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.
Division Spotlight
Nuclear Nonproliferation Policy
The mission of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Policy Division (NNPD) is to promote the peaceful use of nuclear technology while simultaneously preventing the diversion and misuse of nuclear material and technology through appropriate safeguards and security, and promotion of nuclear nonproliferation policies. To achieve this mission, the objectives of the NNPD are to: Promote policy that discourages the proliferation of nuclear technology and material to inappropriate entities. Provide information to ANS members, the technical community at large, opinion leaders, and decision makers to improve their understanding of nuclear nonproliferation issues. Become a recognized technical resource on nuclear nonproliferation, safeguards, and security issues. Serve as the integration and coordination body for nuclear nonproliferation activities for the ANS. Work cooperatively with other ANS divisions to achieve these objective nonproliferation policies.
Meeting Spotlight
Conference on Nuclear Training and Education: A Biennial International Forum (CONTE 2025)
February 3–6, 2025
Amelia Island, FL|Omni Amelia Island Resort
Standards Program
The Standards Committee is responsible for the development and maintenance of voluntary consensus standards that address the design, analysis, and operation of components, systems, and facilities related to the application of nuclear science and technology. Find out What’s New, check out the Standards Store, or Get Involved today!
Latest Magazine Issues
Jan 2025
Jul 2024
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
February 2025
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
A series of firsts delivers new Plant Vogtle units
Southern Nuclear was first when no one wanted to be.
The nuclear subsidiary of the century-old utility Southern Company, based in Atlanta, Ga., joined a pack of nuclear companies in the early 2000s—during what was then dubbed a “nuclear renaissance”—bullish on plans for new large nuclear facilities and adding thousands of new carbon-free megawatts to the grid.
In 2008, Southern Nuclear applied for a combined construction and operating license (COL), positioning the company to receive the first such license from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2012. Also in 2008, Southern became the first U.S. company to sign an engineering, procurement, and construction contract for a Generation III+ reactor. Southern chose Westinghouse’s AP1000 pressurized water reactor, which was certified by the NRC in December 2011.
Fast forward a dozen years—which saw dozens of setbacks and hundreds of successes—and Southern Nuclear and its stakeholders celebrated the completion of Vogtle Units 3 and 4: the first new commercial nuclear power construction project completed in the U.S. in more than 30 years.
J. Haroon, E. Nichita
Nuclear Technology | Volume 208 | Number 2 | February 2022 | Pages 246-267
Technical Paper | doi.org/10.1080/00295450.2021.1929768
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
A new 37-element PHWR fuel bundle, designed for molybdenum-99 production, has been proposed previously. The new bundle has been shown to have lattice properties and reactivity feedback effects equivalent to the standard PHWR bundle. This study looks at the effect the use of molybdenum-99-producing bundles has on the reactivity worth of reactivity devices, through the prism of reactivity-device macroscopic-cross-section increments. The study utilizes three-dimensional supercell configurations and the neutron transport code DRAGON to calculate and compare the incremental macroscopic cross sections and supercell reactivity for adjuster absorbers, shutoff absorber rods and liquid zone controllers when surrounded by molybdenum-99-producing bundles and by regular bundles. Two geometrical representations of fuel bundles are used: a detailed, cluster, representation, whereby all fuel pins are modeled separately, and an annularized representation, whereby each ring of fuel pins and corresponding coolant is represented as a homogeneous annulus. The latter model is the one customarily used in production calculations for finding cross-section increments of reactivity devices.
The study finds that reactivity-device cross-section and supercell reactivity increments are very similar (< 2% difference in reactivity increments) for the case of the molybdenum-producing bundle and the regular bundle. The study also finds that the use of a detailed, cluster, geometrical representation of the fuel bundle produces slightly different cross-section increments and supercell reactivity increments than the use of an annularized geometrical representation. The supercell reactivity-increment difference between the two representations is found to be ~8.0% for adjuster absorbers and ~11.0% for shutoff absorber rods.