Ruminations on NDA Measurement Uncertainty Compared to DA Uncertainty

It is difficult to overestimate the importance that physical measurements performed with nondestructive assay instruments play throughout the nuclear fuel cycle. They underpin decision making in many areas and support: criticality safety, radiation protection, process control, safeguards, facility compliance, and waste measurements. No physical measurement is complete or indeed meaningful, without a defensible and appropriate accompanying statement of uncertainties and how they combine to define the confidence in the results. The uncertainty budget should also be broken down in sufficient detail suitable for subsequent uses to which the nondestructive assay (NDA) results will be applied. Creating an uncertainty budget and estimating the total measurement uncertainty can often be an involved process, especially for non routine situations. This is because data interpretation often involves complex algorithms and logic combined in a highly intertwined way. The methods often call on a multitude of input data subject to human oversight. These characteristics can be confusing and pose a barrier to developing and understanding between experts and data consumers. ASTM subcommittee C26-10 recognized this problem in the context of how to summarize and express precision and bias performance across the range of standards and guides it maintains. In order to create a unified approach consistent with modern practice and embracing the continuous improvement philosophy a consensus arose to prepare a procedure covering the estimation and reporting of uncertainties in non destructive assay of nuclear materials. This paper outlines the needs analysis, objectives and on-going development efforts. In addition to emphasizing some of the unique challenges and opportunities facing the NDA community we hope this article will encourage dialog and sharing of best practice and furthermore motivate developers to revisit the treatment of measurement uncertainty