Evaluation Methodology for Proliferation Resistance and Physical Protection of Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems

The Generation IV International Forum (GIF), initiated in 2000 and formally chartered in mid-2001, is an international collective representing the governments of ten Countries (Argentina, Brazil, Canada, EURATOM, France, Japan, South Korea, South Africa, Switzerland, UK and the USA). The Technology Goals for Generation IV nuclear energy systems, developed during the Roadmap project [1], highlight Proliferation Resistance and Physical Protection (PR&PP) as one of the four goal areas for Generation IV nuclear technology, along with Sustainability, Safety & Reliability, and Economics. On the basis of these four goal areas an evaluation methodology was developed which contributed to identification of the six nuclear energy systems options currently under consideration by GIF. The Generation IV Roadmap [2] recommended the development of a comprehensive evaluation methodology to assess PR&PP of Generation IV nuclear energy systems. An Expert Group was formed and tasked by the GIF in December 2002 to develop an improved evaluation. The expert group includes members of the GIF and representatives from the IAEA. The evaluation methodology uses analysis of pathways to estimate PR&PP measures(defined as the few, high-level parameters that can be used to express Proliferation Resistance or Physical Protection.). Analysis requires definition of the threats, decomposition of the system into its relevant elements (e.g., reactor core, fuel recycle facility, fuel storage), and identification of targets. In the case of proliferation, the targets are nuclear material suitable for use as nuclear explosives, or processes to be misused while in the case of physical protection the targets may be nuclear or radioactive material (theft), or vital equipment (sabotage). Pathways or scenarios for proliferation, theft or sabotage are identified. The nuclear system is then analysed to determine what resistance it provides to oppose the successful completion of the pathway by the threat, and the results expressed in terms of the PR&PP measures. Some of the features of the evaluation method being developed have been already reported in previous meetings and conferences. This paper will describe recent advancements to the evaluation methodology, insights obtained through recent and ongoing work, and the direction being taken to address issues.