scholarly journals Project Hanford management contract quality assurance program implementation plan for nuclear facilities

1997 ◽  
Author(s):  
E.K. Bibb
Keyword(s):  
Quality Assurance ◽  
Program Implementation ◽  
Quality Assurance Program ◽  
Nuclear Facilities ◽  
Implementation Plan ◽  
Management Contract

scholarly journals Quality assurance program of a nuclear facility

2019 ◽  
Vol 97 ◽  
pp. 03015
Author(s):  
Dmitriy Leybman ◽  
Tatiana Khripko
Keyword(s):  
Quality Assurance ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Atomic Energy ◽  
Nuclear Power Engineering ◽  
Quality Assurance Program ◽  
Nuclear Facility ◽  
Nuclear Facilities ◽  
Regular Control ◽  
Construction Works

Quality Assurance Program (QAP, Program) is a standard, which regulates and coordinates activity, as well as determines quality assurance policy regarding services rendered and construction works conducted on nuclear infrastructure facilities. The Program must comply with the requirements of federal rules and regulations in the field of nuclear power engineering. The present QAP is available to all organisation employees carrying out works and rendering services during construction, reconstruction and major repairs of nuclear facilities as well as to experts conducting works and rendering services on a contract basis. The QAP implementation analysis and the evaluation of its results is conducted through internal audits. The implementation of the quality assurance program is provided through the following principles: – the responsibility for quality assurance when conducting actual works and rendering services is imposed upon the task performer; – precise segregation of duties and responsibilities between all contractors; – regular control of compliance with regulations and developer’s requirements, as well as accurate documentation of the monitoring results; – systematic update tracking for all official regulations and norms; – the quality assurance methods incorporate the classification of equipment, systems and installation in terms of their impact on safety of nuclear facilities approved by official rules and regulations in the atomic energy sector.

Codes, Standards and Regulatory Topics for Nuclear Facilities

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taunia Wilde ◽  
Shannan Baker ◽  
Gary M. Sandquist
Keyword(s):  
Quality Control ◽  
Quality Assurance ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Regulatory Commission ◽  
Department Of Energy ◽  
Quality Assurance Program ◽  
Nuclear Facilities ◽  
The Us ◽  
Regulatory Commission

The design, construction, operation, maintenance, and decommissioning and decontamination of nuclear infrastructure particularly nuclear power plants licensed in the US by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) or operated by the US Department of Energy (DOE) or the US Department of Defense (DOD) must be executed under a rigorous and documented quality assurance program that provides adequate quality control and oversight. Those codes, standards, and orders regulate, document and prescribe the essentials for quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) that frequently impact nuclear facilities operated in the US are reviewed and compared.

Geometrical accuracy of the Novalis stereotactic radiosurgery system for trigeminal neuralgia

2004 ◽  
Vol 101 (Supplement3) ◽  
pp. 351-355 ◽  
Author(s):  
Javad Rahimian ◽  
Joseph C. Chen ◽  
Ajay A. Rao ◽  
Michael R. Girvigian ◽  
Michael J. Miller ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Assurance ◽  
Trigeminal Neuralgia ◽  
Image Fusion ◽  
Stereotactic Radiosurgery ◽  
Ct Images ◽  
Radiochromic Film ◽  
Quality Assurance Program ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Geometrical Accuracy ◽  
Fine Print

Object. Stringent geometrical accuracy and precision are required in the stereotactic radiosurgical treatment of patients. Accurate targeting is especially important when treating a patient in a single fraction of a very high radiation dose (90 Gy) to a small target such as that used in the treatment of trigeminal neuralgia (3 to 4—mm diameter). The purpose of this study was to determine the inaccuracies in each step of the procedure including imaging, fusion, treatment planning, and finally the treatment. The authors implemented a detailed quality-assurance program. Methods. Overall geometrical accuracy of the Novalis stereotactic system was evaluated using a Radionics Geometric Phantom Chamber. The phantom has several magnetic resonance (MR) and computerized tomography (CT) imaging—friendly objects of various shapes and sizes. Axial 1-mm-thick MR and CT images of the phantom were acquired using a T1-weighted three-dimensional spoiled gradient recalled pulse sequence and the CT scanning protocols used clinically in patients. The absolute errors due to MR image distortion, CT scan resolution, and the image fusion inaccuracies were measured knowing the exact physical dimensions of the objects in the phantom. The isocentric accuracy of the Novalis gantry and the patient support system was measured using the Winston—Lutz test. Because inaccuracies are cumulative, to calculate the system's overall spatial accuracy, the root mean square (RMS) of all the errors was calculated. To validate the accuracy of the technique, a 1.5-mm-diameter spherical marker taped on top of a radiochromic film was fixed parallel to the x–z plane of the stereotactic coordinate system inside the phantom. The marker was defined as a target on the CT images, and seven noncoplanar circular arcs were used to treat the target on the film. The calculated system RMS value was then correlated with the position of the target and the highest density on the radiochromic film. The mean spatial errors due to image fusion and MR imaging were 0.41 ± 0.3 and 0.22 ± 0.1 mm, respectively. Gantry and couch isocentricities were 0.3 ± 0.1 and 0.6 ± 0.15 mm, respectively. The system overall RMS values were 0.9 and 0.6 mm with and without the couch errors included, respectively (isocenter variations due to couch rotation are microadjusted between couch positions). The positional verification of the marker was within 0.7 ± 0.1 mm of the highest optical density on the radiochromic film, correlating well with the system's overall RMS value. The overall mean system deviation was 0.32 ± 0.42 mm. Conclusions. The highest spatial errors were caused by image fusion and gantry rotation. A comprehensive quality-assurance program was developed for the authors' stereotactic radiosurgery program that includes medical imaging, linear accelerator mechanical isocentricity, and treatment delivery. For a successful treatment of trigeminal neuralgia with a 4-mm cone, the overall RMS value of equal to or less than 1 mm must be guaranteed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document