Operational safety performance indicators for nuclear power plants

  • Published on
    04-Jan-2017

  • View
    212

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Transcript

  • !"!#$%

    &%'()

    " *"+,-. *-"*+/+0/"*-"*

    +1/,* "* ,+)(++)&/0"/&%%'%+%%%&'23

    4)

    5

  • Since the late 1980s, the IAEA has been actively sponsoring work in the area of indicators to monitor nuclear power plant (NPP) operational safety performance. The early activities were mainly focused on exchanging ideas and good practices in the development and use of these indicators at nuclear power plants.

    Since 1995 efforts have been directed towards the elaboration of a framework for the establishment of an operational safety performance indicator programme. The result of this work, compiled in this publication, is intended to assist NPPs in developing and implementing a monitoring programme, without overlooking the critical aspects related to operational safety performance.

    The framework proposed in this report was presented at two IAEA workshops on

    operational safety performance indicators held in Ljubljana, Slovenia, in September 1998 and at the Daya Bay NPP, Szenzhen, China, in December 1998. During these two workshops, the participants discussed and brainstormed on the indicator framework presented. These working sessions provided very useful insights and ideas which where used for the enhancement of the framework proposed. The IAEA wishes to acknowledge the support and contribution of all the participants in these two activities.

    The programme development was enhanced by pilot plant studies. Four plants from

    different countries with different designs participated in this study with the objective of testing the applicability, usefulness and viability of this approach. The IAEA gratefully acknowledges the work developed and the effort made by the four participating plants.

    The work performed by all the participating experts, and the comments and ideas

    contributed by worldwide experts on operational safety are greatly appreciated. The IAEA officers responsible for this report were A. Gmez Cobo and J. Hashmi of the Division of Nuclear Installation Safety.

  • EDITORIAL NOTE The use of particular designations of countries or territories does not imply any judgement by the publisher, the IAEA, as to the legal status of such countries or territories, of their authorities and institutions or of the delimitation of their boundaries.

    The mention of names of specific companies or products (whether or not indicated as registered) does not imply any intention to infringe proprietary rights, nor should it be construed as an endorsement or recommendation on the part of the IAEA.

  • 1. INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................1 2. PLANT SAFETY: SAFETY ATTRIBUTES .....................................................................2 3. OPERATIONAL SAFETY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS: A HIERARCHICAL STRUCTURE ...................................................................................3 3.1. Plant operates smoothly ...............................................................................................5 3.1.1. Overall indicator: Operating performance.......................................................5 3.1.2. Overall indicator: State of structures, systems and components (SSC)...........7 3.1.3. Overall indicator: Events .................................................................................9 3.2. Plant operates with low risk.......................................................................................10 3.2.1. Deterministic approach..................................................................................10 3.2.2. Probabilistic approach ...................................................................................16 3.3. Plant operates with a positive safety attitude .............................................................16 3.3.1. Overall indicator: Attitude towards safety.....................................................16 3.3.2. Overall indicator: Striving for improvement .................................................21 4. OPERATIONAL SAFETY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS: CHARACTERISTICS.......................................................................................................23 5. CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................................24 ! "#$%&'&$(! ) *+(!! (, - ) .$#($!! ("$(!,/ - ) % $%0%$!! (, 1 2 34#(!!,/#(,%!! (, ) 2 "$(!,/!! ( ) 2 !!(!5%0%'%6% 7!! ( ) 2) %(&(5%8#(#!$!7!! () 22 7,%&(0(!$(#!$!7!! ()) ,%'!,/#(,%!! (, )) +%&($5%&(88$! (!, )) ( /4($/!5('4($/!5(88$! (!, )2 ") ! ) #9% !0%,) .%%($85(&&%#9% !0%, ) "$(,8% !'! #9% !0%,): )%0%$8&%'+%8!$,!%, ):

  • 2&8$%&%(!'+%8!$,!%,+%%;8%!% %,'8(! !8(!58$(,) 2 %$% !'!! (,) 2 ,(#$!,+!5!! (%'!!!,2) 2) %!'! (!'5($, 2- 22 ((!,8$(7(!%8%(! *

  • +%,('%8%(!'($$ $%(84%8$(,!,( &&5($'($$!0$0%!+% $%(!,734%0%?(,( %8?,('%7!,%(,7%'!%0%&%!''! $!,+%%,(#$!,+&% ' ( $%( %'!!! ' ( (%6(% $%0%$ ' ,('%7 %+%$%,,? +%% !, (5%%($%,(!5'4+((!#%,( $%(8$(,+$+(0%!%8%(%,('%$7+% +($$%5%$!%,!&%(,!5+%(!#%,

    +!5+ $%0%$ ' ,('%7 !, +% %,$ ' +% &8$%; !%( ! ' 5 %,!5?8%(!($,('%7(+&(8%'&( %;8%!% %+(,,+4+(' ,!5(7,!5$%(,8% '8%'&( % !, !%''% !0%?( (#%&!,$%(!5*+( !,&%0($! !, +% ($8! %8%,%%#7( &8$%%,%'!! (,%,!5%&!($$(,8% ,'8%(!($,('%7 8%'&( % +!, %8 (%&8, 80!% ( '(&%4/ ' !%!'! (! '8%'&( %!! (,4+! ++(0%(%$(!,+!8+%%,!%,('%7(!#%,?(+%%'%,('%8$(8%(!

    +% ( ($ 0($%, ' +% !! (, (% !%% #%!% &%(,%,' ,('%7?

    ($+5+,('%78%'&( % (#%!'%%'&+%%,$,( +!%0%@!5AThe numerical value of any individual indicator may be of no significance if treated in an isolated manner, but may be enhanced when considered in the context of other indicator performances. On the other hand, specific indicator trends over a period of time can provide an early warning to plant management to investigate the causes behind the observed changes. addition to monitoring the changes and trends, it may also be necessary to compare the indicators against identified targets and goals to evaluate performance strengths and weaknesses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he work developed during the IAEA project on operational safety performance indicators and presented in the following Sections was enhanced by pilot plant studies. Four

  • 2

    plants from different countries with different designs participated in this study with the objective of testing the applicability, usefulness and viability of this approach. Information on these pilot exercises is compiled in Annex III.

    !

    !

    "#!! !

    "

    +%%0%$8&%'+%'(&%4/#%5(4!++% ,!%(!'+% %8' $%(84%8$(,('%78%'&( %%,%(%(,(#$7 &8$%%,%'8%(!($,('%7 !! (,? ( % !,! 4(, &(% 4/ 4 ( F, %G ! 4+! + +% 8 $%0%$4$ #% 8%(!($ ,('%7 8%'&( % ( +% %; $%0%$ 4$ #% ?'&4+! +(,%'

    $#%%0%$8%@,%%!5A %'!!5 +% /%7 (!#%,? ! 4(, % %,,(7 %%&!% +% /%7 %$%&%,(,, !(%4!+8$(,+(8%(%,('%$7+%%!&8((,8% ,4%%(%,,%D??(+%

    +!,#(,!,+%%/%7(!#%,4%% +,%+((%(,, !(%4!+8$(,+(8%(%,('%$7

    "$(, "$(, "$(,

    % (,% +%,% (!#%, ( #% !% $7 &%(,%? +% !! ( , % 4(,%;8(% '+% !$ ( $%0%$ ' %(,!$7 6(!'!(#$% !% $7 &%(,(#$% !! (, 4(,!%!'!%@,%%!5)A

  • )

    A HIERARCHICAL STRUCTURE

    ,!5+%(!#%,(,(,(!58!'!! (%0%$8&%?(,%'

    4%% !%!'!%%$4%( +(!#%?

    4%%%,(#$!,+%,, !(%4!+%( +0%($$!! (4(,($%0%$'

    !($$7?%( + ,(%5! !! ( 4(, ,88% #7 ( ,% '

    ? &, ' 4+! + (%($%(7!,%!+%!,7! (,4%%%0%$8%%$%0%$((!&%%,%+(($$%$%0(,('%7(,8% ,'%( +(!#%4%% 0%% +%

    4%%%0!,!%80!%0%($$%0($(!'%$%0((,8% , ' ,('%7 8%'&( %

    4%% !%% 80!% ( #!5% '&0%($$ ,8% !'! !! (,

    %8%,%% 6(!'!(#$%&%(,%, ' 8%'&( % 8% !'! !! (, 4%% +,% ' +%! (#!$!7 !%!'7% $!!5 8%'&( % %, 8#$%& (%(, 6! /$7 , +( ('% 88% !0%,!5(!?&((5%&% $(/% % !0%( !,8%0%'+%8%'&( %%5((!

    3$5$0(7(567+$7&$1%(',5(&7/-',')/

  • 37

    5%

  • 38

    ;)'53 -./6!!')'.'-=/6',)7/ @')/!7-*#) &

    !

    3 : > 7#? /&% 7#? /&8 1 ;/J 60 6.!4 .32 7J222#? /&33 6!A'..!A6@6A'!3: 6!A'!=!3> 3% 38 31 !#? /&3J 30 34 :2 M

    :3 :: .#? /&:> ':% #&:8 #&:1 A:J :0 (:4 M>2 M>3 >:

  • 39

  • 40

  • 5DWLRRIGRZQWLPH

    WR$27

    GDWDEDVH\HWWREHVHWXS

    1RRIGHYLDWLRQVIRXQG

    WKURXJK4$DXGLWVLQ

    ZKLFKSODQWSHUVRQQHOGLG

    QRWIROORZSURFHGXUHV

    3ODQW

    GRFXPHQWDWLRQGUDZLQJ

    FKDQJHVEDFNORJ

    5DWLRRI

    GRFXPHQWDWLRQGUDZLQJ

    FKDQJHVFRPSOHWHGWR

    FKDQJHVLPSOHPHQWHG

    $77,78'(72:$5'6

    352&('85(6

    32/,&,(6$1'58/(6

    1XPEHURIZRUNHUV

    UHFHLYLQJGRVH

    DERYHWKHOLPLWV

    &ROOHFWLYHUDGLDWLRQ

    H[SRVXUH

    :$12

    (IIOXHQWDFWLYLW\

    YV

    DOORZHGOLPLW

    5$',$7,213527(&7,21

    352*5$00(

    ())(&7,9(1(66

    1RRIKXPDQUHOWHG

    LQFLGHQWVGXULQJWHVWLQJ

    PDLQWHQDQFHRUUHVWRUDWLRQ

    GDWDEDVH\HWWREHVHWXS

    1RRIKXPDQHUURUVLQ

    FRQWUROURRPRUILHOG

    GDWDEDVH\HWWREHVHWXS

    +80$1

    3(5)250$1&(

    1XPEHURIVDIHW\UHODWHG

    LVVXHVLQWKHEDFNORJ

    DQDO\VLVSKDVH

    1XPEHURIVDIHW\UHODWHG

    LVVXHVLQWKHEDFNORJ

    LPSOHQWDWLRQSKDVH

    %$&./2*2)

    6$)(7

Recommended

View more >