1 / 19

LEADER L ead-cooled E uropean A dvanced DE monstration R eactor WP 5 - MEETING

LEADER L ead-cooled E uropean A dvanced DE monstration R eactor WP 5 - MEETING 26th February 2013. Participants Royal Institute of Technology – Stockholm (KTH) Empresarios Agrupados (EA) Objective Provide scoping assessment of the source term available for release to the environment

tamah
Download Presentation

LEADER L ead-cooled E uropean A dvanced DE monstration R eactor WP 5 - MEETING

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. LEADER Lead-cooled European Advanced DEmonstration Reactor WP 5 - MEETING 26th February 2013

  2. Participants Royal Institute of Technology – Stockholm (KTH) Empresarios Agrupados (EA) Objective Provide scoping assessment of the source term available for release to the environment Thermodynamic calculations Containment leakage and rates Calculations of fission products formed Assess the transport of airborne radionuclides in containment Perform calculations of the radiological impact of the releases to the public

  3. Second Part: In charge of EA Perform the radiological analysis to determine the impact on the environment Define the methodology to calculate the radiological impact Define the dose limits for each condition Input needed from: The first part of this Task: Source Term Assessment by KTH WP 3 Conceptual Design, to define the release mode and the meteorological conditions Dose assessment for accident condition

  4. Dose assessment methodology: A preliminary dose assessment will be performed with the following objectives: To calculate a preliminary site boundary dose to public (at the Exclusion Area Boundary) based on the reference source terms with no credit to any engineered safeguards. To verify the compliance with the present European criteria for licensing LWR To analyse the sensitivity on the dose to the public of the main uncertainties: retention of radionuclides in the primary coolant, fuel damage extension,... To identify radionuclides with the biggest influence on the environmental dose and to highlight the systems able to limit their release. To analyse the impact on the results of the dose calculation methodology used.

  5. The calculation of accident conditions will be processed according to the Regulatory Guide 1.183 issued by the US NRC In the calculation process, the ways of contamination considered are: The external exposure by submersion in a radioactive cloud. The internal exposure by inhalation of radioactive particles. No credit is given to the exposure via ingestion of contaminated food (milk, plants, meat…).

  6. The dose limits for members of the public set in case of accident condition: The effective dose limits for members of the public set in case of accidents are (NRC RG 1.183): 250 mSv for the accidents assumed to have the worst radiological consequences: a LOCA, a main steam line break for a PWR, a steam generator tube rupture for a PWR…, etc 63 mSv for accidents with less radiological impact: BWR Rod Drop Accident, PWR ROD Ejection Accident…, etc The new trends for the dose release targets of currently designed power plants are around 50 mSv for accidents

  7. Data and Assumptions 7/171 SAs severely damaged Source term  Fission Products: Kr, Xe, I, Sr, Cs, 3H  ENEAActivation:3H (CR), 210Po (Pb)  ENEA 100% release from pins & immediate release Volatilization fractions  800ºC (ULOF)  I, Cs, Sr, Po (by KTH)

  8. Data and Assumptions Containment Model Chemical form of Iodine isotopes  R.G. 1.183  Irrelevant (No removal) Radionuclide removal from containment  only decay and leakage, NO natural deposition, NO spray Primary Containment Leak rate  0.1% d-1 (EUR for LWR, Vol. 2, Rev. C) Dose Conversion Factors  FGR-11&12 X/Q  need of meteorological data  Pitesti (Romania) Reference values for accident condition (Spanish NPP) 7 26 Feb 2013, Petten

  9. Model for RADTRAD calculation: Model simplifications Release into containment = 100% Core Inventory (instantaneoust=0) x [Volatilization fraction] Containment Removal: only DECAY and LEAKAGE (environment) NO Sprays, NO Deposition

  10. Model for RADTRAD calculation:

  11. Activity Released to Environment: True Gases ~1012-1014 Bq (~100%) Lead-soluble FP & AP ~107-1010 Bq (<0.01%)

  12. Whole-body dose Xenon & Krypton ~0.1 mSv after 30 days (~100%) 88Kr+135Xe+133Xe (84%)

  13. Thyroid dose Iodine & Tritium ~0.03 mSv after 30 days (~100%) 131I+3H+133I (99%)

  14. TEDE Noble Gases & Tritium ~0.1 mSv after 30 days (100%)

  15. Doses Whole-body, Thyroid & TEDE ~0.04-0.001% of US NRC limits after 30 days 14 26 Feb 2013, Petten

  16. Doses – Sensitivity Analysis Whole-body, Thyroid & TEDE X/Q*10 & leakage*10  Source term 100 times higher 15 26 Feb 2013, Petten

  17. Conclusions • Compliance with present European Licensing Criteria • Conservative assumptions (damage, release, timing…) • No credit to engineered safeguards*(*Leak rate in accordance with non-loss of containment integrity) • ~100% of whole-body dose due to Noble Gases • Thyroid dose due to I-131 and H-3 (No retention of tritium in lead) • ~13% of TEDE due to Tritium (NO retention in lead) • Target leak rate: 0.1%/d  radiologically adequate • Need of on-site meteorological data (X/Q) • Impact of dose methodology  not expected to be high (Noble Gases) 16 26 Feb 2013, Petten

  18. D18 - Report on Containment Assessment for the ETDR Author: EA Dates: Rev. 0 – January 2013 (status: for comments) Rev. 1 – March 2013

  19. Thank you!

More Related