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.
Paul E. Ruhter, Wilbert G. Zurliene
Nuclear Technology | Volume 87 | Number 2 | October 1989 | Pages 361-367
Technical Paper | TMI-2: Health Physics and Environmental Release / Nuclear Safety | doi.org/10.13182/NT89-A27726
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Although the radiological conditions following the Three Mile Island Unit 2 accident were extraordinary, those that had a potential impact on personnel were largely confined to the auxiliary and fuel handling buildings. The most significant pathway was the letdown, makeup, and purification system. Dose rates in some locations in the auxiliary and fuel handling buildings were in excess of 3 mSv/s (1000 R/h) during the first few days following the accident. The dose rates decreased after 3 to 4 days and stabilized after ∼1 week. Airborne radioactivity levels were initially due to the release of noble gases, and subsequently due to resuspension of surface contamination. During the first month, the mixture of fission products in the reactor coolant changed from mostly cesium to about equal amounts of strontium and cesium. This created some very high beta radiation levels. The significant strontium levels caused the contamination control limit to be reduced to one-half of the preaccident limit.