scholarly journals Multi-unit risk assessment of nuclear power plants: Current status and issues

2018 ◽  
Vol 50 (8) ◽  
pp. 1199-1209 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joon-Eon Yang
Author(s):  
Sangmyeon Ahn ◽  
Jungjoon Lee ◽  
Chanwoo Jeong ◽  
Kyungwoo Choi

We are having 23 units of nuclear power plants in operation and 5 units of nuclear power plants under construction in Korea as of September 2012. However, we don’t have any experience on shutdown permanently and decommissioning of nuclear power plants. There are only two research reactors being decommissioned since 1997. It is realized that improvement of the regulatory framework for decommissioning of nuclear facilities has been emphasized constantly from the point of view of IAEA’s safety standards. It is also known that IAEA will prepare the safety requirement on decommissioning of facilities; its title is the Safe Decommissioning of Facilities, General Safety Requirement Part 6. According to the result of IAEA’s Integrated Regulatory Review Service (IRRS) mission to Korea in 2011, it was recommended that the regulatory framework should require decommissioning plans for nuclear installations to be constructed and operated and these plans should be updated periodically. In addition, after the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan in March of 2011, preparedness for early decommissioning caused by an unexpected severe accident became important issues and concerns. In this respect, it is acknowledged that the regulatory framework for decommissioning of nuclear facilities in Korea need to be improved. First of all, we focus on identifying the current status and relevant issues of regulatory framework for decommissioning of nuclear power plants compared to the IAEA’s safety standards in order to achieve our goal. And then the plan is established for improvement of regulatory framework for decommissioning of nuclear power plants in Korea. It is expected that if the things will go forward as planned, the revised regulatory framework for decommissioning could enhance the safety regime on the decommissioning of nuclear power plants in Korea in light of international standards.


Author(s):  
Pengyi Peng ◽  
Weidong Liu ◽  
Zhichao Yang

Instrumentation and control (I&C) systems in nuclear power plants (NPPs) have the ability to initiate the safety-related functions necessary to shut down the plants and maintain the plants in a safe shutdown condition. I&C systems of low reliability will bring risks to the safe operation of NPPs. A sufficient level of redundancy and diversity of I&C design to ensure the safety is a major focus when designing a new reactor. Usually multiple signal paths are included in an I&C system design. Meanwhile, besides the protection and safety monitoring system (PMS), other sub-systems of I&C such as the diverse actuation system (DAS) will be included as a diverse backup of PMS to perform the functions of reactor trip and engineered safety features actuation systems (ESFAS). However, the construction costs increase as the level of system redundancy and diversity grows. In fact, from the perspective of deterministic theory, an I&C system of only two chains can meet the single failure criterion. So how to obtain the balance of safety and economy is a challenging problem in I&C system designing. Probabilistic Safety Assessment (PSA) is the most commonly used quantitative risk assessment tool for decision-making in selecting the optimal design among alternative options. In this paper, PSA technique was used to identify whether the I&C system design offers adequate redundancy, diversity, and independence with sufficient defense-in-depth and safety margins in the design of a new reactor. Firstly, detailed risk assessment criteria for I&C design were studied and identified in accordance with nuclear regulations. Secondly, different designs were appropriately modeled, and the risk insights were provided, showing the balance of safety and economy of each design. Furthermore, potential design improvements were evaluated in terms of the current risk assessment criterion. In the end, the optimal design was determined, and uncertainty analyses were performed. The results showed that all four designs analyzed in this paper were met the safety goals in terms of PSA, but each design had a different impact on the balance of risk. As the support systems of the NPP we analyzed were relatively weak, loss of off-site power and loss of service water were two main risk contributors. The common cause failure of reactor trip breakers and the sensors of containment pressure were risk-significant. After identifying the major risk factors, the I&C design team can perform subsequent optimizations in the further design based on the PSA results and achieve an optimal balance between safety and economy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document