Education for Nuclear Criticality Safety

Education of Specialists In Nuclear Criticality Safety, 27. L. jfeMcA 2  

The fact remains that nearly all experts in this field are currently employed by national laboratories or industrial organizations. Few university faculties include a specialist in criticality safety. The educational gap could be filled by short courses and institutes. The U.S. Atomte Energy Commission has not supported a proposal for such a course. The Nuclear Criticality Safety Division of the American Nuclear Society has considered the need for such courses, and promotion or possible cosponsorship should be vigorously encouraged. 

The lack of university research in this field is notable. Of 106 papers on criticality safety at a recent meeting of the American Nuclear Society, 5 had authors or coauthors with university affiliations. Universities are not well suited for experimental work in this area, but the dearth of academic analytical work is significant. This would seem to be a fruitful area for future industry-university cooperation. 

It is interesting that most of the research effort has been concentrated on the identification of criticality limits rather than on the consequences of criticality accidents. This is due in part to the philosophy that criticality should be identified and then avoided by flat. However, it does not answer the question What happens if the system becomes supercriticai in spite of the administrators Recent eiqierlmental research in France is an important advance in this direction. Analytical studies of criticality accidents would be highly suitable fOr u versity research. 

BORDEN and D. M. DAWSON, Criticality Safety Experience Under a Broad License, Trans. Am. NmcI. SOC., 14, 684 (1971). 

---