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 Annual Conference
May 31–June 3, 2026
Denver, CO|Sheraton Denver
Standards Program
The Standards Committee is responsible for the development and maintenance of voluntary consensus standards that address the design, analysis, and operation of components, systems, and facilities related to the application of nuclear science and technology. Find out What’s New, check out the Standards Store, or Get Involved today!
Latest Magazine Issues
Dec 2025
Jul 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
January 2026
Nuclear Technology
December 2025
Fusion Science and Technology
November 2025
Latest News
What’s the most difficult question you’ve been asked as a maintenance instructor?
Blye Widmar
"Where are the prints?!"
This was the final question in an onslaught of verbal feedback, comments, and critiques I received from my students back in 2019. I had two years of instructor experience and was teaching a class that had been meticulously rehearsed in preparation for an accreditation visit. I knew the training material well and transferred that knowledge effectively enough for all the students to pass the class. As we wrapped up, I asked the students how they felt about my first big system-level class, and they did not hold back.
“Why was the exam from memory when we don’t work from memory in the plant?” “Why didn’t we refer to the vendor documents?” “Why didn’t we practice more on the mock-up?” And so on.
Brian Terranova, Andrew Whittaker, Len Schwer
Nuclear Technology | Volume 204 | Number 2 | November 2018 | Pages 119-130
Critical Review | doi.org/10.1080/00295450.2018.1472506
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC’s) NUREG-0800, “Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants: LWR Edition—Design of Structures, Components, Equipment, and Systems,” and the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) DOE-STD-1020-2016, “Natural Phenomena Hazards Analysis and Design Criteria for DOE Facilities,” provide guidance for the design of exterior reinforced concrete roof and wall panels against wind-borne missile impact. These documents point to Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.76, “Design-Basis Tornado and Tornado Missiles for Nuclear Power Plants”; RG 1.221, “Design-Basis Hurricane and Hurricane Missiles for Nuclear Power Plants”; and ANSI/ANS-2.3-2011(R2016), “Estimating Tornado, Hurricane, and Extreme Straight Line Wind Characteristics at Nuclear Facility Sites,” for the definition of missiles and impact velocities. Empirical formulas are used to calculate local responses of reinforced concrete walls and slabs impacted by missiles, where these formulas were calibrated using test data that are no longer available for reinterpretation. This critical review analyzes the accuracy of these empirical formulas using data collected from impact tests conducted by the Electric Power Research Institute and Calspan Corporation in the 1970s. Schedule 40 pipes are used as the impacting missile for this review because it is referenced in both NRC and DOE guidance. Outer and effective diameters of the pipe are used to compare empirical predictions and experimental results. None of the empirical relationships predict the local response of reinforced concrete walls and slabs impacted by tornado- and hurricane-borne missiles with the level of accuracy expected for analysis of a nuclear power plant. More accurate design equations are needed, which could be developed by impact analysis of reinforced concrete panels using numerical models that have been rigorously validated using test data. New experiments will be needed to enable validation of numerical models.