Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “International Safeguards”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

352 records · Page 20
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

National Criticality Experiments Research Center (NCERC) - capabilities and recent measurements

The National Criticality Experiments Research Center (NCERC) located at the Device Assembly Facility (DAF) at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) and operated by Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) is home to four critical assemblies which are used to support of range of missions, including nuclear criticality safety and nuclear nonproliferation. Additionally, subcritical systems can also be assembled at NCERC. NCERC is providing critical and subcritical experiments valuable to the nuclear data community and experiments performed at NCERC are often published as benchmarks in the International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project (ICSBEP) Handbook. This manuscript will give a broad overview of recent experiments performed at NCERC, upcoming experiments, and why integral measurements are important and useful to the nuclear data community. The four critical assemblies are GODIVA IV, FLATTOP, COMET, and PLANET. GODIVA IV is a cylindrical metal fast burst reactor, the fourth in the GODIVA series that dates back to the 1950’s. FLATTOP is an highly enriched uranium (HEU) or Pu core reflected by natural uranium. COMET and PLANET are vertical lift assemblies, where one half of the reactor can be lifted to the upper half of the reactor to create a critical system. Some recent experiments include various critical intermediate energy assemblies with lead, and subcritical measurements of plutonium reflected by copper, tungsten, and nickel. Work is also underway to make a better measurement of the critical mass of neptunium, using a neptunium sphere surrounded by nickel shells. Additionally, measurements will be performed next year with HEU shells from Rocky Flats. These HEU shells will be stacked together to make larger systems, allowing for a large range of criticality (from subcritical to delayed critical). Other upcoming measurements include an HEU critical assembly sensitive to intermediate energy neutrons.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
DOE OSTI2020

A Conceptual Design for a Mobile Application to Support Infield Inventory Activities

This paper introduces an inventory assistant being developed at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) that we believe will empower users to perform inventory activities at nuclear facilities more accurately, reliably, and quickly. Inventory activities at nuclear facilities are often conducted using pen and paper, which can be time-consuming, tedious, and susceptible to reading or transcription errors. The proposed inventory assistant would replace the paper-based process used by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors, nuclear facility operators, or verification monitors to complete an inventory of nuclear and non-nuclear items. In general, the inventory assistant would ingest an inventory list, distribute assigned items from the inventory list to one or more mobile devices, enable inventory teams to record their observations in the field, and then enable an inventory lead to integrate and reconcile the observations to produce a final report. The assistant consists of two software components—one for the inventory teams to record observations in the field (In-Field Observations App [IFOA]) and one for the inventory lead to reconcile the inventory list with observations (Distribution, Integration, and Reconciliation Application [DIRA]). This paper introduces the overall workflow of the inventory assistant and describes the IFOA user experience in more detail. To demonstrate the concept, the authors present a use case of IAEA inspectors conducting item counting and tag checking activities of UF6 cylinders at a gas centrifuge enrichment plant with a large number of UF6 cylinders (e.g., thousands). These activities can currently require 30–40 person-days of inspection to complete. Based on experiences during an exercised performed at the IAEA by the ORNL team in 2016, we believe an inventory assistant could allow the IAEA to complete item counting and tag checking using the global identifier or the operator’s barcode in 8–10 person-days of inspection. We would expect other users (e.g., facility operators or verification monitors) to also benefit from significant time savings.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Domestic Extremism: Countering the Threat Posed to Critical Assets

Domestic extremism has been a growing concern in the United States in recent months, as illustrated in multiple bulletins from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) warning law enforcement partners of the heightened threat. As concerns about these actors grows, it is important that facilities in the U.S. and internationally that protect critical assets, such as sensitive information, hazardous materials, or critical infrastructure, have effective methods in place to secure those assets. DE has challenged security systems through the threat of insider attack and violence, creating a new threat to be countered in the Office of Radiological Security’s radiological source security mission. In this effort, we used a literature review and focus group discussions with experts in critical asset security and extremism to understand the nature of the domestic extremist threat, to identify best practices in securing assets, recognize potential gaps in security measures to be corrected, and recommend actions and next steps. Twenty-two subject matter experts participated in a series of five focus group sessions. Questions focused on definitions of domestic extremism, potential changes in the threat, best practices in securing facilities, assets, and personnel, and any perceived gaps. Upon completion of the focus groups, notes were analyzed thematically to identify any recurring patterns in the results. In addition, a review of academic, industry, and government literature was conducted to understand the threat, describe the process of radicalization to extremism, and to identify empirically informed practices in prevention and response. Results of this project demonstrated that further work is needed to define domestic extremism in law, regulation, and policy, to help the U.S. develop a consistent response to the threat within organizations. This is especially important, as SMEs emphasized the need for early intervention in prevention efforts, noting that organizations need clear guidance on when and how to intervene. In addition, the need for social media monitoring was discussed, although challenges remain to do so with appropriate respect for privacy and civil liberties concerns.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
DOE OSTI2025

Demonstration of active neutron interrogation of special nuclear materials using a high-intensity short-pulse-laser-driven neutron source

Detecting shielded special nuclear material, such as nuclear explosives, is a difficult challenge pursued by non-proliferation, anti-terrorism, and nuclear security programs worldwide. Interrogation with intense fast-neutron pulses is a promising method to characterize concealed nuclear material rapidly but is limited by suitable source availability and proven instrumentation. In this study we have pioneered a demonstration of such an interrogation method using a high-intensity, short-pulse, laser-driven neutron source that offers potential benefits compared to conventional neutron sources. The measurement results reported here represent the first experimental demonstration of this interrogation approach on enriched uranium items and demonstrate the feasibility of a precise measurement using realistic nuclear materials, representative of field scenarios, even with just a single laser-driven neutron pulse. Bright pulsed sources can overcome the nuisance background of items with strong internal neutron sources, improving analytical power, while single-shot assay is attractive in high-throughput situations where time is at a premium. The science and technology of this type of neutron production is developing rapidly, and we anticipate that practical mobile interrogation systems will become available based on the detection concepts demonstrated here to meet the growing measurement needs.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
DOE OSTI2023

Examining the potential for detecting simultaneous noble gas and aerosol samples in the international monitoring system radionuclide network

The purpose of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) is to establish a legally binding ban on nuclear weapon test explosions or any other nuclear explosions. The Preparatory Commission for the CTBT Organization (CTBTO PrepCom) is developing the International Monitoring System (IMS) that includes a global network of 80 stations to monitor for airborne radionuclides upon entry into force of the CTBT. All 80 radionuclide stations will monitor for particulate radionuclides and at least half of the stations will monitor for radioxenon. The airborne radionuclide monitoring is an important verification technology both for the detection of a radionuclide release and in the determination of whether the release event originates from a nuclear explosion as opposed to an industrial use of nuclear materials. Nuclear power plants and many medical isotope production facilities release radioxenon into the atmosphere. Low levels of a few particulate isotopes, such as iodine, may also be released. Detections of multiple isotopes are useful for screening the radionuclide samples for relevance to the Treaty. This paper examines the anticipated joint detections in the IMS of noble gas and particulate isotopes from underground nuclear explosions where breaches in the underground containment vents from low levels to up to 1% of the radionuclide inventory of the resulting fission products to the atmosphere. Detection probabilities are based on 844 simulated release events spaced out at 17 release locations and one year in time. Six different release (venting) scenarios, including two fractionated scenarios, were analyzed. When ranked by detection probability, 11 particulate isotopes and one noble gas isotope ( 133 Xe) appear in the top 20 isotopes for all six release scenarios. Using the 11 particulate isotopes and the one noble gas isotope, the IMS has nearly the same detection probability as when 45 particulate and 4 noble gas isotopes are used. Thus, a limited list of relevant radionuclides may be sufficient for treaty verification purposes. The probability that at least one particulate and at least one radioxenon isotope would be detected in the IMS from the release events ranged from 0.15 to 0.86 depending on the release scenario.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
DOE OSTI2022

Continuous-Energy ENDF/B-VIII.0 Cross Section and SCALE 6.2.4 Performance for Nuclear Criticality Safety Applications: 1 H, C, 58,60 Ni, 182,183,184,186 W, 235,238 U, 239 Pu

As part of the nuclear data evaluation and validation cycle, the ENDF/B-VIII.0 cross-section library released in 2018 requires testing to determine areas of improvement and deterioration. Previous work by the authors investigated the performance of 16 O, 56 Fe, and 63,65 Cu cross sections, with this study acting as an extension of the prior work. In addition to the isotopes and nuclear criticality safety benchmarks of interest to the prior work, benchmarks from the International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project Handbook were selected for their k eff sensitivity to 1 H, C, 58,60 Ni, 182,183,184,186 W, 235,238U, or 239 Pu cross sections and were modeled in the SCALE code system maintained by Oak Ridge National Laboratory. In total, 253 benchmark configurations were selected for their sensitivities and modeled using SCALE 6.2.4 Criticality Safety Analysis Sequences (CSAS) continuous-energy Monte Carlo k eff calculations. This collection includes and expands upon the 99 benchmarks in the prior work. The AMPX-processed ENDF/B-VIII.0 library was decomposed into individual ENDF/B-VIII.0 datum libraries for each isotope of interest. Doing so allowed for the individual substitution of an ENDF/B-VIII.0 cross section in the place of ENDF/B-VII.1, determining isotope-specific effects of ENDF/B-VIII.0 relative to ENDF/B-VII.1. Full library calculations with entirely ENDF/B-VII.1 data or entirely ENDF/B-VIII.0 data were also executed. As a measure of performance, the average relative deviation was determined as the ratio of the deviation between calculated and experimental keff to the propagated calculational and experimental uncertainty. With calculated full library and isotope-specific ENDF/B-VIII.0 k eff ’s, an optimized combination of data libraries was estimated and confirmed with SCALE calculations. This showed that reverting 239 Pu, 58 Ni, 16 O, and 65 Cu cross sections to ENDF/B-VII.1 resulted in improved performance relative to the full ENDF/B-VIII.0 library. Across all 253 benchmarks, the average relative deviation was 1.29σ for the full ENDF/B-VII.1 library, 1.17σ for the full ENDF/B-VIII.0 library, and 0.97σ for the optimized combination. The reversion of 239 Pu, 58 Ni, 16 O, and 65 Cu cross sections to ENDF/B-VII.1 in the 99 benchmarks of the prior work resulted in further improved experimental agreement compared to the previously reported improvement from 16 O and 65 Cu alone. Therefore, it is suggested that applications with significant sensitivities to 239 Pu, 58 Ni, 16 O, and 65 Cu consider their choice of nuclear data library.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
DOE OSTI2024

Comparison of source-location algorithms for atmospheric samplers

Numerous algorithms have been developed to determine the source characteristics for an atmospheric release, e.g., (Bieringer et al., 2017). This study compares three models that have been applied to the data collected by the International Monitoring System operated by the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Preparatory Commission to estimate source event parameters. Each model uses a different approach to estimate the parameters. A deterministic model uses a possible source region (PSR) approach (Ringbom et al., 2014) that is based on the correlation between predicted and measured sample values. An unnamed model developed at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (herein called BAYEST) uses a Bayesian formulation (Eslinger et al., 2019; Eslinger et al., 2020; Eslinger and Schrom, 2016). The FREAR model uses a different Bayesian formulation (De Meutter and Hoffman, 2020; De Meutter et al., 2021; Pieter De Meutter, 2021). The performance of the three source-location models is evaluated with 100 synthetic release cases for the single xenon isotope, 133 Xe. The release cases resulted in detections in a fictitious network with 120 noble gas samplers. All three source-location models use the same sampling data. The two Bayesian models yield more accurate location estimates than the deterministic PSR model, with FREAR having slightly better location performance than BAYEST. Samplers with collection periods of 3, 6, 8, 12, and 24-h were used. Results from BAYEST show that location accuracy improves with each reduction in sample collection length. The BAYEST model is slightly better for estimating the start time of the release. The PSR model has about the same spread in start times as the FREAR model, but the PSR results have a better average start time. The Bayesian source-location algorithms give more accurate results than the PSR approach, and provide release magnitude estimates, while the base PSR model does not estimate the release magnitude. This investigation demonstrates that a reasonably dense sampling grid will sometimes yield poor location and time estimates regardless of the model. The poor estimates generally coincide with cases where there is a much larger distance between the release point and the first detecting sampler than the average sampler spacing.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
DOE OSTI2025

Capability Building Progression of an Insider Threat Mitigation Program at an International Research Reactor

The nuclear industry recognizes the difficulties involved in developing effective managerial and leadership skills in a highly technical and proficient workforce such as that found in nuclear facilities. Implementing an insider threat mitigation program (ITMP) within the nuclear industry is a complex and ongoing process that demands a comprehensive understanding of human behavior, an organization’s security culture, and rigorous regulatory requirements yet also accounts for facility characteristics, physical security, material flow, and activities involving nuclear material. Given the high-consequence nature of research reactor operations, even minor lapses can lead to safety, security, and reputational risks. An effective ITMP requires a defense-in-depth approach that incorporates behavioral analysis, robust vetting procedures, continuous monitoring, and cross-disciplinary coordination. It must also promote a culture of vigilance and accountability at all levels up to and including executive leadership but be flexible enough to adapt to evolving global threats and technological advances. Insider threat mitigation is not a one-time effort but rather a sustained commitment to excellence in safety and security. Establishing a culture in which personnel proactively report incidents and issues that could affect nuclear safety and security is vital to maintaining a safe and secure operational environment. This document was developed to guide senior management and research reactor organizations in creating comprehensive programs to effectively manage and mitigate insider threat behaviors and actions. It focuses on the key pillars of an effective ITMP, including the national legal framework, security culture, preventive and protective measures, cyber security, and performance evaluation. By using a systematic approach during implementation, facilities can foster environments conducive to insider threat detection and support long-term program sustainability. The document also provides strategies for improving communication across all levels of an organization, helping to eliminate barriers that hinder the development of robust ITMPs and enhance overall security culture. In today’s organizations, the concept of leveraging safety and security culture lessons to facilitate knowledge transfer is rapidly evolving to expedite insider threat management and security culture improvements. This document outlines the rationale for evaluating an ITMP based on national customs, culture, and stakeholders. The elements are all germane to reliability and trustworthiness and relate to security concerns that states may encounter. The document focuses not only on individual perceptions regarding security issues and capability building but also on team building and how to resolve concerns. The implementers of a facility’s ITMP may zero in on indicators of insider threats within their enterprise. This material will benefit organizations when it is applied using a systematic and structured approach as demonstrated throughout the document.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
DOE OSTI2020

Technical Issues in the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) Ratification Debate: A 20 Year Retrospective

Two decades after the U.S. Senate declined in 1999 to give its consent to ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), the treaty remains in legal and political limbo. Legally, the treaty cannot enter into force without U.S. ratification. However, the Senate’s rejection does not strip the treaty of its force as an element of customary international law or alter the will of other signatories to see it enter into force. Politically, the debate over the virtues and flaws of the treaty remains as strong as ever, with some CTBT advocates pushing energetically for U.S. re-review while some opponents seek ways to “un-sign” the treaty. Meanwhile, despite the Senate’s rejection of the treaty, the United States acts in a manner consistent with its main obligations by maintaining a moratorium on explosive nuclear testing and providing financial support (as well as technical expertise) to the CTBT Organization (CTBTO)—in particular the CTBTO’s International Monitoring System (IMS). The CTBT may well remain in such limbo for a long time to come, unless some catalytic event comes along to re-shape national perceptions and priorities, one way or the other. The treaty’s future, whatever it might be, will be determined in part by how much perspectives might have changed in light of interim developments. Our purpose is to shed light on some of those developments and to assess their relevance. The 1999 ratification debate addressed a large number of issues. Rejection was driven by various policy and technical judgments. The purpose of this paper is to re-examine those technical judgments in light of what has been learned over the following two decades. On some technical matters, there was explicit recognition of extant uncertainties, as well as a conviction and hope that time would dispel them. To be doubly clear, our purpose is not to recommend a way forward on CTBT ratification. The policy judgments of 1999 and 2020 are beyond the scope of this paper. This technical re-examination proceeds as follows. It begins with a short background section to introduce the key technical matters in discussion in the U.S. ratification process. Then it moves systematically through each of those topics with a review of relevant background information, a discussion of key points in debate, an analysis of subsequent experience, and a current assessment. The historical analysis draws on many sources including the primary documents of the Congressional debate, the official article-by-article interpretation by the Department of State, and the statements of key players in the process. We also relied on key technical reports and publications by subject matter experts that have addressed in more detail many of the issues in our focus. These sources include the 2002 and 2012 reports of the National Academy of Sciences as well as publications by senior technical staff of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) who were actively involved in the ratification debate, including then-Laboratory Director Bruce Tarter. We also conducted several interviews with government officials from the 1990s, past laboratory directors, and other members of the scientific community. But, except where individuals are specifically cited by name, the judgments offered here are our own and should not be attributed to any other individual or to LLNL as such.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
DOE OSTI2022

Updated Economic Model for Estimation of GDP Losses in the MACCS Offsite Consequence Analysis Code RDEIM Model Report for MACCS v4.2

This report updates the Regional Disruption Economic Impact Model (RDEIM) GDP-based model described in Bixler et al. (2020) used in the MACCS accident consequence analysis code. MACCS is the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) used to perform probabilistic health and economic consequence assessments for atmospheric releases of radionuclides. It is also used by international organizations, both reactor owners and regulators. It is intended and most commonly used for hypothetical accidents that could potentially occur in the future rather than to evaluate past accidents or to provide emergency response during an ongoing accident. It is designed to support probabilistic risk and consequence analyses and is used by the NRC, U.S. nuclear licensees, the Department of Energy, and international vendors, licensees, and regulators. The update of the RDEIM model in version 4.2 expresses the national recovery calculation explicitly, rather than implicitly as in the previous version. The calculation of the total national GDP losses remains unchanged. However, anticipated gains from recovery are now allocated across all the GDP loss types – direct, indirect, and induced – whereas in version 4.1, all recovery gains were accounted for in the indirect loss type. To achieve this, we’ve introduced new methodology to streamline and simplify the calculation of all types of losses and recovery. In addition, RDEIM includes other kinds of losses, including tangible wealth. This includes loss of tangible assets (e.g., depreciation) and accident expenditures (e.g., decontamination). This document describes the updated RDEIM economic model and provides examples of loss and recovery calculation, results analysis, and presentation. Changes to the tangible cost calculation and accident expenditures are described in section 2.2. The updates to the RDEIM input-output (I-O) model are not expected to affect the final benchmark results Bixler et al. (2020), as the RDEIM calculation for the total national GDP losses remains unchanged. The reader is referred to the MACCS revision history for other cost modelling changes since version 4.0 that may affect the benchmark. RDEIM has its roots in a code developed by Sandia National Laboratories for the Department of Homeland Security to estimate short-term losses from natural and manmade accidents, called the Regional Economic Accounting analysis tool (REAcct). This model was adapted and modified for MACCS. It is based on I-O theory, which is widely used in economic modeling. It accounts for direct losses to a disrupted region affected by an accident, indirect losses to the national economy due to disruption of the supply chain, and induced losses from reduced spending by displaced workers. RDEIM differs from REAcct in in its treatment and estimation of indirect loss multipliers, elimination of double-counting associated with inter-industry trade in the affected area, and that it is intended to be used for extended periods that can occur from a major nuclear reactor accident, such as the one that occurred at the Fukushima Daiichi site in Japan. Most input-output models do not account for economic adaptation and recovery, and in this regard RDEIM differs from its parent, REAcct, because it allows for a user-definable national recovery period. Implementation of a recovery period was one of several recommendations made by an independent peer review panel to ensure that RDEIM is state-of-practice. For this and several other reasons, RDEIM differs from REAcct.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗