A study of a zone approach to IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) safeguards: The low-enriched-uranium zone of a light-water-reactor fuel cycle

Fishbone, L.G.; Higinbotham, W. A.

doi:10.2172/7229141

Cited by 3 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to the zone or extended-MBA approach used here, MA is applied to a collection of facilities or parts thereof in a fuel cycle, instead of to a single facility or part thereof. (Bennett et al 1974;IAEA 1984a;Healey 1984;Brown and Gupta 1984;de Montmollin, Higinbotham and Gupta 1985;and Fishbone and Higinbotham 1986.) The essence of the zone approach is then the elimination of measurement verifications of interfacility , intrazone nuclear-material flows and the determination of verified inventories for all of the nuclear material within the zone for the beginning and end of the zone material-balance period.…”

Section: Iii331 General Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Subject to the eighth assumption in Section III.l, interzone flows, however, could be verified at the facilities within the zone or at facilities outside the zone, conceivably in another State (fourth assumption) (de Montmollin, Higinbotham 1986).…”

Section: Iii331 General Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An important question is whether a zone approach would merely be a verification technique for the IAEA within the existing MBA structure or whether the MBA structure itself would be extended to correspond to the zones (see IAEA 1984a, Appendix A of Higinbotham 1986, andAttachment D of IAEA 1985. ) In the former case, assumed here, the existing Subsidiary Arrangements and Facility Attachments that specify State reporting requirements would cont inue to apply and the IAEA could still maintain book inventories for all facilities within a zone based on frequent interzone and intrazone inventory change reports (ICRs) as well as annual material balance reports (MBRs).…”

Section: Iii331 General Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a consequence, tha burden of inspections on facility operations would be reduced. Though inspection-effort savings would be great in the fresh-fuel zone (Fishbone and Higinbotham 1986), they would be much less in the plutonium zone where timeliness dictates frequent interim inventory verifications.…”

Section: Iii335 Zone-approach Practical Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Task C.55 of the Program for Technical Assistance to IAEA Safeguards (POTAS), the zone approach was discussed theoretically and analyzed for the fresh-fuel Zone 1 of a reference LWR fuel cycle (Fishbone and Higinbotham 1986; see also de Montmollin, Higinbotham and Gupta 1985). This analysis should eventually be completed by including consideration of the irradiated fuel Zone 2 and the plutonium Zone 3.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Framework for fuel-cycle approaches to IAEA safeguards

Fishbone¹

1986

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to compare several nuclear-safeguards verification approaches to one another and to the conventional facility-oriented approach, we establish a framework of the classes of information routinely verifiable by IAEA safeguards inspections. For each facility type within a State nuclear fuel cycle, the classes include flow data, inventory data, and shipper and receiver data. By showing which classes of information are verified for each facility type within three fuel cycles of different complexity, we distinguish the inspection approaches from one another and exhibit their fuel-cycle dependence, i.e., their need for sets of safeguards inspection activities different from those required under the facility-oriented approach at similar facilities in fuel cycles of differing complexity. Tables V-l, V-2, and V-3 graphically depict these relations and give a qualitative summary of the relative effectiveness and effort requirements of the approaches classified. The zone, information-correlation, diversion-assumption-change, and randomization-over-facilities approaches depend intrinsically on the complexity of the fuel cycle: their very definition implies fuel-cycle dependence. The approaches involving randomization over activities and goal relaxations do not have such dependence.

show abstract

Section: Iii331 General Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Iii331 General Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Iii331 General Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Iii335 Zone-approach Practical Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Framework for fuel-cycle approaches to IAEA safeguards

Fishbone¹

1986

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Nuclear non‐proliferation review and improving proliferation resistance assessment in the future

et al. 2020

Int J Energy Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary An increasing number of countries have taken nuclear energy as a preferred approach in response to the environment deterioration and energy supply deficit. The rapid expansion of nuclear technologies, however, would pose a great challenge to nuclear non‐proliferation, especially for the Generation IV nuclear reactor systems, which significantly differ from current nuclear fuel systems. This paper gives an overview of non‐proliferation research activities worldwide and outlines the existing problems, especially in non‐proliferation assessment. Because of numerous processes and various types of variables involved in nuclear fuel cycles (NFC), it is difficult to obtain a quantitative and objective assessment on non‐proliferation. In addition, the influences imposed by national nuclear policy on non‐proliferation have been rarely studied because of their large uncertainties, which may not precisely reflect the real non‐proliferation status in a specific country. In view of the above issues, we put forward an assessment framework by considering impact factors of national nuclear policy and by employing multi‐mathematical models to address some of the issues including subjectivity and uncertainties in the current assessment methodologies.

show abstract

JOINT STUDY OF IMPROVED SAFEGUARDS METHODOLOGY USING NO-NOTICE RANDOMIZED INSPECTION AT JNC'S Pu HANDLING FACILITIES

LU¹,

SANBORN²

2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A study of a zone approach to IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) safeguards: The low-enriched-uranium zone of a light-water-reactor fuel cycle

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Framework for fuel-cycle approaches to IAEA safeguards

Framework for fuel-cycle approaches to IAEA safeguards

Nuclear non‐proliferation review and improving proliferation resistance assessment in the future

JOINT STUDY OF IMPROVED SAFEGUARDS METHODOLOGY USING NO-NOTICE RANDOMIZED INSPECTION AT JNC'S Pu HANDLING FACILITIES

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About