Russia s s efforts to improve safety following the Chernobyl and the Fukushima accidents

Similar documents
Status and Prospects of Nuclear Power Development in Russia

Design and Construction of Advanced Water Cooled Reactors Evolution of VVER Technology Towards NPP-2006 Project

Corium debris configurations in course of accident

Light Water Reactor in Russia

Significant Events in Rostechnadzor Activity Regarding WWER-type NPPs Operation within the Period from September 2015 up to July 2016

Scenarios of Heavy Beyond-Design-Basis Accidents in HTGRs N.G. Kodochigov, Yu.P. Sukharev

РОССИЙСКАЯ АКАДЕМИЯ НАУК Институт проблем безопасного развития атомной энергетики

Evolution of VVER technology towards NPP-2006 project

This is the third National Report of the Russian Federation on the fulfillment of commitments arising from the Convention on Nuclear Safety.

TS1-5: Revision of NS-G-2.15 and Its Implementation for Verification and Validation of Severe Accident Management Guidelines

РОССИЙСКАЯ АКАДЕМИЯ НАУК Институт проблем безопасного развития атомной энергетики

ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS OF RUSSIAN DESIGN

Protective Measure and Criteria Development the experience relating to the accident at the Chernobyl NPP

Radiation protection of itinerant workers in nuclear industry in the Russian Federation at the example of nuclear power plants

II.-1. Major nuclear power facilities in Japan

SUMMARY OF SE NNEGC ENERGOATOM PERFORMANCE IN POST-FUKUSHIMA PERIOD

Presented by Sorin Margeanu

This is the fourth National Report of the Russian Federation on the fulfillment of commitments arising from the Convention on Nuclear Safety.

New Safety Requirements Addressing Feedback From the Fukushima Daiichi Accident

Life Extension of Russian Nuclear Power Plants

RUSSIAN REGULATORY APPROACH TO EXTENSION OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SERVICE LIFE

New Safety Requirements Addressing Feedback From the Fukushima Daiichi Accident

Major events leading to the accident on April 26, 1986

Present status of Russian nuclear power industry. Future outlook through the analysis of the past

Joint Stock Company St. Petersburg Research and Design Institute ATOMENERGOPROEKT (JSC SPbAEP) Baltic NPP project in the Kaliningrad region

Green Cross Russia Nuclear and Radiation Safety Programme. V. M. Kuznetsov Contemporary state of safety at Russian nuclear installations

The Nuclear Crisis in Japan

Vladimir Kascheev, Pavel Poluektov, Oleg Ustinov WM-2012,

Response to Nuclear Emergency Situation - Viewpoints of Crisis Management -

COMPONENTS DISMANTLING AT NOVOVORONEZH UNITS 1, 2 SHUT DOWN FOR DECOMMISSIONING

International Atomic Energy Agency. Technical Working Group on Nuclear Power Plant Instrumentation and Control (TWG-NPPIC)

Safety Culture in the State Atomic Energy Corporation ROSATOM. Inspector General Mr. S.A. Adamchik

Overview of Events at Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant

IV 1. RADIOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE FUKUSHIMA DAIICHI AND CHERNOBYL NUCLEAR ACCIDENTS

The Establishment of Research-and-Education Nuclear Technology Centers on the Basis on Federal Universities: the Potential for Cooperation

Japanese Nuclear Accident And U.S. Response. April 15, 2011

Approaches to Deal with Irradiated Graphite in Russia Proposal for New IAEA CRP on Graphite Waste Management

Risk measure Large Early Release Frequency (LERF) for Severe Nuclear Accidents

CNSC Fukushima Task Force Nuclear Power Plant Safety Review Criteria

Integrated Quality System of JSC Rosenergoatom Concern Basis for Ensuring Safety and Enhancement of Efficiency

RUSSIA S CURRENT AND FUTURE NUCLEAR BUSINESS STRATEGIES & NUCLEAR EXPORT POLICIES

Olena Mykolaichuk State Nuclear Regulatory Inspectorate of Ukraine Chairperson

Safety Implication for Gen-IV SFR based on the Lesson Learned from the Fukushima Dai-ichi NPPs Accident. Ryodai NAKAI Japan Atomic Energy Agency

The need for strengthening of international cooperation in the area of analysis of radiological consequences

Stress tests specifications Proposal by the WENRA Task Force 21 April 2011

Application of the Defense-in-Depth Concept in the Projects of New-Generation NPPs Equipped with VVER Reactors. JSC ATOMENERGOPROEKT Moscow

Measures being taken to reinforce Ukrainian old designs NPPs and implementation of IAEA's requirements for new units 3 & 4 of Khmelnitsky NPP

ICRP Symposium on the International System of Radiological Protection

Naturally Safe HTGR in the response to the Fukushima Daiichi NPP accident

Presentation to the Japanese Cabinet Office

Problems of nuclear legacy regulation in Russia

21 November 1995 No.170-FZ RUSSIAN FEDERATION FEDERAL LAW ON ATOMIC ENERGY USE

Enhancement of Nuclear Safety

CAPACITY BUILDING FOR NATIONAL NUCLEAR INFRASTRUCTURE IN EMERGING NUCLEAR COUNTRIES

Regulatory Actions and Follow up Measures against Fukushima Accident in Korea

Lessons Learnt after the Chernobyl Accident 25 Years Later

The Fukushima Daiichi Incident Dr. Matthias Braun - 19 May p.1

POST-FUKUSHIMA STRESS TESTS OF EUROPEAN NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS CONTENTS AND FORMAT OF NATIONAL REPORTS

Operation of nuclear power plants in Russia today and tomorrow

Technical potentialities of integration of reactor vessel external cooling in operating WWER-440 plant - Assessment results

EDF NPPs Post-Fukushima Complementary Safety Assessments

A New Emergency Response Scheme Based On Lessons Learned From The Fukushima Daiich NPP Accident

Swedish Radiation Safety Authority. Central Authority for overall responsibility for Radiation and Nuclear safety. Zlatan Delalic 5 June 2012 Sida 1

Safety reassessment of WWR-K RR related to HEU/LEU conversion and feedback from accident at the Fukushima-Daiichi NPP

Fukushima Lessons Learnt and Follow-up Activities of Rostechnadzor

The French CODIRPA approach Policy elements for post-accident management in the event of a nuclear accident

Accident Management Programme for Indian Pressurized Heavy Water Reactors Chander Mohan Bhatia Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited

NPP Construction in Russia and abroad

MEXT Nuclear Energy R&D

Norwegian Regulatory Cooperation

STATUS of SAMGs and EPR in TURKEY

WHAT HAPPENED, WHAT IS GOING ON IN FUKUSHIMA NO.1 NUCLEAR POWER STATION?

Insights into Radiological Impacts from Major Severe Accidents of Nuclear Power Plants

TERM TASK FORCE. Presented to: Waste Management Symposia By: Dr. Charles L. Miller. Phoenix, AZ. Fukushima Daiichi NRC Near Term Task Force 1

Nuclear Technologies in Russia: Sustainable Innovative Development

The Fukushima Daiichi Incident

WENRA and its expectations on the safety of new NPP

The Fukushima Daiichi Incident Dr. Matthias Braun - 16 November p.1

Up-to-date issues of VVER Technology Development

Compilation of recommendations and suggestions

Safety Provisions for the KLT-40S Reactor Plant

IAEA Activities in Nuclear Safety and Security following the Fukushima Daiichi accident

Republic of Belarus Ministry of Energy Republican Engineering Design and Research Unitary Enterprise BELNIPIENERGOPROM

CURRENT NUCLEAR POWER ISSUES IN RUSSIA

International Conference. Fifteen Years after the Chornobyl Accident. Lessons Learned EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Nuclear Emergency Preparedness and Response in Japan following Fukushima Accident

Rosatom offer in the field of operation, maintenance and modernization of NNP

Emergency preparedness and response in case of nuclear and radiological events on-site or off-site and the experience of RODOS system application

Chernobyl : A Failure in Safe Operations

HOW TO FACE CONCERNS OF RADIATION EFFECTS

ONE YEAR AFTER FUKUSHIMA: LESSONS FOR A SAFER NUCLEAR ENERGY. Denis Flory. Deputy Director General of the IAEA

IAEA International Missions (2013) to Japan on Fukushima-D NPP decommissioning and on off-site remediation

Summary of Open Seminar - Countermeasures for Nuclear/Radiological Emergency at Nuclear Facilities -

IAEA-J4-TM TM for Evaluation of Design Safety

The Risk of Nuclear Power

Copyright 2016 ThinkReliability. How a Reactor Works

PLUTONIUM UTILIZATION IN REACTOR FUEL

DSS ARGOS AND RODOS WITHIN EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

Introduction to the Accident at Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Station

Jacques REPUSSARD. Director General of IRSN UNU. Tokyo, 20 December 2013

Transcription:

РОССИЙСКАЯ АКАДЕМИЯ НАУК Институт проблем безопасного развития атомной энергетики RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Nuclear Safety Institute (IBRAE) Russia s s efforts to improve safety following the Chernobyl and the Fukushima accidents Leonid Bolshov

Post Chernobyl efforts SU/Russia changed attitude to SA: Science based approach Internationalization Studies of DiD phenomena and models Scenario analysis Harmonization of regulations (INSAG-3) Modernization of all NPPs Upgrade of the Russian emergency response system and Rosatom emergency system 2

Basic Safety Principles LEGISLATIVE BLOCK SAFETY CULTURE Priority ranking Human factor TECHNOLOGICAL BLOCK (Technical provision of safety) Federal laws (principles of responsibilities) System of norms and regulations Availability of state licensing system (independent regulation) BASE of KNOWLEDGE about processes and phenomena PRINCIPLE OF DEFENSE-IN-DEPTH Multiple safety barriers Diverse levels of safety barriers accidents to be prevented mitigation of accident consequences (emergency management) 3

Reactivity accidents various types of fuel rod destructions CLAD BREACH Clad cogging over fuel pellet boundary Fuel rod with high burn-up (left) and with fresh fuel (right) FUEL ROD FRAGMENTATION Lower plug with sow melt Specific swelling with clad breach Cross-section of fuel rod with maximal deformation Fuel pellet fragments with melted-out central cavity 4

Loss of coolant accidents RASPLAV MASCA In vessel melt retention Database on thermal physical properties of corium contains data for temperatures up to 3100 К Database of crucial parameters describing the molten pool behavior was created A tool for analysis was developed 5

Change of Russian Safety Concept (INSAG-3) OLD SAFETY CONCEPT NEW SAFETY CONCEPT 1. In-depth analysis: design basis accidents and postulated initiating events 1. Analysis of beyond-designbasis accidents with possible severe damage of reactor core up to its full melting 2. Number of registered failures during evolution of design-basis accidents is limited to the principle of a single failure 2. A principle of a single failure is withdrawn while analyzing the beyonddesign-basis accidents 6

Development of safety requirements Toughening the requirement of various defense levels independence, minimization of possibility of accident development at next stages Radiation risk in all conditions and modes should be comparable with the risk from other industrial installations used for similar purposes There should not be a necessity in evacuation out of the plant site Requirements on placing the nuclear installations should not contain additional restrictions in comparison with other industrial facilities 7

Post Chernobyl efforts Adoption of safety culture principles: Priority of safety in design, construction and operation in general and day-to-day management Education and training programs Full scope simulators at every plant 8

Post Chernobyl efforts Cleaning and remediation Cleaning of contaminated areas after Chernobyl Medical screening 1990 Extraordinary protection measures 1994 Conversion of federal programs from saving lives to social rehabilitation 9

Efficiency of water protection measures at the Chernobyl NPP and their environmental effects Countermeasure Localized l37 Cs activity, TBq Cost, 10 6 dollars Individuals Specific cost, dollars/mbq Environmental effects Filtering dam system Wells in riverbed Pond-cooler isolation 0.074-0.11 46 3000 420-620 Forest flood in 4000 hc 0.44-0.74 50 500 68-114 < 0.037 > 100 > 1000 > 2700 4.5 mln. m 3 sand capture, which sand could cover ooze sediments in Kiev reservoir Elevation of ground waters in the Chernobyl NPP site

Comparative efficiency of protective measures related to reduction of radiation exposure

Costs of countermeasures after the Chernobyl NPP accident Countermeasure Range of reduced costs, Experience (year, place, dollars per 1 man Sv, man Gy contingent) Iodine prophylaxis 0.02-0.1 1986, Pripyt population Sanitary treatment 25-500 1986, Chernobyl NPP area 1986 Children of One week refusal of milk 1-15 contaminated areas of the consumption (children) Ukraine Restriction of consumption and control of local foodstuff 2,800-25,000 8,600-68,000 13,800-120,000 1986, Bryansk region 1987, Bryansk region 1989, Bryansk region

Chernobyl experience Contamination density Average dose, msv Area, km 2 Population, thous. > 15 Ci/km 2 (555 kbq/m 2 ) > 40 Ci/km 2 (1480 kbq/m 2 ) 10 11000 85 40 3620 7 In accord with the Chernobyl Law in 1991, the territories contaminated with Cs above 1 Ci/km 2 were assigned with the affected lands. The total area comprised 160 thous. km 2 with the population of about 3 million. As the Chernobyl experience showed, the excessive and radiologically unjustified protective measures (primarily evacuation) could lead to a sharp amplification of negative psychological, social and economic consequences.

Legacy issues During restructuring of economy after SU disintegration, a number of back-end and legacy issues are being solved: Since 2008, a large-scale Federal Program addressing legacy and back-end issues is in progress Safety of waste and SNF storage improved Centralized dry storage of SNF built 2011 Federal Law on Radioactive Waste Management had set a limit for temporary storage and necessitated ultimate disposal of all wastes 14

Russian nuclear program Large scale domestic construction of VVER- 1200 (Kaliningrad, Leningrad-2, Rostov, Novovoronezh-2, Nizhniy Novgorod, Kursk ) VVER-1200 foreign constructions (China, India, Turkey, Vietnam, ) Fast reactors with closed fuel cycle R&D program (Beloyarskaya BN-1200, BREST, ) SMRs (floating, SVBR, VBR, VVER-640 ) 15

Operating Russian nuclear plants 10 NPPs, 33 units, N inst. =25242 MW 16

NPP Operator - JSC Concern Rosenergoatom Rosenergoatom was established on 07.09.1992 as NPP Operator by the RF President s Decree 33 25242 MWt - number of existing power units - the installed capacity 177.3 bln kw-h - generated in 2012 35 thous. pers. - Rosenergoatom s employees 17

18 Russian nuclear power roadmap Russian nuclear power roadmap Kalinin NPP Unit 4 Beloyarsk NPP Unit 4 (BN-800) NV-II NPP Unit 2 Leningrad-II NPP Unit 2 Baltic NPP Unit 1 Baltic NPP Unit 2 Beloyarsk NPP Unit 5 (BN-1200) Kursk-II NPP Unit 1 Nizhny Novgorod NPP Unit 2 NV-II NPP Unit 1 Leningrad-II NPP Unit 1 Rostov NPP Unit 4 Leningrad-II NPP Unit 3 Nizhny Novgorod NPP Unit 1 Leningrad-II NPP Unit 4 Kursk-II NPP Unit 2 Rostov NPP Unit 3 Кola-II NPP Unit 1 Beloyarsk NPP Unit 6 (BN-1200) Seversk NPP Unit 1 (BN-1200) Central NPP Unit 1 Кola-II NPP Unit 2

The Number of Deaths and Early Effects of Radiation Accidents Based on published data (except for malicious acts and nuclear weapon tests) Type of accident 1945-1965 1966-1986 1987-2007 Total Accidents at nuclear facilities 46 early effects 227 early effects * 2 early effects 275 early effects Opinion of the Committee regarding the Report completeness Most of the deaths and many injuries were likely reported. Occupational accidents Incidents with orphan IRS Accidents during research projects Accidents during medical use 16 deaths 40 deaths* 3 deaths 59 deaths 8 early 109 early 49 early 166 early effects effects effects effects 0 deaths 20 deaths 5 deaths 25 deaths 5 early 60 early 204 early 269 early effects effects effects effects 7 deaths 10 deaths 16 deaths 33 deaths 1 early effect 21 early 5 early 27 early effects effects effects 0 deaths 0 deaths 0 deaths 0 deaths no data 470 early 143 early 613 early effects effects effects no data 3 deaths 42 deaths 45 deaths A number of deaths and injuries were not likely reported. A number of deaths and injuries were not likely reported. A number of deaths and injuries were not likely reported. It is evident that many deaths and a significant number of injuries were not reported. TOTAL Early effects 60 887 403 1350 Deaths 23 73 66 162 19 Table 10 p.52 of Appendix R.671 to the UNSCEAR 2008 Report

Summary Data for Major (> 5 Victims) Accidents in the Energy Sector in 1969-2000 OECD countries Non-OECD countries Type Accidents Victims Victim/GW Accidents Victims Victim/GW Coal 75 2259 0.157 1044 18 017 0.597 Coal (data for China, 1994-1999) Coal (excluding China) 819 11 334 6.169 102 4831 0.597 Oil 165 3713 0.132 232 16 505 0.897 Natural gas 90 1043 0.085 45 1000 0.111 Oil & gas 59 1905 1.957 46 2016 14.896 Hydropower 1 14 0.003 10 29 924 10.285 Nuclear power 0 0-1 31* 0.048 Total 390 8934 1480 72 324 * Instant deaths only 20

What was wrong? Main safety objective: the protection of the public from excessive exposure, is not accurate. Core melt accidents with low or no radiation effects used to have large scale consequences because of public illiteracy, contradictory health regulations, bad communication 21

22 General outcome of the Fukushima Daiichi accident 1. It is now clear that many factors contributing to the Fukushima accident were identified prior to the accident: poor severe accident management planning structure; lack of safety improvements; inadequate evaluation of external hazards; weak regulatory system; lack of training of personnel on emergency preparedness. 2. The necessary measures to address these shortcomings were not put in place.

Tests of defense-in-depth efficiency have been done: - for each power unit in operation in Russia - taking into account all credible extreme impacts on NPP that are specific for the placement region 23 - taking into account various combinations of the extreme impacts

Results of the in-depth assessment 1 2 3 4 Total loss of heat removal from the reactor core Upgrading works aimed at safety at safety improvement of NPPs have been been implemented during last 10 15 15 years years Vulnerabilities and initial events have been revealed for each NPP Implementation of supplementary measures aimed at enhancement of NPP robustness is needed Not all BDBA initial events were considered in designs of the operating NPPs Complete and durable (over 10 days) loss of NPP connections to external power sources Combination of 2 or more independent initiating events 24

Additional measures to improve safety of Russian NPPs Near-term actions Purchasing and equipping the plants with portable engineering means to be used for elimination of severe BDBAs: Diesel generators, Diesel-driven pumps, Motor-driven pumps, etc. Medium- and long-term actions Analysis and development of specific supplementary design solutions to be implemented at each NPP 25

Introduction of mobile emergency equipment at NPPs In 2012, the following equipment was delivered to 10 Russian NPPs: 31 units 36 units 35 units 80 units 182 units 26

Scale of the Problem What do you know about the victims of military and peaceful atom? Students Event Real number of victims Students evaluations Immediate and quick death of 210 000 people About 300 000 people Hiroshima Remote consequences among 86572 hibakushas 421 people 750 000 people Immediate and quick death of 31 people 40 000 people Remote consequences (liquidators and population) 60 people 250 000 people Chernobyl 27

Software and hardware systems (SHS) SHS for rescue units of the State Corporation "Rosatom" to assess the consequences of radiation accidents to the environment (air, water) and the population SHS with 3-D models to assess the effects of radiation accidents in complex industrial environment 28

Systems of emergency response and radiation monitoring in the RF regions Territorial systems are created in the RF regions, where operational NPPs and NPPs under construction are located, to support local authorities functioning and to demonstrate safety of the NPP s operation (system of emergency preparedness and independent radiation monitoring) Scope of work: Establishment of crisis centers; Creation of territorial automated system of radiation monitoring; Development and equipment of software & technical systems; Creation of mobile laboratory facilities; Conduct of exercises and training. 29

Incident analysis for Fukushima-1 units 1-3 and spent fuel pool 4 (SOCRAT) Without water cooling taken into account Reactor BWR/3 calculation model for SOCRAT code 30

Atmosphere transfer modeling with account of detailed weather data in Japan Modeling results and monitoring data - Model - ARMS measurement - DOE monitoring 31

Fukushima experience Territories and population in the areas with expected annual dose for population above 20 and 100 msv after the Fukushima NPP accident In 20-km zone Out 20- km zone Total Expected annual dose, msv/year > 20 > 100 Area, km 2 Total 327 101 Populated 109 24 Population, individuals 43 700 8750 Area, km 2 Total 368 53 Populated 84 11 Population, individuals 16 300 4000 Area, km 2 Total 695 154 Populated 193 35 Population, individuals 60 000 12 550 32

Fukushima experience Recommendations on protective measures For major part of the Japanese territory, the total radiation exposure doses for population for 20 days after the accident did not exceed 0.1 msv. No protective measures are required. The total dose for population for 20 days in the most contaminated prefecture Ibaraki reached 0.6-1.0 msv. Such prevention measure as control of milk and vegetable contamination for the first month is recommended. In the north-west trace out the boundary of 20-km area, the maximal doses for 20 days could reach 50 msv. The expected dose for the first year without protection measure could reach total 150 msv. Population evacuation is not justified. Deactivation, regular control over food and water contamination and some other measures are recommended.

34 In April 2012, WANO MC s Board of Governors adopted the idea proposed by Operating organizations to establish WANO MC Regional Crisis Center (RCC)

RCC 1. Early notification and exchange of credible information between WANO MC Members in case of an accident or a safety important event occurred at NPP. 2. Establishing the Expert Community to provide real-time consultations and early engineering and technical support on request of an emergency NPP. 3. Establishing mechanisms for early provision of materials and technical resources as assistance of WANO MC Members on request of an emergency NPP. 35

What to do Detailed safety analysis of low probable scenarios with severe consequences. A global consensus on a set of accidents that should be considered and could be ignored. For severe, although low-probable accidents, protective measures should be included. The 100 times gap between radiation effect and regulation should be bridged. Public information should be an essential part of the atomic energy use. National technical centers should support emergency response to radiological incidents. 36

Conclusion Include into consideration the unlikely, though severe, accidents and eliminate them by deterministic methods; Be fully prepared for emergency response; Clear the rules for radiation protection; Provide the public involvement in the issues of radiation and nuclear technology safety. 37