DOCSLIB.ORG

Revitalizing Nuclear Security in an Era of Uncertainty

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Revitalizing Nuclear Security in an Era of Uncertainty PROJECT ON MANAGING THE ATOM Revitalizing Nuclear Security in an Era of Uncertainty Matthew Bunn Nickolas Roth William H. Tobey REPORT JANUARY 2019 Project on Managing the Atom Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs Harvard Kennedy School 79 JFK Street Cambridge, MA 02138 www.belfercenter.org/MTA Statements and views expressed in this report are solely those of the authors and do not imply endorsement by Harvard University, the Harvard Kennedy School, or the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. The authors of this report invite liberal use of the information provided in it for educational purposes, requiring only that the reproduced material clearly cite the source, using: Matthew Bunn, Nickolas Roth, and William H. Tobey, “Revitalizing Nuclear Security in an Era of Uncertainty,” (Cambridge, Mass: Project on Managing the Atom, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School, January 2019). Design and Layout by Jacob Carozza and Andrew Facini Cover photo: A member of the Czech Army takes part in an anti-terrorism drill at the Temelin nuclear power plant near the town of Tyn nad Vltavou, Czech Republic, April 11, 2017. (REUTERS/David W Cerny) Copyright 2019, President and Fellows of Harvard College Printed in the United States of America PROJECT ON MANAGING THE ATOM Revitalizing Nuclear Security in an Era of Uncertainty Matthew Bunn Nickolas Roth William H. Tobey REPORT JANUARY 2019 Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank Tom Bielefeld, Anthony Wier, and the many U.S. government officials who provided helpful comments on this paper. The authors are grateful to Jacob Carozza, Andrew Facini, Melissa Kappotis, and Ralph Grossmann for their help with the editing and preparation of the report. Research for this paper was sup ported by grants from the Carnegie Corporation of New York and the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. About the Project on Managing the Atom The Project on Managing the Atom (MTA) is the Harvard Kennedy School’s principal research group on nuclear policy issues. Established in 1996, the purpose of the MTA project is to provide leadership in advancing policy-relevant ideas and analysis for reducing the risks of nuclear and radiological terrorism; stopping nuclear proliferation and reducing nuclear arsenals; lowering the barriers to safe, secure, and peaceful nuclear energy use; and addressing the connections among these problems. Through its fellows program, the MTA project also helps to prepare the next generation of leaders for work on nuclear policy problems. The MTA project provides its research, analysis, and commentary to policy makers, scholars, journalists, and the public. E-mail: [email protected] Website: http://belfercenter.org/MTA ii Revitalizing Nuclear Security in an Era of Uncertainty About the Authors Matthew Bunn is a Professor of Practice at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Gov ernment, and the faculty leader of the Project on Managing the Atom. Before coming to Harvard, Bunn served as an adviser to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, as a study director at the National Academy of Sciences, and as editor of Arms Control Today. He is the author or co-author of more than 25 books or major technical reports (most recently Preventing Black-Market Trade in Nuclear Technology), and over 150 articles in publications ranging from Science to The Washington Post. Nickolas Roth is a Research Associate at the Belfer Center’s Project on Managing the Atom. Before coming to Harvard, he spent a decade work- ing in Washington, D.C., where his work focused on arms control and nonproliferation policy. Mr. Roth has written dozens of articles on nuclear security, nonproliferation, and arms control. His work has appeared in or been cited by newspapers around the world. Roth is also a Research Fellow at the Center for International and Security Studies at the University of Maryland. William H. Tobey is a Senior Fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard Kennedy School. From 2006 to 2009, he was Deputy Administrator for Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation at the National Nuclear Security Administration. Mr. Tobey also served on the National Security Council Staff under three presidents, in defense policy, arms control, and counterproliferation positions. He is a member of the Nuclear and Radiation Studies Board of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs | Harvard Kennedy School iii Table of Contents Executive Summary ......................................................................................................1 I. Introduction: The Search for Nuclear Security Excellence11 ....................... A Vision for Nuclear Security ..................................................................................................12 Assessing Nuclear Security Progress: An Uncertain Enterprise .......................................15 II. The Nuclear Terrorism Threat ........................................................................21 Overview ..................................................................................................................................... 21 Types of Nuclear Terrorism ......................................................................................................22 Box: Debating the Probability of Nuclear Terrorism ............................................................24 Means, Motive, and Opportunity for Nuclear Terrorism .....................................................26 Box: Incidents Related to U.S. Nuclear Weapons in Europe ..............................................30 Box: The Hatton Garden Heist ................................................................................................34 Trends and Threat Vectors Affecting the Risk of Nuclear Terrorism .................................37 Net Assessment ........................................................................................................................ 42 III. Global Nuclear Security Since 2016: A Progress Assessment45 ................ Measuring Nuclear Security Progress ....................................................................................46 Protecting Against the Full Spectrum of Plausible Threats ................................................49 Box: Demonstrated Adversary Tactics and Capabilities ......................................................52 Comprehensive, Multilayered Protection Against Insider Threats .....................................55 In-Depth Vulnerability Assessment and Realistic Performance Testing ............................60 Strong Security Cultures ..........................................................................................................64 Consolidating Nuclear Weapons and Weapons-Usable Nuclear Material .........................68 Nuclear Security in Selected Countries: 2018 .....................................................................91 Russia ............................................................................................................................... 91 Pakistan ............................................................................................................................ 95 India .................................................................................................................................. 99 iv Revitalizing Nuclear Security in an Era of Uncertainty IV. International Frameworks for Strengthening Nuclear Security105 ............. Impact of the Nuclear Security Summits ............................................................................105 The International Atomic Energy Agency ............................................................................110 The United Nations .................................................................................................................119 The Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism ...........................................................121 Interpol ......................................................................................................................................122 The Global Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction and the G7 Summits .........................................................................................124 The Nuclear Security Contact Group ...................................................................................126 International Legal Nuclear Security Frameworks..............................................................127 Bilateral Nuclear Security Cooperation ...............................................................................130 Industry and Civil Society Organizations .............................................................................132 Nuclear Security Education and Training ............................................................................135 Good Practice Exchanges ......................................................................................................136 V. Assessing National-Level Inputs to Nuclear Security ..............................139 Effective Nuclear Security Leadership .................................................................................139 Sustained, High-Level Political Attention to Nuclear Security ......................................140 Designated Officials With Responsibility for Nuclear Security Progress
Load more

Recommended publications
  • CHAPTER 13 Reactor Safety Design and Safety Analysis Prepared by Dr
    1 CHAPTER 13 Reactor Safety Design and Safety Analysis prepared by Dr. Victor G. Snell Summary: The chapter covers safety design and safety analysis of nuclear reactors. Topics include concepts of risk, probability tools and techniques, safety criteria, design basis accidents, risk assessment, safety analysis, safety-system design, general safety policy and principles, and future trends. It makes heavy use of case studies of actual accidents both in the text and in the exercises. Table of Contents 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 6 1.1 Overview ............................................................................................................................. 6 1.2 Learning Outcomes............................................................................................................. 8 1.3 Risk ...................................................................................................................................... 8 1.4 Hazards from a Nuclear Power Plant ................................................................................ 10 1.5 Types of Radiation in a Nuclear Power Plant.................................................................... 12 1.6 Effects of Radiation ........................................................................................................... 12 1.7 Sources of Radiation ........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • CMD19-H100-8.Pdf
    CMD 19-H100.8 File/dossier : 6.01.07 Date : 2019-08-30 Edocs pdf : 5983279 Oral Presentation Exposé oral Submission from Nuclear Waste Mémoire d’Action Déchets Nucléaires et Watch and Inter-Church Uranium Inter-Church Uranium Committee Committee Educational Cooperative Educational Cooperative In the Matter of À l’égard de Saskatchewan Research Council, Saskatchewan Research Council SLOWPOKE-2 Reactor Installation nucléaire SLOWPOKE-2 Request by the Saskatchewan Research Demande du Saskatchewan Research Council Council to authorize the decommissioning of afin d’autoriser le déclassement du réacteur the SLOWPOKE-2 reactor SLOWPOKE-2 Commission Public Hearing Audience publique de la Commission September 26, 2019 Le 26 septembre 2019 This page was intentionally Cette page a été intentionnellement left blank laissée en blanc Decommissioning of Saskatchewan Research Council SLOWPOKE-2 Reactor (Ref. 2019-H-100) Nuclear Waste Watch and Inter-Church Uranium Committee Educational Cooperative’s Submission to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission Prepared by: Jessica Karban Legal Counsel, Canadian Environmental Law Association August 30, 2019 ISBN: 978-1-77189-996-3 Publication No. 1290 Report from NWW & ICUCEC | 2 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS Recommendation 1: In order to facilitate public participation, all Commission Member Documents (CMDs) and accompanying references should be made available on the CNSC’s website at least 60 days in advance of intervention deadlines and remain on the website for future public use. Recommendation 2: Based on our review of applicable requirements governing decommissioning in Canada, we request that the CNSC: 1. Develop a principled overall policy framework underpinning a robust, clear, and enforceable regulatory regime for the decommissioning of nuclear facilities as well as the waste that arises from nuclear and decommissioning activities; 2.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comprehensive Approach to Elimination of Highly-Enriched
    Science and Global Security, 12:137–164, 2004 Copyright C Taylor & Francis Inc. ISSN: 0892-9882 print DOI: 10.1080/08929880490518045 AComprehensive Approach to Elimination of Highly-Enriched-Uranium From All Nuclear-Reactor Fuel Cycles Frank von Hippel “I would be prepared to submit to the Congress of the United States, and with every expectation of approval, [a] plan that would ... encourage world-wide investigation into the most effective peacetime uses of fissionable material...with the certainty that the investigators had all the material needed for the conducting of all experiments that were appropriate.” –President Dwight D. Eisenhower at the United Nations, Dec. 8, 1953, Over a period of about a decade after President Eisenhower’s “Atoms for Peace” speech, the U.S. and Soviet Union exported research reactors to about 40 countries. By the mid-1970s, most of these reactors were fueled with weapon-useable highly-enriched uranium (HEU), and most of those with weapon-grade uranium. In 1978, because of heightened concern about nuclear proliferation, both countries launched programs to develop low-enriched uranium (LEU) replacement fuel containing less than 20 percent 235U for foreign research reactors that they were supplying with HEU fuel. By the time the Soviet Union collapsed, most of the Soviet-supplied research reactors outside the USSR had been converted to 36% enriched uranium but the program then stalled because of lack of funding. By the end of 2003, the U.S. program had converted 31 reactors to LEU, including 11 within the U.S. If the development of very high density LEU fuel is successful, it appears that conversion of virtually all remaining research Received 12 January 2004; accepted 23 February 2004.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Security Governance in India: Institutions, Instruments, and Culture (2019)
    SANDIA REPORT SAND2020-10916 Printed October 2020 Nuclear Security Governance in India: Institutions, Instruments, and Culture (2019) Sitakanta Mishra (Associate Professor, School of Liberal Studies, Pandit Deendayal Petroleum University, Gujarat, India) Happymon Jacob (Associate Professor, School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India) Visiting Research Scholars Cooperative Monitoring Center Sandia National Laboratories P.O. Box 5800 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185-MS1373 Prepared by Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185 and Livermore, California 94550 Issued by Sandia National Laboratories, operated for the United States Department of Energy by National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC. NOTICE: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government, nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, make any warranty, express or implied, or assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represent that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government, any agency thereof, or any of their contractors or subcontractors. The views and opinions expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government, any agency thereof, or any of their contractors. Printed in the United States of America. This report has been reproduced directly from the best available copy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Slowpoke Licensing Model
    AECL—9981 CA9200276 AECL-9981 ATOMIC ENERGY ENERGIEATOMIQUE OF CANADA LIMITED DU CANADA LIMITEE THE SLOWPOKE LICENSING MODEL LE MODELE D'AUTORISATION DE CONSTRUIRE DE SLOWPOKE V.G. SNELL, F. TAKATS and K. SZIVOS Prepared for presentation at the Post-Conference Seminar on Small- and Medium-Sized Nuclear Reactors San Diego, California, U S A. 1989 August 21-23 Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories Laboratoires nucleates de Chalk River Chalk River, Ontario KOJ 1J0 August 1989 aout ATOMIC ENERGY OF CANADA LIMITED THE SLOWPOKE LICENSING MODEL by V.G. Snell, F. Takats and K. Szivos Prepared for presentation at the Post-Conference Seminar on Small- and Medium-Sized Nuclear Reactors San Diego, California, U.S.A. 1989 August 21-23 Local Energy Systems Business Unit Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories Chalk River, Ontario KOJ 1JO 1989 August ENERGIE ATOMIQUE DU CANADA LIMITED LE MODELS D'AUTORISATION DE CONSTRUIRE DE SLOWPOKE par V.G. Snell, F. Takats et K. Szivos Resume Le Systeme Energetique SLOWPOKE (SES-10) est un reacteur de chauffage de 10 MW realise au Canada. II pent fonctionner sans la presence continue d'un operateur autorise et etre implante dans des zones urbaines. II a des caracteristiques de surete indulgentes dont des echelles de temps transitoires de l'ordre d'heures. On a developpe, au Canada, un precede appele autorisation de construire "d'avance" pour identifier et resoudre les questions reglementaires au debut du processus. Du fait du marche possible, en Hongrie, pour le chauffage nucleaire urbain, on a etabli un plan d'autorisation de construire qui comporte 1'experience canadienne en autorisation de construire, identifie les besoins particuliers de la Hongrie et reduit le risque de retard d'autorisation de construire en cherchant 1'accord de toutes les parties au debut du programme.
    [Show full text]
  • Justin Trudeau John Kirton, Copyright November 27, 2017
    Lecture 12 Enthusiastic, Expansive Engagement under Justin Trudeau John Kirton, Copyright November 27, 2017 Introduction Debate: The Five competing Schools Puzzles: Thesis: Enthusiastic, Expansive Engagement Doctrine Campaign Platform Campaign Promises Throne Speech 1 Freeland’s Foreign Policy Speech, June 6, 2017 Defence Policy Document, June 2017 International Development Policy Statement, June 2017 Distribution of Resources Summit Diplomacy Budgets Military Instruments Trade Agreements Decisions 1. Ending Attacks on ISIS, October 20, 2015 2. Accepting Syrian Refugees, October 20, 2015 3. Controlling Climate Change, October 20, 2015- 4. Supporting G20 Stimulus, November 2015- 5. Selling Saudis Arms, January 4, 2016 6. Seeking a Security Council Seat, February 11, 2016 7. Reinforcing NATO, June 30, 2016 8. Accommodating China (FTA, AIIB), August 2016 9. Ratifying CETA, October 30, 2016 10. Buying 18 Super Hornets, November 22, 2016 11. Renegotiating NAFTA 12. Joining the CPTPP-11, November 2017 13. Pursuing Peacekeeping, November 2017 14. G7 Summitry for Charlevoix 2017 Lecture 12: Enthusiastic, Expansive Engagement under Justin Trudeau Introduction On October 19, 2015, Canadians elected a majority government headed by a new prime minister, Justin Trudeau, leader of the formerly third-place parliamentary Liberal Party. Soon after being sworn in on November 4, Trudeau proclaimed “we’re back on the world stage.” He then flew to the long-scheduled Group of 20 (G20) Summit in Antalya, Turkey, held on November 15–16. His words and deeds suggested that a new era of Canadian international engagement had begun. The Debate The directions and determinants of Trudeau’s foreign policy soon inspired a debate among five distinct schools of thought.
    [Show full text]
  • Workshop on Proposed Amendments to the Nuclear Security Regulations
    Workshop on Proposed Amendments to the Nuclear Security Regulations Michael Beaudette Director Nuclear Security Division October 12, 2016 e-Doc: 5054938 nuclearsafety.gc.ca Focus of Today’s Workshop • Licensees currently listed in Schedule 2 of the Nuclear Security Regulations – Cameco, GE-Hitachi, Nordion, SRB Technologies • Licensees who process, use and store Category III nuclear material – examples include Slowpoke Reactors, McMaster Nuclear Reactor • Licensees and stakeholders who transport or arrange for the transport of nuclear material – examples include RSB Logistic, TAM International, Laurentide Forwarders Inc. Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission 2 Today’s Goals • Provide an overview of several proposed amendments that CNSC staff is considering making to the Nuclear Security Regulations (NSR) and receive preliminary feedback from stakeholders • Provide an opportunity for stakeholders to suggest additional areas for potential amendments to the NSR Please note that this is a CNSC staff assessment for prompting early discussion Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission 3 Objectives of Amendments • Ensure that the regulations continue to fulfill their role in effectively addressing Canada’s nuclear security • Ensure that Canada continues to fulfill its international obligations for the security of nuclear and radioactive materials Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission 4 Overview of the Regulatory Amendment process Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission 5 Context: Changes Since Last Amendments • Last major amendments to NSR published in 2006 •
    [Show full text]
  • Minutes of the CNSC Meeting Held Wednesday and Thursday
    December 9 and 10, 2009 Minutes of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) Meeting held Wednesday, December 9, 2009 beginning at 9:07 a.m. at the CNSC Headquarters, 14th floor, 280 Slater Street, Ottawa, Ontario. The meeting was adjourned at 6:45 p.m. on Wednesday, December 9 and reconvened on Thursday, December 10, 2009 at 9:05 a.m. at the same location. The public meeting was adjourned again at 12:37 p.m., reconvened at 3:32 p.m. and closed at 4:05 p.m. Present: M. Binder, President A. Graham C.R. Barnes A. Harvey R.J. Barriault M. J. McDill M. Leblanc, Secretary J. Lavoie, Senior General Counsel P. Reinhardt, Recording Secretary M. Young, Recording Secretary CNSC staff advisors were: P. Webster, F. Rinfret, P. Elder, K. Lafrenière, T. Schaubel, B.R. Ravishankar, L. Desaulniers., J. Schmidt, M. Ilin, J. Jaferi, G. Cherkas, S. Lei, M. Rinker and D. Werry Other contributors were: • Atomic Energy Canada Limited: W. Pilkington and A.J. White • Bruce Power Inc.: F. Saunders • Hydro-Québec: C. Gélinas • University of Alberta: G. Pavlich and M. J. M. Duke • Ecole Polytechnique de Montréal: G. Kennedy, G. Marleau and C. Chilian • Royal Military College of Canada: K. Nielsen and R. Weir • Saskatchewan Research Council: J. Muldoon, Y. Wo and W. Yuen • Ontario Power Generation Inc.: M. Elliott and R. Leavitt, • Province of Ontario: S. Imbrogno • Cameco Corporation: A. Thorne, C. Astles, A. Oliver, D. Clark, J. Degraw, K. Vetor, R. Peters, A. Kodarin, M. Longinov, T. Rouse and M. Garrard • NB Power Nuclear: G.
    [Show full text]
  • Q L'energieatomique of Canada Limited Vasv Du Canada Limitee
    AECL-8252 ATOMIC ENERGY flF*~Q L'ENERGIEATOMIQUE OF CANADA LIMITED VASV DU CANADA LIMITEE SLOWPOKE: THE FIRST DECADE AND BEYOND SLOWPOKE: La premiere decennie et apres J.W. HILBORN and G.A. BURBIDGE Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories Laburatoires nucleates de Chalk River Chalk River, Ontario October 1983 octobre ATOMIC ENERGY OF CANADA LIMITED SLOWPOKE: The First Decade and Beyond by J.U. Hilborn and G.A. Burbidge* *Radiochemical Company Reactor Physics Branch Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories Chalk River, Ontario KOJ 1J0 Canada October 1983 AECL-8252 L'ENERGIE ATOMIQUE DU CANADA, LIMITEE SLOWPOKE: La premiere décennie et aprës* par J.W. Hilborn et G.A. Burbridge** Resume Depuis le démarrage du premier réacteur SLOWPOKE dans les Laboratoires nucléaires de Chalk River en 1970, six réacteurs de recherche SLOWPOKE-2 ont été installés ailleurs au Canada et un septième est en voie d'instal- lation en Jamaïque. Conçu principalement pour les analyses par activation neutronique, le SLOWPOKE de 20 kW produit un flux de neutrons thermiques de 10i2 n.cnr^s"' dans cinq alvéoles destinées aux échantillons situées dans un réflecteur en béryllium entourant le coeur du réacteur. Il y a cinq autres alvéoles dans le réflecteur rempli d'eau situé ä l'extérieur du réflecteur en béryllium. Le SLOWPOKE a d'excellentes propriétés en matière de sécurité provenant de la température négative et des coefficients de vide du coeur, d'une réactivitê maximale limitée et de l'accès interdit au coeur par les utilisateurs. Il en résulte que le réacteur n'a pas besoin d'un système d'arrêt automatique, de chambres d'ionisation de neutrons ou d'instruments de démarrage â faible puissance.
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of the Topical Session of the Rwmc 40Th Meeting On
    Unclassified NEA/RWM(2007)9 Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Economiques Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 18-Jun-2007 ___________________________________________________________________________________________ English - Or. English NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE Unclassified NEA/RWM(2007)9 PROCEEDINGS OF THE TOPICAL SESSION OF THE RWMC 40TH MEETING ON: APPROACHES AND PRACTICES IN DECOMMISSIONING OF FACILITIES AND MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE FROM NON-NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE RELATED ACTIVITIES Held at the NEA Offices in Issy-les-Moulineaux, France on 14 March 2007 English - Or. English JT03229237 Document complet disponible sur OLIS dans son format d'origine Complete document available on OLIS in its original format NEA/RWM(2007)9 2 NEA/RWM(2007)9 FOREWORD Many activities in modern society involve the use of radioactive materials necessitating dedicated facilities for their production, application, and storage. This applies universally and, regardless of whether or not they are involved in nuclear fuel cycle related activities, all countries need frameworks for decommissioning of contaminated facilities and the construction of facilities for radioactive waste management in a manner that does not impact unduly on society in terms of safety and costs. Countries with nuclear power programmes are perhaps more likely to have in place the necessary infrastructure for dealing with non-power wastes. Nevertheless, a general concern exists about whether enough attention has been paid to small users and/or producers of radioactive materials, whether in academia, in medicine or in industry. Legacy waste is also an important issue in some countries. The exchange of the information about experiences of member countries in this area may thus be expected to have widespread benefits.
    [Show full text]
  • Whiteshell Laboratories – Manitoba’S Contribution to Nuclear Engineering in Canada
    Whiteshell Laboratories – Manitoba’s Contribution to Nuclear Engineering in Canada Prepared By Chris Saunders, P. Eng. and Ray Sochaski, P.Eng; Life Member Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) established a role in Manitoba in 1963 when the Whiteshell Nuclear J.L. Gray Research Establishment (WNRE; later renamed Whiteshell James Lorne Gray was born in Brandon, Laboratories) first took shape. WNRE was Canada’s second Manitoba in 1913. After nuclear science research and development laboratory and public school in the first facility of its kind in western Canada. Through its Winnipeg, he graduated years of operation, the people of the WNRE made with a Masters in Mechanical Engineering significant contributions to the science and engineering from the University of knowledge of Canada’s nuclear industry. This article Saskatchewan in 1938. He highlights just a few of these many accomplishments. joined the Royal Canadian Air Force in 1939. In the Beginning Mr. Gray’s scientific career began at the National Research In the late 1950s AECL’s managers thought Chalk River Council in 1948. He was assigned to the “Chalk River” Laboratories (CRL) was nearing the saturation point. A project. He advanced to become President of AECL in 1958. For the next 16 years he led the corporation through quick survey indicated that three provinces were lacking an impressive growth period that saw Canada become a federal research facilities: Newfoundland, Alberta and leader in nuclear engineering and technologies. Manitoba. Newfoundland, it was felt was not an option at Mr. Gray was appointed a Companion of the Order of the time, having joined Canada less than ten years Canada in 1969 and was awarded the Professional previously in 1949.
    [Show full text]
  • The 2010 Nuclear Security Summit: a Status Update
    An Arms Control Association and Partnership for Global Security Report The 2010 Nuclear Security Summit: A Status Update April 2011 Robert Golan-Vilella, Michelle Marchesano, and Sarah Williams An Arms Control Association and Partnership for Global Security Report The 2010 Nuclear Security Summit: A Status Update April 2011 Robert Golan-Vilella, Michelle Marchesano, and Sarah Williams About the Authors Robert Golan-Vilella is a Herbert Scoville Jr. Peace Fellow at the Arms Control Association. He is a graduate of Yale University and has previously interned at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies. Michelle Marchesano is a senior budget and policy analyst at the Partnership for Global Security (PGS). She has been with PGS since graduating from Drexel University in 2007. She is currently earning a graduate degree in international science and technology policy from the Elliott School of International Affairs at the George Washington University. Sarah Williams is a Herbert Scoville Jr. Peace Fellow in the Center for Science, Technology and Security Policy at the American Association for the Advancement of Science. She is also the Coordinator of the Fissile Materials Working Group. She holds a graduate degree in global policy studies from the LBJ School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas-Austin and a bachelor’s degree from the University of Maryland - College Park. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Tom Collina and Kenneth Luongo for reviewing drafts of this report. We would also like to thank Margaret Balza for her research assistance and fact-checking and Lovely Umayam for her general assistance in the early stages of this project.
    [Show full text]