Assessing the Proliferation Resistance of Innovative Nuclear Fuel Cycles

The National Nuclear Security Administration is developing methods for nonproliferation assessments to support the development and implementation of U.S. nonproliferation policy. This paper summarizes the key results of that effort. Proliferation resistance is the degree of difficulty that a nuclear material, facility, process, or activity poses to the acquisition of one or more nuclear weapons. A top-level measure of proliferation resistance for a fuel cycle system is developed here from a hierarchy of metrics. At the lowest level, intrinsic and extrinsic barriers to proliferation are defined. These barriers are recommended as a means to characterize the proliferation characteristics of a fuel cycle. Because of the complexity of nonproliferation assessments, the problem is decomposed into: metrics to be computed, barriers to proliferation, and a finite set of threats. The spectrum of potential threats of nuclear proliferation is complex and ranges from small terrorist cells to industrialized countries with advanced nuclear fuel cycles. Two general categories of methods have historically been used for nonproliferation assessments: attribute analysis and scenario analysis. In the former, attributes of the systems being evaluated (often fuel cycle systems) are identified that affect their proliferation potential. For a particular system under consideration, the attributes are weighted subjectively. In scenario analysis, hypothesized scenarios of pathways to proliferation are examined. The analyst models the process undertaken by the proliferant to overcome barriers to proliferation and estimates the likelihood of success in achieving a proliferation objective. An attribute analysis approach should be used at the conceptual design level in the selection of fuel cycles that will receive significant investment for development. In the development of a detailed facility design, a scenario approach should be undertaken to reduce the potential for design vulnerabilities. While, there are distinctive elements in each approach, an analysis could be performed that utilizes aspects of each approach

Radiological accidents potentially important to human health risk in the U.S. Department of Energy waste management program

Human health risks as a consequence of potential radiological releases resulting from plausible accident scenarios constitute an important consideration in the US Department of Energy (DOE) national program to manage the treatment, storage, and disposal of wastes. As part of this program, the Office of Environmental Management (EM) is currently preparing a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) that evaluates the risks that could result from managing five different waste types. This paper (1) briefly reviews the overall approach used to assess process and facility accidents for the EM PEIS; (2) summarizes the key inventory, storage, and treatment characteristics of the various DOE waste types important to the selection of accidents; (3) discusses in detail the key assumptions in modeling risk-dominant accidents; and (4) relates comparative source term results and sensitivities

Accident analysis for transuranic waste management alternatives in the U.S. Department of Energy waste management program

Preliminary accident analyses and radiological source term evaluations have been conducted for transuranic waste (TRUW) as part of the US Department of Energy (DOE) effort to manage storage, treatment, and disposal of radioactive wastes at its various sites. The approach to assessing radiological releases from facility accidents was developed in support of the Office of Environmental Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (EM PEIS). The methodology developed in this work is in accordance with the latest DOE guidelines, which consider the spectrum of possible accident scenarios in the implementation of various actions evaluated in an EIS. The radiological releases from potential risk-dominant accidents in storage and treatment facilities considered in the EM PEIS TRUW alternatives are described in this paper. The results show that significant releases can be predicted for only the most severe and extremely improbable accidents sequences

Evaluation Methodology For Proliferation Resistance And Physical Protection Of Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems: An Overview

This paper provides an overview of the methodology approach developed by the Generation IV International Forum Expert Group on Proliferation Resistance & Physical Protection for evaluation of Proliferation Resistance and Physical Protection robustness of Generation IV nuclear energy systems options. The methodology considers a set of alternative systems and evaluates their resistance or robustness to a collection of potential threats. For the challenges considered, the response of the system to these challenges is assessed and expressed in terms of outcomes. The challenges to the system are given by the threats posed by potential proliferant States and sub-national adversaries on the nuclear systems. The characteristics of the Generation IV systems, both technical and institutional, are used to evaluate their response to the threats and determine their resistance against the proliferation threats and robustness against sabotage and theft threats. System response encompasses three main elements: 1.System Element Identification. The nuclear energy system is decomposed into smaller elements (subsystems) at a level amenable to further analysis. 2.Target Identification and Categorization. A systematic process is used to identify and select representative targets for different categories of pathways, within each system element, that actors (proliferant States or adversaries) might choose to use or attack. 3.Pathway Identification and Refinement. Pathways are defined as potential sequences of events and actions followed by the proliferant State or adversary to achieve its objectives (proliferation, theft or sabotage). For each target, individual pathway segments are developed through a systematic process, analyzed at a high level, and screened where possible. Segments are connected into full pathways and analyzed in detail. The outcomes of the system response are expressed in terms of PR&PP measures. Measures are high-level characteristics of a pathway that include information important to the evaluation methodology users and to the decisions of a proliferant State or adversary. They are first evaluated for segments and then aggregated for complete pathways. Results are aggregated as appropriate to permit pathway comparisons and system assessment. The paper highlights the current achievements in the development of the Proliferation Resistance and Physical Protection Evaluation Methodology. The way forward is also briefly presented together with some conclusions

Development of a Methodology to Assess Proliferation Resistance and Physical Protection for Generation IV Systems

Enhanced proliferation resistance and physical protection (PR&PP) is one of the technology goals for advanced nuclear concepts, such as Generation IV systems. Under the auspices of the Generation IV International Forum, the Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology of the U.S. DOE, the Office of Nonproliferation Policy of the National Nuclear Security Administration, and participating organizations from six other countries are sponsoring an international working group to develop an evaluation methodology for PR&PP. This methodology will permit an objective PR&PP comparison between alternative nuclear systems (e.g., different reactor types or fuel cycles) and support design optimization to enhance robustness against proliferation, theft and sabotage. The paper summarizes the proposed assessment methodology including the assessment framework, measures used to express the PR&PP characteristics of the system, threat definition, system element and target identification, pathway identification and analysis, and estimation of the measures

Analysis of accident sequences and source terms at treatment and storage facilities for waste generated by US Department of Energy waste management operations

This report documents the methodology, computational framework, and results of facility accident analyses performed for the US Department of Energy (DOE) Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (WM PEIS). The accident sequences potentially important to human health risk are specified, their frequencies assessed, and the resultant radiological and chemical source terms evaluated. A personal-computer-based computational framework and database have been developed that provide these results as input to the WM PEIS for the calculation of human health risk impacts. The WM PEIS addresses management of five waste streams in the DOE complex: low-level waste (LLW), hazardous waste (HW), high-level waste (HLW), low-level mixed waste (LLMW), and transuranic waste (TRUW). Currently projected waste generation rates, storage inventories, and treatment process throughputs have been calculated for each of the waste streams. This report summarizes the accident analyses and aggregates the key results for each of the waste streams. Source terms are estimated, and results are presented for each of the major DOE sites and facilities by WM PEIS alternative for each waste stream. Key assumptions in the development of the source terms are identified. The appendices identify the potential atmospheric release of each toxic chemical or radionuclide for each accident scenario studied. They also discuss specific accident analysis data and guidance used or consulted in this report

Analysis of accident sequences and source terms at waste treatment and storage facilities for waste generated by USDOE Waste Management Operations: Volume 2, Appendixes A and B

This volume comprises two appendixes: Chemical source terms for low-level mixed waste accidents, and radionuclide releases from facility accidents (HLW, LLW, LLMW(alpha and nonalpha))