Responding to a 2024 article about the weapons potential of fuel used by some advanced reactors, the head of the National Nuclear Security Administration last week said the agency aims to evaluate risks of high-assay low enriched uranium.
“It is important that U.S. [advanced and small modular reactor (A/SMR)] designs compete favorably in the global market and set high standards for safety, security, and safeguards, especially considering Russia’s takeover of Ukraine’s largest nuclear power plant,” Jill Hruby, administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) said in a letter published in Science magazine.
Hruby was responding to a June article in the magazine titled “The weapons potential of high-assay low-enriched uranium” (HALEU).
The article’s authors, Scott Kemp, Edwin Lyman, Mark Deinert, Richard Garwin and Frank von Hippel argued the “explosion of interest” in HALEU can “undermine” the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons present in international policymaking over the past 70 years.
“Governments and others promoting the use of HALEU have not carefully considered the potential proliferation and terrorism risks that the wide adoption of this fuel creates,” the Science article said, urging Congress to restrict enrichment levels below 10-12% for reactor fuels.
Three months later, the American Nuclear Society (ANS) wrote an open letter condemning the story, saying it was “particularly problematic” to imply the U.S. should “unilaterally decide” a lower commercial uranium fuel enrichment threshold.
“While we agree that the proliferation risks of HALEU merit careful consideration, we are confident that these can be addressed within the existing international frameworks,” ANS said in the letter.
In response to Hruby’s letter, a spokesperson for ANS said in an email to the Exchange Monitor Thursday that ANS “stands behind” its letter with concerns about the Science article, and is “confident” safeguards and security will be considered for HALEU as Hruby said.
“We do note that the September 3, 2024, ANS letter did not recommend NNSA undertake another risk evaluation of HALEU-based reactors,” the spokesperson said. “However, if such a review is undertaken, we will support a thorough, unbiased, and, to the extent practical, transparent evaluation of the issue.”
In September, an NNSA spokesperson, responding to queries about the Science article, raised some of the same points Hruby made in her statement.
“The U.S. government remains a strong partner and supporter of the International Atomic Energy Agency [(IAEA)] to implement international safeguards and develop safety and security guidance that evolves as risks and threats do,” the NNSA spokesperson said in the email. “Additionally, NNSA has established programs to partner with U.S. advanced reactor companies to design-in effective safeguards and security measures.”
