Publication Laka-library:
Vol II, Appendix B, Part 9: Oak Ridge, Site Assessment (1994)
| Author | Plutonium Working Gr US DoE |
| Date | September 1994 |
| Classification | 3.01.5.30/30 (UNITED STATES - GENERAL NUCLEAR WEAPONS PLANTS + CLEAN UP) |
| Front | 
|
From the publication:
Oak Ridge Site Assessment Team Report Executive Summary This report provides the input to and results of the Department of Energy (DOE) - Oak Ridge Operations (ORO) DOE Plutonium Environment, Safety and Health (ES&H) Vulnerability Assessment (VA) self-assessment performed by the Site Assessment Team (SAT) for the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL or X-10) and the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant (Y-12) sites that are managed by Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. (MMES). As initiated (March 15, 1994) by the Secretary of Energy, the objective of the VA is to identify and rank-order DOE-ES&H vulnerabilities associated with plutonium storage and operations for the purpose of decision making on the interim safe management and ultimate disposition of fissile materials. This assessment is directed at plutonium and other co-located transuranics in various forms. Guidance for conducting the VA was provided in the DOE Plutonium ES&H VA Project Plan and Assessment Plan and OS, dated April 25, 1994, and supplementary guidance provided at the May 19-21, 1994, Colorado Springs, Colorado, Team Training. Vulnerabilities were categorized as worker health and safety, public safety and health, and environmental damage. Each vulnerability category was evaluated according to "severity (H-high, M-medium, L-low)" of "Likelihood" and "Hazard. " A DOE Headquarters Working Group Assessment Team (WGAT) visited the Oak Ridge sites between June 20, 1994, and July 1, 1994, for the purpose of reviewing and validating a prior draft SAT report. The current document represents the final version of the SAT report and is the result of SAT revisions and interpretations by the WGAT. A total of 59 responses to the Question Set (OS) were collected from ORNL and Y-12 site personnel - 48 from ORNL and 11 from Y-12. The SAT identified 14 vulnerabilities from the 59 responses to the QS. Of these 59 responses and 14 identified vulnerabilities, the WGAT judged that only 19 responses and 9 vulnerabilities were "in-scope" by their interpretation of DOE Headquarters guidance. The WGAT independently identified 12 vulnerabilities, 4 of which concurred withSAT- identified vulnerabilities. Thus, between the SAT and WGAT, a total of 17 vulnerabilities were identified. Subsequently, DOE Headquarters suggested that the 40 "out-of- scope" QS responses and associated 5 vulnerabilities be included in the Attachment to this report. Of the 17 identified "in-scope " vulnerabilities, 6 are considered general at both X-10 and Y-12 site facilities, 8 are specific to X-10 site facilities, and 3 are specific to Y-12 site facilities. Evaluation of the nine identified "in-scope" vulnerabilities separately by "Likelihood" and "Hazard" resulted in nine worker health and safety vulnerabilities (3-Ll, 3-LM, 1-LH, 2-ML), two public safety and health vulnerabilities (2-LL), and two environmental damage vulnerabilities (2-LL). These vulnerabilities are generally characterized as low-frequency "unusual occurrence" events.
This publication is only available at Laka on paper, not as pdf.
You can borrow the publication or request a copy. When we're available, this is possible for a small fee.