Risk-Informing ESBWR Design with Probabilistic Safety ... · Risk-Informing ESBWR Design with...
Transcript of Risk-Informing ESBWR Design with Probabilistic Safety ... · Risk-Informing ESBWR Design with...
Copyright 2013 GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy International, LLC - All rights reserved
Risk-Informing ESBWR
Design with Probabilistic
Safety Assessments
Gary Miller Senior Application Engineer
INPRO Dialogue Forum
November 19-23, 2013
1
Copyright 2013 GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy International, LLC - All rights reserved
ESBWR Probabilistic Safety Assessments
2
INPRO Criteria Evaluated:
• IN 1.3.1 Calculated frequency of design basis events • IN 1.6.1 Independence of different levels of defense in depth • IN 4.4.1 Use of a risk-informed approach
Copyright 2013 GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy International, LLC - All rights reserved
IN 1.3.1: Calculated frequency of occurrence of design basis accidents
3
Acceptance Limit: Reduced frequency of accidents that can cause plant damage relative to existing facilities. Background: Development and use of a PSA in the ESBWR design process allowed the designers to assess design options that reduced the risks of core damage and radiological release. Extensive use of operating experience and advanced light water reactor design principles (e.g. passive safety) have significantly reduced the plant risks.
Copyright 2013 GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy International, LLC - All rights reserved
IN 1.3.1: Calculated frequency of occurrence of design basis accidents
4
Example 1: Comparison of Core Damage Frequencies
1.00E-08
1.00E-07
1.00E-06
1.00E-05
1.00E-04
Regulatory Goal Reference BWR 6 ABWR ESBWR
Internal Events CDF
Copyright 2013 GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy International, LLC - All rights reserved
IN 1.3.1: Calculated frequency of occurrence of design basis accidents
5
Example 2: Contributions to Core Damage Frequency Internal Events Accident Sequence Frequency (/a)
Reference BWR ABWR ESBWR
Station Blackout 3.9 E-06 1.1 E-07 <1 E-09
ATWS 1.1 E-07 3 E-10 3 E-09
Transient
Condition
1.9 E-08 4.5 E-08 6 E-9
LOCA <1 E-08 7 E-09 7 E-09
Safety
Architecture
2 Divisions 3 Divisions 4 Divisions +
Passive
Copyright 2013 GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy International, LLC - All rights reserved
IN 1.6.1 Independence of different levels of defense in depth (DID)
6
Acceptance Limit: Adequate independence is demonstrated, e.g., through deterministic and probabilistic means… Background: The ESBWR design incorporates independence between accident mitigation and severe accident management Example: PSA severe accident insights were used to develop the Basemat internal Melt and Coolability (BiMAC) device
Copyright 2013 GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy International, LLC - All rights reserved
IN 1.6.1 Independence of different levels of defense in depth (DID)
7
Defense Levels 1 Prevention of abnormal operation and failures 2 Control of abnormal operation and detection of failures
3 Control of accidents within the design basis 4 Control of severe plant conditions, including prevention of accident progression and mitigation of the consequences of severe accidents 5 Mitigation of radiological consequences of significant releases of radioactive materials
Copyright 2013 GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy International, LLC - All rights reserved
BiMAC concept
BiMAC designed to: • Passively quench high
temperature corium • Mitigate core-concrete
reactions • Controlled by an
independent logic platform
BiMAC - Basemat internal Melt Arrest and Coolability
8
Copyright 2013 GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy International, LLC - All rights reserved
IN 4.4.1 Risk-informed approach
9
Acceptance Limit: A careful use of risk informed approaches based on proven data sets has been performed by the designer
Background: Insights from the ESBWR PSA have been used to implement several design enhancements, and consequently, have contributed a significant improvement to nuclear safety.
Copyright 2013 GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy International, LLC - All rights reserved
IN 4.4.1 Risk-informed approach
10
Example 1 - PSA used in ESBWR design: Added redundant, physically separated flow paths in response to fire analysis. Alternative cooling system Fail-safe actuation of ICS
Added parallel injection line valves for ICS to eliminate a dependency on power supplies. Changed fire suppression piping route to reduce room flooding frequency.
Copyright 2013 GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy International, LLC - All rights reserved
Isolation Condenser System - Standby
11
Copyright 2013 GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy International, LLC - All rights reserved
IN 4.4.1 Risk-informed approach
12
Example 2 – Operator Actions PSA was intentionally pessimistic on estimating Human Error Probabilities No recovery actions are credited Identify PSA accident sequences where operator actions are important, and then improve them with physical design changes
Copyright 2013 GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy International, LLC - All rights reserved
References
13
ESBWR
Safety Evaluation Report (NRC): http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1034/ML103470210.html
Design Certification Document (DCD) Rev. 9: http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1034/ML103440266.html
NEDO-33201, Revision 6, Probabilistic Risk Assessment ESBWR Design Certification http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1028/ML102880536.html
NRC Final Design Approval: http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1105/ML110540310.pdf
Reference BWR (Grand Gulf NPP) NUREG-1150
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr1150/