Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “safety codes and standards”

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 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

Analysis of Air-Purifying Respirator (APR) Cartridge Performance Testing on Hanford Tanks SX-101 and SX-104: Volume 2 - Raw Analytical Data

As the Tank Operations Contractor for U.S. Department of Energy operations at the Hanford site in Washington State, Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) is responsible for managing highly radioactive wastes stored in tanks at Hanford. To protect workers at Hanford Tank Farms, WRPS tests air-purifying respirator (APR) and powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR) chemical cartridges commonly used at the tank farms. The tests were conducted to determine the period of time the cartridges would provide adequate performance for APRs and PAPRs when workers are exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPC) from any vapors exiting headspaces in the storage tanks. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Standard 29 Code of the Federal Regulations (CFR) 1910.134(d)(3)(iii)(b)(2) specifies that for protection against gases and vapors, employers shall implement a schedule for cartridges to ensure that change-outs occur before the end of service life. The change schedule can be based on objective information or data that ensures cartridge change-outs occur before the end of their service life. The primary function of the WRPS Cartridge Test Program is to obtain objective data to determine service lives for the APR and PAPR cartridges used at Hanford Tank Farms. WRPS contracted with Pacific Northwest National Laboratory to analyze the test data and offer an independent analysis and any recommendations. This report summarizes data analysis of APR cartridge testing on headspace vapors from Hanford SX-101 and SX-104 single-shell tanks. Volume 1 of this report documents the testing, data analysis, results, conclusions, and recommendations resulting from the APR testing on SX-101 and SX-104 headspace vapors. Volume 2 provides an introduction to the raw data, including analytical laboratory analysis results that supported the analysis and conclusions documented in Volume 1.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Analysis of Air-Purifying Respirator (APR) and Powered Air-Purifying Respirator (PAPR) Cartridge Performance Testing on a Hanford AX Tank Farm Exhauster Slipstream Volume 2: Raw Analytical Data

As the Tank Operations Contractor for U.S. Department of Energy operations at the Hanford site in Washington State, Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) is responsible for managing highly radioactive wastes stored in tanks at Hanford. To protect workers at Hanford Tank Farms, WRPS tests air-purifying respirator (APR) and powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR) chemical cartridges commonly used at the tank farms. The tests were conducted to determine the period of time the cartridges would provide adequate performance for APRs and PAPRs when workers are exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPC) from any vapors exiting headspaces in the storage tanks. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Standard 29 Code of the Federal Regulations (CFR) 1910.134(d)(3)(iii)(b)(2) specifies that for protection against gases and vapors, employers shall implement a schedule for cartridges to ensure that change-outs occur before the end of service life. The change schedule can be based on objective information or data that ensures cartridge change-outs occur before the end of their service life. The primary function of the WRPS Cartridge Test Program is to obtain objective data to determine service lives for the APR and PAPR cartridges used at Hanford Tank Farms. WRPS contracted with Pacific Northwest National Laboratory to analyze the test data and offer an independent analysis and any recommendations. This report summarizes data analysis of APR and PAPR cartridge testing on a vapor slipstream from the Hanford AX tank farm exhauster. Volume 1 of this report documents the testing, data analysis, results, conclusions, and recommendations resulting from the cartridge testing on AX exhauster slipstream vapors. Volume 2 provides an introduction to the raw data, including analytical laboratory analysis results that supported the analysis and conclusions documented in Volume 1.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS1975

Program for developing and implementing a new approach to designing for fire safety in buildings

The traditional method of providing for fire safety in buildings through reliance on codes and standards that prescribe specific measures to be taken in the design and construction of buildings to minimize the potential for a fire occurring and to protect property and life should a fire occur was evaluated. A new approach to designing for fire safety in buildings is outlined.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2005

Formal Safety Certification of Aerospace Software

In principle, formal methods offer many advantages for aerospace software development: they can help to achieve ultra-high reliability, and they can be used to provide evidence of the reliability claims which can then be subjected to external scrutiny. However, despite years of research and many advances in the underlying formalisms of specification, semantics, and logic, formal methods are not much used in practice. In our opinion this is related to three major shortcomings. First, the application of formal methods is still expensive because they are labor- and knowledge-intensive. Second, they are difficult to scale up to complex systems because they are based on deep mathematical insights about the behavior of the systems (t.e., they rely on the "heroic proof"). Third, the proofs can be difficult to interpret, and typically stand in isolation from the original code. In this paper, we describe a tool for formally demonstrating safety-relevant aspects of aerospace software, which largely circumvents these problems. We focus on safely properties because it has been observed that safety violations such as out-of-bounds memory accesses or use of uninitialized variables constitute the majority of the errors found in the aerospace domain. In our approach, safety means that the program will not violate a set of rules that can range for the simple memory access rules to high-level flight rules. These different safety properties are formalized as different safety policies in Hoare logic, which are then used by a verification condition generator along with the code and logical annotations in order to derive formal safety conditions; these are then proven using an automated theorem prover. Our certification system is currently integrated into a model-based code generation toolset that generates the annotations together with the code. However, this automated formal certification technology is not exclusively constrained to our code generator and could, in principle, also be integrated with other code generators such as RealTime Workshop or even applied to legacy code. Our approach circumvents the historical problems with formal methods by increasing the degree of automation on all levels. The restriction to safety policies (as opposed to arbitrary functional behavior) results in simpler proof problems that can generally be solved by fully automatic theorem proves. An automated linking mechanism between the safety conditions and the code provides some of the traceability mandated by process standards such as DO-178B. An automated explanation mechanism uses semantic markup added by the verification condition generator to produce natural-language explanations of the safety conditions and thus supports their interpretation in relation to the code. It shows an automatically generated certification browser that lets users inspect the (generated) code along with the safety conditions (including textual explanations), and uses hyperlinks to automate tracing between the two levels. Here, the explanations reflect the logical structure of the safety obligation but the mechanism can in principle be customized using different sets of domain concepts. The interface also provides some limited control over the certification process itself. Our long-term goal is a seamless integration of certification, code generation, and manual coding that results in a "certified pipeline" in which specifications are automatically transformed into executable code, together with the supporting artifacts necessary for achieving and demonstrating the high level of assurance needed in the aerospace domain.

Denney, Ewen↗
DOE OSTI2019

SolarAPP+ ® (Solar Automated Permit Processing Plus) [SWR-19-51]

SolarAPP+ ®: Safe and affordable home solar through permitting automation. NREL has launched a collaborative effort with key code officials, authorities having jurisdiction (AHJs), and the solar industry to develop an instant online solar permitting platform for code compliant residential systems. SolarAPP (Solar Automated Permit Processing) will: -Provide a flexible, web-based PV-permitting tool for residential systems at no-cost to AHJs. -Enable standardization of instant permitting processes. -Evaluate applications for safety and code compliance. -Offer opportunities to incorporate energy storage and expand to other market segments.

Cook, Jeffrey↗
NASA NTRS2021

Wire Rope Inspection Report Safety Division, Code 360

The purpose of this report is to review Federal Regulations, Voluntary Consensus Standards (VCS), and best practices associated with WRI requirements within the government and industry. This report provides an analysis to NASA Headquarters regarding the limited risks that wire ropes present to the Agency based on the interpretation of Section 29 CFR 1910.179 (m) of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements that allow inspections of OHC wire rope based on the operational status of the crane. This report also provides details and recommendations for the reduction of personnel exposure to safety risk associated with working at heights while inspecting wire rope on inactive lifting devices.

Wire Rope↗
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 NTRS1982

Master list and index to NASA directives

All NASA management directives in force as of August 1, 1982 are listed by major subject headings showing number, effective data, title, responsible office, and distribution code. Delegations of authority in print by that date are listed numerically as well as by the installation or office to which special authority is assigned. Other consolidated lists show all management handbooks, directives applicable to the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, directions published in the Code of Federal Regulations, complementary manuals, and NASA safety standards. Distribution policies and instructions for ordering directives are included.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1984

Master list and index to NASA directives

All NASA management directives in force as of August 1, 1984 are listed by major subject headings showing number, effective date, title, responsible office, and distribution code. Delegations of authority in print by that date are listed numerically as well as by the installation or office to which special authority is assigned. Other consolidated lists show all management handbooks, directives applicable to the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, directives published in the Code of Federal Regulations, complementary manuals, and NASA safety standards. Distribution policies and instructions for ordering directives are included.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1994

Second NASA Workshop on Wiring for Space Applications

This document contains the proceedings of the Second NASA Workshop on Wiring for Space Applications held at NASA LeRC in Cleveland, OH, 6-7 Oct. 1993. The workshop was sponsored by NASA Headquarters Code QW Office of Safety and Mission Quality, Technical Standards Division and hosted by NASA LeRC, Power Technology Division, Electrical Components and Systems Branch. The workshop addressed key technology issues in the field of electrical power wiring for space applications. Speakers from government, industry, and academia presented and discussed topics on arc tracking phenomena, wiring system design, insulation constructions, and system protection. Presentation materials provided by the various speakers are included in this document.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1994

First NASA Workshop on Wiring for Space Applications

This document contains the proceedings of the First NASA Workshop on Wiring for Space Applications held at NASA Lewis Research Center in Cleveland, OH, July 23-24, 1991. The workshop was sponsored by NASA Headquarters Code QE Office of Safety and Mission Quality, Technical Standards Division and hosted by the NASA Lewis Research Center, Power Technology Division, Electrical Components and Systems Branch. The workshop addressed key technology issues in the field of electrical power wiring for space applications. Speakers from government, industry and academia presented and discussed topics on arc tracking phenomena, wiring applications and requirements, and new candidate insulation materials and constructions. Presentation materials provided by the various speakers are included in this document.

Hammond, Ahmad↗
DOE OSTI2026

Manufactured Home Equipment Sizing and Selection Tool

This tool is for use for manufactured homes built to the HUD Code (thermal provisions of the Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards, Subpart F, Section §3280), including manufactured homes certified as ENERGY STAR® and DOE Efficient New Homes. It provides a simple look-up procedure to assist equipment specifiers, HVAC contractors, home installers, retailers, manufacturers, and electric utility staff. For new manufactured homes, it guides in selection of single speed heat pumps and air conditioners. For existing homes, it determines design conditions and nominal equipment size. The guidelines provide a simple but accurate procedure that reduces oversizing and its associated problems.

Source record↗
DOE OSTI2023

Safety Related Concerns with Installation and Use of Switch-Rated Plug/Receptacle Combinations in Lieu of Metal-Enclosed Disconnect Switches

The manufacturers of Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL) listed, switch-rated, plug and receptacle combinations tout their convenience, reliability, efficiency, and compliance with both the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 70®, National Electric Code (NEC), and National Fire Protection Association 70E®, The Standard for Electrical Safety in the Workplace, as advantages to using these products in lieu of traditional metal-enclosed disconnect switches. The purpose of this paper is to raise awareness of several unintended consequences that can result when replacement involves high energy cord and plug connected equipment. This paper describes several possible issues in complying with the NFPA 70 Articles 110 and 400 and NFPA 70E Articles 110 and 130 that should be considered when using load rated plug/receptacle combinations. This paper is intended to address high energy circuits typically associated with 480 volt pin and sleeve type connections in applications where incident energy levels may exceed 1.2 calories/centimeter² (cal/cm²).

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Flammable Gas Generation and Control at the Idaho Completion Project Legacy Combustible Gas Generation - 20191

On April 11, 2018, four drums containing transuranic waste at the Idaho National Laboratory underwent over-pressurization, ejecting their lids and spreading radiological waste within a facility. An investigation has found that waste in the drums generated methane gas, which contributed to the event. Subsequent to the investigation, the potential for drums to have methane and other flammable analytes whose concentrations could approach or exceed the lower flammability limit (LFL) and the adequacy of the controls to prevent or mitigate a possible deflagration was evaluated. An extensive review of the historical records was performed to determine how many drums exceed the LFL. The historical record identified a small quantity of drums that exceeded the LFL for xylene, hydrogen, and methane. The primary codified applicable code or standard for handling drums is 29 CFR 1910.120 (j) 'Handling Drums and Containers.' It is used throughout the commercial and government sector. This code is integrated throughout the Fluor Idaho safety management programs and procedures to control the Standard Industrial Hazards (SIHs) associated with drum and container handling. Example requirements include: - Drums and containers are inspected, and their integrity assured prior to being moved. - Site operations are organized to minimize the amount of drum or container movement. - When there is a reasonable possibility of flammable atmospheres being present, material handling equipment and hand tools are of the type to prevent sources of ignition. Drums and containers under pressure, as evidenced by bulging or swelling, are not moved until the cause for excess pressure is determined and appropriate containment procedures have been implemented to protect employees from explosive relief of the drum. Drums which exceed the WIPP FGA limit have NCRs associated with them. Once a drum fails flammable gas sampling, an NCR is initiated. The NCR drives placement into NCR dense pack rows. A standing order drives placement of the FGA failures to a single planer segregation location. These drums are not allowed for further processing or shipment until the NCR has been cleared. Once in the single planer rows, follow-up FGA testing is performed by CCP. The NCR is dispositioned by follow-up sampling occurring after adequate time has been provided for the gas to diffuse through the filter assembly, or, in some cases, the drums are repackaged into additional drums to reduce the source term. To date, the ICP project has performed approximately 1.5 million drums moves without a deflagration event due to combustible gas generation. Flammable gas generation in a transuranic waste drum is not unique to the ICP but is common across the DOE complex. Based on the experience at Idaho, application of industry standards is sufficient to control the risk of drum deflagration due to drum movements. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS2017

NASA Requirements for Ground-Based Pressure Vessels and Pressurized Systems (PVS)

The purpose of this document is to ensure the structural integrity of PVS through implementation of a minimum set of requirements for ground-based PVS in accordance with this document, NASA Policy Directive (NPD) 8710.5, NASA Safety Policy for Pressure Vessels and Pressurized Systems, NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) 8715.3, NASA General Safety Program Requirements, applicable Federal Regulations, and national consensus codes and standards (NCS).

Greulich, Owen Rudolf↗
DOE OSTI2021

Development of Risk Mitigation Guidance for Hydrogen Sensor Placement Indoors and Outdoors

Guidance on Sensor Placement remains one of the top priorities for the safe deployment of hydrogen and fuel cell equipment in the commercial marketplace. Building on the success of Phase 1 work reported at ICHS2019 and published in IJHE, this paper discusses the consecutive steps to further develop and validate such guidance for mechanically ventilated enclosures. The key step included a more in-depth analysis of sensitivity to variation of physical parameters in a small enclosure, and finally, expansion of the developed approach to confined spaces in an outdoor environment.

codes and standards↗
DOE OSTI2020

Analysis of Air-Purifying Respirator (APR) and Powered Air-Purifying Respirator (PAPR) Cartridge Performance Testing on Hanford Tanks BY-108 and BY-110 Volume 2: Raw Analytical Data

As the Tank Operations Contractor for U.S. Department of Energy operations at the Hanford site in Washington State, Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) is responsible for managing highly radioactive wastes stored in tanks at Hanford. WRPS tests air-purifying respirator (APR) and powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR) chemical cartridges commonly used by workers at Hanford Tank Farms to determine the period of time that the cartridges would provide adequate performance for APRs and PAPRs used to protect workers when exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPC) from any vapors exiting headspaces in the storage tanks. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Standard promulgated in Title 29 of the Code of the Federal Regulations (CFR) 1910.134(d)(3)(iii)(b)(2) specifies that for protection against gases and vapors, employers shall implement a schedule for cartridges to ensure that change-outs occur before the end of service life. The change schedule can be based on objective information or data that ensures cartridge change-outs occur before the end of their service life. The primary function of the WRPS Cartridge Test Program is to obtain objective data to determine service lives for the APR and PAPR cartridges used at Hanford Tank Farms. WRPS contracted with Pacific Northwest National Laboratory to analyze the test data and offer an independent analysis and any recommendations. This report summarizes data analysis of APR and PAPR cartridge testing on BY-110 and BY-108 headspace vapors, respectively. Two different APR cartridges from SCOTT Safety (Monroe, North Carolina) were assessed for the BY-110 headspace vapors, and two different PAPR cartridges—one from MSA Safety Inc. (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) and another from 3M (Maplewood, Minnesota)—were assessed for the BY-108 headspace vapors. Volume 1 of this report documents the testing, data analysis, results, conclusions, and recommendations resulting from the cartridge testing of vapors from the BY-110 and BY-108 headspaces. Volume 2 provides an introduction to the raw data, including analytical laboratory analysis results that supported the analysis and conclusions documented in Volume 1.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

Global Trends of ASME "N-Stamp" Certifications for Nuclear Component Vendors

Historically, nuclear component manufacturing vendors, from small businesses through large conglomerates, have felt compelled to obtain an American Society for Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Nuclear Certification, known colloquially as an "N-stamp", to assure supply chain quality standards that will be acceptable to regulators and safety concerns. Since the N-stamp quality standard is a U.S.-origin code, combined with the apparent decline in the U.S. nuclear industry alongside the growth of the Asian nuclear industry, there is the question of whether the rest of the world, including new entrants to the nuclear industry, also regard N-stamp as a needed certification. This study addresses this question through analysis of the entire N-stamp database of holders, and former holders, of N-stamp certificates of all types and for all regions worldwide from 1989-2020 (the dates available in the database). From this 30 years of data, we find that actually U.S.-based vendors still consistently obtain the largest number of N-stamps worldwide over all time periods, but also find that the countries participating in the N-stamp certification process has broadly expanded beyond just North America, Japan, S. Korea and Western Europe (the primary N-stamp recipients before the mid-2000's). We produced global heats maps and bar charts to illustrate our findings, as well as further investigation into why the data shows changes over time and region. We note that nuclear entities involved with Soviet-type reactors do not participate in the N-stamp process, but instead pursue the Russian version PNAE, which is substantially similar to the ASME code. We conclude that at least from the N-stamp database, the United States nuclear component manufacturing industry is alive and well, although there have been some consolidations, and that the ASME N-stamp appears to still be a valued certificate worldwide, including in China which now ranks second only to the United States in obtaining N-stamp certificates in recent years. We further note that the vendors of new reactor types, in particular High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactors (HTGRs) and Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), are actively engaged with ASME (and other U.S.-based nuclear standards bodies such as the American Nuclear Society and Nuclear Energy Institute) to coordinate updates to the ASME N-Stamp criteria to ensure applicability of the code for these new designs. Implications of these findings include the following: The global use of the U.S.-origin N-stamp certification supports the view that, despite the decline of the U.S. nuclear industry, the United States remains an esteemed global leader in the area of nuclear safety. As the U.S. Government works to revitalize the U.S. nuclear industry, especially in the area of exports, it may be beneficial to leverage the global standing of the N-stamp certification. The findings indicate that the N-stamp database would be a useful tool for the U.S. Government to use to track the growth of the civil nuclear industry in foreign countries, under certain circumstances. The Excel-format N-stamp database produced as part of this study may be a useful tool for this purpose. N-stamp data may be a useful tool for foreign governments to use to identify nuclear manufacturers within their own country, especially to identify "targets" for outreach on nuclear export control compliance. The U.S. Government could carry this message to foreign partners during bilateral engagements or as part of Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) discussions on industry outreach.

42 ENGINEERING↗