335 résultats
1968734070PN. New. 1968. Soft Cover. Date is original print. This is a reprint edition. . PN paperback
1962285279CERN Geneva 1962. Softcover 2 Bände mit 3 Teilen Part I: Relativistic kinematics and precession of polarization. Part II: Recapitulation of quantum mechanics. III: Formal theory of scattering. Zustand: mit einer Namenseintragung. Ecken Kanten gut. Der Rücken fehlt jeweils gänzlich der Block hält aber gut zusammen. CERN, Geneva, paperback
926416071X.Gpaperback. Good. Access codes and supplements are not guaranteed with used items. May be an ex-library book. paperback
197849270Washington DC: GPO 1978. very good. 65 wraps figures appendix. H.A.S.C. No. 95-95. Topics covered include conclusions of the Panel SALT II status unresolved SALT II issues United States-Soviet Strategic Trends U.S. strategic requirements unilateral arms restraint and SALT II: no cause of euphoria. GPO paperback
150020899X.Gpaperback. Good. Access codes and supplements are not guaranteed with used items. May be an ex-library book. paperback
1500610615.Gpaperback. Good. Access codes and supplements are not guaranteed with used items. May be an ex-library book. paperback
1500615595.Gpaperback. Good. Access codes and supplements are not guaranteed with used items. May be an ex-library book. paperback
B9781497307681Paperback / softback. New. paperback
199977511Washington DC: U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 1999. Presumed First Edition First printing. Wraps. Very good. Various paginations approximately 100 pages. Abbreviations. Appendix A: Tritium-Producing Burnable Absorber Rod TPBAR Tritium Production Core TPC Failure Modes and Effects Analysis VMEA Appendix B: Chronology of Correspondence. Appendix C: References. Cover has slight wear and soiling. Tritium-producing burnable absorber rods TPBARs used in the U.S. Department of Energy's Tritium Readiness Program are designed to produce tritium when placed in a Westinghouse or Framatome 17x17 fuel assembly and irradiated in a pressurized water reactor PWR. Under the terms of the Joint DOE/NRC Memorandum of Understanding of May 22 1996 NRC provided review and consultation services to assist DOE in assessing and resolving technical and licensing issues associated with the production of tritium in a commercial light-water reactor. The staff's review of the DOE topical report on the tritium production core and the staff's conclusions regarding the acceptability of irradiating up to approximately 3300 TPBARS in a core reload are documented in this safety evaluation. The staff identified a number of interface items that needed to be addressed by a licensee referencing the "Tritium Production Core Topical Report" in its plant-specific application for authorization to produced tritium for DOE. These are listed in Section 5 of this report. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation paperback
199777644Washington DC: U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 1997. Presumed First Edition First printing. Wraps. Very good. Various paginations approximately 76 pages. Abbreviations. Appendix A-Chronology of Correspondence. Some cover wear. Under the terms of the Joint DOE/NRC Memorandum of Understanding of May 22 1996 NRC was providing consultation services to assist DOE in assessing and resolving technical and licensing issues associated with DOE's proposal for the production of tritium in a commercial light-water reactor. DOE had submitted a revised report containing sufficient information for the staff to determine whether the use of a CLWR to irradiate a limited number of tritium-producing burnable absorber rods in lead test assemblies LTAs raised issues involving an unreviewed safety question. The NRC reviewed the DOE report and prepared this safety analysis to address the acceptabiity of the proposed irradiation and whether a licensee could irradiate of these LTAs without NRC licensing action. As summarized in Section 10 of this safety evaluation the staff identified issued that required further NRC review. The staff also identified a number of areas in which an individual licensee undertaking irradiation of TPBAR LTAs would have to supplement the information in the DOE report before the staff could determine whether the proposed irradiation was acceptable at a particular facility. Therefore the staff concluded that a licensee undertaking irradiation of TPBAR LTAs in a CLWR would have to submit an application for amendment of its facility operating license before inserting the LTAs into the reactor. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation paperback
1497307686.Gpaperback. Good. Access codes and supplements are not guaranteed with used items. May be an ex-library book. paperback
199946443Washington DC: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm 1999. First Edition. First Printing. good. Approx. 100 wraps abbreviations chronology of correspondence glossary label with previous owner's name partially removed from fr cover. Covers somewhat worn and soiled distribution letter laid in. NUREG-1672. Project No. 697. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm paperback
2013x-1442225114Center for Strategic & Intl studies 2013. Paperback. New. 86 pages. 11.25x8.75x0.25 inches. Center for Strategic & Intl studies paperback
ria9781442225114_inpPaperback. New. New Book; Fast Shipping from UK; Not signed; Not First Edition; America’s nuclear energy industry is in decline. Low natural gas prices financing hurdles failure to find a permanent repository for high-level nuclear waste reactions to the Fukushima accident in Japan and other factors are h paperback
B9781442225114Paperback / softback. New. paperback
1442225114.Gpaperback. Good. Access codes and supplements are not guaranteed with used items. May be an ex-library book. paperback
201273678Washington DC: Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future 2012. Presumed First Edition First printing. Wraps. Good. xxi1 158 pages. Illustrations color. Maps. Endnotes. Cover creased and has slight wear and soiling. Members of the commission included: Lee Hamilton Brent Scowcroft Albert Carnesdale Pete Domenici Susan Eisenhower Chuck Hagel and Ernest Moniz. A Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future was appointed by President Obama to look into future options for existing and future nuclear waste following the ending of work on the incomplete Yucca Mountain Repository. At present there are 70 nuclear power plant sites where 65000 tons of spent fuel is stored in the USA. Each year more than 2000 tons are added to this total. Nine states have "explicit moratoria on new nuclear power until a storage solution emerges". A deep geological repository seems to be the favored approach to storing nuclear waste. On January 26 2012 the Commission submitted its final report to Energy Secretary Steven Chu. The Commission put forth seven recommendations for developing a comprehensive strategy to pursue. A major recommendation was that "the United States should undertake an integrated nuclear waste management program that leads to the timely development of one or more permanent deep geological facilities for the safe disposal of spent fuel and high-level nuclear waste". On January 26 2012 the Commission submitted its final report to Energy Secretary Steven Chu. In their final report the Commission put forth several recommendations for developing a comprehensive strategy to pursue. A major recommendation was that "the United States should undertake an integrated nuclear waste management program that leads to the timely development of one or more permanent deep geological facilities for the safe disposal of spent fuel and high-level nuclear waste". There is an "international consensus on the advisability of storing nuclear waste in deep underground repositories" but no country in the world has yet opened such a site. In their final report the Commission put forth seven recommendations for developing a comprehensive strategy to pursue: Recommendation #1--The United States should undertake an integrated nuclear waste management program that leads to the timely development of one or more permanent deep geological facilities for the safe disposal of spent fuel and high-level nuclear waste. Recommendation #2--A new single-purpose organization is needed to develop and implement a focused integrated program for the transportation storage and disposal of nuclear waste in the United States. Recommendation #3--Assured access to the balance in the Nuclear Waste Fund NWF and to the revenues generated by nuclear waste fee payments from utility ratepayers is absolutely essential and must be provided to the new nuclear waste management organization. Recommendation #4--A new approach is needed to site and develop nuclear waste facilities in the United States in the future. We believe that these processes are most likely to succeed if they are: · Adaptive-in the sense that process itself is flexible and produces decisions that are responsive to new information and new technical social or political developments. · Staged-in the sense that key decisions are revisited and modified as necessary along the way rather than being pre-determined in advance. · Consent-based-in the sense that affected communities have an opportunity to decide whether to accept facility siting decisions and retain significant local control. · Transparent-in the sense that all stakeholders have an opportunity to understand key decisions and engage in the process in a meaningful way. · Standards- and science-based-in the sense that the public can have confidence that all facilities meet rigorous objective and consistently-applied standards of safety and environmental protection. · Governed by partnership arrangements or legally-enforceable agreements with host states tribes and local communities. Recommendation #5--The current division of regulatory responsibilities for long-term repository performance between the NRC and the EPA is appropriate and should continue. The two agencies should develop new site-independent safety standards in a formally coordinated joint process that actively engages and solicits input from all the relevant constituencies. Recommendation #6--The roles responsibilities and authorities of local state and tribal governments with respect to facility siting and other aspects of nuclear waste disposal must be an element of the negotiation between the federal government and the other affected units of government in establishing a disposal facility. In addition to legally-binding agreements as discussed in Recommendation #4 all affected levels of government local state tribal etc. must have at a minimum a meaningful consultative role in all other important decisions. Additionally states and tribes should retain-or where appropriate be delegated-direct authority over aspects of regulation permitting and operations where oversight below the federal level can be exercised effectively and in a way that is helpful in protecting the interests and gaining the confidence of affected communities and citizens. Recommendation #7--The Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board NWTRB should be retained as a valuable source of independent technical advice and review. Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future paperback
197785184New York: American Physical Society 1977. Presumed First Edition First printing thus. Wraps. Good/No dust jacket issued. Format is approximately 8.5 inches by 11 inches by 1.5 inches. Three hole punched. Various paginations. Front cover has wear soiling a blacked out portion name and an edge tear. Other pages have small blacked out portions at the top. This report was to be published in teh Review of Modern Physics per cover. The APS Study Group found existing technology and straightforward extensions sufficient for managing nuclear wastes but unresolved economic institutional and political questions cloud the commercial use of plutonium. The study group consisted of a dozen physicists chemists engineers and geologists. Contents include: Summary of the Study; Introduction; Primer on the Fuel Cycle; LWR Fuel Cycle--Technology and Economics of Reprocessing and Recycle; LWR Fuel Cycle--Assessment of Radiation Exposures; LWR Fuel Cycle--Safeguards; High-Level and TRU Waste Management; Advanced Fuel Cycle Alternatives; Institutional and Organizational Issues of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Waste Management Program and Appendixes. Utilization of nuclear fuels and management of nuclear wastes have become major topics of public discussion. Under the auspices of the American Physical Society this study was undertaken as an independent evaluation of technical issues in the use of fissionable materials in nuclear fuel cycles together with their principal economic environmental health and safety implications. Reprocessing and recycling in light water reactors were examined along with technical measures proposed as possible safeguards; advanced reactor fuel cycles were also studied for their resource and safeguards implications. Much of the work of the group centered on the principal alternatives for disposal of radioactive wastes and control of effluents. The group examined the research and development programs sponsored by government agencies along with associated relationships among agencies and between government and private industry. Available information was also considered on nuclear fuel resources and on important economic and environmental aspects of the various fuel cycles in order to strive for a balanced comparative study. The report presents many conclusions on various aspects of the nuclear fuel cycles and also provides recommendations concerning present utilization and future improvement of fuel cycle technology. American Physical Society paperback
199747957Arlington VA: Nuclear Waste Technical Bd 1997. First Edition. First Printing. very good. Approx. 100 wraps references glossary. This report was submitted in accordance with the requirements of the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1987 Public Law 100-123. It presents findings and recommendations. Congress created the Board to evaluate the technical and scientific validity of the Department of Energy's program to manage the permanent disposition of the nation's civilian spent fuel and high-level radioactive waste. Specifically the Board is charged with evaluating the DOE site-characterization activities at Yucca Mountain Nevada as well as activities relating to the design of the repository and to the packaging and transport of spent fuel and high-level radioactive waste. Nuclear Waste Technical Bd paperback
198580983Washington DC: President's Blue Ribbon Task Group on Nuclear Weapons Program Management 1985. Presumed First Edition First printing of Executive Secretariat Report Tabbed items appear to be reprints/copies. Three Ring Binder. Good. Some documents between 1985-1990. Includes Volume # I Nuclear Weapons Program hole punched and disbound Part 1 Organizations and Responsibilities iii 34 pages Part 2 Processes and Procedures 35-65 3 pages. Volume II Previous Studies iii 1 66--Bound laid in Volume II Appendix Previous Studies various paginations approximately 50 pages lain in Volume III Recent Initiatives various paginations approximately 80 pages lain in and Summary of Background Material iii 1 29 3 pages laid in. Volume #I Parts 1 and 2 is in a three-ring binder with 25 tabbed sections. William Clark was the Chairman of the Blue Ribbon Task Group. This report was submitted in compliance with Section 1632 of the Department of Defense Authorization Act 1985 Public Law 98-525 and Executive Order 12499 of January 18 1985. The Task Group addressed procedures used by the Departments of Defense and Energy in establishing requirements and providing resources for the research development testing production surveillance and retirement of nuclear weapons. Members of the Task Group included James Schlesinger Former Secretary of Energy and Defense Former Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission Harold Agnew former Director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory Jeane Kirkpatrick Former Ambassador to the United Nations and William Perry Former Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering. A second copy of Tab R laid in with meeting agenda . A second copy of Tab S laid in. This mass of information is approximately 3 inches thick. "The President established by Executive Order 12499 the Blue Ribbon Task Group on Nuclear Weapons Program Management at the direction of the Congress to address fiscal accountability and discipline in the nation's nuclear weapons program. The Task Group was asked to ''examine the procedures used by DOD Department of Defense and DOE Department of Energy in establishing requirements for and providing resources for the research development testing production surveillance and retirement of nuclear weapons'' and to recommend any needed change in coordination budgeting or management procedures. The Task Group was also asked to address ''whether DOD should assume the responsibility for funding current DOE weapon activities and material production programs.'' The Task Group found that the present relationship between DOD and DOE for managing the nuclear weapons program is sound. Accordingly the Task Group sought a process for improving the integrated determination of nuclear weapon requirements and the management of nuclear weapon production." <br/><br/>Tabs are: A: 1983 MOU on Joint Nuclear Weapon Activities B: Agreement for the Development Production and Standardization of Atomic Weapons C: 1977 Supplement to B D: 1984 Supplement to B E: DOD Directive 3150.1 Joint Nuclear Weapons Development Studies and Engineering Projects; F: no hole punched document present but Policy and Procedures for Certifying High-Yield Nuclear Warhead Designs for Stockpile G: Interim Rules for Procedure for the Nuclear Weapon Council H: DOD Instruction 5000.2 Major System Acquisition Procedures 1980 I: DOD Directive 5000.1 Major System Acquisition Procedures J: DOD Instruction 5000.2 Major System Acquisition Procedures 1987 K: DOD Directive 5000.49 Defense Acquisition Board L: Department of Defense Directive 5134.1 Under Secretary of Defense Acquisition M. Department of Defense Instruction 5030.55 Joint AEC-DoD Nuclear Weapons Development Procedures Mc DOD and DOE Acquisition Activities hardcopy vugraphs N: AEC-DOD Project Officer Liaison Procedures O: 1987 Memorandum on Warhead Costs P: Memorandum on Management of AEC Weapons Development/Production Interface Q: Proposal for a revised supplement to the 1953 agreement R; MOU on Stockpile Confidence Testing S: Revisions to the Implementation Action Plan IAP for the Blue Ribbon Task Group BRTG Recommendations T: Information on Decision Cost U: Key Selection Drivers V: Briefing Outline W: Reprint on article on Defense System Acquisition and XYZ: Definitions of Sigma categories. President's Blue Ribbon Task Group on Nuclear Weapons Program Management unknown
199959756Washington DC: Commission on Maintaining United States Nuclear Weapons Expertise 1999. Wraps. Very good. Includes illustrations. Various paginations approximately 120 pages. List of Documents. The Commission on Maintaining United States Nuclear Weapons Expertise hereafter referred to as the Commission was prescribed by the National Defense Authorization Act of FY 1997. The Congress identified the need for the Commission because of the substantial changes in the environment affecting nuclear weapons design production and testing since the end of the Cold War. In view of these changes the Commission was tasked with reviewing ongoing efforts of Department of Energy DOE to attract scientific engineering and technical personnel recommending improvements and identifying actions where needed and developing a plan for recruitment and retention within the DOE nuclear weapons complex.1 We have arrived at 12 recommendations in four areas: national commitment program management personnel policies and oversight. What the Commission proposed was not a classic plan in the narrow sense but a series of recommendations to assure that critical well-qualified personnel are available to execute the Stockpile Stewardship Program SSP and to assure the safety and reliability of the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile today and in future years. The Commission was directed to "Develop a plan for recruiting and retaining within the Department of Energy DOE nuclear weapons complex such scientified engineering and technical personnel as the Commission determines appropriate in order to permit the Department to maintain over the long term a safe and reliable nuclear weapons stockpile without engaging in underground nuclear testing. " Commission on Maintaining United States Nuclear Weapons Expertise paperback
198562509Washington DC: United States 1985. Presumed first edition/first printing. Wraps. Good. No dust jacket as issued. Paperclip mark on front and first page noted. Cover has some wear and soiling. 3 x 15 p. The appendices were in separate volumes at least two were classified and are not present. William Clark was the Chairman of the Blue Ribbon Task Group. This report was submitted in compliance with Section 1632 of the Department of Defense Authorization Act 1985 Public Law 98-525 and Executive Order 12499 of January 18 1985. The Task Group addressed procedures used by the Departments of Defense and Energy in establishing requirements and providing resources for the research development testing production surveillance and retirement of nuclear weapons. Members of the Task Group included James Schlesinger Former Secretary of Energy and Defense Former Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission Harold Agnew former Director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory Jeane Kirkpatrick Former Ambassador to the United Nations and William Perry Former Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering. United States paperback
200865325Washington DC: United States Department of Defense 2008. Presumed first edition/first printing. Wraps. Very good. No dust jacket as issued. Includes illustrations. Various paginations 84 pages. Footnotes. Serious incidents in 2006 and 2007 alerted the Department of Defense to the Air Force's mishandling of nuclear weapons and nuclear weapons-related material. In June 2008 Secretary fo Defense Robert Gates appointed a Task Force on Nuclear Weapons Management to recommend necessary improvements and measures to enhance deterrence and international confidence in the U.S. nuclear deterrent. This report was stated as being the first of two from the Task Force. United States, Department of Defense paperback
20081348697PN. New. 2008. Soft Cover. This is a reprint edition. . PN paperback
