Planning for future: towards rev D

Transcription

1 European Utility Requirements for LWR nuclear power plants EUR seminar 2010, Barcelona, June 1 st 2010 Planning for future: towards rev D Pierre BERBEY, EDF

2 page 2 An important item of our roadmap: updating the generic specification Last revision (revision C) of the volumes 1 & 2 released in April 2001 A lot of preparatory material gathered by the EUR organisation since 2001 to improve the text Feedback from project evaluations Comparisons with other specifications Analyses of the recent regulatory documents vs. EUR New policies and new chapters Some sections are outdated The EUR organisation is considering a revision D of the volumes 1 & 2

3 detailed review of the key chapters of the volume 2 rev C by the EUR organization detailed review of the key chapters of the volume 2 rev C by the EUR organization in identification of the points that still appeared unclear, showed discrepancies with the overall technical policies of the EUR document, were felt either too design-specific or too solutionoriented or would deserve more detailed rationales, etc. proposals for evolution, where possible specific EUR reports have been written soon after the revision C of volume 2 had been published, page 3 with contribution of the authors of the revision fresh memory Available material

4 recent analyses of compliance of the AP1000, the AES92 and the EPR the recent analyses of compliance of the AP1000, the AES92 and the EPR have been made vs. the EUR revision C A lot of comments collected: page 4 relevance of some EUR requirements right interpretation neutrality of the requirements, undue exclusion of proposed technical solutions this material has been gathered in specific EUR background reports, written by the EUR engineers in charge of the analysis The works have been completed during the analysis and are available

5 update of the EUR transmission grid requirements Revision C of the EUR chapter 2.3 from the works of a specific EUR TWG Situation in Europe not stable: switching from regulated markets to open market proposed update of the EUR transmission grid requirements by a specific EUR topical working group in page 5 Distinguish better the stakes of the HV grid operators from the producers' Paid grid services vs. mandatory (and free) services Technical options to accommodate the different situations of nuclear generation in the different European countries: base operation, primary power control only, extended load following A draft revision D of the EUR chapter 2.3 is available for integration in a next revision D of the volume 2.

6 the EUR Criteria for Limited Impact crop trading limited < 1 year crop trading limited < 1 month public temporary relocation < 1 month site page 6 3 km 10 km 100 km Any distance: public countermeasures not required < 1day no public relocation > 1 month

7 simplification of the EUR criteria for limiting impact proposal for simplification of the EUR criteria for limiting impact (CLI, appendix B to chapter 2.1) the current EUR methodology is sound and valid page 7 its provides assurance that the radionuclide release in a severe accident will not exceed limited environmental impacts. The methodology is decoupled the design specs from site evaluation and simplifies the design process. It has appeared complicated to the users A study to simplify the approach has given positive results Of the three design targets expressed as dose limits: TEA (emergency), TDA (delayed), and TLA (long term), the TEA is bounding, and the TDA and TLA can be eliminated. Proposal to revise the appendix B to chapter 2.1, without changing the qualitative release targets in DEC and severe accident

8 decommissioning More specific consideration of decommissioning in the initial design of the new LWR plants. An update of the EUR decommissioning requirements has been carried out in and a draft revision D of the chapter 2.16 is available for integration in a next revision D. May be further evolution would be necessary page 8

9 consideration of ageing and lifetime extension in the new plant design A specific EUR topical working group has been set up in 2008 to identify the sections of the EUR volume 2 that should be modified to explicitly take provisions for plant ageing and plant life extension in the initial design. A set of revised sections is being produced under the leadership of CEZ. Expected to be approved around the end of 2010 page 9

10 comparison between EUR and EPRI-URD Update of the comparison between EUR and EPRI-URD going on A collaboration frame has been re-established with EPRI to update the EUR comparison report established in the mid 90's. Limited resource available at either party, thus limited scope: page 10 the 35 "macro-issues" identified in 1995 No extensive analysis at requirement level Outcome: proposals for evolution of the EUR document No search for convergence with EPRI URD at this stage

11 follow up of the WENRA works on harmonization of nuclear safety in Europe review and follow up of the WENRA works on harmonization of nuclear safety in Europe. WENRA Reference Levels for operating plants page 11 Analysis at detail level vs. EUR Identification and quantification of the discrepancies Proposals to change a few requirements of EUR volume 2 ready WENRA safety objectives for new power reactors Identification and quantification of the discrepancies Synthetic comments together with Foratom/ENISS Discussion with WENRA engaged

12 consideration of NPP environmental impact in EUR consideration of environmental impact in the EUR design objectives an important item of new builds licensing in Europe Site specific, but the specification could be standardised and integrated into the EUR document Works by a specific EUR TWG to be undertaken in 2010 page 12

13 missing parts Important contributions missing in the material available today page 13 analysis of the updated IAEA Safety Standards feedback from the MDEP works The decision whether and how to integrate part or the whole of this material into a revision D is still being discussed within the EUR organization.

14 Which schedule? Large resource necessary for a complete updating of the EUR volumes 1 & 2 Need to guarantee consistency when a change is introduced Topical approach preferred to chapter by chapter revision A pilot case may be undertaken in 2010 Eventually, around 2 years necessary to cover the complete scope with the inputs available today page 14

15 European Utility Requirements for future LWR plants Get fresh news at: