Overview of Seismic Issues in Design Certification and Combined License Application Reviews

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jim Xu ◽  
Sujit Samaddar
Keyword(s):  
Seismic Design ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Power Plants ◽  
Response Spectra ◽  
Nuclear Regulatory Commission ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Site Specific ◽  
License Application ◽  
Standard Design

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.

Expectations for Inservice Testing Programs at New Nuclear Power Plants

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas G. Scarbrough
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Power Plants ◽  
Reactor Core ◽  
Nuclear Regulatory Commission ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Mechanical Equipment ◽  
American Society ◽  
Regulatory Commission ◽  
Safety Systems

In a series of Commission papers, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) described its policy for inservice testing (IST) programs to be developed and implemented at nuclear power plants licensed under 10 CFR Part 52. This paper discusses the expectations for IST programs based on those Commission policy papers as applied in the NRC staff review of combined license (COL) applications for new reactors. For example, the design and qualification of pumps, valves, and dynamic restraints through implementation of American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Standard QME-1-2007, “Qualification of Active Mechanical Equipment Used in Nuclear Power Plants,” as accepted in NRC Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.100 (Revision 3), “Seismic Qualification of Electrical and Active Mechanical Equipment and Functional Qualification of Active Mechanical Equipment for Nuclear Power Plants,” will enable IST activities to assess the operational readiness of those components to perform their intended functions. ASME has updated the Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants (OM Code) to improve the IST provisions for pumps, valves, and dynamic restraints that are incorporated by reference in the NRC regulations with applicable conditions. In addition, lessons learned from performance experience and testing of motor-operated valves (MOVs) will be implemented as part of the IST programs together with application of those lessons learned to other power-operated valves (POVs). Licensee programs for the Regulatory Treatment of Non-Safety Systems (RTNSS) will be implemented for components in active nonsafety-related systems that are the first line of defense in new reactors that rely on passive systems to provide reactor core and containment cooling in the event of a plant transient. This paper also discusses the overlapping testing provisions specified in ASME Standard QME-1-2007; plant-specific inspections, tests, analyses, and acceptance criteria; the applicable ASME OM Code as incorporated by reference in the NRC regulations; specific license conditions; and Initial Test Programs as described in the final safety analysis report and applicable RGs. Paper published with permission.

scholarly journals Overview of NRC NUREG-1482, Revision 2, Guidelines for Inservice Testing at Nuclear Power Plants: Inservice Testing of Pumps and Valves, and Inservice Examination and Testing of Dynamic Restrains (Snubbers) at Nuclear Power Plants

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gurjendra S. Bedi
Keyword(s):  
Power Plant ◽  
Nuclear Power Plant ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Regulatory Commission ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Regulatory Guidance ◽  
American Society ◽  
Regulatory Commission

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff issued Revision 2 to NUREG-1482, “Guidelines for Inservice Testing at Nuclear Power Plant,” to assist the nuclear power plant licensees in establishing a basic understanding of the regulatory basis for pump and valve inservice testing (IST) programs and dynamic restraints (snubbers) inservice examination and testing programs. Since the Revision 1 issuance of NUREG-1482, certain tests and measurements required by earlier editions and addenda of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code for Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants (OM Code) have been clarified, updated, revised or eliminated. The revision to NUREG-1482 incorporates and addresses those changes, and includes the IST programs guidelines related to new reactors. The revised guidance incorporates lessons learned and experience gained since the last issue. This paper provides an overview of the contents of the NUREG-1482 and those changes and discusses how they affect NRC guidance on implementing pump and valve inservice testing (IST) programs. For the first time, this revision added dynamic restraint (snubber) inservice examination and testing program guidelines along with pump and valve IST programs. This paper highlights important changes to NUREG-1482, but is not intended to provide a complete record of all changes to the document. The NRC intends to continue to develop and improve its guidance on IST methods through active participation in the ASME OM Code consensus process, interactions with various technical organizations, user groups, and through periodic updates of NRC-published guidance and issuance of generic communications as the need arises. Revision 2 to NUREG-1482 incorporates regulatory guidance applicable to the 2004 Edition including 2005 and 2006 Addenda to the ASME OM Code. Revision 0 and Revision 1 to NUREG-1482 are still valid and may continue to be used by those licensees who have not been required to update their IST program to the 2004 Edition including the 2005 and 2006 Addenda (or later Edition) of the ASME OM Code. The guidance provided in many sections herein may be used for requesting relief from or alternatives to ASME OM Code requirements. However, licensees may also request relief or authorization of an alternative that is not in conformance with the guidance. In evaluating such requested relief or alternatives, the NRC uses the guidelines/recommendations of the NUREG, where applicable. The guidelines and recommendations provided in this NUREG and its Appendix A do not supersede the regulatory requirements specified in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 10 CFR 50.55a, “Codes and standards”. Further, this NUREG does not authorize the use of alternatives to, grant relief from, the ASME OM Code requirements for inservice testing of pumps and valves, or inservice examination and testing of dynamic restraints (snubbers), incorporated by reference in 10 CFR 50.55a. Paper published with permission.

Overview of Implementation of Probabilistic-Risk-Assessment-Based Seismic Margin Analyses in Design Certification and Combined License Applications

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jim Xu
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Power Plants ◽  
Probabilistic Risk Assessment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Severe Accident ◽  
Site Specific ◽  
Standard Design ◽  
Probabilistic Risk

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.

Preliminary Research on the Elimination of OBE in the Seismic Design of NPP

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Qiang Li ◽  
Jian Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Seismic Design ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Power Plants ◽  
User Requirements ◽  
Regulatory Requirements ◽  
Standard Design ◽  
Explicit Analysis ◽  
Design Analyses ◽  
Requirements Documents

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.

scholarly journals Seismic Analysis Issues in Design Certification Applications for New Reactors

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Morante ◽  
Manuel Miranda ◽  
Jim Xu
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Seismic Analysis ◽  
Nuclear Regulatory Commission ◽  
Design Parameters ◽  
Specific Design ◽  
Site Specific ◽  
Safety Issues ◽  
Standard Design ◽  
Regulatory Commission

The licensing framework established by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission under Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 52, “Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants,” provides requirements for standard design certifications (DCs) and combined license (COL) applications. The intent of this process is the early resolution of safety issues at the DC application stage. Subsequent COL applications may incorporate a DC by reference. Thus, the COL review will not reconsider safety issues resolved during the DC process. However, a COL application that incorporates a DC by reference must demonstrate that relevant site-specific design parameters are within the bounds postulated by the DC, and any departures from the DC need to be justified. This paper provides an overview of several seismic analysis issues encountered during a review of recent DC applications under the 10 CFR Part 52 process, in which the authors have participated as part of the safety review effort.

Inservice Testing Program Improvements for New Reactors Small Modular Reactors (SMRs)

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald C. Lippy
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Regulatory Commission ◽  
The United States ◽  
Nuclear Industry ◽  
Small Modular Reactors ◽  
American Society ◽  
Construction Permit ◽  
Regulatory Commission

The nuclear industry is preparing for the licensing and construction of new nuclear power plants in the United States. Several new designs have been developed and approved, including the “traditional” reactor designs, the passive safe shutdown designs and the small modular reactors (SMRs). The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) provides specific Codes used to perform preservice inspection/testing and inservice inspection/testing for many of the components used in the new reactor designs. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) reviews information provided by applicants related to inservice testing (IST) programs for Design Certifications and Combined Licenses (COLs) under Part 52, “Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants,” in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR Part 52) (Reference 1). The 2012 Edition of the ASME OM Code defines a post-2000 plant as a nuclear power plant that was issued (or will be issued) its construction permit, or combined license for construction and operation, by the applicable regulatory authority on or following January 1, 2000. The New Reactors OM Code (NROMC) Task Group (TG) of the ASME Code for Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants (NROMC TG) is assigned the task of ensuring that the preservice testing (PST) and IST provisions in the ASME OM Code to address pumps, valves, and dynamic restraints (snubbers) in post-2000 nuclear power plants are adequate to provide reasonable assurance that the components will operate as needed when called upon. Currently, the NROMC TG is preparing proposed guidance for the treatment of active pumps, valves, and dynamic restraints with high safety significance in non-safety systems in passive post-2000 reactors including SMRs.

scholarly journals Reactor performance, system reliability, instrumentation and control

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 43
Author(s):  
Andreas Schumm ◽  
Madalina Rabung ◽  
Gregory Marque ◽  
Jary Hamalainen
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Power Plants ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Software Systems ◽  
Reactor Performance ◽  
Horizon 2020 ◽  
Term Operation ◽  
In The Beginning ◽  
Electrical Cables

We present a cross-cutting review of three on-going Horizon 2020 projects (ADVISE, NOMAD, TEAM CABLES) and one already finished FP7 project (HARMONICS), which address the reliability of safety-relevant components and systems in nuclear power plants, with a scope ranging from the pressure vessel and primary loop to safety-critical software systems and electrical cables. The paper discusses scientific challenges faced in the beginning and achievements made throughout the projects, including the industrial impact and lessons learned. Two particular aspects highlighted concern the way the projects sought contact with end users, and the balance between industrial and academic partners. The paper concludes with an outlook on follow-up issues related to the long term operation of nuclear power plants.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document