IAEA Meeting

European Union Response to Fukushima European Stress Tests and Peer Review
Philippe JAMET Chairman Stress Test Peer Review Board
International Experts Meeting on Reactor and Spent Fuel Safety in the Light of the Accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant IAEA Headquarters, Vienna 20 March 2012

1
20 March 2012

Content
IAEA Meeting

Background Stress Tests Peer Review Public Outreach Conclusion

2
20 March 2012

General European Context

IAEA Meeting

Safety is a national responsibility National Frameworks comply with General European Safety Directive IAEA Safety Fundamentals CNS Report to European Commission Peer review of National Framework
1
20 March 2012

European Regulators Organizations

IAEA Meeting

ENSREG: European Nuclear Safety Regulators Group + European Commission

European policy advisory group

WENRA: Western European Nuclear Regulators Association

Club of Regulators

4
20 March 2012

WENRA and ENSREG

IAEA Meeting

Over 150 Facilities in 17 European countries

1
20 March 2012

IAEA Meeting

First European Steps in Reaction to Fukushima

11 March: Fukushima accident occurs 24 25 March: European Council Request
Stress tests to be developed by ENSREG, the Commission and WENRA Review all EU plants in light of lessons learned from Japan Assessments conducted by national Authorities Assessments subject to a peer review

1
20 March 2012

Content
IAEA Meeting

Background Stress Tests Peer Review Public Outreach Conclusion

1
20 March 2012

Objective of Stress Tests

IAEA Meeting

Targeted reassessment of safety margins and robustness of plants, in light of the Fukushima accident
Natural Hazards Loss of Safety Systems Severe Accident Management

Improvement of Plant Safety taking into account the first lessons learned from Fukushima Security issues treated by a dedicated ad-hoc group
8
20 March 2012

Specification of Stress Tests

IAEA Meeting

Methodology drafted by WENRA in April Approved by ENSREG in May Specification of EU Stress Tests published by ENSREG and European Commission on 25 May 2011
9
20 March 2012

Stress Tests Steps

IAEA Meeting

1 June: National Regulators formulate request based on ENSREG Specification 15 September: Operators produce reports responding to National Regulators requests 1 January: Regulators transmit National Reports to the European Commission assessing Operators responses
10

20 March 2012

General Approach (1)

IAEA Meeting

Assessment of current situation Current Safety Requirements (Design Basis) in particular for earthquake and flooding Compliance with current Safety Requirements Regulatory oversight, Periodic Safety Reviews, evidence of improvement

11
20 March 2012

General Approach (2)

IAEA Meeting

Robustness of Plants Assessment of robustness beyond Design Basis: identification of margins and cliff edge effects Strong features and possible improvements Further actions and requests from Regulators

12
20 March 2012

Natural Hazards
IAEA Meeting

13
20 March 2012

Natural Hazards Margin Assessment

IAEA Meeting

Continuous increase of severity of External Hazards (Earthquake, Flood,) Corresponding destruction or unavailability of Systems, Structures and Components up to core melt Identification of cliff edge effects and margins Identification of strong features and weaknesses Possible improvements
14
20 March 2012

Loss of Safety Systems (1)

IAEA Meeting

15
20 March 2012

Loss of Safety Systems (2)

IAEA Meeting

1
20 March 2012

16

Loss of Safety Systems Cliff Edge Effects

IAEA Meeting

Assumption that more and more electrical systems are lost Assumption that heat sink is lost Combination of both Assessment of time before core damage Identification of strong features and weaknesses Possible improvements
17
20 March 2012

Severe Accident Management (1)

IAEA Meeting

18
20 March 2012

Severe Accident Management (2)

IAEA Meeting

19
20 March 2012

Severe Accident Management (3)

IAEA Meeting

20
20 March 2012

Severe Accident Management Robustness (1)

IAEA Meeting

Assessment of accident management organization and equipments in case of extreme conditions

Destruction of infrastructure Isolation of site Devastation of site Accident affecting multiple units Radioactive releases and high dose rates Unavailability of instrumentation and communication

21
20 March 2012

Severe Accident Management Robustness (2)

IAEA Meeting

Protection of containment integrity

Hydrogen explosion Pressurization Vessel melt through

Cooling of core and spent fuel pool Necessary conditions to allow accident management by Operators (radiation protection, equipment, outside support, procedures, training)
22
20 March 2012

Severe Accident Management Robustness (3)

IAEA Meeting

Identification of strong features and weaknesses Possible improvements

23
20 March 2012

Preliminary Results from National Regulator Reports

IAEA Meeting

Safety improvements have been identified by all Operators and National Regulators Countries are at different stages of implementation
In some countries decisions have been made and plant modifications are underway or in place In other countries actions are just now being considered and have not yet been implemented
24

20 March 2012

Examples of Safety Improvements

IAEA Meeting

Full implementation or improvements to severe accident mitigation guidelines Installation of containment vents or filtered containment vents Use of mobile equipment to provide electricity or cooling water Strategies to increase battery time Protection of severe accident equipment from extreme natural hazards Response teams to provide external assistance quickly following an accident
25

20 March 2012

Hard Core for Extreme Situations

IAEA Meeting

Hard Core of material and organizational measures to manage basic safety functions in extreme situations Prevent a severe accident or limit its progression Limit large-scale releases in a severe accident Enable the operator to perform emergency management duties Designed to withstand much more severe conditions than design basis of the plants Implementation decided for a significant proportion of European plants
26

20 March 2012

Content
IAEA Meeting

Background Stress Tests Peer Review Public Outreach Conclusion

1
20 March 2012

27

IAEA Meeting

Overall Objectives of the Peer Review

IMPROVE SAFETY Ensure that no important issues have been overlooked Give National Regulators information for consideration of good practices and further improvements

28
20 March 2012

Peer Review Definition

IAEA Meeting

WENRA prepared first draft in June Involvement of Stakeholders Methodology endorsed by ENSREG on 12 October

1
20 March 2012

29

Peer Review Scope and Deliverables

IAEA Meeting

Review of National Reports written by Regulators by experts designated by Regulators (no Operator) Final report with 17 country reports as annexes to be transmitted to ENSREG on 25 April

30
20 March 2012

IAEA Meeting

Challenges
Over 150 reactors 17 countries with nuclear power 80 reviewers from over 20 participating countries Different designs Different regulatory regimes Very short time line
31

1
20 March 2012

Peer Review Timeline

IAEA Meeting

32
20 March 2012

Peer Review Process

IAEA Meeting

Board Oversight
Topical Reviews in 3 teams:
-External Hazards -Loss of Safety Systems -Severe Accident Management
Draft Topical Reports and Draft Country Reports

Country Reviews:
6 teams in parallel

Peer Review Report

Country Reports

33
20 March 2012

Board
IAEA Meeting

Chairman - Philippe JAMET (France) Vice-Chairman Antoni GURGUI (Spain) Project Manager Petr KRS (Czech Republic) Group 1 Leader David SHEPHERD (United Kingdom) Group 2 Leader Ervin LISKA (Sweden) Group 3 Leader Joseph MISAK (Slovak Republic) Non-nuclear State Rep. Andreas MOLIN (Austria) EU Commission Rep. Massimo GARRIBBA (EC) _________________ Secretariat Mark NOEL (EC) Communication task force advising the Board - Claire Lyons (UK) ENSREG approved the Board on 7 November 34

20 March 2012

Participants
IAEA Meeting

Nuclear Member States Belgium Bulgaria Czech Republic Finland France Germany Hungary Lithuania Netherlands Romania Slovakia Slovenia Sweden Spain United Kingdom
35

Non Nuclear Member States Austria Denmark Greece Italy Ireland Luxembourg Poland Nuclear Non-Member States Ukraine Switzerland European Commission

20 March 2012

Observers
IAEA Meeting

Canada Croatia Japan UAE USA

IAEA

36
20 March 2012

IAEA Meeting

Desk-Top Review
1 January: Peer Review started with desk-top review
All National Reports reviewed Over 1800 questions posted First version of Country Reports drafted

27 January: Questions grouped, prioritized and sent to National Regulators

1
20 March 2012

37

Topical Review
IAEA Meeting

5 February Topical Review began in Luxembourg (2 weeks) Review of national reports topic by topic
80 participants 51 review sessions conducted over 6 days 6 days of report writing with full topical teams 2 additional days of report writing with team leaders and deputy team leaders Plenary sessions
38
20 March 2012

Country Reviews
IAEA Meeting

Currently in progress until the end of March 2012 6 teams 4 days in each country One plant visit in each Country Complete previous Topical Reviews Finalize country reports
1
20 March 2012

39

Final Tasks
IAEA Meeting

Finalize Final Report Present results to ENSREG in April Make the Final Report public Host public meeting to share results

40
20 March 2012

Preliminary Results
IAEA Meeting

Considerable work has been done by all counties in the context of the stress tests All Operators and Regulators have taken actions to improve safety Peer Review is beneficial and requires very significant resources IAEA Safety Standards and WENRA Reference Levels are very useful references for such an international exercise
41

1
20 March 2012

Content
IAEA Meeting

Background Stress Tests Peer Review Public Outreach Conclusion

1
20 March 2012

42

Public Outreach
IAEA Meeting

Public Stakeholder Meeting on 17 January on Peer Review process Second Public Stakeholder Meeting to present the results (May 2012) ENSREG web site
Public meetings conclusions and slides Periodic status updates Other relevant notices

Possibility given to stakeholders to post questions for the Peer Review

43
20 March 2012

17 January Public Event

ENSREG Meeting IAEA Meeting

Public Event held in Brussels Meeting well attended ~180 people Most European Countries represented
Regulators Industry Labor Unions Local Communities NGOs
44
24 March 2012 20 February2012

Global Appreciation
IAEA Meeting

Stakeholders openly expressed their views Stress tests and peer review draw significant interest and are generally seen positively General agreement on scope of Stress Tests and Peer Review Strong desire for tangible results
1
20 March 2012

45

Comments/Criticisms
IAEA Meeting

Many comments suggesting Stress Tests and Peer Review should go further
Airplane crash Comprehensive safety assessment Offsite emergency preparedness

1
20 March 2012

46

Content
IAEA Meeting

Background Stress Tests Peer Review Public Outreach Conclusion

1
20 March 2012

47

Conclusion (1)
IAEA Meeting

Peer review progressing on schedule, to be completed in April Significant resources have been involved over the past three months Many observers have been invited to follow the European effort
1
20 March 2012

48

Conclusion (2)
IAEA Meeting

Europe is willing to share internationally the Stress Tests and Peer Review experience and results Revision of the IAEA Safety Standards and implementation of the Agency post-Fukushima Action Plan are examples where European Stress Tests and Peer Review could provide contributions to the international effort.
49

1
20 March 2012

Conclusion (3)
IAEA Meeting

Europe is committed to be strongly involved in the actions aimed at drawing lessons from the Fukushima and improving safety at the international level.

50
20 March 2012