Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “safety reporting”

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 OSTI2020

Proposed guidance for preparing and reviewing a molten salt non-power production or utilization facility application

Development of non-power molten salt reactors (MSRs) are under consideration to further establish an MSR experience base, support the requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.43(e), and provide any additional analyses needed for development of a full-scale MSR. Guidance provided in this report is based on MSRs operating with liquid fuel (i.e., fuel dissolved within a molten salt). These reactors, unless owned by the DOE or DOD, will require licensing by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff. Standard review plan (SRP) guidance for large light water reactors (LWRs) is available in NUREG-0800, Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants; Light Water Reactor (LWR) Edition. However, NRC staff observed that NUREG-0800 is very cumbersome to apply to non-power reactors “because of the great differences in complexity and hazards between non-power reactors and nuclear power plants.” Therefore, a program to develop performance-based guidance applicable to non-power reactors was initiated. In 1996, NUREG-1537, Parts 1 and 2, Guidelines for Preparing and Reviewing Applications for the Licensing of Non-Power Reactors, was published. Part 1, the format and content guide, suggests a uniform format for presenting information in non-power reactor applications that is acceptable to the NRC staff, but conformance with the format and content is not required. Part 2, the SRP, ensures the quality and uniformity of the staff review of an application. Unfortunately, the application guidelines and SRP do not provide adequate guidance for all advanced non-LWR technologies and applications. This discrepancy eventually led to the 2012 development of interim staff guidance (ISG) for NUREG-1537, which includes criteria for describing and reviewing aqueous homogeneous reactors (AHRs). Specifically, NUREG-1537 ISG, 2012 expanded the original document to address three areas: 1. updated criteria for heterogeneous non-power reactors, 2. criteria for licensing AHRs, and 3. criteria for licensing a Part 50-licensed isotope production facility. In 2015, the US Department of Energy (DOE) opted to build on the AHR NUREG-1537 ISG experience by performing a gap analysis of the guidance that would be used to license a non-power MSR. MSRs represent one of the advanced non-LWR technologies selected by DOE for development through a multiyear cost share award with Southern Company Services. Under this Advanced Reactor Concepts 2015 (DOE Advanced Reactor Concepts [ARC] 15) award program, the DOE tasked Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) to evaluate the guidance changes that the NRC may need to consider when licensing an MSR non-power reactor. ORNL staff, with support from Boston Government Services, LLC, focused on five system-related chapters in NUREG-1537 that were considered most relevant to inform the effort that would be required for a non-power MSR applicant. ORNL documented this review in a technical report, ORNL/TM-2018/834, Proposed Guidance for Preparing and Reviewing Molten Salt Non-Power Reactor License Applications (NUREG-1537). The report was subsequently shared with industry and the NRC. The 2018 review was limited in scope, focusing on key system chapters based on the expected significance of each chapter relative to expected differences in addressing advanced non-LWR technologies, specifically non-power MSRs, compared with heterogeneously fueled non-power reactors. In the ORNL report, proposed generic adaptations were suggested for the following NUREG-1537 chapters: Chapter 4, “Reactor Description”; Chapter 5, “Reactor Coolant Systems”; Chapter 6, “Engineered Safety Features”; Chapter 9, “Auxiliary Systems”; Chapter 11, “Radiation Protection Program and Waste Management” The inclusion of Chapter 11 in the previous review effort was intended to provide guidance for categorizing the waste-handling process for an MSR operating with homogenous fuel. The introductions from Parts 1 and 2 of the 2012 NUREG-1537 ISG provide guidance for the application and review of production facilities. After a period of operation, non-power MSRs with homogenous fuel will include gaseous and soluble fission products. The gaseous fission products will be collected and held for decay in an off-gas system. There might also be an initiative to polish or filter the soluble fission products in the fuel salt by some mechanical or chemical means. The treatment and handling of fission products in the non-power MSR fuel salt and the description of this process in the safety analysis report (SAR) must be very precise to avoid the waste treatment facility being construed as a co-located special nuclear material (SNM) fuel cycle facility (see Section 2.3 of this report). Subsequent to the release of ORNL/TM-2018/834, NRC staff expressed a desire to continue the regulatory gap analysis that was begun in that report. This would provide additional clarity and information addressed in certain sections of the original report, while also providing new guidance on certain topics not addressed in the original report. This revision would benefit the NRC staff reviewing applications involving non-power MSR designs and would help developers understand how the NRC staff might approach the review of such applications. The focus of this report is to provide infrastructure support to the NRC staff for the regulatory review of non-power MSRs.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
NASA NTRS1974

System safety checklist Skylab program report

Design criteria statement applicable to a wide variety of flight systems, experiments and other payloads, associated ground support equipment and facility support systems are presented. The document reflects a composite of experience gained throughout the aerospace industry prior to Skylab and additional experience gained during the Skylab Program. It has been prepared to provide current and future program organizations with a broad source of safety-related design criteria and to suggest methods for systematic and progressive application of the criteria beginning with preliminary development of design requirements and specifications. Recognizing the users obligation to shape the checklist to his particular needs, a summary of the historical background, rationale, objectives, development and implementation approach, and benefits based on Skylab experience has been included.

Mcnail, E. M.↗
NASA NTRS1975

Safety management of a complex R&D ground operating system

Report discusses safety program implementation for large R&D operating system. Analytical techniques are defined and suggested as tools for identifying potential hazards and determining means to effectively control or eliminate hazards.

Connors, J.↗
DOE OSTI2022

Report on General Hydrogen Safety

Hydrogen is an important resource for many different industries throughout the world, including refining, manufacturing, and as a direct energy source. Hydrogen production, through methods such as steam methane reforming, has been developed over several decades. There is a large global demand for hydrogen from these industries and safe production and distribution are paramount for hydrogen systems. Codes and standards have been developed to reduce the risk associated with hydrogen accidents to the public. These codes and standards are similar to those in other industries in which there is inherent risk to the public, such as gasoline and natural gas production and distribution. Although there will always be a risk to the public in these types of fuels, the codes and standards are developed to reduce the likelihood of an accident occurring and reduce the severity of impact, should one occur. This report reviews the current state of hydrogen in the United States and outlines the codes and standards that ensure safe operation of hydrogen systems. The total hydrogen demand and use in different industries is identified. Additionally, the current landscape of hydrogen production and fueling stations in the United States is outlined. The safety of hydrogen systems is discussed through an overview of the purpose, methods, and content included in codes and standards. As outlined in this safety overview, the risk to the public in operation of hydrogen generation facilities and fueling stations is reduced through implementation of appropriate measures. Codes, such as NFPA 2, ensure that the risk associated with a hydrogen system is no greater than the risk presented by gasoline refueling stations.

08 HYDROGEN↗
NASA NTRS2001

A Synthetic Vision Preliminary Integrated Safety Analysis

This report documents efforts to analyze a sample of aviation safety programs, using the LMI-developed integrated safety analysis tool to determine the change in system risk resulting from Aviation Safety Program (AvSP) technology implementation. Specifically, we have worked to modify existing system safety tools to address the safety impact of synthetic vision (SV) technology. Safety metrics include reliability, availability, and resultant hazard. This analysis of SV technology is intended to be part of a larger effort to develop a model that is capable of "providing further support to the product design and development team as additional information becomes available". The reliability analysis portion of the effort is complete and is fully documented in this report. The simulation analysis is still underway; it will be documented in a subsequent report. The specific goal of this effort is to apply the integrated safety analysis to SV technology. This report also contains a brief discussion of data necessary to expand the human performance capability of the model, as well as a discussion of human behavior and its implications for system risk assessment in this modeling environment.

Hemm, Robert↗
NASA NTRS2022

NASA System-Wide Safety Wildland Firefighting Operations Workshop Report

On March 9-11, 2022, NASA’s System-Wide Safety Wildland Firefighting Operations Workshop engaged the broader wildland firefighting management ecosystem in a safety-oriented discussion via a virtual platform. This enabled a better understanding of how NASA and community expertise can be leveraged in the safe development of current and future firefighting systems and operations. The goals of the workshop were to: (1) identify and prioritize the top safety-oriented risks, gaps in capabilities, and emerging technologies to enhance wildland firefighting for both near-term and far-term concepts, with a specific focus on aviation operations and (2) engage the stakeholder community in defining emergent safety-oriented scope, roles, responsibilities, and procedures for agents undergoing increasingly complex wildland firefighting operations in information-rich, but uncertain environments. Workshop participants were solicited from wildland firefighting stakeholders across government, industry, and academia. All levels of government were engaged, as NASA sought attendees from federal, state, local, and tribal government agencies. Industry participants from traditional wildland firefighting domains such as data visualization and equipment manufacturers were invited, and corporate attendees from novel application domains such as aerial robotics and autonomous systems were present as well. The top three findings were as follows: (1) Enhancing situation awareness is a safety priority, especially in the use of aerial assets; (2) Timely access to information along with data fusion and integrated displays will enhance safety-critical decision-making both inside and outside aviation contexts; and (3) Tailorable standards and common operating pictures in the field will enhance inter-agency cooperation in the wildland firefighting lifecycle and enable the optimal use of limited resources such as aerial assets. The workshop helped inform NASA of the relevant safety-related wildland firefighting concerns and aided the broader ecosystem in understanding the potential safety-oriented role NASA might play in this community. Increased engagement with crucial governmental stakeholders (e.g., U.S. Forest Service, CAL FIRE, etc.) along with industry partners in cutting- edge information -centric domains is a fundamental next step. Additionally, the workshop findings will help define the first of a series of operationally challenging demonstrations, held in concert with strategic ecosystem partners, known as the Safety Demonstrator Series for NASA’s System-Wide Safety project. The first demonstration is set in the wildland firefighting application domain and will: (1) examine high risk operational scenarios to reduce their overall risk via services, functions or capabilities that act as risk mitigators (or transfer that risk to automated systems better able to tolerate it) and (2) explore novel tools and technologies that will enhance safety margins by enabling non-traditional or neoteric operational paradigms.

wildland firefighting↗
DOE OSTI2025

Engineering Design Report: High-Pressure Safety Squib

This project encompassed the mechanical portion of the squib system and included the design and analysis of the valve body, selection of tube and tube fittings, valve mounting, and initiator/detonator selection. The electrical portion of the squib has already been designed by another team and is outside of the scope of the project. Electrical information and requirements provided are only for use in selecting a compatible detonator/initiator.

42 ENGINEERING↗
NASA NTRS1981

Report by the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel

The process of preparation for the first two shuttle flights was observed and information from both flights was gathered in order to confirm the concept and performance of the major elements of the space transportation system. To achieve truly operational operating safety, regularity, and minimum practical cost, the organization of efforts between the R&D community and any transportation service organization should be clearly separated with the latter organization assuming responsibilities for marketing its services; planning and acquiring prime hardware and spares; maintainance; certification of procedures; training; and creation of requirements for future development. A technical audit of the application of redundancy concepts to shuttle systems is suggested. The state of the art of space transportation hardware suggests that a number of concept changes may improve reliability, costs, and operational safety. For the remaining R&D flights, it is suggested that a redline audit be made of limits that should not be exceeded for ready to launch.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1995

Airport ramp safety and crew performance issues

This study examined 182 ramp operations incident reports from the Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS) database, to determine which factors influence ramp operation incidents. It was found that incidents occurred more often during aircraft arrival operations than during departure operations; incidents occurred most often at the gate stop area, less so at the gate entry/exit areas, and least on the ramp fringe areas; and reporters cited fewer incidents when more ground crew were present. The authors offer suggestions for both airline management and flight crews to reduce the rate of ramp incidents.

Chamberlin, Roy↗
DOE OSTI2024

Impacts of Irradiation Structural Behavior on Thermal Hydraulics Safety Analysis to Support MURR LEU Conversion

The University of Missouri Research Reactor (MURR) located in Columbia, Missouri is one of six U.S. High Performance Research Reactors (USHPRR), including one critical facility, that is actively collaborating with U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Material Management and Minimization (M3) Office of Reactor Conversion and Uranium Supply to convert from the use of highly enriched uranium (HEU; ≥20 wt% U-235) to low-enriched uranium (LEU; <20 wt% U-235) fuel. A new type of very high-density LEU fuel based on an alloy of uranium and 10 wt% molybdenum (U-10Mo) is expected to allow the conversion to LEU of MURR, as well as four other USHPRR. MURR has been working with the Reactor Conversion Pillar at Argonne to perform fuel element design and fuel cycle performance analyses, steady-state thermal hydraulics safety analysis, and accident safety analyses in preparation for the conversion of MURR and to support a preliminary safety analysis report for conversion to LEU fuels. Subsequent analyses have also been performed, including transition cycles where all-fresh LEU fuel elements are introduced upon conversion and progressing through reactor operations the core is brought to equilibrium. Thermal hydraulics safety analyses performed as part of the above have employed an assumption on channel gap reduction due to burnup-related phenomena including fuel swelling, irradiation creep, and oxide layer buildup. Recently, a series of structural analyses have been performed on the MURR LEU fuel plates and an element due to significant differences between the plate and element designs of the MURR HEU and LEU fuels. In addition, NUREG-1537 indicates that structural phenomena are to be evaluated. Two separate types of structural analyses were performed for the MURR LEU fuel element: fluid-structure interaction (FSI) and irradiation thermo-mechanical. The FSI analysis evaluated the effects of hydraulic forces on the MURR LEU fuel element to quantify the flow-induced plate deflection, and a minimal impact to the channel gap thickness was predicted under prototypic and bounding conditions. The irradiation thermo-mechanical analysis evaluated the effects of fuel swelling, irradiation creep, and thermal expansion for the MURR LEU plates and the element for prototypic thermal and irradiation conditions based on a high-fidelity approach multiphysics approach. Overall, this thermo-mechanical analysis predicts smaller gap thickness changes in previously limiting regions. Larger changes are predicted in the middle of channels, and for end channels where power density is not typically a maximum. An additional thermo-mechanical analysis was performed for the outermost HEU fuel plate, which showed a similar magnitude of deflection as the outermost LEU plate. Due to substantial differences between the channel gap reductions assumed for the previous safety analyses and those predicted by the irradiation thermo-mechanical analysis, a need to evaluate their impact on the thermal hydraulics safety analyses arose. This report presents the results from the steady-state safety analyses for normal operation as well as the accident analyses for the two most limiting accident scenarios.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
NASA NTRS1994

Aerospace safety advisory panel

This report from the Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) contains findings, recommendations, and supporting material concerning safety issues with the space station program, the space shuttle program, aeronautics research, and other NASA programs. Section two presents findings and recommendations, section three presents supporting information, and appendices contain data about the panel membership, the NASA response to the March 1993 ASAP report, and a chronology of the panel's activities during the past year.

Source record↗
DOE OSTI2025

High Flux Isotope Reactor Low-Enriched Uranium High Density Silicide Fuel Preliminary Design Update: System Transient Analysis

As a part of conversion efforts from highly enriched uranium (HEU) to low-enriched uranium (LEU) fuel under direction of the National Nuclear Security Administration of the U.S. Department of Energy, multiple proposed designs of the High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) have been created and assessed regarding reactor physics performance metrics, including designs utilizing uranium silicide dispersion fuel (U3Si2-Al). This report updates the previous analyses that evaluated the nuclear safety performance of LEU fuel designs with respect to selected accident events from the HFIR Safety Analysis Report (SAR). Both the Low Density (LD) and High Density (HD) Optimized designs’ reactivity initiated accident fuel performance improved relative to the HEU fuel, attributed to greater 238 U negative Doppler feedback. However, the thermal margins for primary coolant system accidents were reduced with some acceptance criteria unable to be met. The need to resolve reduced thermal margin, open modeling items, and unresolved assumptions was identified.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗