SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Risk management”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 433 records · Page 24

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS2006

Advancing the practice of systems engineering at JPL

In FY 2004, JPL launched an initiative to improve the way it practices systems engineering. The Lab's senior management formed the Systems Engineering Advancement (SEA) Project in order to "significantly advance the practice and organizational capabilities of systems engineering at JPL on flight projects and ground support tasks." The scope of the SEA Project includes the systems engineering work performed in all three dimensions of a program, project, or task: 1. the full life-cycle, i.e., concept through end of operations 2. the full depth, i.e., Program, Project, System, Subsystem, Element (SE Levels 1 to 5) 3. the full technical scope, e.g., the flight, ground and launch systems, avionics, power, propulsion, telecommunications, thermal, etc. The initial focus of their efforts defined the following basic systems engineering functions at JPL: systems architecture, requirements management, interface definition, technical resource management, system design and analysis, system verification and validation, risk management, technical peer reviews, design process management and systems engineering task management, They also developed a list of highly valued personal behaviors of systems engineers, and are working to inculcate those behaviors into members of their systems engineering community. The SEA Project is developing products, services, and training to support managers and practitioners throughout the entire system lifecycle. As these are developed, each one needs to be systematically deployed. Hence, the SEA Project developed a deployment process that includes four aspects: infrastructure and operations, communication and outreach, education and training, and consulting support. In addition, the SEA Project has taken a proactive approach to organizational change management and customer relationship management - both concepts and approaches not usually invoked in an engineering environment. This paper'3 describes JPL's approach to advancing the practice of systems engineering at the Lab. It describes the general approach used and how they addressed the three key aspects of change: people, process and technology. It highlights a list of highly valued personal behaviors of systems engineers, discusses the various products, services and training that were developed, describes the deployment approach used, and concludes with several lessons learned.

process improvement↗

DOE OSTI2024

Advancing process-based flood frequency analysis for assessing flood hazard and population flood exposure

Recent studies have showcased the use of process-based hydrological models with Stochastic Storm Transposition (SST) techniques to conduct Flood Frequency Analysis (FFA). This framework, referred hereby FFA-SST, has proved to be a robust strategy to estimate peak flows of specific annual exceedance probability (e.g., 100-year peak flow) that can reflect natural and anthropogenic disturbances, including changes in land use and meteorological patterns. With the objective of advancing the FFA-SST framework, this study presents for the first time the use of an Integrated Surface-Subsurface Hydrological Model (ISSHM) to conduct FFA-SST by extending the analysis from peak flow responses to flood extent, enabling a unique view and analysis of flood hazard and population flood exposure at the basin scale. As a proof-of-concept, we used the ISSHM, Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (Amanzi-ATS) model, and the SST model, RainyDay, to conduct FFA-SST by simulating the flood response to 5,000 annual synthetic storm events in a 2,227 $km^2$ Southeast Texas watershed. We demonstrate that ATS, without site-specific calibration, provides a robust process-based representation of peak flows, flood extent, streamflow, evapotranspiration, soil moisture content, and water storage changes. Our results and analyses, covering frequency curves up to a 500-year return period for peak flows, basin inundation fractions, and the number of people exposed to flooding, offer a unique perspective to analyze flood impacts across spatial scales. Overall, this study provides critical insights for flood risk management by extending the FFA-SST framework to include both flood hazard and population flood exposure analyses at the basin scale. Such an approach will empower stakeholders and disaster emergency agencies with a more comprehensive understanding of flood impacts across the entire basin domain, facilitating informed decision-making for flood risk assessment and management.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS2006

From Zero to Integration in Eight Months, the Dawn Ground Data System Engineering Challenge

The Dawn GDS Team met the SC Sim integration challenge in eight months. The GDS System Engineering approach in response to the SC Simintegration challenge, focused on a set of key practices: decomposition of project request into manageable requirements; integration of multiple ground disciplines and experts into a focused team effort; risk management thru management of expectations; and aggregation of intermediate products into a final product. By maintaining a a system-level focus, the overall systems engineering process unified team GDS Team members with a common goal: the success of the ground system as a whole and not just the success of their individual expert contributions. Incorporation of Agile-type development efforts were aligned with a risk strategy based on team-oriented principles and expectations management, thus achieving a more stable baseline solution without compromising the integrity of the GDS design.

Dawn Mission↗

DOE OSTI2021

Recommended Practices for Managing Induced Seismicity Risk Associated with Geologic Carbon Storage

The geologic storage of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) is one method to help reduce or eliminate atmospheric CO 2 emissions. The sequestered CO 2 is originally captured from the atmosphere or from a stationary industrial source and subsequently injected into a deep subsurface porous rock formation. To facilitate the successful deployment of field scale carbon storage projects, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is developing tools and protocols for defensible, science-based frameworks to quantify and mitigate risks associated with the long-term storage of CO 2 . This protocol specifically addresses the risk of induced seismicity due to injection in a geologic carbon storage (GCS) site. This integrated and risk-based protocol is a product of the U.S. DOE Fossil Energy’s National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP), a multi-year collaborative research effort of Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL). These recommended practices describe a set of 7 steps to evaluate, manage, communicate, and mitigate the risk of induced seismicity at GCS sites. The base methodology of the recommended practices follows a framework similar to the Protocol for Addressing Induced Seismicity Associated with Enhanced Geothermal Systems (Majer et al., 2012), developed for the Geothermal Technology Office of the U.S. DOE. These recommended practices present a framework to systematically assess the induced seismicity risk and quantify the associated uncertainties. These recommendations are based on current research and are sufficiently general to allow for modification and application to a variety of different types of sites. The substance of the recommended practices contained herein includes both technical and non-technical issues, and covers all operational stages of the GCS project lifecycle. They start at the preliminary risk assessment phase, continue through site assessment and characterization, include best practice communication and seismic monitoring plan methodologies, discuss the evaluation and mitigation of seismic hazard and risk, and closes with an exploration of operational management plans, which conclude when the induced seismicity risk abates back to background level. The focus of these recommendations is on actively managing the risks associated with induced seismicity by developing an actionable risk management plan that starts at the project proposal stage and continues through site closure through an iterative assessment and improvement process. The audience of this document is expected to include all interested stakeholders (e.g., operators, project developers, regulators, and the general public) and is expressly written to be accessible to this broad range of partners. This document is intended to disseminate knowledge gained through recent advances in the science of induced seismicity hazard and risk assessments, to provide updates based on recent experience gained by similar corollary injection-induced seismicity cases, and most importantly to establish a uniform framework to carry out a successful induced seismicity risk management plan for carbon storage projects in the future. These recommendations do not directly address any domestic or international regulations or standards. A complementary NRAP report makes recommendations for the assessment and management of environmental subsurface risks associated with unwanted fluid migration at GCS sites (Thomas et al., 2021) and should be referred to in order to address those additional GCS site risks.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2021

Recommended Practices for Managing Induced Seismicity Risk Associated with Geologic Carbon Storage

The geologic storage of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) is one method to help reduce or eliminate atmospheric CO 2 emissions. The sequestered CO 2 is originally captured from the atmosphere or from a stationary industrial source and subsequently injected into a deep subsurface porous rock formation. To facilitate the successful deployment of field scale carbon storage projects, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is developing tools and protocols for defensible, science-based frameworks to quantify and mitigate risks associated with the long-term storage of CO 2 . This protocol specifically addresses the risk of induced seismicity due to injection in a geologic carbon storage (GCS) site. This integrated and risk-based protocol is a product of the U.S. DOE Fossil Energy’s National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP), a multi-year collaborative research effort of Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL). These recommended practices describe a set of 7 steps to evaluate, manage, communicate, and mitigate the risk of induced seismicity at GCS sites. The base methodology of the recommended practices follows a framework similar to the $\textit{Protocol for Addressing Induced Seismicity Associated with Enhanced Geothermal Systems}$ (Majer et al., 2012), developed for the Geothermal Technology Office of the U.S. DOE. These recommended practices present a framework to systematically assess the induced seismicity risk and quantify the associated uncertainties. These recommendations are based on current research and are sufficiently general to allow for modification and application to a variety of different types of sites. The substance of the recommended practices contained herein includes both technical and non-technical issues, and covers all operational stages of the GCS project lifecycle. They start at the preliminary risk assessment phase, continue through site assessment and characterization, include best practice communication and seismic monitoring plan methodologies, discuss the evaluation and mitigation of seismic hazard and risk, and closes with an exploration of operational management plans, which conclude when the induced seismicity risk abates back to background level. The focus of these recommendations is on actively managing the risks associated with induced seismicity by developing an actionable risk management plan that starts at the project proposal stage and continues through site closure through an iterative assessment and improvement process. The audience of this document is expected to include all interested stakeholders (e.g., operators, project developers, regulators, and the general public) and is expressly written to be accessible to this broad range of partners. This document is intended to disseminate knowledge gained through recent advances in the science of induced seismicity hazard and risk assessments, to provide updates based on recent experience gained by similar corollary injection-induced seismicity cases, and most importantly to establish a uniform framework to carry out a successful induced seismicity risk management plan for carbon storage projects in the future. These recommendations do not directly address any domestic or international regulations or standards. A complementary NRAP report makes recommendations for the assessment and management of environmental subsurface risks associated with unwanted fluid migration at GCS sites (Thomas et al., 2021) and should be referred to in order to address those additional GCS site risks

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2022

Production Agency Quality Assurance Management Execution Strategy [Thesis]

There are multiple federal directives that Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) must follow for the proper implementation of quality assurance, strategic planning, and execution of manufacturing and surveillance operations. Recent assessments identified that manufacturing in all processing areas is dynamic due to influencing scope changes, design modifications, funding adjustments, and staff attrition. In response, this project was started to develop a comprehensive PAQ execution strategy to support the success of LANL’s manufacturing mission. This project’s method for developing an updated architecture was to create an integrated, flexible, reliable, and agile strategic process. The execution plan has five deliverables: 1) an integrated schedule view of PAQ work scope, 2) a resource management plan that aligns with the required scope, 3) a metrics monitoring dashboard, 4) a project management plan for sustaining NAP 401.1A implementation, and 5) a risk management plan. The research design is a mixed-method approach focused on data collection for each deliverable. The methodology entails qualitative and quantitative research, metrics monitoring, data analysis, and the creation of a dashboard. The qualitative methods used include literature reviews and interviews. The quantitative methods include resource, financial, schedule and survey data analysis. Preliminary and final results were peer reviewed by subject matter experts both within the ALDWP organization and deployed support.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Developing a Decision Support System for Regional Agricultural Nonpoint Salinity Pollution Management: Application to the San Joaquin River, California

Environmental problems and production losses associated with irrigated agriculture, such as salinity, degradation of receiving waters, such as rivers, and deep percolation of saline water to aquifers, highlight water-quality concerns that require a paradigm shift in resource-management policy. New tools are needed to assist environmental managers in developing sustainable solutions to these problems, given the nonpoint source nature of salt loads to surface water and groundwater from irrigated agriculture. Equity issues arise in distributing responsibility and costs to the generators of this source of pollution. This paper describes an alternative approach to salt regulation and control using the concept of “Real-Time Water Quality management”. The approach relies on a continually updateable WARMF (Watershed Analysis Risk Management Framework) forecasting model to provide daily estimates of salt load assimilative capacity in the San Joaquin River and assessments of compliance with salinity concentration objectives at key monitoring sites on the river. The results of the study showed that the policy combination of well-crafted river salinity objectives by the regulator and the application of an easy-to use and maintain decision support tool by stakeholders have succeeded in minimizing water quality (salinity) exceedances over a 20-year study period.

real-time management economics↗

NASA NTRS2011

Safety and Mission Assurance: A NASA Perspective

Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) consists of the safety, reliability, maintainability, software assurance and quality disciplines, which are applied to reduce the probability of mishaps and ensure mission success. NASA uses a risk management process which requires various organizations to identify, analyze and mitigate/control risks associated with operations and decision making processes.

Higginbotham, Scott Alan↗

NASA NTRS2011

Incorporating Risk

This presentation is about cost risk identification and estimation which is only a part of risk management. The purpose of this step is to identify common software risks, to assess their impact on the cost estimate, and to make revisions to the estimate based on these impacts.

Risk identifcation↗

DOE OSTI2021

The FLOod Probability Interpolation Tool (FLOPIT): A Simple Tool to Improve Spatial Flood Probability Quantification and Communication

Understanding flood probabilities is essential to making sound decisions about flood-risk management. Many people rely on flood probability maps to inform decisions about purchasing flood insurance, buying or selling real-estate, flood-proofing a house, or managing floodplain development. Current flood probability maps typically use flood zones (for example the 1 in 100 or 1 in 500-year flood zones) to communicate flooding probabilities. However, this choice of communication format can miss important details and lead to biased risk assessments. Here we develop, test, and demonstrate the FLOod Probability Interpolation Tool (FLOPIT). FLOPIT interpolates flood probabilities between water surface elevation to produce continuous flood-probability maps. FLOPIT uses water surface elevation inundation maps for at least two return periods and creates Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP) as well as inundation maps for new return levels. Potential advantages of FLOPIT include being open-source, relatively easy to implement, capable of creating inundation maps from agencies other than FEMA, and applicable to locations where FEMA published flood inundation maps but not flood probability. Using publicly available data from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood risk databases as well as state and national datasets, we produce continuous flood-probability maps at three example locations in the United States: Houston (TX), Muncy (PA), and Selinsgrove (PA). We find that the discrete flood zones generally communicate substantially lower flood probabilities than the continuous estimates.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS2001

Proceedings from the 2001 NASA Occupational Health Conference: Risk Assessment and Management in 2001

This Conference convened approximately 86 registered participants of invited guest speakers, NASA presenters, and a broad spectrum of the Occupational Health disciplines representing NASA Headquarters and all NASA Field Centers. Two days' Professional Development Courses on Exposure Assessment Strategies and Statistics and on Advanced Cardiac Life Support training and recertification preceded the Conference. With the theme, 'Risk Assessment and Management in 2001,' conferees were first provided updates from the Program Principal Center Office and the Headquarters Office. Plenary sessions elaborated on several topics: biological terrorism, OSHA recordability, Workers' Compensation issues, Federal ergonomic standards, bridging aerospace medicine and occupational health-especially in management of risk in spaceflight, and EAP operations with mission failures. A keynote address dealt with resiliency skills for 21st century workers and two NASA astronaut speakers highlighted a tour of the Johnson Space Center. During discipline specific breakout sessions, current issues in occupational health management and policy, credentialing and privileging, health risk assessment, measurement and standardization, audits, database development, prevention and rehabilitation, international travel and infection control, employee assistance, nursing process, and environmental health were presented.

Roberson, Sheri↗

DOE OSTI2020

Southeast Regional CO 2 Utilization and Storage Acceleration Partnership (SECARB-USA): Preliminary Regional Assessment of Potential Storage Complexes, Including Capacities and Costs, Based on Application of NRAP and SCO2T (Deliverable 3.3) Storage Complexes

The Recipient will assist with the field validation of one or more risk assessment toolsets through: 1) collaborative research; 2) sharing of relevant datasets, information, and technical insights from field efforts; and 3) other modeling and simulation toolsets as they are developed. Collaborative research could include, but is not limited to: 1) demonstrating use of field data for improved leakage pathway characterization, uncertainty reduction, and risk management and uncertainty workflows; 2) testing and validation of a specific National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP) tool using site specific data; and 3) improved modeling or reduced-order modeling of geophysical monitoring.

42 ENGINEERING↗

NASA NTRS2011

Medical Updates Number 5 to the International Space Station Probability Risk Assessment (PRA) Model Using the Integrated Medical Model

The Integrated Medical Model (IMM) Project has been developing a probabilistic risk assessment tool, the IMM, to help evaluate in-flight crew health needs and impacts to the mission due to medical events. This package is a follow-up to a data package provided in June 2009. The IMM currently represents 83 medical conditions and associated ISS resources required to mitigate medical events. IMM end state forecasts relevant to the ISS PRA model include evacuation (EVAC) and loss of crew life (LOCL). The current version of the IMM provides the basis for the operational version of IMM expected in the January 2011 timeframe. The objectives of this data package are: 1. To provide a preliminary understanding of medical risk data used to update the ISS PRA Model. The IMM has had limited validation and an initial characterization of maturity has been completed using NASA STD 7009 Standard for Models and Simulation. The IMM has been internally validated by IMM personnel but has not been validated by an independent body external to the IMM Project. 2. To support a continued dialogue between the ISS PRA and IMM teams. To ensure accurate data interpretation, and that IMM output format and content meets the needs of the ISS Risk Management Office and ISS PRA Model, periodic discussions are anticipated between the risk teams. 3. To help assess the differences between the current ISS PRA and IMM medical risk forecasts of EVAC and LOCL. Follow-on activities are anticipated based on the differences between the current ISS PRA medical risk data and the latest medical risk data produced by IMM.

Butler, Doug↗

NASA NTRS2015

Stratospheric Aerosol and Gas Experiment, SAGE III on ISS, An Earth Science Mission on the International Space Station, Schedule Risk Analysis, A Project Perspective

The presentation provides insight into the schedule risk analysis process used by the Stratospheric Aerosol and Gas Experiment III on the International Space Station Project. The presentation focuses on the schedule risk analysis process highlighting the methods for identification of risk inputs, the inclusion of generic risks identified outside the traditional continuous risk management process, and the development of tailored analysis products used to improve risk informed decision making.

Bonine, Lauren↗

DOE OSTI2024

Forest structural complexity and ignition pattern influence simulated prescribed fire effects

Background: Forest structural characteristics, the burning environment, and the choice of ignition pattern each influence prescribed fire behaviors and resulting fire effects; however, few studies examine the influences and interactions of these factors. Understanding how interactions among these drivers can influence prescribed fire behavior and effects is crucial for executing prescribed fires that can safely and effectively meet management objectives. To analyze the interactions between the fuels complex and ignition patterns, we used FIRETEC, a three-dimensional computational fluid dynamics fire behavior model, to simulate fire behavior and effects across a range of horizontal and vertical forest structural complexities. For each forest structure, we then simulated three different prescribed fires each with a unique ignition pattern: strip-head, dot, and alternating dot. Results: Forest structural complexity and ignition pattern affected the proportions of simulated crown scorch, consumption, and damage for prescribed fires in a dry, fire-prone ecosystem. Prescribed fires in forests with complex canopy structures resulted in increased crown consumption, scorch, and damage compared to less spatially complex forests. The choice of using a strip-head ignition pattern over either a dot or alternating-dot pattern increased the degree of crown foliage scorched and damaged, though did not affect the proportion of crown consumed. We found no evidence of an interaction between forest structural complexity and ignition pattern on canopy fuel consumption, scorch, or damage. Conclusions: We found that forest structure and ignition pattern, two powerful drivers of fire behavior that forest managers can readily account for or even manipulate, can be leveraged to influence fire behavior and the resultant fire effects of prescribed fire. These simulation findings have critical implications for how managers can plan and perform forest thinning and prescribed burn treatments to meet risk management or ecological objectives.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS2011

Assessing the Likelihood of Rare Medical Events in Astronauts

Despite over half a century of manned space flight, the space flight community is only now coming to fully assess the short and long term medical dangers of exposure to reduced gravity environments. Further, as new manned spacecraft are designed and with the advent of commercial flight capabilities to the general public, a full understanding of medical risk becomes even more critical for maintaining and understanding mission safety and crew health. To address these critical issues, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Human Research Program (HRP) has begun to address the medical hazards with a formalized risk management approach by effectively identifying and attempting to mitigate acute and chronic medical risks to manned space flight. This paper describes NASA Glenn Research Center?s (GRC) efforts to develop a systematic methodology to assess the likelihood of in-flight medical conditions. Using a probabilistic approach, medical risks are assessed using well established and accepted biomedical and human performance models in combination with fundamentally observed data that defines the astronauts? physical conditions, environment and activity levels. Two different examples of space flight risk are used to show the versatility of our approach and how it successfully integrates disparate information to provide HRP decision makers with a valuable source of information which is otherwise lacking.

Myers, Jerry G., Jr.↗

DOE OSTI1993

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 34, No. 1, January-March 1993]

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: 1 An Integrated Regional Approach To Risk Management of Industrial Systems, S. Chakraborty and R. Stratton; 9 Annual Technical Meeting of the NRC Cooperative Severe Accident Research Program, E. G. Silver; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 13 Deterministic Severe Accident Criteria as Severe Accident Design Criteria and Policy for the New Production Reactor-Heavy Water Reactor, P. T. Rhoads; 20 Proposed Deterministic Severe Accident Criteria for the Heavy Water Reactor-New Production Reactor Containment, K. D. Bergeron, S. E. Slezak, and C. E. Leach; 33 Quasi-Static Core Liquid Level Depression and Long-Term Core Uncovery During a PWR LOCA, Y. Kukita, R. R. Schultz, H. Nakamura, and J. Katayama; 49 LIRA: An Advanced Containment System to Minimize the Accidental Radioactivity Releases, A. Turricchia; 63 Errata to “A Review of Hydrogen Production During Melt/Water Interaction in LWRs,” Vol. 33, No. 4; CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 64 The Nuplex 80+™ Advanced Control Complex from ABB Combustion Engineering, F. Ridolfo, D. Harmon, and K. Scarola; DESIGN FEATURES: 76 A Scheme for Passive Isolation of the Containment of a Reactor, A. K. Ghosh, V. V. Raj, and K. Kakodkar; 84 Utility Requirements for Safety in the Passive Advanced Light-Water Reactor, T. U. Marston, W. H. Layman, and G. Bockhold, Jr.; WASTE AND SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT: 91 Activities Related to Waste and Spent Fuel Management, Compiled by M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 103 Testing Deficiencies in Auxiliary Systems Feedwater Systems, J. D. Kueck; 110 Reactor Shutdown Experience, Compiled by J. W. Cletcher; 113 Selected Safety-Related Events, Compiled by G. A. Murphy; 115 Operating U.S. Power Reactors, Compiled by M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 133 General Administrative Activities, Compiled by M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver; 145 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides, D. S. Queener; 150 Proposed Rule Changes as of Sept. 30, 1992; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 75 Harvard Short Course on Risk: Science, Assessment, and Management; 102 International Conference on Reactor Physics and Reactor Computations; 102 The Fourth International Conference on Nuclear Waste Reprocessing and Waste Management [RECOD ’94]; 132 International Symposium on the Radiological Exposure of the Population of the European Community from Radioactivity in the Mediterranean Sea [MARINA-MED]; 162 International High-Level Radioactive Waste Conference ‘Technology Integration—Above and Below”; 154 The Authors; 158 Indexes to Nuclear Safety, Volume 33.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI1993

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 34, No. 1, January-March 1993]

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗