Regulatory Guide 1.91: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Adams
{{Adams
| number = ML003740286
| number = ML12298A133
| issue date = 02/28/1978
| issue date = 01/31/1975
| title = Rev 1 Evaluations of Explosions Postulated to Occur on Transportation Routes Near Nuclear Power Plants
| title = Evaluation of Explosions Postulated to Occur on Transportation Routes Near Nuclear Power Plant Sites.
| author name =  
| author name =  
| author affiliation = NRC/RES
| author affiliation = US Atomic Energy Commission (AEC)
| addressee name =  
| addressee name =  
| addressee affiliation =  
| addressee affiliation =  
Line 10: Line 10:
| license number =  
| license number =  
| contact person =  
| contact person =  
| document report number = RG-1.91, Rev 1
| document report number = RG-1.091
| document type = Regulatory Guide
| document type = Regulatory Guide
| page count = 6
| page count = 6
}}
}}
{{#Wiki_filter:U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY  
{{#Wiki_filter:January 1975 U.S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
COMMISSION
7 REGULATORY  
Revision 1 February 1978 ,'REGULATORY  
GUI DIRECTORATE
GUIDE OFFICE OF STANDARDS  
OF REGULATORY  
DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS REGULATORY  
REGULATORY  
GUIDE 1.91 EVALUATION
GUIDE 1.91 EVALUATIONS
OF EXPLOSIONS  
OF EXPLOSIONS  
POSTULATED  
POSTULATED  
TO OCCUR ON TRANSPORTATION  
TO OCCUR ON TRANSPORTATION  
ROUTES NEAR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS
ROUTES NEAR NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SITES DE


==A. INTRODUCTION==
==A. INTRODUCTION==
General Design Criterion  
General Design Criterion  
4, "Environmental and Missile Design Basis," of Appendix A, "General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants," to 10 CFR Part 50, "Licensing of Production and Utiliza tion Facilities," requires that nuclear power plant structures, systems, and components important to safety be appropriately protected against dynamic ef fects resulting from equipment failures that may occur within the nuclear power plant as well as events and conditions that may occur outside the nuclear power plant. These latter events include the effects of ex plosion of hazardous materials that may be carried on nearby transportation routes. This guide describes methods acceptable to the NRC staff for determining whether the risk of damage due to an explosion on a nearby transportation route is sufficiently high to warrant a detailed investigation.
4, "Environmental and Missile Design Basis" of Appendix A, "General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants," to 10 CFR Part 50,"Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," requires that nuclear power plant structures, systems, and components important to safety be appropriately protected against dynamic effects resulting from equipment failures which may occur within the nuclear power unit as well as events and conditions which may occur outside the nuclear pov, er unit. These latter events include the effects of explosion of hazardous materials which may be carried on nearby transportation routes.This guide describes a method acceptable to the Regulatory staff for determining safe distances from a nuclear power plant to a transportation route over which explosive material (not including gases) may be carried.
 
Acceptable methods for evaluating structural adequacy when an investiga tion is warranted are also described.
 
This guide is -limited to solid explosives and hydrocarbons liquified under pressure and is not applicable to cryogenically liquified hydrocarbons, e.g., LNG. It considers the effects of airblasts on highway, rail, and water routes but excludes pipelines and fixed facilities.


==B. DISCUSSION==
==B. DISCUSSION==
In order to meet General Design Criterion  
In order to meet General Design Criterion  
2, "De sign Basis for Protection Against Natural Phenomena," of Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50 with respect to tornadoes, the structures, systems, and components important to safety of a nuclear power plant must be designed to withstand the effects of a design basis tornado, including wind, pressure drop, and the effects of missiles, without causing an acci dent and without damage that would prevent a safe and orderly shutdown.
2, "Design Basis for Protection Against Natural Phenomena," of Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50 with respect to tornadoes, the structures, systems, and components important to safety of a nuclear power plant must be designed to withstand the wind pressure and sudden internal pressure changes due to a design basis tornado without causing an accident, and without damage that would prevent a safe and orderly shutdown.


In addition, those structures, systems, and components must be designed to ac commodate the vibratory ground motion associated with the Safe Shutdown Earthquake.
Since the nuclear power plant is designed to safely withstand the design basis tornado described in Regulatory Guide 1.76,"Design Basis Tornado for Nuclear Power Plants," an explosion which produces a peak overpressure no greater than the wind pressure caused by the tornado should not cause an accident or prevent the safe shutdown of the plant. It should be noted that -this applies only to the adequacy of the plant with respect to external dynamic overpressure.


The effects of explosives that are of concern in analyzing structural response to blast are incident or reflected pressure (overpressure), dynamic (drag) pressure, blast-induced ground motion, and blast generated missiles.
The potential effect of missiles from these explosions is still under study. This regulatory guide describes a method for determining distances from the.power .plant to a railway, highway, or navigable waterway beyond which any explosion that might occur on, these transportation routes is not likely to have an adverse effect on plant operation or prevent a safe shutdown.


It is the judgment of the NRC staff that, for explosions of the magnitude considered in this guide and the structures, systems, and compo nents that must be protected, overpressure effects are controlling.
Under these conditions, a detailed review of the transport of explosives on these transportation routes would not be required.In establishing the distances referred to above, it is necessary to determine the dynamic wind pressure associated with the wind speed of the design basis tornado determined from Regulatory Guide 1.76 for each of the three regions of the contiguous United States. Table 1 presents the wind speeds for the three regions and the associated dynamic pressures calculated from q = 0.002558V 2 (this represents the kinetic energy per unit volume of moving air), where is the dynamic pressure in pounds per square foot and V is the maximum wind velocity in miles per hour (see Reference 1).TABLE 1 DESIGN BASIS TORNADO WIND SPEED CHARACTERISTICS
I ý 1xamuma Wind 1 Dynamic Wind Dynamic Wind Region Speed, mph Pressure, psi Pressure, psf I 360 2.3 331.2 II 300 1.6 230.4 III 240 1.0 144.0 aThe maximum wind speed is the sum of the rotational speed coniponent and the maximum translational speed component.


Drag pressure effects will be much smaller than those due to the wind loading assumed for the design basis tornado. The effects of blast generated missiles will be less than those associated with the blast overpressure levels considered in this guide. If the overpressure criteria of this guide are exceeded, the effects of missiles must be considered.
The calculational method used to analyze the relationships of explosive charge to distance is first to USAEC REGULATORY
GUIDES Copies of published guides may be obtained by request indicating the divisions desired to the US. Atomic Energy Commission, Washington, D.C. 20545, Regulatory Guides are issued to describe and make available to the public Attention:
Director of Regulatory Standards.


The effects of blast-induced ground motion at the overpressure levels considered in this guide will be less than those of the vibratory ground motion as sociated with the Safe Shutdown Earthquake.
Comments and suggestions for methods acceptable to the AEC Regulatory staff of implementing specific parts of improvements in these guides are encouraged and should be sent to the Secretary the Commission's regulations, to delineate techniques .sed by the staff in of the Commission, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Washington, D.C. 20545, evaluating specific problems or postulated accidents, or to provide guidance to Attention:
Dockeiing and Service Section.applicants.


This regulatory guide describes a method for de termining distances from critical plant structures to a railway, highway, or navigable waterway beyond which any explosion that might occur on these trans portation routes is not likely to have an adverse effect on plant operation or to prevent a safe shutdown.
Regulatory Guides are not substitutes for regulations and compliance with them is not required.


Under these conditions, a detailed review of the transport of explosives on these transportation routes would not be required.
Methods and solutions different from those set out in The guides are issued in the following ten broad divisions:
the guides will be acceptable if they provide a basis for the findings requisite to the issuance or continuance of a permit or license by the Commission.


A method for establishing the distances referred to above can be based on a level of peak positive inci dent overpressure (designated as Ps, in Ref. 1) below which no significant damage would be expected.
1. Power Reactors 6. Products 2. Research and Test Reactors


It is USNRC REGULATORY
===7. Transportation===
GUIDES Comments should be sent to the Secretary of the Commission, US. Nuclear Regu.  Regulatory Guides are issued to describe and make available to the public methods latory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555. Attention Docketing and Service acceptable to the NRC staff of implementing specific parts of the Commission's Branch.  regulations, to delineate techniques used by the staff in evaluating specific problems The guides are issued in the following ten broad divisions or postulated accidents, or to provide guidance to applicants.
 
Regulatory Guides are not substitutes for regulations, and compliance with them is not required.
 
1. Power Reactors 6. Products Methods and solutions different from those set out in the guides will be accept- 2. Research and Test Reactors 7. Transportation able if they provide a basis for the findings requisite to the issuance or continuance
3. Fuels and Materials Facilities  
3. Fuels and Materials Facilities  
8. Occupational Health of a permit or license by the Commission.
8. Occupational Health Published guides will be revised periodically, as appropriate, to accommodate  
 
4. Environmental and Siting 9. Antitrust Review comments and to reflect new information or experience.
4. Environmental andSiting
9. Antitrust Review 5. Materials and Plant Protection
10. General Comments and suggestions for improvements in these guides are encouraged at all times, and guides will be revised, as appropriate, to accommodate comments and Requests for single copies of issued guides (whch may be reproduced)
or for place to reflect new information or experience.
 
However, comments on this guide,if ment on an automatic distribution list for single copies of fut-ire guide% in specilic received within about two months after its issuance, will be particularly useful in divisions should be made in writing to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, evaluating the need for an early revision.


Washington, D.C. 20555. Attention.
5. Materials and Plant Protection
10. General r, assume that the limiting peak overpressure due to an explosion is equal to the dynamic wind pressure resulting from a design basis tornado for a specific region and then to calculate the limiting distance beyond which the peak overpressure resulting from an explosion will not exceed the design dynamic wind pressure.The conservative correlation for determining the peak explosion overpressure as a function of distance and weight of explosive (TNT) is the curve for peak reflected pressure, Pr, on Figure 1. As defined in Reference
2, the peak reflected .pressure occurs when the shock wave impinges on a surface oriented so that a line which describes the path of travel of the wave is normal to the surface. This curve is taken from Figure 4.12 of Reference
2 with some of the symbols modified.Table 1 gives 2.3 psi as the external dynamic wind pressure due to a design basis tornado in Region I. From Figure 1, the scaled distance, ZG, corresponding to a peak reflected pressure of 2.3 psi is found to be 41. The following function of distance and explosive charge is then determined for Region I: RG = 41Wl/3 Similarly, the correlations for the remaining regions are: Regionl RG =55Wl/3 Region III RG = 80Wl/3 I where RG is the distance in feet from an exploding charge of W pounds of TNT. Reference
3 provides the TNT equivalents of other types of explosives.


Director.
For hazardous materials not listed in Reference
3, the applicant should substantiate the derivation of the TNT equivalent used.The maximum probable hazardous cargo for a single highway truck is approximately
43,000 pounds (equiv-alent TNT). The distance beyond which an exploding truck will not have an adverse effect on plant operations or will not prevent a safe shutdown is indicated in Figures 2, 3, and 4 for Regions I, II, and III, respectively.


Division of Document Control the judgment of the NRC staff that, for the structures, systems, and components of concern, this level can be conservatively chosen at 1 psi (approximately
Similarly, the maximum explosive cargo in a railroad box car is approximately
7 kPa). Based on experimental data on hemispherical charges of TNT cited in Reference
132,000 pounds (equivalent TNT). The distance beyond which an exploding railroad box car will not have an adverse effect on plant operations or will not prevent a safe shutdown is shown in Figures 2, 3, and 4. In this case, it is also necessary to consider the possible effects of a simultaneous explosion of connected box cars. For illustrative purposes an evaluation for three box cars is provided.
1, a safe distance can then be conservatively defined by the relationship R > kW/3 where R is the distance in feet from an exploding charge of W pounds of TNT. When R is in feet and W in pounds, k = 45. When R is in meters and W in kilograms, k = 18. The concept of TNT equivalence, i.e., finding the mass of substance in question that will produce the same blast effect as a unit mass of TNT, has long been used in establishing safe separation distances for solid explosives.


A test program is required to estab lish that equivalence (Ref. 2). For solid substances more efficient in producing blast effects than TNT, equivalents are known by the manufacturers.
The distance beyond which three box cars exploding simultaneously will not have an adverse effect on plant operations or will not prevent a safe shutdown is shown on Figures 2, 3, and 4. If there is a significant probability that more than three box cars of explosives will pass by the nuclear power plant in one shipment, further evaluation by the applicant will be necessary.


For solid substances not intended for use as explosives but subject to accidental detonation, it is conservative
The largest probable quantity of explosive material transported by ship is approximately  
:o use a TNT equivalence of one in establishing safe ;tandoff distances, i.e.. use the cargo mass in Equa ion (1).  Application of the TNT equivalence concept to )ossible detonations of vapor clouds formed after an iccidental release of hydrocarbons is not as well Jocumented.
 
However, investigations of accidents
:hat resulted in blast damage have used this concept n attempts to estimate, based on blast damage, the zffective yield of the explosion (Ref. 3). Most as sessments of this type have led to estimates that less than one percent of the calorific energy of the substance was released in blast effects. Since the ratios of heat of combustion of hydrocarbons to that of TNT are typically about 10, this corresponds to an equivalence on a mass basis of 10 percent. However, there have been accidents in which estimates of the calorific energy released were as high as 10 percent.
 
The blast energy realized depends, in great measure, on phenomena that are accident specific, i.e., the rate of release of the substance and the way in which the cloud is ignited. A reasonable upper bound to the blast energy potentially available based on experi mental detonations of confined vapor clouds is a mass equivalence of 240 percent (Ref. 4). A detailed analysis of possible accident scenarios for particular sites, including consideration of the actual cargo, site topography, and prevailing meteorological conditions may justify a lower effective yield. But, when estab lishing safe stand-off distances independent of site conditions, use of an upper bound is prudent.Determination of the maximum probable quantity of hazardous cargo is dependent on both the transpor tation mode and the vehicles utilized.
 
The maximum probable hazardous solid cargo for a single highway truck is 50,000 pounds (23,000 kg). Similarly, the maximum explosive cargo in a single railroad box car is approximately
132,000 pounds (60,000 kg). The largest probable quantity of explosive material trans ported by ship is approximately  
10,000,000  
10,000,000  
pounds (4,500,000
pounds (equivalent TNT). The distance from the shipping channel beyond which such an explosive charge will have no adverse effect on plant operations or prevent a safe shutdown is shown on Figures 2, 3, and 4.Table 2 summarizes the results of the minimum distances shown on Figures 2, 3, and 4 for the maximum postulated shipments by truck, railroad boxcar, multiple railroad boxcars, and ship.TABLE 2 DISTANCES (IN FEET) TO EQUIVALENT
kg). For illustrative purposes, the safe distances, as defined by inequality
TORNADO OVERPRESSURES
(1), are shown in Figure 1 for these quantities of TNT. When ship ments are made in connected vehicles such as rail road cars or barge trains, an investigation of the pos sibility of explosion of the contents of more than one vehicle is necessary.
Tornado 43,000-1b
 
1 132,000-1b
In cases where the distances from the transporta tion route to the structures, systems, and components that must be protected are not sufficiently great to allow a conclusion (based on conservative assump tions) that the peak positive incident overpressure would be less than I psi (approximately
396,000-tb
7 kPa), an analysis of the frequency of hazardous cargo ship ment may show that the attendant risk is sufficiently low. It is the judgment of the NRC staff that, if the exposure rate, r, defined in Equation (2) can be shown to be less than 10r per year, the risk of dam age due to explosions is sufficiently low.r = nfs where r = exposure rate, (2)n = explosion rate for the substance and transportation mode in question in explosions per mile, f = frequency of shipment for the sub stance in question in shipments per year, and s = exposure distance in miles (see Fig ure 2).  If the substance in question is shipped on more than one transportation mode near the plant, exposure rates calculated for the modes should be summed.  If an adequate data base for estimating the explo sion rate for a substance is lacking, an estimate can be made by utilizing nationwide statistics for the par ticular transportation mode, i.e., n = nln 2 (3) where ni = accidents per mile for the transporta tion mode, and n 2 = cargo explosions per accident for the transportation mode.  Because of the low frequency of occurrence of the events under consideration, estimates based on aver-1.91-2 Ii age frequency may have wide confidence bands, and conservative estimates may be preferred.
10,000,000-l1 Regionj Truckload
 
1-Boxcar Load 3-Boxcar Loa Shipload I 1500 2100 3000 9000 II 1900 2800 4000 11500 III 2800 j 4000 5800 17000 C. REGULATORY  
If estimates of explosion rate, frequency of shipment, and expo~ sure distance are made on a realistic or best estimate basis, an exposure rate less than 10' per year is suf ficiently low. If conservative estimates are used, an exposure rate less than 10-6 per year is sufficiently low.  If it cannot be shown that the distance to the trans portation route is great enough or that the exposure rate is low enough to render sufficiently low the risk of damage to a structure housing a system or compo nent that must be protected, an analysis of the blast load effects may be made. The loading combination to be considered may be limited to: C =D + L + T, + R, + B (4) where C = combined load effect, D -dead load effect, L -live load effect (not including wind or snow loads), T,, = thermal load effect during normal operating or shutdown conditions, R,, = pipe reaction effect during normal operating or shutdown conditions, and B = blast load effect, with the explosion source positioned to maximize the load combination for the structural element under consideration.
POSITION In the design of nuclear power plants, the ability to withstand the possible effects of explosions occurring on nearby transportation routes should be considered relative to the effects of the design basis tornado.When carriers that transport explosives can approach vital structures of a nuclear facility no closer than the distances indicated in Figures 2, 3, and 4, no further consideration need be given to the effects of external dynamic overpressure in plant design. If transportation routes are closer to structures and systems important to safety than the distances indicated in Figures 2, 3, and 4, the applicant should show that the risk to the public is acceptably low on the basis of, for example, low probability of explosions or structural capability for safety-related structures to withstand explosions.
 
Only the incident (or, if appropriate, re flected) pressure loading need be considered.
 
Either a static analysis using twice the appropriate pressure loading or an elastic analysis using dynamic load factors (Ref. 5) is acceptable for computing blast load effects. The blast pressure should be considered to act both inward and outward in order to account for dynamic stress reversal.
 
Overturning and sliding stability as well as the ability of supporting structures to carry loads transmitted from the directly loaded ex terior surfaces must be assessed.
 
C. REGULATORY  
POSITION In the design of nuclear power plants, the ability to withstand the possible effects of explosions occurring on nearby transportation routes should be considered.
 
The following methods are acceptable to the NRC staff for ensuring that the risk of damage due to an explosion on a nearby transportation route is suffi ciently low.  I. When carriers that transport explosives can approach vital structures of a nuclear facility no closer than the distances computed using Figure 1, no further consideration need be given to the effects of blast in plant design. In calculating TNT equivalents, assumptions of 100 percent TNT (mass) equivalence for solid energetic materials and 240 percent TNT (mass) equivalence for substances subject to vapor phase explosions are acceptable upper bounds when effective yields generated from test data do not exist.  Lower effective yields may be justified by analyses accounting for reacti.on kinetics, site topography, and prevailing meteorological conditions when the hazardous cargos can be identified.
 
2. If transportation routes are closer to structures and systems important to safety than the distances computed using Figure 1, the applicant may show that the risk is acceptably low on the basis of low probability of explosions.
 
A demonstration that the rate of exposure to a peak positive incident overpres sure in excess of 1 psi (7 kPa) is less than 10-6 per year, when based on conservative assumptions, or 10-7 per year, when based on realistic assumptions, is acceptable.
 
Due consideration should be given to the comparability of conditions on the route to those of the accident data base.  3. If transportation routes are closer to structures and systems important to safety than the distances computed using Figure 1, the applicant may show that the risk to the public is acceptably low on the basis of capability of the safety-related structures to withstand blast and missile effects associated with de tonation of the hazardous cargo. In assessing the capacity of structures to resist blast loads, a simplified quasi-static analysis of blast effects using the load combination of Equation (4) is acceptable.
 
Effective yields based on analyses accounting for reaction kinetics, site topography, and prevailing meteorological conditions can be used when justified.


==D. IMPLEMENTATION==
==D. IMPLEMENTATION==
The purpose of this section is to provide guidance to applicants and licensees regarding the NRC staff's plans for utilizing this regulatory guide. Except in those cases in which the applicant pro poses an alternative method for complying with spec ified portions of the Commission's regulations, the method described herein will be used in the evalua tion of construction permit applications docketed on or after February 24, 1978.  If an applicant wishes to use this regulatory guide in developing submittals for applications docketed on or before February 24, 1978, the pertinent portions of the application will be evaluated on the basis of this guide.1.91-3 REFERENCES
The purpose of this section is to provide guidance to applicants and licensees regarding the Regulatory staff's plans for utilizing this regulatory guide.Except in those cases in which the applicant proposes an alternative method for complying with specified portions of the Commission's regulations, the method described herein will be used' in the evaluation of construction permit applications docketed on or after March 14, 197
1. Department of the Army Technical Manual TM 5-1300, "Structures to Resist the Effects of Acci dental Explosions," June 1969.  2. Napadensky, H. S., and L. Jablansky, "TNT Equivalency Investigations," Proceedings of the 16th Annual Explosives Safety Seminar, Depart ment of Defense Explosives Safety Board, Wash ington, D.C., September
1974.3. Strehlow, R. A., and W. E. Baker, "The Charac terization and Evaluation of Accidental Explo sions," NASA CR-134779, June 1975.  4. Eichler, T. V., and H. S. Napadensky, "Acciden tal Vapor Phase Explosions on Transportation Routes near Nuclear Power Plants," Final Report J 6405, IIT Research Institute, Chicago, Illinois, April 1977.  5. Biggs, J. M., "Introduction to Structural Dynamics," McGraw-Hill, New York, 1964.1.91-4 I
100,000 I r 1 I i ,,i , , 1 ,1, Ujl u. 10,000 -Nc --= m---om=--.. 
z z 0 0 -.  x w o .Clie '01 C Cr, I I I I I I I I ! I I I I II I ! I I I I I 1 1 I I I 1 103 10 4  105 106 TNT EQUIVALENT
IN POUNDS 3 m 5 107 Figure 1. Radius to Peak Incident Pressure of 1 PSI.


TRANSPORTATION
===5. REFERENCES===
ROUTE z s ee %P O S ' '0 R = 45EV a Figure 2. Exposure Distance Calculation SAFETY-RELATED
1. "Wind Forces on Structures" Paper No. 3269, ASCE Transactions, Vol. 126, Part II, 1961.2. Department of the Army Technical Manual TM 5-1300, "Structures to Resist the Effects of Accidental Explosions." June 1969.3. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, Volume 152, Article 1, "Prevention of and Protection Against Explosion of Munitions, Fuels and other Hazardous Mixtures." Part 4, October 28, 1968.1.91-2
STRUCTURE}}
1000 if If IEW1IIIiI3]EFtIIIFEFE~IL
I L L a.I-a.E 0 z%100 10 Pr-0.1 I 10 100 SCALED GROUND DISTANCE ZG = RG /W1/3 P = Peak Positive Normal Reflected Pressure, psi W = Charge Weight, lb RG = Radial Distance from Charge, ft ZG = Scaled Ground Distance, ft/lb 1/3 Figure 1 Peak Positive Normal Reflected Pressure for Hemispherical TNT Surface Explosion at Sea Level 1.91-3
100,000 i-LL ,-z 0 rh 0 0-J LL U-LU z I-co)a 10,000 1,000 o~.10 3 105 106 AMOUNT OF EXPLOSIVE
IN POUNDS FIGURE 2 APPLICABLE
TO TORNADO REGION I
100,000 I-j I.Lu z 10,000 __ _ _ _ _ _ _-z 0 0 u-0.0 oi 0 -u Lu Lu o~ > U 00 II -T 1 1.-1 1 1o 3  104 ios.16 10 7  10 8 AMOUNT OF EXPLOSIVE
IN POUNDS FIGURE 3 APPLICABLE
TO TORNADO REGION Ut I.-Lu Lu U-z 2 0 a-6 CL x 0 ILA Lu z"0 ON 10 5  106 AMOUNT OF EXPLOSIVE
IN POUNDS FIGURE 4 APPLICABLE
TO TORNADO REGION 1T1}}


{{RG-Nav}}
{{RG-Nav}}

Revision as of 12:00, 15 July 2019

Evaluation of Explosions Postulated to Occur on Transportation Routes Near Nuclear Power Plant Sites.
ML12298A133
Person / Time
Issue date: 01/31/1975
From:
US Atomic Energy Commission (AEC)
To:
References
RG-1.091
Download: ML12298A133 (6)


January 1975 U.S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION

7 REGULATORY

GUI DIRECTORATE

OF REGULATORY

STANDARDS REGULATORY

GUIDE 1.91 EVALUATION

OF EXPLOSIONS

POSTULATED

TO OCCUR ON TRANSPORTATION

ROUTES NEAR NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SITES DE

A. INTRODUCTION

General Design Criterion 4, "Environmental and Missile Design Basis" of Appendix A, "General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants," to 10 CFR Part 50,"Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," requires that nuclear power plant structures, systems, and components important to safety be appropriately protected against dynamic effects resulting from equipment failures which may occur within the nuclear power unit as well as events and conditions which may occur outside the nuclear pov, er unit. These latter events include the effects of explosion of hazardous materials which may be carried on nearby transportation routes.This guide describes a method acceptable to the Regulatory staff for determining safe distances from a nuclear power plant to a transportation route over which explosive material (not including gases) may be carried.

B. DISCUSSION

In order to meet General Design Criterion 2, "Design Basis for Protection Against Natural Phenomena," of Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50 with respect to tornadoes, the structures, systems, and components important to safety of a nuclear power plant must be designed to withstand the wind pressure and sudden internal pressure changes due to a design basis tornado without causing an accident, and without damage that would prevent a safe and orderly shutdown.

Since the nuclear power plant is designed to safely withstand the design basis tornado described in Regulatory Guide 1.76,"Design Basis Tornado for Nuclear Power Plants," an explosion which produces a peak overpressure no greater than the wind pressure caused by the tornado should not cause an accident or prevent the safe shutdown of the plant. It should be noted that -this applies only to the adequacy of the plant with respect to external dynamic overpressure.

The potential effect of missiles from these explosions is still under study. This regulatory guide describes a method for determining distances from the.power .plant to a railway, highway, or navigable waterway beyond which any explosion that might occur on, these transportation routes is not likely to have an adverse effect on plant operation or prevent a safe shutdown.

Under these conditions, a detailed review of the transport of explosives on these transportation routes would not be required.In establishing the distances referred to above, it is necessary to determine the dynamic wind pressure associated with the wind speed of the design basis tornado determined from Regulatory Guide 1.76 for each of the three regions of the contiguous United States. Table 1 presents the wind speeds for the three regions and the associated dynamic pressures calculated from q = 0.002558V 2 (this represents the kinetic energy per unit volume of moving air), where is the dynamic pressure in pounds per square foot and V is the maximum wind velocity in miles per hour (see Reference 1).TABLE 1 DESIGN BASIS TORNADO WIND SPEED CHARACTERISTICS

I ý 1xamuma Wind 1 Dynamic Wind Dynamic Wind Region Speed, mph Pressure, psi Pressure, psf I 360 2.3 331.2 II 300 1.6 230.4 III 240 1.0 144.0 aThe maximum wind speed is the sum of the rotational speed coniponent and the maximum translational speed component.

The calculational method used to analyze the relationships of explosive charge to distance is first to USAEC REGULATORY

GUIDES Copies of published guides may be obtained by request indicating the divisions desired to the US. Atomic Energy Commission, Washington, D.C. 20545, Regulatory Guides are issued to describe and make available to the public Attention:

Director of Regulatory Standards.

Comments and suggestions for methods acceptable to the AEC Regulatory staff of implementing specific parts of improvements in these guides are encouraged and should be sent to the Secretary the Commission's regulations, to delineate techniques .sed by the staff in of the Commission, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Washington, D.C. 20545, evaluating specific problems or postulated accidents, or to provide guidance to Attention:

Dockeiing and Service Section.applicants.

Regulatory Guides are not substitutes for regulations and compliance with them is not required.

Methods and solutions different from those set out in The guides are issued in the following ten broad divisions:

the guides will be acceptable if they provide a basis for the findings requisite to the issuance or continuance of a permit or license by the Commission.

1. Power Reactors 6. Products 2. Research and Test Reactors

7. Transportation

3. Fuels and Materials Facilities

8. Occupational Health Published guides will be revised periodically, as appropriate, to accommodate

4. Environmental and Siting 9. Antitrust Review comments and to reflect new information or experience.

5. Materials and Plant Protection

10. General r, assume that the limiting peak overpressure due to an explosion is equal to the dynamic wind pressure resulting from a design basis tornado for a specific region and then to calculate the limiting distance beyond which the peak overpressure resulting from an explosion will not exceed the design dynamic wind pressure.The conservative correlation for determining the peak explosion overpressure as a function of distance and weight of explosive (TNT) is the curve for peak reflected pressure, Pr, on Figure 1. As defined in Reference

2, the peak reflected .pressure occurs when the shock wave impinges on a surface oriented so that a line which describes the path of travel of the wave is normal to the surface. This curve is taken from Figure 4.12 of Reference

2 with some of the symbols modified.Table 1 gives 2.3 psi as the external dynamic wind pressure due to a design basis tornado in Region I. From Figure 1, the scaled distance, ZG, corresponding to a peak reflected pressure of 2.3 psi is found to be 41. The following function of distance and explosive charge is then determined for Region I: RG = 41Wl/3 Similarly, the correlations for the remaining regions are: Regionl RG =55Wl/3 Region III RG = 80Wl/3 I where RG is the distance in feet from an exploding charge of W pounds of TNT. Reference

3 provides the TNT equivalents of other types of explosives.

For hazardous materials not listed in Reference

3, the applicant should substantiate the derivation of the TNT equivalent used.The maximum probable hazardous cargo for a single highway truck is approximately

43,000 pounds (equiv-alent TNT). The distance beyond which an exploding truck will not have an adverse effect on plant operations or will not prevent a safe shutdown is indicated in Figures 2, 3, and 4 for Regions I, II, and III, respectively.

Similarly, the maximum explosive cargo in a railroad box car is approximately

132,000 pounds (equivalent TNT). The distance beyond which an exploding railroad box car will not have an adverse effect on plant operations or will not prevent a safe shutdown is shown in Figures 2, 3, and 4. In this case, it is also necessary to consider the possible effects of a simultaneous explosion of connected box cars. For illustrative purposes an evaluation for three box cars is provided.

The distance beyond which three box cars exploding simultaneously will not have an adverse effect on plant operations or will not prevent a safe shutdown is shown on Figures 2, 3, and 4. If there is a significant probability that more than three box cars of explosives will pass by the nuclear power plant in one shipment, further evaluation by the applicant will be necessary.

The largest probable quantity of explosive material transported by ship is approximately

10,000,000

pounds (equivalent TNT). The distance from the shipping channel beyond which such an explosive charge will have no adverse effect on plant operations or prevent a safe shutdown is shown on Figures 2, 3, and 4.Table 2 summarizes the results of the minimum distances shown on Figures 2, 3, and 4 for the maximum postulated shipments by truck, railroad boxcar, multiple railroad boxcars, and ship.TABLE 2 DISTANCES (IN FEET) TO EQUIVALENT

TORNADO OVERPRESSURES

Tornado 43,000-1b

1 132,000-1b

396,000-tb

10,000,000-l1 Regionj Truckload

1-Boxcar Load 3-Boxcar Loa Shipload I 1500 2100 3000 9000 II 1900 2800 4000 11500 III 2800 j 4000 5800 17000 C. REGULATORY

POSITION In the design of nuclear power plants, the ability to withstand the possible effects of explosions occurring on nearby transportation routes should be considered relative to the effects of the design basis tornado.When carriers that transport explosives can approach vital structures of a nuclear facility no closer than the distances indicated in Figures 2, 3, and 4, no further consideration need be given to the effects of external dynamic overpressure in plant design. If transportation routes are closer to structures and systems important to safety than the distances indicated in Figures 2, 3, and 4, the applicant should show that the risk to the public is acceptably low on the basis of, for example, low probability of explosions or structural capability for safety-related structures to withstand explosions.

D. IMPLEMENTATION

The purpose of this section is to provide guidance to applicants and licensees regarding the Regulatory staff's plans for utilizing this regulatory guide.Except in those cases in which the applicant proposes an alternative method for complying with specified portions of the Commission's regulations, the method described herein will be used' in the evaluation of construction permit applications docketed on or after March 14, 197

5. REFERENCES

1. "Wind Forces on Structures" Paper No. 3269, ASCE Transactions, Vol. 126, Part II, 1961.2. Department of the Army Technical Manual TM 5-1300, "Structures to Resist the Effects of Accidental Explosions." June 1969.3. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, Volume 152, Article 1, "Prevention of and Protection Against Explosion of Munitions, Fuels and other Hazardous Mixtures." Part 4, October 28, 1968.1.91-2

1000 if If IEW1IIIiI3]EFtIIIFEFE~IL

I L L a.I-a.E 0 z%100 10 Pr-0.1 I 10 100 SCALED GROUND DISTANCE ZG = RG /W1/3 P = Peak Positive Normal Reflected Pressure, psi W = Charge Weight, lb RG = Radial Distance from Charge, ft ZG = Scaled Ground Distance, ft/lb 1/3 Figure 1 Peak Positive Normal Reflected Pressure for Hemispherical TNT Surface Explosion at Sea Level 1.91-3

100,000 i-LL ,-z 0 rh 0 0-J LL U-LU z I-co)a 10,000 1,000 o~.10 3 105 106 AMOUNT OF EXPLOSIVE

IN POUNDS FIGURE 2 APPLICABLE

TO TORNADO REGION I

100,000 I-j I.Lu z 10,000 __ _ _ _ _ _ _-z 0 0 u-0.0 oi 0 -u Lu Lu o~ > U 00 II -T 1 1.-1 1 1o 3 104 ios.16 10 7 10 8 AMOUNT OF EXPLOSIVE

IN POUNDS FIGURE 3 APPLICABLE

TO TORNADO REGION Ut I.-Lu Lu U-z 2 0 a-6 CL x 0 ILA Lu z"0 ON 10 5 106 AMOUNT OF EXPLOSIVE

IN POUNDS FIGURE 4 APPLICABLE

TO TORNADO REGION 1T1