Diffusion in the Vicinity of Standard-design Nuclear Power Plants-I. Wind-tunnel Evaluation of Diffusive Characteristics of a Simulated Suburban Neutral Atmospheric Boundary Layer

1982 ◽  
Vol 43 (6) ◽  
pp. 813-827
Author(s):  
Al W. Payne ◽  
William H. Snyder ◽  
Francis S. Binkowski ◽  
James E. Watson
2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-55
Author(s):  
Fedor Bryukhan

Due to the fact that the potential threat to the health to the public living near nuclear power plants is largely determined by the level of air pollution by radionuclides, identification of the dispersion conditions of pollutants in the atmospheric boundary layer is of great importance in the development of engineering protection means for nuclear facilities. In turn, the engineering protection of nuclear power plants provides for the development of automated radiation monitoring systems and their main components, i. e. atmospheric boundary layer status monitoring systems. When analyzing and predicting the radiation situation in the vicinity of nuclear power plants, the determination of atmospheric dispersion variability parameters over time is essential. This research is aimed at assessing interannual and intra-annual variability of atmospheric dispersion parameters in the Belorussian nuclear power plant siting region based on the atmospheric boundary layer monitoring data. This study has revealed the relative interannual stability of the main average annual atmospheric dispersion characteristics throughout the observation period in 2015-2019. At the same time, the average seasonal values of the atmospheric boundary layer dispersion parameters are characterized by significant fluctuations thereof over the annual course. The feasibility of such monitoring for other potentially hazardous industrial facilities, such as thermal power plants and chemical plants, is also noted.


Author(s):  
Jim Xu ◽  
Sujit Samaddar

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) established a new process for licensing nuclear power plants under Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 52, “Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants,” which provides requirements for early site permits (ESPs), standard design certifications (DCs), and combined license (COL) applications. In this process, an application for a COL may incorporate by reference a DC, an ESP, both, or neither. This approach allows for early resolution of safety and environmental issues. The COL review will not reconsider the safety issues resolved by the DC and ESP processes. However, a COL application that incorporates a DC by reference needs to demonstrate that pertinent site-specific parameters are confined within the safety envelopes established by the DC. This paper provides an overview of site parameters related to seismic designs and associated seismic issues encountered in DC and COL application reviews using the 10 CFR Part 52 process. Since DCs treat the seismic design and analysis of nuclear power plant (NPP) structures, systems, and components (SSC) as bounding to future potential sites, the design ground motions and associated site parameters are often conservatively specified, representing envelopes of site-specific seismic hazards and parameters. For a COL applicant to incorporate a DC by reference, it needs to demonstrate that the site-specific hazard in terms of ground motion response spectra (GMRS) is enveloped by the certified design response spectra of the DC. It also needs to demonstrate that the site-specific seismic parameters, such as foundation-bearing capacities, soil profiles, and the like, are confined within the site parameter envelopes established by the DC. For the noncertified portion of the plant SSCs, the COL applicant should perform the seismic design and analysis with respect to the site-specific GMRS and associated site parameters. This paper discusses the seismic issues encountered in the safety reviews of DC and COL applications. Practical issues dealing with comparing site-specific features to the standard designs and lessons learned are also discussed.


Author(s):  
Jim Xu

The licensing process for new reactors in the United States was established in accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 52, “Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants,” which provides requirements for early site permit (ESP), standard design certification (DC), and combined license (COL) applications. In this process, an application for a COL may incorporate by reference a DC, an ESP, both, or neither. This approach allows for the early resolution of safety and environmental issues. The safety issues resolved by the DC and ESP processes are not reconsidered during a COL review. However, a COL application that incorporates a DC by reference must demonstrate that pertinent site-specific characteristics are confined within the envelopes established by the DC’s site parameters. This paper provides an overview of the implementation of probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) based seismic margin analyses in DC and COL applications. In addressing the severe accident preventions and mitigations for new reactors, 10 CFR 52.47(a)(27) requires that the final safety analysis report for a DC application describe the design-specific PRA and its results. Regulatory Guide 1.206, “Combined License Applications for Nuclear Power Plants (LWR Edition),” issued June 2007, further states that the scope of this assessment should be a Level 1 and Level 2 PRA that includes internal and external hazards and addresses all plant operating modes. However, the staff recognized that it is not practical for a DC applicant to perform a seismic PRA because a DC application would not contain site-specific seismic hazard information. As an alternative approach to a seismic PRA, the staff proposed a PRA-based seismic margin analysis in SECY-93-087, “Policy, Technical, and Licensing Issues Pertaining to Evolutionary and Advanced Light-Water Reactor (ALWR) Designs,” dated April 2, 1993, and the Commission approved it in the corresponding staff requirements memorandum, dated July 21, 1993. This analysis preserves key elements of a seismic PRA to the maximum extent possible and estimates the design-specific plant seismic capacity in terms of sequence-level high confidence of low probability of failure capacities and fragility for all sequences leading to core damage or containment failures up to approximately 1.67 times the ground motion acceleration of the design-basis safe-shutdown earthquake. Using this approach, the analysis can demonstrate acceptably low seismic risk for a DC. This paper discusses the implementation aspects of PRA-based seismic margin analyses in support of a DC application and post-DC updating activities, including COL updates to incorporate site- and plant-specific features and post-COL verifications.


Author(s):  
Qiang Li ◽  
Jian Zhang

Two levels of seismic, i.e. OBE and SSE, are conventionally considered in the seismic design of nuclear power plants. OBE is formerly set to equal to one half of SSE. In Advanced Light Water Reacter User Requirements Documents (ALWR-URD), US EPRI recommented to decrease OBE to one third of SSE. In the standard design of third generation of nuclear power plants, such as AP1000 of Westinghouse and EPR of AREVA, OBE was eliminated and substituted by lower level earthquake. In AP1000 standard design, OBE was decreased to one third of SSE and explicit analysis on OBE in the seimic design analyses is not required. Literatures and reports related to the regulatory requirements of seismic design are reviewed to study the reasons and means to be taken to address the issue of elimination of OBE from the design analyses of NPP. It will provide guidelines on the issue of elimination of OBE from seimic analysis of NPP design in China.


Author(s):  
Marjorie B. Bauman ◽  
Richard F. Pain ◽  
Harold P. Van Cott ◽  
Margery K. Davidson

2010 ◽  
pp. 50-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pablo T. León ◽  
Loreto Cuesta ◽  
Eduardo Serra ◽  
Luis Yagüe

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document