Constellation's best estimate alternate source term methodology overview

Abstract

Safety analyses for a nuclear power plants need to consider postulated accidents that results in at risk of accidental release of radiation. The regulations require plant specific safety analysis reports to include an evaluation of the requirements of 10CFR50.67. Such a safety analysis report mandates limits such that calculated radiological consequences relative to certain dose locations do not exceed a total effective dose equivalent (TEDE) limits following a postulated release of radioactivity. Calculations are performed to estimate the radiological consequences, in terms of dose, to people and equipment to ensure the estimated doses are within the prescribed limits. Analysis should demonstrate, with reasonable assurance, that these prescribed limits are complied with. Conventional methodologies utilize conservative approaches to address lack of uncertainty quantification in the utilized approaches, methods, and/or inputs. These built-in excess conservatisms often result in compounding effects and hence overly conservative results in the estimated radiological consequences, which leads to inaccurate margin evaluation for operation and accident mitigation. Therefore, evaluating accurate dose consequences is needed for both operational and safety reasons. The research documented in this paper provides an overview of Constellation's Best Estimate Alternate Source Term (BEAST) Methodology. BEAST methodology relies upon the use of realistic yet bounding input distributions for key analysis parameters, which replaces use of conservative deterministic singular inputs that bound overall analysis domain. This approach enables evaluating a more accurate accident analysis response, while enabling a bounding licensing basis envelope via more accurate quantification of uncertainty in the application. Therefore, built-in margin for a given scenario is more accurately evaluated.