MTA-RP-002: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with "{{DISPLAYTITLE:Reduce Dose Using Application-Specific, Prefabricated Lead Shielding Assembly - MTA-RP-002}} {{MTATemplate|| | Date |12/15/2020 | Functional Area Where Benefits Will Be Realized | Radiation Protection, Quality Control, Maintenance | Reference Implementation Guidance | 2015 NEI TIP Awards – Submittal 38 (ID: 8223133) | Industry SME | EPRI – Donald Cool Contact: NuclearPlantMod@epri.com | Previous Implementation | Please contact EPRI for implement...") |
(Revision 0 Reviewed by Colton Smith) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{DISPLAYTITLE:Reduce Dose Using Application-Specific, Prefabricated Lead Shielding Assembly - MTA-RP-002}} | {{DISPLAYTITLE:Reduce Dose Using Application-Specific, Prefabricated Lead Shielding Assembly - MTA-RP-002}} | ||
[[Modernization_Technology_Assessment| Return to MTA Table]] | |||
{{MTATemplate|| | {{MTATemplate|| | ||
| Date |12/15/2020 | | Date |12/15/2020 | ||
| Functional Area Where Benefits Will Be Realized | Radiation Protection, Quality Control, Maintenance | | Functional Area Where Benefits Will Be Realized | Radiation Protection, Quality Control, Maintenance | ||
| Reference Implementation Guidance | 2015 NEI TIP Awards – Submittal 38 (ID: 8223133) | | Reference Implementation Guidance | 2015 NEI TIP Awards – Submittal 38 (ID: 8223133) | ||
| Industry SME | EPRI – | | Industry SME | EPRI – Chemistry and Radiation Safety | ||
Contact: NuclearPlantMod@epri.com | Contact: NuclearPlantMod@epri.com | ||
| Previous Implementation | Please contact EPRI for implementation examples and contacts. | | Previous Implementation | Please contact EPRI for implementation examples and contacts. | ||
| Implementation Enablers | N/A | | Implementation Enablers | N/A | ||
| Applicability | All reactor types | | Applicability | All reactor types | ||
All geographic regions | All geographic regions | ||
| Line 25: | Line 19: | ||
Providing shielding from radiation during inspection and maintenance tasks can be difficult and time‑consuming, especially for tasks that are conducted infrequently. Application‑specific shielding assemblies can reduce the required set‑up time, improve shielding effectiveness, and improve industrial safety by allowing assembly in low‑hazard areas. This MTA provides an example of a custom‑designed, application‑specific, prefabricated shielding assembly for Core (Support) Barrel (CSB) inspections. A similar approach may be useful for other components and equipment requiring shielding. | Providing shielding from radiation during inspection and maintenance tasks can be difficult and time‑consuming, especially for tasks that are conducted infrequently. Application‑specific shielding assemblies can reduce the required set‑up time, improve shielding effectiveness, and improve industrial safety by allowing assembly in low‑hazard areas. This MTA provides an example of a custom‑designed, application‑specific, prefabricated shielding assembly for Core (Support) Barrel (CSB) inspections. A similar approach may be useful for other components and equipment requiring shielding. | ||
To conduct the inspection, the CSB must be removed from the reactor vessel and placed in a storage stand on the reactor cavity floor. | To conduct the inspection, the CSB must be removed from the reactor vessel and placed in a storage stand on the reactor cavity floor. For this utility, the top of the CSB extends above the water line of the filled reactor cavity floor when placed in its stand and additional shielding is necessary to protect against the radiation from the top of the CSB. Previous methods of shielding (i.e., individual lead shielding blankets or water tanks) were difficult to install and provided only partial shielding of the top of the CSB. A custom shielding assembly was used to facilitate installation and reduce dose during installation of the shielding and during subsequent tasks in nearby areas of the containment building. | ||
==Benefits== | ==Benefits== | ||
| Line 35: | Line 29: | ||
* Improved installation of CSB top shielding through prefabrication and assembly of shielding package in low‑dose environment leads to reduction in man‑hours, reduction in lay‑down area required, increase in containment crane availability, and improved industrial safety. | * Improved installation of CSB top shielding through prefabrication and assembly of shielding package in low‑dose environment leads to reduction in man‑hours, reduction in lay‑down area required, increase in containment crane availability, and improved industrial safety. | ||
* Reduction in dose during CSB top shielding installation and during CSB inspections (approx. 5 rem, equivalent to $125,000 assuming $25,000 per rem). | * Reduction in dose during CSB top shielding installation and during CSB inspections (approx. 5 rem, equivalent to $125,000 assuming $25,000 per rem). | ||
* Improved shielding leads to a reduction in dose for other maintenance activities in the containment building. | * Improved shielding leads to a reduction in dose for other maintenance activities in the containment building. The utility reported additional savings of 1.55 rem but specific savings vary by outage. | ||
* Reduction in water use of approximately 4,000 gallons compared to an alternative method using water tanks. | * Reduction in water use of approximately 4,000 gallons compared to an alternative method using water tanks. | ||
| Line 51: | Line 45: | ||
* Typical project risks associated with first‑time use of a new approach, including construction of the equipment on‑site with limited space and crane availability. These risks can be mitigated by careful planning. | * Typical project risks associated with first‑time use of a new approach, including construction of the equipment on‑site with limited space and crane availability. These risks can be mitigated by careful planning. | ||
* Design of the shielding assembly is plant‑specific and should be reviewed by plant personnel if designed by a contractor. | * Design of the shielding assembly is plant‑specific and should be reviewed by plant personnel if designed by a contractor. | ||
==SWEEP Score== | |||
{| class="wikitable" style="vertical-align:bottom;" | |||
|- | |||
! Category | |||
! style="text-align:center;" | Level | |||
! Description | |||
|- | |||
| Cost | |||
| style="text-align:center;" | 3 | |||
| The cost for the initial development and deployment is less than $1 million. | |||
|- | |||
| Savings | |||
| style="text-align:center;" | 1 | |||
| Savings in labor and dose are less than $1 million per use. | |||
|- | |||
| Payback | |||
| style="text-align:center;" | 3 | |||
| Based on savings for reduced man‑hours and reduced dose, payback is likely achieved during first use. | |||
|- | |||
| Licensing Readiness | |||
| style="text-align:center;" | 3 | |||
| This technology does not require regulatory review. | |||
|- | |||
| Technology Readiness | |||
| style="text-align:center;" | 3 | |||
| The shielding approach has been used successfully at a nuclear plant. | |||
|- | |||
| Implementation Proficiency | |||
| style="text-align:center;" | 3 | |||
| The implementation of this technology does not require knowledge of digital technologies. | |||
|} | |||
Latest revision as of 17:22, 26 March 2026
| Administrative Items | |
|---|---|
| Date | 12/15/2020 |
| Functional Area Where Benefits Will Be Realized | Radiation Protection, Quality Control, Maintenance |
| Reference Implementation Guidance | 2015 NEI TIP Awards – Submittal 38 (ID: 8223133) |
| Industry SME | EPRI – Chemistry and Radiation Safety
Contact: NuclearPlantMod@epri.com |
| Previous Implementation | Please contact EPRI for implementation examples and contacts. |
| Implementation Enablers | N/A |
| Applicability | All reactor types
All geographic regions |
| Keywords | Shielding; ALARA; inspections; reactor internals; core support barrel |
| Business Case Analysis Cross-Reference | N/A |
Description
Providing shielding from radiation during inspection and maintenance tasks can be difficult and time‑consuming, especially for tasks that are conducted infrequently. Application‑specific shielding assemblies can reduce the required set‑up time, improve shielding effectiveness, and improve industrial safety by allowing assembly in low‑hazard areas. This MTA provides an example of a custom‑designed, application‑specific, prefabricated shielding assembly for Core (Support) Barrel (CSB) inspections. A similar approach may be useful for other components and equipment requiring shielding.
To conduct the inspection, the CSB must be removed from the reactor vessel and placed in a storage stand on the reactor cavity floor. For this utility, the top of the CSB extends above the water line of the filled reactor cavity floor when placed in its stand and additional shielding is necessary to protect against the radiation from the top of the CSB. Previous methods of shielding (i.e., individual lead shielding blankets or water tanks) were difficult to install and provided only partial shielding of the top of the CSB. A custom shielding assembly was used to facilitate installation and reduce dose during installation of the shielding and during subsequent tasks in nearby areas of the containment building.
Benefits
Benefits Estimate
Level 1 – Savings in labor and reduced dose for the reactor vessel inspection team are approximately $200,000 per 10‑year inspection (accounting for reduction in man‑hours and dose). Additional benefits that cannot be readily quantified are described below.
Benefits Description
- Increased effectiveness of CSB top shielding during CSB inspections.
- Improved installation of CSB top shielding through prefabrication and assembly of shielding package in low‑dose environment leads to reduction in man‑hours, reduction in lay‑down area required, increase in containment crane availability, and improved industrial safety.
- Reduction in dose during CSB top shielding installation and during CSB inspections (approx. 5 rem, equivalent to $125,000 assuming $25,000 per rem).
- Improved shielding leads to a reduction in dose for other maintenance activities in the containment building. The utility reported additional savings of 1.55 rem but specific savings vary by outage.
- Reduction in water use of approximately 4,000 gallons compared to an alternative method using water tanks.
Costs and Schedule
Cost
Level 3 – The cost for the new shield assembly is approximately $200,000 higher than the alternative (total of $350,000), including field assembly. Cost for subsequent deployments is estimated to be $100,000 when re‑using the assembly.
Schedule
Six months to one year – Approximately one year of preparation for the initial implementation, less thereafter.
Scope Context
Per reactor
Risks
- Typical project risks associated with first‑time use of a new approach, including construction of the equipment on‑site with limited space and crane availability. These risks can be mitigated by careful planning.
- Design of the shielding assembly is plant‑specific and should be reviewed by plant personnel if designed by a contractor.
SWEEP Score
| Category | Level | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | 3 | The cost for the initial development and deployment is less than $1 million. |
| Savings | 1 | Savings in labor and dose are less than $1 million per use. |
| Payback | 3 | Based on savings for reduced man‑hours and reduced dose, payback is likely achieved during first use. |
| Licensing Readiness | 3 | This technology does not require regulatory review. |
| Technology Readiness | 3 | The shielding approach has been used successfully at a nuclear plant. |
| Implementation Proficiency | 3 | The implementation of this technology does not require knowledge of digital technologies. |