Results for “Security Requirements” — Page 19

DOE OSTI2018

Constant Rate Production: DOE Approach to Meeting NASA Needs for Radioisotope Power Systems for Nuclear-Enabled Launches

The use of radioisotope power systems (RPSs) for nuclear-enabled National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) missions is made possible through a long-standing arrangement between the Department of Energy (DOE) and NASA. The requirements for the power system come from NASA, but DOE performs the procurement, fueling, testing, and delivery. A challenge has been interplay between the schedule for RPS availability from DOE versus the schedule for competitively selected missions. By mutual agreement, the actual operations to procure an RPS and prepare it for fueling have always been delayed until the final selection of a mission. The timeline for a New Frontiers–class mission leaves approximately 5 to 6 years from the time of final mission selection to the actual launch date. The number of RPSs used for a New Frontiers–class mission can be one to three units. If one or two units are needed, the timeline from the decision point to the launch date is a challenge, but it is achievable. The activities taking place include manufacturing the power system, producing the fuel, and performing the assembly/testing and delivery operations. If the mission selected requires three RPSs, the logistics of accomplishing all activities during the 5–6 years is problematic. The challenge involves obtaining the necessary resources for plutonium production, heat source production, and assembly/testing operations. Typically, the time between RPS-enabled missions requires staffing reduction down to 65%–75% of peak staffing levels to reduce costs. Coupling the ~2 year duration needed for hiring, training, and obtaining the appropriate security clearances for the required staff with the requirement for the RPS to arrive at Kennedy Space Center 6 months before the launch erodes much of the 5–6 years available to comfortably support the use of three RPSs. To provide better support for NASA RPS missions, a different approach for the production of heat sources was devised—constant rate production. This involves a higher level of base capability at DOE national laboratories to provide a stabilized workforce. This will enable 10–15 heat sources to be produced annually and placed into a stable intermediate form to enable storage for up to several years leading to quick production of general purpose heat source modules when a mission is selected. The upfront production of 238 Pu is maintained so material is constantly in the pipeline. Production of key specialized components is also maintained using this model.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2024

Advanced Reactor Safeguards and Security - Advanced Delay Technologies

As a new generation of reactors is developed, reducing the cost of physical security without impacting the required system effectiveness will help to make new reactors economical. This report discusses several access delay technologies available to help improve the overall effectiveness of the physical security system. These technologies include both passive and active delay elements, as well as guidance on best practices related to security by design principles.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

NASA NTRS2020

History and Logic Model NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Instrument and Payload Systems Engineering Technical Performance Study

Historically, some NASA missions have exceeded schedule and cost commitments. Studies suggest technical performance is a contributor. The 1980 NASA Project Management Study concluded, "one of the most significant contributors to cost and schedule growth is inadequate definition of technical and management aspects of a program..." (as cited in GAO/NSIAD-93-97, p. 11). The 1991 NASA Roles and Missions Report identified a "need for increased emphasis on technological readiness and requirements on the front end of a program" (as cited in GAO/NSIAD-93-97, p. 11). The 1992 NASA Program Costs Report stated that NASA officials identified, among other things, "insufficient definition studies... [and] program redesigns and technical complexities" as reasons for cost and schedule overruns (GAO/NSAID-93-97, p. 11). The 2002 Task Force on Acquisition of National Security Space Programs found "requirements definition and control issues, unhealthy cost bias in proposal evaluation, widespread lack of budget reserves required to implement high risk programs on schedule, and an overall underappreciation of the importance of appropriately staffed and trained system engineering staff to manage the technologically demanding and unique aspects of space programs" (DoD, 2003, p.i.) In 2007, The NASA Office of the Chief Engineer chartered the NASA Instrument Capability Study (NICS) “to determine whether NASA instrument developers are facing challenges that impact the capability to design and build quality instruments or whether there are flaws in the acquisition strategy evidenced by schedule delays, cost overruns, and increased technical risk via design deficiencies. The... team was also chartered to determine if occurrences [are]... isolated cases or if there are generic issues... If the issues [are] found to be generic, the team [is] to offer solutions to recover such capability" (NICS Report, 2008, p. vi). The 2008 NICS Report, led by Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), identified challenges to instrument technical performance consistent with findings from previous reports. In 2017, the Instrument Project Division (IPD) Implementation Study was initiated to determine if there was a change in meeting schedule and cost commitments after implementing certain NICS recommendations. In 2018, the Instrument Technical Performance Study was initiated to determine the current state of Instrument Technical Performance in the GSFC Payload & Instrument Systems Engineering Branch. The purpose of the combined studies is to answer the question, "Is there a relationship between meeting NASA scientific instrument technical success and meeting schedule and cost commitments? If yes, what is the relationship?" References Department of Defense Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics. (2003). The report of the defense science board/ air force scientific advisory board joint task force on acquisition of national security space programs. Washington DC. Government Accounting Office. (1992). NASA program costs: Space missions require substantially more funding than initially estimated. GAO/NSIAD-93-97. Washington DC. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency, Department of Defense. (2008). The NASA instrument capability study final report. NP-2008-11-058-GSFC. Washington DC.

Robbins, Geraldine↗

NASA NTRS1993

Security aspects of space operations data

This paper deals with data security. It identifies security threats to European Space Agency's (ESA) In Orbit Infrastructure Ground Segment (IOI GS) and proposes a method of dealing with its complex data structures from the security point of view. It is part of the 'Analysis of Failure Modes, Effects Hazards and Risks of the IOI GS for Operations, including Backup Facilities and Functions' carried out on behalf of the European Space Operations Center (ESOC). The security part of this analysis has been prepared with the following aspects in mind: ESA's large decentralized ground facilities for operations, the multiple organizations/users involved in the operations and the developments of ground data systems, and the large heterogeneous network structure enabling access to (sensitive) data which does involve crossing organizational boundaries. An IOI GS data objects classification is introduced to determine the extent of the necessary protection mechanisms. The proposal of security countermeasures is oriented towards the European 'Information Technology Security Evaluation Criteria (ITSEC)' whose hierarchically organized requirements can be directly mapped to the security sensitivity classification.

Schmitz, Stefan↗

DOE OSTI2017

Microalgae Feedstocks for Aviation Fuels

There is significant global interest in developing, testing, and using alternative jet fuels for both commercial and military use in an effort to create a sustainable and stable fuel supply while reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Currently, the aviation industry is entirely dependent on a finite-supply of petroleum based fuel sourced in part by politically and economically unstable regions of the world. Commercial jet fuel use within the contiguous United States (CONUS) was 17.8 billion gallons per year (BGY) in 2009, while jet fuel use in 2010 by the U.S. Air Force (USAF), Navy, and Army was 1.5 BGY, 0.6 BGY, and 0.8 BGY, respectively (Carter et al., 2011). U.S. commercial and military aviation sectors have set ambitious near-term alternative fuel and environmental performance targets. This includes a tentative Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) goal of 1 BGY alternative fuel use by commercial aircraft by 2018. The USAF has set a target of 50% for USAF domestic aviation via alternative fuels by 2016 (0.73 BGY), and 50% of the Navy’s total energy consumption afloat (0.3 BGY) will come from alternative fuels by 2020 (Carter et al., 2011). If these targets become policy, at least 2 BGY of domestically-produced alternative jet fuel will be required by 2020. The Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007 established production requirements for domestic alternative fuels under the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS). For example, 36 billion gallons of renewable fuel must be produced by 2022, of which 21 billion gallons shall be advanced biofuels. EISA defines advanced biofuels as non-corn starch derived biofuels having lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions 50% lower than gasoline. There a number of potential fuel pathways for meeting the RFS. One of these is biomass-based diesel, including jet fuel (Schnepf and Yacobucci, 2013). The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO) has a stated goal in its 2013 Multi-Year Program Plan (USDOE, 2013) to support the RFS through development of “…commercially viable biomass utilization technologies to encourage the creation of a new domestic bioenergy industry…”. BETO has also recognized the potential for aviation biofuels to support the bioenergy industry, seeing drop-in bio-based jet fuels one of the viable alternatives for the aviation industry and the military to meet their ambitious near-term GHG reduction targets (USDOE, 2014). One of the important Multi-year Program Plan Targets (USDOE, 2013) is to establish feedstock resource assessment models to evaluate the geographic, economic, quality and environmental criteria for which 20 million metric tons of ash free dry weight (AFDW) algal biomass can be produced by 2022. Toward meeting the EISA requirements, algal biofuels may offer a number of advantages. They can produce a range of biofuel feedstocks suitable for diesel and aviation fuels. Microalgae, on a strain-specific basis, can be cultivated using impaired water including saline, and/or brackish pumped groundwater or seawater, treated industrial wastewater, municipal sewage effluent, and produced water generated from oil and gas drilling operations. Additionally, microalgae require nitrogen and phosphates as essential nutrients and could provide water treatment co-benefits to municipalities, industry, and the environment.

algae↗

DOE OSTI2020

The Floating Chameleon: Floating Nuclear Power Plants and the Nexus of Maritime and Nuclear Security Law

During the 63rd regular session of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) General Conference, as part of Norway's statement to the General Conference, Mr. Auden Halvorsen, State Secretary for Norway, made the following statement about transportable nuclear power plants (TNPPs): "Deployment of transportable nuclear power plants—TNPPs—demands our attention. The Agency must intensify its conversations of all aspects of the safety and security of such facilities. . . . The scope and applicability of existing requirements and instruments need to be clarified and developed including dialogue with the International Maritime Organization [IMO]." Ensuring the security of TNPPs is essential for their deployment and implementation. TNPPs may be floating nuclear power plants (FNPPs), which bring together elements of nuclear security related to the nuclear power plant with elements of maritime security. Insofar as an FNPP weds the principles of nuclear and maritime security, it also weds the two domains, the ancient traditions and contemporary practices of maritime law with the contemporary practices of nuclear law. Fundamentally, this raises the question, what are the legal requirements for the security of a FNPP? Although both maritime law and nuclear law have established regimes for security through various legal instruments, does an FNPP expose gaps between the current international legal instruments? The previous question of whether international legal regimes define requirements for the security of FNPPs, but a threshold question remains: what is an FNPP? For purposes of nuclear and maritime security, is an FNPP a facility, is an FNPP a vessel and therefore a transport, or does an FNPP change its status based upon temporal and spatial considerations such as when it is docked at a port generating power or in transit to its destination? This set of questions, and others addressed later in this article, highlights that the issue is not merely a question about security but intersects elements of safety whether an FNPP is in uncharted waters of the international regime for both nuclear and maritime law. Here, this paper addresses many of the questions posed above related to the security regulations for an FNPP.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗

DOE OSTI2017

2016 Annual Summary Report for the Area 3 and Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Sites at the Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada: Review of the Performance Assessments and Composite Analyses

The Maintenance Plan for the Performance Assessments and Composite Analyses for the Area 3 and Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Sites at the Nevada Test Site (National Security Technologies, LLC 2007a) requires an annual review to assess the adequacy of the performance assessments (PAs) and composite analyses (CAs), with the results submitted to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Environmental Management. The Disposal Authorization Statements for the Area 3 and Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Sites (RWMSs) also require that such reviews be made and that secondary or minor unresolved issues be tracked and addressed as part of the maintenance plan.The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) performed an annual review of the Area 3 and Area 5 RWMS PAs and CAs for federal fiscal year (FY) 2016. This annual summary report presents results and conclusions of the FY 2016 review, and determines the adequacy of the PAs and CAs. Operational factors (e.g., waste forms and containers, facility design, and waste receipts), closure plans, monitoring results, and research and development (R&D) activities were reviewed to determine the adequacy of the PAs. Likewise, the environmental restoration activities at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) relevant to the sources of residual radioactive material that are considered in the CAs, the land-use planning, and the results of the environmental monitoring and R&D activities were reviewed to determine the adequacy of the CAs. Important developments in FY 2016 include the following: Development of a new Area 5 RWMS closure inventory estimate based on disposals through FY 2016, Evaluation of new or revised waste streams by special analysis, and Development and acceptance of version 4.200 of the Area 5 RWMS GoldSim PA/CA model. The Area 3 RWMS has been in inactive status since July 1, 2006, with the last shipment received in April 2006. The FY 2016 review of operations, facility design, closure plans, monitoring results, and R&D results for the Area 3 RWMS indicates no changes that would impact PA validity. The conclusion of the annual review is that all performance objectives can be met and the Area 3 RWMS PA remains valid. There is no need to revise the Area 3 RWMS PA. Review of Area 5 RWMS operations, design, closure plans, monitoring results, and R&D activities indicates that no significant changes have occurred. The FY 2016 PA results, generated with the Area 5 RWMS v4.200 GoldSim PA model, indicate that there continues to be a reasonable expectation of meeting all performance objectives. All results remain less than 50% of their performance objectives. The results and conclusions of the Area 5 RWMS PA are judged valid, and there is no need to the revise the PA. A review of changes potentially impacting the CAs indicates that no significant changes occurred in FY 2016. A new Corrective Action Unit (CAU), CAU 576, with corrective action sites near the Area 3 RWMS and Area 5 RWMS was identified in FY 2016. The sites are currently under investigation and not expected to be important sources for the CA. The continuing adequacy of the CAs was evaluated with the new models, and no significant changes that would alter the CAs’ results or conclusions were found. The revision of the Area 3 RWMS CA, which will include the Yucca Flat Underground Test Area (CAU 97) source, is scheduled for FY 2024, following the completion of the Corrective Action Decision Document/Corrective Action Plan. Inclusion of the Frenchman Flat Underground Test Area (CAU 98) source in the Area 5 RWMS CA is planned pending the completion of the CAU 98 Closure Report in FY 2017. Near-term R&D efforts will focus on continuing development of the PA, CA, and inventory models for the Area 3 and Area 5 RWMSs.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Test & Measurement System Security in an IT World

Automated test and measurement systems are coming under increased cybersecurity scrutiny. Most of these systems fall under the “Operational Technology” designation, as defined by NIST, and often have unique requirements that conflict with enterprise security policy. These systems are typically not well understood by traditional enterprise IT personnel, which leaves them ill-supported or invalidated.▪This presentation attempts to help Test System owners recognize the security landscape, determine their unique system requirements and concerns, and negotiate a peer-level working arrangement with an existing IT department while maintaining a NIST-recommended level of autonomy and sovereignty.

automated test↗

DOE OSTI2024

Network Security Challenges and Countermeasures for Software-Defined Smart Grids: A Survey

The rise of grid modernization has been prompted by the escalating demand for power, the deteriorating state of infrastructure, and the growing concern regarding the reliability of electric utilities. The smart grid encompasses recent advancements in electronics, technology, telecommunications, and computer capabilities. Smart grid telecommunication frameworks provide bidirectional communication to facilitate grid operations. Software-defined networking (SDN) is a proposed approach for monitoring and regulating telecommunication networks, which allows for enhanced visibility, control, and security in smart grid systems. Nevertheless, the integration of telecommunications infrastructure exposes smart grid networks to potential cyberattacks. Unauthorized individuals may exploit unauthorized access to intercept communications, introduce fabricated data into system measurements, overwhelm communication channels with false data packets, or attack centralized controllers to disable network control. An ongoing, thorough examination of cyber attacks and protection strategies for smart grid networks is essential due to the ever-changing nature of these threats. Previous surveys on smart grid security lack modern methodologies and, to the best of our knowledge, most, if not all, focus on only one sort of attack or protection. This survey examines the most recent security techniques, simultaneous multi-pronged cyber attacks, and defense utilities in order to address the challenges of future SDN smart grid research. The objective is to identify future research requirements, describe the existing security challenges, and highlight emerging threats and their potential impact on the deployment of software-defined smart grid (SD-SG).

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

NASA NTRS2004

Securing Mobile Networks in an Operational Setting

This paper describes a network demonstration and three month field trial of mobile networking using mobile-IPv4. The network was implemented as part of the US Coast Guard operational network which is a ".mil" network and requires stringent levels of security. The initial demonstrations took place in November 2002 and a three month field trial took place from July through September of 2003. The mobile network utilized encryptors capable of NSA-approved Type 1 algorithms, mobile router from Cisco Systems and 802.11 and satellite wireless links. This paper also describes a conceptual architecture for wide-scale deployment of secure mobile networking in operational environments where both private and public infrastructure is used. Additional issues presented include link costs, placement of encryptors and running routing protocols over layer-3 encryption devices.

Ivancic, William D.↗

DOE OSTI2013

Area 3 and Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Sites at the Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada: Review of the Performance Assessments and Composite Analyses (2012 Annual Summary Report)

The Maintenance Plan for the Performance Assessments and Composite Analyses for the Area 3 and Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Sites at the Nevada Test Site (National Security Technologies, LLC 2007a) requires an annual review to assess the adequacy of the performance assessments (PAs) and composite analyses (CAs), with the results submitted to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Environmental Management. The Disposal Authorization Statements for the Area 3 and Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Sites (RWMSs) also require that such reviews be made and that secondary or minor unresolved issues be tracked and addressed as part of the maintenance plan (DOE 1999a, 2000). The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office performed an annual review of the Area 3 and Area 5 RWMS PAs and CAs for fiscal year (FY) 2012. This annual summary report presents data and conclusions from the FY 2012 review, and determines the adequacy of the PAs and CAs. Operational factors (e.g., waste forms and containers, facility design, and waste receipts), closure plans, monitoring results, and research and development (RD) activities were reviewed to determine the adequacy of the PAs. Likewise, the environmental restoration activities at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) relevant to the sources of residual radioactive material that are considered in the CAs, the land-use planning, and the results of the environmental monitoring and RD activities were reviewed to determine the adequacy of the CAs. Important developments in FY 2012 include the following: Release of a special analysis for the Area 3 RWMS assessing the continuing validity of the PA and CA; Development of a new Area 5 RWMS closure inventory estimate based on disposals through FY 2012; Evaluation of new or revised waste streams by special analysis; and Development of version 4.114 of the Area 5 RWMS GoldSim PA model. The Area 3 RWMS has been in inactive status since July 1, 2006, with the last shipment received in April 2006. The FY 2012 review of operations, facility design, closure plans, monitoring results, and RD results for the Area 3 RWMS indicates no changes that would impact PA validity. A special analysis using the Area 3 RWMS v2.102 GoldSim PA model was prepared to update the PA results for the Area 3 RWMS in FY 2012. The special analysis concludes that all performance objectives can be met and the Area 3 RWMS PA remains valid. There is no need to the revise the Area 3 RWMS PA. Review of Area 5 RWMS operations, design, closure plans, monitoring results, and RD activities indicates no significant changes other than an increase in the inventory disposed. The FY 2012 PA results, generated with the Area 5 RWMS v4.114 GoldSim PA model, indicate that there continues to be a reasonable expectation of meeting all performance objectives. The results and conclusions of the Area 5 RWMS PA are judged valid, and there is no need to the revise the PA. A review of changes potentially impacting the CAs indicates that no significant changes occurred in FY 2012. The continuing adequacy of the CAs was evaluated with the new models, and no significant changes that would alter CA results or conclusions were found. The revision of the Area 3 RWMS CA, which will include the Underground Test Area source term (Corrective Action Unit [CAU] 97), is scheduled for FY 2024, following the completion of the Yucca Flat CAU 97 Corrective Action Decision Document/Corrective Action Plan in FY 2016. Inclusion of the Frenchman Flat CAU 98 results in the Area 5 RWMS CA is scheduled for FY 2016, pending the completion of the CAU 98 closure report in FY 2015. Near-term RD efforts will focus on continuing development of the Area 3 and Area 5 RWMS GoldSim PA/CA and inventory models.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2014

2013 Annual Summary Report for the Area 3 and Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Sites at the Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada: Review of the Performance Assessments and Composite Analyses

The Maintenance Plan for the Performance Assessments and Composite Analyses for the Area 3 and Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Sites at the Nevada Test Site (National Security Technologies, LLC 2007a) requires an annual review to assess the adequacy of the performance assessments (PAs) and composite analyses (CAs), with the results submitted to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Environmental Management. The Disposal Authorization Statements for the Area 3 and Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Sites (RWMSs) also require that such reviews be made and that secondary or minor unresolved issues be tracked and addressed as part of the maintenance plan (DOE 1999a, 2000). The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office performed an annual review of the Area 3 and Area 5 RWMS PAs and CAs for fiscal year (FY) 2013. This annual summary report presents data and conclusions from the FY 2013 review, and determines the adequacy of the PAs and CAs. Operational factors (e.g., waste forms and containers, facility design, and waste receipts), closure plans, monitoring results, and research and development (R&D) activities were reviewed to determine the adequacy of the PAs. Likewise, the environmental restoration activities at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) relevant to the sources of residual radioactive material that are considered in the CAs, the land-use planning, and the results of the environmental monitoring and R&D activities were reviewed to determine the adequacy of the CAs. Important developments in FY 2013 include the following: • Development of a new Area 5 RWMS closure inventory estimate based on disposals through. FY 2013 • Evaluation of new or revised waste streams by special analysis. • Development of version 4.115 of the Area 5 RWMS GoldSim PA/CA model.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2024

Security of Mobile Radiological Sources: Overview of Industry Applied Technologies

Small radiological sources used in industrial settings recurrently require transit between job sites. Securing these sources, while stationary, can be addressed with standard security approaches and equipment. Transport of these sources increases the risk and complexity of managing and maintaining control of these sources. Implementing methodologies to securely monitor and locate sources improves response and resolution of anomalous events during transit. The Mobile Source Transit Security (MSTS) system was developed to improve security and provide situational awareness of these mobile sources throughout their job cycle. The MSTS development effort focused on creating a set of systems that could be successfully implemented in industrial radiography and well-logging applications. The MSTS team worked to address source presence and location through use and storage. The MSTS system monitors radiological sources as they move from the base of operations to the job site and back. The system provides near-real-time monitoring of the mobile source location and status and early notification of source loss or theft by transmitting operational status and alerting anomalous conditions over telematic links worldwide. The MSTS system can trigger an armed response or initiation of search and recovery operations and will automatically alert management and responsible staff if a radioactive source is lost or stolen whether it is on-site, in transport, or in storage.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗

DOE OSTI2015

Application of Framework for Integrating Safety, Security and Safeguards (3Ss) into the Design Of Used Nuclear Fuel Storage Facility

Department of Energy’s Office of Nuclear Energy, Fuel Cycle Research and Development develops options to the current commercial fuel cycle management strategy to enable the safe, secure, economic, and sustainable expansion of nuclear energy while minimizing proliferation risks by conducting research and development focused on used nuclear fuel recycling and waste management to meet U.S. needs. Used nuclear fuel is currently stored onsite in either wet pools or in dry storage systems, with disposal envisioned in interim storage facility and, ultimately, in a deep-mined geologic repository. The safe management and disposition of used nuclear fuel and/or nuclear waste is a fundamental aspect of any nuclear fuel cycle. Integrating safety, security, and safeguards (3Ss) fully in the early stages of the design process for a new nuclear facility has the potential to effectively minimize safety, proliferation, and security risks. The 3Ss integration framework could become the new national and international norm and the standard process for designing future nuclear facilities. The purpose of this report is to develop a framework for integrating the safety, security and safeguards concept into the design of Used Nuclear Fuel Storage Facility (UNFSF). The primary focus is on integration of safeguards and security into the UNFSF based on the existing Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) approach to addressing the safety/security interface (10 CFR 73.58 and Regulatory Guide 5.73) for nuclear power plants. The methodology used for adaptation of the NRC safety/security interface will be used as the basis for development of the safeguards /security interface and later will be used as the basis for development of safety and safeguards interface. Then this will complete the integration cycle of safety, security, and safeguards. The overall methodology for integration of 3Ss will be proposed, but only the integration of safeguards and security will be applied to the design of the UNFSF. The framework for integration of safeguards and security into the UNFSF will include 1) identification of applicable regulatory requirements, 2) selection of a common system that share dual safeguard and security functions, 3) development of functional design criteria and design requirements for the selected system, 4) identification and integration of the dual safeguards and security design requirements, and 5) assessment of the integration and potential benefit.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2012

Disposal Process for High Activity Sources by a University through the U.S. Dept. of Energy's Off-Site Source Recovery Project - 12076

Sealed radioactive sources are used in a wide variety of applications by a large number of license holders in the Unites States. Applications range from low-activity calibration sources to high-activity irradiators for engineering, research, or medical purposes. This paper describes and evaluates the safety and security measures in place for disused sealed sources, in particular of high activity sealed sources at the end of their operational life-time. The technical, radiation protection, and financial challenges for licensees and the Competent Authorities are reviewed from the point of view of the license holder. As an example, the waste management processes and the chain of custody for disused research irradiator sources are followed from extraction from the irradiator facility to the source disposal or recycling contractor. Possible safety and security concern in the waste disposal process are investigated in order to identify improvement potential for radiation protection or source security. Two shipments of disused sealed sources from Colorado State University (CSU) have been conducted through the CSU Radiation Control Office (RCO) in the last two years, with a third shipment expected to be completed by the end of November 2011. Two of the sources shipped are considered 'high' activity and exceed the U.S. NRC limits requiring increased controls for security purposes. Three sources were shipped in 2009 and ten more are expected in 2011. A total activity of 117.3 GBq was shipped in 2009. Nine sources were recently shipped in October 2011 through a third party waste broker where the total activity was 96.34 GBq. The last source is scheduled for shipment no later than 30 November 2011 and contains an activity of 399.96 GBq. Radiation waste disposal of high activity sources in large shields with unknown manufacturers, serial numbers, or model numbers is an arduous process requiring multiple contacts with various state and federal agencies. DOE's OSRP has made it possible for CSU to dispose of older unused sources in an economically viable way. Disposal of multiple sources all at once was not an option prior to the establishment of the SCATR program. While CSU was able to dispose of sealed sources when funds were available, the cost to the University would have been prohibitive for this type of mass removal and disposal of radiation sources initiated within this initiative. Where we estimate a cost of about $130 k to ship these sources otherwise, CSU's contribution of $21 k realized a significant savings in what would have been an impossible disposal cost. Removing unused radiation sources from CSU has realized a cost savings while removing a potential security threat. (authors)

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

SU-G-PinS Room/Hall E-00: HAZMAT Training for the Medical Physicist - Part II

Medical Physicists are frequently involved in shipping radioactive materials or supervising those who do. Current U.S. Department of Transportation Hazardous Material Regulations, 49 CFR Parts 171 - 185, require hazmat employees to have documented training specified in 49 CFR 172 Subpart H. A hazmat employee is defined as an individual who: (1) loads, unloads or handles hazardous material; (2) manufactures, tests, reconditions, repairs, modifies, marks or otherwise represents containers, drums or packagings as qualified for use in the transportation of hazardous materials; (3) prepares hazardous materials for transportation; (4) is responsible for safety of transporting hazardous materials; or (5) operates a vehicle used to transport hazardous materials. Recurrent training is required at least once every three years. (The IATA two year training interval is not applicable and is generally misunderstood.) FAA has escalated inspection and enforcement. Facilities who ship radiopharmaceuticals to other laboratories, return radiopharmaceuticals or radioactive sources to suppliers, or otherwise ship radioactive materials have been cited for failure to provide and document the required training. The interrelationship of transportation regulations, 49 CFR, IATA, ICAO and other transportation regulations, which are frequently misunderstood, will be explained. The course will cover typical shipments by air and highway which are encountered in a medical institution. Items such as fissile materials, highway route controlled quantities, rail shipments, vessel shipments and such will be omitted; although specific questions may be addressed. A major objective of the course is to present the process of shipping radioactive material in a sequential and logical fashion. How radioactive materials for transportation purposes are defined by activity concentrations for exempt materials and activity limits for exempt consignments will be explained. Radioactive material shipments of excepted packages and Type A packages will be emphasized. The program is designed to meet the function specific DOT training requirements for shippers of medical radioactive materials. General awareness training and security awareness training can be obtained from two free DOT training CDs. Safety training and security awareness training is generally satisfied by the training required under the institution’s radioactive material license. For shippers of radioactive Yellow III labeled packages an in-depth written security plan and training are no longer required as of April 8, 2010. In general almost all shippers of medical radioactive material are now not required to have an in-depth security plan. Contents of general awareness training, security awareness training and in-depth security plans will be briefly outlined. It is the hazmat employer’s responsibility to ensure that each hazmat employee is properly trained. No third party can fulfill that requirement. It is the hazmat employer’s responsibility to determine the degree to which this course meets the employer’s requirements, including contents of the course and the examination. Participants will gain sufficient knowledge to prepare hazmat training programs for others in their institutions. A handout will be posted which should be printed out and brought to the course for reference during the presentation. The handout will also satisfy part of the training documentation required by DOT. A feature handout section is a composite table which provides A1, A2, RQ, Exempt Concentration, and Exempt Consignment values in a single table in both Becquerel and Curie units. Course attendance will be certified through the AAPM CEU documentation system. Learning Objectives: Understand the regulatory requirements for shipping radioactive materials. Understand the regulatory requirements for training of hazmat employees. Comprehend how to classify, package, mark, label, document, placard, and transport radioactive materials.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

SU-G-PinS Room/Hall E-01

Medical Physicists are frequently involved in shipping radioactive materials or supervising those who do. Current U.S. Department of Transportation Hazardous Material Regulations, 49 CFR Parts 171 - 185, require hazmat employees to have documented training specified in 49 CFR 172 Subpart H. A hazmat employee is defined as an individual who: (1) loads, unloads or handles hazardous material; (2) manufactures, tests, reconditions, repairs, modifies, marks or otherwise represents containers, drums or packagings as qualified for use in the transportation of hazardous materials; (3) prepares hazardous materials for transportation; (4) is responsible for safety of transporting hazardous materials; or (5) operates a vehicle used to transport hazardous materials. Recurrent training is required at least once every three years. (The IATA two year training interval is not applicable and is generally misunderstood.) FAA has escalated inspection and enforcement. Facilities who ship radiopharmaceuticals to other laboratories, return radiopharmaceuticals or radioactive sources to suppliers, or otherwise ship radioactive materials have been cited for failure to provide and document the required training. The interrelationship of transportation regulations, 49 CFR, IATA, ICAO and other transportation regulations, which are frequently misunderstood, will be explained. The course will cover typical shipments by air and highway which are encountered in a medical institution. Items such as fissile materials, highway route controlled quantities, rail shipments, vessel shipments and such will be omitted; although specific questions may be addressed. A major objective of the course is to present the process of shipping radioactive material in a sequential and logical fashion. How radioactive materials for transportation purposes are defined by activity concentrations for exempt materials and activity limits for exempt consignments will be explained. Radioactive material shipments of excepted packages and Type A packages will be emphasized. The program is designed to meet the function specific DOT training requirements for shippers of medical radioactive materials. General awareness training and security awareness training can be obtained from two free DOT training CDs. Safety training and security awareness training is generally satisfied by the training required under the institution’s radioactive material license. For shippers of radioactive Yellow III labeled packages an in-depth written security plan and training are no longer required as of April 8, 2010. In general almost all shippers of medical radioactive material are now not required to have an in-depth security plan. Contents of general awareness training, security awareness training and in-depth security plans will be briefly outlined. It is the hazmat employer’s responsibility to ensure that each hazmat employee is properly trained. No third party can fulfill that requirement. It is the hazmat employer’s responsibility to determine the degree to which this course meets the employer’s requirements, including contents of the course and the examination. Participants will gain sufficient knowledge to prepare hazmat training programs for others in their institutions. A handout will be posted which should be printed out and brought to the course for reference during the presentation. The handout will also satisfy part of the training documentation required by DOT. A feature handout section is a composite table which provides A1, A2, RQ, Exempt Concentration, and Exempt Consignment values in a single table in both Becquerel and Curie units. Course attendance will be certified through the AAPM CEU documentation system. Learning Objectives: Understand the regulatory requirements for shipping radioactive materials. Understand the regulatory requirements for training of hazmat employees. Comprehend how to classify, package, mark, label, document, placard, and transport radioactive materials.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

SU-CD-PinS Room/Hall E-00: HAZMAT Training for the Medical Physicist - Part I

Medical Physicists are frequently involved in shipping radioactive materials or supervising those who do. Current U.S. Department of Transportation Hazardous Material Regulations, 49 CFR Parts 171 - 185, require hazmat employees to have documented training specified in 49 CFR 172 Subpart H. A hazmat employee is defined as an individual who: (1) loads, unloads or handles hazardous material; (2) manufactures, tests, reconditions, repairs, modifies, marks or otherwise represents containers, drums or packagings as qualified for use in the transportation of hazardous materials; (3) prepares hazardous materials for transportation; (4) is responsible for safety of transporting hazardous materials; or (5) operates a vehicle used to transport hazardous materials. Recurrent training is required at least once every three years. (The IATA two-year training interval is not applicable and is generally misunderstood.) FAA has escalated inspection and enforcement. Facilities who ship radiopharmaceuticals to other laboratories, return radiopharmaceuticals or radioactive sources to suppliers, or otherwise ship radioactive materials have been cited for failure to provide and document the required training. The interrelationship of transportation regulations, 49 CFR, IATA, ICAO and other transportation regulations, which are frequently misunderstood, will be explained. The course will cover typical shipments by air and highway which are encountered in a medical institution. Items such as fissile materials, highway route controlled quantities, rail shipments, vessel shipments and such will be omitted; although specific questions may be addressed. A major objective of the course is to present the process of shipping radioactive material in a sequential and logical fashion. How radioactive materials for transportation purposes are defined by activity concentrations for exempt materials and activity limits for exempt consignments will be explained. Radioactive material shipments of excepted packages and Type A packages will be emphasized. The program is designed to meet the function specific DOT training requirements for shippers of medical radioactive materials. General awareness training and security awareness training can be obtained from two free DOT training CDs. Safety training and security awareness training is generally satisfied by the training required under the institution’s radioactive material license. For shippers of radioactive Yellow III labeled packages an in-depth written security plan and training are no longer required as of April 8, 2010. In general almost all shippers of medical radioactive material are now not required to have an in-depth security plan. Contents of general awareness training, security awareness training and in-depth security plans will be briefly outlined. It is the hazmat employer’s responsibility to ensure that each hazmat employee is properly trained. No third party can fulfill that requirement. It is the hazmat employer’s responsibility to determine the degree to which this course meets the employer’s requirements, including contents of the course and the examination. Participants will gain sufficient knowledge to prepare hazmat training programs for others in their institutions. A handout will be posted which should be printed out and brought to the course for reference during the presentation. The handout will also satisfy part of the training documentation required by DOT. A feature handout section is a composite table which provides A1, A2, RQ, Exempt Concentration, and Exempt Consignment values in a single table in both Becquerel and Curie units. Course attendance will be certified through the AAPM CEU documentation system. Learning Objectives: Understand the regulatory requirements for shipping radioactive materials. Understand the regulatory requirements for training of hazmat employees. Comprehend how to classify, package, mark, label, document, placard, and transport radioactive materials.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗