Environment, Safety, and Health Risk Assessment Program (ESHRAP)

The Environment, Safety and Health Risk Assessment Program (ESHRAP) models human safety and health risk resulting from waste management and environmental restoration activities. Human safety and health risks include those associated with storing, handling, processing, transporting, and disposing of radionuclides and chemicals. Exposures to these materials, resulting from both accidents and normal, incident-free operation, are modeled. In addition, standard industrial risks (falls, explosions, transportation accidents, etc.) are evaluated. Finally, human safety and health impacts from cleanup of accidental releases of radionuclides and chemicals to the environment are estimated. Unlike environmental impact statements and safety analysis reports, ESHRAP risk predictions are meant to be best estimate, rather than bounding or conservatively high. Typically, ESHRAP studies involve risk predictions covering the entire waste management or environmental restoration program, including such activities as initial storage, handling, processing, interim storage, transportation, and final disposal. ESHRAP can be used to support complex environmental decision-making processes and to track risk reduction as activities progress

Constructing Predictive Estimates for Worker Exposure to Radioactivity During Decommissioning: Analysis of Completed Decommissioning Projects

An analysis of completed decommissioning projects is used to construct predictive estimates for worker exposure to radioactivity during decommissioning activities. The preferred organizational method for the completed decommissioning project data is to divide the data by type of facility, whether decommissioning was performed on part of the facility or the complete facility, and the level of radiation within the facility prior to decommissioning (low, medium, or high). Additional data analysis shows that there is not a downward trend in worker exposure data over time. Also, the use of a standard estimate for worker exposure to radioactivity may be a best estimate for low complete storage, high partial storage, and medium reactor facilities; a conservative estimate for some low level of facility radiation facilities (reactor complete, research complete, pits/ponds, other), medium partial process facilities, and high complete research facilities; and an underestimate for the remaining facilities. Limited data are available to compare different decommissioning alternatives, so the available data are reported and no conclusions can been drawn. It is recommended that all DOE sites and the NRC use a similar method to document worker hours, worker exposure to radiation (person-rem), and standard industrial accidents, injuries, and deaths for all completed decommissioning activities

Simplified Risk Model Version II (SRM-II) Structure and Application

The Simplified Risk Model Version II (SRM-II) is a quantitative tool for efficiently evaluating the risk from Department of Energy waste management activities. Risks evaluated include human safety and health and environmental impact. Both accidents and normal, incident-free operation are considered. The risk models are simplifications of more detailed risk analyses, such as those found in environmental impact statements, safety analysis reports, and performance assessments. However, wherever possible, conservatisms in such models have been removed to obtain best estimate results. The SRM-II is used to support DOE complex-wide environmental management integration studies. Typically such activities involve risk predictions including such activities as initial storage, handling, treatment, interim storage, transportation, and final disposal

General Electric Reactor Protection System Unavailability, 1984--1995

An analysis was performed of the safety-related performance of the reactor protection system (RPS) at U. S. General Electric commercial reactors during the period 1984 through 1995. RPS operational data were collected from the Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System and Licensee Event Reports. A risk-based analysis was performed on the data to estimate the observed unavailability of the RPS, based on a fault tree model of the system. Results were compared with existing unavailability estimates from Individual Plant Examinations and other reports

Westinghouse Reactor Protection System Unavailability, 1984--1995

An analysis was performed of the safety-related performance of the reactor protection system (RPS) at U. S. Westinghouse commercial reactors during the period 1984 through 1995. RPS operational data were collected from the Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System and Licensee Event Reports. A risk-based analysis was performed on the data to estimate the observed unavailability of the RPS, based on a fault tree model of the system. Results were compared with existing unavailability estimates from Individual Plant Examinations and other reports

A Framework for Making Sustainable Cleanup Decisions Using the KONVERGENCE Model

The effects of closure decisions for used nuclear facilities can extend centuries into the future. Yet, the longevity of decisions made over the past half century has been poor. Our goal is an improved decision framework for decommissioning, stewardship, and waste management. This paper describes our overall framework. Companion papers describe the underlying philosophy of the KONVERGENCE Model for Sustainable Decisions1 and implications for a class of intractable decision problems.2 Where knowledge, values, and resources converge (the K, V, and R in KONVERGENCE), you will find a sustainable decision – a decision that works over time. Our approach clarifies what is needed to make and keep decisions over relevant time periods. The process guides participants through establishing the real problem, understanding the universes of knowledge, values, resources, and generating alternatives. We explore three classes of alternatives – reusable (e.g. greenfield), closed (e.g. entombed structures), and adaptable. After testing for konvergence of alternatives among knowledge, values, resources, we offer suggestions to diagnose divergence, to reduce divergence by refining alternatives to address identified weaknesses, and to plan to keep konvergence over the life of the decision. We believe that decisions made via this method will better stand the test of time – because it will be either acceptable to keep them unchanged or possible to adapt them as knowledge, values, and resources change

Legacy Risk Measure for Environmental Management Waste

The Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) is investigating the development of a comprehensive and quantitative risk model framework for environmental management activities at the site. Included are waste management programs (high-level waste, transuranic waste, low-level waste, mixed low-level waste, spent nuclear fuel, and special nuclear materials), major environmental restoration efforts, major decontamination and decommissioning projects, and planned long-term stewardship activities. Two basic types of risk estimates are included: risks from environmental management activities, and long-term legacy risks from wastes/materials. Both types of risks are estimated using the Environment, Safety, and Health Risk Assessment Program (ESHRAP) developed at the INEEL. Given these two types of risk calculations, the following evaluations can be performed: • Risk evaluation of an entire program (covering waste/material as it now exists through disposal or other end states) • Risk comparisons of alternative programs or activities • Comparisons of risk benefit versus risk cost for activities or entire programs • Ranking of programs or activities by risk • Ranking of wastes/materials by risk • Evaluation of site risk changes with time as activities progress • Integrated performance measurement using indicators such as injury/death and exposure rates. This paper discusses the definition and calculation of legacy risk measures and associated issues. The legacy risk measure is needed to support three of the seven types of evaluations listed above: comparisons of risk benefit versus risk cost, ranking of wastes/materials by risk, and evaluation of site risk changes with time

Engineering Fundamentals and Problem Solving

This edition presents an introduction into the engineering field and remains the most comprehensive textbook for an introductory engineering course. Students are introduced to subject areas that require the application of fundamental engineering concepts. The author\u27s approach keeps students on task toward an engineering career by showing how the materials apply to the student\u27s school, life, and career.https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/abe_eng_books/1003/thumbnail.jp

Engineering Fundamentals and Problem Solving

This edition presents an introduction into the engineering field and remains the most comprehensive textbook for an introductory engineering course. Students are introduced to subject areas that require the application of fundamental engineering concepts. The author's approach keeps students on task toward an engineering career by showing how the materials apply to the student's school, life, and career.This is the Table of Content and Preface from Eide, Arvid R., Roland D. Jenison, Steven K. Mickelson, and Larry L. Northup. Engineering Fundamentals and Problem Solving, Seventh edition. New York: McGraw-Hill Education (2018). Posted with permission.</p

Engineering Fundamentals and Problem Solving

459hl