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
Young Members Group
The Young Members Group works to encourage and enable all young professional members to be actively involved in the efforts and endeavors of the Society at all levels (Professional Divisions, ANS Governance, Local Sections, etc.) as they transition from the role of a student to the role of a professional. It sponsors non-technical workshops and meetings that provide professional development and networking opportunities for young professionals, collaborates with other Divisions and Groups in developing technical and non-technical content for topical and national meetings, encourages its members to participate in the activities of the Groups and Divisions that are closely related to their professional interests as well as in their local sections, introduces young members to the rules and governance structure of the Society, and nominates young professionals for awards and leadership opportunities available to members.
Meeting Spotlight
ANS Student Conference 2025
April 3–5, 2025
Albuquerque, NM|The University of New Mexico
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
Mar 2025
Jan 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
May 2025
Nuclear Technology
April 2025
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
El Salvador: Looking to nuclear
In 2022, El Salvador’s leadership decided to expand its modest, mostly hydro- and geothermal-based electricity system, which is supported by expensive imported natural gas and diesel generation. They chose to use advanced nuclear reactors, preferably fueled by thorium-based fuels, to power their civilian efforts. The choice of thorium was made to inform the world that the reactor program was for civilian purposes only, and so they chose a fuel that was plentiful, easy to source and work with, and not a proliferation risk.
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.
