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

Title: A Methodology for the Analysis and Selection of Alternative for the Disposition of Surplus Plutonium

Abstract

The Department of Energy (DOE) - Office of Fissile Materials Disposition (OFMD) has announced a Record of Decision (ROD) selecting alternatives for disposition of surplus plutonium. A major objective of this decision was to further U.S. efforts to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Other concerns that were addressed include economic, technical, institutional, schedule, environmental, and health and safety issues. The technical, environmental, and nonproliferation analyses supporting the ROD are documented in three DOE reports [DOE-TSR 96, DOE-PEIS 96, and DOE-NN 97, respectively]. At the request of OFMD, a team of analysts from the Amarillo National Resource Center for Plutonium (ANRCP) provided an independent evaluation of the alternatives for plutonium that were considered during the evaluation effort. This report outlines the methodology used by the ANRCP team. This methodology, referred to as multiattribute utility theory (MAU), provides a structure for assembling results of detailed technical, economic, schedule, environment, and nonproliferation analyses for OFMD, DOE policy makers, other stakeholders, and the general public in a systematic way. The MAU methodology has been supported for use in similar situations by the National Research Council, an agency of the National Academy of Sciences.1 It is important to emphasize that the MAU process doesmore » not lead to a computerized model that actually determines the decision for a complex problem. MAU is a management tool that is one component, albeit a key component, of a decision process. We subscribe to the philosophy that the result of using models should be insights, not numbers. The MAU approach consists of four steps: (1) identification of alternatives, objectives, and performance measures, (2) estimation of the performance of the alternatives with respect to the objectives, (3) development of value functions and weights for the objectives, and (4) evaluation of the alternatives and sensitivity analysis. These steps are described below.« less

Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Amarillo National Resource Center for Plutonium, Amarillo, TX (US)
Sponsoring Org.:
US Department of Energy (US)
OSTI Identifier:
761454
DOE Contract Number:  
FC04-95AL85832
Resource Type:
Technical Report
Resource Relation:
Other Information: PBD: 31 Aug 1999
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS; 45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEFENSE; EVALUATION; FISSILE MATERIALS; MANAGEMENT; NUCLEAR WEAPONS; PERFORMANCE; PLUTONIUM; PROLIFERATION; SAFETY; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Citation Formats

NONE. A Methodology for the Analysis and Selection of Alternative for the Disposition of Surplus Plutonium. United States: N. p., 1999. Web. doi:10.2172/761454.
NONE. A Methodology for the Analysis and Selection of Alternative for the Disposition of Surplus Plutonium. United States. doi:10.2172/761454.
NONE. Tue . "A Methodology for the Analysis and Selection of Alternative for the Disposition of Surplus Plutonium". United States. doi:10.2172/761454. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/761454.
@article{osti_761454,
title = {A Methodology for the Analysis and Selection of Alternative for the Disposition of Surplus Plutonium},
author = {NONE},
abstractNote = {The Department of Energy (DOE) - Office of Fissile Materials Disposition (OFMD) has announced a Record of Decision (ROD) selecting alternatives for disposition of surplus plutonium. A major objective of this decision was to further U.S. efforts to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Other concerns that were addressed include economic, technical, institutional, schedule, environmental, and health and safety issues. The technical, environmental, and nonproliferation analyses supporting the ROD are documented in three DOE reports [DOE-TSR 96, DOE-PEIS 96, and DOE-NN 97, respectively]. At the request of OFMD, a team of analysts from the Amarillo National Resource Center for Plutonium (ANRCP) provided an independent evaluation of the alternatives for plutonium that were considered during the evaluation effort. This report outlines the methodology used by the ANRCP team. This methodology, referred to as multiattribute utility theory (MAU), provides a structure for assembling results of detailed technical, economic, schedule, environment, and nonproliferation analyses for OFMD, DOE policy makers, other stakeholders, and the general public in a systematic way. The MAU methodology has been supported for use in similar situations by the National Research Council, an agency of the National Academy of Sciences.1 It is important to emphasize that the MAU process does not lead to a computerized model that actually determines the decision for a complex problem. MAU is a management tool that is one component, albeit a key component, of a decision process. We subscribe to the philosophy that the result of using models should be insights, not numbers. The MAU approach consists of four steps: (1) identification of alternatives, objectives, and performance measures, (2) estimation of the performance of the alternatives with respect to the objectives, (3) development of value functions and weights for the objectives, and (4) evaluation of the alternatives and sensitivity analysis. These steps are described below.},
doi = {10.2172/761454},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {1999},
month = {8}
}