Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “National Nuclear Security Administration”

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 307 records · Page 17

Strategic Analyses and Assessments Office Annual Report 2023

The past year has seen a significant increase in focus on strategic issues with the continued aggression by Russia, the rapid expansion of China’s military—particularly their nuclear capabilities, North Korea’s rapid improvements in intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) technology, and the increase in Iranian fuel enrichment. The U.S. continues to modernize Nuclear Command Control and Communication and all three legs of its nuclear Triad—Columbia-class submarines, Sentinel ICBMs, and B-21 bombers—for the Department of Defense (DOD). At the same time, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) is updating its stockpile, producing the B61-12, the new B61-13, the W88 Alteration, the W87-1—with new pits, and the W80-4. This rework of the nuclear enterprise represents the most aggressive expansion of our capabilities and infrastructure in the modern era. At the same time, the Strategic Posture Commission completed its report to Congress and reported that the current modernization program, although clearly necessary, is insufficient to meet the threats that are emerging.

45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEF↗

Reassessment of PHDS Fulcrum40h High Purity Germanium (HPGe) Detector System Performance

This report presents a comprehensive evaluation of the updated PHDS Fulcrum40h High Purity Germanium (HPGe) detector system, benchmarking its performance, usability, and software capabilities against the current National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Nuclear Emergency Support Team (NEST) HPGe Detector System Requirements Document. Systematic measurements were conducted using a single Fulcrum40h detector to assess key parameters including gamma efficiency and resolution, neutron detection efficiency, gamma pulse-pileup response, and gamma-to-neutron crosstalk. The Fulcrum40h system, acquired in August 2022, has undergone recent updates by PHDS to address deficiencies identified following the initial NEST requirements release. The results provide critical insights into the detector’s operational capabilities and compliance with NNSA NEST standards.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗

Knowledge Transfer Program for International Nuclear Safeguards

Nuclear safeguards were first announced in 1945 by the U.S., Canadian and British governments as a means to exchange scientific information about peaceful uses of atomic energy and prevent the use of nuclear material for weapons. International nuclear safeguards, now under the provision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), serves to hold accountable the 140 member countries (States) that have entered into treaties and agreements against the spread of nuclear weapons. Most notably, the IAEA acts as a nuclear materials inspectorate under the global Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, brought about in 1968, that specifies commitments member States make to the world?s non-proliferation regime. The Office of International Nuclear Safeguards (OINS) is part of the National Nuclear Security Administration, a semi-autonomous agency within the U.S. Department of Energy. Within OINS, the Human Capital Development program recognizes the need to build workforce capacity and safeguards expertise. This includes supporting the education and training of younger generations working in international nuclear safeguards. One of the program?s main concerns is core competencies being lost to retirement or attrition and building knowledge retention pipelines from senior to new professionals. One identified core competency is knowledge gained by individuals who have completed IAEA assignments such as missions to member States to conduct safeguards inspections. Such individuals possess unique knowledge, and efforts are being put forth to effectively capture this knowledge within the national laboratories complex. To this end, we report findings from a one-year mentor-mentee knowledge retention program in which an international safeguards subject matter expert imparted knowledge and skills to a willing professional mentee. The knowledge and skills stem from the mentor?s multi-year assignment at the IAEA in Vienna, Austria.

98 - NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL↗

Model America: Data and Models for every U.S. Building

The 5-year goal of the “Model America” concept was to generate a model of every building in the United States. This data repository delivers on that goal with "Model America v1". Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) has developed the Automatic Building Energy Modeling (AutoBEM) software suite to process multiple types of data, extract building-specific descriptors, generate building energy models, and simulate them on High Performance Computing (HPC) resources. For more information, see AutoBEM-related publications (bit.ly/AutoBEM). There were 125,715,609 buildings detected in the United States. Of this number, 122,146,671 (97.2%) buildings resulted in a successful generation and simulation of a building energy model. This dataset includes the full 125 million buildings. Future updates may include additional buildings, data improvements, or other algorithmic model enhancements in "Model America v2". This dataset contains OSM and IDF zip files for every U.S. county. Each zip file contains the generated buildings from that county. The .csv input data contains the following data fields: 1. ID - the Unique Building Identifier (UBID), generated using the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) BuildingID framework 2. Centroid - building center location in latitude/longitude (from Footprint2D) 3. Footprint2D - building polygon of 2D footprint (lat1/lon1_lat2/lon2_...) 4. State_abbr - state name 5. Area - estimate of total conditioned floor area (ft2) 6. Area2D - footprint area (ft2) 7. Height - building height (ft) 8. NumFloors - number of floors (above-grade) 9. WWR_surfaces - percent of each facade (pair of points from Footprint2D) covered by fenestration/windows (average 14.5% for residential, 40% for commercial buildings) 10. CZ - ASHRAE Climate Zone designation 11. BuildingType - DOE prototype building designation (IECC=residential) as implemented by OpenStudio-standards 12. Standard - building vintage This data is made free and openly available in hopes of stimulating any simulation-informed use case. Data is provided as-is with no warranties, express or implied, regarding fitness for a particular purpose. We wish to thank our sponsors which include Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD), U.S. Dept. of Energy’s (DOE) Building Technologies Office (BTO), Office of Electricity (OE), Biological and Environmental Research (BER), and National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). Update (September 23, 2025): We corrected the ID field in all state-level.csv input files to ensure one-to-one consistency with the corresponding .osm and .idf output files. The schema and file structure are unchanged; only the values in the ID column were modified. No files were added or removed, and the .zip bundles (containing .osm / .idf) are unchanged. The corrected .csv inputs were re-extracted in March 2025 from the original data generated ~ 2021 (Theta supercomputer runs), and published here to align input IDs with model outputs. Update (September 6, 2026): The Model America dataset was updated to replace the previous building ID field with the Unique Building Identifier (UBID), using the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) BuildingID framework. UBIDs provide standardized, location-based identifiers for individual building footprints and improve interoperability with other building and geospatial datasets. The data files containing the previous building identifiers were updated to include UBIDs. This update standardizes building identification; the underlying Model America building characteristics and energy simulation results were not recomputed as part of this update.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

2018 LDRD Annual Report (Argonne National Laboratory)

Argonne National Laboratory’s Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) program encourages the development of novel technical concepts, enhances the Laboratory’s research and development (R&D) capabilities, and enables pursuit of strategic laboratory goals. Argonne’s LDRD projects are proposal based and peer reviewed, supporting ideas that require advanced exploration so they can be sufficiently developed to pursue support through normal programmatic channels. Among the aims of the projects supported by the LDRD program are the establishment of engineering proofs of principle, assessment of design feasibility for prospective facilities, development of instrumentation or computational methods or systems, and discoveries in fundamental science and exploratory development. All LDRD projects have demonstrable ties to one or more of the science, energy, environment, and national security missions of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and its National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), and many are also relevant to the missions of other federal agencies that sponsor work at Argonne. A natural consequence of the more “applied” type projects is their concurrent relevance to industry. The LDRD program is managed in overarching portfolios, each containing multiple projects each fiscal year. The LDRD Prime portfolio is further divided into strategic focus areas aligned with Argonne’s strategic plan. The largest component of Argonne’s program is LDRD Prime, which emphasizes R&D explicitly aligned with Laboratory major initiatives in support of Argonne’s strategic plan. The choice of Focus Areas under the LDRD Prime component reflects the major initiatives; the state of development of relevant technical fields; the potential value of advancing those fields to DOE/NNSA and the nation; and the compatibility of the fields with existing facilities, capabilities, and staff expertise at Argonne. Focus Areas with projects that ended in FY18 are: Advanced Computing, Biological and Environmental Science Capability Development, Energy Manufacturing Science and Engineering, Hard X-ray Sciences, Materials and Chemistry, Securing Energy and Critical Resources, and The Universe as Our Laboratory (ULab).

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

Model America - data and models of every U.S. building

The 5-year goal of the 'Model America' concept was to generate a model of every building in the United States. This data repository delivers on that goal. Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) has developed the Automatic Building Energy Modeling (AutoBEM) software suite to process multiple types of data, extract building-specific descriptors, generate building energy models, and simulate them on High Performance Computing (HPC) resources. For more information, see AutoBEM-related publications (bit.ly/AutoBEM). There were 125,714,640 buildings detected in the United States and this dataset contains 122,930,327 (97.8%) buildings which resulted in a successful simulation. Future, annual updates have been proposed that may include additional buildings, data improvements, or other algorithmic enhancements. This dataset of 122.9 million buildings includes: Models (state_county.zip) - OpenStudio (v3.1.0) and EnergyPlus (v9.4) building energy models. Please note that the download requires the free Globus Connect Personal (https://www.globus.org/globus-connect-personal); Each model has approximately 3,000 building input descriptors that can be extracted. Please see the EnergyPlus(v9.4) 2,784-page Input/Output Reference Guide (https://energyplus.net/sites/all/modules/custom/nrel_custom/pdfs/pdfs_v9.4.0/InputOutputReference.pdf) for everything that can be retrieved or simulated from these models. These models were derived from the following metadata, which is not included in this dataset: 1. ID - unique building ID 2. County - county name 3. State - state name 4. CZ - ASHRAE Climate Zone designation 5. Clim_Zone - text label of climate zone 6. est_year - estimated year of construction 7. est_commercial - estimated building type (0=residential, 1=commercial) 8. Centroid - building center location in latitude/longitude (from Footprint2D) 9. Footprint2D - building polygon of 2D footprint (lat1/lon1_lat2/lon2_...) 10. Height - building height (meters) 11. Area2D - footprint area (ft2) 12. BuildingType - DOE prototype building designation (IECC=residential) as implemented by OpenStudio-standards 13. WWR_surfaces - percent of each facade (pair of points from Footprint2D) covered by fenestration/windows (average 14.5% for residential, 40% for commercial buildings) 14. NumFloors - number of floors (above-grade) 15. Area - estimate of total conditioned floor area (ft2) 16. Standard - building vintage. These models are made free and openly available in hopes of stimulating any simulation-informed use case. Data is provided as-is with no warranties, express or implied, regarding fitness for a particular purpose. We wish to thank our sponsors which include Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD), U.S. Dept. of Energy's (DOE) Building Technologies Office (BTO), Office of Electricity (OE), Biological and Environmental Research (BER), and National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). This research used resources of the Argonne Leadership Computing Facility, which is a DOE Office of Science User Facility supported under Contract DE-AC02-06CH11357. Please cite as: New, Joshua R., Adams, Mark, Bass, Brett, Berres, Anne, and Clinton, Nicholas (2021). 'Model America - data and models of every U.S. building. [Data set].' Constellation, doi.ccs.ornl.gov/ui/doi/339, April 14, 2021

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

C136A and C138A Report of Analysis

In this work the isotopic ratios and weight percentages of 238 Pu, 239 Pu, 240 Pu, 241 Pu and 242 Pu were determined using Isotope Dilution Mass Spectrometry. Two samples of C136A and C138A were sent to the Analytical Research laboratories by the National Nuclear Security Administration Nuclear Reference Material Program. The four samples were dissolved in concentrated hydrochloric acid. From the parent solutions, eight aliquots were taken, diluted, spiked with 244 Pu and submitted to separations. After the samples were separated, they were analyzed using Multicollector Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry. Along with the samples, two C126A Quality Control Samples were analyzed each day. Mass bias standards were also analyzed at the beginning, during and at the end of the analysis. GUM Workbench Pro software Version 2.4.1.406 was used to calculate the isotopic ratios relative to 239 Pu, and total Pu mass and the correlated expanded uncertainties.

37 - INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL AND ANALYTICAL C↗

Expedited Walkdowns and Preparation of Cost Estimates for Decontamination and Demolition of Excess Facilities - 20335

Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC (LLNS) is the prime contractor responsible for managing and operating Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). The mission of the LLNL is to strengthen security of the United States through development and application of world-class science and technology to enhance the nation's defense, reduce the global threat from terrorism and weapons of mass destruction, and respond with vision, quality, integrity, and technical excellence to scientific issues of national importance. To accomplish its mission, LLNL must plan and manage its campus space and facilities to optimize use of its relatively small one-square-mile footprint. LLNL currently has numerous excess facilities that require decontamination and demolition (D and D). The LLNL Legacy Facility Program is responsible for stewardship and risk reduction programs to effectively manage these excess assets at LLNL. The Legacy Facility Program identified 10 excess facilities at LLNL that were candidates for demolition based on risks from further degradation of the facilities, potential exposure to hazardous materials, or need for removal to make way for new program facilities. The buildings range from a structure built in 1943 to serve as a US Navy drill hall during World War II, to a facility that provided neutrons to study material properties for the fusion energy program. The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) appropriated FY19 funding for the development of Class 3 estimates for these 10 excess facilities that would be used to develop a Program Management Plan for funding consideration. Class 3 estimates are not conceptual, nor overly detailed, but adequate to be used for budget and appropriation purposes. Using existing strategic sourcing agreements, LLNL was able to organize a team of senior subject matter experts (SMEs) with diverse technical backgrounds across the Department of Energy (DOE) Complex to complete extensive process knowledge (PK) reviews and walk-downs of each excess facility and to deliver accurate and complete estimates under an expedited schedule (i.e., within eight weeks). To facilitate the expedited schedule, LLNL was fully prepared for the arrival of the JGMS team, which consisted of the following companies: J.G. Management Systems, Inc. (JGMS); Strata-G, LLC; and Michael Baker International. LLNL provided background and PK information on the excess facilities, pictures, supporting historical documentation, and radiological survey history as well as escorted access to the facilities. The JGMS team has previous experience supporting Program Management Plans for excess facilities at the Y-12 National Security Complex. The team mobilized to LLNL and performed the facility walk-downs from January 22-25, 2019. Using a methodical evaluation process, expertise, and experience, the team was able to deliver walk-down draft reports and estimates to LLNL before their February 8, 2019 deadline. LLNL then in turn reviewed, completed the estimates by adding waste management costs and other LLNL costs, and delivered the estimates to NNSA by February 15, 2019. The completed final reports, including draft D and D estimates, were delivered to LLNL before their March 6, 2019 deadline. The work was successfully completed ahead of the expedited schedule required by LLNL, resulting in a commendation from the client. This paper describes how the partnership and collaboration as a fully integrated team comprised of the prime contractor, LLNS, and the JGMS team successfully met the needs of the US government, resulting in the performance of expedited site walk-downs, the development of summary evaluation reports, and the preparation of draft Class 3 estimates and preliminary schedules for the D and D of 10 excess facilities at LLNL. The efforts of the team will enable the D and D of the first excess facility in the 2020-2021 time frame. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

White Rock Canyon Riparian Monitoring

Land and natural resources within the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) complex are owned and managed by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). The Laboratory’s eastern boundary is in White Rock Canyon (WRC) along the Rio Grande within Technical Areas (TAs) 70 and 33, with approximately 4 miles of property along the river (Figure 1). In 1999, the riparian corridor from the mesa tops down to the river was designated as the White Rock Canyon Reserve by former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson and is recreationally open to the public (DOE 1999). This area provides viable foraging and stopover habitat for many species of wildlife, including the Yellow-billed Cuckoo and the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher, both of which are federally listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

LLM Generation of Online Courses from a Curated Set of Documents in the Nuclear Safeguards Domain

A multidisciplinary team at Argonne National Laboratory explores the application of advanced technologies to enhance knowledge transfer and retention within the nuclear safeguards domain. Specifically, it examines the feasibility of leveraging secure large language models (LLMs) to streamline the creation of e-learning modules for the U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Office of International Nuclear Safeguards (NA-241). The initiative addresses the critical need for preserving institutional memory and accelerating skill development amidst the imminent retirement of senior professionals in the field in addition to supporting good knowledge management practices. The project integrates instructional design theory with cutting-edge AI technologies to transform curated document sets from the Safeguards Knowledge Repository (SKR) into modular online courses. By automating the generation of learning objectives and instructional content, the effort aims to reduce manual effort while maintaining high-quality educational outcomes. A limited measure of human supervision, however, ensures accuracy, relevance, and alignment with NNSA’s strategic priorities. Key findings highlight the potential of AI-assisted course generation to support safeguards professionals by creating structured, interactive learning experiences. The report underscores the importance of SME validation to address limitations in AI-generated content, such as terminology errors and gaps in coverage. Recommendations include adopting a structured workflow combining LLM acceleration with expert oversight to ensure accuracy, usability, and alignment with learner needs. This work demonstrates Argonne’s commitment to advancing national security and scientific excellence through innovative knowledge management solutions.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗

PUFFIn Software Modeling for Quality Management

PUFFIn (PENELOPE User Friendly Fast Interface) was designed as a fast and simple Monte Carlo simulation tool for the transport of photons and electrons, with a primary purpose as a learning and education tool for a broad range of static configurations in the radiation processing industry. Development of the PUFFIn software is funded by the Office of Radiological Security (ORS) within the United States National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). PUFFIn helps fill the education and knowledge gaps in the industry, as identified in reports by Fermilab (2017) and the IAEA (2020). PUFFIn uses the PENELOPE (NEA-2023) physics engine to perform simulations on static configurations. PUFFIn has support for multiple geometry types from simple, single material simulations to full 3D configurations created from CAD input files or images from X-Ray Tomography scans. PUFFin was designed to be easy for the novice user, it will generate the input and geometry files required by PENLOPE and will display the output plots within the PUFFIn interface. PUFFin is distributed for free but requires a free workshop so users can be adequately trained in its use. Workshops have been presented in the past at Texas A&M university, the Aerial-CRT facility in Strasbourg France and Jakarta Indonesia. PUFFIn simulations have been validated by 10 MeV ebeam experiments done at Aerial-CRT in France (Radiation Physics and Chemistry 222 (2024) 111774). Further user experimental comparisons were made at the medical product hands on workshop at Texas A&M in October 2024.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE Challenges and Opportunities Associated with Accountable Nuclear Material Needs for Development and Commercialization of Fusion Nuclear Energy

Fusion energy represents a transformative opportunity to deliver a safe, plentiful, and carbon-free source of reliable primary power. In recent years, fusion research and development have accelerated significantly, particularly within the US, driven by decades of foundational public investment. Notably, in 2024 the US Department of Energy (DOE) established a comprehensive Fusion Energy Strategy aimed at collaborating with industry partners to enable the deployment of fusion power plants and grid integration by the 2030s. This strategy is chiefly implemented through the DOE Office of Science (SC) Fusion Energy Sciences program. This project was initiated to identify potential approaches for the Office of Environment, Safety, and Health (NA-ESH-12) within DOE’s National Nuclear Security Administration to begin engagement with the fusion community on future accountable material needs. The goal of the project is to inform and influence the supply of and demand for accountable nuclear materials as fusion energy is developed and commercialized. NA-ESH-12 must proactively engage with the fusion community regarding the production and management of accountable nuclear materials. Given the complexity and scale of materials required for research, pilot projects, and eventual commercial reactors, early coordination is vital. The project’s objective is to provide insights that will shape the supply and demand landscape for critical nuclear materials, ensuring that DOE is prepared to effectively support fusion energy development and commercialization. In FY 2025, an initial limited review was conducted to identify the status of the fusion energy community’s progress toward full-scale energy production and the need for accountable nuclear material. This included communications with SC, NA-ESH-12, Savannah River National Laboratory, and Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and attending the Rutgers University–sponsored Supply Chain Workshop: Scaling the Fusion Industry and the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Ninth DEMO Programme Workshop. The review to date indicates that the amounts of tritium, lithium-6, and deuterium required by the fusion industry will be dependent on fuel type, breeding technology, blankets, and R&D improvements. One concern is that the commercial sector does not have a sufficient supply chain to meet the demand for development and commercialization for fusion energy production. The supply and demand estimates for these materials should be routinely reviewed as fusion technologies mature.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗

UAS IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS FOR NUCLEAR SECURITY

Uncrewed aerial systems (UAS) have been an area of focus for the Office of International Nuclear Security within the US Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration and other foreign and domestic organizations for several years. This emerging technology provides significant capabilities to the nuclear security realm, but there are many things to consider when implementing them into an established security design or network. The goal of this paper is to discuss some of the benefits, challenges, and lessons learned with using UAS at nuclear facilities and during transport of material. Generic examples of UAS implementation will be used to facilitate a publicly releasable paper and presentation. The paper will start with a summary of the types and capabilities of UAS to provide a better understanding for people unfamiliar with current and new capabilities of these systems. Since there are many different types and sizes of UAS, this paper will focus on drones 55 lb and smaller. Then some of the use cases of UAS for security and challenges of employing them will be covered. Finally, lessons learned and some best practices that Oak Ridge National Laboratory has discovered from research, development, testing, and evaluation will be summarized.

Stockwell, Brandon↗

Safeguards by Design Projects (FY2020 Final Report)

This University Engagement project challenged engineering students at universities, that do not have Bachelor degrees in nuclear engineering but do have research reactors and some nuclear engineering coursework, to incorporate Safeguards by Design concepts into their Senior Capstone Design Project. This University Engagement project was part of the U. S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), Office of Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation, Office of International Nuclear Safeguards, Next Generation Safeguards Initiative, Human Capital Development: University Engagement Program. This program exposed university students with Mechanical Engineering majors and Nuclear Engineering minors to the concepts of international nuclear safeguards. FY20, three teams at the University of Rhode Island and one team at the University of Texas - Austin participated in researching, designing, building, and testing projects to support international nuclear safeguards measurements or verification. The projects involved engaging in activities at the university’s research reactors. All the projects engaged students with prototyping a design and/or tool for application at the Universities’ reactor. At the end of the course, most of the students expressed the experience was a positive and they learned more about international nuclear safeguards and applying requirements than they had previously encountered. This school year the projects were further complicated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Both universities cancelled in class room classes, and limited direct student/professor interactions. Furthermore, Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) greatly restricted travel, therefore making it impossible to visit the students at the end of the semester for the review of their design projects. The final design and review meeting for the projects happened via the internet. Additionally, while the teams planned to build prototypes this did not happen since there was a social distancing ban on students meeting in person.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

Women as a Force Multiplier for Bringing Nuclear Forensic Capabilities to the International Stage

In 2009, the US Department of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration’s (NNSA’s) Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation Program initiated a new nuclear forensics outreach effort under its Confidence Building Measures Program. Little did they know that the timing could not have been better. This article focuses on the early years (2009–2015) of the NNSA’s international nuclear forensics outreach, specifically the efforts and experiences of the women who helped establish this program, building it from a fledgling, bilateral effort into an enduring technical capacity provider engaging with dozens of countries and multilateral organizations. At the onset of the program, nuclear forensics was an emerging priority within the US Government and receiving increased focus from international organizations through high-level diplomatic efforts such as the Nuclear Security Summit and Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism. Additionally, working-level initiatives were gaining traction through the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Nuclear Forensics International Technical Working Group. Over the next 6 years, a small team comprising a uniquely large number of women NNSA federal, contract, and national laboratory staff served as key leaders engaging with the international community to strengthen global technical nuclear forensics capacity and best practices. The program continues today under the Nuclear Smuggling Detection and Deterrence Program as Investigation Support. The experiences shared here detail a unique time period when the new technical discipline of nuclear forensics was beginning to mature and gain international traction. The authors have made every effort to remember history correctly and be as inclusive as possible. A wealth of training, guidance, and exercise documentation was developed in the 2009–2015 time frame, much of which still serves as the foundation for today’s even more extensive program and community of dedicated technical and diplomatic practitioners.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗

Women as a force multiplier for bringing nuclear forensic capabilities to the international stage

In 2009, the U.S. Department of Energy / National Nuclear Security Administration’s (DOE/NNSA) Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation (DNN) Program initiated a new nuclear forensics outreach effort under its Confidence Building Measures Program. Little did they know that the timing could not have been better. This article focuses on the early years (2009-2015) of the NNSA’s international nuclear forensics outreach, specifically the efforts and experiences of the women who helped establish this program, building it from a fledgling bilateral effort into an enduring technical capacity provider engaging with dozens of countries and multilateral organizations. At the onset of the program, nuclear forensics was an emerging priority within the U.S. Government and receiving increased focus from international organizations through high-level diplomatic efforts such as the Nuclear Security Summit and Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism. Additionally, working-level initiatives were gaining traction through the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Nuclear Forensics International Technical Working Group. Over the next six years, a small team comprised of a uniquely large number of women NNSA federal, contract, and national laboratory staff served as key leaders engaging with the international community to strengthen global technical nuclear forensics capacity and best practices. The program continues today under the Nuclear Smuggling Detection and Deterrence Program as Investigation Support. The experiences shared here detail a unique time period when the new technical discipline of nuclear forensics was beginning to mature and gain international traction. The authors have made every effort to remember history correctly and be as inclusive as possible. A wealth of training, guidance, and exercises documentation was developed in the 2009-2015 timeframe, much of which still serves as the foundation for today’s even more extensive program and community of dedicated technical and diplomatic practitioners.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗

A Plan to Qualify New Fuel for the High Flux Isotope Reactor for Material Minimization

The High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is one of five high power research reactors the Office of Material Management and Minimization (M3) Program, Office of Conversion is working to convert from using highly enriched uranium (HEU) fuel to using low-enriched uranium (LEU) fuel. This effort stems from the primary objective within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to achieve permanent threat reduction by minimizing, and when possible, eliminating weapon-usable nuclear material around the world. Under M3’s Office of Conversion, the U.S. High Performance Research Reactor (USHPRR) Project is pursuing fuel qualification and licensing of LEU fuels to support the high-performance reactors. All high-performance reactors except HFIR will be converted to LEU monolithic uranium-molybdenum alloy fuel. HFIR will be evaluated for conversion to LEU using a uranium silicide fuel, namely, U3Si2-Al dispersion fuel. The mission of the USHPRR Project is to develop the technology needed to reduce, and eventually eliminate, worldwide use of HEU in civilian applications. The goal is to develop the technical means needed to use low enriched uranium (LEU) instead of HEU fuel in research and test reactors without significant penalties in performance, economics, or safety of the reactors. The USHPRR Project has four major elements, called Pillars: Fuel Qualification (FQ) managed at Idaho National Laboratory (INL), Fuel Fabrication (FF) managed at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Reactor Conversion (RC) managed at Argonne National Laboratory (Argonne), and Cross-Cutting (CC) managed at Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL). FQ is responsible for the qualification of the fuel type. RC is responsible for supporting reactor conversion analysis and overseeing licensing submittals leading to conversions of domestic reactors to LEU fuel. For the FQ effort, FQ (INL) worked in collaboration with RC (Argonne) and ORNL to develop the plan for the uranium silicide fuel qualification for HFIR. The resulting HFIR Fuel Qualification Plan provides the general approach for the USHPRR team to move the selected uranium silicide fuel design for HFIR conversion through qualification. Authorization and use in HFIR will be approved through the DOE’s Office of Science. Uranium silicide fuel was previously qualified in NUREG-1313 at an approximate maximum heat flux of 1.4 MW/m2 and a maximum fuel section temperature of about 130°C. In addition to the different regulator process utilized by DOE, these upper limits will be exceeded in HFIR; therefore, further testing will be necessary to ensure the fuel can meet HFIR qualification requirements. The HFIR fuel loading may exceed 4.8 gU/cm3 which was determined in the NUREG-1313 safety evaluation to be acceptable for use in non-power NRC-licensed reactors provided there exist no other safety considerations. In addition, the uranium silicide fuel will need to be qualified in a HFIR-specific design. This plan includes the currently available information from the USHPRR Project Functions and Requirements document and expands these requirements to ensure that planned tests have traceable results providing evidence that the requirements have been met. Data collection methods are discussed as well as the process to show that the requirements have been met. This document is designed to provide a pathway for researchers to obtain data necessary and at the appropriate quality level for HFIR fuel qualification

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

A Plan to Qualify New Fuel for the High Flux Isotope Reactor for Material Minimization

The High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is one of five high power research reactors the Office of Material Management and Minimization (M3) Program, Office of Conversion is working to convert from using highly enriched uranium (HEU) fuel to using low-enriched uranium (LEU) fuel. This effort stems from the primary objective within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to achieve permanent threat reduction by minimizing, and when possible, eliminating weapon-usable nuclear material around the world. Under M3’s Office of Conversion, the U.S. High Performance Research Reactor (USHPRR) Project is pursuing fuel qualification and licensing of the high-performance reactors to operate with LEU fuels. All high-performance reactors except HFIR will be converted to LEU monolithic uranium-molybdenum alloy fuel. HFIR will be evaluated for conversion to LEU using a uranium silicide fuel, namely, U3Si2-Al dispersion fuel.The mission of the USHPRR Project is to develop the technology needed to reduce, and eventually eliminate, worldwide use of HEU in civilian applications. The goal is to develop the technical means needed to use low enriched uranium (LEU) instead of HEU fuel in research and test reactors without significant penalties in performance, economics, or safety of the reactors. The USHPRR Project has four major elements, called Pillars: Fuel Qualification (FQ) managed at Idaho National Laboratory (INL), Fuel Fabrication (FF) managed at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Reactor Conversion (RC) managed at Argonne National Laboratory (Argonne), and Cross-Cutting (CC) managed at Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL). FQ is responsible for the qualification of the fuel type. RC is responsible for supporting reactor conversion analysis and overseeing licensing submittals leading to conversions of domestic reactors to LEU fuel. For the FQ effort, FQ (INL) worked in collaboration with RC (Argonne) and ORNL to develop the plan for the uranium silicide fuel qualification for HFIR.The resulting HFIR Fuel Qualification Plan provides the general approach for the USHPRR team to move the selected uranium silicide fuel design for HFIR conversion through qualification. Authorization and use in HFIR will be approved through the DOE’s Office of Science. Uranium silicide fuel was previously qualified in NUREG-1313 at an approximate maximum heat flux of 1.4 MW/m2 and a maximum fuel section temperature of about 130°C. In addition to the different regulator process utilized by DOE, these upper limits will be exceeded in HFIR; therefore, further testing will be necessary to ensure the fuel can meet HFIR qualification requirements. The HFIR fuel loading may exceed 4.8 gU/cm3 which was determined in the NUREG-1313 safety evaluation to be acceptable for use in non-power NRC-regulated reactors provided there exist no other safety considerations. In addition, the uranium silicide fuel will need to be qualified in a HFIR-specific design. This plan includes the currently available information from the USHPRR Project Functions and Requirements document and expands these requirements to ensure that planned tests have traceable results providing evidence that the requirements have been met. Data collection methods are discussed as well as the process to show that the requirements have been met. This document is designed to provide a pathway for researchers to obtain data necessary and at the appropriate quality level for HFIR fuel qualification.

Shokes, Tamara↗