Application of SAFE to an operating reactor Page: 2 of 13
This article is part of the collection entitled: Office of Scientific & Technical Information Technical Reports and was provided to Digital Library by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
categrries represent a decomposition of the analysis so that a com-
comphensive evaluation of the physical protection system can be
Figure 1 shows the physical protection evaluation process
broken down into five different areas: (1) facility characteriza-
tion, (2) facility representation, (3) component performance, (4)
adversary path analysis, and (5) effectiveness evaluation. Any com-
prehensive evaluation technique must consider these areas in some
level of detail. The first step in the evaluation process is begun
by completion of the facility characterization phase. A primary con-
cern in this phase is target identification. The facility character-
ization phase is an input to the SAFE methodology. The second step
in the evaluation process converts a plant layout (blueprints) into
a computerized facility representation. The third step requires the
analyst to set the component performance of the physical protection
system based on those adversary characteristics which are of con-
cern. The fourth step involves the generation of critical adversary
paths to each target. The final step in the process, effectiveness
evaluation, provides a more detailed analysis of the critical adver-
- sary paths. For a comprehensive analysis, the analyst must select
and evaluate several alternate paths, different environmental and
adversary conditions or threats, and different targets that might
* represent different operational conditions (i.e., in a maintenance
mode of a nuclear reactor, the facility might be configured quite
differently than it is in a normal operation mode and possess a
different set of targets). If the analyst were designing a facil-
ity, he would actually repeat the entire process from the beginning
and consider changes to the facility. To perform a comprehensive
analysis, the analyst would have to cycle through each of these
loops several times, looking at different paths and different en-
vironmental conditions that were relevant to the specific site and
different threat characteristics. Each of the five areas which
comprise the physical protection evaluation process is discussed
briefly in the following sections of this paper.
The first step in the evaluation process is the facility char-
acterization phase. The objective of this phase is to determine six
essential facility characteristics: (1) the plant layout character-
istics, (2) the targets and vital areas, (3) the operational condi-
tions, which include such items as maintenance condition, normal
operation and emergency condition, (4) the environmental conditions
that are relevant to the specific site, i.e., heavy rain, snow, or
extreme cold, (5) identification of the components of the physical
protection system and their location, and (6) the characteristics
of the guard forces which include number of guards, types of weapons,
routing of patrols, etc. The facility characterization process is
illustrated in Figure 2. The inputs to the facility characterization
process include the various security plans that have been developed
by the facility, the facility drawing, the safety analysis report,
and the environmental reports for the facility. This information
Here’s what’s next.
This article can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Article.
Chapman, L.D. Application of SAFE to an operating reactor, article, January 1, 1979; United States. (digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc1105741/m1/2/: accessed October 19, 2018), University of North Texas Libraries, Digital Library, digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.