ANS is committed to advancing, fostering, and promoting the development and application of nuclear sciences and technologies to benefit society.
Explore the many uses for nuclear science and its impact on energy, the environment, healthcare, food, and more.
Explore membership for yourself or for your organization.
Conference Spotlight
2026 Nuclear Energy Conference & Expo (NECX)
August 24–27, 2026
Dallas, TX|Hilton Anatole
Latest Magazine Issues
Jul 2026
Jan 2026
2026
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
September 2026
Nuclear Technology
August 2026
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
The human factor in licensing and operating the next generation of nuclear plants
As human factors specialists working at the intersection of human performance and nuclear operations, we are witnessing one of the nuclear sector’s most significant transitions in decades. The emergence of small modular reactors, microreactors, and other advanced designs is reshaping the industry’s landscape. Digital instrumentation and controls, passive safety systems, and increased automation are creating opportunities for greater safety margins and more flexible operation. These same features also fundamentally redefine what it means to “operate” a nuclear plant. Interactions among human roles, automation, and passive systems shape how people maintain awareness, exercise judgment, and intervene when necessary. These developments affect both operational realities and the regulatory foundations on which nuclear safety is built.
Stan Kaplan
Nuclear Technology | Volume 102 | Number 1 | April 1993 | Pages 137-142
Technical Note | Mixed-Oxide Fuel / Nuclear Reactor Safety | doi.org/10.13182/NT93-A34809
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
This paper is inspired by the recent work of Theofanous et al on the risk of liner failure in Mark-I containments. In that work, the authors presented a probabilistic framework and methodology for dealing with uncertainties surrounding “Level 2,” i.e., post-core-melt phenomena in nuclear plants. In so doing, they have advanced the state of the art of risk assessment and decision making in regard to such phenomena. The key ideas in this framework and methodology have application, of course, beyond Level 2 phenomena. The purposes of the present paper are to abstract and lift out these key ideas so that they can be seen more clearly and to place them in context along with similar ideas used elsewhere, particularly in seismic risk assessment and in the treatment of through-wall cracking and pressurized thermal shock transients. The author hopes, in this way, to clear up confusion and to advance the cause of consistency in the use of the words “probability,” “uncertainty,” “frequency,” “variability,” “randomness,” etc.