ANS is committed to advancing, fostering, and promoting the development and application of nuclear sciences and technologies to benefit society.
Explore the many uses for nuclear science and its impact on energy, the environment, healthcare, food, and more.
Explore membership for yourself or for your organization.
Conference Spotlight
2026 ANS Annual Conference
May 31–June 3, 2026
Denver, CO|Sheraton Denver
Latest Magazine Issues
Mar 2026
Jan 2026
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
April 2026
Nuclear Technology
February 2026
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
NRC provides timeline update on rules, meeting EO deadline
Last May, President Trump issued Executive Order (EO) 14300, “Ordering the Reform of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,” which mandated that the NRC review and overhaul its rules within 18 months of the EO being issued.
At a public meeting on Thursday, NRC officials shared details and an overview of the rulemaking process, saying that they were on target to have these rules ready by the November 23 deadline.
M. F. Murphy, A. Lüthi, R. Seiler, P. Grimm, O. Joneja, A. Meister, R. van Geemert, F. Jatuff, R. Brogli, R. Jacot-Guillarmod, T. Williams, S. Helmersson, R. Chawla
Nuclear Science and Engineering | Volume 141 | Number 1 | May 2002 | Pages 32-45
Technical Paper | doi.org/10.13182/NSE02-A2264
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Accurate critical experiments have been performed for the validation of total fission (Ftot) and 238U-capture (C8) reaction rate distributions obtained with CASMO-4, HELIOS, BOXER, and MCNP4B for the lower axial region of a real Westinghouse SVEA-96+ fuel assembly. The assembly comprised fresh fuel with an average 235U enrichment of 4.02 wt%, a maximum enrichment of 4.74 wt%, 14 burnable-absorber fuel pins, and full-density water moderation. The experimental configuration investigated was core 1A of the LWR-PROTEUS Phase I project, where 61 different fuel pins, representing ~64% of the assembly, were gamma-scanned individually. Calculated (C) and measured (E) values have been compared in terms of C/E distributions. For Ftot, the standard deviations are 1.2% for HELIOS, 0.9% for CASMO-4, 0.8% for MCNP4B, and 1.7% for BOXER. Standard deviations of 1.1% for HELIOS, CASMO-4, and MCNP4B and 1.2% for BOXER were obtained in the case of C8. Despite the high degree of accuracy observed on the average, it was found that the five burnable-absorber fuel pins investigated showed a noticeable underprediction of Ftot, quite systematically, for the deterministic codes evaluated (average C/E for the burnable-absorber fuel pins in the range 0.974 to 0.988, depending on the code).
