the design and operation of a nuclear facility in ensuring nuclear safety and security. South Africa does not have national nuclear industry codes and standards. The NNR is therefore non-prescriptive as it comes to the use of industry codes and standards. Regulatory framework (current) provide for the protection of persons, property, and environment against nuclear damage, through Licensing Process: Safety standards; Safety assessment; Authorisation and conditions of authorisation; Public participation process; Compliance assurance; Enforcement

Safety study application guide

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1993-07-01

Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., (Energy Systems) is committed to performing and documenting safety analyses for facilities it manages for the Department of Energy (DOE). Included are analyses of existing facilities done under the aegis of the Safety Analysis Report Upgrade Program, and analyses of new and modified facilities. A graded approach is used wherein the level of analysis and documentation for each facility is commensurate with the magnitude of the hazard(s), the complexity of the facility and the stage of the facility life cycle. Safety analysis reports (SARs) for hazard Category 1 and 2 facilities are usually detailed and extensive because these categories are associated with public health and safety risk. SARs for Category 3 are normally much less extensive because the risk to public health and safety is slight. At Energy Systems, safety studies are the name given to SARs for Category 3 (formerly open-quotes lowclose quotes) facilities. Safety studies are the appropriate instrument when on-site risks are limited to irreversible consequences to a few people, and off-site consequences are limited to reversible consequences to a few people. This application guide provides detailed instructions for performing safety studies that meet the requirements of DOE Orders 5480.22, open-quotes Technical Safety Requirements,close quotes and 5480.23, open-quotes Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports.close quotes A seven-chapter format has been adopted for safety studies. This format allows for discussion of all the items required by DOE Order 5480.23 and for the discussions to be readily traceable to the listing in the order. The chapter titles are: (1) Introduction and Summary, (2) Site, (3) Facility Description, (4) Safety Basis, (5) Hazardous Material Management, (6) Management, Organization, and Institutional Safety Provisions, and (7) Accident Analysis

Safety Requirements and Modern Technical Requirements in Human Information Systems in Amman Hotels

OpenAIRE

Farouq Ahmad Alazzam; Sattam Rakan Allahawiah; Mohammad Nayef Alsarayreh; Kafa Hmoud Abdallah al Nawaiseh

2015-01-01

This study aimed to demonstrate the availability of Safety requirements and modern technical requirements in human information systems in Amman hotels. an the most important results of this study is the availability of security and safety requirements in human information systems In Amman hotels and The adequacy of the information that it provided .and show that all departments are not connected by appropriate and effective communication networks in adequate form . Also sophisticated operatin...

Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility interim operational safety requirements

CERN Document Server

Covey, L I

2000-01-01

The Interim Operational Safety Requirements (IOSRs) for the Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility (WESF) define acceptable conditions, safe boundaries, bases thereof, and management or administrative controls required to ensure safe operation during receipt and inspection of cesium and strontium capsules from private irradiators; decontamination of the capsules and equipment; surveillance of the stored capsules; and maintenance activities. Controls required for public safety, significant defense-in-depth, significant worker safety, and for maintaining radiological consequences below risk evaluation guidelines (EGs) are included.

Safety analysis report upgrade program at the Plutonium Facility, Los Alamos National Laboratory

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Pan, P.Y.

1993-01-01

Plutonium research and development activities have resided at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) since 1943. The function of the Plutonium Facility (PF-4) has been to perform basic special nuclear materials research and development and to support national defense and energy programs. The original Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) for PF-4 was approved by DOE in 1978. This FSAR analyzed design-basis and bounding accidents. In 1986, DOE/AL published DOE/AL Order 5481.1B, ''Safety Analysis and Review System'', as a requirement for preparation and review of safety analyses. To meet the new DOE requirements, the Facilities Management Group of the Nuclear Material Technology Division submitted a draft FSAR to DOE for approval in April 1991. This draft FSAR analyzed the new configurations and used a limited-scope probabilistic risk analysis for accident analysis. During the DOE review of the draft FSAR, DOE Order 5480.23 ''Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports'', was promulgated and was later officially released in April 1992. The new order significantly expands the scope, preparation, and maintenance efforts beyond those required in DOE/AL Order 5481.1B by requiring: description of institutional and human-factor safety programs; clear definitions of all facility-specific safety commitments; more comprehensive and detailed hazard assessment; use of new safety analysis methods; and annual updates of FSARs. This paper describes the safety analysis report (SAR) upgrade program at the Plutonium Facility in LANL. The SAR upgrade program is established to meet the requirements in DOE Order 5480.23. Described in this paper are the SAR background, authorization basis for operations, hazard classification, and technical program elements

Quantifying and Addressing the DOE Material Reactivity Requirements with Analysis and Testing of Hydrogen Storage Materials & Systems

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Khalil, Y. F. [United Technologies Research Center (UTRC), East Hartford, CT (United States)

2012-04-30

The objective of this project is to examine safety aspects of candidate hydrogen storage materials and systems being developed in the DOE Hydrogen Program. As a result of this effort, the general DOE safety target will be given useful meaning by establishing a link between the characteristics of new storage materials and the satisfaction of safety criteria. This will be accomplished through the development and application of formal risk analysis methods, standardized materials testing, chemical reactivity characterization, novel risk mitigation approaches and subscale system demonstration. The project also will collaborate with other DOE and international activities in materials based hydrogen storage safety to provide a larger, highly coordinated effort.

Richland Operations (DOE-RL) Environmental Safety Health (ES and H) FY 2000 and FY 2001 Execution Commitment Summary

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

REEP, I.E.

2000-12-01

All sites in the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Complex prepare this report annually for the DOE Office of Environment, Safety and Health (EH). The purpose of this report is to provide a summary of the previous and current year's Environment, Safety and Health (ES&H) execution commitments and the Safety and Health (S&H) resources that support these activities. The fiscal year (FY) 2000 and 2001 information and data contained in the Richland Operations Environment, Safefy and Health Fiscal Year 2002 Budget-Risk Management Summary (RL 2000a) were the basis for preparing this report. Fiscal year 2001 activities are based on the President's Amended Congressional Budget Request of $689.6 million for funding Ofice of Environmental Management (EM) $44.0 million for Fast Flux Test Facility standby less $7.0 million in anticipated DOE, Headquarters holdbacks for Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology (NE); and $55.3 million for Safeguards and Security (SAS). Any funding changes as a result of the Congressional appropriation process will be reflected in the Fiscal Year 2003 ES&H Budget-Risk Management Summary to be issued in May 2001. This report provides the end-of-year status of FY 2000 ES&H execution commitments, including actual S&H expenditures, and describes planned FY 2001 ES&H execution commitments and the S&H resources needed to support those activities. This requirement is included in the ES&H guidance contained in the FY 2002 Field Budget Call (DOE 2000).

OSHA safety requirements for hazardous chemicals in the workplace.

Science.gov (United States)

Dohms, J

1992-01-01

This article outlines the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements set forth by the Hazard Communication Standard, which has been in effect for the healthcare industry since 1987. Administrators who have not taken concrete steps to address employee health and safety issues relating to hazardous chemicals are encouraged to do so to avoid the potential of large fines for cited violations. While some states administer their own occupational safety and health programs, they must adopt standards and enforce requirements that are at least as effective as federal requirements.

Spent nuclear fuel project multi-canister overpack, additional NRC requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Garvin, L.J.

1998-01-01

The US Department of Energy (DOE), established in the K Basin Spent Nuclear Fuel Project Regulatory Policy, dated August 4, 1995 (hereafter referred to as the Policy), the requirement for new Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) Project facilities to achieve nuclear safety equivalency to comparable US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)-licensed facilities. For activities other than during transport, when the Multi-Canister Overpack (MCO) is used and resides in the Canister Storage Building (CSB), Cold Vacuum Drying (CVD) facility or Hot Conditioning System, additional NRC requirements will also apply to the MCO based on the safety functions it performs and its interfaces with the SNF Project facilities. An evaluation was performed in consideration of the MCO safety functions to identify any additional NRC requirements needed, in combination with the existing and applicable DOE requirements, to establish nuclear safety equivalency for the MCO. The background, basic safety issues and general comparison of NRC and DOE requirements for the SNF Project are presented in WHC-SD-SNF-DB-002

The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission's financial guarantee requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Ferch, R.

2006-01-01

The Nuclear Safety and Control Act gives the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) the legal authority to require licensees to provide financial guarantees in order to meet the purposes of the Act. CNSC policy and guidance with regard to financial guarantees is outlined, and the current status of financial guarantee requirements as applied to various CNSC licensees is described. (author)

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

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Hopper, Calvin Mitchell

2011-01-01

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

Systems engineered health and safety criteria for safety analysis reports

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Beitel, G.A.; Morcos, N.

1993-01-01

The world of safety analysis is filled with ambiguous words: codes and standards, consequences and risks, hazard and accident, and health and safety. These words have been subject to disparate interpretations by safety analysis report (SAR) writers, readers, and users. open-quotes Principal health and safety criteriaclose quotes has been one of the most frequently misused phrases; rarely is it used consistently or effectively. This paper offers an easily understood definition for open-quotes principal health and safety criteriaclose quotes and uses systems engineering to convert an otherwise mysterious topic into the primary means of producing an integrated SAR. This paper is based on SARs being written for environmental restoration and waste management activities for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Requirements for these SARs are prescribed in DOE Order 5480-23, open-quotes Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports.close quotes

Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Design. Specific Safety Requirements (Russian Edition); Bezopasnost' atomnykh ehlektrostantsij: proektirovanie. Konkretnye trebovaniya bezopasnosti

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

NONE

2012-04-15

This publication is a revision of Safety Requirements No. NS-R-1, Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Design. It establishes requirements applicable to the design of nuclear power plants and elaborates on the safety objective, safety principles and concepts that provide the basis for deriving the safety requirements that must be met for the design of a nuclear power plant. It will be useful for organizations involved in the design, manufacture, construction, modification, maintenance, operation and decommissioning of nuclear power plants, as well as for regulatory bodies. Contents: 1. Introduction; 2. Applying the safety principles and concepts; 3. Management of safety in design; 4. Principal technical requirements; 5. General plant design; 6. Design of specific plant systems.

Construction safety in DOE. Part 2, Students guide

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Handwerk, E.C.

1993-08-01

This report is the second part of a compilation of safety standards for construction activities on DOE facilities. This report covers the following areas: floor and wall openings; cranes, derricks, hoists, elevators, and conveyors; motor vehicles, mechanized equipment, and marine operations; excavations; concrete and masonry construction; steel erection; underground construction, caisson, cofferdams, and compressed air; demolition; blasting and the use of explosives; power transmission and distribution; rollover protective structures, overhead protection; and ladders.

Status of safety issues at licensed power plants: TMI action plan requirements, unresolved safety issues, generic safety issues

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1991-12-01

As part of ongoing US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) efforts to ensure the quality and accountability of safety issue information, a program was established whereby an annual NUREG report would be published on the status of licensee implementation and NRC verification of safety issues in major NRC requirements areas. This information was compiled and reported in three NUREG volumes. Volume 1, published in March 1991, addressed the status of of Three Mile Island (TMI) Action Plan Requirements. Volume 2, published in May 1991, addressed the status of unresolved safety issues (USIs). Volume 3, published in June 1991, addressed the implementation and verification status of generic safety issues (GSIs). This annual NUREG report combines these volumes into a single report and provides updated information as of September 30, 1991. The data contained in these NUREG reports are a product of the NRC's Safety Issues Management System (SIMS) database, which is maintained by the Project Management Staff in the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation and by NRC regional personnel. This report is to provide a comprehensive description of the implementation and verification status of TMI Action Plan Requirements, safety issues designated as USIs, and GSIs that have been resolved and involve implementation of an action or actions by licensees. This report makes the information available to other interested parties, including the public. An additional purpose of this NUREG report is to serve as a follow-on to NUREG-0933, ''A Prioritization of Generic Safety Issues,'' which tracks safety issues up until requirements are approved for imposition at licensed plants or until the NRC issues a request for action by licensees

High-Speed Maglev Trains; German Safety Requirements

Science.gov (United States)

1991-12-31

This document is a translation of technology-specific safety requirements developed : for the German Transrapid Maglev technology. These requirements were developed by a : working group composed of representatives of German Federal Railways (DB), Tes...

Technical Safety Requirements for the Waste Storage Facilities

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Larson, H L

2007-01-01

This document contains Technical Safety Requirements (TSR) for the Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (RHWM) WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES, which include Area 612 (A612) and the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) Storage Area at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The TSRs constitute requirements regarding the safe operation of the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. These TSRs are derived from the Documented Safety Analysis for the Waste Storage Facilities (DSA) (LLNL 2006). The analysis presented therein determined that the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are low-chemical hazard, Hazard Category 2 non-reactor nuclear facilities. The TSRs consist primarily of inventory limits and controls to preserve the underlying assumptions in the hazard and accident analyses. Further, appropriate commitments to safety programs are presented in the administrative controls sections of the TSRs. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are used by RHWM to handle and store hazardous waste, TRANSURANIC (TRU) WASTE, LOW-LEVEL WASTE (LLW), mixed waste, California combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste generated at LLNL as well as small amounts from other U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facilities, as described in the DSA. In addition, several minor treatments (e.g., drum crushing, size reduction, and decontamination) are carried out in these facilities. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are located in two portions of the LLNL main site. A612 is located in the southeast quadrant of LLNL. The A612 fenceline is approximately 220 m west of Greenville Road. The DWTF Storage Area, which includes Building 693 (B693), Building 696 Radioactive Waste Storage Area (B696R), and associated yard areas and storage areas within the yard, is located in the northeast quadrant of LLNL in the DWTF complex. The DWTF Storage Area fenceline is approximately 90 m west of Greenville Road. A612 and the DWTF Storage Area are subdivided into various facilities and storage

Technical Safety Requirements for the Waste Storage Facilities

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Larson, H L

2007-09-07

This document contains Technical Safety Requirements (TSR) for the Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (RHWM) WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES, which include Area 612 (A612) and the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) Storage Area at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The TSRs constitute requirements regarding the safe operation of the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. These TSRs are derived from the Documented Safety Analysis for the Waste Storage Facilities (DSA) (LLNL 2006). The analysis presented therein determined that the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are low-chemical hazard, Hazard Category 2 non-reactor nuclear facilities. The TSRs consist primarily of inventory limits and controls to preserve the underlying assumptions in the hazard and accident analyses. Further, appropriate commitments to safety programs are presented in the administrative controls sections of the TSRs. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are used by RHWM to handle and store hazardous waste, TRANSURANIC (TRU) WASTE, LOW-LEVEL WASTE (LLW), mixed waste, California combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste generated at LLNL as well as small amounts from other U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facilities, as described in the DSA. In addition, several minor treatments (e.g., drum crushing, size reduction, and decontamination) are carried out in these facilities. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are located in two portions of the LLNL main site. A612 is located in the southeast quadrant of LLNL. The A612 fenceline is approximately 220 m west of Greenville Road. The DWTF Storage Area, which includes Building 693 (B693), Building 696 Radioactive Waste Storage Area (B696R), and associated yard areas and storage areas within the yard, is located in the northeast quadrant of LLNL in the DWTF complex. The DWTF Storage Area fenceline is approximately 90 m west of Greenville Road. A612 and the DWTF Storage Area are subdivided into various facilities and storage

Development of High-Level Safety Requirements for a Pyroprocessing Facility

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Seo, Seok Jun; Jo, Woo Jin; You, Gil Sung; Choung, Won Myung; Lee, Ho Hee; Kim, Hyun Min; Jeon, Hong Rae; Ku, Jeong Hoe; Lee, Hyo Jik [KAERI, Daejeon (Korea, Republic of)

2016-05-15

Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI) has been developing a pyroproceesing technology to reduce the waste volume and recycle some elements. The pyroprocessing includes several treatment processes which are related with not only radiological and physical but also chemical and electrochemical properties. Thus, it is of importance to establish safety design requirements considering all the aspects of those properties for a reliable pyroprocessing facility. In this study, high-level requirements are presented in terms of not only radiation protection, nuclear criticality, fire protection, and seismic safety but also confinement and chemical safety for the unique characteristics of a pyroprocessing facility. Several high-level safety design requirements such as radiation protection, nuclear criticality, fire protection, seismic, confinement, and chemical processing were presented for a pyroprocessing facility. The requirements must fulfill domestic and international safety technology standards for a nuclear facility. Furthermore, additional requirements should be considered for the unique electrochemical treatments in a pyroprocessing facility.

Pressure Safety Program Implementation at ORNL

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Lower, Mark [ORNL; Etheridge, Tom [ORNL; Oland, C. Barry [XCEL Engineering, Inc.

2013-01-01

The Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is a US Department of Energy (DOE) facility that is managed by UT-Battelle, LLC. In February 2006, DOE promulgated worker safety and health regulations to govern contractor activities at DOE sites. These regulations, which are provided in 10 CFR 851, Worker Safety and Health Program, establish requirements for worker safety and health program that reduce or prevent occupational injuries, illnesses, and accidental losses by providing DOE contractors and their workers with safe and healthful workplaces at DOE sites. The regulations state that contractors must achieve compliance no later than May 25, 2007. According to 10 CFR 851, Subpart C, Specific Program Requirements, contractors must have a structured approach to their worker safety and health programs that at a minimum includes provisions for pressure safety. In implementing the structured approach for pressure safety, contractors must establish safety policies and procedures to ensure that pressure systems are designed, fabricated, tested, inspected, maintained, repaired, and operated by trained, qualified personnel in accordance with applicable sound engineering principles. In addition, contractors must ensure that all pressure vessels, boilers, air receivers, and supporting piping systems conform to (1) applicable American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (2004) Sections I through XII, including applicable code cases; (2) applicable ASME B31 piping codes; and (3) the strictest applicable state and local codes. When national consensus codes are not applicable because of pressure range, vessel geometry, use of special materials, etc., contractors must implement measures to provide equivalent protection and ensure a level of safety greater than or equal to the level of protection afforded by the ASME or applicable state or local codes. This report documents the work performed to address legacy pressure vessel deficiencies and comply

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

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

CARTER, R.P.

1999-01-01

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

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

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

CARTER, R.P.

1999-11-19

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

Discussion on several important safety requirements for the new nuclear power plant

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Yan Tianwen; Li Jigen; Zhang Lin; Feng Youcai; Jia Xiang; Li Wenhong

2013-01-01

Post the Fukushima nuclear accident, the Chinese government raised higher safety goals and safety requirements for the new nuclear power plant to be constructed. The paper expounded the important indicators of safety requirements and the aspects of safety modification that had been developed for the new NPPs. It also discussed and analyzed the main fields required by the new NPPs safety requirements in the safety goals, safety evaluation of sites, defenses of internal and external events, severe accident prevention and mitigation, design of reactor core, containment system and I and C system, and optimization of engineering measure, which gave some references to the design, construction and safety modifications of new NPPs in China. (authors)

Design requirements of communication architecture of SMART safety system

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Park, H. Y.; Kim, D. H.; Sin, Y. C.; Lee, J. Y.

2001-01-01

To develop the communication network architecture of safety system of SMART, the evaluation elements for reliability and performance factors are extracted from commercial networks and classified the required-level by importance. A predictable determinacy, status and fixed based architecture, separation and isolation from other systems, high reliability, verification and validation are introduced as the essential requirements of safety system communication network. Based on the suggested requirements, optical cable, star topology, synchronous transmission, point-to-point physical link, connection-oriented logical link, MAC (medium access control) with fixed allocation are selected as the design elements. The proposed architecture will be applied as basic communication network architecture of SMART safety system

Experience with performance based training of nuclear criticality safety engineers

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Taylor, R.G.

1993-01-01

For non-reactor nuclear facilities, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) does not require that nuclear criticality safety engineers demonstrate qualification for their job. It is likely, however, that more formalism will be required in the future. Current DOE requirements for those positions which do have to demonstrate qualification indicate that qualification should be achieved by using a systematic approach such as performance based training (PBT). Assuming that PBT would be an acceptable mechanism for nuclear criticality safety engineer training in a more formal environment, a site-specific analysis of the nuclear criticality safety engineer job was performed. Based on this analysis, classes are being developed and delivered to a target audience of newer nuclear criticality safety engineers. Because current interest is in developing training for selected aspects of the nuclear criticality safety engineer job, the analysis is incompletely developed in some areas

Software Quality Assurance for Nuclear Safety Systems

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Sparkman, D R; Lagdon, R

2004-01-01

The US Department of Energy has undertaken an initiative to improve the quality of software used to design and operate their nuclear facilities across the United States. One aspect of this initiative is to revise or create new directives and guides associated with quality practices for the safety software in its nuclear facilities. Safety software includes the safety structures, systems, and components software and firmware, support software and design and analysis software used to ensure the safety of the facility. DOE nuclear facilities are unique when compared to commercial nuclear or other industrial activities in terms of the types and quantities of hazards that must be controlled to protect workers, public and the environment. Because of these differences, DOE must develop an approach to software quality assurance that ensures appropriate risk mitigation by developing a framework of requirements that accomplishes the following goals: (sm b ullet) Ensures the software processes developed to address nuclear safety in design, operation, construction and maintenance of its facilities are safe (sm b ullet) Considers the larger system that uses the software and its impacts (sm b ullet) Ensures that the software failures do not create unsafe conditions Software designers for nuclear systems and processes must reduce risks in software applications by incorporating processes that recognize, detect, and mitigate software failure in safety related systems. It must also ensure that fail safe modes and component testing are incorporated into software design. For nuclear facilities, the consideration of risk is not necessarily sufficient to ensure safety. Systematic evaluation, independent verification and system safety analysis must be considered for software design, implementation, and operation. The software industry primarily uses risk analysis to determine the appropriate level of rigor applied to software practices. This risk-based approach distinguishes safety

TWRS safety SSCs: Requirements and characteristics

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Smith-Fewell, M.A.

1997-01-01

Safety Systems, Structures, and Components (SSCs) have been identified from hazard and accident analyses. These analyses were performed to support the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) and Basis for Interim Operation (BID). The text identifies and evaluates the SSCs and their supporting SSCs to show that they either prevent the occurrence of the accident or mitigate the consequences of the accident to below the acceptance guidelines. The requirements for the SSCs to fulfill these tasks are described

10 CFR 830.202 - Safety basis.

Science.gov (United States)

2010-01-01

... 10 Energy 4 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Safety basis. 830.202 Section 830.202 Energy DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NUCLEAR SAFETY MANAGEMENT Safety Basis Requirements § 830.202 Safety basis. (a) The contractor responsible for a hazard category 1, 2, or 3 DOE nuclear facility must establish and maintain the safety basis...

Disposal of Radioactive Waste. Specific Safety Requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2011-01-01

The IAEA's Statute authorizes the Agency to 'establish or adopt... standards of safety for protection of health and minimization of danger to life and property' - standards that the IAEA must use in its own operations, and which States can apply by means of their regulatory provisions for nuclear and radiation safety. The IAEA does this in consultation with the competent organs of the United Nations and with the specialized agencies concerned. A comprehensive set of high quality standards under regular review is a key element of a stable and sustainable global safety regime, as is the IAEA's assistance in their application. The IAEA commenced its safety standards programme in 1958. The emphasis placed on quality, fitness for purpose and continuous improvement has led to the widespread use of the IAEA standards throughout the world. The Safety Standards Series now includes unified Fundamental Safety Principles, which represent an international consensus on what must constitute a high level of protection and safety. With the strong support of the Commission on Safety Standards, the IAEA is working to promote the global acceptance and use of its standards. Standards are only effective if they are properly applied in practice. The IAEA's safety services encompass design, siting and engineering safety, operational safety, radiation safety, safe transport of radioactive material and safe management of radioactive waste, as well as governmental organization, regulatory matters and safety culture in organizations. These safety services assist Member States in the application of the standards and enable valuable experience and insights to be shared. Regulating safety is a national responsibility, and many States have decided to adopt the IAEA's standards for use in their national regulations. For parties to the various international safety conventions, IAEA standards provide a consistent, reliable means of ensuring the effective fulfilment of obligations under the

Setting clear expectations for safety basis development

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

MORENO, M.R.

2003-01-01

DOE-RL has set clear expectations for a cost-effective approach for achieving compliance with the Nuclear Safety Management requirements (10 CFR 830, Nuclear Safety Rule) which will ensure long-term benefit to Hanford. To facilitate implementation of these expectations, tools were developed to streamline and standardize safety analysis and safety document development resulting in a shorter and more predictable DOE approval cycle. A Hanford Safety Analysis and Risk Assessment Handbook (SARAH) was issued to standardized methodologies for development of safety analyses. A Microsoft Excel spreadsheet (RADIDOSE) was issued for the evaluation of radiological consequences for accident scenarios often postulated for Hanford. A standard Site Documented Safety Analysis (DSA) detailing the safety management programs was issued for use as a means of compliance with a majority of 3009 Standard chapters. An in-process review was developed between DOE and the Contractor to facilitate DOE approval and provide early course correction. As a result of setting expectations and providing safety analysis tools, the four Hanford Site waste management nuclear facilities were able to integrate into one Master Waste Management Documented Safety Analysis (WM-DSA)

Cognitive screening of older drivers does not produce safety benefits

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Siren, Anu Kristiina; Meng, Annette

2012-01-01

Although screening policies for older drivers based on chronological age are widely used in many countries, previous research has shown that increasing age does not cause higher crash rates and that consequently, chronological age per se is at best only a weak predictor of safe driving performanc...... is an example of a political measure that intuitively makes sense, but fails to produce the desired benefits. On the contrary, on a system level, it decreases the overall safety and is connected to various direct and indirect costs........ Previous research on age-based mandatory screening of older drivers has not been able to demonstrate any safety benefits from screening measures.The present study is a population-based evaluation of the safety effects that the introduction of the cognitive test as an age-based screening tool has had...

Safety Design Strategy for the Advanced Test Reactor Emergency Firewater Injection System Replacement Project

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Duckwitz, Noel

2011-01-01

In accordance with the requirements of U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 413.3B, 'Program and Project Management for the Acquisition of Capital Assets,' safety must be integrated into the design process for new or major modifications to DOE Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities. The intended purpose of this requirement involves the handling of hazardous materials, both radiological and chemical, in a way that provides adequate protection to the public, workers, and the environment. Requirements provided in DOE Order 413.3B and DOE Order 420.1B, 'Facility Safety,' and the expectations of DOE-STD-1189-2008, 'Integration of Safety into the Design Process,' provide for identification of hazards early in the project and use of an integrated team approach to design safety into the facility. This safety design strategy provides the basic safety-in-design principles and concepts that will be used for the Advanced Test Reactor Reliability Sustainment Project. While this project does not introduce new hazards to the ATR, it has the potential for significant impacts to safety-related systems, structures, and components that are credited in the ATR safety basis and are being replaced. Thus the project has been determined to meet the definition of a major modification and is being managed accordingly.

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

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

VINCENT, Andrew

2005-01-01

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

Governmental, Legal and Regulatory Framework for Safety. General Safety Requirements. Part 1

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

NONE

2010-09-15

The objective of this publication is to establish requirements in respect of the governmental, legal and regulatory framework for safety. It covers the essential aspects of the framework for establishing a regulatory body and taking other actions necessary to ensure the effective regulatory control of facilities and activities utilized for peaceful purposes. Other responsibilities and functions, such as liaison within the global safety regime and on support services for safety (including radiation protection), emergency preparedness and response, nuclear security, and the State system of accounting for and control of nuclear material, are also covered.

78 FR 9902 - DOE Response to Recommendation 2012-2 of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, Hanford...

Science.gov (United States)

2013-02-12

... Safety Board, Hanford Tank Farms Flammable Gas Safety Strategy; Correction AGENCY: Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice; Correction SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE) published a document in the Federal... Facilities Safety Board, Hanford Tank Farms Flammable Gas Safety Strategy. This document corrects an error in...

Safety evaluation report of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant safety analysis report: Contact-handled transuranic waste disposal operations

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1997-02-01

DOE 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports, requires that the US Department of Energy conduct an independent, defensible, review in order to approve a Safety Analysis Report (SAR). That review and the SAR approval basis is documented in this formal Safety Evaluation Report (SER). This SER documents the DOE's review of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant SAR and provides the Carlsbad Area Office Manager, the WIPP SAR approval authority, with the basis for approving the safety document. It concludes that the safety basis documented in the WIPP SAR is comprehensive, correct, and commensurate with hazards associated with planned waste disposal operations

Investigational new drug safety reporting requirements for human drug and biological products and safety reporting requirements for bioavailability and bioequivalence studies in humans. Final rule.

Science.gov (United States)

2010-09-29

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending its regulations governing safety reporting requirements for human drug and biological products subject to an investigational new drug application (IND). The final rule codifies the agency's expectations for timely review, evaluation, and submission of relevant and useful safety information and implements internationally harmonized definitions and reporting standards. The revisions will improve the utility of IND safety reports, reduce the number of reports that do not contribute in a meaningful way to the developing safety profile of the drug, expedite FDA's review of critical safety information, better protect human subjects enrolled in clinical trials, subject bioavailability and bioequivalence studies to safety reporting requirements, promote a consistent approach to safety reporting internationally, and enable the agency to better protect and promote public health.

45 CFR 98.41 - Health and safety requirements.

Science.gov (United States)

2010-10-01

... establishment of any new or additional requirements if existing requirements comply with the requirements of the... as grandparents, great grandparents, siblings (if living in a separate residence), aunts, and uncles... care providers” does not include grandparents, great grandparents, siblings (if such providers live in...

Final report on DOE nuclear facilities

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1991-11-01

Risk analysis policy and guidance should be developed, especially for the non-DOE nuclear facilities. Minimum standards should be set on issues including risk management, the scope and depth of risk analysis (e.g., site-wide analysis, worker risk), and approaches to treatment of external events. Continued vigilance is required in maintaining operation staffing levels at the DOE research and testing reactors. Safety Analysis Reports should be updated to reflect the evolving configurations of the facilities and the current safety analysis requirements. The high-level waste storage programs at Hanford, Savannah River and INEL were evaluated. The Department of Energy has not adopted a cleanup policy with specific, clear objectives. DOE should define the respective roles of Headquarters, the field offices, and the M ampersand O contractors. The proposed budget priority setting system should not be implemented. The plan to develop a nation-wide programmatic environmental impact statement (PEIS) should be rethought. An environmental impact statement on the total cleanup program is inconsistent with the localized nature of cleanup decisionmaking. DOE must provide for significant improvements in its radiation protection and safety programs to meet current, and future, technical, engineering, and scientific procedures and practices for controlling sources and contamination, performing external and internal dosimetry, and implementing incident response plans, including applicable protective action guides. The culture of safety is not yet well established at Rocky Flats. The philosophy of the Department of Energy and the management of Rocky Flats is not understood, accepted and believed by the work force. The Advisory Committee has serious concerns about whether DOE's current program at WIPP will be able to demonstrate, in a timely manner, compliance with EPA's proposed long-term performance and human intrusion requirements for disposal of TRU and high-level radioactive wastes

Operating safety requirements for the intermediate level liquid waste system

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1980-07-01

The operation of the Intermediate Level Liquid Waste (ILW) System, which is described in the Final Safety Analysis, consists of two types of operations, namely: (1) the operation of a tank farm which involves the storage and transportation through pipelines of various radioactive liquids; and (2) concentration of the radioactive liquids by evaporation including rejection of the decontaminated condensate to the Waste Treatment Plant and retention of the concentrate. The following safety requirements in regard to these operations are presented: safety limits and limiting control settings; limiting conditions for operation; and surveillance requirements. Staffing requirements, reporting requirements, and steps to be taken in the event of an abnormal occurrence are also described

The practical implementation of integrated safety management for nuclear safety analysis and fire hazards analysis documentation

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

COLLOPY, M.T.

1999-01-01

In 1995 Mr. Joseph DiNunno of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board issued an approach to describe the concept of an integrated safety management program which incorporates hazard and safety analysis to address a multitude of hazards affecting the public, worker, property, and the environment. Since then the U S . Department of Energy (DOE) has adopted a policy to systematically integrate safety into management and work practices at all levels so that missions can be completed while protecting the public, worker, and the environment. While the DOE and its contractors possessed a variety of processes for analyzing fire hazards at a facility, activity, and job; the outcome and assumptions of these processes have not always been consistent for similar types of hazards within the safety analysis and the fire hazard analysis. Although the safety analysis and the fire hazard analysis are driven by different DOE Orders and requirements, these analyses should not be entirely independent and their preparation should be integrated to ensure consistency of assumptions, consequences, design considerations, and other controls. Under the DOE policy to implement an integrated safety management system, identification of hazards must be evaluated and agreed upon to ensure that the public. the workers. and the environment are protected from adverse consequences. The DOE program and contractor management need a uniform, up-to-date reference with which to plan. budget, and manage nuclear programs. It is crucial that DOE understand the hazards and risks necessarily to authorize the work needed to be performed. If integrated safety management is not incorporated into the preparation of the safety analysis and the fire hazard analysis, inconsistencies between assumptions, consequences, design considerations, and controls may occur that affect safety. Furthermore, confusion created by inconsistencies may occur in the DOE process to grant authorization of the work. In accordance with

Multimegawatt Space Reactor Safety

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Stanley, M.L.

1989-01-01

The Multimegawatt (MMW) Space Reactor Project supports the Strategic Defense Initiative Office requirement to provide reliable, safe, cost-effective, electrical power in the MMW range. Specifically, power may be used for neutral particle beams, free electron lasers, electromagnetic launchers, and orbital transfer vehicles. This power plant technology may also apply to the electrical power required for other uses such as deep-space probes and planetary exploration. The Multimegawatt Space Reactor Project, the Thermionic Fuel Element Verification Program, and Centaurus Program all support the Multimegawatt Space Nuclear Power Program and form an important part of the US Department of Energy's (DOE's) space and defense power systems activities. A major objective of the MMW project is the development of a reference flight system design that provides the desired levels of public safety, health protection, and special nuclear material (SNM) protection when used during its designated missions. The safety requirements for the MMW project are a hierarchy of requirements that consist of safety requirements/regulations, a safety policy, general safety criteria, safety technical specifications, safety design specifications, and the system design. This paper describes the strategy and philosophy behind the development of the safety requirements imposed upon the MMW concept developers. The safety organization, safety policy, generic safety issues, general safety criteria, and the safety technical specifications are discussed

Philosophy and safety requirements for land-based nuclear installations

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Kellermann, Otto

1978-01-01

The main ideas of safety philosophy for land-based nuclear installations are presented together with their background of protection goals. Today's requirements for design and quality assurance are deductively shown. Finally a proposition is made for a new balancing of safety philosophy according to the high safety level that nuclear installations have reached

Cross-index to DOE-prescribed occupational safety codes and standards

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1982-01-01

A compilation of detailed information from more than three hundred and fifty DOE-prescribed or OSHA-referenced industrial safety codes and standards is presented. Condensed data from individual code portions are listed according to reference code, section, paragraph and page. A glossary of letter initials/abbreviations for the organizations or documents whose codes or standards are contained in this Cross-Index, is listed

Safety integrity requirements for computer based I ampersand C systems

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Thuy, N.N.Q.; Ficheux-Vapne, F.

1997-01-01

In order to take into account increasingly demanding functional requirements, many instrumentation and control (I ampersand C) systems in nuclear power plants are implemented with computers. In order to ensure the required safety integrity of such equipment, i.e., to ensure that they satisfactorily perform the required safety functions under all stated conditions and within stated periods of time, requirements applicable to these equipment and to their life cycle need to be expressed and followed. On the other hand, the experience of the last years has led EDF (Electricite de France) and its partners to consider three classes of systems and equipment, according to their importance to safety. In the EPR project (European Pressurized water Reactor), these classes are labeled E1A, E1B and E2. The objective of this paper is to present the outline of the work currently done in the framework of the ETC-I (EPR Technical Code for I ampersand C) regarding safety integrity requirements applicable to each of the three classes. 4 refs., 2 figs

A comparison of the difference of requirements between functional safety and nuclear safety controllers

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Chen, C.K.; Lee, C.L.; Shyu, S.S. [Inst. of Nuclear Energy Research, Taoyuan, Taiwan (China)

2014-07-01

In order to establish self-reliant capabilities of nuclear I&C systems in Taiwan, Taiwan's Nuclear I&C System (TNICS) project had been established by Institute of Nuclear Energy Research (INER). A Triple Modular Redundant (TMR) safety controller (SCS-2000) has been completed and gone through the IEC 61508 Safety Integrity Level 3 (SIL3) certification of Functional Safety for industries. Based on the certification processes, the difference of requirements between Functional Safety and Nuclear Safety controllers in term of hardware and software are addressed in this study. Besides, the measures used to determine and verify the reliability of the safety control system design are presented. (author)

Predisposal management of radioactive waste. General safety requirements. Pt. 5

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2009-01-01

The objective of this Safety Requirements publication is to establish, the requirements that must be satisfied in the predisposal management of radioactive waste. This publication sets out the objectives, criteria and requirements for the protection of human health and the environment that apply to the siting, design, construction, commissioning, operation and shutdown of facilities for the predisposal management of radioactive waste, and the requirements that must be met to ensure the safety of such facilities and activities. This Safety Requirements publication applies to the predisposal management of radioactive waste of all types and covers all the steps in its management from its generation up to its disposal, including its processing (pretreatment, treatment and conditioning), storage and transport. Such waste may arise from the commissioning, operation and decommissioning of nuclear facilities; the use of radionuclides in medicine, industry, agriculture, research and education; the processing of materials that contain naturally occurring radionuclides; and the remediation of contaminated areas. The introduction of the document (Section 1) informs about its objective, scope and structure. The protection of human health and the environment is considered in Section 2 of this publication. Section 3 establishes requirements for the responsibilities associated with the predisposal management of radioactive waste. Requirements for the principal approaches to and the elements of the predisposal management of radioactive waste are established in Section 4. Section 5 establishes requirements for the safe development and operation of predisposal radioactive waste management facilities and safe conduct of activities. The Annex presents a discussion of the consistency of the safety requirements established in this publication with the fundamental safety principles

Recommended general safety requirements for nuclear power plants

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1983-06-01

This report presents recommendations for a set of general safety requirements that could form the basis for the licensing of nuclear power plants by the Atomic Energy Control Board. In addition to a number of recommended deterministic requirements the report includes criteria for the acceptability of the design of such plants based upon the calculated probability and consequence (in terms of predicted radiation dose to members of the public) of potential fault sequences. The report also contains a historical review of nuclear safety principles and practices in Canada

Evaluation of safety, an unavoidable requirement in the applications of ionizing radiations

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Jova Sed, Luis Andres

2013-01-01

The safety assessments should be conducted as a means to evaluate compliance with safety requirements (and thus the application of fundamental safety principles) for all facilities and activities in order to determine the measures to be taken to ensure safety. It is an essential tool in decision making. For long time we have linked the safety assessment to nuclear facilities and not to all practices involving the use of ionizing radiation in daily life. However, the main purpose of the safety assessment is to determine if it has reached an appropriate level of safety for an installation or activity and if it has fulfilled the objectives of safety and basic safety criteria set by the designer, operating organization and the regulatory body under the protection and safety requirements set out in the International Basic safety Standards for Protection against Ionizing Radiation and for the Safety of Radiation Sources. This paper presents some criteria and personal experiences with the new international recommendations on this subject and its practical application in the region and demonstrates the importance of this requirement. Reflects the need to train personnel of the operator and the regulatory body in the proportional application of this requirement in practice with ionizing radiation

Safety of Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facilities. Safety Requirements (Arabic Edition)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2015-01-01

This publication covers the broad scope of requirements for fuel cycle facilities that, in light of the experience and present state of technology, must be satisfied to ensure safety for the lifetime of the facility. Topics of specific relevance include aspects of nuclear fuel generation, storage, reprocessing and disposal

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

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

NONE

1998-05-01

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

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

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1998-05-01

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

Risk and safety requirements for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in allergology

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Kowalski, Marek L; Ansotegui, Ignacio; Aberer, Werner

2016-01-01

One of the major concerns in the practice of allergy is related to the safety of procedures for the diagnosis and treatment of allergic disease. Management (diagnosis and treatment) of hypersensitivity disorders involves often intentional exposure to potentially allergenic substances (during skin...... attempted to present general requirements necessary to assure the safety of these procedures. Following review of available literature a group of allergy experts within the World Allergy Organization (WAO), representing various continents and areas of allergy expertise, presents this report on risk...... associated with diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in allergology and proposes a consensus on safety requirements for performing procedures in allergy offices. Optimal safety measures including appropriate location, type and required time of supervision, availability of safety equipment, access...

Requirements to be met by a safety philosophy

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Hahn, L.

1990-01-01

The author's assessment of the use of safety philosophies is that, since 'safety philosophers' still are not certain whether a safety philosophy ought to be applicable to just one, particular technology, or rather to a variety of different technologies, there is reason to state that the required ethical, philosophical and political foundations to build a safety philosophy on are still missing. And this, the author presumes, is one of the reasons why our society to a far extent is incapable of acting, faced not only with the nuclear issue, but also with the present and future ecological challenge. (orig./DG) [de

Defence-in-depth and development of safety requirements for advanced nuclear reactors

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Carnino, A.; Gasparini, M.

2002-01-01

The paper addresses a general approach for the preparation of the design safety requirements using the IAEA Safety Objectives and the strategy of defence-in-depth. It proposes a general method (top-down approach) to prepare safety requirements for a given kind of reactor using the IAEA requirements for nuclear power plants as a starting point through a critical interpretation and application of the strategy of defence-in-depth. The IAEA has recently developed a general methodology for screening the defence-in-depth of nuclear power plants starting from the fundamental safety objectives as proposed in the IAEA Safety Fundamentals. This methodology may provide a useful tool for the preparation of safety requirements for the design and operation of any kind of reactor. Currently the IAEA is preparing the technical basis for the development of safety requirements for Modular High Temperature Gas Reactors, with the aim of showing the viability of the method. A draft TECDOC has been prepared and circulated among several experts for comments. This paper is largely based on the content of the draft TECDOC. (authors)

Guidance for preparation of safety analysis reports for nonreactor facilities and operations

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1992-01-01

Department of Energy (DOE) Orders 5480.23, ''Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports,'' and 5481.1B, ''Safety Analysis and Review System'' require the preparation of appropriate safety analyses for each DOE operation and subsequent significant modifications including decommissioning, and independent review of each safety analysis. The purpose of this guide is to assist in the preparation and review of safety documentation for Oak Ridge Field Office (OR) nonreactor facilities and operation. Appendix A lists DOE Orders, NRC Regulatory Guides and other documents applicable to the preparation of safety analysis reports

Safety research needs for Russian-designed reactors. Requirements situation

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Brown, R. Allan; Holmstrom, Heikki; Reocreux, Michel; Schulz, Helmut; Liesch, Klaus; Santarossa, Giampiero; Hayamizu, Yoshitaka; Asmolov, Vladimir; Bolshov, Leonid; Strizhov, Valerii; Bougaenko, Sergei; Nikitin, Yuri N.; Proklov, Vladimir; Potapov, Alexandre; Kinnersly, Stephen R.; Voronin, Leonid M.; Honekamp, John R.; Frescura, Gianni M.; Maki, Nobuo; Reig, Javier; ); Bekjord, Eric S.; Rosinger, Herbert E.

1998-01-01

In June 1995, an OECD Support Group was set up to perform a broad study of the safety research needs of Russian-designed reactors. The emphasis of the study is on the VVER-type reactors in part because of the larger base of knowledge within the NEA Member countries related to LWRs. For the RBMKs, the study does not make the judgement that such reactors can be brought to acceptable levels of safety but focuses on near term efforts that can contribute to reducing the risk to the public. The need for the safety research must be evaluated in context of the lifetime of the reactors. The principal outcome of the work of the Support Group is the identification of a number of research topics which the members believe should receive priority attention over the next several years if risk levels are to be reduced and public safety enhanced. These appear in the Conclusions and Recommendations section of the report, and are the following: - The most important near-term need for VVER and RBMK safety research is to establish a sound technical basis for the emergency operating procedures used by the plant staff to prevent or halt the progression of accidents (i.e., Accident Management) and for plant safety improvements. - Co-operation of Western and Eastern experts should help to avoid East-West know-how gaps in the future, as safety technology continues to improve. - Safety research in Eastern countries will make an important contribution to public safety as it has in OECD countries. - RBMK safety research, including verification of codes, starts from a smaller base of experience than VVER, and is at an earlier stage of development. Technical Conclusions: - Research to improve human performance and operational safety of VVER and RBMK plants is extremely important. - VVER thermal-hydraulic and reactor physics research should focus on full validation of codes to VVER-specific features, and on extension of experimental data base. - Methods of assessing VVER pressure boundary

Governmental, Legal and Regulatory Framework for Safety. General Safety Requirements. Part 1, Revision 1 (Chinese Edition)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2016-01-01

This publication establishes requirements in respect of the governmental, legal and regulatory framework for safety. It covers the essential aspects of the framework for establishing a regulatory body and taking other actions necessary to ensure the effective regulatory control of facilities and activities utilized for peaceful purposes. Other responsibilities and functions, such as liaison within the global safety regime and on support services for safety (including radiation protection), emergency preparedness and response, nuclear security, and the State system of accounting for and control of nuclear material, are also covered. A review of Safety Requirements publications was commenced in 2011 following the accident in the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan. The review revealed no significant areas of weakness and resulted in just a small set of amendments to strengthen the requirements and facilitate their implementation, which are contained in the present publication.

Safety Design Strategy for the Advanced Test Reactor Diesel Bus (E-3) and Switchgear Replacement Project

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Duckwitz, Noel

2011-01-01

In accordance with the requirements of U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 413.3B, 'Program and Project Management for the Acquisition of Capital Assets,' safety must be integrated into the design process for new or major modifications to DOE Hazard Category 1, 2, and 3 nuclear facilities. The intended purpose of this requirement involves the handling of hazardous materials, both radiological and chemical, in a way that provides adequate protection to the public, workers, and the environment. Requirements provided in DOE Order 413.3B and DOE Order 420.1B, 'Facility Safety,' and the expectations of DOE-STD-1189-2008, 'Integration of Safety into the Design Process,' provide for identification of hazards early in the project and use of an integrated team approach to design safety into the facility. This safety design strategy provides the basic safety-in-design principles and concepts that will be used for the Advanced Test Reactor Reliability Sustainment Project. While this project does not introduce new hazards to the ATR, it has the potential for significant impacts to safety-related systems, structures, and components that are credited in the ATR safety basis and are being replaced. Thus the project has been determined to meet the definition of a major modification and is being managed accordingly.

EPR meets the next generation PWR safety requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Bouteille, Francois; Czech, Juergen; Sloan, Sandra

2006-01-01

At the origin was the common decision in 1989 of Framatome and Siemens to cooperate to design a Nuclear Island which meets the future needs of utilities. EDF and a group of main German Utilities joined this effort in 1991 and from that point were completely involved in the progress of the work. Compliance of the EPR with the European Utility Requirements (EUR) was verified to ensure a large acceptability of the design by other participating utilities. In addition, the entire process was backed up to the end of 1998 by the French and the German Safety Authorities which engaged into a long-lasting cooperation to define common requirements applicable to future Nuclear Power Plants. Upon signature of the Olkiluoto 3 contract, STUK, the Finnish safety and radiation authority, began reviewing the design of the EPR. Upon the favorable recommendation of STUK, the Finnish government delivered a Construction License for the Olkiluoto 3 NPP on February 17, 2005. Following the positive conclusion of the political debate in France with regard to nuclear energy, EDF will also submit a request to start the construction of an EPR on the Flamanville site. In the US, the first steps in view of a Design Certification by the NRC have been taken. These three independent decisions make the EPR the leading first generation 3+ design under construction. Important safety functions are assured by separate systems in a straightforward operating mode. Four separate, redundant trains for all safety systems are installed in four separate layout division for which a strict separation is ensured so that common mode failure, for example due to internal hazards, can be ruled out. A reduction in common mode failure potential is also obtained by design rules ensuring the systematic application of functional diversity. A four train-redundancy for the major safety systems provides flexibility in adapting the design to maintenance requirements, thus contributing to reduce the outage duration. Additional

Predisposal Management of Radioactive Waste. General Safety Requirements Pt. 5

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2010-01-01

There are a large number of facilities and activities around the world in which radioactive material is produced, handled and stored. This Safety Requirements publication presents international consensus requirements for the management of radioactive waste prior to its disposal. It provides the safety imperatives on the basis of which facilities can be designed, operated and regulated. The publication is supported by a number of Safety Guides that provide up to date recommendations and guidance on best practices for management of particular types of radioactive waste, for storage of radioactive waste, for assuring safety by developing safety cases and supporting safety assessments, and for applying appropriate management systems. Contents: 1. Introduction; 2. Protection of human health and the environment; 3. Responsibilities associated with the predisposal management of radioactive waste; 4. Steps in the predisposal management of radioactive waste; 5. Development and operation of predisposal radioactive waste management facilities and activities; Annex: Predisposal management of radioactive waste and the fundamental safety principles.

Predisposal Management of Radioactive Waste. General Safety Requirements Pt. 5

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2009-01-01

There are a large number of facilities and activities around the world in which radioactive material is produced, handled and stored. This Safety Requirements publication presents international consensus requirements for the management of radioactive waste prior to its disposal. It provides the safety imperatives on the basis of which facilities can be designed, operated and regulated. The publication is supported by a number of Safety Guides that provide up to date recommendations and guidance on best practices for management of particular types of radioactive waste, for storage of radioactive waste, for assuring safety by developing safety cases and supporting safety assessments, and for applying appropriate management systems. Contents: 1. Introduction; 2. Protection of human health and the environment; 3. Responsibilities associated with the predisposal management of radioactive waste; 4. Steps in the predisposal management of radioactive waste; 5. Development and operation of predisposal radioactive waste management facilities and activities; Annex: Predisposal management of radioactive waste and the fundamental safety principles.

Operational accidents and radiation exposures at DOE facilities. Fiscal year 1978

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1978-01-01

Comprehensive safety programs are maintained at DOE facilities in order to protect both personnel and property from accidents. To ensure compliance with safety standards and regulations and maximize effectiveness of the safety programs, an extensive inspection and appraisal program is conducted at the contractor and field office levels by both DOE field and Headquarters safety personnel. When accidents do occur, investigations are conducted to identify causes and determine managerial or safety actions needed to prevent similar occurrences. DOE safety requirements include the reporting of personnel injury, property and motor vehicle losses on a quarterly basis, and radiation doses on an annual basis. The radiation dose data for CY 1978 are presented and reviewed in this report. All other data in this report are for FY 1978

Feed tank transfer requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Freeman-Pollard, J.R.

1998-01-01

This document presents a definition of tank turnover; DOE responsibilities; TWRS DST permitting requirements; TWRS Authorization Basis (AB) requirements; TWRS AP Tank Farm operational requirements; unreviewed safety question (USQ) requirements; records and reporting requirements, and documentation which will require revision in support of transferring a DST in AP Tank Farm to a privatization contractor for use during Phase 1B

Engineering design guidelines for nuclear criticality safety

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Waltz, W.R.

1988-08-01

This document provides general engineering design guidelines specific to nuclear criticality safety for a facility where the potential for a criticality accident exists. The guide is applicable to the design of new SRP/SRL facilities and to major modifications Of existing facilities. The document is intended an: A guide for persons actively engaged in the design process. A resource document for persons charged with design review for adequacy relative to criticality safety. A resource document for facility operating personnel. The guide defines six basic criticality safety design objectives and provides information to assist in accomplishing each objective. The guide in intended to supplement the design requirements relating to criticality safety contained in applicable Department of Energy (DOE) documents. The scope of the guide is limited to engineering design guidelines associated with criticality safety and does not include other areas of the design process, such as: criticality safety analytical methods and modeling, nor requirements for control of the design process

Tank Farms Technical Safety Requirements. Volume 1 and 2

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

CASH, R.J.

2000-01-01

The Technical Safety Requirements (TSRs) define the acceptable conditions, safe boundaries, basis thereof, and controls to ensure safe operation during authorized activities, for facilities within the scope of the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR)

Tank Farms Technical Safety Requirements [VOL 1 and 2

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

CASH, R.J.

2000-12-28

The Technical Safety Requirements (TSRs) define the acceptable conditions, safe boundaries, basis thereof, and controls to ensure safe operation during authorized activities, for facilities within the scope of the Tank Waste Remediation System (TWRS) Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR).

Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Design. Specific Safety Requirements (Spanish Edition); Seguridad de las centrales nucleares: Diseno. Requisitos de seguridad especificos

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

NONE

2012-04-15

This publication is a revision of Safety Requirements No. NS-R-1, Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Design. It establishes requirements applicable to the design of nuclear power plants and elaborates on the safety objective, safety principles and concepts that provide the basis for deriving the safety requirements that must be met for the design of a nuclear power plant. It will be useful for organizations involved in the design, manufacture, construction, modification, maintenance, operation and decommissioning of nuclear power plants, as well as for regulatory bodies. Contents: 1. Introduction; 2. Applying the safety principles and concepts; 3. Management of safety in design; 4. Principal technical requirements; 5. General plant design; 6. Design of specific plant systems.

Hazard Analysis and Safety Requirements for Small Drone Operations: To What Extent Do Popular Drones Embed Safety?

Science.gov (United States)

Plioutsias, Anastasios; Karanikas, Nektarios; Chatzimihailidou, Maria Mikela

2018-03-01

Currently, published risk analyses for drones refer mainly to commercial systems, use data from civil aviation, and are based on probabilistic approaches without suggesting an inclusive list of hazards and respective requirements. Within this context, this article presents: (1) a set of safety requirements generated from the application of the systems theoretic process analysis (STPA) technique on a generic small drone system; (2) a gap analysis between the set of safety requirements and the ones met by 19 popular drone models; (3) the extent of the differences between those models, their manufacturers, and the countries of origin; and (4) the association of drone prices with the extent they meet the requirements derived by STPA. The application of STPA resulted in 70 safety requirements distributed across the authority, manufacturer, end user, or drone automation levels. A gap analysis showed high dissimilarities regarding the extent to which the 19 drones meet the same safety requirements. Statistical results suggested a positive correlation between drone prices and the extent that the 19 drones studied herein met the safety requirements generated by STPA, and significant differences were identified among the manufacturers. This work complements the existing risk assessment frameworks for small drones, and contributes to the establishment of a commonly endorsed international risk analysis framework. Such a framework will support the development of a holistic and methodologically justified standardization scheme for small drone flights. © 2017 Society for Risk Analysis.

Technical Safety Requirements for the Waste Storage Facilities

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Laycak, D.T.

2010-01-01

This document contains Technical Safety Requirements (TSR) for the Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (RHWM) WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES, which include Area 625 (A625) and the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) Storage Area at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The TSRs constitute requirements regarding the safe operation of the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. These TSRs are derived from the Documented Safety Analysis for the Waste Storage Facilities (DSA) (LLNL 2009). The analysis presented therein determined that the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are low-chemical hazard, Hazard Category 2 non-reactor nuclear facilities. The TSRs consist primarily of inventory limits and controls to preserve the underlying assumptions in the hazard and accident analyses. Further, appropriate commitments to safety programs are presented in the administrative controls sections of the TSRs. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are used by RHWM to handle and store hazardous waste, TRANSURANIC (TRU) WASTE, LOW-LEVEL WASTE (LLW), mixed waste, California combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste generated at LLNL as well as small amounts from other U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facilities, as described in the DSA. In addition, several minor treatments (e.g., size reduction and decontamination) are carried out in these facilities. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are located in two portions of the LLNL main site. A625 is located in the southeast quadrant of LLNL. The A625 fenceline is approximately 225 m west of Greenville Road. The DWTF Storage Area, which includes Building 693 (B693), Building 696 Radioactive Waste Storage Area (B696R), and associated yard areas and storage areas within the yard, is located in the northeast quadrant of LLNL in the DWTF complex. The DWTF Storage Area fenceline is approximately 90 m west of Greenville Road. A625 and the DWTF Storage Area are subdivided into various facilities and storage areas, consisting

Technical Safety Requirements for the Waste Storage Facilities

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Laycak, D T

2008-06-16

This document contains Technical Safety Requirements (TSR) for the Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (RHWM) WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES, which include Area 625 (A625) and the Decontamination and Waste Treatment Facility (DWTF) Storage Area at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The TSRs constitute requirements regarding the safe operation of the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES. These TSRs are derived from the 'Documented Safety Analysis for the Waste Storage Facilities' (DSA) (LLNL 2008). The analysis presented therein determined that the WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are low-chemical hazard, Hazard Category 2 non-reactor nuclear facilities. The TSRs consist primarily of inventory limits and controls to preserve the underlying assumptions in the hazard and accident analyses. Further, appropriate commitments to safety programs are presented in the administrative controls sections of the TSRs. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are used by RHWM to handle and store hazardous waste, TRANSURANIC (TRU) WASTE, LOW-LEVEL WASTE (LLW), mixed waste, California combined waste, nonhazardous industrial waste, and conditionally accepted waste generated at LLNL as well as small amounts from other U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facilities, as described in the DSA. In addition, several minor treatments (e.g., size reduction and decontamination) are carried out in these facilities. The WASTE STORAGE FACILITIES are located in two portions of the LLNL main site. A625 is located in the southeast quadrant of LLNL. The A625 fenceline is approximately 225 m west of Greenville Road. The DWTF Storage Area, which includes Building 693 (B693), Building 696 Radioactive Waste Storage Area (B696R), and associated yard areas and storage areas within the yard, is located in the northeast quadrant of LLNL in the DWTF complex. The DWTF Storage Area fenceline is approximately 90 m west of Greenville Road. A625 and the DWTF Storage Area are subdivided into various facilities and storage areas

Safety assessment requirements for onsite transfers of radioactive material

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Opperman, E.K.; Jackson, E.J.; Eggers, A.G.

1992-05-01

This document contains the requirements for developing a safety assessment document for an onsite package containing radioactive material. It also provides format and content guidance to establish uniformity in the safety assessment documentation and to ensure completeness of the information provided

Background and planning requirements for spent fuel shipments to DOE

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Ravenscroft, Norman [Edlow International Company, 1666 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 201, Washington, DC 20009 (United States)

1996-10-01

Information is provided on the planning required and the factors that must be included in the planning process for spent fuel shipments to DOE. A summary is also provided on the background concerning renewal of the DOE spent fuel acceptance policy in May 1996. (author)

Status of safety issues at licensed power plants: TMI Action Plan requirements, unresolved safety issues, generic safety issues, other multiplant action issues

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1992-12-01

This report is to provide a comprehensive description of the implementation and verification status of Three Mile Island (TMI) Action Plan requirements, safety issues designated as Unresolved Safety Issues (USIs), Generic Safety Issues(GSIs), and other Multiplant Actions (MPAs) that have been resolved and involve implementation of an action or actions by licensees. This report makes the information available to other interested parties, including the public. An additional purpose of this NUREG report is to serve as a follow-on to NUREG-0933, ''A Prioritization of Generic Safety Issues,'' which tracks safety issues up until requirements are approved for imposition at licensed plants or until the NRC issues a request for action by licensees

Martin Marietta Energy Systems Nuclear Criticality Safety Improvement Program

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Speas, I.G.

1987-01-01

This report addresses questions raised by criticality safety violation at several DOE plants. Two charts are included that define the severity and reporting requirements for the six levels of accidents. A summary is given of all reported criticality incident at the DOE plants involved. The report concludes with Martin Marietta's Nuclear Criticality Safety Policy Statement

Safety and environmental requirements and design targets for TIBER-II

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Piet, S.J.

1987-09-01

A consistent set of safety and environmental requirements and design targets was proposed and adopted for the TIBER-II (Tokamak Ignition/Burn Experimental Reactor) design effort. TIBER-II is the most recent US version of a fusion experimental test reactor (ETR). These safety and environmental design targets were one contribution of the Fusion Safety Program in the TIBER-II design effort. The other contribution, safety analyses, is documented in the TIBER-II design report. The TIBER-II approach, described here, concentrated on logical development of, first, a complete and consistent set of safety and environmental requirements that are likely appropriate for an ETR, and, second, an initial set of design targets to guide TIBER-II. Because of limited time in the TIBER-II design effort, the iterative process only included one iteration - one set of targets and one design. Future ETR design efforts should therefore build on these design targets and the associated safety analyses. 29 refs., 5 figs., 3 tabs

Safety requirements to be met in final storage of heat-producing waste an evaluation of the BMU draft

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Thomauske, B.

2008-01-01

The German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, and Nuclear Safety (BMU) on August 12, 2008 published a July 29, 2008 draft of the ''Safety Requirements to Be Met in Final Storage of Heat-producing Radioactive Waste.'' As announced by the BMU, these safety requirements are to bring up to the state of the art the safety criteria of 1983. Over a couple of years, efforts had been made to adapt the criteria to the internationally accepted standard as demanded by the Advisory Committees on Reactor Safeguards (RSK) and Radiation Protection (SSK). The main changes made by the BMU are the introduction of a phased procedure in building repositories. A phased plans approval procedure under the Atomic Energy Act has been foreseen by the Ministry for this purpose. In addition, the draft provides for the introduction of a risk-based goal of protection. To ensure retrievability of the waste, the casks are to have a demonstrated service life of 500 years. The BMU draft safety requirements are unable to bring the safety criteria of 1983 up to the current state of the art. Here are the key points of criticism: - A risk-based goal of protection is introduced. The yardstick to be applied is to be defined in a guideline yet to be elaborated. As a consequence, the draft lacks substance. - As in licensing of nuclear facilities, the licensing procedure provides for a phased plans approval procedure for exploration. This analogy does not exist, as exploration is not the first phase of the plant to be built but a measure which is a precondition for obtaining a permit for construction and operation. - The information contained in the draft indicates that, contrary to international recommendations, it tightens the goal of protection by more than one order of magnitude. - The requirements to be met by the casks because of retrievability impose constraints on solutions optimized for safety in emplacement technology. - The risk-based approach is not mature and is

[Does simulator-based team training improve patient safety?].

Science.gov (United States)

Trentzsch, H; Urban, B; Sandmeyer, B; Hammer, T; Strohm, P C; Lazarovici, M

2013-10-01

Patient safety became paramount in medicine as well as in emergency medicine after it was recognized that preventable, adverse events significantly contributed to morbidity and mortality during hospital stay. The underlying errors cannot usually be explained by medical technical inadequacies only but are more due to difficulties in the transition of theoretical knowledge into tasks under the conditions of clinical reality. Crew Resource Management and Human Factors which determine safety and efficiency of humans in complex situations are suitable to control such sources of error. Simulation significantly improved safety in high reliability organizations, such as the aerospace industry.Thus, simulator-based team training has also been proposed for medical areas. As such training is consuming in cost, time and human resources, the question of the cost-benefit ratio obviously arises. This review outlines the effects of simulator-based team training on patient safety. Such course formats are not only capable of creating awareness and improvements in safety culture but also improve technical team performance and emphasize team performance as a clinical competence. A few studies even indicated improvement of patient-centered outcome, such as a reduced rate of adverse events but further studies are required in this respect. In summary, simulator-based team training should be accepted as a suitable strategy to improve patient safety.

Spent fuel storage requirements. An update of DOE/RL-85-2

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1986-10-01

Utility projections of spent fuel storage capacities indicate that some commercial light water reactors (LWRs) have inadequate capacity to handle projected spent fuel discharges. This report presents estimates of potential near-term requirements for additional LWR spent fuel storage capacity, based on information supplied by utilities operating commercial nuclear power plants. These estimates provide information needed for planning the Department of Energy's (DOE) activities to be carried out under the DOE's Commercial Spent Fuel Management (CSFM) Program, in conjunction with the requirements of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. This report is the latest in a series published by the DOE on LWR spent fuel storage requirements. The estimates in this report cover the period from the present through the year 2000. Although the DOE objective is to begin accepting spent fuel for final disposal in 1998, types of fuel and the receipt rates to be shipped are not yet known. Hence, this report makes no assumption regarding such fuel shipments. The report also assesses the possible impacts of increased fuel exposure and spent fuel transshipment on the requirements for additional storage capacity

Canister Storage Building (CSB) Technical Safety Requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

KRAHN, D.E.

2000-01-01

The purpose of this section is to explain the meaning of logical connectors with specific examples. Logical connectors are used in Technical Safety Requirements (TSRs) to discriminate between, and yet connect, discrete Conditions, Required Actions, Completion Times, Surveillances, and Frequencies. The only logical connectors that appear in TSRs are AND and OR. The physical arrangement of these connectors constitutes logical conventions with specific meanings

A new approach to determine the environmental qualification requirements for the safety related equipment

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Hasnaoui, C.; Parent, G.

2000-01-01

The objective of the environmental qualification of safety related equipment is to ensure that the plant defense-in-depth is not compromised by common mode failures following design basis accidents with a harsh environment. A new approach based on safety functions has been developed to determine what safety-related equipment is required to function during and after a design basis accident, as well as their environmental qualification requirements. The main feature of this approach is to use auxiliary safety functions established from safety requirements as credited in the safety analyses. This approach is undertaken in three steps: identification of the auxiliary safety functions of each main safety function; determination of the main equipment groups required for each auxiliary safety function; and review of the safety analyses for design basis accidents in order to determine the credited auxiliary safety functions and their mission times for each accident scenario. Some of the benefits of the proposed approach for the determination of the safety environmental qualification requirements are: a systematic approach for the review of safety analyses based on a safety function check list, and the insurance, with the availability of the safety functions, that Gentilly-2 defense-in-depth would not be compromised by design basis accidents with a harsh environment. (author)

Safety-related control air systems

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Anon.

1977-01-01

This Standard applies to those portions of the control air system that furnish air required to support, control, or operate systems or portions of systems that are safety related in nuclear power plants. This Standard relates only to the air supply system(s) for safety-related air operated devices and does not apply to the safety-related air operated device or to air operated actuators for such devices. The objectives of this Standard are to provide (1) minimum system design requirements for equipment, piping, instruments, controls, and wiring that constitute the air supply system; and (2) the system and component testing and maintenance requirements

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

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

NONE

1998-09-01

This Department of Energy (DOE) is approved for use by all components of DOE. It contains guidelines that should be followed when preparing Criticality Safety Evaluations that will be used to demonstrate the safety of operations performed at DOE Non-Reactor Nuclear Facilities. Adherence with these guidelines will provide consistency and uniformity in Criticality Safety Evaluations (CSEs) across the complex and will document compliance with DOE Order 5480.24 requirements as they pertain to CSEs.

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

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1998-09-01

This Department of Energy (DOE) is approved for use by all components of DOE. It contains guidelines that should be followed when preparing Criticality Safety Evaluations that will be used to demonstrate the safety of operations performed at DOE Non-Reactor Nuclear Facilities. Adherence with these guidelines will provide consistency and uniformity in Criticality Safety Evaluations (CSEs) across the complex and will document compliance with DOE Order 5480.24 requirements as they pertain to CSEs

41 CFR 128-1.8006 - Seismic Safety Program requirements.

Science.gov (United States)

2010-07-01

... 41 Public Contracts and Property Management 3 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Seismic Safety Program requirements. 128-1.8006 Section 128-1.8006 Public Contracts and Property Management Federal Property Management Regulations System (Continued) DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 1-INTRODUCTION 1.80-Seismic Safety Program...

Transportation Safety Excellence in Operations Through Improved Transportation Safety Document

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Dr. Michael A. Lehto; MAL

2007-01-01

A recent accomplishment of the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Materials and Fuels Complex (MFC) Nuclear Safety analysis group was to obtain DOE-ID approval for the inter-facility transfer of greater-than-Hazard-Category-3 quantity radioactive/fissionable waste in Department of Transportation (DOT) Type A drums at MFC. This accomplishment supported excellence in operations through safety analysis by better integrating nuclear safety requirements with waste requirements in the Transportation Safety Document (TSD); reducing container and transport costs; and making facility operations more efficient. The MFC TSD governs and controls the inter-facility transfer of greater-than-Hazard-Category-3 radioactive and/or fissionable materials in non-DOT approved containers. Previously, the TSD did not include the capability to transfer payloads of greater-than-Hazard-Category-3 radioactive and/or fissionable materials using DOT Type A drums. Previous practice was to package the waste materials to less-than-Hazard-Category-3 quantities when loading DOT Type A drums for transfer out of facilities to reduce facility waste accumulations. This practice allowed operations to proceed, but resulted in drums being loaded to less than the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) waste acceptance criteria (WAC) waste limits, which was not cost effective or operations friendly. An improved and revised safety analysis was used to gain DOE-ID approval for adding this container configuration to the MFC TSD safety basis. In the process of obtaining approval of the revised safety basis, safety analysis practices were used effectively to directly support excellence in operations. Several factors contributed to the success of MFC's effort to obtain approval for the use of DOT Type A drums, including two practices that could help in future safety basis changes at other facilities. (1) The process of incorporating the DOT Type A drums into the TSD at MFC helped to better integrate nuclear safety

Hot Cell Facility (HCF) Safety Analysis Report

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

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

2000-11-01

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

Hot Cell Facility (HCF) Safety Analysis Report

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

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

2000-01-01

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

Evaluation of replacement tritium facility (RTF) compliance with DOE safety goals using probabilistic consequence assessment methodology

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

O'Kula, K.R.; East, J.M.; Moore, M.L.

1993-01-01

The Savannah River Site (SRS), operated by the Westinghouse Savannah River Company (WSRC) for the US Department of Energy (DOE), is a major center for the processing of nuclear materials for national defense, deep-space exploration, and medical treatment applications in the United States. As an integral part of the DOE's effort to modernize facilities, implement improved handling and processing technology, and reduce operational risk to the general public and onsite workers, transition of tritium processing at SRS from the Consolidated Tritium Facility to the Replacement Tritium Facility (RTF) began in 1993. To ensure that operation of new DOE facilities such as RTF present minimum involuntary and voluntary risks to the neighboring public and workers, indices of risk have been established to serve as target levels or safety goals of performance for assessing nuclear safety. These goals are discussed from a historical perspective in the initial part of this paper. Secondly, methodologies to quantify risk indices are briefly described. Lastly, accident, abnormal event, and normal operation source terms from RTF are evaluated for consequence assessment purposes relative to the safety targets

Status of safety issues at licensed power plants: TMI Action Plan requirements; unresolved safety issues; generic safety issues; other multiplant action issues

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1993-12-01

As part of ongoing US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) efforts to ensure the quality and accountability of safety issue information, the NRC established a program for publishing an annual report on the status of licensee implementation and NRC verification of safety issues in major NRC requirements areas. This information was initially compiled and reported in three NUREG-series volumes. Volume 1, published in March 1991, addressed the status of Three Mile Island (TMI) Action Plan Requirements. Volume 2, published in May 1991, addressed the status of unresolved safety issues (USIs). Volume 3, published in June 1991, addressed the implementation and verification status of generic safety issues (GSIs). The first annual supplement, which combined these volumes into a single report and presented updated information as of September 30, 1991, was published in December 1991. The second annual supplement, which provided updated information as of September 30, 1992, was published in December 1992. Supplement 2 also provided the status of licensee implementation and NRC verification of other multiplant action (MPA) issues not related to TMI Action Plan requirements, USIs, or GSIs. This third annual NUREG report, Supplement 3, presents updated information as of September 30, 1993. This report gives a comprehensive description of the implementation and verification status of TMI Action Plan requirements, safety issues designated as USIs, GSIs, and other MPAs that have been resolved and involve implementation of an action or actions by licensees. This report makes the information available to other interested parties, including the public. Additionally, this report serves as a follow-on to NUREG-0933, ''A Prioritization of Generic Safety Issues,'' which tracks safety issues until requirements are approved for imposition at licensed plants or until the NRC issues a request for action by licensees

25 CFR 42.6 - When does due process require a formal disciplinary hearing?

Science.gov (United States)

2010-04-01

... 25 Indians 1 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false When does due process require a formal disciplinary... RIGHTS § 42.6 When does due process require a formal disciplinary hearing? Unless local school policies and procedures provide for less, a formal disciplinary hearing is required before a suspension in...

Integrated Safety Management System Phase I Verification for the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) [VOL 1 & 2

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

SETH, S.S.

2000-01-10

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Policy 450.4, Safety Management System Policy commits to institutionalizing an Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS) throughout the DOE complex as a means of accomplishing its missions safely. DOE Acquisition Regulation 970.5204-2 requires that contractors manage and perform work in accordance with a documented safety management system.

47 CFR 80.305 - Watch requirements of the Communications Act and the Safety Convention.

Science.gov (United States)

2010-10-01

... and the Safety Convention. 80.305 Section 80.305 Telecommunication FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION (CONTINUED) SAFETY AND SPECIAL RADIO SERVICES STATIONS IN THE MARITIME SERVICES Safety Watch Requirements and Procedures Ship Station Safety Watches § 80.305 Watch requirements of the Communications Act and the Safety...

Safety requirements for the Pu carriers

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Mishima, H.

1993-01-01

Ministry of Transport of Japan has now set about studying requirements for Pu carriers to ensure safety. It was first studied what the basic concept of safe carriage of Pu should be, and the basic ideas have been worked out. Next the requirements for the Pu carriers were studied based on the above. There are at present no international requirements of construction and equipment for the nuclear-material carriers, but MOT of Japan has so far required special construction and equipment for the nuclear-material carriers which carry a large amount of radioactive material, such as spent fuel or low level radioactive waste, corresponding to the level of the respective potential hazard. The requirements of construction and equipment of the Pu carriers have been established considering the difference in heat generation between Pu and spent fuel, physical protection, and so forth, in addition to the above basic concept. (J.P.N.)

76 FR 16758 - DOE Response to Recommendation 2010-1 of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, Safety...

Science.gov (United States)

2011-03-25

... Recommendation; a detailed explanation is provided below. We have clarified aspects of sub-recommendation 1, 2.... Sub-recommendation 1--Immediately affirm the requirement that unmitigated, bounding-type accident... details DOE's expectations for accident analyses to identify hazard controls for most DOE nuclear...

US Department of Energy DOE Nevada Operations Office, Nevada Test Site: Underground safety and health standards

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

1993-05-01

The Nevada Test Site Underground Safety and Health Standards Working Group was formed at the direction of John D. Stewart, Director, Nevada Test Site Office in April, 1990. The objective of the Working Group was to compile a safety and health standard from the California Tunnel Safety Orders and OSHA for the underground operations at the NTS, (excluding Yucca Mountain). These standards are called the NTS U/G Safety and Health Standards. The Working Group submits these standards as a RECOMMENDATION to the Director, NTSO. Although the Working Group considers these standards to be the most integrated and comprehensive standards that could be developed for NTS Underground Operations, the intent is not to supersede or replace any relevant DOE orders. Rather the intent is to collate the multiple safety and health references contained in DOE Order 5480.4 that have applicability to NTS Underground Operations into a single safety and heath standard to be used in the underground operations at the NTS. Each portion of the standard was included only after careful consideration by the Working Group and is judged to be both effective and appropriate. The specific methods and rationale used by the Working Group are outlined as follows: The letter from DOE/HQ, dated September 28, 1990 cited OSHA and the CTSO as the safety and health codes applicable to underground operations at the NTS. These mandated codes were each originally developed to be comprehensive, i.e., all underground operations of a particular type (e.g., tunnels in the case of the CTSO) were intended to be adequately regulated by the appropriate code. However, this is not true; the Working Group found extensive and confusing overlap in the codes in numerous areas. Other subjects and activities were addressed by the various codes in cursory fashion or not at all.

US Department of Energy DOE Nevada Operations Office, Nevada Test Site: Underground safety and health standards

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1993-05-01

The Nevada Test Site Underground Safety and Health Standards Working Group was formed at the direction of John D. Stewart, Director, Nevada Test Site Office in April, 1990. The objective of the Working Group was to compile a safety and health standard from the California Tunnel Safety Orders and OSHA for the underground operations at the NTS, (excluding Yucca Mountain). These standards are called the NTS U/G Safety and Health Standards. The Working Group submits these standards as a RECOMMENDATION to the Director, NTSO. Although the Working Group considers these standards to be the most integrated and comprehensive standards that could be developed for NTS Underground Operations, the intent is not to supersede or replace any relevant DOE orders. Rather the intent is to collate the multiple safety and health references contained in DOE Order 5480.4 that have applicability to NTS Underground Operations into a single safety and heath standard to be used in the underground operations at the NTS. Each portion of the standard was included only after careful consideration by the Working Group and is judged to be both effective and appropriate. The specific methods and rationale used by the Working Group are outlined as follows: The letter from DOE/HQ, dated September 28, 1990 cited OSHA and the CTSO as the safety and health codes applicable to underground operations at the NTS. These mandated codes were each originally developed to be comprehensive, i.e., all underground operations of a particular type (e.g., tunnels in the case of the CTSO) were intended to be adequately regulated by the appropriate code. However, this is not true; the Working Group found extensive and confusing overlap in the codes in numerous areas. Other subjects and activities were addressed by the various codes in cursory fashion or not at all

Additional guidance for including nuclear safety equivalency in the Canister Storage Building and Cold Vacuum Drying Facility final safety analysis report

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Garvin, L.J.

1997-05-20

This document provides guidance for the production of safety analysis reports that must meet both DOE Order 5480.23 and STD 3009, and be in compliance with the DOE regulatory policy that imposes certain NRC requirements.

Additional guidance for including nuclear safety equivalency in the Canister Storage Building and Cold Vacuum Drying Facility final safety analysis report

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Garvin, L.J.

1997-01-01

This document provides guidance for the production of safety analysis reports that must meet both DOE Order 5480.23 and STD 3009, and be in compliance with the DOE regulatory policy that imposes certain NRC requirements

Quality assurance requirements for the computer software and safety analyses

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Husarecek, J.

1992-01-01

The requirements are given as placed on the development, procurement, maintenance, and application of software for the creation or processing of data during the design, construction, operation, repair, maintenance and safety-related upgrading of nuclear power plants. The verification and validation processes are highlighted, and the requirements put on the software documentation are outlined. The general quality assurance principles applied to safety analyses are characterized. (J.B.). 1 ref

Safety requirements expected to the prototype fast breeder reactor 'Monju'

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2014-11-01

In July 2013, Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) has enforced new regulatory requirements in consideration of severe accidents for the commercial light water reactors (LWR) and also prototype power generation reactors such as the sodium-cooled fast reactors (SFR) of 'Monju' based on TEPCO Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident (hereinafter referred to as '1F accident') occurred in March 2011. Although the regulatory requirements for SFR will be revised by NRA with consideration for public comments, Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA) set up 'Advisory Committee on Monju Safety Requirements' consisting of fast breeder reactor (FBR) and safety assessment experts in order to establish original safety requirements expected to the prototype FBR 'Monju' considering severe accidents with knowledge from JAEA as well as scientific and technical insights from the experts. This report summarizes the safety requirements expected to Monju discussed by the committee. (author)

Meeting up-to-date safety requirements in the Russian NPP projects

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Tepkyan, G. O.; Yashkin, A. V.

2014-01-01

Safety features in Russian NPP designs are implemented by the combination of active and passive safety systems • Russian NPP designs are in compliance with up-to-date international and European safety requirements and refer to Generation III+ • Russian state-of-the-art designs have already implemented some design solutions, which take into account “post-Fukushima” requirements. Russian NPP design principles have been approved during the European discussions in spring 2012, including the IAEA extraordinary session addressed to Fukushima NPP accident

Review of the DOE Packaging and Transportation Safety Program

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Snyder, B.J.; Cece, J.M.

1992-12-01

This report documents the results of a year-long self-assessment of DOE-EH transportation and packaging safety activities. The self-assessment was initiated in September 1991 and concluded in August 1992. The self-assessment identified several significant issues, some of which have been resolved by EH. Also, improvements in the EH program were made during the course of the self-assessment. The report reflects the status of the EH transportation and packaging safety activities at the conclusion of the self-assessment. This report consists of several sections which discuss background, objectives and description of the review. Another section includes summary discussion and key conclusions. Appendix A, Issues, Observations and Recommendations, lists fifteen issues, including appropriate observations and recommendations. A Corrective Action Plan, which documents EH managements resolve to implement the agreed-upon recommendations, is included. The Corrective Action Plan reflects the status of completed and planned actions as of the date of the report

Governmental, Legal and Regulatory Framework for Safety. General Safety Requirements. Part 1 (Spanish Edition)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2010-01-01

The objective of this publication is to establish requirements in respect of the governmental, legal and regulatory framework for safety. It covers the essential aspects of the framework for establishing a regulatory body and taking other actions necessary to ensure the effective regulatory control of facilities and activities utilized for peaceful purposes. Other responsibilities and functions, such as liaison within the global safety regime and on support services for safety (including radiation protection), emergency preparedness and response, nuclear security, and the State system of accounting for and control of nuclear material, are also covered

Governmental, Legal and Regulatory Framework for Safety. General Safety Requirements. Part 1 (French Edition)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2010-01-01

The objective of this publication is to establish requirements in respect of the governmental, legal and regulatory framework for safety. It covers the essential aspects of the framework for establishing a regulatory body and taking other actions necessary to ensure the effective regulatory control of facilities and activities utilized for peaceful purposes. Other responsibilities and functions, such as liaison within the global safety regime and on support services for safety (including radiation protection), emergency preparedness and response, nuclear security, and the State system of accounting for and control of nuclear material, are also covered

Governmental, Legal and Regulatory Framework for Safety. General Safety Requirements. Part 1 (Chinese Edition)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2010-01-01

The objective of this publication is to establish requirements in respect of the governmental, legal and regulatory framework for safety. It covers the essential aspects of the framework for establishing a regulatory body and taking other actions necessary to ensure the effective regulatory control of facilities and activities utilized for peaceful purposes. Other responsibilities and functions, such as liaison within the global safety regime and on support services for safety (including radiation protection), emergency preparedness and response, nuclear security, and the State system of accounting for and control of nuclear material, are also covered

Governmental, Legal and Regulatory Framework for Safety. General Safety Requirements. Part 1 (Arabic Edition)

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

NONE

2010-09-15

The objective of this publication is to establish requirements in respect of the governmental, legal and regulatory framework for safety. It covers the essential aspects of the framework for establishing a regulatory body and taking other actions necessary to ensure the effective regulatory control of facilities and activities utilized for peaceful purposes. Other responsibilities and functions, such as liaison within the global safety regime and on support services for safety (including radiation protection), emergency preparedness and response, nuclear security, and the State system of accounting for and control of nuclear material, are also covered.

Specification of advanced safety modeling requirements (Rev. 0).

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Fanning, T. H.; Tautges, T. J.

2008-06-30

The U.S. Department of Energy's Global Nuclear Energy Partnership has lead to renewed interest in liquid-metal-cooled fast reactors for the purpose of closing the nuclear fuel cycle and making more efficient use of future repository capacity. However, the U.S. has not designed or constructed a fast reactor in nearly 30 years. Accurate, high-fidelity, whole-plant dynamics safety simulations will play a crucial role by providing confidence that component and system designs will satisfy established design limits and safety margins under a wide variety of operational, design basis, and beyond design basis transient conditions. Current modeling capabilities for fast reactor safety analyses have resulted from several hundred person-years of code development effort supported by experimental validation. The broad spectrum of mechanistic and phenomenological models that have been developed represent an enormous amount of institutional knowledge that needs to be maintained. Complicating this, the existing code architectures for safety modeling evolved from programming practices of the 1970s. This has lead to monolithic applications with interdependent data models which require significant knowledge of the complexities of the entire code in order for each component to be maintained. In order to develop an advanced fast reactor safety modeling capability, the limitations of the existing code architecture must be overcome while preserving the capabilities that already exist. To accomplish this, a set of advanced safety modeling requirements is defined, based on modern programming practices, that focuses on modular development within a flexible coupling framework. An approach for integrating the existing capabilities of the SAS4A/SASSYS-1 fast reactor safety analysis code into the SHARP framework is provided in order to preserve existing capabilities while providing a smooth transition to advanced modeling capabilities. In doing this, the advanced fast reactor safety models

Specification of advanced safety modeling requirements (Rev. 0)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Fanning, T. H.; Tautges, T. J.

2008-01-01

The U.S. Department of Energy's Global Nuclear Energy Partnership has lead to renewed interest in liquid-metal-cooled fast reactors for the purpose of closing the nuclear fuel cycle and making more efficient use of future repository capacity. However, the U.S. has not designed or constructed a fast reactor in nearly 30 years. Accurate, high-fidelity, whole-plant dynamics safety simulations will play a crucial role by providing confidence that component and system designs will satisfy established design limits and safety margins under a wide variety of operational, design basis, and beyond design basis transient conditions. Current modeling capabilities for fast reactor safety analyses have resulted from several hundred person-years of code development effort supported by experimental validation. The broad spectrum of mechanistic and phenomenological models that have been developed represent an enormous amount of institutional knowledge that needs to be maintained. Complicating this, the existing code architectures for safety modeling evolved from programming practices of the 1970s. This has lead to monolithic applications with interdependent data models which require significant knowledge of the complexities of the entire code in order for each component to be maintained. In order to develop an advanced fast reactor safety modeling capability, the limitations of the existing code architecture must be overcome while preserving the capabilities that already exist. To accomplish this, a set of advanced safety modeling requirements is defined, based on modern programming practices, that focuses on modular development within a flexible coupling framework. An approach for integrating the existing capabilities of the SAS4A/SASSYS-1 fast reactor safety analysis code into the SHARP framework is provided in order to preserve existing capabilities while providing a smooth transition to advanced modeling capabilities. In doing this, the advanced fast reactor safety models will

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

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

MORENO, M.R.

2004-01-01

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

Current trends in codal requirements for safety in operation of nuclear power plants

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Srivasista, K.; Shah, Y.K.; Gupta, S.K.

2006-01-01

The Code of practice on safety in nuclear power plant operation states the requirements to be met during operation of a nuclear power plant for assuring safety. Among various stages of authorization, regulatory body issues authorization for operation of a nuclear power plant, monitors and enforces regulatory requirements. The responsible organization shall have overall responsibility and the plant management shall have the primary responsibility for ensuring safe and efficient operation of its nuclear power plants. A set of codal requirements covering technical and administrative aspects are mandatory for the plant management to implement to ensure that the nuclear power plant is operated in accordance with the design intent. Requirements on operating procedures and instructions establish operation and maintenance, inspection and testing of the plant in a planned and systematic way. The requirements on emergency preparedness programme establish with a reasonable assurance that, in the event of an emergency situation, appropriate measures can be taken to mitigate the consequences. Commissioning requirements verify performance criteria during commissioning to ensure that the design intent and QA requirements are met. Several modifications in systems important to safety required during operation of a nuclear power plant are regulated. However new operational codal requirements arising out of periodic safety review, operational experience feedback, life management, probabilistic safety assessment, physical security, safety convention and obligations and decommissioning are not covered in the present code of practice for safety in nuclear power plant operation. Codal provisions on 'Review by operating organization on aspects of design having implications on operability' are also required to be addressed. The merits in developing such a methodology include acceptance of the design by operating organization, ensuring maintainability, proper layout etc. in the new designs

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

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1995-09-01

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

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

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

NONE

1995-09-01

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

Safety requirements and safety experience of nuclear facilities in the Federal Republic of Germany

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Schnurer, H.L.

1977-01-01

Peaceful use of nuclear energy within the F.R.G. is rapidly growing. The Energy Programme of the Federal Government forecasts a capacity of up to 50.000 MW in 1985. Whereas most of this capacity will be of the LWR-Type, other activities are related to LMFBR - and HTGR - development, nuclear ships, and facilities of the nuclear fuel cycle. Safety of nuclear energy is the pacemaker for the realization of nuclear programmes and projects. Due to a very high population - and industrialisation density, safety has the priority before economical aspects. Safety requirements are therefore extremely stringent, which will be shown for the legal, the technical as well as for the organizational area. They apply for each nuclear facility, its site and the nuclear energy system as a whole. Regulatory procedures differ from many other countries, assigning executive power to state authorities, which are supervised by the Federal Government. Another particularity of the regulatory process is the large scope of involvement of independent experts within the licensing procedures. The developement of national safety requirements in different countries generates a necessity to collaborate and harmonize safety and radiation protection measures, at least for facilities in border areas, to adopt international standards and to assist nuclear developing countries. However, different nationally, regional or local situations might raise problems. Safety experience with nuclear facilities can be concluded from the positive construction and operation experience, including also a few accidents and incidents and the conclusions, which have been drawn for the respective factilities and others of similar design. Another tool for safety assessments will be risk analyses, which are under development by German experts. Final, a scope of future problems and developments shows, that safety of nuclear installations - which has reached a high performance - nevertheless imposes further tasks to be solved

40 CFR 33.301 - What does this subpart require?

Science.gov (United States)

2010-07-01

... AGENCY PROGRAMS Good Faith Efforts § 33.301 What does this subpart require? A recipient, including one... good faith efforts whenever procuring construction, equipment, services and supplies under an EPA...

Safety assessment for the 118-B-1 Burial Ground excavation treatability tests. Revision 2

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Zimmer, J.J.; Frain, J.M.

1994-12-01

This revision of the Safety Assessment provides an auditable safety analysis of the hazards for the proposed treatability test activities per DOE-EM-STD-5502-94, DOE Limited Standard, Hazard Baseline Documentation (DOE 1994). The proposed activities are classified as radiological activities and as such, no longer require Operational Safety Limits (OSLs). The OSLS, Prudent Actions, and Institutional and Organization Controls have been removed from this revision and replaced with ''Administrative Actions Important to Safety,'' as determined by the hazards analysis. Those Administrative Actions Important to Safety are summarized in Section 1.1, ''Assessment Summary.''

Safety related requirements on future nuclear power plants

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Niehaus, F.

1991-01-01

Nuclear power has the potential to significantly contribute to the future energy supply. However, this requires continuous improvements in nuclear safety. Technological advancements and implementation of safety culture will achieve a safety level for future reactors of the present generation of a probability of core-melt of less than 10 -5 per year, and less than 10 -6 per year for large releases of radioactive materials. There are older reactors which do not comply with present safety thinking. The paper reviews findings of a recent design review of WWER 440/230 plants. Advanced evolutionary designs might be capable of reducing the probability of significant off-site releases to less than 10 -7 per year. For such reactors there are inherent limitations to increase safety further due to the human element, complexity of design and capability of the containment function. Therefore, revolutionary designs are being explored with the aim of eliminating the potential for off-site releases. In this context it seems to be advisable to explore concepts where the ultimate safety barrier is the fuel itself. (orig.) [de

Development of NPP Safety Requirements into Kenya's Grid Codes

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Ndirangu, Nguni James; Koo, Chang Choong [KEPCO International Nuclear Graduate School, Ulsan (Korea, Republic of)

2015-10-15

As presently drafted, Kenya's grid codes do not contain any NPP requirements. Through case studies of selected grid codes, this paper will study frequency, voltage and fault ride through requirements for NPP connection and operation, and offer recommendation of how these requirements can be incorporated in the Kenya's grid codes. Voltage and frequency excursions in Kenya's grid are notably frequently outside the generic requirement and the values observed by the German and UK grid codes. Kenya's grid codes require continuous operation for ±10% of nominal voltage and 45.0 to 52Hz on the grid which poses safety issues for an NPP. Considering stringent NPP connection to grid and operational safety requirements, and the importance of the TSO to NPP safety, more elaborate requirements need to be documented in the Kenya's grid codes. UK and Germany have a history of meeting high standards of nuclear safety and it is therefore recommended that format like the one in Table 1 to 3 should be adopted. Kenya's Grid code considering NPP should have: • Strict rules for voltage variation, that is, -5% to +10% of the nominal voltage • Strict rules for frequency variation, that is, 48Hz to 52Hz of the nominal frequencyand.

Development of NPP Safety Requirements into Kenya's Grid Codes

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Ndirangu, Nguni James; Koo, Chang Choong

2015-01-01

As presently drafted, Kenya's grid codes do not contain any NPP requirements. Through case studies of selected grid codes, this paper will study frequency, voltage and fault ride through requirements for NPP connection and operation, and offer recommendation of how these requirements can be incorporated in the Kenya's grid codes. Voltage and frequency excursions in Kenya's grid are notably frequently outside the generic requirement and the values observed by the German and UK grid codes. Kenya's grid codes require continuous operation for ±10% of nominal voltage and 45.0 to 52Hz on the grid which poses safety issues for an NPP. Considering stringent NPP connection to grid and operational safety requirements, and the importance of the TSO to NPP safety, more elaborate requirements need to be documented in the Kenya's grid codes. UK and Germany have a history of meeting high standards of nuclear safety and it is therefore recommended that format like the one in Table 1 to 3 should be adopted. Kenya's Grid code considering NPP should have: • Strict rules for voltage variation, that is, -5% to +10% of the nominal voltage • Strict rules for frequency variation, that is, 48Hz to 52Hz of the nominal frequencyand

Integrated Safety Management System Phase I Verification for the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) [VOL 1 and 2

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

SETH, S.S.

2000-01-01

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Policy 450.4, Safety Management System Policy commits to institutionalizing an Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS) throughout the DOE complex as a means of accomplishing its missions safely. DOE Acquisition Regulation 970.5204-2 requires that contractors manage and perform work in accordance with a documented safety management system

Spent fuel storage requirements. An update of DOE/RL-83-1

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1984-05-01

Spent fuel storage capacities at some commercial light water reactors (LWRs) are inadequate to handle projected spent fuel discharges. This report presents estimates of potential near-term requirements for additional LWR spent fuel storage capacity, based on information voluntarily supplied by utilities operating commercial nuclear power plants. These estimates provide information needed for planning the Department of Energy's (DOE) Federal Interim Storage (FIS) Program and the spent fuel research, development, and demonstration (RD and D) activities to be carried out under the DOE's Commercial Spent Fuel Management (CSFM) Program, in conjunction with the requirements of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. This report is the latest in a series published by the DOE on LWR spent fuel storage requirements. Since the planning needs of the CSFM program focus on the near-term management of spent fuel inventories from commercial nuclear power reactors, the estimates in this report cover the ten-year period from the present through 1983. The report also assesses the possible impacts of using various concepts to reduce the requirements for additional storage capacity

Nuclear fuels with high burnup: safety requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Phuc Tran Dai

2016-01-01

Vietnam authorities foresees to build 3 reactors from Russian design (VVER AES 2006) by 2030. In order to prepare the preliminary report on safety analysis the Vietnamese Agency for Radioprotection and Safety has launched an investigation on the behaviour of nuclear fuels at high burnups (up to 60 GWj/tU) that will be those of the new plants. This study deals mainly with the behaviour of the fuel assemblies in case of loss of coolant (LOCA). It appears that for an average burnup of 50 GWj/tU and for the advanced design of the fuel assembly (cladding and materials) safety requirements are fulfilled. For an average burnup of 60 GWj/tU, a list of issues remains to be assessed, among which the impact of clad bursting or the hydrogen embrittlement of the advanced zirconium alloys. (A.C.)

Fuel Supply Shutdown Facility Interim Operational Safety Requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

BENECKE, M.W.

2000-01-01

The Interim Operational Safety Requirements for the Fuel Supply Shutdown (FSS) Facility define acceptable conditions, safe boundaries, bases thereof, and management of administrative controls to ensure safe operation of the facility

Preparedness and response for a nuclear or radiological emergency. Safety requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2004-01-01

This Safety Requirements publication establishes the requirements for an adequate level of preparedness and response for a nuclear or radiological emergency in any State. Their implementation is intended to minimize the consequences for people, property and the environment of any nuclear or radiological emergency. The fulfilment of these requirements will also contribute to the harmonization of arrangements in the event of a transnational emergency. These requirements are intended to be applied by authorities at the national level by means of adopting legislation, establishing regulations and assigning responsibilities. The requirements apply to all those practices and sources that have the potential for causing radiation exposure or environmental radioactive contamination warranting an emergency intervention and that are: (a) Used in a State that chooses to adopt the requirements or that requests any of the sponsoring organizations to provide for the application of the requirements. (B) Used by States with the assistance of the FAO, IAEA, ILO, PAHO, OCHA or WHO in compliance with applicable national rules and regulations. (C) Used by the IAEA or which involve the use of materials, services, equipment, facilities and non-published information made available by the IAEA or at its request or under its control or supervision. Or (d) Used under any bilateral or multilateral arrangement whereby the parties request the IAEA to provide for the application of the requirements. The requirements also apply to the off-site jurisdictions that may need to make an emergency intervention in a State that adopts the requirements. The types of practices and sources covered by these requirements include: fixed and mobile nuclear reactors. Facilities for the mining and processing of radioactive ores. Facilities for fuel reprocessing and other fuel cycle facilities. Facilities for the management of radioactive waste. The transport of radioactive material. Sources of radiation used in

42 CFR 3.210 - Required disclosure of patient safety work product to the Secretary.

Science.gov (United States)

2010-10-01

... 42 Public Health 1 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Required disclosure of patient safety work product... HUMAN SERVICES GENERAL PROVISIONS PATIENT SAFETY ORGANIZATIONS AND PATIENT SAFETY WORK PRODUCT Confidentiality and Privilege Protections of Patient Safety Work Product § 3.210 Required disclosure of patient...

Meeting the requirements for a DOE environmental restoration project. The Fernald strategy

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Vanoss, R.L.; Risenhoover, G.M.

1994-01-01

Environmental Restoration (ER) of five Operable Units (OU) at Fernald Environmental Management Project (FEMP) includes compliance with the requirements of Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and DOE Orders. Each regulatory driver has differing procedural requirements for documenting calculations, decisions, and actions involved in site cleanup. Integration of documentation and avoidance of duplication can save time and money. Such savings are being achieved by OU specific application of supporting studies, revised procedures, and guidance documents. Each OU is seeking appropriate opportunities to produce single documents that simultaneously fulfill the important requirements of the other regulations and DOE orders. These opportunities are evaluated at all phases of decision making, remedial design, and remedial action. Three essential processes precede environmental restoration/remedial action at a DOE site/project: 1. Completion of decision-making documents required by governing or applicable statutes. 2. Completion of important scientific and engineering analyses of remedial alternatives, and design and implementation of the remedial solution established in the CERCLA Record of Decision (ROD). 3. Preparation of DOE-mandated documentation to record engineering evaluations and cost estimates required for budgeting, decision making, and project management. Methodology and requirements for each process have developed from long, successful practice, but independently of each other. FERMCO, as new DOE contractor at Fernald and first Environmental Restoration Management Contractor (ERMC), is committed to a process of Continuous Performance Improvement (CPI). A major reevaluation of documentation and processes for support of environmental decision-making and design of cleanup activities to remediate the five OUs at the FEMP is being undertaken

Fracture toughness requirements of reactor vessel material in evaluation of the safety analysis report of nuclear power plants

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Widia Lastana Istanto

2011-01-01

Fracture toughness requirements of reactor vessel material that must be met by applicants for nuclear power plants construction permit has been investigated in this paper. The fracture toughness should be described in the Safety Analysis Reports (SARs) document that will be evaluated by the Nuclear Energy Regulatory Agency (BAPETEN). Because BAPETEN does not have a regulations or standards/codes regarding the material used for the reactor vessel, especially in the fracture toughness requirements, then the acceptance criteria that applied to evaluate the fracture toughness of reactor vessel material refers to the regulations/provisions from the countries that have been experienced in the operation of nuclear power plants, such as from the United States, Japan and Korea. Regulations and standards used are 10 CFR Part 50, ASME and ASTM. Fracture toughness of reactor vessel materials are evaluated to ensure compliance of the requirements and provisions of the Regulatory Body and the applicable standards, such as ASME or ASTM, in order to assure a reliability and integrity of the reactor vessels as well as providing an adequate safety margin during the operation, testing, maintenance, and postulated accident conditions over the reactor vessel lifetime. (author)

Discussion of important safety requirements for new nuclear power plants

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Zhang Lin; Jia Xiang; Yan Tianwen; Li Wenhong; Li Chun

2014-01-01

This paper presents the analysis of several important safety requirements and improvement direction. Technical view of security goals on site safety evaluation, internal and external events fortification, serious accident prevention and mitigation, as well as the core, containment system and instrument control system design and engineering optimization, and etc are indicated. It will be useful for new plant design, construction and safety improvement. (authors)

Lessons learned in the implementation of Integrated Safety Management at DOE Order Compliance Sites vs Necessary and Sufficient Sites

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Hill, R.L.

2000-01-01

This paper summarizes the development and implementation of Integrated Safety Management (ISM) at an Order Compliance Site (Savannah River Site) and a Necessary and Sufficient Site (Nevada Test Site). A discussion of each core safety function of ISM is followed by an example from an Order Compliance Site and a Necessary and Sufficient Site. The Savannah River Site was the first DOE site to have a DOE Headquarters-validated and approved ISM System. The NTS is beginning the process of verification and validation. This paper defines successful strategies for integrating Environment, Safety, and Health management into work under various scenarios

Development of photovoltaic array and module safety requirements

Science.gov (United States)

1982-01-01

Safety requirements for photovoltaic module and panel designs and configurations likely to be used in residential, intermediate, and large-scale applications were identified and developed. The National Electrical Code and Building Codes were reviewed with respect to present provisions which may be considered to affect the design of photovoltaic modules. Limited testing, primarily in the roof fire resistance field was conducted. Additional studies and further investigations led to the development of a proposed standard for safety for flat-plate photovoltaic modules and panels. Additional work covered the initial investigation of conceptual approaches and temporary deployment, for concept verification purposes, of a differential dc ground-fault detection circuit suitable as a part of a photovoltaic array safety system.

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

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1993-11-01

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

Management implementation plan for a safety analysis and review system

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Hulburt, D.A.; Berkey, B.D.

1981-04-01

The US Department of Energy has issued an Order, DOE 5481.1, which establishes uniform requirements for the preparation and review of Safety Analysis for DOE Operations. The Management Implementation Plan specified herein establishes the administrative procedures and technical requirements for implementing DOE 5481.1 to Operations under the cognizance of the Pittsburgh Energy Technology Center. This Implementation Plan is applicable to all present and future Operations under the cognizance of PETC. The Plan identifies those Operations for which DOE 5481.1 is applicable and those Operations for which no further analysis is required because the initial determination and review has concluded that DOE 5481.1 does not apply

OCRWM [Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management] Safety Plan

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1986-12-01

The OCRWM Safety Plan sets forth management policies and general requirements for the safety of the public and of personnel associated with the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Program (hereinafter called the ''Program''). It is applicable to all individuals and organizational elements of the Program, including all facilities and activities controlled by the Program pursuant to the Act, and to all phases of the Program. The plan defines the responsibilities assigned by the Director of the OCRWM to the various OCRWM line organizations, and to the contractors and the projects. It discusses the means by which safety policies and requirements will be communicated, and summarizes the applicable DOE Orders, and the procedures for reviewing, reporting, and evaluating safety problems. In addition, the OCRWM Safety Plan addresses DOE Orders applicable to occupational health and safety, worker protection, and public health and safety. OCRWM believes that it has an equally high level of commitment to both public safety and worker safety. The Plan also summarizes applicable NRC criteria and regulations that will be imposed through the formal licensing proceedings. While the Safety Plan sets forth OCRWM policy, it is not intended to be prescriptive in the details of implementation. Each OCRWM program element must develop and control its own set of detailed requirements for the protection of its workers and the public based on the principles set forth herein

The Management System for Facilities and Activities. Safety Requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2011-01-01

This publication establishes requirements for management systems that integrate safety, health, security, quality assurance and environmental objectives. A successful management system ensures that nuclear safety matters are not dealt with in isolation but are considered within the context of all these objectives. The aim of this publication is to assist Member States in establishing and implementing effective management systems that integrate all aspects of managing nuclear facilities and activities in a coherent manner. It details the planned and systematic actions necessary to provide adequate confidence that all these requirements are satisfied. Contents: 1. Introduction; 2. Management system; 3. Management responsibility; 4. Resource management; 5. Process implementation; 6. Measurement, assessment and improvement.

Safety Design Requirements for The Interior Architecture of Scientific Research Laboratories

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

ElDib, A.A.

2014-01-01

The paper discusses one of the primary objectives of interior architecture design of research laboratories (specially those using radioactive materials) where it should provide a safe, accessible environment for laboratory personnel to conduct their work. A secondary objective is to allow for maximum flexibility for safe research. Therefore, health and safety hazards must be anticipated and carefully evaluated so that protective measures can be incorporated into the interior architectural design of these facilities wherever possible. The interior architecture requirements discussed in this paper illustrate some of the basic health and safety design features required for new and remodeled laboratories.The paper discusses one of the primary objectives of interior architecture design of research laboratories (specially those using radioactive materials) where it should provide a safe, accessible environment for laboratory personnel to conduct their work. A secondary objective is to allow for maximum flexibility for safe research. Therefore, health and safety hazards must be anticipated and carefully evaluated so that protective measures can be incorporated into the interior architectural design of these facilities wherever possible. The interior architecture requirements discussed in this paper illustrate some of the basic health and safety design features required for new and remodeled laboratories.

12 CFR 617.7630 - Does this Federal requirement affect any state property laws?

Science.gov (United States)

2010-01-01

... 12 Banks and Banking 6 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false Does this Federal requirement affect any state property laws? 617.7630 Section 617.7630 Banks and Banking FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION FARM CREDIT SYSTEM BORROWER RIGHTS Right of First Refusal § 617.7630 Does this Federal requirement affect any state property...

Status of safety issues at licensed power plants: TMI Action Plan requirements, unresolved safety issues, generic safety issues, other multiplant action issues. Supplement 4

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1994-12-01

As part of ongoing US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) efforts to ensure the quality and accountability of safety issue information, the NRC established a program for publishing an annual report on the status of licensee implementation and NRC verification of safety issues in major NRC requirements areas. This information was initially compiled and reported in three NUREG-series volumes. Volume 1, published in March 1991, addressed the status of Three Mile Island (TMI) Action Plan Requirements. Volume 2, published in May 1991, addressed the status of unresolved safety issues (USIs). Volume 3, published in June 1991, addressed the implementation and verification status of generic safety issues (GSIs). The first annual supplement, which combined these volumes into a single report and presented updated information as of September 30, 1991, was published in December 1991. The second annual supplement, which provided updated information as of September 30, 1992, was published in December 1992. Supplement 2 also provided the status of licensee implementation and NRC verification of other multiplant action (MPA) issues not related to TMI Action Plan requirements, USIs, or GSIs. Supplement 3 gives status as of September 30, 1993. This annual report, Supplement 4, presents updated information as of September 30, 1994. This report gives a comprehensive description of the implementation and verification status of TMI Action Plan requirements, safety issues designated as USIs, GSIs, and other MPAs that have been resolved and involve implementation of an action or actions by licensees. This report makes the information available to other interested parties, including the public. Additionally, this report serves as a follow-on to NUREG-0933, ''A Prioritization of Generic Safety Issues,'' which tracks safety issues until requirements are approved for imposition at licensed plants or until the NRC issues a request for action by licensees

DOE 2010 occupational radiation exposure

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

none,

2011-11-01

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Analysis within the Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) publishes the annual DOE Occupational Radiation Exposure Report to provide an overview of the status of radiation protection practices at DOE.* The DOE 2010 Occupational Radiation Exposure Report provides an evaluation of DOE-wide performance regarding compliance with DOE Part 835 dose limits and as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) process requirements. In addition, the report provides data to DOE organizations responsible for developing policies for protection of individuals from the effects of radiation. The report provides a summary and an analysis of occupational radiation exposure information from the monitoring of individuals involved in DOE activities. The occupational radiation exposure information is analyzed in terms of aggregate data, dose to individuals, and dose by site over the past 5 years.

Software Safety Analysis of Digital Protection System Requirements Using a Qualitative Formal Method

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Lee, Jang-Soo; Kwon, Kee-Choon; Cha, Sung-Deok

2004-01-01

The safety analysis of requirements is a key problem area in the development of software for the digital protection systems of a nuclear power plant. When specifying requirements for software of the digital protection systems and conducting safety analysis, engineers find that requirements are often known only in qualitative terms and that existing fault-tree analysis techniques provide little guidance on formulating and evaluating potential failure modes. A framework for the requirements engineering process is proposed that consists of a qualitative method for requirements specification, called the qualitative formal method (QFM), and a safety analysis method for the requirements based on causality information, called the causal requirements safety analysis (CRSA). CRSA is a technique that qualitatively evaluates causal relationships between software faults and physical hazards. This technique, extending the qualitative formal method process and utilizing information captured in the state trajectory, provides specific guidelines on how to identify failure modes and the relationship among them. The QFM and CRSA processes are described using shutdown system 2 of the Wolsong nuclear power plants as the digital protection system example

DOE Standard: Fire protection design criteria

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1999-07-01

The development of this Standard reflects the fact that national consensus standards and other design criteria do not comprehensively or, in some cases, adequately address fire protection issues at DOE facilities. This Standard provides supplemental fire protection guidance applicable to the design and construction of DOE facilities and site features (such as water distribution systems) that are also provided for fire protection. It is intended to be used in conjunction with the applicable building code, National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Codes and Standards, and any other applicable DOE construction criteria. This Standard replaces certain mandatory fire protection requirements that were formerly in DOE 5480.7A, ''Fire Protection'', and DOE 6430.1A, ''General Design Criteria''. It also contains the fire protection guidelines from two (now canceled) draft standards: ''Glove Box Fire Protection'' and ''Filter Plenum Fire Protection''. (Note: This Standard does not supersede the requirements of DOE 5480.7A and DOE 6430.1A where these DOE Orders are currently applicable under existing contracts.) This Standard, along with the criteria delineated in Section 3, constitutes the basic criteria for satisfying DOE fire and life safety objectives for the design and construction or renovation of DOE facilities

Feed tank transfer requirements

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Freeman-Pollard, J.R.

1998-09-16

This document presents a definition of tank turnover. Also, DOE and PC responsibilities; TWRS DST permitting requirements; TWRS Authorization Basis (AB) requirements; TWRS AP Tank Farm operational requirements; unreviewed safety question (USQ) requirements are presented for two cases (i.e., tank modifications occurring before tank turnover and tank modification occurring after tank turnover). Finally, records and reporting requirements, and documentation which will require revision in support of transferring a DST in AP Tank Farm to a privatization contractor are presented.

Feed tank transfer requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Freeman-Pollard, J.R.

1998-01-01

This document presents a definition of tank turnover. Also, DOE and PC responsibilities; TWRS DST permitting requirements; TWRS Authorization Basis (AB) requirements; TWRS AP Tank Farm operational requirements; unreviewed safety question (USQ) requirements are presented for two cases (i.e., tank modifications occurring before tank turnover and tank modification occurring after tank turnover). Finally, records and reporting requirements, and documentation which will require revision in support of transferring a DST in AP Tank Farm to a privatization contractor are presented

Safety-related control air systems - approved 1977

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Anon.

1978-01-01

This standard applies to those portions of the control air system that furnish air required to support, control, or operate systems or portions of systems that are safety related in nuclear power plants. This standard relates only to the air supply system(s) for safety-related air operated devices and does not apply to the safety-related air operated device or to air operated actuators for such devices. The objectives of this standard are to provide (1) minimum system design requirements for equipment, piping, instruments, controls, and wiring that constitute the air supply system; and (2) the system and component testing and maintenance requirements

DOE occupational radiation exposure 1996 report

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

NONE

1996-12-31

The goal of the US Department of Energy (DOE) is to conduct its radiological operations to ensure the health and safety of all DOE employees including contractors and subcontractors. The DOE strives to maintain radiation exposures to its workers below administrative control levels and DOE limits and to further reduce these exposures and releases to levels that are ``As Low As Reasonably Achievable`` (ALARA). The DOE Occupational Radiation Exposure Report, 1996 provides summary and analysis of the occupational radiation exposure received by individuals associated with DOE activities. The DOE mission includes stewardship of the nuclear weapons stockpile and the associated facilities, environmental restoration of DOE and precursor agency sites, and energy research. Collective exposure at DOE has declined by 80% over the past decade due to a cessation in opportunities for exposure during the transition in DOE mission from weapons production to cleanup, deactivation and decommissioning, and changes in reporting requirements and dose calculation methodology. In 1996, the collective dose decreased by 10% from the 1995 value due to decreased doses at five of the seven highest-dose DOE sites. For 1996, these sites attributed the reduction in collective dose to the completion of several decontamination and decommissioning projects, reduced spent fuel storage activities, and effective ALARA practices. This report is intended to be a valuable tool for managers in their management of radiological safety programs and commitment of resources.

DOE occupational radiation exposure 1996 report

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1996-01-01

The goal of the US Department of Energy (DOE) is to conduct its radiological operations to ensure the health and safety of all DOE employees including contractors and subcontractors. The DOE strives to maintain radiation exposures to its workers below administrative control levels and DOE limits and to further reduce these exposures and releases to levels that are ''As Low As Reasonably Achievable'' (ALARA). The DOE Occupational Radiation Exposure Report, 1996 provides summary and analysis of the occupational radiation exposure received by individuals associated with DOE activities. The DOE mission includes stewardship of the nuclear weapons stockpile and the associated facilities, environmental restoration of DOE and precursor agency sites, and energy research. Collective exposure at DOE has declined by 80% over the past decade due to a cessation in opportunities for exposure during the transition in DOE mission from weapons production to cleanup, deactivation and decommissioning, and changes in reporting requirements and dose calculation methodology. In 1996, the collective dose decreased by 10% from the 1995 value due to decreased doses at five of the seven highest-dose DOE sites. For 1996, these sites attributed the reduction in collective dose to the completion of several decontamination and decommissioning projects, reduced spent fuel storage activities, and effective ALARA practices. This report is intended to be a valuable tool for managers in their management of radiological safety programs and commitment of resources

Model review and evaluation for application in DOE safety basis documentation of chemical accidents - modeling guidance for atmospheric dispersion and consequence assessment

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Lazaro, M. A. [Argonne National Lab. (ANL), Argonne, IL (United States); Woodarad, K. [Argonne National Lab. (ANL), Argonne, IL (United States); Hanna, S. R. [Argonne National Lab. (ANL), Argonne, IL (United States); Hesse, D. J. [Argonne National Lab. (ANL), Argonne, IL (United States); Huang, J. -C. [Argonne National Lab. (ANL), Argonne, IL (United States); Lewis, J. [Argonne National Lab. (ANL), Argonne, IL (United States); Mazzola, C. A. [Argonne National Lab. (ANL), Argonne, IL (United States)

1997-09-01

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), through its Defense Programs (DP), Office of Engineering and Operations Suppon, established the Accident Phenomenology and Consequence (AP AC) Methodology Evaluation Program to identify and evaluate methodologies and computer codes to support accident phenomenological and consequence calculations for both radiological and nonradiological materials at DOE facilities and to identify development needs. The program is also intended to define and recommend "best or good engineering/safety analysis practices" to be followed in preparing ''design or beyond design basis" assessments to be included in DOE nuclear and nonnuclear facility safety documents. The AP AC effort is intended to provide scientifically sound and more consistent analytical approaches, by identifying model selection procedures and application methodologies, in order to enhance safety analysis activities throughout the DOE complex.

The actual development of European aviation safety requirements in aviation medicine: prospects of future EASA requirements.

Science.gov (United States)

Siedenburg, J

2009-04-01

Common Rules for Aviation Safety had been developed under the aegis of the Joint Aviation Authorities in the 1990s. In 2002 the Basic Regulation 1592/2002 was the founding document of a new entity, the European Aviation Safety Agency. Areas of activity were Certification and Maintenance of aircraft. On 18 March the new Basic Regulation 216/2008, repealing the original Basic Regulation was published and applicable from 08 April on. The included Essential Requirements extended the competencies of EASA inter alia to Pilot Licensing and Flight Operations. The future aeromedical requirements will be included as Annex II in another Implementing Regulation on Personnel Licensing. The detailed provisions will be published as guidance material. The proposals for these provisions have been published on 05 June 2008 as NPA 2008- 17c. After public consultation, processing of comments and final adoption the new proposals may be applicable form the second half of 2009 on. A transition period of four year will apply. Whereas the provisions are based on Joint Aviation Requirement-Flight Crew Licensing (JAR-FCL) 3, a new Light Aircraft Pilot Licence (LAPL) project and the details of the associated medical certification regarding general practitioners will be something new in aviation medicine. This paper consists of 6 sections. The introduction outlines the idea of international aviation safety. The second section describes the development of the Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA), the first step to common rules for aviation safety in Europe. The third section encompasses a major change as next step: the foundation of the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and the development of its rules. In the following section provides an outline of the new medical requirements. Section five emphasizes the new concept of a Leisure Pilot Licence. The last section gives an outlook on ongoing rulemaking activities and the opportunities of the public to participate in them.

SAFETY BASIS DESIGN DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGES IMECE2007-42747

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

RYAN GW

2007-09-24

'Designing in Safety' is a desired part of the development of any new potentially hazardous system, process, or facility. It is a required part of nuclear safety activities as specified in the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 420.B, Facility Safety. This order addresses the design of nuclear related facilities developed under federal regulation IOCFR830, Nuclear Safety Management. IOCFR830 requires that safety basis documentation be provided to identify how nuclear safety is being adequately addressed as a condition for system operation (e.g., the safety basis). To support the development of the safety basis, a safety analysis is performed. Although the concept of developing a design that addresses 'Safety is simple, the execution can be complex and challenging. This paper addresses those complexities and challenges for the design activity of a system to treat sludge, a corrosion product of spent nuclear fuel, at DOE's Hanford Site in Washington State. The system being developed is referred to as the Sludge Treatment Project (STP). This paper describes the portion of the safety analysis that addresses the selection of design basis events using the experience gained from the STP and the development of design requirements for safety features associated with those events. Specifically, the paper describes the safety design process and the application of the process for two types of potential design basis accidents associated with the operation of the system, (1) flashing spray leaks and (2) splash and splatter leaks. Also presented are the technical challenges that are being addressed to develop effective safety features to deal with these design basis accidents.

SAFETY BASIS DESIGN DEVELOPMENT CHALLENGES IMECE2007-42747

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

RYAN GW

2007-01-01

'Designing in Safety' is a desired part of the development of any new potentially hazardous system, process, or facility. It is a required part of nuclear safety activities as specified in the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 420.B, Facility Safety. This order addresses the design of nuclear related facilities developed under federal regulation IOCFR830, Nuclear Safety Management. IOCFR830 requires that safety basis documentation be provided to identify how nuclear safety is being adequately addressed as a condition for system operation (e.g., the safety basis). To support the development of the safety basis, a safety analysis is performed. Although the concept of developing a design that addresses 'Safety is simple, the execution can be complex and challenging. This paper addresses those complexities and challenges for the design activity of a system to treat sludge, a corrosion product of spent nuclear fuel, at DOE's Hanford Site in Washington State. The system being developed is referred to as the Sludge Treatment Project (STP). This paper describes the portion of the safety analysis that addresses the selection of design basis events using the experience gained from the STP and the development of design requirements for safety features associated with those events. Specifically, the paper describes the safety design process and the application of the process for two types of potential design basis accidents associated with the operation of the system, (1) flashing spray leaks and (2) splash and splatter leaks. Also presented are the technical challenges that are being addressed to develop effective safety features to deal with these design basis accidents

10 CFR 850 Implementation of Requirements

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Lee, S

2012-01-05

10 CFR 850 defines a contractor as any entity, including affiliated entities, such as a parent corporation, under contract with DOE, including a subcontractor at any tier, with responsibility for performing work at a DOE site in furtherance of a DOE mission. The Chronic Beryllium Disease Prevention Program (CBDPP) applies to beryllium-related activities that are performed at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The CBDPP or Beryllium Safety Program is integrated into the LLNL Worker Safety and Health Program and, thus, implementation documents and responsibilities are integrated in various documents and organizational structures. Program development and management of the CBDPP is delegated to the Environment, Safety and Health (ES&H) Directorate, Worker Safety and Health Functional Area. As per 10 CFR 850, Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS) periodically submits a CBDPP to the National Nuclear Security Administration/Livermore Site Office (NNSA/LSO). The requirements of this plan are communicated to LLNS workers through ES&H Manual Document 14.4, 'Working Safely with Beryllium.' 10 CFR 850 is implemented by the LLNL CBDPP, which integrates the safety and health standards required by the regulation, components of the LLNL Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS), and incorporates other components of the LLNL ES&H Program. As described in the regulation, and to fully comply with the regulation, specific portions of existing programs and additional requirements are identified in the CBDPP. The CBDPP is implemented by documents that interface with the workers, principally through ES&H Manual Document 14.4. This document contains information on how the management practices prescribed by the LLNL ISMS are implemented, how beryllium hazards that are associated with LLNL work activities are controlled, and who is responsible for implementing the controls. Adherence to the requirements and processes described in the ES&H Manual ensures

Long term safety requirements and safety indicators for the assessment of underground radioactive waste repositories

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Vovk, Ivan

1998-01-01

This presentation defines: waste disposal, safety issues, risk estimation; describes the integrated waste disposal process including quality assurance program. Related to actinides inventory it shows the main results of calculated activity obtained by deterministic estimation. It includes the Radioactive Waste Safety Standards and requirements; features related to site, design and waste package characteristics, as technical long term safety criteria for radioactive waste disposal facilities. Fundamental concern regarding the safety of radioactive waste disposal systems is their radiological impact on human beings and the environment. Safety requirements and criteria for judging the level of safety of such systems have been developed and there is a consensus among the international community on their basis within the well-established system of radiological protection. So far, however, little experience has been gained in applying long term safety criteria to actual disposal systems; consequently, there is an international debate on the most appropriate nature and form of the criteria to be used, taking into account the uncertainties involved. Emerging from the debate is the increasing conviction that the combined use of a variety of indicators would be advantageous in addressing the issue of reasonable assurance in the different time frames involved and in supporting the safety case for any particular repository concept. Indicators including risk, dose, radionuclide concentration, transit time, toxicity indices, fluxes at different points within the system, and barrier performance have all been identified as potentially relevant. Dose and risk are the indicators generally seen as most fundamental, as they seek directly to describe the radiological impact of a disposal system, and these are the ones that have been incorporated into most national standards to date. There are, however, certain problems in applying them. Application of a variety of different indicators

Recommended safety objectives, principles and requirements for mini-reactors

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1991-05-01

Canadian and international publications containing objectives, principles and requirements for the safety of nuclear facilities in general and nuclear power plants in particular have been reviewed for their relevance to mini-reactors. Most of the individual recommendations, sometimes with minor wording changes, are applicable to mini-reactors. However, some prescriptive requirements for the shutdown, emergency core cooling and containment systems of power reactors are considered inappropriate for mini-reactors. The Advisory Committee on Nuclear Safety favours a generally non-prescriptive approach whereby the applicant for a mini-reactor license is free to propose any means of satisfying the fundamental objectives, but must convince the regulatory agency to that effect. To do so, a probabilistic safety assessment (PSA) would be the favoured procedure. A generic PSA for all mini-reactors of the same design would be acceptable. Notwithstanding this non-prescriptive approach, the ACNS considers that it would be prudent to require the existence of at least one independent shutdown system and two physically independent locations from which the reactor can be shut down and the shutdown condition monitored, and to require provision for an assumed loss of integrity of the primary cooling system's boundary unless convincing arguments to the contrary are presented. The ACNS endorses in general the objectives and fundamental principles proposed by the interorganizational Small Reactor Criteria working group, and intends to review and comment on the documents on specific applications to be issued by that working group

Developing glovebox robotics to meet the national robot safety standard and nuclear safety criteria

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

McMahon, T.T.; Sievers, R.H.

1991-09-01

Development of a glove box based robotic system by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) is reported. Safety issues addressed include planning to meet the special constraints of operations within a hazardous material glove box and with hostile environments, compliance with the current and draft national robotic system safety standards, and eventual satisfaction of nuclear material handling requirements. Special attention has been required for the revision to the robot and control system models which antedate adoption of the present national safety standard. A robotic test bed, using non-radioactive surrogates is being activated at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory to develop the material handling system and the process interfaces for future special nuclear material processing applications. Part of this effort is to define, test, and revise adequate safety controls to ensure success when the system is eventually deployed at a DOE site. The current system is primarily for demonstration and testing, but will evolve into the baseline configuration from which the production system is to be derived. This results in special hazards associated with research activities which may not be present on a production line. Nuclear safety is of paramount importance and has been successfully addressed for 50 years in the DOE weapons production complex. It carries its particular requirements for robot systems and manual operations, as summarized below: Criticality must be avoided (materials cannot consolidate or accumulate to approach a critical mass). Radioactive materials must be confined. The public and workers must be protected from accountable radiation exposure. Nuclear material must be readily retrievable. Nuclear safety must be conclusively demonstrated through hazards analysis. 7 refs

Safety requirements for long term operation of NPPs

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Houdre, T.; Osouf, N.; Juvin, J.-C.

2012-01-01

In the future, the reactors operating at present will run alongside reactors of the EPR type or their equivalent, designed for a significantly higher level of safety. This raises the question of the acceptability of continued operation of reactors beyond 40 years when there is an available technology that is safer. Two objectives are therefore imperative. First, a re-evaluation of the safety level in the light of that required of EPR type reactors or their equivalent is necessary, with proposals to bring about significant and relevant improvements to the reactors. R and D work in France and elsewhere is already indicating orientations that could lead to answers, and improvements that would provide significant reductions in release in case of severe accident are being studied. Second, strict compliance of the reactors with the applicable regulations must be demonstrated. At the same time, ageing and obsolescence of the equipment will have to be managed. Where these two points are concerned, ASN expects far-reaching proposals from the licensee. With a view to a request for continued operation beyond 40 years, ASN has referred the matter to the Advisory Committee for nuclear reactors which will meet at the end of 2011 to establish the safety requirements for reactors at their fourth ten-yearly outage. (author)

Nuclear criticality safety basics for personnel working with nuclear fissionable materials. Phase I

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Vausher, A.L.

1984-10-01

DOE order 5480.1A, Chapter V, ''Safety of Nuclear Facilities,'' establishes safety procedures and requirements for DOE nuclear facilities. The ''Nuclear Criticality Safety Basic Program - Phase I'' is documented in this report. The revised program has been developed to clearly illustrate the concept of nuclear safety and to help the individual employee incorporate safe behavior in his daily work performance. Because of this, the subject of safety has been approached through its three fundamentals: scientific basis, engineering criteria, and administrative controls. Only basics of these three elements were presented. 5 refs

Fuel supply shutdown facility interim operational safety requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Besser, R.L.; Brehm, J.R.; Benecke, M.W.; Remaize, J.A.

1995-01-01

These Interim Operational Safety Requirements (IOSR) for the Fuel Supply Shutdown (FSS) facility define acceptable conditions, safe boundaries, bases thereof, and management or administrative controls to ensure safe operation. The IOSRs apply to the fuel material storage buildings in various modes (operation, storage, surveillance)

Preliminary Safety Analysis Report for the Transuranic Storage Area Retrieval Enclosure at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1993-03-01

This Transuranic Storage Area Retrieval Enclosure Preliminary Safety Analysis Report was completed as required by DOE Order 5480.23. The purpose of this document is to construct a safety basis that supports the design and permits construction of the facility. The facility has been designed to the requirements of a Radioactive Solid Waste Facility presented in DOE Order 6430.1A

Safety and regulatory requirements of nuclear power plants

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Kumar, S.V.; Bhardwaj, S.A.

2000-01-01

A pre-requisite for a nuclear power program in any country is well established national safety and regulatory requirements. These have evolved for nuclear power plants in India with participation of the regulatory body, utility, research and development (R and D) organizations and educational institutions. Prevailing international practices provided a useful base to develop those applicable to specific system designs for nuclear power plants in India. Their effectiveness has been demonstrated in planned activities of building up the nuclear power program as well as with unplanned activities, like those due to safety related incidents etc. (author)

Safety Basis Report

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

R.J. Garrett

2002-01-01

As part of the internal Integrated Safety Management Assessment verification process, it was determined that there was a lack of documentation that summarizes the safety basis of the current Yucca Mountain Project (YMP) site characterization activities. It was noted that a safety basis would make it possible to establish a technically justifiable graded approach to the implementation of the requirements identified in the Standards/Requirements Identification Document. The Standards/Requirements Identification Documents commit a facility to compliance with specific requirements and, together with the hazard baseline documentation, provide a technical basis for ensuring that the public and workers are protected. This Safety Basis Report has been developed to establish and document the safety basis of the current site characterization activities, establish and document the hazard baseline, and provide the technical basis for identifying structures, systems, and components (SSCs) that perform functions necessary to protect the public, the worker, and the environment from hazards unique to the YMP site characterization activities. This technical basis for identifying SSCs serves as a grading process for the implementation of programs such as Conduct of Operations (DOE Order 5480.19) and the Suspect/Counterfeit Items Program. In addition, this report provides a consolidated summary of the hazards analyses processes developed to support the design, construction, and operation of the YMP site characterization facilities and, therefore, provides a tool for evaluating the safety impacts of changes to the design and operation of the YMP site characterization activities

Safety Basis Report

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

R.J. Garrett

2002-01-14

As part of the internal Integrated Safety Management Assessment verification process, it was determined that there was a lack of documentation that summarizes the safety basis of the current Yucca Mountain Project (YMP) site characterization activities. It was noted that a safety basis would make it possible to establish a technically justifiable graded approach to the implementation of the requirements identified in the Standards/Requirements Identification Document. The Standards/Requirements Identification Documents commit a facility to compliance with specific requirements and, together with the hazard baseline documentation, provide a technical basis for ensuring that the public and workers are protected. This Safety Basis Report has been developed to establish and document the safety basis of the current site characterization activities, establish and document the hazard baseline, and provide the technical basis for identifying structures, systems, and components (SSCs) that perform functions necessary to protect the public, the worker, and the environment from hazards unique to the YMP site characterization activities. This technical basis for identifying SSCs serves as a grading process for the implementation of programs such as Conduct of Operations (DOE Order 5480.19) and the Suspect/Counterfeit Items Program. In addition, this report provides a consolidated summary of the hazards analyses processes developed to support the design, construction, and operation of the YMP site characterization facilities and, therefore, provides a tool for evaluating the safety impacts of changes to the design and operation of the YMP site characterization activities.

Development of Onsite Transportation Safety Documents for Nevada Test Site

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Frank Hand; Willard Thomas; Frank Sciacca; Manny Negrete; Susan Kelley

2008-01-01

Department of Energy (DOE) Orders require each DOE site to develop onsite transportation safety documents (OTSDs). The Nevada Test Site approach divided all onsite transfers into two groups with each group covered by a standalone OTSD identified as Non-Nuclear and Nuclear. The Non-Nuclear transfers involve all radioactive hazardous material in less than Hazard Category (HC)-3 quantities and all chemically hazardous materials. The Nuclear transfers involve all radioactive material equal to or greater than HC-3 quantities and radioactive material mated with high explosives regardless of quantity. Both OTSDs comply with DOE O 460.1B requirements. The Nuclear OTSD also complies with DOE O 461.1A requirements and includes a DOE-STD-3009 approach to hazard analysis (HA) and accident analysis as needed. All Nuclear OTSD proposed transfers were determined to be non-equivalent and a methodology was developed to determine if 'equivalent safety' to a fully compliant Department of Transportation (DOT) transfer was achieved. For each HA scenario, three hypothetical transfers were evaluated: a DOT-compliant, uncontrolled, and controlled transfer. Equivalent safety is demonstrated when the risk level for each controlled transfer is equal to or less than the corresponding DOT-compliant transfer risk level. In this comparison the typical DOE-STD-3009 risk matrix was modified to reflect transportation requirements. Design basis conditions (DBCs) were developed for each non-equivalent transfer. Initial DBCs were based solely upon the amount of material present. Route-, transfer-, and site-specific conditions were evaluated and the initial DBCs revised as needed. Final DBCs were evaluated for each transfer's packaging and its contents

Product Engineering Class in the Software Safety Risk Taxonomy for Building Safety-Critical Systems

Science.gov (United States)

Hill, Janice; Victor, Daniel

2008-01-01

When software safety requirements are imposed on legacy safety-critical systems, retrospective safety cases need to be formulated as part of recertifying the systems for further use and risks must be documented and managed to give confidence for reusing the systems. The SEJ Software Development Risk Taxonomy [4] focuses on general software development issues. It does not, however, cover all the safety risks. The Software Safety Risk Taxonomy [8] was developed which provides a construct for eliciting and categorizing software safety risks in a straightforward manner. In this paper, we present extended work on the taxonomy for safety that incorporates the additional issues inherent in the development and maintenance of safety-critical systems with software. An instrument called a Software Safety Risk Taxonomy Based Questionnaire (TBQ) is generated containing questions addressing each safety attribute in the Software Safety Risk Taxonomy. Software safety risks are surfaced using the new TBQ and then analyzed. In this paper we give the definitions for the specialized Product Engineering Class within the Software Safety Risk Taxonomy. At the end of the paper, we present the tool known as the 'Legacy Systems Risk Database Tool' that is used to collect and analyze the data required to show traceability to a particular safety standard

Safety assessment and verification for nuclear power plants. Safety guide

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2001-01-01

verification' are used differently in different countries. The way that these terms have been used in this Safety Guide is explained in Section 2. The term 'design' as used here includes the specifications for the safe operation and management of the plant. This Safety Guide identifies the key recommendations for carrying out the safety assessment and the independent verification. It provides detailed guidance in support of IAEA, Safety of Nuclear Power Plants: Design, Safety Standards Series No. NS-R-1 (2000), particularly in the area of safety analysis. However, this does not include all the technical details which are available and reference is made to other IAEA publications on specific design issues and safety analysis methods. Specific deterministic or probabilistic safety targets or radiological limits can vary in different countries and are the responsibility of the regulatory body. This Safety Guide provides some references to targets and limits established by international organizations. Operators, and sometimes designers, may also set their own safety targets which may be more stringent than those set by the regulator or may address different aspects of safety. In some countries operators are expected to do this as part of their 'ownership' of the entire safety case. This Safety Guide does not include specific recommendations for the safety assessment of those plant systems for which dedicated Safety Guides exist. Section 2 defines the terms 'safety assessment', 'safety analysis' and 'independent verification' and outlines their relationship. Section 3 gives the key recommendations for the safety assessment of the principal and plant design requirements. Section 4 gives the key recommendations for safety analysis. It describes the identification of postulated initiating events (PIEs), which are used throughout the safety assessment including the safety analysis, the deterministic transient analysis and severe accident analysis, and the probabilistic safety analysis

Requirements on the provisional safety analyses and technical comparison of safety measures

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2010-04-01

decide on the provision of a design license for a repository site for SMA and another one for HAA, or for a common site for both SMA and HAA. The present report concerns the second step and recapitulates the assertions of SGT on the provisional safety analyses and on the safety technical comparison. It establishes the specific requirements of the Swiss Federal Nuclear Safety Inspectorate (ENSI) on provisional safety and the safety technical comparison. Further, it defines the extent and content of the safety technical documentation necessary for step 2

Legal and governmental infrastructure for nuclear, radiation, radioactive waste and transport safety. Safety requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2000-01-01

This publication establishes requirements for legal and governmental responsibilities in respect of the safety of nuclear facilities, the safe use of sources of ionizing radiation, radiation protection, the safe management of radioactive waste and the safe transport of radioactive material. Thus, it covers development of the legal framework for establishing a regulatory body and other actions to achieve effective regulatory control of facilities and activities. Other responsibilities are also covered, such as those for developing the necessary support for safety, involvement in securing third party liability and emergency preparedness

Legal and governmental infrastructure for nuclear, radiation, radioactive waste and transport safety. Safety requirements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2004-01-01

This publication establishes requirements for legal and governmental responsibilities in respect of the safety of nuclear facilities, the safe use of sources of ionizing radiation, radiation protection, the safe management of radioactive waste and the safe transport of radioactive material. Thus, it covers development of the legal framework for establishing a regulatory body and other actions to achieve effective regulatory control of facilities and activities. Other responsibilities are also covered, such as those for developing the necessary support for safety, involvement in securing third party liability and emergency preparedness

Workshop on Program for Elimination of Requirements Marginal to Safety: Proceedings

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Dey, M.

1993-09-01

These are the proceedings of the Public Workshop on the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Program for Elimination of Requirements Marginal to Safety. The workshop was held at the Holiday Inn, Bethesda, on April 27 and 28, 1993. The purpose of the workshop was to provide an opportunity for public and industry input to the program. The workshop addressed the institutionalization of the program to review regulations with the purpose of eliminating those that are marginal. The objective is to avoid the dilution of safety efforts. One session was devoted to discussion of the framework for a performance-based regulatory approach. In addition, panelists and attendees discussed scope, schedules and status of specific regulatory items: containment leakage testing requirements, fire protection requirements, requirements for environmental qualification of electrical equipment, requests for information under 10CFR50.54(f), requirements for combustible gas control systems, and quality assurance requirements

Workshop on Program for Elimination of Requirements Marginal to Safety: Proceedings

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Dey, M. [Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC (United States). Div. of Safety Issue Resolution; Arsenault, F.; Patterson, M.; Gaal, M. [SCIENTECH, Inc., Rockville, MD (United States)

1993-09-01

These are the proceedings of the Public Workshop on the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission`s Program for Elimination of Requirements Marginal to Safety. The workshop was held at the Holiday Inn, Bethesda, on April 27 and 28, 1993. The purpose of the workshop was to provide an opportunity for public and industry input to the program. The workshop addressed the institutionalization of the program to review regulations with the purpose of eliminating those that are marginal. The objective is to avoid the dilution of safety efforts. One session was devoted to discussion of the framework for a performance-based regulatory approach. In addition, panelists and attendees discussed scope, schedules and status of specific regulatory items: containment leakage testing requirements, fire protection requirements, requirements for environmental qualification of electrical equipment, requests for information under 10CFR50.54(f), requirements for combustible gas control systems, and quality assurance requirements.

Reactor safety

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Meneley, D.A.

The people of Ontario have begun to receive the benefits of a low cost, assured supply of electrical energy from CANDU nuclear stations. This indigenous energy source also has excellent safety characteristics. Safety has been one of the central themes of the CANDU development program from its very beginning. A great deal of work has been done to establish that public risks are small. However, safety design criteria are now undergoing extensive review, with a real prospect of more stringent requirements being applied in the future. Considering the newness of the technology it is not surprising that a consensus does not yet exist; this makes it imperative to discuss the issues. It is time to examine the policies and practice of reactor safety management in Canada to decide whether or not further restrictions are justified in the light of current knowledge

Radiation Protection and Safety of Radiation Sources: International Basic Safety Standards. General Safety Requirements. Pt. 3 (Chinese Edition)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2014-01-01

This publication is the new edition of the International Basic Safety Standards. The edition is co-sponsored by seven other international organizations — European Commission (EC/Euratom), FAO, ILO, OECD/NEA, PAHO, UNEP and WHO. It replaces the interim edition that was published in November 2011 and the previous edition of the International Basic Safety Standards which was published in 1996. It has been extensively revised and updated to take account of the latest finding of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, and the latest recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. The publication details the requirements for the protection of people and the environment from harmful effects of ionizing radiation and for the safety of radiation sources. All circumstances of radiation exposure are considered

Radiation protection and safety of radiation sources: International basic safety standards. General safety requirements. Pt. 3 (French Edition)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2016-01-01

This publication is the new edition of the International Basic Safety Standards. The edition is co-sponsored by seven other international organizations — European Commission (EC/Euratom), FAO, ILO, OECD/NEA, PAHO, UNEP and WHO. It replaces the interim edition that was published in November 2011 and the previous edition of the International Basic Safety Standards which was published in 1996. It has been extensively revised and updated to take account of the latest finding of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, and the latest recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. The publication details the requirements for the protection of people and the environment from harmful effects of ionizing radiation and for the safety of radiation sources. All circumstances of radiation exposure are considered

Radiation Protection and Safety of Radiation Sources: International Basic Safety Standards. General Safety Requirements. Pt. 3 (Arabic Edition)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

2015-01-01

This publication is the new edition of the International Basic Safety Standards. The edition is co-sponsored by seven other international organizations — European Commission (EC/Euratom), FAO, ILO, OECD/NEA, PAHO, UNEP and WHO. It replaces the interim edition that was published in November 2011 and the previous edition of the International Basic Safety Standards which was published in 1996. It has been extensively revised and updated to take account of the latest finding of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, and the latest recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. The publication details the requirements for the protection of people and the environment from harmful effects of ionizing radiation and for the safety of radiation sources. All circumstances of radiation exposure are considered

Hazardous Substance Release Reporting Under CERCLA, EPCR {section}304 and DOE Emergency Management System (EMS) and DOE Occurrence Reporting Requirements. Environmental Guidance

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Traceski, T.T.

1994-06-01

Releases of various substances from DOE facilities may be subject to reporting requirements under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), as well as DOE`s internal ``Occurrence Reporting and Processing of Operations Information`` and the ``Emergency Management System`` (EMS). CERCLA and EPCPA are Federal laws that require immediate reporting of a release of a Hazardous Substance (HS) and an Extremely Hazardous Substance (EHS), respectively, in a Reportable Quantity (RQ) or more within a 24-hour period. This guidance uses a flowchart, supplemental information, and tables to provide an overview of the process to be followed, and more detailed explanations of the actions that must be performed, when chemical releases of HSs, EHSs, pollutants, or contaminants occur at DOE facilities. This guidance should be used in conjunction with, rather than in lieu of, applicable laws, regulations, and DOE Orders. Relevant laws, regulations, and DOE Orders are referenced throughout this guidance.

Electrical safety guidelines

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

1993-09-01

The Electrical Safety Guidelines prescribes the DOE safety standards for DOE field offices or facilities involved in the use of electrical energy. It has been prepared to provide a uniform set of electrical safety standards and guidance for DOE installations in order to affect a reduction or elimination of risks associated with the use of electrical energy. The objectives of these guidelines are to enhance electrical safety awareness and mitigate electrical hazards to employees, the public, and the environment.

Tiger team findings related to DOE environmental restoration activities

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Levitan, W.M.

1991-01-01

Tiger Team Assessments were implemented in June 1989 as part of a strategy to ensure that DOE facilities fully comply with Federal, state, local and DOE environment, safety, and health (ES ampersand H) requirements. The Tiger Teams provide the Secretary of Energy with information on current ES ampersand H compliance status of each DOE facility and causes for noncompliance. To date, Tiger Team Assessments have been completed at 25 DOE facilities. With regard to assessments of environmental restoration activities, the performance of DOE facilities was evaluated against the requirements of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), as amended, the National Contingency Plan (NCP), and DOE Order 5400.4, CERCLA Requirements, among others. Five major categories of environmental restoration-related findings were identified: (1) environmental restoration program planning and management (found at 60 percent of the sites assessed); (2) community relations/administrative record (60 percent); (3) characterization of extent of contamination (56 percent); (4) identification and evaluation of inactive waste sites (56 percent); and (5) DOE and NCP requirements for response action studies (44 percent). Primary causal factors for these findings were inadequate procedures, resources, supervision, and policy implementation

Radiation safety requirements for training of users of diagnostic X ...

African Journals Online (AJOL)

Background. Globally, the aim of requirements regarding the use and ownership of diagnostic medical X-ray equipment is to limit radiation by abiding by the 'as low as reasonably achievable' (ALARA) principle. The ignorance of radiographers with regard to radiation safety requirements, however, is currently a cause of ...

Cross-Index to DOE-prescribed industrial safety codes and standards

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1980-01-01

This Cross-Index volume is the 1980 compilation of detailed information from more than two hundred and ninety Department of Energy (DOE) prescribed or Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) referenced industrial safety codes and standards. The compilation of this material was conceived and initiated in 1973, and is revised yearly to provide information from current codes. Condensed data from individual code portions are listed according to reference code, section, paragraph, and page. Each code is given a two-digit reference code number or letter in the Contents section. This reference code provides ready identification of any code listed in the Cross-Index. The computerized information listings are on the left-hand portion of Cross-Index page; in order to the right of the listing are the reference code letters or numbers, the section, paragraph, and page of the referenced code containing expanded information on the individual listing. Simplified How to Use directions are listed. A glossary of letter initials/abbreviations for the organizations or documents, whose codes or standards are contained in this Cross-Index, is included

The application of integrated safety management principles to the Tritium Extraction Facility project

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Hickman, M.O.; Viviano, R.R.

2000-01-01

The DOE has developed a program that is accomplishing a heightened safety posture across the complex. The Integrated Safety Management (ISM) System (ISMS) program utilizes five core functions and seven guiding principles as the basis for implementation. The core functions define the work scope, analyze the hazards, develop and implement hazard controls, perform the work, and provide feedback for improvement. The guiding principles include line management responsibility, clear roles and responsibilities, competence per responsibilities, identification of safety standards/requirements, tailored hazard control, balanced priorities, and operations authorization. There exists an unspecified eighth principle, that is, worker involvement. A program requiring the direct involvement of the employees who are actually performing the work has been shown to be quite an effective method of communicating safety requirements, controlling work in a safe manner, and reducing safety violations and injuries. The Tritium Extraction Facility (TEF) projects, a component of the DOE's Commercial Light Water Reactor Tritium Production program, has taken the ISM principles and core functions and applied them to the project's design. The task of the design team is to design a facility and systems that will meet the production requirements of the DOE tritium mission as well as a design that minimizes the workers' exposure to adverse safety situations and hazards/hazardous materials. During the development of the preliminary design for the TEF, design teams consisted of not only designers but also personnel who had operational experience in the existing tritium and personnel who had operational experience in the existing tritium and personnel who had specialized experience from across the DOE complex. This design team reviewed multiple documents associated with the TEF operation in order to identify and document the hazards associated with the tritium process. These documents include hazards

UMTRA project office federal employee occupational safety and health program plan

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1994-06-01

This document establishes the Federal Employee Occupational Safety and Health (FEOSH) Program for the US Department of Energy (DOE) Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Project Office. This program will ensure compliance with applicable requirements of DOE Order 3790.1B and DOE Albuquerque Operations Office (AL) Order 3790.lA. FEOSH Program responsibilities delegated by the DOE-AL to the UMTRA Project Office by AL Order 3790.1A also are assigned. The UMTRA Project Office has developed the UMTRA Project Environmental, Safety, and Health (ES ampersand H) Plan (DOE, 1992), which establishes the basic programmatic ES ampersand H requirements for all participants on the UMTRA Project. The ES ampersand H plan is designed primarily to cover remedial action activities at UMTRA sites and defines the ES ampersand H responsibilities of both the UMTRA Project Office and its contractors. The UMTRA FEOSH Program described herein is a subset of the overall UMTRA ES ampersand H program and covers only federal employees working on the UMTRA Project

Commercial Decommissioning at DOE's Rocky Flats

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Freiboth, C.; Sandlin, N.; Schubert, A.; Hansen, S.

2002-01-01

Due in large part to the number of nuclear facilities that make up the DOE complex, DOE-EM work has historically been paperwork intensive and driven by extensive regulations. Requirements for non-nuclear facilities are often grouped with those of nuclear facilities, driving up costs. Kaiser-Hill was interested in applying a commercial model to demolition of these facilities and wanted to apply necessary and sufficient standards to the work activities, but avoid applying unnecessary requirements. Faced with demolishing hundreds of uncontaminated or non-radiologically contaminated facilities, Kaiser-Hill has developed a subcontracting strategy to drastically reduce the cost of demolishing these facilities at Rocky Flats. Aiming to tailor the demolition approach of such facilities to more closely follow commercial practices, Kaiser-Hill recently released a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the demolition of the site's former central administration facility. The RFP significantly reduced requirements for compliance with specific DOE directives. Instead, the RFP required subcontractors to comply with health and safety requirements commonly found in the demolition of similar facilities in a commercial setting. This resulted in a number of bids from companies who have normally not bid on DOE work previously and at a reduced cost over previous approaches. This paper will discuss the details of this subcontracting strategy

Hanford Site Wide Transportation Safety Document [SEC 1 Thru 3

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

MCCALL, D L

2002-06-01

This safety evaluation report (SER) documents the basis for the US Department of Energy (DOE), Richland Operations Office (RL) to approve the Hanford Sitewide Transportation Safety Document (TSD) for onsite Transportation and Packaging (T&P) at Hanford. Hanford contractors, on behalf of DOE-RL, prepared and submitted the Hanford Sitewide Transportation Safety Document, DOE/RL-2001-0036, Revision 0, (DOE/RL 2001), dated October 4, 2001, which is referred to throughout this report as the TSD. In the context of the TSD, Hanford onsite shipments are the activities of moving hazardous materials, substances, and wastes between DOE facilities and over roadways where public access is controlled or restricted and includes intra-area and inter-area movements. The TSD sets forth requirements and standards for onsite shipment of radioactive and hazardous materials and wastes within the confines of the Hanford Site on roadways where public access is restricted by signs, barricades, fences, or other means including road closures and moving convoys controlled by Hanford Site security forces.

High level waste storage tanks 242-A evaporator standards/requirement identification document

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Biebesheimer, E.

1996-01-01

This document, the Standards/Requirements Identification Document (S/RIDS) for the subject facility, represents the necessary and sufficient requirements to provide an adequate level of protection of the worker, public health and safety, and the environment. It lists those source documents from which requirements were extracted, and those requirements documents considered, but from which no requirements where taken. Documents considered as source documents included State and Federal Regulations, DOE Orders, and DOE Standards

Correct safety requirements during the life cycle of heating plants; Korrekta saekerhetskrav under vaermeanlaeggningars livscykel

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Tegehall, Jan; Hedberg, Johan [Swedish National Testing and Research Inst., Boraas (Sweden)

2006-10-15

The safety of old steam boilers or hot water generators is in principle based on electromechanical components which are generally easy to understand. The use of safety-PLC is a new and flexible way to design a safe system. A programmable system offers more degrees of freedom and consequently new problems may arise. As a result, new standards which use the Safety Integrity Level (SIL) concept for the level of safety have been elaborated. The goal is to define a way of working to handle requirements on safety in control systems of heat and power plants. SIL-requirements are relatively new within the domain and there is a need for guidance to be able to follow the requirements. The target of this report is the people who work with safety questions during new construction, reconstruction, or modification of furnace plants. In the work, the Pressure Equipment Directive, 97/23/EC, as well as standards which use the SIL concept have been studied. Additionally, standards for water-tube boilers have been studied. The focus has been on the safety systems (safety functions) which are used in water-tube boilers for heat and power plants; other systems, which are parts of these boilers, have not been considered. Guidance has been given for the aforementioned standards as well as safety requirements specification and risk analysis. An old hot water generator and a relatively new steam boiler have been used as case studies. The design principles and safety functions of the furnaces have been described. During the risk analysis important hazards were identified. A method for performing a risk analysis has been described and the appropriate content of a safety requirements specification has been defined. If a heat or power plant is constructed, modified, or reconstructed, a safety life cycle shall be followed. The purpose of the safety life cycle is to plan, describe, document, perform, check, test, and validate that everything is correctly done. The components of the safety

DOE 2012 occupational radiation exposure

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

none,

2013-10-01

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Analysis within the Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) publishes the annual DOE Occupational Radiation Exposure Report to provide an overview of the status of radiation protection practices at DOE (including the National Nuclear Security Administration [NNSA]). The DOE 2012 Occupational Radiation Exposure Report provides an evaluation of DOE-wide performance regarding compliance with Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.), Part 835, Occupational Radiation Protection dose limits and as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) process requirements. In addition, the report provides data to DOE organizations responsible for developing policies for protection of individuals from the adverse health effects of radiation. The report provides a summary and an analysis of occupational radiation exposure information from the monitoring of individuals involved in DOE activities. Over the past 5-year period, the occupational radiation exposure information is analyzed in terms of aggregate data, dose to individuals, and dose by site.

DOE 2011 occupational radiation exposure

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

none,

2012-12-01

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Analysis within the Office of Health, Safety and Security (HSS) publishes the annual DOE Occupational Radiation Exposure Report to provide an overview of the status of radiation protection practices at DOE (including the National Nuclear Security Administration [NNSA]). The DOE 2011 Occupational Radiation Exposure Report provides an evaluation of DOE-wide performance regarding compliance with Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.), Part 835, Occupational Radiation Protection dose limits and as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) process requirements. In addition, the report provides data to DOE organizations responsible for developing policies for protection of individuals from the adverse health effects of radiation. The report provides a summary and an analysis of occupational radiation exposure information from the monitoring of individuals involved in DOE activities. The occupational radiation exposure information is analyzed in terms of aggregate data, dose to individuals, and dose by site over the past five years.

DOE 2013 occupational radiation exposure

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

none,

2014-11-01

The Office of Analysis within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security (EHSS) publishes the annual DOE Occupational Radiation Exposure Report to provide an overview of the status of radiation protection practices at DOE (including the National Nuclear Security Administration [NNSA]). The DOE 2013 Occupational Radiation Exposure Report provides an evaluation of DOE-wide performance regarding compliance with Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.), Part 835, Occupational Radiation Protection dose limits and as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) process requirements. In addition, the report provides data to DOE organizations responsible for developing policies for protection of individuals from the adverse health effects of radiation. The report provides a summary and an analysis of occupational radiation exposure information from the monitoring of individuals involved in DOE activities. Over the past five-year period, the occupational radiation exposure information has been analyzed in terms of aggregate data, dose to individuals, and dose by site.

Indicators of safety culture - selection and utilization of leading safety performance indicators

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Reiman, Teemu; Pietikaeinen, Elina (VTT, Technical Research Centre of Finland (Finland))

2010-03-15

performance indicators can help in reflecting on this model. Key questions to ask when selecting and utilizing safety performance indicators are 1) what is required from the nuclear power plant to perform safely and 2) what is required from the organization in order to be aware of its safety level and enhance its safety performance. The indicators should provide information on whether these requirements are met or not, where the organization should put more effort to meet the requirements and finally, does the organization have an accurate view on the requirements

Indicators of safety culture - selection and utilization of leading safety performance indicators

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Reiman, Teemu; Pietikaeinen, Elina

2010-03-01

performance indicators can help in reflecting on this model. Key questions to ask when selecting and utilizing safety performance indicators are 1) what is required from the nuclear power plant to perform safely and 2) what is required from the organization in order to be aware of its safety level and enhance its safety performance. The indicators should provide information on whether these requirements are met or not, where the organization should put more effort to meet the requirements and finally, does the organization have an accurate view on the requirements

Nitrogen-system safety study: Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1982-07-01

The Department of Energy has primary responsibility for the safety of operations at DOE-owned nuclear facilities. The guidelines for the analysis of credible accidents are outlined in DOE Order 5481.1. DOE has requested that existing plant facilities and operations be reviewed for potential safety problems not covered by standard industrial safety procedures. This review is being conducted by investigating individual facilities and documenting the results in Safety Study Reports which will be compiled to form the Existing Plant Final Safety Analysis Report which is scheduled for completion in September, 1984. This Safety Study documents the review of the Plant Nitrogen System facilities and operations and consists of Section 4.0, Facility and Process Description, and Section 5.0, Accident Analysis, of the Final Safety Analysis Report format. The existing nitrogen system consists of a Superior Air Products Company Type D Nitrogen Plant, nitrogen storage facilities, vaporization facilities and a distribution system. The system is designed to generate and distribute nitrogen gas used in the cascade for seal feed, buffer systems, and for servicing equipment when exceptionally low dew points are required. Gaseous nitrogen is also distributed to various process auxiliary buildings. The average usage is approximately 130,000 standard cubic feet per day

77 FR 75439 - Guidances for Industry and Investigators on Safety Reporting Requirements for Investigational New...

Science.gov (United States)

2012-12-20

...] Guidances for Industry and Investigators on Safety Reporting Requirements for Investigational New Drug Applications and Bioavailability/Bioequivalence Studies, and a Small Entity Compliance Guide; Availability... Reporting Requirements for INDs and BA/BE Studies'' and ``Safety Reporting Requirements for INDs and BA/BE...

Modeling of requirement specification for safety critical real time computer system using formal mathematical specifications

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Sankar, Bindu; Sasidhar Rao, B.; Ilango Sambasivam, S.; Swaminathan, P.

2002-01-01

Full text: Real time computer systems are increasingly used for safety critical supervision and control of nuclear reactors. Typical application areas are supervision of reactor core against coolant flow blockage, supervision of clad hot spot, supervision of undesirable power excursion, power control and control logic for fuel handling systems. The most frequent cause of fault in safety critical real time computer system is traced to fuzziness in requirement specification. To ensure the specified safety, it is necessary to model the requirement specification of safety critical real time computer systems using formal mathematical methods. Modeling eliminates the fuzziness in the requirement specification and also helps to prepare the verification and validation schemes. Test data can be easily designed from the model of the requirement specification. Z and B are the popular languages used for modeling the requirement specification. A typical safety critical real time computer system for supervising the reactor core of prototype fast breeder reactor (PFBR) against flow blockage is taken as case study. Modeling techniques and the actual model are explained in detail. The advantages of modeling for ensuring the safety are summarized

Plutonium Finishing Plant safety evaluation report

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1995-01-01

The Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) previously known as the Plutonium Process and Storage Facility, or Z-Plant, was built and put into operation in 1949. Since 1949 PFP has been used for various processing missions, including plutonium purification, oxide production, metal production, parts fabrication, plutonium recovery, and the recovery of americium (Am-241). The PFP has also been used for receipt and large scale storage of plutonium scrap and product materials. The PFP Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) was prepared by WHC to document the hazards associated with the facility, present safety analyses of potential accident scenarios, and demonstrate the adequacy of safety class structures, systems, and components (SSCs) and operational safety requirements (OSRs) necessary to eliminate, control, or mitigate the identified hazards. Documented in this Safety Evaluation Report (SER) is DOE's independent review and evaluation of the PFP FSAR and the basis for approval of the PFP FSAR. The evaluation is presented in a format that parallels the format of the PFP FSAR. As an aid to the reactor, a list of acronyms has been included at the beginning of this report. The DOE review concluded that the risks associated with conducting plutonium handling, processing, and storage operations within PFP facilities, as described in the PFP FSAR, are acceptable, since the accident safety analyses associated with these activities meet the WHC risk acceptance guidelines and DOE safety goals in SEN-35-91

Nuclear safety review requirements for launch approval

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Sholtis, J.A. Jr.; Winchester, R.O.

1992-01-01

Use of nuclear power systems in space requires approval which is preceded by extensive safety analysis and review. This careful study allows an informed risk-benefit decision at the highest level of our government. This paper describes the process as it has historically been applied to U.S. isotopic power systems. The Ulysses mission, launched in October 1990, is used to illustrate the process. Expected variations to deal with reactor-power systems are explained

A DOE manual: DOE Methods for Evaluating Environmental and Waste Management Samples

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Goheen, S.C.; McCulloch, M.; Riley, R.G.

1994-01-01

Waste Management inherently requires knowledge of the waste's chemical composition. The waste can often be analyzed by established methods; however, if the samples are radioactive, or are plagued by other complications, established methods may not be feasible. The US Department of Energy (DOE) has been faced with managing some waste types that are not amenable to standard or available methods, so new or modified sampling and analysis methods are required. These methods are incorporated into DOE Methods for Evaluating Environmental and Waste Management Samples (DOE Methods), which is a guidance/methods document for sampling and analysis activities in support of DOE sites. It is a document generated by consensus of the DOE laboratory staff and is intended to fill the gap within existing guidance documents (e. g., the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, SW-846), which apply to low-level or non-radioactive samples. DOE Methods fills the gap by including methods that take into account the complexities of DOE site matrices. The most recent update, distributed in October 1993, contained quality assurance (QA), quality control (QC), safety, sampling, organic analysis, inorganic analysis, and radioanalytical guidance as well as 29 methods. The next update, which will be distributed in April 1994, will contain 40 methods and will therefore have greater applicability. All new methods are either peer reviewed or labeled ''draft'' methods. Draft methods were added to speed the release of methods to field personnel

Romania - NPP PLiM Between Regulatory Requirement / Oversight and Operator Safety / Financial Interest

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Goicea, Lucian

2012-01-01

Cernavoda Unit 1 PLiM started in the first third of its design life, to develop as regulatory requirements of the components of standards and programmes and to benefit by earlier implementation of the measures for achieving maximum operating life. CNCAN regulatory present approach on the utility PLiM combines the regulatory requirements on management system, ageing management provisions of periodic safety review, detailed technical requirements of ageing programmes and different techniques focusing only on safety issues. (author)

Safety of DOE nuclear facilities. Hearings before the Subcommittee on Energy and Power of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives, One Hundredth Congress, First Session, H.R. 783, H.R. 2047 and H.R. 3123, November 5 and 19, 1987

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Anon.

1988-01-01

H.R. 783 is a bill to require the Secretary of Energy to ensure the compliance of certain operations of the Department of Energy (DOE) with Federal environmental standards and for other purposes. H.R. 2047 is a bill to establish a Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Agency in order to provide for increased standards of safety with respect to radioactive emissions resulting from activities carried out at nuclear facilities of DOE. H.R. 3123 is a bill to create an independent oversight board to ensure the safety of United States Government nuclear facilities, to apply the provisions of OSHA to certain DOE nuclear facilities, to clarify the jurisdiction and powers of Government agencies dealing with nuclear wastes, to ensure independent research on the effects of radiation on human beings, and for other purposes

Specification of safety requirements for waste packages with respect to practicable quality control measures

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Gruendler, D.; Wurtinger, W.

1987-01-01

Waste packages for disposal in a repository in the Federal Republic of Germany have to meet safety requirements derived from site specific safety analyses. The examination of the waste packages with regard to compliance with these requirements is the main objective of quality control measures. With respect to quality control the requirements have to be specified in a way that practicable control measures can be applied. This is dealt with for the quality control of the activity inventory and the quality control of the waste form. The paper discusses the determination of the activity of hard-to-measure radionuclides and the specification of safety related requirements for the waste form and the packaging using typical examples

Complex-wide review of DOE`s management of low-level radioactive waste - progress to date

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Letourneau, M.J.

1995-12-31

The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Recommendation 94-2 includes a recommendation that the Department of Energy (DOE) conduct a comprehensive, complex-wide review of the low-level waste issue to establish the dimensions of the low-level waste problem and to identify necessary corrective actions to address the safe disposition of past, present, and future volumes. DOE`s Implementation Plan calls for the conduct of a complex-wide review of low-level radioactive waste treatment, storage, and disposal sites to identify environmental, safety, and health vulnerabilities. The complex-wide review focuses on low-level waste disposal facilities through a site evaluation survey, reviews of existing documentation, and onsite observations. Low-level waste treatment and storage facilities will be assessed for their ability to meet waste acceptance criteria for disposal. Results from the complex-wide review will be used to form the basis for an integrated and planned set of actions to correct the identified vulnerabilities and to prompt development of new requirements for managing low-level waste.

Ferrocyanide Safety Program: Data requirements for the ferrocyanide safety issue developed through the data quality objectives (DQO) process

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Buck, J.W.; Anderson, C.M.; Pulsipher, B.A.; Toth, J.J.; Turner, P.J.; Cash, R.J.; Dukelow, G.T.; Meacham, J.E.

1993-12-01

This document records the data quality objectives (DQO) process applied to the Ferrocyanide Waste Tank Safety Issue at the Hanford Site by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory and Westinghouse Hanford Company. Specifically, the major recommendations and findings from this Ferrocyanide DQO process are presented so that decision makers can determine the type, quantity, and quality of data required for addressing tank safety issues. The decision logic diagrams and error tolerance equations also are provided. Finally, the document includes the DQO sample-size formulas for determining specific tank sampling requirements

High-level waste storage tank farms/242-A evaporator standards/requirements identification document (S/RID), Vol. 7

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

1994-04-01

This Requirements Identification Document (RID) describes an Occupational Health and Safety Program as defined through the Relevant DOE Orders, regulations, industry codes/standards, industry guidance documents and, as appropriate, good industry practice. The definition of an Occupational Health and Safety Program as specified by this document is intended to address Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Recommendations 90-2 and 91-1, which call for the strengthening of DOE complex activities through the identification and application of relevant standards which supplement or exceed requirements mandated by DOE Orders. This RID applies to the activities, personnel, structures, systems, components, and programs involved in maintaining the facility and executing the mission of the High-Level Waste Storage Tank Farms.

High-level waste storage tank farms/242-A evaporator standards/requirements identification document (S/RID), Vol. 7

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1994-04-01

This Requirements Identification Document (RID) describes an Occupational Health and Safety Program as defined through the Relevant DOE Orders, regulations, industry codes/standards, industry guidance documents and, as appropriate, good industry practice. The definition of an Occupational Health and Safety Program as specified by this document is intended to address Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Recommendations 90-2 and 91-1, which call for the strengthening of DOE complex activities through the identification and application of relevant standards which supplement or exceed requirements mandated by DOE Orders. This RID applies to the activities, personnel, structures, systems, components, and programs involved in maintaining the facility and executing the mission of the High-Level Waste Storage Tank Farms

ON THE IMPACT OF FLIGHT SAFETY CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS ON THE AERODYNAMIC EFFICIENCY OF COMMERCIAL AIRPLANES

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Vladimir I. Shevyakov

2018-01-01

Full Text Available The article considers the issue of aerodynamics efficiency implementation taking into account certification requirements for flight safety. Aerodynamics efficiency means high aerodynamic performance (depending on the airplane size, aerodynamic performance in cruise flight, high aerodynamic performance at takeoff, as well as lift performance at landing.The author estimated the impact on aerodynamics efficiency of both the requirements for aerodynamics performance and requirements for aircraft systems, noncompliance with which may result in significant change of expected operating conditions. It was shown that the use of supercritical wing profiles may result in flight mode limitations due to failure of the required buffeting capacities. It does not allow engaging all the advantages of aerodynamics layout and requires special design solutions to prevent such cases.There were reviewed certification requirements for flight level pressure altitude accuracy and icing conditions warning sysytem. The research presented the methods of aerodynamic efficiency increase by meeting the requirements for reduced vertical separation minima flights and in icing conditions, including requirements for air data probes. Reduced vertical separation minima flight requirements are met by means of efficient air data probes location. Theoretical methods of flow calculation determine areas on the airplane skin surface where static probes minimize errors depending on angle-of-attack and sideslip. It was shown that if certification requirements are not met and in case of flight out of reduced vertical separation minima area, aerodynamics efficiency is significantly reduced and fuel consumption can be increased by 10% and higher. Suggested approaches implementation allows increasing commercial airplanes competitiveness.

Innovative nuclear reactor - Indian approach to meet user requirements for safety

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Saha, D.; Sinha, R.K.

2002-01-01

Full text: For sustainable development of nuclear energy, a number of key issues are to be addressed. It should be economically competitive; it must address the issues related to nuclear safety, proliferation resistance, environmental impact, waste disposal and cross cutting issues like social and infra-structural aspects. To compete successfully in the long term, in the highly competitive energy market and to overcome other challenges, it is necessary to introduce innovative reactor and fuel cycle concepts. Indian Advanced Heavy Water Reactor (AHWR) is one such innovative reactor. To guide the research and development activities related to innovative concepts, user requirements are to be formulated. User requirements covering various aspects of sustainable development are being formulated at both national and international levels. One such international project involved in the formulation of user requirements is the IAEA International Project on Innovative Nuclear Reactors and Fuel Cycles (INPRO). This paper deals with INPRO user requirements for safety and Indian approach to meet these requirements through AHWR

Chemical process safety management within the Department of Energy

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Piatt, J.A.

1995-07-01

Although the Department of Energy (DOE) is not well known for its chemical processing activities, the DOE does have a variety of chemical processes covered under OSHA's Rule for Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals (the PSM Standard). DOE, like industry, is obligated to comply with the PSM Standard. The shift in the mission of DOE away from defense programs toward environmental restoration and waste management has affected these newly forming process safety management programs within DOE. This paper describes the progress made in implementing effective process safety management programs required by the PSM Standard and discusses some of the trends that have supported efforts to reduce chemical process risks within the DOE. In June of 1994, a survey of chemicals exceeding OSHA PSM or EPA Risk Management Program threshold quantities (TQs) at DOE sites found that there were 22 processes that utilized toxic or reactive chemicals over TQs; there were 13 processes involving flammable gases and liquids over TQs; and explosives manufacturing occurred at 4 sites. Examination of the survey results showed that 12 of the 22 processes involving toxic chemicals involved the use of chlorine for water treatment systems. The processes involving flammable gases and liquids were located at the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and Naval petroleum Reserve sites

Implementation guide for use with suspect/counterfeit items: Requirements of DOE O 440.1, worker protection management; 10 CFR 830.120; and DOE 5700.6C, quality assurance

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1997-06-01

Department of Energy (DOE) Order (O) 440.1, Worker Protection Management For DOE Federal and Contractors Employees, [7] sets forth requirements for DOE and its contractors to implement suspect and counterfeit items (S/CI) controls as part of the quality assurance (QA) programs required by 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 830.120 [8] or DOE 5700.6C, Quality Assurance [9]. DOE G-830.120, Implementation Guide for Use with 10 CFR Part 830.120, Quality Assurance, [10] provides additional guidance on establishing and implementing effective QA processes to control S/CIs. DOE O 232.1, Occurrence Reporting and Processing of Operations, [11] specifies requirements for reporting S/CIs under the DOE Occurrence Reporting and Processing System (ORPS). DOE promulgated the requirements and guidance to control or eliminate the hazards posed by S/CIs, which can lead to unexpected equipment failures and undue risks to the DOE mission, the environment, and personnel. This Guide is a compendium of information contained in the referenced DOE directives and other documents concerning S/CI controls. It incorporates, updates, and supersedes earlier guidance issued in Plan for the Suspect/Counterfeit Products Issue in the Department of Energy, dated October 1993, [4] and in memoranda issued by Defense Programs (DP) [12-16] and other DOE program offices. This guidance was developed to strengthen the procurement process, identify and eliminate S/CIs, and improve the reporting of S/CIs. The information in this Guide, when implemented by DOE and its contractors, will satisfy the S/CI requirements contained in the referenced DOE directives

Implementation guide for use with suspect/counterfeit items: Requirements of DOE O 440.1, worker protection management; 10 CFR 830.120; and DOE 5700.6C, quality assurance

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

NONE

1997-06-01

Department of Energy (DOE) Order (O) 440.1, Worker Protection Management For DOE Federal and Contractors Employees, [7] sets forth requirements for DOE and its contractors to implement suspect and counterfeit items (S/CI) controls as part of the quality assurance (QA) programs required by 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 830.120 [8] or DOE 5700.6C, Quality Assurance [9]. DOE G-830.120, Implementation Guide for Use with 10 CFR Part 830.120, Quality Assurance, [10] provides additional guidance on establishing and implementing effective QA processes to control S/CIs. DOE O 232.1, Occurrence Reporting and Processing of Operations, [11] specifies requirements for reporting S/CIs under the DOE Occurrence Reporting and Processing System (ORPS). DOE promulgated the requirements and guidance to control or eliminate the hazards posed by S/CIs, which can lead to unexpected equipment failures and undue risks to the DOE mission, the environment, and personnel. This Guide is a compendium of information contained in the referenced DOE directives and other documents concerning S/CI controls. It incorporates, updates, and supersedes earlier guidance issued in Plan for the Suspect/Counterfeit Products Issue in the Department of Energy, dated October 1993, [4] and in memoranda issued by Defense Programs (DP) [12-16] and other DOE program offices. This guidance was developed to strengthen the procurement process, identify and eliminate S/CIs, and improve the reporting of S/CIs. The information in this Guide, when implemented by DOE and its contractors, will satisfy the S/CI requirements contained in the referenced DOE directives.

Seismic Safety Guide

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Eagling, D.G.

1985-01-01

The Seismic Safety Guide provides facilities managers with practical guidelines for administering a comprehensive earthquake safety program. Most facilities managers, unfamiliar with earthquake engineering, tend to look for answers in techniques more sophisticated than required to solve the actual problems in earthquake safety. Often the approach to solutions to these problems is so academic, legalistic, and financially overwhelming that mitigation of actual seismic hazards simply does not get done in a timely, cost-effective way. The objective of the Guide is to provide practical advice about earthquake safety so that managers and engineers can get the job done without falling into common pitfalls, prolonged diagnosis, and unnecessary costs. It is comprehensive with respect to earthquakes in that it covers the most important aspects of natural hazards, site planning, rehabilitation of existing buildings, design of new facilities, operational safety, emergency planning, non-structural elements, life lines, and risk management. 5 references

42 CFR 9.10 - Occupational Health and Safety Program (OHSP) and biosafety requirements.

Science.gov (United States)

2010-10-01

... 42 Public Health 1 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Occupational Health and Safety Program (OHSP) and... SANCTUARY SYSTEM § 9.10 Occupational Health and Safety Program (OHSP) and biosafety requirements. (a) How are employee Occupational Health and Safety Program risks and concerns addressed? The sanctuary shall...

A Review of Safety and Design Requirements of the Artificial Pancreas.

Science.gov (United States)

Blauw, Helga; Keith-Hynes, Patrick; Koops, Robin; DeVries, J Hans

2016-11-01

As clinical studies with artificial pancreas systems for automated blood glucose control in patients with type 1 diabetes move to unsupervised real-life settings, product development will be a focus of companies over the coming years. Directions or requirements regarding safety in the design of an artificial pancreas are, however, lacking. This review aims to provide an overview and discussion of safety and design requirements of the artificial pancreas. We performed a structured literature search based on three search components-type 1 diabetes, artificial pancreas, and safety or design-and extended the discussion with our own experiences in developing artificial pancreas systems. The main hazards of the artificial pancreas are over- and under-dosing of insulin and, in case of a bi-hormonal system, of glucagon or other hormones. For each component of an artificial pancreas and for the complete system we identified safety issues related to these hazards and proposed control measures. Prerequisites that enable the control algorithms to provide safe closed-loop control are accurate and reliable input of glucose values, assured hormone delivery and an efficient user interface. In addition, the system configuration has important implications for safety, as close cooperation and data exchange between the different components is essential.

Information Management system of the safety regulatory requirements and guidance for the Korea next generation reactors

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Yun, Y. C.; Lee, J. H.; Lee, H. C.; Lee, J. S.

2000-01-01

In order to achieve the safety of the Korea Next Generation Reactors (KNGR), the Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety has carried out the Safety and Regulatory Requirements and Guidance (SRRG) development program from 1992 such as establishment of the SRRG hierarchy, development of technical requirements and guidance, and consideration of new licensing system. The SRRG hierarchy for the KNGR was consisted of five tiers; Safety Objectives, Safety Principles, General Safety Criteria, Specific Safety Requirements and Safety Regulatory Guides. The developed SRRG have been compared the criteria in 10CFR and Reg. Guide in the U.S.A and the IAEA documents for assuring internationally acceptable level of the SRRG. To improve the efficiency and accuracy of SRRG development, the construction of database system was required in the course of development. Therefore, the Information Management System of SRRG for the KNGR has been developed which enables developers to quickly and accurately seek and systematically manage whole contexts of the SRRG, reference requirements, and current atomic energy regulation rules. Moreover, through homepage whose URL is 'http://kngr.kins.re.kr', the concerned persons and public can acquire the information related with SRRG and KNGR project, and post his/her thought to the opinion forum in the homepage

Information Management system of the safety regulatory requirements and guidance for the Korea next generation reactors

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Yun, Y. C. [LG-EDS Systems, Seoul (Korea, Republic of); Lee, J. H.; Lee, H. C.; Lee, J. S. [Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety, Taejon (Korea, Republic of)

2000-05-01

In order to achieve the safety of the Korea Next Generation Reactors (KNGR), the Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety has carried out the Safety and Regulatory Requirements and Guidance (SRRG) development program from 1992 such as establishment of the SRRG hierarchy, development of technical requirements and guidance, and consideration of new licensing system. The SRRG hierarchy for the KNGR was consisted of five tiers; Safety Objectives, Safety Principles, General Safety Criteria, Specific Safety Requirements and Safety Regulatory Guides. The developed SRRG have been compared the criteria in 10CFR and Reg. Guide in the U.S.A and the IAEA documents for assuring internationally acceptable level of the SRRG. To improve the efficiency and accuracy of SRRG development, the construction of database system was required in the course of development. Therefore, the Information Management System of SRRG for the KNGR has been developed which enables developers to quickly and accurately seek and systematically manage whole contexts of the SRRG, reference requirements, and current atomic energy regulation rules. Moreover, through homepage whose URL is 'http://kngr.kins.re.kr', the concerned persons and public can acquire the information related with SRRG and KNGR project, and post his/her thought to the opinion forum in the homepage.

The practical implementation of safety culture

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Touzet, Rodolfo [Comision Nacional de Energia Atomica, Buenos Aires. (Argentina)

2008-07-01

When, during the review of the Chernobyl accident, the INSAG Committee introduced the term 'Safety Culture', it spread very quickly. Later on, as a result of activities sponsored by the IAEA, the original Safety Culture concept was extended to include a large number of issues that are typical requirements of Quality Assurance Unfortunately, the way in which certain organizations approached this subject has not helped to find the right way for it to be implemented. Safety Culture is not mentioned at all in ICRP-60 and in the new recommendations of 2005 it does not even appear in the principal body and only a minor reference exists. The IAEA's Basic Safety Standards deal with the requirements for Safety Culture and for Quality Assurance as absolutely individual issues; however, Safety Culture should be considered as a part of the Quality System. Very recently the situation was strongly improved by the release of the new standard 'The Management System for Facilities and Activities' Safety Requirements GS-R-3. The EURATOM 97/43 Directive, used in the European Community for the preparation of regulations for medical practice, which, while inspired by ICRP-73, does not even mention Safety Culture. Increasing personnel training is not enough if, at the same time, there are no activities aimed at improving their attitude towards quality and safety. To achieve a change in Culture in the organization or to implant the new concept, there must be a suitable supporting Methodology to allow it to be put into practice. If not, the Safety Culture will only be a simple expression of wishes without any chance of success. Criteria, methodology and effective practical tools must be available. Two basic principles for the management system (GSR-3): a) All the tasks may be considered as 'a system of interactive processes'; b) All persons must take part in order to achieve safety and quality. These two principles are the basis of the strategy for the development of a Safety Culture

The practical implementation of safety culture

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Touzet, Rodolfo

2008-01-01

When, during the review of the Chernobyl accident, the INSAG Committee introduced the term 'Safety Culture', it spread very quickly. Later on, as a result of activities sponsored by the IAEA, the original Safety Culture concept was extended to include a large number of issues that are typical requirements of Quality Assurance Unfortunately, the way in which certain organizations approached this subject has not helped to find the right way for it to be implemented. Safety Culture is not mentioned at all in ICRP-60 and in the new recommendations of 2005 it does not even appear in the principal body and only a minor reference exists. The IAEA's Basic Safety Standards deal with the requirements for Safety Culture and for Quality Assurance as absolutely individual issues; however, Safety Culture should be considered as a part of the Quality System. Very recently the situation was strongly improved by the release of the new standard 'The Management System for Facilities and Activities' Safety Requirements GS-R-3. The EURATOM 97/43 Directive, used in the European Community for the preparation of regulations for medical practice, which, while inspired by ICRP-73, does not even mention Safety Culture. Increasing personnel training is not enough if, at the same time, there are no activities aimed at improving their attitude towards quality and safety. To achieve a change in Culture in the organization or to implant the new concept, there must be a suitable supporting Methodology to allow it to be put into practice. If not, the Safety Culture will only be a simple expression of wishes without any chance of success. Criteria, methodology and effective practical tools must be available. Two basic principles for the management system (GSR-3): a) All the tasks may be considered as 'a system of interactive processes'; b) All persons must take part in order to achieve safety and quality. These two principles are the basis of the strategy for the development of a Safety Culture

Nuclear health and safety

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

1991-08-01

This paper is a review of environmental and safety programs at facilities in the Naval Reactors Program which shows no basis for allegations that unsafe conditions exist there or that the environment is being harmed by activities conducted there. The prototype reactor design provides safety measures that are consistent with commercial nuclear power plants. Minor incidents affecting safety and the environment have occurred, however, and dents affecting safety and the environment have occurred, however, and as with other nuclear facilities, past activities have caused environmental problems that require ongoing monitoring and vigilance. While the program has historically been exempt from most oversight, some federal and state environmental oversight agencies have recently been permitted access to Naval Reactors facilities for oversight purposes. The program voluntarily cooperates with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission regarding reactor modifications, safety improvements, and component reliability. In addition, the program and its contractors have established an extensive internal oversight program that is geared toward reporting the slightest deviations from requirements or procedures. Given the program's classification policies and requirements, it does not appear that the program routinely overclassifies information to prevent its release to the public or to avoid embarrassment. However, GAO did not some instances in which documents were improperly classified

49 CFR 1106.3 - Actions for which Safety Integration Plan is required.

Science.gov (United States)

2010-10-01

... 49 Transportation 8 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Actions for which Safety Integration Plan is required. 1106.3 Section 1106.3 Transportation Other Regulations Relating to Transportation (Continued... TRANSPORTATION BOARD CONSIDERATION OF SAFETY INTEGRATION PLANS IN CASES INVOLVING RAILROAD CONSOLIDATIONS...

Regulatory requirements and administrative practice in safety of nuclear installations

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Servant, J.

1977-01-01

This paper reviews the current situation of the France regulatory rules and procedures dealing with the safety of the main nuclear facilities and, more broadly, the nuclear security. First, the author outlines the policy of the French administration which requires that the licensee responsible for an installation has to demonstrate that all possible measures are taken to ensure a sufficient level of safety, from the early stage of the project to the end of the operation of the plant. Thus, the administration performs the assessment on a case-by-case basis, of the safety of each installation before granting a nuclear license. On the other hand, the administration settles overall safety requirements for specific categories of installations or components, which determine the ultimate safety performances, but avoid, as far as possible, to detail the technical specifications to be applied in order to comply with these goals. This approach, which allows the designers and the licensees to rely upon sound codes and standards, gains the advantage of a great flexibility without imparing the nuclear safety. The author outlines the licensing progress for the main categories of installations: nuclear power plants of the PWR type, fast breeders, uranium isotope separation plants, and irradiated fuel processing plants. Emphasis is placed on the most noteworthy points: standardization of projects, specific risks of each site, problems of advanced type reactors, etc... The development of the technical regulations is presented with emphasis on the importance of an internationally concerned action within the nuclear international community. The second part of this paper describes the France operating experience of nuclear installations from the safety point of view. Especially, the author examines the technical and administrative utilization of data from safety significant incidents in reactors and plants, and the results of the control performed by the nuclear installations