First of all, in the scopes of this research paper it is important to rely to the fact that the nuclear power in US is a very disputable question at the moment. For durable period of time, the low cost natural gas and coal have been used as the core arguments against nuclear power generation in the country. Even while taking in account the fact that the set of the precautions is involved into the nuclear reactor designing, constructing and in the operation of the nuclear installations, it is not possible to claim such construction as an absolutely safe one. (Stoiber, 2010)._x000D_
_x000D_
While discussing the impact of the nuclear energy for the human health, it is important to rely to the fact that the low exposure to ionizing radiation is not harmful for humans. The group of risk in the nuclear fuel cycle is made of people, who work at nuclear reactors or live near such reactors. (Kerr, 2006)._x000D_
_x000D_
In the scopes of this paper it is important to rely to the fact that there are three types of risk- acceptable, unacceptable, and tolerable. They are separated by numerical boundaries. The structure for the risk management in the nuclear power industry is provided by the tolerable risk framework._x000D_
_x000D_
The risk, which implies the small probability of occurrence or its outcomes are not harmful and significant, and which may be accepted by a particular social group is considered as the acceptable risk. That is why the actions, directed for such risk reduction are not required. The next type of the risk in the nuclear power industry is an unacceptable risk – when the society is not willing to bear it – and the measures, directed to its likelihood reduction are to be undertaken. The last type of the risk is the tolerable risk. It is the non-negligible risk, which has not been minimized to the acceptable level, but at the same time the particular social group has the intensions of its bearing in order to get the benefits, which are associated with the risky activity, implying it (Levenson, 1981)._x000D_
_x000D_
According to the tolerable risk range, it is possible to seek the further risk reductions by taking in consideration the costs, feasibility and other criteria. That is why it is important to reduce the tolerable risks (which are between the acceptable and unacceptable risks) to the rate “as low as reasonably practicable” (ALARP), which means the rate when the costs or other feasibility concerns make the further reductions impossible. It is possible to make a conclusion that the core purpose of the risk management in the nuclear power industry is pushing the risks from unacceptable to the acceptable region, while applying the specific ALARP considerations._x000D_
_x000D_
The core potential source of risk and of hazard in the nuclear reactor construction and operation in US is the radioactive products of fission, which are retained in the process of normal operation of the system within the fuel elements. That is why the most risky accidents are those, which are related to the fuel elements failures: the reactor core overheating or the failures in the systems, which are initially developed for the releases containing. In order to evaluate the probabilities of such accidents, the information, concerning the failure of the components in the nuclear industry and in the conventional industries should be analyzed (Ball, 1994)._x000D_
_x000D_
There are such situations in the nuclear power industry when the risk is so high that it is considered as the intolerable. In such situations, there is a need of managing the situation in order to reduce the risks ASAP (as in the case of Chernobyl in 1986). Such situations are considered to take their place only in the cases when the unexpected failures take their place or some non-human circumstances make their impact on the cases (case of Fukushima Dai-ichi 2011, which has been mainly caused by the natural non-human factor – earthquake). In such cases, the activities, which would result the improved safety in the longer, should be undertaken. At the same time, it is important to put an emphasis on the fact that it is not acceptable to allow the plant of the nuclear power industry to operate at the highest level of risk until the other alternative source of the energy is found. In the circumstances when the long-term risks reduction activities imply the short-term risk occurrence, all the efforts should be directed to carrying out the set of activities, directed to the risk minimization (Travis, 1987).