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 Winter Conference & Expo
November 15–18, 2026
Phoenix, AZ|Arizona Grand Resort & Spa
Latest Magazine Issues
Aug 2026
Jan 2026
2026
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
October 2026
Nuclear Technology
September 2026
Fusion Science and Technology
August 2026
Latest News
What’s reshaping nuclear licensing and compliance today?
Mark Reidmeyer
It is the convergence of urgency, innovation, and modernization that is reshaping nuclear licensing and compliance today.
For decades, nuclear licensing operated in a relatively stable environment built around large light water reactors, predictable review cycles, and well-established regulatory pathways. Today, that model is evolving rapidly. Advanced reactors, AI-enabled tools, digital engineering platforms, grid reliability concerns, and aggressive decarbonization goals are all pushing the industry—and regulators—to move faster and think differently.
R. Dierckx, A. Marchal, A. van Wauwe
Nuclear Technology | Volume 3 | Number 9 | September 1967 | Pages 532-539
Technical Paper and Note | doi.org/10.13182/NT67-A27934
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
The use of a direct reactivity meter for control-rod calibration was studied. The reactor model was simplified by reducing the number of delayed-neutron and photoneutron groups from 15 to 6, and by putting dn/dt equal to zero, without greatly affecting the accuracy of the reactivity measurements. The influence of errors in the knowledge of the parameters of the remaining six delayed-neutron groups was studied. Measurements were made on two reactors: ECO, a cold reactor; and ISPRA-I, a reactor with a strong long-lived photoneutron source. The measurements performed with the direct reactivity meter were compared to normal rod-drop measurement techniques and period measurement techniques, and were found to agree in general to ±2%. The long-lived source term, which depends on the reactor operation history, was found to a precision of better than ±1%.