Naval Reactors History Database (nrhdb)
Favorites (0)
Search:
Rickover, Hyman G. in subject [X]
rss icon RSS | Modify Search | New Search | nrhdb Home
Results:  19 itemsBrowse by Facet | Title
Sorted by:  
Page: Prev  1 2
Date
unknown (1)
1990 (1)
1989 (1)
expand1979 (1)
1976 (1)
1975 (2)
1974 (2)
1971 (1)
1970 (1)
1969 (2)
1968 (1)
1966 (1)
expand1962 (1)
expand1960 (1)
1959 (1)
1957 (1)
Type
Text (18)
Image (1)
11Title:  Statement of Admiral H.G. Rickover, USN before the Subcommittee on Energy Research and Production of the Committee on Science and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives Add
 Summary:  In the aftermath of the March 1979 reactor accident at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant, Admiral Hyman Rickover, director of the Navy's nuclear propulsion program, was invited to submit information on the Naval Reactors program to a U.S. House of Representatives subcommittee investigating the accident. At the time, Rickover's program was responsible for the operation of 153 reactors, including shipboard and prototype plants and the reactor at the commercial Shippingport Atomic Power Station. His statement describes, in depth, the values and training process in the Naval Reactors program. Rickover notes that "reactor safety requires adherence to a total concept wherein all elements are recognized as important and each is constantly reinforced" (7). For example, plant design and operator training are integrally related to one another, and this is reflected in the program's approach to both areas. On pages 14-16, Rickover describes his philosophy of conservatism in terms of plant design. Most notably, U.S. naval nuclear propulsion plants are designed to be inherently stable; unlike the Three Mile Island plant, they rely on operator instead of automatic reactor control; and, actual nuclear propulsion plants, not simulators, are used for the training of plant operators. Most of the statement focuses on the operator training process in the program. Rickover describes two primary objectives for the training program. Trainees are taught: "1) the principles of science and engineering which are fundamental to the design, construction, and operation of naval nuclear propulsion plants; and (2) the details and practical knowledge needed to operate and operations these plants" (35-36). The two primary components of the training are Nuclear Power School, which provides the theoretical foundation for officers and enlisted trainees, and prototype training; the operation of both schools is described in great depth, clearly indicating the importance that Rickover placed upon training in ensuring the safe operation of naval nuclear propulsion plants. In the hands-on prototype training for officers and enlisted trainees, Rickover emphasizes the different phases of training (classroom and in-hull) and the variety of assessment methods used (including oral checkouts on plant systems, watchstander observation, written examinations, and oral boards). There are some legibility problems in this digital document. 
 Source:  http://www.taproot.com/content/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/RickeoverCongressionalTestimony.pdf 
 Date:  24 May 1979 
 Subject(s):  Reactor safety | Rickover, Hyman G. | Naval Reactors 
 Type:  Text 
 Format:  PDF 
 Similar items:  Find
12Title:  Naval reactor program and Shippingport project Add
 Summary:  This Joint Committee on Atomic Energy hearing record includes lengthy testimony by Admiral Hyman Rickover, Director, Naval Nuclear Propulsion, on a range of issues, including the Shippingport Atomic Power Station, the first nuclear power plant that supplied commercial power on a large scale. Rep. Melvin Price, chair of the Subcommittee on Research and Development, opens the hearing by praising Rickover and Naval Reactors: "The [Joint Committee] has been very favorably impressed by the excellent contributions the AEC has made to the civilian power program through the naval reactors program" (1). The hearing includes Rickover's update on naval nuclear propulsion. He describes some of the problems with the Seawolf's sodium-cooled reactor plant, and Naval Reactors' reactor development philosophy (with parallel development of thermal energy/pressurized water and intermediate range/sodium-cooled reactor plants). He also describes some of the other challenges faced by the program at its beginning, such as the need to support the development of a Zirconium industry to support naval nuclear propulsion. Regarding training generally and prototype training (which continues today) specifically, Rickover asserts that in the S1W prototype, "we have no better training facility in the Navy than we have there and it is absolutely essential for the future of nuclear power in the Navy that we train the people there, on a real plant, a live one, because we do not want any accidents to happen" [on nuclear-powered vessels in the fleet] (5). During the hearing, Admiral Rickover provides committee members with information on the PWR (Shippingport's pressurized water reactor plant). He notes that Naval Reactors' approach with the Shippingport plant is similar to that used with earlier submarine reactors and propulsion plants: "The Naval Reactors Branch approves the details of the design. We keep in constant touch with what the reactor designers, the machinery designers, the shipbuilders, and the construction contractors are doing" (26). Also, the document includes the testimony of John Simpson, the manager of the Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory, Westinghouse; he provides information on Bettis' support for both submarine plants and the Shippingport plant. In summary, the hearing describes how Naval Reactors supported the design and development of the civilian Shippingport plan and the common threads between Shippingport and the successful submarine reactor program. Clearly, a point of interest for committee members is the cost of design, development, and construction for the Shippingport plant, because of their interest in a successful commercial nuclear power industry in the United States. 
 Source:  http://collections.stanford.edu/atomicenergy/bin/search/advanced/process?clauseMapped%28catKey%29=3163463&sort=title 
 Date:   1957 
 Subject(s):  Shippingport Atomic Power Station | Rickover, Hyman G. | Naval Reactors 
 Type:  Text 
 Format:  PDF 
 Similar items:  Find
13Title:  Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program--1975 Add
 Summary:  This document is the unclassified version of Admiral Hyman Rickover's March 5, 1975 testimony to the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy. This hearing occurred during a time of transition, as the Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA) had replaced the Atomic Energy Commission and was now the civilian parent of Rickover's Naval Reactors organization. Rickover reports to the committee on the recent, successful sea trials of the USS Nimitz, the second nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. He also reports on the operation and construction of SSN-688 (Los Angeles) class high-speed fast attack submarines. This hearing record provides a great deal of information on the Light Water Breeder Reactor (LWBR). Rickover describes its basic design: "We are now working on a breeder core to go into the existing Shippingport plant as a backfit. This breeder core will use light water instead of sodium as coolant." Continuing: "This breeder core will use the thorium/uranium-233 fuel cycle" (21). The LWBR enabled Naval Reactors to install the breeder core into the existing Shippingport reactor vessel and to leverage its experience with water-cooled plants in investigating breeding. During this testimony, Rickover and David Leighton of Naval Reactors contrast the LWBR design with liquid metal breeder reactors, including the significantly lower design costs of the LWBR and the greater breeding potential of the liquid metal design. Appendix 2 is a detailed report on the design, goals, and breeding process for the LWBR. 
 Source:  http://collections.stanford.edu/atomicenergy/bin/search/advanced/process?clauseMapped%28catKey%29=5461005&sort=title 
 Date:   1975 
 Subject(s):  Light Water Breeder Reactor (LWBR) | Rickover, Hyman G. | Naval Reactors 
 Type:  Text 
 Format:  PDF 
 Similar items:  Find
14Title:  Admiral Rickover just outside of the S1W hull entrance Add
 Summary:  Admiral Hyman Rickover (at center of group) at a hull entrance for the Mark I, or S1W, reactor plant. The S1W (the Nautilus prototype) achieved initial criticality on 30 March 1953; two months later, reactor power was used to drive the prototype's shaft. Rickover then ordered a continuous 100 hour run of the S1W propulsion plant that demonstrated beyond question the revolutionary impact that nuclear propulsion would have upon submarines. 
 Source:  http://www.inl.gov/proving-the-principle/chapter_10.pdf 
 Reference:  Rockwell, Theodore. The Rickover Effect: How One Man Made a Difference. Lincoln, NE: IUniverse, 2002, pages 133-137 and 140-143. 
 Date:   unknown  
 Subject(s):  S1W | Rickover, Hyman G. | Naval Reactors 
 Type:  Image 
 Format:  PNG 
 Similar items:  Find
15Title:  Naval reactor program and Polaris missile system Add
 Summary:  This document is the public record of a Joint Committee on Atomic Energy hearing on the Polaris missile submarine program. The hearing was conducted on board the USS George Washington, the first ballistic missile submarine, which was powered by the already-proven S5W reactor. The record describes the integration of nuclear propulsion technology, proven in earlier submarines such as the Nautilus, and ballistic missile technology, under the oversight of Admiral William F. Raborn. Its introduction describes the Joint Committee's focus on reactor safety, mentioning the 1961 SL-1 accident at the Idaho National Laboratory and the importance of the design, construction, and operation standards created by Naval Reactors: "The committee also looks to the Navy to meet the Atomic Energy Commission's safety standards in all aspects of its nuclear propulsion program and to resist any pressures to force this new technology into an old system which may have sufficed for ordinary propulsion" (VI). In his testimony, Admiral Hyman Rickover (Director, Naval Nuclear Propulsion) notes that the first three Polaris subs were originally designed as attack submarines and converted to ballistic missile submarines. (All of these submarines were powered by the S5W reactor plant.) Rickover describes the unique aspects of the Naval Reactors program (for example, its close collaboration with Atomic Energy Commission laboratories and land prototypes in plant testing). The document includes correspondence between the Navy, the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), the AEC's Safeguards Committee, and the congressional Joint Committee on Atomic Energy. The Joint Committee's ongoing and strong support of Admiral Rickover and the Naval Reactors program is reflected in an opening letter from its chair and ranking member to the Secretary of the Navy (pages 10 and 11 of the hearing document). 
 Source:  http://tinyurl.com/cj5c652 
 Date:  09 April 1960 
 Subject(s):  S5W | Reactor safety | Rickover, Hyman G. | Naval Reactors 
 Type:  Text 
 Format:  PDF 
 Similar items:  Find
16Title:  Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program--1969 Add
 Summary:  This Joint Committee on Atomic Energy hearing was held to obtain supplemental data for the fiscal year 1970 Atomic Energy Commission request for the naval reactors development program. The document includes information on several issues of controversy between the Joint Committee and the Executive Branch, including the ongoing construction of nuclear-powered aircraft carriers, the development of a high speed fast attack submarine (Los Angeles-class), and Admiral Rickover's continuation as the head of the Naval Reactors program. It includes a lengthy (101 pages) record of Admiral Rickover's testimony to the Joint Committee. Rickover's testimony focuses on the danger on the Soviet Union's submarine buildup and the need to build the high speed, fast attack submarine; this construction program was a point of contention between the Joint Committee and both the Johnson and Nixon administrations. The Joint Committee's position in the document: "Because of the urgency of delivering these new ships to the fleet, the Joint Committee strongly recommends that the fiscal year 1970 nuclear warship construction program include as a minimum the funds necessary to award contracts for the first three high-speed submarines and advance funding for five more" (VII). Also, given the lengthy battle between the Joint Committee and the Department of Defense over the application of nuclear power to aircraft carriers (with Defense Secretary Robert McNamara recommending the construction of a conventional carrier in 1963), Rickover's description of systems analysis in his testimony (on pages 63-65) is both interesting and revealing. 
 Source:  http://collections.stanford.edu/atomicenergy/bin/search/advanced/process?clauseMapped%28catKey%29=5461012&sort=title 
 Date:   1969 
 Subject(s):  S6G | USS Los Angeles (SSN-688) | Rickover, Hyman G. | Naval Reactors 
 Type:  Text 
 Format:  PDF 
 Similar items:  Find
17Title:  Rickover and the nuclear navy: The discipline of technology Add
 Summary:  An official history of the Naval Reactors program written by the late Francis Duncan. Duncan was co-author of Nuclear Navy, 1946-1962, the foundational history of the program. 
 Source:  http://energy.gov/management/downloads/duncan-rickover-and-nuclear-navy 
 Date:   1990 
 Subject(s):  Naval Reactors | Rickover, Hyman G. | USS Thresher (SSN-593) | USS Nimitz (CVN-68) | Reactor safety 
 Type:  Text 
 Format:  PDF 
 Similar items:  Find
18Title:  Tour of "USS Enterprise" and report on Joint AEC Naval Reactor Program Add
 Summary:  This document is based on a hearing that members of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy conducted on board the USS Enterprise in the spring of 1962. The hearing touched on a number of issues, involving both capabilities and costs, which factored into the adoption of nuclear propulsion for aircraft carriers. The first commanding officer of the Enterprise, Vincent P. de Poix, summarized the benefits of nuclear propulsion for carriers, including the ability to rapidly position the ship for air operations, the ability to sail to a trouble spot because of the carrier's support for sustained high-speed propulsion, and the absence of stack gases in the flight deck area, which minimizes aircraft corrosion in comparison with operations on an oil-fired carrier. The qualitative advantages that de Poix summarized, however, were weighed against quantitative advantages emphasized by Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, who recommended in 1963 that the next carrier to be built (CV-67) be conventionally-powered. The hearing also provides a nice summary of the naval nuclear propulsion training program, including the role of the Idaho National Laboratory's A1W prototype. Both the Enterprise's Reactor Officer, D.P. Brooks, and the ship's Engineering Officer, R.S. Smith, testify at the hearing and describe training approaches and the organization of the Enterprise's nuclear-trained officers and operators on the ship. The hearing document also includes "A treatise on nuclear propulsion in surface ships." This study was commissioned by Admiral Arleigh Burke, Chief of Naval Operations, in late 1960 and was completed in early 1961. It detailed both the favorable and limiting aspects regarding the adoption of nuclear propulsion in surface ships. A cost factor of 1.5 was included in the study. As summarized by historian Francis Duncan, this finding suggested that "the navy could buy ten nuclear-powered ships or fifteen oil-fired ships of the same type for the same total sum." Admiral Hyman Rickover (Director, Naval Nuclear Propulsion) also testified at this hearing and addressed both this cost factor and the capabilities provided by nuclear propulsion. Finally, pages 54 through 56 of the hearing document include Rickover's summary of Shippingport Atomic Power Station reactor attributes and the potential benefits that the work at Shippingport could have for the nation's commercial nuclear power industry. 
 Source:  http://collections.stanford.edu/atomicenergy/bin/search/advanced/process?clauseMapped%28catKey%29=3160343&sort=title 
 Reference:  Duncan, Francis. Rickover and the Nuclear Navy: The Discipline of Technology. Annapolis, Md: Naval Institute Press, 1990, pages 111-114. 
 Date:  31 March 1962 
 Subject(s):  A1W | A2W | USS Enterprise (CVN-65) | Shippingport Atomic Power Station | Rickover, Hyman G. | Naval Reactors 
 Type:  Text 
 Format:  PDF 
 Similar items:  Find
19Title:  Nuclear navy, 1946-1962 Add
 Summary:  The foundational history of the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program, covering the period of the program's creation, under the leadership of Hyman G. Rickover, to 1962, by which time the United States Navy's fleet included nuclear-powered attack submarines, ballistic missile submarines, and surface ships. The program's leadership in support of the Shippingport Atomic Power Station is also chronicled. 
 Source:  http://energy.gov/management/downloads/hewlett-and-duncan-nuclear-navy-1946-1962 
 Date:   1974 
 Subject(s):  Naval Reactors | Rickover, Hyman G. | S1W | USS Nautilus (SSN-571) | S1G | USS Seawolf (SSN-575) 
 Type:  Text 
 Format:  PDF 
 Similar items:  Find
Page: Prev  1 2

nrhdb Home