Tritium Safety Issues David Petti March 7, 2001 Tritium Town Meeting Livermore, CA.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe in der Helmholtz-Gemeinschaft Garching, 10 Nov.2006TW6-TSS-SEA 2.1 I. CristescuSlide1 HVT-TLK FZK - EURATOM ASSOCIATION Occupational.
Advertisements

Generic Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR): Safety Systems Overview
Lessons Learned from the Application of Risk Management in the Shipment of LNG.
Constellation Energy “The Way Energy Works” PWR Tritium Issues G. C. Jones.
Tritium Management at Fermilab Stuart Henderson Associate Laboratory Director for Accelerators Community Advisory Board Meeting August 23, 2012.
Modeling boiling water reactor main steam isolation valve leakage using MELCOR Presented at the 21 st Annual Regulatory Information Conference March 10-12,
5/19/2015 Segmentation of the Legacy C Area Disassembly Spent Fuel Pool Prepared by: Jon Guy, N&CSE Spent Fuel Project Lead UNCLASSIFIED DOES NOT CONTAIN.
1 Chemical Hazards. 2 Purpose of Lectures on Chemical Safety To understand the hazardous properties of chemicals prior to their use. To transport / handle.
Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Two Tube Failure Event for the Helium Cooled Blanket Lee Cadwallader and Brad Merrill INEEL Fusion.
School for drafting regulations Nuclear Safety Decommissioning Vienna, 2-7 December 2012 Tea Bilic Zabric.
Safety and Environment Thrusts - Extension of the Fusion Safety Standard and Design Integration Through Safety Harnessing Fusion Power: ReNeWS HFP Theme.
Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Safety Issues Related to Flibe/Ferritic Steel Blanket and Vacuum Vessel Placement Brad Merrill.
May 22nd & 23rd 2007 Stockholm EUROTRANS: WP 1.5 Task Containment Assessment IP-EUROTRANS DOMAIN 1 Design WP 1.5 Safety Assessment of the Transmutation.
Fusion Power Plant Licensing and Waste Management by Antonio Natalizio for Presentation at the 9 th Course on Technology of Fusion Reactors at Erice (Monastero.
Overview of the ARIES “Pathways” Program Farrokh Najmabadi UC San Diego 8 th International Symposium on Fusion Nuclear Technology Heidelberg, Germany 01–
Overview of radioactivity vs. chemical toxicity issues for Overview of radioactivity vs. chemical toxicity issues for potential target materials presented.
Tritium Safety Issues & Results for IFE Power Plants* Jeff Latkowski & Susana Reyes Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory *With assistance from the GA.
ARIES Meeting General Atomics, February 25 th, 2005 Brad Merrill, Richard Moore Fusion Safety Program Pressurization Accidents in ARIES-CS.
Page 1 of 14 Reflections on the energy mission and goals of a fusion test reactor ARIES Design Brainstorming Workshop April 2005 M. S. Tillack.
ARIES Meeting April 22-23, 2002 U. Wisconsin, Madison Work performed under the auspices of the U. S. Department of Energy by University of California Lawrence.
Safety assessment for Safety assessment for potential target materials: radioactivity vs. chemical toxicity presented by: Susana Reyes ARIES Group Meeting.
Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Safety Related Design Issues Brad Merrill, Dave Petti, Lee Cadwallader Fusion Safety Program ARIES.
Oxidation of Graphite Walls: Preliminary Results from SOMBRERO Safety Analysis S. Reyes, J. F. Latkowski Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Laser IFE.
1 Chemical Process Safety. 2 Outline of Lecture on Chemical Process Safety Inherent Safety Hazard Identification Risk Assessment Fire Protection.
Seminar: Safety in Nuclear Fusion Plants - La Sapienza University (Rome) – 24 April 2015 Design Basis Accidents (DBA) M. T. Porfiri – ENEA UTFUS-TECN (Frascati)
PART IX: EMERGENCY EXPOSURE SITUATIONS Module IX.1: Generic requirements for emergency exposure situations Lesson IX.1-2: General Requirements Lecture.
Task TW5-SL53 7b Planning: 12 Months Review of the New Design of the Tritium Building and Detritiation Systems.
Higher Regulatory Standards Series 430. Higher Regulatory Standards 432 Elements Dougherty County (2007 Manual) – Total Points: 2740 – Activity 430.
40 Nuclear Fission and Fusion After fusion, the total mass of the light nuclei formed in the fusion process is less than the total mass of the nuclei that.
Engineering Risk Assessments and Risk Communication Sarah Arulanandam, Hazard and Risk Group RWDI West Inc. DISCLOSURE OF MATERIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURES:
Vessel Vacuum Tritium Permeation & PbLi/Water Safety Issues Paul Humrickhouse INL Fusion Safety Program October 13 th -14 th, 2011 ARIES Meeting Gaithersburg,
EFDA EUROPEAN FUSION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 1 Agenda Kick Off Meeting of the contract EFDA-ENEA 05/ Task TW5-SEA 4.2 “Update Failure Mode and Effect.
Page 1 of 11 An approach for the analysis of R&D needs and facilities for fusion energy ARIES “Next Step” Planning Meeting 3 April 2007 M. S. Tillack ?
S A C C O N E A P E S Chapter 11: Nuclear Energy
INPRO Assessment of Safety of Innovative Nuclear Reactors and Fuel Cycle Facilities INPRO Assessment of Safety of Innovative Nuclear Reactors and Fuel.
PLANT DESIGN.
FAULT TREE ANALYSIS (FTA). QUANTITATIVE RISK ANALYSIS Some of the commonly used quantitative risk assessment methods are; 1.Fault tree analysis (FTA)
Explosion An explosion is a rapid expansion of gases resulting in a rapid moving pressure or shock wave. The expansion can be mechanical or it can be.
,Yalta,17-th Symposium of AER1 IMPACT OF CHANGED FUEL PERFORMANCES ON SAFETY BARRIER EFFECTIVENESS AT NORMAL OPERATION OF NPP WITH VVER A.V.
MODULE “PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL” SAFETY ASSESSMENT DURING DECOMMISSIONING SAFE DECOMMISSIONING OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS Project BG/04/B/F/PP ,
Vincent MASSAUT 10/10/ EFDA Task TW6-TSS-SEA 2.1 Occupational Radiation Exposure - ALARA in ITER: further refinement Kick off meeting Garching, 10/10/2006.
Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Tritium Release Limits for Fusion Facilities David Petti INEEL Fusion Safety Program APEX/ITER.
ATOMIC ENERGY 4 Binding Energy 4 Fission and Fusion 4 Nuclear Reactors 4 Electrical Generation.
Tritium and Safety Issues for Power Plants Lee Cadwallader Fusion Safety Program ARIES Meeting Bethesda, MD April 4-5, 2011.
Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant Event Summary and FPL/DAEC Actions.
General RP guidelines for CENF CENF secondary beam study group H. Vincke07/05/
Main Requirements on Different Stages of the Licensing Process for New Nuclear Facilities Module 4.5/1 Design Geoff Vaughan University of Central Lancashire,
ITER and Fusion Safety Aspects H.-W. Bartels, ITER Prague, 13.November 2006.
Nuclear Power Plant Meltdown Zach, Luke, and Nick.
Regulatory Framework for Uranium Production Facilities in the U.S.
©Ian Sommerville 2004Software Engineering, 7th edition. Chapter 9 Slide 1 Critical Systems Specification 1.
INPRO Assessment of Safety of Innovative Nuclear Reactors and Fuel Cycles INPRO Assessment of Safety of Innovative Nuclear Reactors and Fuel Cycles Y.
-1- UNRESTRICTED / ILLIMITÉ Demonstrating the Safety of Long-Term Waste Management Facilities Dave Garrick 2015 September.
Overview of the Safety and Tritium Applied Research (STAR) Facility Phil Sharpe Fusion Safety Program Idaho National Laboratory, USA HAPL Program Meeting.
PROTECTIVE ACTIONS AND REENTRY. Protective Actions Promptly and effectively implemented or recommended for implementation to minimize the consequences.
EUROnu Costing Workshop May 2011 Beta-Beam Costing Exercise Elena Wildner, CERN 25/05/11 1 EUROnu Costing Workshop, CERN May 2011.
Low Power and Shutdown PSA IAEA Training Course on Safety Assessment of NPPs to Assist Decision Making Workshop Information IAEA Workshop City, Country.
1.9. Safety assessment “School for Drafting Regulations on Radiation Safety, IAEA - Module 1 Regulatory framework for safety, authorization and inspection.
Radiological impacts from nuclear industrial facilities on the public and the environment : Their magnitude and the next 50 years forecast Sylvain Saint-Pierre.
Environmental Protection & Nuclear Safety Division
Recent Developments Regarding Control Room Habitability Assessment
Environmental Protection & Nuclear Safety Division
Sandia National Laboratories
Nuclear Energy.
NRC Event Number – Event Date
Harnessing Fusion Power: Safety and Environment - Overview and Thrusts
4th ISOE European Workshop on Occupational Exposure Management at NPPs Lyon, France, March 2004 Kirsi Alm-Lytz Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority.
Preliminary Analysis of Loss of Vacuum Events in ARIES-RS
BHOPAL Industrial Disaster Management Cycle: OECD 2004.
RSFs & categorisation 20 May, 2019.
Presentation transcript:

Tritium Safety Issues David Petti March 7, 2001 Tritium Town Meeting Livermore, CA

Outline Releases during normal operation Releases under accident conditions Tritium confinement –Inventory guidelines –Number of barriers –Implementation concerns for MFE and IFE Deflagration/Detonation Risk Contamination Issues –Ventilation –Maintenance

Release during Normal Operation DOE Fusion Safety Standard requires less than 0.1 mSv/yr (10 mrem/year), a factor of 10 below regulatory standards (application of ALARA principle) For a typical site with a 1 km site boundary, this translates into: – 20 to 30 Ci/day up the stack as HTO – 2 to 3 Ci/day release at ground level as HTO (which is the most likely location for leakage from power conversion system) –Factor of ten higher if HT Tritiated liquid releases can be much more stringent depending on the specific state

Release Under Accident Conditions DOE Fusion Safety Standard states the facility must meet a dose limit of 10 mSv (1 Rem) under worst postulated accident to avoid the need for public evacuation We used to apply average weather conditions for such an assessment per DOE Fusion Safety Standard More recent DOE emergency planning guidance is now very clear that we must use conservative weather!

Release Under Accident Conditions For a typical site, with a 1 km site boundary, the 10 mSv dose converts to the following release limits for grams of tritium as HTO: Weather AverageConservative Elevated 1500 g 150 g Groundlevel 150 g 15 g 15 g of tritium release will be extremely difficult to meet! It may mean greater confinement.

Tritium Confinement Per US DOE Fusion Safety Standard, confinement of radioactivity is the primary public safety function: Radioactive and hazardous material confinement barriers of sufficient number, strength, leak tightness, and reliability shall be incorporated in the design of fusion facilities to prevent releases of radioactive and/or hazardous materials from exceeding evaluation guidelines during normal operation or during off- normal conditions. In the design of confinement barriers, the principles of redundancy, diversity, and independence shall be considered. Specifically, in the case of multiple barriers, failure of one barrier shall not result in the failure of another barrier if evaluation guidelines could be exceeded. Redundancy and diversity shall be considered in the total confinement strategy if new or untested components of a barrier are used.

Confinement Implementation Where are the major inventories? How many barriers? How much inventory are you confining? What about the penetrations? How do you implement confinement barriers there? What are the testing requirements for the barriers?

Major Inventories Chamber –Co-deposited material –Implanted or bred in PFC –In dust/debris –Cryopumps Tritium Plant –ISS was the component with the highest inventory in ITER EDA Tritium Target Factory (IFE) –Diffusion chambers and target preparation

Tritium Source Term in ITER EDA

Number of barriers The number of barriers should be based on the vulnerable inventory and reliability of confinement barriers such that the risk based design dose targets are not exceeded (i.e., work backwards from dose targets) A highly reliable robust barrier would have a breach probability of ~ per challenge. A less reliable barrier would have a breach probability of ~ to per challenge. (Actual reliability depends on the design and the postulated challenges to the barrier) It is a design decision to determine how many barriers are needed. More reliable barriers have more stringent design criteria than less reliable barriers and would cost more to design, build, certify, maintain and survey. In general, lower vulnerable inventories require fewer barriers. As a rule of thumb, in ITER less than 100 to 150 g would require one highly reliable barrier or two less reliable barriers. 100 g to 1 kg would require two highly reliable barriers Segmentation of the inventory is a good way to minimize the number of required confinement barriers, but it may increase facility foot print and add components like valves to the design

Confinement in the ITER-EDA design (1 kg of tritium in plasma chamber)

ITER EDA Tritium Plant Confinement

Confinement in MFE Penetrations Probably most important for fusion given large number of penetrations attached to the plasma chamber in both MFE and IFE In MFE, the primary confinement boundary in many cases followed the vacuum boundary. Valves that were needed for leak testing also became parts of the confinement boundary. In some cases such as HCD, windows were also part of the first confinement barrier and the second barrier was a fast-acting valve downstream in the system An extra valve was inserted in the pumping lines between the plasma chamber and tritium plant to prevent any tokamak off- normal event from propagating into the tritium plant Implementing the redundancy, diversity and physical separation requirements was most difficult in some of the penetrations because of the physical layout of the system

Confinement in IFE Penetrations Our goal is to use existing systems or components to implement safety functions so as to avoid adding on components and systems For confinement, we try to confine as close to the source as possible because of the cost associated with large confinement buildings or structures For IFE, with all of the beam openings, the nearest physical boundary up the beam lines may be 50 m away. Control of such a large confinement boundary would be very difficult and problematic. The use of fast acting valves in the beam lines may be needed to implement confinement in IFE systems. This is being examined as part of the ARIES-IFE study

Testing Requirements From the DOE Fusion Safety Standard: –Consistent with the safety analysis, the design of confinement barriers shall specify an acceptable global leak rate under off-normal conditions, taking into account the vulnerable inventories of radioactive and hazardous materials, and the potential energy sources available to liberate such inventories. Any confinement barrier, including equipment, penetrations, seals, etc., relevant to the establishment of an acceptable leak rate shall be designed and constructed in such a way as to enable initial and periodic leak testing Such testing requirements are used in current fission reactors, university reactors, and DOE nuclear facilities

Deflagration/Detonation Risk Most common mode of explosion, can be severe (break glass, cause shrapnel, topple buildings Combustion wave propagates at subsonic velocity, between 1 and 1000 m/s Pressures from mbar to 8 bar Low ignition energy, mJ Most severe form of explosion (collapse strong buildings, denude trees) Combustion wave propagates at supersonic velocity, between 1500 and 2000 m/s Pressures 15 bar and higher are possible High ignition energy, kJ H 2 + air --> explosion Deflagration Detonation

Deflagration/Detonation Risk Tritium, as a hydrogenic species can pose a deflagration or detonation risk Hydrogen deflagration concentration is 4 to 75% at STP. Detonation concentration is 18 to 59%. Limits are set on the amount of hydrogenic species in the plasma chamber and tritium plant Analysis of response of systems was performed in ITER to examine worst credible deflagration/detonation For ITER, hydrogen generation from Be/steam interactions were much more important than the in-vessel tritium inventory Tritium inventory on cryopumps can be a concern for small tokamak machines such as FIRE (set the regeneration time) Currently examining the issue for the IFE Target Factory

Tritium Contamination Safety requirement is to minimize spread of contamination as much as possible Secondary confinement in process systems (e.g. in the gloveboxes in the tritium plant) usually have glovebox cleanup systems All rooms/areas where high levels of tritium contamination are expected in an off-normal conditions usually have emergency atmospheric detritiation systems The plasma chamber and the heat transfer vaults may need a maintenance detritiation system to reduce levels if human entry is required Tritium contamination is an important consideration in the design of the HVAC systems for the facility and in the development of maintenance approaches in the plant Minimizing spread of contamination is a strong design driver for occupational safety

ITER EDA Radiation Access Zoning

Summary Tritium safety issues –during normal operation --> permeation and leakage –during off-normal operation --> inventory minimization, confinement, deflagration risk, leak testing –and during maintenance --> minimizing contamination are strong design drivers for fusion systems

Fusion Safety Chemical Reactivity Experiments Molten Salt Tritium/ Chemistry Pot Experiments Fusion Safety Mobilization Testing Tritium Uptake in Materials Home of the STAR Facility at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Tritium Plasma Experiment TPE Plasma STAR Be sample after exposure to ion beam Mo alloy samples after exposure to air W brush samples Dust/Debris Characterization DIII-DTFTRC-MOD NOVA Tore Supra