Naval Reactors History Database (nrhdb)
Favorites (0)
Search:
1984 in date [X]
rss icon RSS | Modify Search | New Search | nrhdb Home
Results:  3 itemsBrowse by Facet | Title
Sorted by:  
Page: 1
Date
1984[X]
Type
Text (3)
1Title:  Department of Energy FY 1985 Congressional budget request: Atomic energy defense activities Add
 Summary:  The FY 1985 Naval Reactors budget request, part of the Department of Energy's request for FY 1985. The program overview notes the importance of NR's support for national security, in that "the most survivable leg of our strategic defense triad" is based upon nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (674). One interesting aspect of the overview is that, in the list of benefits gained from advanced reactor development, the reduction of plant operators is not included. This could be considered the pre-drawdown perspective on reactor development. The importance of the Expended Core Facility's work is emphasized by the statement that "examination of spent reactor cores provides valuable information about core performance and the effects of reactor operation on reactor materials" (676). The role of computer systems in core and component design is described in the "Nuclear Design and Analysis" section. In 1984, there were eight naval nuclear prototype plants in operation. (By 2011, the number of prototypes had been reduced to four.) The request notes the importance of the ability to test reactor cores and components in these plants: "no amount of analysis or accelerated testing can provide the data which can be obtained from the actual in-service experience obtained by operating the prototypes" (682). The prototypes' role in operator training is described in the "Reactor Operation and Testing" section. 
 Source:  http://www.osti.gov/bridge 
 Date:   1984 
 Subject(s):  Budgetary information | Naval Reactors 
 Type:  Text 
 Format:  PDF 
 Similar items:  Find
2Title:  Shippingport station decommissioning project: Overview and justification Add
 Summary:  This 1984 report, written by Frank E. Coffman of the Department of Energy, is a support justification for the decommissioning of the Shippingport Atomic Power Station, the first nuclear power plant that produced significant amounts of energy for civilian use. The report's short history mentions the ongoing relationship between the Naval Reactors organization and the Shippingport plant ("operated by Duquesne Light Company under supervision of the DOE Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Naval Reactors"). The document describes several decommissioning options and the financial benefits of dismantling the plant in a short timeframe. Just as the Shippingport plant served as a model for the design, construction, and operation of commercial nuclear power plants, Coffman envisions Shippingport serving as a model for the decommissioning process, the first "full scale power reactor decommissioning demonstration project." The Shippingport plant dismantlement began in 1985. In December 1988, its reactor vessel was removed from the containment building and shipped to the Hanford Site for burial. 
 Source:  http://www.osti.gov/bridge 
 Date:   1984 
 Subject(s):  Shippingport Atomic Power Station | Naval Reactors 
 Type:  Text 
 Format:  PDF 
 Similar items:  Find
3Title:  Nuclear analysis and performance of the Light Water Breeder Reator (LWBR) core power operations at Shippingport (LWBR Development Program) Add
 Summary:  This report, written by H.C. Hecker, analyzes the performance of the thorium oxide-uranium oxide Light Water Breeder Reactor (LWBR) core that was used in the Shippingport Atomic Power Station from 1977 to 1982. During this period, the Shippingport plant generated 1.7 billion net kilowatt hours of energy to the Duquesne Light Energy utility. Heckert notes that the core's design Effective Full Power Hours output of 18,000 was exceeded in the first three years of operation (at 18,298 EFPH). At this point, limits on reactor power and primary plant pressure and temperature were adopted to extend core life. The unique LWBR design, in which reactivity was controlled through the use of movable fuel assemblies instead of hafnium control rods, is noted by the author. In 1982, "the end of reactivity lifetime at a maximum power level of 80% was reached at about 27,100 EFPH with the 12 movable seed assemblies at the maximum withdrawn position" (3). Hecker also describes the core's breeding efficiency: "Fuel depletion calculations which approximated the actual power operations indicate that more fissile fuel was produced in the core than was consumed. The calculated final fissile fuel content is 1.3 percent greater than the initial fissile fuel inventory" (4). Both the core materials and reactivity control systems were "designed to minimize parasitic neutron losses," thus supporting the breeding process (5). The report includes a description and diagrams of the LWBR's core design, which used the seed-blanket arrangement employed in the original Shippingport core. Historian Francis Duncan describes the time commitments that Admiral Hyman Rickover and the Naval Reactors organization made to the development of a civilian nuclear power industry in the United States, through its technical oversight of the design, construction, and operation of the Shippingport Atomic Power Station and later that of the Light Water Breeder Reactor core. The LWBR was installed in the existing Shippingport reactor pressure vessel and demonstrated breeding in a pressurized water reactor plant. 
 Source:  http://www.osti.gov/bridge 
 Reference:  Duncan, Francis. Rickover and the Nuclear Navy: The Discipline of Technology. Annapolis, Md: Naval Institute Press, 1990, pages 190-231. 
 Date:   1984 
 Subject(s):  Light Water Breeder Reactor (LWBR) | Shippingport Atomic Power Station | Naval Reactors 
 Type:  Text 
 Format:  PDF 
 Similar items:  Find

nrhdb Home