Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “NUCLEAR PROTECTION”

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.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

IAEA ITC28 Project Report. 28th International Training Course on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Materials and Nuclear Facilities

Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) has hosted the International Training Course on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Materials and Nuclear Facilities since 1978. This course is the flagship training course of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). On behalf of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), SNL manages, develops, and coordinates all course materials, and works closely with the IAEA to arrange all logistical details for the course. ITC-28 incorporated several new approaches based on feedback and experience with ITC-27 and earlier versions of the course. For ITC-28, an addition to the Integrated Security Facility (ISF) at SNL was a mock reactor hall with a mock reactor pool. Other facilities at the ISF include a mock processing facility, material receiving area, and central alarm station. The physical protection system at the ISF—an area that formerly housed Category I nuclear material—provides many opportunities for hands-on, real world training in the design and evaluation of a physical protection system (PPS). This document provides a brief description of ITC-28, including a summary of lessons learned and key recommendations for future development efforts.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2023

29 th International Training Course on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Materials and Nuclear Facilities (Project Summary)

Sandia National Laboratories (Sandia) has hosted the International Training Course on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Materials and Nuclear Facilities since 1978. This course is the flagship training course of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). On behalf of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), Sandia manages, develops, and coordinates all course materials, and works closely with the IAEA to arrange all logistical details for the course ITC-29 incorporated some updates to the facility models, based on feedback received in ITC-28 and the ITC-29 dry run. In addition, all the graphics were refreshed after ITC-28 and implemented in the posters, data handbooks, etc. As in ITC-28, the ITC-29 staff worked closely with the IAEA on course materials, including a peer review process to ensure all course materials were aligned with Nuclear Security Series No. 13 and other relevant international guidance documentation from the IAEA. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, ITC-29 was postponed twice and eventually took place in the late summer/early fall of 2022. Due to ongoing COVID-19 restrictions and safety requirements, the number of participants was reduced by about 31 percent from 59 participants in ITC-28 to 41 in ITC-29. As a result, the number of subgroups also decreased from eight in ITC-28 to six for ITC-29. This enabled the Sandia team to implement more opportunities for social distancing, particularly in the large classrooms. Despite the challenges, ITC-29 still passed a significant milestone, with the one-thousandth participant of the international training course attending during this event. Finally, the ITC staff continued the use of its improved method of evaluation to capture participants’ satisfaction with the updated course and to gather feedback concerning future improvements. This document provides a brief description of ITC-29, including a summary of lessons learned and key recommendations for future development efforts.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
DOE OSTI2021

A Risk-Informed Performance-Based Methodology to Manage Fire Protection Systems in Nuclear Facilities

Fire protection systems (FPSs) and features are installed in U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Hazard Category 1, 2, or 3 nuclear facilities to protect property (maximum possible fire loss thresholds), life, and nuclear safety (i.e., structures, systems, and components). These FPSs and features are designed and maintained in accordance with the prescriptive guidance provided in applicable building codes and National Fire Protection Association codes and standards. Management, operations, and maintenance activities of FPSs involve significant effort. A DOE facility’s documented safety analysis or other safety basis document could also rely on FPSs to provide either a safety significant or safety class function to mitigate fire hazards and minimize radiological consequences. In some cases, the designation of safety significant or safety class may be determined to provide a layer of defense-in-depth to minimize nuclear safety risks independent of the fire risk. DOE standards allow the use of performance-based design alternatives developed by the fire industry but do not consider the defense-in-depth layers of protection provided in DOE facilities to prevent or mitigate the risks associated with unintended release of radioactive materials into the environment. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory developed a decision-making methodology tailored for DOE non-reactor nuclear facilities to manage FPSs and features by integrating nuclear safety risk insights into a performance-based analysis. This risk-informed, performance-based (RIPB) methodology can be used to provide the technical basis for classifying an FPS as safety class and safety significant, tailoring administrative controls (e.g., technical safety requirements), and ranking the importance of FPSs to prioritize maintenance, upgrades, and replacement activities. The RIPB methodology is a graded approach to inform DOE facility owners and Fire Protection Program managers of the most risk-significant FPSs and equipment, and those systems would be cost-beneficial to relax rigor if there is a need to re-design the FPS coverage or deviate from DOE and National Fire Protection Association standards for those systems that would be less significant. This paper describes the framework used to develop the RIPB methodology and the outcome of implementing this methodology in a use-case nuclear facility. This paper also discusses the impact to DOE policies and standards and the safety margins and defense-in-depth measures credited in nuclear safety assessments in a facility’s documented safety analysis and the benefits of implementing an RIPB methodology in lieu of a prescriptive method to comply with fire protection requirements.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2015

25 th International Training Course (ITC-25) on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Facilities and Materials Evaluation Report

The goal of this evaluation report is to provide the information necessary to improve the effectiveness of the ITC provided to the International Atomic Energy Agency Member States. This report examines ITC-25 training content, delivery methods, scheduling, and logistics. Ultimately, this report evaluates whether the course provides the knowledge and skills necessary to meet the students’ needs in the protection of nuclear materials and facilities.

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

Light output quenching in response to deuterium-ions and alpha particles and pulse shape discrimination in deuterated trans-stilbene

We characterized the light output response of a new 140 cm 3 stilbene-d 12 crystal up to 14.1 MeV neutron energies using a coincidence neutron scattering system. We also characterized its light output response to alpha particles in the 5 to 6 MeV energy range. The excellent PSD capability of the stilbene-d 12 detector allowed us to select light pulses produced by particles of increasing ionization density, namely electrons, protons, deuterium-ions, and alpha particles. The measured fast decay component of the light pulses is increasingly quenched as the ionization density of the particle in the crystal increases. Consistently with this finding, the Birks’ quenching parameter of alpha particles is approximately 8.5 times larger compared to the quenching of deuterium ions, produced by neutron scattering interactions. The reported experimental characterization will allow high-fidelity modeling of the detector enabling its application for fast-neutron detection and spectroscopy in nuclear physics, radiation protection, nuclear security, and non-proliferation.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2018

Project Summary 27th International Training Course on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Materials and Nuclear Facilities

The course content consisted of 32 modules that included topics necessary to understand how to conduct PPS design and evaluation. An important aspect of ITC-27's training methodology was to ensure that each topic was presented via lecture (hear), and also included demonstrations (see) and hands-on field activities (do), whenever applicable. A final exercise provided participants with the opportunity to apply the design and evaluation knowledge gained during the course. Guest lecturers—both domestic and international—supplemented information from related agency perspectives. A new topic—Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS)—offered participants a high-level awareness of the types, uses, and capabilities of these systems and how they might be used in both an adversarial and protective capacity.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
DOE OSTI2021

Characterization of stilbene-d 12 for neutron spectroscopy without time of flight

In this work, we have experimentally characterized the light-output response of a deuterated trans-stilbene (stilbene-d 12 ) crystal to quasi-monoenergetic neutrons in the 0.8 to 4.4 MeV energy range. These data allowed us to perform neutron spectroscopy measurements of a DT 14.1 MeV source and a 239 PuBe source by unfolding the impinging neutron spectrum from the measured light-output response. The stilbene-d 12 outperforms a 1 H-stilbene of similar size when comparing the shape of the unfolded spectra and the reference ones. These results confirm the viability of non-hygroscopic stilbene-d 12 crystal for direct neutron spectroscopy without need for time-of-flight measurements. This capability makes stilbene-d 12 a well suited detector for fast-neutron spectroscopy in many applications including nuclear reaction studies, radiation protection, nuclear non-proliferation, and space travel.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
DOE OSTI2020

Counter Unmanned Aircraft System (CUAS) Implementation Storyline

This report is an FY21 Deliverable for NA-21.1, International Nuclear Security, WBS 21.1.1.1.4 Counter Unmanned Aircraft Systems (CUAS), under C.1.4, Develop Suite of Engagement Materials and Tools for Country/Regional Teams. The responsibility for protecting nuclear assets is an immense challenge for governments. Policy changes based on geopolitics, instability of government regimes, and technological advances that facilitate theft of nuclear material all contribute to the enduring task of staying current with these and other threats. One of the recent threats to come along is the use of drones or Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) to circumvent traditional Physical Security Systems. There are significant resources invested on physical protection systems for securing nuclear assets, but many of these systems can now be bypassed by simply flying over these measures intended to guard against ground attacks. In recent years the threat increased to hostile groups to attack or surveil due to advances and availability of UAS platforms. It is now more urgent to implement systems and procedures to counter the UAS threat. The United States (U.S.) federal government granted authority to the Department of Energy (DOE) to implement a Counter UAS to protect nuclear assets. This document provides a very practical and transparent view of the trials, tribulations and challenges we encountered while implementing the first Counter-Unmanned Aircraft System (CUAS) Program in the DOE at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL).

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

MCNP ® Code V.6.3.0 Release Notes

The Monte Carlo N-Particle ® (MCNP ® ) code is a general-purpose, continuous-energy, generalized geometry, time-dependent, radiation transport code developed by the MCNP development team. The MCNP calculations provide predictive capabilities that can replace expensive or impossible-to perform experiments. Specific application problems include simulations of experimental diagnostics, intrinsic radiation, radiation detection and measurement, criticality safety, nuclear threat reduction and response, radiation health protection, nuclear weapons effects, and nuclear forensics. This MCNP code, version 6.3.0, follows the MCNP6.2.0 version. Since the release of MCNP6.2.0, many changes have been made to the MCNP code. These changes include new or improved features, a new build system, code enhancement and modernization, and bug fixes. The MCNP code, version 6.3.0, theory and user input information is documented in MCNP ® Code Version 6.3.0 Theory & User Manual, the build guidance for various platforms is documented in MCNP ® Code Version 6.3.0 Build Guide, and the verification and validation testing for various application benchmark test suites is documented in MCNP ® Code Version 6.3.0 Verification & Validation Testing.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2025

MCNP® Code Version 6.3.1 Release Notes

The Monte Carlo N-Particle® (MCNP® ) code is a general-purpose, continuous-energy, generalized-geometry, time-dependent, radiation transport code developed by the MCNP development team. MCNP calculations provide predictive capabilities that can replace expensive or impossible-to-perform experiments. Specific application problems include simulations of experimental diagnostics, intrinsic radiation, radiation detection and measurement, criticality safety, nuclear threat reduction and response, radiation health protection, nuclear weapons effects, and nuclear forensics. This MCNP code, version 6.3.1, follows the MCNP6.3.0 version. Since the release of MCNP6.3.0, a variety of bug fixes and code enhancements have been completed for MCNP6.3.1. A few new features have also been added to this release to support both ongoing research and the release of the latest ENDF/B-VIII.1 nuclear data library. The MCNP code, version 6.3.1, theory and user input information is documented in MCNP® Code Version 6.3.1 Theory & User Manual, the build guidance for various platforms is documented in MCNP® Code Version 6.3.1 Build Guide, and the verification and validation testing for various application benchmark test suites is documented in MCNP® Code Version 6.3.1 Verification & Validation Testing.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2020

INTEGRATION OF FLEX EQUIPMENT AND OPERATOR ACTIONS IN PLANT FORCE-ON-FORCE MODELS WITH DYNAMIC RISK ASSESSMENT

The overall operation and maintenance cost to protect nuclear power plants accounts for approximately 7% of the total cost of power generation, with labor accounting for half of this cost. In the current research, from interaction with utilities and other stakeholders, it was determined that physical security forces account for nearly 20% of the entire workforce at several nuclear power plants. Labor costs continue to rise in the U.S., so any measures to reduce the cost of operating a nuclear power plant will need to include a reduction in labor. The physical security pathway within the DOE’s Light Water Reactor Sustainability program aims to lower the cost of physical security through directed research into modeling and simulation, application of advanced sensors or deployment of advanced weapons. This report presents a modeling and simulation framework for integrating Diverse and Flexible Mitigation Capability (FLEX) portable equipment performance with Force on Force models of a plant’s physical security posture. The generic framework is described in detail, followed by a case study of modeling an adversarial attack aimed at causing a radiological release by sabotaging the plant’s power supply and its ultimate heat sink capabilities at a hypothetical nuclear power plant. Two different FLEX deployment strategies, series and parallel, are modeled with distinct timelines. The results of the adversarial attack modeled in a commercial Force on Force tool are integrated with the FLEX deployment model in INL’s dynamic modeling tool EMRALD. Monte Carlo simulation is used to model the distribution of the timeline in FLEX deployment strategies. The results demonstrate that, even in the extreme case of a successful adversarial attack, deployment of FLEX equipment can result in a significantly high likelihood of preventing radiological release. The modeling and simulation framework integrating FLEX equipment with Force on Force models enables the nuclear power plants to credit FLEX portable equipment in the plant security posture, resulting in an efficient and optimized physical security.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2017

Nuclear safety regulation in the post-Fukushima era

The March 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident prompted regulators around the world to take a hard look at their requirements for protecting nuclear plants against severe accidents. In the United States, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) ordered a “top-to-bottom” review of its regulations, and ultimately approved a number of safety upgrades. It rejected other risk-reduction measures, however, using a screening process that did not adequately account for impacts of large-scale land contamination events. Among rejected options was a measure to end dense packing of 90 spent fuel pools, which we consider critical for avoiding a potential catastrophe much greater than Fukushima. Unless the NRC improves its approach to assessing risks and benefits of safety improvements—by using more realistic parameters in its quantitative assessments and also taking into account societal impacts—the United States will remain needlessly vulnerable to such disasters.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗