skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Prioritizing Acquisition Paths under the State-Level Concept

Authors:
; ; ;
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (LLNL), Livermore, CA (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE
OSTI Identifier:
1150054
Report Number(s):
LLNL-CONF-657230
DOE Contract Number:
DE-AC52-07NA27344
Resource Type:
Conference
Resource Relation:
Conference: Presented at: Institute of Nuclear Materials Management 55th Annual Meeting, Atlanta, GA, United States, Jul 20 - Jul 24, 2014
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS AND PHYSICAL PROTECTION

Citation Formats

Anzelon, G A, Budlong-Sylvester, K, Murphy, C, and Reynolds, C L. Prioritizing Acquisition Paths under the State-Level Concept. United States: N. p., 2014. Web.
Anzelon, G A, Budlong-Sylvester, K, Murphy, C, & Reynolds, C L. Prioritizing Acquisition Paths under the State-Level Concept. United States.
Anzelon, G A, Budlong-Sylvester, K, Murphy, C, and Reynolds, C L. Thu . "Prioritizing Acquisition Paths under the State-Level Concept". United States. doi:. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1150054.
@article{osti_1150054,
title = {Prioritizing Acquisition Paths under the State-Level Concept},
author = {Anzelon, G A and Budlong-Sylvester, K and Murphy, C and Reynolds, C L},
abstractNote = {},
doi = {},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {Thu Jul 17 00:00:00 EDT 2014},
month = {Thu Jul 17 00:00:00 EDT 2014}
}

Conference:
Other availability
Please see Document Availability for additional information on obtaining the full-text document. Library patrons may search WorldCat to identify libraries that hold this conference proceeding.

Save / Share:
  • The International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) Department of Safeguards has launched a project to further develop the State-level concept for the planning, implementation, and evaluation of safeguards activities. In order to further evolve the safeguards system an emphasis is placed on integrating inspection-related activities and the State evaluation process to draw safeguards conclusions in the most efficient way. The credible implementation of acquisition pathway analysis is central to the success of the IAEA's State-level concept. NNSA's Office of Nuclear Safeguards and Security (NA-241) The Next Generation Safeguards Initiative (NGSI) is sponsoring Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) to produce a studymore » that will examine the use of acquisition pathway analysis in: (1) Developing a State-specific, State-level approach (SLA) and Annual Implementation Plan (AIP); (2) Maximizing the utility of the physical model; and (3) Supporting resource allocation decisions through a pathway prioritization. To deal with the challenge of developing an effective and efficient SLA, this study looks at: (1) Prioritizing proliferation pathways based on an assessment of a State's capabilities and assumed proliferation strategies; and (2) Relevant State behavior (e.g., transparency, cooperation, etc.) while avoiding subjective judgments about States themselves. The study makes use of case studies and concrete examples in order to illustrate how new concepts and approaches will be implemented, and how they may differ from more traditional safeguards approaches.« less
  • The role of State and Regional Systems of Accounting for and Control of Nuclear Materials (SSACs/RSACs) will increase within the framework of the state-level concept that is being implemented by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). In order to effectively implement the concept and further establish a state-level approach, which is sought to tailor safeguards activities in a specific state accordingly, collaboration between SSACs/RSACs and the IAEA is very important. Nevertheless, the implementation of such concept is not simple. Optimal relationship between operators and national/governmental authorities and between SSACs/RSACs and the IAEA is an evolving process. Benefits of such anmore » approach as well as roles and responsibilities must be made clear to all parties involved. Acknowledging the uniqueness and diversity of SSACs/RSACs is a first step, followed by the implementation of confidence-building measures that result from an efficient communication process, and culminating with a transparent technical cooperation program. This paper analyses various aspects of the complex relationship among all parties involved in the implementation of the state-level concept: operators, national authorities, government agencies, SSACs/RSACs, and the IAEA. The author analyses the intricate network of possibilities to improve cooperation and discusses issues involving the provision of additional and voluntary information by SSACs/RSACs to the IAEA.« less
  • Safeguards and security upgrade projects are selected to meet a variety of disparate, sometimes conflicting, concerns that have been identified by vulnerability studies and other reviews. Trade-offs must frequently be made regarding project selection and scheduling. This paper describes a two-phase, quantitative methodology that explicitly addresses the trade-offs between competing safeguards objectives, and selects and schedules safeguards upgrade projects in a manner that ensures that the maximum benefit is realized within time and budget constraints. In the first phase, a multiattribute preference model is developed to provide a quantitative measure of the relative values that management places on meeting differentmore » objectives. In the second phase, an optimization model is used to select and schedule upgrade projects in the most effective manner with respect to the priorities specified in the preference model. The optimization model can accommodate complex relationships among upgrades projects and safeguards objectives that are not captured by simple ranking schemes.« less