Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “SAFETY”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 235 records · Page 13
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

Chemical Process Safety at TRISO-Based, Metal-Based, and Salt-Based Fuel Fabrication Facilities: Technical Assessment and Guidance Assessment

As part of efforts to prepare for potential and ongoing safety reviews for licensing of advanced non-light-water reactor fuel cycles, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) tasked Pacific Northwest National Laboratory to prepare an assessment on the state of knowledge of potential chemical processes at fuel cycle facilities supporting the front end of these fuel cycles, and to assess the associated regulatory guidance. This report provides a technical assessment of chemical process safety considerations to support NRC licensing reviews of fabrication processes for tri-structural isotropic (TRISO) based, metallic-based, and salt-based fuels. The assessments involved collecting publicly available information on the fuel fabrication processes to (i) identify the operational process steps, characteristics and chemicals involved, (ii) identify the physical safety considerations and health safety considerations during licensing reviews of the various process steps, and (iii) collect information to support assessments of severity of accidents and potential mitigative measures to be implemented. The assessment provides a foundational basis on chemical process safety considerations for advanced fuel fabrication activities, although it is recognized that licensing reviews may necessitate design-specific considerations. The specific conditions under which chemical hazards emerge will require process-specific considerations, highlighting the importance of process-informed interpretation. The assessment also determined that exposure guidelines and limits to assess the consequences of acute exposures are limited for some chemicals, although alternative limits and supplementary information from databases or safety data sheets provide sufficient information to evaluate consequences of acute exposures. In addition, it was identified that metallic and salt fuel fabrication processes may involve beryllium, which is an exposure hazard. The regulatory framework for the licensing of advanced fuel cycle facilities, per 10 CFR Part 70 Domestic Licensing of Special Nuclear Material, is deemed robust and flexible to address the chemical safety considerations in this report. A review was conducted on various regulatory guidance and technical basis documents. This included reviewing NUREG-1520, Revision 2, Standard Review Plan for Fuel Cycle Facilities License Applications – Final Report and the process descriptions in Appendix A of NUREG/CR-6410, Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facility Accident Analysis Handbook, to address advanced fuel types. As new fuels will involve process-specific chemical uses, process-specific considerations are provided in this report. Additionally, it is noted that the U.S. Department of Energy protective action criteria database includes Temporary Emergency Exposure Limits (TEELs) for process-specific chemicals. This report provides technical information to support chemical safety assessments of new advanced fuel cycle facilities and identifies technical and safety information to support licensing reviews. No regulatory barriers were identified for the licensing of advanced fuel cycle facilities.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
NASA NTRS1991

An interagency space nuclear propulsion safety policy for SEI - Issues and discussion

An interagency Nuclear Safety Policy Working Group (NSPWG) was chartered to recommend nuclear safety policy, requirements, and guidelines for the Space Exploration Initiative 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 topics include reactor start-up, inadvertent criticality, radiological release and exposure, disposal, entry, safeguards, risk/reliability, operational safety, ground testing, and other considerations. In this paper the emphasis is placed on the safety policy and the issues and considerations that are addressed by the NSPWG recommendations.

Marshall, A. C.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Nuclear safety

Topics dealing with nuclear safety are addressed which include the following: general safety requirements; safety design requirements; terrestrial safety; SP-100 Flight System key safety requirements; potential mission accidents and hazards; key safety features; ground operations; launch operations; flight operations; disposal; safety concerns; licensing; the nuclear engine for rocket vehicle application (NERVA) design philosophy; the NERVA flight safety program; and the NERVA safety plan.

Buden, D.↗
NASA NTRS1992

NSPWG-recommended safety requirements and guidelines for SEI nuclear propulsion

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

Marshall, Albert C.↗
NASA NTRS2002

Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel

This Annual Report of the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) presents results of activities during calendar year 2001. The year was marked by significant achievements in the Space Shuttle and International Space Station (ISS) programs and encouraging accomplishments by the Aerospace Technology Enterprise. Unfortunately, there were also disquieting mishaps with the X-43, a LearJet, and a wind tunnel. Each mishap was analyzed in an orderly process to ascertain causes and derive lessons learned. Both these accomplishments and the responses to the mishaps led the Panel to conclude that safety and risk management is currently being well served within NASA. NASA's operations evidence high levels of safety consciousness and sincere efforts to place safety foremost. Nevertheless, the Panel's safety concerns have never been greater. This dichotomy has arisen because the focus of most NASA programs has been directed toward program survival rather than effective life cycle planning. Last year's Annual Report focused on the need for NASA to adopt a realistically long planning horizon for the aging Space Shuttle so that safety would not erode. NASA's response to the report concurred with this finding. Nevertheless, there has been a greater emphasis on current operations to the apparent detriment of long-term planning. Budget cutbacks and shifts in priorities have severely limited the resources available to the Space Shuttle and ISS for application to risk-reduction and life-extension efforts. As a result, funds originally intended for long-term safety-related activities have been used for operations. Thus, while safety continues to be well served at present, the basis for future safety has eroded. Section II of this report develops this theme in more detail and presents several important, overarching findings and recommendations that apply to many if not all of NASA's programs. Section III of the report presents other significant findings, recommendations and supporting material applicable to specific program areas. Appendix A presents a list of Panel members. Appendix B contains the reaction of the ASAP to NASA's response to the calendar year 2000 findings and recommendations. In accordance with a practice started last year, this Appendix includes brief narratives as well as classifications of the responses as 'open,' 'closed,' or 'continuing.' Appendix C details the Panel's activities during the reporting period.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2003

Certification Processes for Safety-Critical and Mission-Critical Aerospace Software

This document is a quick reference guide with an overview of the processes required to certify safety-critical and mission-critical flight software at selected NASA centers and the FAA. Researchers and software developers can use this guide to jumpstart their understanding of how to get new or enhanced software onboard an aircraft or spacecraft. The introduction contains aerospace industry definitions of safety and safety-critical software, as well as, the current rationale for certification of safety-critical software. The Standards for Safety-Critical Aerospace Software section lists and describes current standards including NASA standards and RTCA DO-178B. The Mission-Critical versus Safety-Critical software section explains the difference between two important classes of software: safety-critical software involving the potential for loss of life due to software failure and mission-critical software involving the potential for aborting a mission due to software failure. The DO-178B Safety-critical Certification Requirements section describes special processes and methods required to obtain a safety-critical certification for aerospace software flying on vehicles under auspices of the FAA. The final two sections give an overview of the certification process used at Dryden Flight Research Center and the approval process at the Jet Propulsion Lab (JPL).

Nelson, Stacy↗
NASA NTRS2003

Certification Processes for Safety-Critical and Mission-Critical Aerospace Software

This document is a quick reference guide with an overview of the processes required to certify safety-critical and mission-critical flight software at selected NASA centers and the FAA. Researchers and software developers can use this guide to jumpstart their understanding of how to get new or enhanced software onboard an aircraft or spacecraft. The introduction contains aerospace industry definitions of safety and safety-critical software, as well as, the current rationale for certification of safety-critical software. The Standards for Safety-Critical Aerospace Software section lists and describes current standards including NASA standards and RTCA DO-178B. The Mission-Critical versus Safety-Critical software section explains the difference between two important classes of software: safety-critical software involving the potential for loss of life due to software failure and mission-critical software involving the potential for aborting a mission due to software failure. The DO-178B Safety-critical Certification Requirements section describes special processes and methods required to obtain a safety-critical certification for aerospace software flying on vehicles under auspices of the FAA. The final two sections give an overview of the certification process used at Dryden Flight Research Center and the approval process at the Jet Propulsion Lab (JPL).

Nelson, Stacy↗
NASA NTRS2004

Synthesizing Safety Conditions for Code Certification Using Meta-Level Programming

In code certification the code consumer publishes a safety policy and the code producer generates a proof that the produced code is in compliance with the published safety policy. In this paper, a novel viewpoint approach towards an implementational re-use oriented framework for code certification is taken. It adopts ingredients from Necula's approach for proof-carrying code, but in this work safety properties can be analyzed on a higher code level than assembly language instructions. It consists of three parts: (1) The specification language is extended to include generic pre-conditions that shall ensure safety at all states that can be reached during program execution. Actual safety requirements can be expressed by providing domain-specific definitions for the generic predicates which act as interface to the environment. (2) The Floyd-Hoare inductive assertion method is refined to obtain proof rules that allow the derivation of the proof obligations in terms of the generic safety predicates. (3) A meta-interpreter is designed and experimentally implemented that enables automatic synthesis of proof obligations for submitted programs by applying the modified Floyd-Hoare rules. The proof obligations have two separate conjuncts, one for functional correctness and another for the generic safety obligations. Proof of the generic obligations, having provided the actual safety definitions as context, ensures domain-specific safety of program execution in a particular environment and is simpler than full program verification.

Eusterbrock, Jutta↗
NASA NTRS2005

Space-Based Range Safety and Future Space Range Applications

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration Space-Based Telemetry and Range Safety study is a multiphase project to demonstrate the performance, flexibility and cost savings that can be realized by using space-based assets for the Range Safety (global positioning system metric tracking data, flight termination command and range safety data relay) and Range User (telemetry) functions during vehicle launches and landings. Phase 1 included flight testing S-band Range Safety and Range User hardware in 2003 onboard a high-dynamic aircraft platform at Dryden Flight Research Center (Edwards, California) using the NASA Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System as the communications link. The current effort, Phase 2, includes hardware and packaging upgrades to the S-band Range Safety system and development of a high data rate Ku-band Range User system. The enhanced Phase 2 Range Safety Unit provided real-time video for three days during the historic GlobalFlyer (Scaled Composites, Mojave, California) flight in March, 2005. Additional Phase 2 testing will include a sounding rocket test of the Range Safety system and aircraft flight testing of both systems. Future testing will include a flight test on a launch vehicle platform. This report discusses both Range Safety and Range User developments and testing with emphasis on the Range Safety system. The operational concept of a future space-based range is also discussed.

Whiteman, Donald E.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Mitigating Motion Base Safety Issues: The NASA LaRC CMF Implementation

The NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC), Cockpit Motion Facility (CMF) motion base design has taken advantage of inherent hydraulic characteristics to implement safety features using hardware solutions only. Motion system safety has always been a concern and its implementation is addressed differently by each organization. Some approaches rely heavily on software safety features. Software which performs safety functions is subject to more scrutiny making its approval, modification, and development time consuming and expensive. The NASA LaRC's CMF motion system is used for research and, as such, requires that the software be updated or modified frequently. The CMF's customers need the ability to update the simulation software frequently without the associated cost incurred with safety critical software. This paper describes the CMF engineering team's approach to achieving motion base safety by designing and implementing all safety features in hardware, resulting in applications software (including motion cueing and actuator dynamic control) being completely independent of the safety devices. This allows the CMF safety systems to remain intact and unaffected by frequent research system modifications.

Bryant, Richard B., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Space-Based Range Safety and Future Space Range Applications

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Space-Based Telemetry and Range Safety (STARS) study is a multiphase project to demonstrate the performance, flexibility and cost savings that can be realized by using space-based assets for the Range Safety [global positioning system (GPS) metric tracking data, flight termination command and range safety data relay] and Range User (telemetry) functions during vehicle launches and landings. Phase 1 included flight testing S-band Range Safety and Range User hardware in 2003 onboard a high-dynamic aircraft platform at Dryden Flight Research Center (Edwards, California, USA) using the NASA Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System (TDRSS) as the communications link. The current effort, Phase 2, includes hardware and packaging upgrades to the S-band Range Safety system and development of a high data rate Ku-band Range User system. The enhanced Phase 2 Range Safety Unit (RSU) provided real-time video for three days during the historic Global Flyer (Scaled Composites, Mojave, California, USA) flight in March, 2005. Additional Phase 2 testing will include a sounding rocket test of the Range Safety system and aircraft flight testing of both systems. Future testing will include a flight test on a launch vehicle platform. This paper discusses both Range Safety and Range User developments and testing with emphasis on the Range Safety system. The operational concept of a future space-based range is also discussed.

Whiteman, Donald E.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Implementation of Programmatic Quality and the Impact on Safety

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the implementation of a programmatic quality assurance discipline within the International Space Station Program and the resulting impact on safety. NASA culture has continued to stress safety at the expense of quality when both are extremely important and both can equally influence the success or failure of a Program or Mission. Although safety was heavily criticized in the media after Col~imbiaa, strong case can be made that it was the failure of quality processes and quality assurance in all processes that eventually led to the Columbia accident. Consequently, it is possible to have good quality processes without safety, but it is impossible to have good safety processes without quality. The ISS Program quality assurance function was analyzed as representative of the long-term manned missions that are consistent with the President s Vision for Space Exploration. Background topics are as follows: The quality assurance organizational structure within the ISS Program and the interrelationships between various internal and external organizations. ISS Program quality roles and responsibilities with respect to internal Program Offices and other external organizations such as the Shuttle Program, JSC Directorates, NASA Headquarters, NASA Contractors, other NASA Centers, and International Partner/participants will be addressed. A detailed analysis of implemented quality assurance responsibilities and functions with respect to NASA Headquarters, the JSC S&MA Directorate, and the ISS Program will be presented. Discussions topics are as follows: A comparison of quality and safety resources in terms of staffing, training, experience, and certifications. A benchmark assessment of the lessons learned from the Columbia Accident Investigation (CAB) Report (and follow-up reports and assessments), NASA Benchmarking, and traditional quality assurance activities against ISS quality procedures and practices. The lack of a coherent operational and sustaining quality assurance strategy for long-term manned space flight. An analysis of the ISS waiver processes and the Problem Reporting and Corrective Action (PRACA) process implemented as quality functions. Impact of current ISS Program procedures and practices with regards to operational safety and risk A discussion regarding a "defense-in-depth" approach to quality functions will be provided to address the issue of "integration vs independence" with respect to the roles of Programs, NASA Centers, and NASA Headquarters. Generic recommendations are offered to address the inadequacies identified in the implementation of ISS quality assurance. A reassessment by the NASA community regarding the importance of a "quality culture" as a component within a larger "safety culture" will generate a more effective and value-added functionality that will ultimately enhance safety.

Huls, Dale Thomas↗
NASA NTRS2011

C-Band Airport Surface Communications System Engineering-Initial High-Level Safety Risk Assessment and Mitigation

This document is being provided as part of ITT's NASA Glenn Research Center Aerospace Communication Systems Technical Support (ACSTS) contract: "New ATM Requirements--Future Communications, C-Band and L-Band Communications Standard Development." ITT has completed a safety hazard analysis providing a preliminary safety assessment for the proposed C-band (5091- to 5150-MHz) airport surface communication system. The assessment was performed following the guidelines outlined in the Federal Aviation Administration Safety Risk Management Guidance for System Acquisitions document. The safety analysis did not identify any hazards with an unacceptable risk, though a number of hazards with a medium risk were documented. This effort represents an initial high-level safety hazard analysis and notes the triggers for risk reassessment. A detailed safety hazards analysis is recommended as a follow-on activity to assess particular components of the C-band communication system after the profile is finalized and system rollout timing is determined. A security risk assessment has been performed by NASA as a parallel activity. While safety analysis is concerned with a prevention of accidental errors and failures, the security threat analysis focuses on deliberate attacks. Both processes identify the events that affect operation of the system; and from a safety perspective the security threats may present safety risks.

Zelkin, Natalie↗
NASA NTRS2011

Achieving the Proper Balance Between Crew and Public Safety

A paramount objective of all human-rated launch and reentry vehicle developers is to ensure that the risks to both the crew onboard and the public are minimized within reasonable cost, schedule, and technical constraints. Past experience has shown that proper attention to range safety requirements necessary to ensure public safety must be given early in the design phase to avoid additional operational complexities or threats to the safety of people onboard, and the design engineers must give these requirements the same consideration as crew safety requirements. For human spaceflight, the primary purpose and operational concept for any flight safety system is to protect the public while maximizing the likelihood of crew survival. This paper will outline the policy considerations, technical issues, and operational impacts regarding launch and reentry vehicle failure scenarios where crew and public safety are intertwined and thus addressed optimally in an integrated manner. An overview of existing range and crew safety policy requirements will be presented. Application of these requirements and lessons learned from both the Space Shuttle and Constellation Programs will also be discussed. Using these past programs as examples, the paper will detail operational, design, and analysis approaches to mitigate and balance the risks to people onboard and in the public. Manned vehicle perspectives from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Air Force organizations that oversee public safety will be summarized as well. Finally, the paper will emphasize the need to factor policy, operational, and analysis considerations into the early design trades of new vehicles to help ensure that both crew and public safety are maximized to the greatest extent possible.

Gowan, John↗
NASA NTRS2011

Application of the Life Safety Code to a Historic Test Stand

NASA has conducted a study to assess alternatives to refurbishing existing launch vehicle modal test facilities as opposed to developing new test facilities to meet the demands of a very fiscally constrained test and evaluation environment. The results of this study showed that Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Test Stand (TS) 4550 could be made compliant, within reasonable cost and schedule impacts, if safety processes and operational limitations were put in place to meet the safety codes and concerns of the Fire Marshall. Trades were performed with key selection criteria to ensure that appropriate levels of occupant safety are incorporated into test facility design modifications. In preparation for the ground vibration tests that were to be performed on the Ares I launch vehicle, the Ares Flight and Integrated Test Office (FITO) organization evaluated the available test facility options, which included the existing mothballed structural dynamic TS4550 used by Apollo and Shuttle, alternative ground vibration test facilities at other locations, and construction of a new dynamic test stand. After an exhaustive assessment of the alternatives, the results favored modifying the TS4550 because it was the lowest cost option and presented the least schedule risk to the NASA Constellation Program for Ares Integrated Vehicle Ground Vibration Test (IVGVT). As the renovation design plans and drawings were being developed for TS4550, a safety concern was discovered the original design for the construction of the test stand, originally built for the Apollo Program and renovated for the Shuttle Program, was completed before NASA s adoption of the currently imposed safety and building codes per National Fire Protection Association Life Safety Code [NFPA 101] and International Building Codes. The initial FITO assessment of the design changes, required to make TS4550 compliant with current safety and building standards, identified a significant cost increase and schedule impact. An effort was launched to thoroughly evaluate the applicable life safety requirements, examine the context in which they were derived, and determine a means by which the TS4550 modifications could be made within budget and on schedule, while still providing the occupants with appropriate levels of safety.

Askins, Bruce↗
NASA NTRS2012

2011 NASA Range Safety Annual Report

Welcome to the 2011 edition of the NASA Range Safety Annual Report. Funded by NASA Headquarters, this report provides a NASA Range Safety overview for current and potential range users. As is typical with odd year editions, this is an abbreviated Range Safety Annual Report providing updates and links to full articles from the previous year's report. It also provides more complete articles covering new subject areas, summaries of various NASA Range Safety Program activities conducted during the past year, and information on several projects that may have a profound impact on the way business will be done in the future. Specific topics discussed and updated in the 2011 NASA Range Safety Annual Report include a program overview and 2011 highlights; Range Safety Training; Range Safety Policy revision; Independent Assessments; Support to Program Operations at all ranges conducting NASA launch/flight operations; a continuing overview of emerging range safety-related technologies; and status reports from all of the NASA Centers that have Range Safety responsibilities. Every effort has been made to include the most current information available. We recommend this report be used only for guidance and that the validity and accuracy of all articles be verified for updates. Once again the web-based format was used to present the annual report. We continually receive positive feedback on the web-based edition and hope you enjoy this year's product as well. As is the case each year, contributors to this report are too numerous to mention, but we thank individuals from the NASA Centers, the Department of Defense, and civilian organizations for their contributions. In conclusion, it has been a busy and productive year. I'd like to extend a personal Thank You to everyone who contributed to make this year a successful one, and I look forward to working with all of you in the upcoming year.

Dumont, Alan G.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Evolution of International Space Station Program Safety Review Processes and Tools

The International Space Station Program at NASA is constantly seeking to improve the processes and systems that support safe space operations. To that end, the ISS Program decided to upgrade their Safety and Hazard data systems with 3 goals: make safety and hazard data more accessible; better support the interconnection of different types of safety data; and increase the efficiency (and compliance) of safety-related processes. These goals are accomplished by moving data into a web-based structured data system that includes strong process support and supports integration with other information systems. Along with the data systems, ISS is evolving its submission requirements and safety process requirements to support the improved model. In contrast to existing operations (where paper processes and electronic file repositories are used for safety data management) the web-based solution provides the program with dramatically faster access to records, the ability to search for and reference specific data within records, reduced workload for hazard updates and approval, and process support including digital signatures and controlled record workflow. In addition, integration with other key data systems provides assistance with assessments of flight readiness, more efficient review and approval of operational controls and better tracking of international safety certifications. This approach will also provide new opportunities to streamline the sharing of data with ISS international partners while maintaining compliance with applicable laws and respecting restrictions on proprietary data. One goal of this paper is to outline the approach taken by the ISS Progrm to determine requirements for the new system and to devise a practical and efficient implementation strategy. From conception through implementation, ISS and NASA partners utilized a user-centered software development approach focused on user research and iterative design methods. The user-centered approach used on the new ISS hazard system utilized focused user research and iterative design methods employed by the Human Computer Interaction Group at NASA Ames Research Center. Particularly, the approach emphasized the reduction of workload associated with document and data management activities so more resources can be allocated to the operational use of data in problem solving, safety analysis, and recurrence control. The methods and techniques used to understand existing processes and systems, to recognize opportunities for improvement, and to design and review improvements are described with the intent that similar techniques can be employed elsewhere in safety operations. A second goal of this paper is to provide and overview of the web-based data system implemented by ISS. The software selected for the ISS hazard systemMission Assurance System (MAS)is a NASA-customized vairant of the open source software project Bugzilla. The origin and history of MAS as a NASA software project and the rationale for (and advantages of) using open-source software are documented elsewhere (Green, et al., 2009).

Ratterman, Christian D.↗
DOE OSTI1994

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 35, No. 1, January-June 1994]

Nuclear Safety is a review journal that covers significant developments in the field of nuclear safety. Its scope includes the analysis and control of hazards associated with nuclear energy, operations involving fissionable materials, and the products of nuclear fission and their effects on the environment. Primary emphasis is on safety in reactor design, construction, and operation; however, the safety aspects of the entire fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing, nuclear waste disposal, handling of radioisotopes, and environmental effects of these operations, are also treated. Table of Contents for this issue follows. GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: THE CHERNOBYL ACCIDENT: 1 Chernobyl Accident Management Actions, A. R Sich 25 The IAEA-ASSET Approach to Avoiding Accidents is to Recognize the Precursors to Prevent Incidents, F. Reisch; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 36 A Review of the Available Information on the Triggering Stage of a Steam Explosion, D. F. Fletcher; 58 Analysis and Modeling of Flow-Blockage-Induced Steam Explosion Events in the High-Flux Isotope Reactor, R. P. Taleyarkhan, V. Georgevich, C. W. Nestor, U. Gat, B. L. Lepard, D. H. Cook, J. Freels, S. J. Chang, C. Luttrell, R. C. Gwaltney, and J. Kirkpatrick; 74 An Analysis of Disassembling the Radial Reflector of a Thermionic Space Nuclear Reactor Power System, M. S. El-Genk and D. V. Paramonov; CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 86 Standards for High-Integrity Software, D. R. Wallace, D. R. Kuhn, L M. Ippolito, and L. Beltracchi; DESIGN FEATURES: 98 Adoption of New Design Features for the Next Generation Nuclear Power Reactors, L. S. Tong; 114 Review of Nuclear Piping Seismic Design Requirements, G. C. Slagis and S. E. Moore; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: 128 PC-Based Probabilistic Safety Assessment Study for a Geological Waste Repository Placed in a Bedded Salt Formation, S. A. Khan; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 142 Managing Aging in Nuclear Power Plants: Insights from NRC’s Maintenance Team Inspection Reports, A. Fresco and M. Subudhi; 150 Reactor Shutdown Experience, Compiled by J. W. Cletcher; 153 Selected Safety-Related Events, Compiled by G. A. Murphy; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 158 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides, D. S. Queener; 168 Proposed Rule Changes as of Dec. 31, 1993; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 177 Symposium on Radioactive and Mixed Waste—Risk as a Basis for Waste Classification; 177 1995 Incineration Conference 178 Ninth Power Plant Dynamics Control and Testing Symposium; 174 The Authors

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗