A PROPOSED METHODOLOGY FOR THE ANALYSIS AND SELECTION OF ALTERNATIVES FOR THE DISPOSITION OF SURPLUS PLUTONIUM

A Proposed Methodology for the Analysis and Selection of Alternatives for the Disposition of Surplus Plutonium The nuclear states are currently involved in the development of comprehensive approaches to the long-term storage and management of fissile materials. A major objective of this effort is to provide a framework for prevention of the proliferation of nuclear weapons. The evaluation should include non-proliferation, economic, technical, institutional, schedule, environmental, and health and safety issues. The ANRCP has proposed that an evaluation of alternatives be guided by the principles of decision analysis, a logical and formal approach to the solution of complicated problems that are too complex to solve informally. This approach would consist of four steps: 1) identification of alternatives and objectives, 2) estimation of the performance of the alternatives with respect to the objectives, 3) development of values and weights for the objectives, and 4) evaluation of the alternatives and sensitivity analysis. In order to facilitate the evaluation process, the ANRCP proposes the use of nine objectives grouped into the following categories: 1) Non-proliferation objectives (which includes resistance to theft and diversion by unauthorized parties, resistance to retrieval and reuse by the host nation, schedule, and fostering progress and cooperation with other nations and Russia) 2) Operational effectiveness (which includes cost, technical viability, and other benefits) 3) Environmental, safety, and health considerations. In order to evaluate alternatives on the basis of these objectives, they have been clarified through the definition of secondary objectives in some cases. Once the objectives were defined, the next step is to develop measures of performance associated with these objectives. Some of these measures of performance use natural scales, such as cost (dollars), time (months), and environmental impacts (cubic meters of secondary waste). Other measures require specially constructed verbal scales and the performance of each alternative is assessed based on expert judgment.