Publications

Publications / SAND Report

EPRI/NRC-RES fire PRA guide for nuclear power facilities. Volume 1, summary and overview

Forester, John A.; Wyant, Francis J.; Nowlen, Steven P.

This report documents state-of-the-art methods, tools, and data for the conduct of a fire Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) for a commercial nuclear power plant (NPP) application. The methods have been developed under the Fire Risk Re-quantification Study. This study was conducted as a joint activity between EPRI and the U. S. NRC Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) under the terms of an EPRI/RES Memorandum of Understanding [RS.1] and an accompanying Fire Research Addendum [RS.2]. Industry participants supported demonstration analyses and provided peer review of this methodology. The documented methods are intended to support future applications of Fire PRA, including risk-informed regulatory applications. The documented method reflects state-of-the-art fire risk analysis approaches. The primary objective of the Fire Risk Study was to consolidate recent research and development activities into a single state-of-the-art fire PRA analysis methodology. Methodological issues raised in past fire risk analyses, including the Individual Plant Examination of External Events (IPEEE) fire analyses, have been addressed to the extent allowed by the current state-of-the-art and the overall project scope. Methodological debates were resolved through a consensus process between experts representing both EPRI and RES. The consensus process included a provision whereby each major party (EPRI and RES) could maintain differing technical positions if consensus could not be reached. No cases were encountered where this provision was invoked. While the primary objective of the project was to consolidate existing state-of-the-art methods, in many areas, the newly documented methods represent a significant advancement over previously documented methods. In several areas, this project has, in fact, developed new methods and approaches. Such advances typically relate to areas of past methodological debate.