국외 원자력발전소 해체 안전성 평가 방법론 분석
Analysis of the Methodologies for Safety Assessment of Decommissioning a Foreign Nuclear Power Plant
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
plants are expected to reach the end of their design life by 2030. As a result, the demand for nuclearpower plant decommissioning is anticipated to increase, and the domestic nuclear decommissioning industry isexpected to gradually expand. However, due to the lack of experience in decommissioning commercial nuclear powerplants in Korea, there is currently a shortage of the expertise and technology needed for safety assessments, whichis essential for decommissioning planning. Therefore, it is necessary to establish a safety assessment methodologythat can be applied to the domestic decommissioning industry by investigating and analyzing international cases togather foundational data. The purpose of this study is to investigate and compare decommissioning safety assessmentmethodologies used in international cases. For this purpose, safety assessment methodologies proposed by theInternational Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) were examined. Additionally, decommissioning documents such as the decommissioning experience report for SONGS Unit 1 in theU.S. and the decommissioning plans for Trojan and Shoreham nuclear power plants were analyzed. Then, each casewas compared and analyzed in terms of decommissioning safety assessment procedures and risk analysis methods. The analysis of the IAEA’s decommissioning safety assessment methodology show that it follows a systematic andcomplementary process that reflects essential considerations. The NRC’s methodology is similar to that of the IAEA butdiffers in the approach to risk identification and the application of the graded approach. In the case of SONGS Unit 1in the U.S., risks associated with decommissioning activities were identified based on prior decommissioning cases. A preliminary assessment was then conducted to quantitatively determine the risk levels of each decommissioningactivity. Safety measures were subsequently established based on the risk levels, completing the safety assessmentprocess. For the Trojan and Shoreham nuclear power plants, site and facility characterization was performed, andproportional safety measures were implemented. Additionally, high-risk scenarios were analyzed to ensure thesafety of decommissioning activities. All analyzed safety assessment methodologies shared common features suchas risk identification, analysis, and the application of the graded approach in safety measures. However, there weresome differences in risk identification and analysis methods, as well as in the techniques used for establishing safetymeasures. The results of this study can serve as foundational data for developing safety assessment methodologies forfuture decommissioning plans.
Abstract
plants are expected to reach the end of their design life by 2030. As a result, the demand for nuclearpower plant decommissioning is anticipated to increase, and the domestic nuclear decommissioning industry isexpected to gradually expand. However, due to the lack of experience in decommissioning commercial nuclear powerplants in Korea, there is currently a shortage of the expertise and technology needed for safety assessments, whichis essential for decommissioning planning. Therefore, it is necessary to establish a safety assessment methodologythat can be applied to the domestic decommissioning industry by investigating and analyzing international cases togather foundational data. The purpose of this study is to investigate and compare decommissioning safety assessmentmethodologies used in international cases. For this purpose, safety assessment methodologies proposed by theInternational Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) were examined. Additionally, decommissioning documents such as the decommissioning experience report for SONGS Unit 1 in theU.S. and the decommissioning plans for Trojan and Shoreham nuclear power plants were analyzed. Then, each casewas compared and analyzed in terms of decommissioning safety assessment procedures and risk analysis methods. The analysis of the IAEA’s decommissioning safety assessment methodology show that it follows a systematic andcomplementary process that reflects essential considerations. The NRC’s methodology is similar to that of the IAEA butdiffers in the approach to risk identification and the application of the graded approach. In the case of SONGS Unit 1in the U.S., risks associated with decommissioning activities were identified based on prior decommissioning cases. A preliminary assessment was then conducted to quantitatively determine the risk levels of each decommissioningactivity. Safety measures were subsequently established based on the risk levels, completing the safety assessmentprocess. For the Trojan and Shoreham nuclear power plants, site and facility characterization was performed, andproportional safety measures were implemented. Additionally, high-risk scenarios were analyzed to ensure thesafety of decommissioning activities. All analyzed safety assessment methodologies shared common features suchas risk identification, analysis, and the application of the graded approach in safety measures. However, there weresome differences in risk identification and analysis methods, as well as in the techniques used for establishing safetymeasures. The results of this study can serve as foundational data for developing safety assessment methodologies forfuture decommissioning plans.
참고문헌 (28)
- NSSC, "Article 2, Subparagraph 24 of the Nuclear Safety Act", ~ (2020)
- NSSC, "Article 28 of the Nuclear Safety Act", ~ (2015)
- NSSC, "NSSC Notice No. 2021-10", ~ (2021)
- IAEA, "Safety Assessment for Decommissioning. IAEA SRS No.77", ~ (2013)
- Safety Assessment for the Decommissioning of Facilities Using Radioactive Material, "IAEA", ~, pp.IAEA No. WS-G-5.2 (2009)
- Decommissioning of Facilities, "IAEA", ~, pp.IAEA No. GSR part 6 (2014)
- Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Plants, "IAEA", ~, pp.IAEA SSG No.47 (2018)
- NRC, "Generic Environmental Impact Statement on Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities, NUREG-0586", ~ (1988)
- NRC, "Generic Environmental Impact Statement on Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities Supplement 1, NUREG-0586", ~ (2002)
- Decommissioning Considerations for New Nuclear Power Plants, "NEA", ~, pp.NEA No. 6833 (2010)
- NRC, "Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors, Regulatory Guide 1.184", ~ (2012)
- NRC, "Standard Format and Content for Post-shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report, Regulatory Guide 1.185", ~ (2012)
- Hyunkeun Shin, "A Study on the Application of Graded Approach to Decommissioning Safety Assessment Based on IAEA Stnadards & DeSa Project Experience", ~ (2019)
- Risk Assessment on Hazards for Decommissioning Safety of a Nuclear Facility, "Jeong K-S", ~ (2010)
- San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station – Unit Decommissioning Experience Report, "EPRI", ~ (2008)
- Trojan Nuclear Plant Decommissioning Plan and License Termination Plan, "PGE", ~ (2001)
- Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Decommissioning Plan, "Long Island Power Authority.", ~ (1990)
- Technology, Safety and Costs of Decommissioning a Reference Pressurized Water Reactor Power Station, "NRC", ~, pp.NUREC (1978), CR-0130
- NRC, "Standard Format and Content of License Termination Plans for Nuclear Power Reactors, Regulatory Guide 1.179", 179~ (2019)
- NRC, "Generic Environmental Impact Statement in Support of Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for License Termination of NRC-Licensed Nuclear Facilities, NUREG-1496", ~ (1997)
- Contents of Applications; Technical Information in Final Safety Analysis Report, "NRC", ~, pp.10 CFR 52.157 (2007)
- Achieving the Goals of the Decommissioning Safety Case, "NEA", ~, pp.NEA No.5417 (2005)
- NRC, "Environmental Effect of Renewing the Operation License of a Nuclear Power Plant, 10 CFR 51 subpart A appendix B", ~ (2017)
- NRC, "Numerical Guides for Design Objectives and Limiting Conditions for Operation to Meet the Criterion “As Los as is Reasonably Achievable” for Radioactive Material in Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactor Effluents, 10 CFR 50 appendix I", ~ (2021)
- NRC, "Occupational Dose Limits, 10 CFR 20 subpart C", ~ (2021)
- OSHA, "Occupational Safety and Health Standards, 29 CFR 1910 subpart A", ~ (1970)
- NRC, "Radiation Dose Limits for Individual Members of the Public, 10 CFR subpart D", ~ (2021)
- Technology, Safety and Costs of Decommissioning a Reference Boiling Water Reactor Power Station, "NRC", ~, pp.NUREC (1980), CR-0672