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.
Division Spotlight
Nuclear Criticality Safety
NCSD provides communication among nuclear criticality safety professionals through the development of standards, the evolution of training methods and materials, the presentation of technical data and procedures, and the creation of specialty publications. In these ways, the division furthers the exchange of technical information on nuclear criticality safety with the ultimate goal of promoting the safe handling of fissionable materials outside reactors.
Meeting Spotlight
2025 ANS Annual Conference
June 15–18, 2025
Chicago, IL|Chicago Marriott Downtown
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
Jun 2025
Jan 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
July 2025
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
Smarter waste strategies: Helping deliver on the promise of advanced nuclear
At COP28, held in Dubai in 2023, a clear consensus emerged: Nuclear energy must be a cornerstone of the global clean energy transition. With electricity demand projected to soar as we decarbonize not just power but also industry, transport, and heat, the case for new nuclear is compelling. More than 20 countries committed to tripling global nuclear capacity by 2050. In the United States alone, the Department of Energy forecasts that the country’s current nuclear capacity could more than triple, adding 200 GW of new nuclear to the existing 95 GW by mid-century.
Somayajulu L. N. Dhulipala, Chandrakanth Bolisetti, Richard Yorg, Philip Hashimoto, Justin L. Coleman, Mark Cox
Nuclear Technology | Volume 207 | Number 11 | November 2021 | Pages 1712-1724
Technical Note – Special section on the Seismic Analysis and Risk Assessment of Nuclear Facilities | doi.org/10.1080/00295450.2020.1792743
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Following U.S. Department of Energy Order 420.1 C for the mitigation of natural phenomena hazards, such as earthquakes, to nuclear facilities through periodic reassessments, Idaho National Laboratory (INL) has developed the Seismic Hazard Periodic Re-Evaluation Methodology (SHPRM). The SHPRM involves seven criteria that evaluate changes to the seismic hazard at a site due to changes in the input models/data over time. Should these changes to the seismic hazard result in an increase in the design or licensing-basis ground motion of the facility from that which the facility was designed for, the SHPRM includes a criterion for reevaluating the facility risk objectives. While the criteria corresponding to the reevaluation of the seismic hazard and the design basis have been previously demonstrated and published, there is currently no guidance on reevaluating seismic risk for the purpose of SHPRM. This paper complements the published reports and papers on the application of SHPRM by demonstrating the risk objectives criterion for a generic nuclear facility (GNF), thereby closing the loop on the application of the SHPRM. The GNF is assumed to be located at the INL site and designated as a Seismic Design Category-3 facility as per American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)/Structural Engineering Institute (SEI) 43-05. The demonstration includes a risk assessment for a baseline seismic hazard calculated in 2006 and an updated seismic hazard calculated in 2015. After presenting the baseline and the updated seismic hazard curves at this site, the state-of-practice methodology for calculating fragility functions for the facility is presented, along with the fragilities calculated for the GNF. Employing a fault tree analysis using the INL in-house seismic analysis and risk assessment software MASTODON, the seismic risks of collapse of the GNF for the baseline and updated seismic hazards are computed to be 5.27E−05 and 5.2E−06, respectively. The results show that not only the reevaluated seismic risk is smaller, but more importantly, that it meets the risk objectives set by ASCE/SEI 43-05.
