Checklists and logs;
Certificates and approvals;
Reports on significant events;
Reports of deviations and their resolution;
Reports of changes implemented;
Walkdown and handover documentation from construction and commissioning (see para. 4.46).
| Sekce | Odstavec | Text |
|---|---|---|
| Main | 1.1. | Requirements for the safety of research reactors, with particular emphasis on their design and operation, are established in IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSR‑3, Safety of Research Reactors [1]. |
| Main | 1.2. | This Safety Guide provides recommendations on the commissioning of research reactors, both the commissioning of reactor modifications and experiments and the commissioning of the reactor itself. |
| Main | 1.3. | This Safety Guide was developed in parallel with seven other Safety Guides on the safety of research reactors, as follows:
|
| Main | 1.4. | Additional recommendations on the safety of research reactors are provided in IAEA Safety Standards Series Nos SSG‑20 (Rev. 1), Safety Assessment for Research Reactors and Preparation of the Safety Analysis Report [9], and SSG‑24 (Rev. 1), Safety in the Utilization and Modification of Research Reactors [10]. |
| Main | 1.5. | The terms used in this Safety Guide are to be understood as defined and explained in the IAEA Nuclear Safety and Security Glossary [11]. |
| Main | 1.6. | This Safety Guide supersedes IAEA Safety Standards Series No. NS‑G‑4.1, Commissioning of Research Reactors1. |
| Main | 1.7. | The objective of this Safety Guide is to provide recommendations on the commissioning of research reactors to meet the relevant requirements established in SSR‑3 [1], in particular Requirements 30 and 73. |
| Main | 1.8. | The recommendations provided in this Safety Guide are aimed at operating organizations of research reactors, regulatory bodies and other organizations involved in a research reactor project. |
| Main | 1.9. | This Safety Guide is primarily intended for use for heterogeneous, thermal spectrum research reactors that have a power rating of up to several tens of megawatts. For research reactors of higher power, specialized reactors (e.g. fast spectrum reactors) and reactors that have specialized facilities (e.g. hot or cold neutron sources, high pressure and high temperature loops), additional guidance may be needed. For such research reactors, the recommendations provided in IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSG‑28, Commissioning for Nuclear Power Plants [12], might be more suitable. Homogeneous reactors and accelerator driven systems are outside the scope of this publication. |
| Main | 1.10. | Some research reactors, critical assemblies and subcritical assemblies with a low hazard potential might need a less comprehensive commissioning programme. While all recommendations in this Safety Guide are to be considered, some might not be applicable to such research reactors, critical assemblies and subcritical assemblies (see Requirement 12 and paras 2.15–2.17 of SSR‑3 [1], as well as IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSG‑22 (Rev. 1), Use of a Graded Approach in the Application of the Safety Requirements for Research Reactors [13]). |
| Main | 1.11. | In this Safety Guide, subcritical assemblies will be mentioned separately only if a specific recommendation is not relevant for, or is applicable only to, subcritical assemblies. |
| Main | 1.12. | Although this Safety Guide is primarily intended for the commissioning of newly designed and constructed reactors, it is also suitable for the recommissioning of a research reactor (e.g. after a period of extended shutdown) and for the commissioning of new experimental devices and reactor modifications. |
| Main | 1.13. | Additional guidance may be useful for certain modifications. In particular, recommendations on the commissioning of new digital systems are provided in SSG‑37 (Rev. 1) [8]. |
| Main | 1.14. | Sections 2 and 3 provide recommendations on the management system for commissioning and on the commissioning programme, respectively. Section 3 includes general recommendations for the commissioning process and, in particular, for the preparation and review of the commissioning programme. Section 4 provides recommendations on the organization for commissioning and the management of commissioning and establishes the responsibilities and functions of the organizations and groups involved, including interfaces between groups and handover activities. Section 5 describes the general considerations, tests and prerequisites for the different stages of the commissioning programme. Reference to the Appendix is made when describing the tests and prerequisites for each stage. Section 6 covers preparation of the commissioning procedures and reporting of the results and conclusions of commissioning. Section 7 provides recommendations on keeping the commissioning records and updating the safety documentation to take into account the results of commissioning. Section 8 deals with the commissioning of new experimental devices, experiments and reactor modifications. The Appendix provides a comprehensive list of prerequisites and tests that are usually included in the commissioning programme for a research reactor. |
| Main | 2.1. | A management system that integrates safety, health, environmental, security, quality, human‑and‑organizational‑factor, societal and economic elements for the research reactor project is required to be developed (see Requirement 4 of SSR‑3 [1]). The documentation of the management system should describe the system that controls the planning and implementation of all activities at the research reactor, including the development and implementation of the commissioning process. Approval of the management system (or parts thereof) by the regulatory body may be required (see para. 4.12 of SSR‑3 [1]). |
| Main | 2.2. | In accordance with paras 4.13–4.20 of SSR‑3 [1], the management system is required to cover four functional categories, as follows:
|
| Main | 2.3. | As part of the management system, the arrangements for the management of the commissioning of the research reactor should be established and implemented by the operating organization early in the planning for commissioning. These arrangements should apply to the commissioning of all items, services and processes important to safety and should include the means of establishing controls over commissioning activities. This should provide confidence that commissioning is performed in accordance with established codes, standards, specifications, procedures and administrative controls, as required by para. 4.16 of SSR‑3 [1]. |
| Main | 2.4. | In establishing the management system, a graded approach in accordance with the relative importance to safety of each item or process is required to be used (see para. 4.7 of SSR‑3 [1]). |
| Main | 2.5. | The objective of the management system as applied to commissioning should be to ensure that the facility meets the following:
|
| Main | 2.6. | The management system is required to support the development, implementation and enhancement of a strong safety culture (see paras 1.5(b) and 4.9 of GSR Part 2 [14]). This safety culture should be applied in all aspects of the commissioning programme. |
| Main | 2.7. | The management system should describe how commissioning work is to be managed, performed, documented and assessed. The documentation of the management system is required to include the organizational structure, functional responsibilities, levels of authority and interfaces for those managing, performing and assessing the adequacy of work (see para. 4.16 of GSR Part 2 [14]). The management system should also address planning and scheduling of commissioning activities, resource allocation (see Requirement 9 of GSR Part 2 [14] and para. 4.15 of SSR‑3 [1]) and human factors. |
| Main | 2.8. | The application of the management system to commissioning should be described in the commissioning programme and documented in procedures and instructions. These procedures and instructions should document both the commissioning activities and the performance and verification of specific commissioning activities. The relevant requirements of the management system are required to be communicated to the personnel in the commissioning organization (see para. 4.26 of GSR Part 2 [14]). |
| Main | 2.9. | Requirement 11 of GSR Part 2 [14] states that “The organization shall put in place arrangements with vendors, contractors and suppliers for specifying, monitoring and managing the supply to it of items, products and services that may influence safety.” Methods of control should be adopted to ensure that procured items and services meet the relevant requirements of the management system and perform as specified. This may involve the development of specifications for items to be procured, the evaluation of vendors and suppliers, and inspections or tests. |
| Main | 2.10. | Commissioning activities should be performed and recorded in accordance with the procedures and instructions documented in the management system. |
| Main | 2.11. | The commissioning programme should include the following:
|
| Main | 2.12. | Documents essential to the performance and verification of commissioning activities (e.g. procedures, specifications, drawings) are required to be controlled (see Requirement 8 of GSR Part 2 [14]). In particular, measures should be established for the preparation, identification, review, validation, approval, issue, distribution, revision and archiving of such documents. These measures should apply to the following:
|
| Main | 2.13. | Methods should be established to manage non‑conformance (see para. 7.48 of SSR‑3 [1]) and to implement corrective actions and changes. Items, services and processes that do not meet their specified performance requirements, including those that necessitate design changes, should be identified and reported to the appropriate level of management and should be corrected in accordance with the arrangements for approving concessions, corrective actions and preventive actions (see also para. 7.76 of SSR‑3 [1]). To ensure improvement, the causes of such non‑conformance are required to be evaluated, and action is required to be taken to prevent their recurrence (see para. 6.3 of GSR Part 2 [14]). |
| Main | 2.14. | In accordance with Requirement 2 of SSR‑3 [1], the operating organization (licensee) has the prime responsibility for the safety of the research reactor during commissioning. In cases where commissioning activities have been assigned to another organization, the organization performing these activities should be accountable to the operating organization. The reactor management2 should participate in the commissioning programme by means of the following:
|
| Main | 2.15. | In accordance with para. 7.28 of SSR‑3 [1], the competence requirements for personnel performing commissioning work are required to be determined. Suitable training is required to be provided (see paras 7.28 and 7.29 of SSR‑3 [1]) to ensure that personnel are competent to perform their assigned work. |
| Main | 2.16. | External personnel (e.g. personnel employed by vendors and suppliers) who perform commissioning activities should be appropriately trained and qualified. Such personnel should be able to demonstrate proficiency or adequate prior qualifications, training and experience. Paragraph 4.15(b) of SSR‑3 [1] states that “The management system shall ensure that: …External personnel (including suppliers and experimenters) are adequately trained and qualified and perform their activities under the same controls and to the same standards as the reactor personnel”. Research reactor supervisors should review the work of such personnel during preparation for the work, during the work and during testing. |
| Main | 2.17. | Vendors and suppliers should be evaluated and selected on the basis of specified criteria. Paragraph 4.15(a) of SSR‑3 [1] states: |
| Main | 2.18. | Paragraph 4.15(c) of SSR‑3 [1] states that “The management system shall ensure that: …The equipment, tools, materials, hardware and software necessary to conduct the work in a safe manner are identified, provided, checked, and verified and maintained.” The equipment should be suitable for its intended use. Equipment used for monitoring, data collection, and inspections and tests should have a valid calibration certificate and should be appropriately documented. |
| Main | 2.19. | The activities and interfaces between different groups involved in commissioning should be planned, controlled and managed to ensure effective communication and the clear assignment of responsibility. |
| Main | 2.20. | The operating organization should nominate a person to be responsible and accountable for developing and documenting the commissioning programme, monitoring the performance of the programme, ensuring that the operating personnel are competent, and evaluating the impact of the programme on safety. This person is usually the reactor manager (see paras 7.13–7.19 of SSR‑3 [1]). |
| Main | 2.21. | In accordance with para. 4.16 of SSR‑3 [1], commissioning is required to be performed in accordance with established engineering codes, standards, specifications, procedures and administrative controls. |
| Main | 2.22. | Inspection, testing, verification and validation activities should be completed before the implementation or operational use of structures, systems and components (SSCs). |
| Main | 2.23. | Appropriate monitoring and measurement of SSCs should be performed to provide evidence of conformity to design requirements and satisfactory performance in service. |
| Main | 2.24. | Paragraph 4.19 of SSR‑3 [1] states that “Suppliers shall be evaluated and selected on the basis of specified criteria.” Such criteria should be developed and documented within the operating organization’s procurement process. |
| Main | 2.25. | Paragraph 4.20 of SSR‑3 [1] states: |
| Main | 2.26. | Suitable methods should be applied for monitoring the effectiveness of the commissioning programme. The methods should take into account the operational conditions expected during the operation and planned utilization of the research reactor. |
| Main | 2.27. | Paragraph 7.54 of SSR‑3 [1] states: |
| Main | 2.28. | An organizational unit should be established to conduct independent assessments of the commissioning programme. This organizational unit may be the reactor safety committee, as described in paras 7.26 and 7.27 of SSR‑3 [1] and in para. 4.18 of this Safety Guide. Further requirements on the management of independent assessments and self‑assessments are established in GSR Part 2 [14], and further recommendations are provided in GS‑G‑3.5 [15]. |
| Main | 2.29. | Independent assessment measures, including review and verification, should be established to ensure that commissioning activities are performed as specified in the appropriate procedures. These measures may include the following:
|
| Main | 2.30. | Qualified personnel should perform the verification of commissioning activities; these personnel should not be directly responsible for the commissioning activities being verified. |
| Main | 2.31. | The audits referred to in para. 2.27 should determine the adequacy and effectiveness of, and adherence to, all aspects of the management system during the commissioning programme. In the audits, particular attention should be paid to the interfaces and transfers of responsibility that occur between the different groups involved in construction, installation, commissioning and operation. |
| Main | 3.1. | Requirement 30 of SSR‑3 [1] states: |
| Main | 3.2. | Requirement 73 of SSR‑3 [1] states that “The operating organization for a research reactor facility shall ensure that a commissioning programme for the research reactor is established and implemented.” |
| Main | 3.3. | The commissioning programme should demonstrate that the design requirements and intent, as stated in the safety analysis report, have been met. |
| Main | 3.4. | To meet Requirement 30 of SSR‑3 [1], planning for the commissioning programme should begin at the design stage to permit interaction between the designers and the commissioning planners. |
| Main | 3.5. | An additional commissioning programme is often necessary following reactor modifications or when installing new experimental devices that have major safety significance. Further recommendations are provided in SSG‑24 (Rev. 1) [10] and in Section 8 of this Safety Guide. |
| Main | 3.6. | Paragraph 7.49 of SSR‑3 [1] states that “The detailed commissioning programme shall be submitted to the safety committee and the regulatory body and shall be subjected to an appropriate review and assessment before being implemented.” A graded approach should be used by the reactor safety committee and the regulatory body in determining the appropriate level of this review and assessment. |
| Main | 3.7. | Organizational arrangements necessary to achieve the objectives of the commissioning programme (see para. 7.51 of SSR‑3 [1]) should be established. These arrangements should provide the basis for convenient and practical working arrangements that allow the optimum use of available personnel, instruments and methods. Section 4 of this Safety Guide provides further recommendations. |
| Main | 3.8. | In accordance with para. 7.47 of SSR‑3 [1], all anticipated operational modes of the research reactor, including the planned core arrangements and experimental set‑ups, are required to be considered in the commissioning programme. The planned core arrangements and the limitations on experiments should be included in the limiting conditions for safe operation during commissioning and should be verified during the commissioning process. |
| Main | 3.9. | Paragraph 7.50 of SSR‑3 [1] states that “Experimental devices and their potential impact on reactor operations shall be given adequate consideration during the commissioning of the reactor.” Some experimental devices may undergo commissioning at the same time as the reactor systems. The commissioning of such devices should be integrated into the reactor commissioning programme. |
| Main | 3.10. | Information on commissioning and operating experience from other similar facilities should be used in developing the commissioning programme (see also Requirement 88 and para. 6.23 of SSR‑3 [1]). |
| Main | 3.11. | In accordance with para. 7.47 of SSR‑3 [1], the commissioning programme is required to include a programme for the testing of SSCs on the basis of their importance to safety. The Appendix contains recommendations on the necessary tests. While this requirement allows for the application of a graded approach to this testing, even SSCs with a lower safety significance should be tested with the aim of demonstrating functionality and safety. Tests should be arranged in functional groups and in a logical sequence and should be conducted in accordance with written procedures that include acceptance criteria. The commissioning programme is required to be divided into stages, in accordance with para. 7.52 of SSR‑3 [1]. |
| Main | 3.12. | Hold points or witness points for review or inspection should be established throughout the commissioning programme to ensure that test results have been evaluated, that all prerequisites for the next stage have been completed and that the design requirements and the requirements of the regulatory body have been met. |
| Main | 3.13. | Procedures for radiation protection, for emergency preparedness and response, for nuclear security (including physical security and computer security) and for handling of nuclear material needed for commissioning should be established and referenced in the commissioning programme. The applicability of these procedures for use during routine operation should be validated. |
| Main | 3.14. | Requirement 90 of SSR‑3 [1] states: |
| Main | 3.15. | The commissioning programme should be documented in such a way as to enable the objectives and methods of testing to be understood for review and implementation purposes and to permit management control and coordination. The documentation describing the commissioning programme for a research reactor should cover the following:
|
| General description of the commissioning programme | 3.16. | The general description should give an overall picture of the objectives, requirements, major tests and procedures at each stage of the commissioning programme and of the results expected. |
| Organization and responsibilities | 3.17. | The documentation describing the commissioning programme should describe the organization responsible for commissioning and should include an organizational chart. The functions and responsibilities of the organizations or groups involved and of key individual positions (e.g. the heads of the management group (see paras 4.10–4.14) and the commissioning group (see para. 4.16)) should be clearly presented. Further recommendations are provided in Section 4. |
| Commissioning stages, with tests and prerequisites, and their scheduling | 3.18. | The documentation describing the commissioning programme should describe the main stages in commissioning. As noted in para. 7.52 of SSR‑3 [1], these stages are usually arranged in the following sequence:
|
| Commissioning stages, with tests and prerequisites, and their scheduling | 3.19. | The documentation describing the commissioning programme should describe the main commissioning tests devised to demonstrate safe operation within the design specifications of all the research reactor systems and components. This description should include prerequisites for beginning testing, such as system settings (e.g. the alarm level set point) or evidence of completion of previous tests. The interdependence of various systems should be considered in developing the commissioning programme. |
| Commissioning stages, with tests and prerequisites, and their scheduling | 3.20. | The documentation describing the commissioning programme should describe the schedule for performing the main tests. This schedule should include the following:
|
| Commissioning stages, with tests and prerequisites, and their scheduling | 3.21. | The documentation describing the commissioning programme should describe simulations of the effects of malfunctions in control and process systems and equipment that could be expected to occur over the lifetime of the research reactor (e.g. loss of electrical power supplies). These simulations should be included in the commissioning programme only to the extent that they are practicable and will not jeopardize the safety of the reactor. |
| Commissioning procedures and reports | 3.22. | The commissioning programme should include provisions for the preparation, review and approval of commissioning procedures, in accordance with para. 7.55 of SSR‑3 [1]. A list of the procedures for the commissioning tests should also be included or should be appropriately referenced. Further recommendations are provided in Section 6 of this Safety Guide. |
| Commissioning procedures and reports | 3.23. | The commissioning programme should include provisions for the preparation of (a) summary reports after particular stages or substages for which reviews and approvals are necessary before the commencement of subsequent stages and (b) a comprehensive commissioning report upon conclusion of the commissioning tests. Further recommendations are provided in Section 6. |
| Documentation generated by the commissioning programme | 3.24. | The documentation describing the commissioning programme should include provisions for the documentation and archiving of commissioning records (see para. 7.55 of SSR‑3 [1]), together with records of any design changes made or concessions given. Further recommendations are provided in Section 7 of this Safety Guide. |
| Documentation generated by the commissioning programme | 3.25. | As part of the commissioning programme, the safety documentation, including the safety analysis report and other documentation for the research reactor, should be revised as necessary on the basis of the results of the commissioning programme. |
| Documentation generated by the commissioning programme | 4.1. | A commissioning organization should be established by the operating organization of the research reactor. The operating organization should specify the following aspects of the commissioning organization:
|
| Documentation generated by the commissioning programme | 4.2. | The principal activities performed during commissioning may be divided into three categories, as follows:
|
| Documentation generated by the commissioning programme | 4.3. | The structure of a typical commissioning organization includes the following:
|
| Documentation generated by the commissioning programme | 4.4. | There are many ways in which the groups described in para. 4.3 can be formed by different organizations. The composition of the groups, in addition to being influenced by the physical size and design of the facility, may also depend on the availability and experience of personnel performing specialized functions. If the operating organization decides to contract any of these activities to another organization, responsibility for safety remains with the operating organization. |
| Documentation generated by the commissioning programme | 4.5. | In a research reactor, an overlap of personnel between the various groups is common. In such cases, responsibilities should be assigned so that the performance of tests and other functions, and their verification, are appropriately separated. |
| Documentation generated by the commissioning programme | 4.6. | Other persons may participate in commissioning activities, such as representatives of designers, manufacturers and quality assurance organizations. They should collaborate with the groups described in para. 4.3, as appropriate. In particular, designers and manufacturers should provide the necessary information to enable each group to perform its function. |
| Documentation generated by the commissioning programme | 4.7. | The commissioning organization and the arrangements made to ensure proper coordination of commissioning activities should be established early enough to allow the identification of all such activities and adequate time for preparation. |
| Documentation generated by the commissioning programme | 4.8. | If the operating personnel are not already members of the commissioning group, the commissioning organization should make provision for the participation of future operating personnel in the commissioning process, so that they become knowledgeable about the research reactor during commissioning. The aim should be for operating personnel to gain practical experience and develop an ‘institutional memory’ of the facility. This will also help in achieving a smooth handover of the facility to the operating personnel when the commissioning process is completed. |
| Operating organization | 4.9. | The operating organization may choose to be the management group and to manage the commissioning directly. Alternatively, a separate management group may be appointed by the operating organization and made responsible for overseeing all commissioning activities and for controlling and coordinating the activities of other groups participating in commissioning. |
| Management group | 4.10. | The role of the management group may be fulfilled by a committee consisting of senior personnel with experience in the disciplines associated with a research reactor. The reactor manager may belong to the management group. |
| Management group | 4.11. | If a commissioning manager is appointed, that manager’s authority and responsibility should be defined by the management group. |
| Management group | 4.12. | The management group should include expertise in reactor physics, radiation protection, reactor operations and nuclear safety and should have access to appropriate experts when needed. |
| Management group | 4.13. | The management group should have executive authority for the conduct of all activities associated with the commissioning programme. |
| Management group | 4.14. | If the reactor manager, who has direct responsibility for reactor safety, disagrees with decisions of the management group, the disagreement should be resolved by the operating organization. The regulatory body may intervene if it believes that safety is being compromised. |
| Construction group | 4.15. | The construction group is the group of personnel to whom the operating organization has delegated the responsibility for constructing the research reactor. These persons might or might not be directly employed by the operating organization, which retains the overall responsibility for their actions. The construction group may consist of the designers, manufacturers, vendors, suppliers, installers and constructors for the research reactor. The construction group should ensure that the installation has been constructed in accordance with specifications and should deal with any deficiencies and modifications identified during the commissioning programme. |
| Commissioning group | 4.16. | The commissioning group is the group of personnel to whom the operating organization has delegated the responsibility for commissioning. These persons might or might not be directly employed by the operating organization, which retains the overall responsibility for their actions. The commissioning group should consist of personnel with a background and experience relevant to the SSCs to be commissioned. The commissioning group should ensure that SSCs are tested to provide assurance that the research reactor has been completed in accordance with the design intent, that operation of individual systems meets design requirements and that the facility is ready for safe operation. |
| Operations group | 4.17. | The operations group is the group of personnel to whom the operating organization has delegated the responsibility for operating the reactor. The operations group may include employees of other organizations (e.g. the reactor vendor), together with employees of the operating organization. In any case, the operating organization retains the overall responsibility for the actions of the operations group. The operations group should consist of personnel who have responsibility for the operation of the research reactor. In the context of the commissioning programme, the operations group should ensure that the operation of the facility is in accordance with the assumptions and intent of this programme. If necessary, qualification of appropriate members of the operations group so that they can be authorized by the regulatory body (see para. 7.28 of SSR‑3 [1]) to perform specified tasks (e.g. reactor operation) during and after fuel loading should be part of the commissioning programme. |
| Reactor safety committee | 4.18. | Requirement 6 of SSR‑3 [1] states that “A safety committee (or an advisory group) that is independent from the reactor manager shall be established to advise the operating organization on all the safety aspects of the research reactor.” |
| Reactor safety committee | 4.19. | Paragraph 4.27 of SSR‑3 [1] further states: |
| Reactor safety committee | 4.20. | The duties of the reactor safety committee(s) in commissioning should be described in the commissioning programme and should include the responsibilities described in para. 4.34 of this Safety Guide. |
| Other groups | 4.21. | Other groups, such as groups for quality management, radiation protection and design, may also be formed to participate in commissioning, as necessary. |
| Other groups | 4.22. | The role of the regulatory body in the commissioning process for a research reactor is specified by the legal framework and national regulations. The main role of the regulatory body in the commissioning process (including the preparations for commissioning) is the oversight of commissioning activities, including, where appropriate, issuing relevant authorizations, as described in section 3 of SSR‑3 [1]. The purpose of this regulatory oversight should be to ensure that the research reactor is constructed in accordance with the design intent and its licensing base and that the operating organization has made the necessary arrangements to progress from construction to operation. |
| Operating organization | 4.23. | Requirement 67 of SSR‑3 [1] states that “The operating organization for a research reactor facility shall have the prime responsibility for safety in the operation of the facility.” |
| Operating organization | 4.24. | The operating organization has overall responsibility for overseeing the satisfactory completion of all commissioning activities and has ultimate responsibility for safety during commissioning. The operating organization should also have responsibility for setting up a commissioning organization and for ensuring that management arrangements for commissioning are established, as described in Section 2. |
| Operating organization | 4.25. | Paragraph 7.3 of SSR‑3 [1] states that “The responsibility of the operating organization for the safety of the research reactor shall not be delegated.” The operating organization may delegate part or all of the activities of planning, establishing and implementing the commissioning programme but remains responsible for its effectiveness. |
| Operating organization | 4.26. | With regard to the commissioning organization, as the licensee, the operating organization should be the only correspondent with the regulatory body on commissioning matters. Paragraph 7.51 of SSR‑3 [1] states: |
| Operating organization | 4.27. | The operating organization should arrange for the required submissions to the regulatory body at the commissioning stage and should disseminate information from the regulatory body on regulatory requirements to the relevant parts of the commissioning organization. |
| Operating organization | 4.28. | If an issue of major safety significance is discovered during commissioning (e.g. in the regulatory body’s review and assessment of submissions from the operating organization or as a result of deviations discovered during commissioning), the operating organization should ensure that safety analyses are performed and that procedures are applied for design, construction and commissioning equivalent to those applied for the reactor itself. After satisfactory safety assessment, the resumption of commissioning activities should be subject to approval by the operating organization and, if necessary, the regulatory body. |
| Operating organization | 4.29. | If the operating organization chooses to be the management group and to manage the commissioning directly, it should assume the additional responsibilities stated in para. |
| Operating organization | 4.30. | Alternatively, the operating organization may choose to appoint a separate management group. |
| Management group | 4.30. | The responsibilities of the management group should include the following:
|
| Construction group | 4.31. | The responsibilities of the construction group should include the following:
|
| Commissioning group | 4.32. | The responsibilities of the commissioning group should include the following:
|
| Operations group | 4.33. | The responsibilities of the operations group relevant to commissioning should include the following:
|
| Reactor safety committee | 4.34. | Paragraph 7.49 of SSR‑3 [1] states that “The detailed commissioning programme shall be submitted to the safety committee…and shall be subjected to an appropriate review and assessment before being implemented.” |
| Other groups | 4.35. | The responsibilities of any other groups that may be involved in the commissioning process, such as designers, manufacturers and technical support organizations, should be established by the management group and documented in the management system. |
| Other groups | 4.36. | In accordance with para. 7.49 of SSR‑3 [1], the detailed commissioning programme is required to be submitted to the regulatory body for review and assessment before being implemented. In its review of the commissioning programme, the regulatory body should verify that its requirements for the review and approval of test results and for witnessing of tests (see para. 3.20 (c) of this Safety Guide) have been understood and correctly implemented. The commencement of commissioning should be subject to the approval of the regulatory body following a satisfactory assessment of the commissioning programme. In some cases, this approval may be granted step by step during the commissioning process. |
| Other groups | 4.37. | Before authorizing the loading of fuel into the research reactor, the regulatory body needs to have completed the review and assessment of the following:
|
| Other groups | 4.38. | Before authorizing routine operation of the research reactor, the regulatory body should complete the review and assessment of the results of the commissioning programme and the updated safety analysis report, including the OLCs. |
| Other groups | 4.39. | Since many activities are performed in parallel during the commissioning of a research reactor, the interfaces between these activities should be managed by the operating organization (or by the management group on behalf of the operating organization) to ensure the safety of personnel and of the facility and to ensure the effective and efficient implementation of the commissioning programme. |
| Other groups | 4.40. | Appropriate work control processes should be established to coordinate the activities of all groups participating in the commissioning programme. |
| Other groups | 4.41. | In accordance with para. 9.3 of SSR‑3 [1], the operating organization is required to establish adequate measures during commissioning to ensure effective communication and coordination among the different groups involved in order to ensure that safety measures and security measures do not compromise one another. |
| Interfaces between construction group activities and commissioning group activities | 4.42. | The responsibilities of the construction group relevant to the commissioning programme are described in para. 4.31. These responsibilities should be defined before commissioning is commenced to prevent misunderstandings. Particular topics on which the construction group and the commissioning group may have interfaces are as follows:
|
| Interfaces between commissioning group activities and operating group activities | 4.43. | The following topics should be considered when managing the interfaces between the commissioning group and the operating group:
|
| Interfaces between commissioning group activities and operating group activities | 4.44. | The operating organization should ensure that an appropriate procedure is established for handover of the research reactor following successful commissioning. Special care should be taken to ensure that responsibilities before and after the handover are clearly defined. Requirement 67 of SSR‑3 [1] states that “The operating organization for a research reactor facility shall have the prime responsibility for safety in the operation of the facility.” |
| Interfaces between commissioning group activities and operating group activities | 4.45. | A review of the handover of the research reactor should be performed by personnel designated by the operating organization. In performing the review, meetings should be held and representatives of the organizations involved in the handover process should perform facility walkdowns. |
| Interfaces between commissioning group activities and operating group activities | 4.46. | As part of the handover of the research reactor, documentation should be transferred in acceptance packages and should include the following:
|
| Interfaces between commissioning group activities and operating group activities | 4.47. | A final acceptance document that verifies that all parameters and conditions satisfy the acceptance criteria should be provided to the operating organization. |
| Interfaces between commissioning group activities and operating group activities | 4.48. | Requirement 81 of SSR‑3 [1] states that “The operating organization for a research reactor facility shall prepare emergency arrangements for preparedness for, and response to, a nuclear or radiological emergency.” |
| Interfaces between commissioning group activities and operating group activities | 4.49. | In addition, para. 7.89 of SSR‑3 [1] states that “Appropriate emergency arrangements shall be established from the time that nuclear fuel is first brought to the site, and all emergency arrangements shall be completed before the commencement of fuel loading.” Non‑radiation‑related hazards should be considered in the emergency arrangements. |
| Interfaces between commissioning group activities and operating group activities | 4.50. | Requirements for such emergency arrangements are established in IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 7, Preparedness and Response for a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency [16]. |
| Interfaces between commissioning group activities and operating group activities | 4.51. | All personnel involved in the commissioning programme are required to be trained to respond appropriately to emergencies (see para. 7.91 of SSR‑3 [1]). |
| Interfaces between commissioning group activities and operating group activities | 5.1. | In accordance with para. 7.52 of SSR‑3 [1], the commissioning programme is required to be divided into stages (see paras 3.11 and 3.18 of this Safety Guide). |
| Interfaces between commissioning group activities and operating group activities | 5.2. | The group of tests to be performed within each stage should be determined, together with the point in the sequence of tests at which a review of the test results should be completed before continuing to the next stage. On the basis of such a review, the management group should consider whether the commissioning programme should continue to the next stage and whether the next stage should be modified as a consequence of the test results or because any tests in the stage were not undertaken or were not completed. |
| Interfaces between commissioning group activities and operating group activities | 5.3. | Substages should be used during commissioning when necessary. The sequence of tests within each substage should be specified in the chronological order in which they will be performed. A detailed list of tests and prerequisites to be considered for inclusion in a commissioning programme is provided in the Appendix. |
| Interfaces between commissioning group activities and operating group activities | 5.4. | At the appropriate commissioning stages, the relevant safety system settings and alarm settings, including those for radiation monitoring instruments, should be determined and used. |
| Interfaces between commissioning group activities and operating group activities | 5.5. | The sequencing of tests should be determined, with account taken of the need for the following:
|
| Interfaces between commissioning group activities and operating group activities | 5.6. | The sequencing of tests should be ordered so that the safety of the research reactor is not dependent on the performance of the component being tested. |
| Interfaces between commissioning group activities and operating group activities | 5.7. | Full in situ functional performance tests should be performed for all systems important to safety and for those auxiliary and supporting systems necessary for their operation. If only partial testing is possible, this should not jeopardize the demonstration of the functional performance of the system as a whole. |
| Interfaces between commissioning group activities and operating group activities | 5.8. | Before starting the commissioning tests, the following documentation should be prepared, reviewed, made subject to approval and issued in accordance with the management system of the operating organization:
|
| Stage A: Tests prior to fuel loading | 5.9. | For the equipment scheduled to be commissioned, in stage A, initial operational data should be recorded, functional performance should be verified and compatibility of operation with interfacing systems should be confirmed. The pre‑operational workplace monitoring programme and environmental monitoring programme should be completed during stage A. |
| Prerequisites for stage A | 5.10. | The construction of SSCs should be completed to the extent that outstanding construction items do not affect the validity of test results. Verification that construction conforms to facility drawings should be complete, as should other inspections and tests relating to the construction of the research reactor. Some of these inspections and tests may have been performed at fabrication plants during the manufacture of components as well as in workshops prior to the installation of components. |
| Tests for stage A | 5.11. | The completion of the tests for stage A is necessary before proceeding to stage B. Details of the tests to be performed in stage A are given in the Appendix. |
| Tests for stage A | 5.12. | Procedures should be established to ensure the adequate retesting of any SSCs that are returned to the custody of the construction group or that have been subject to maintenance or have been modified during or following stage A. |
| Tests for stage A | 5.13. | To meet the requirements established in para. 7.54 of SSR‑3 [1], a review should be conducted following stage A to verify that the test programme has been completed and reported, that any deviations have been identified and corrected, and that the tests to this point have been adequate to demonstrate that fuel loading tests, initial criticality tests and low power tests can be performed in a safe manner. The review should confirm that the OLCs are adequate and practical and should identify any new constraints on operation of the research reactor. |
| Stage B: Fuel loading tests, initial criticality tests and low power tests | 5.14. | Tests conducted in stage B should confirm that the reactor core, the reactivity control systems, the reactor shutdown and protection systems, other safety systems, the reactor physics parameters, the characteristics of the core coolant system and the shielding, as appropriate, are all satisfactory. Measures should be taken to ensure that the buildup of radioactive material during this stage is kept to a minimum to facilitate any subsequent corrective actions that might be necessary. |
| Stage B: Fuel loading tests, initial criticality tests and low power tests | 5.15. | Except for subcritical assemblies, as soon as the reactor is made critical, all safety equipment, especially equipment that could not be tested before startup, should be tested at a low power level. A period of low power operation is advisable for the training of personnel. |
| Stage B: Fuel loading tests, initial criticality tests and low power tests | 5.16. | Initial criticality tests and low power tests might not apply to subcritical assemblies. Stage B tests of these assemblies might only comprise fuel loading and physics tests. For subcritical assemblies, all safety equipment should be tested after loading the required fuel assemblies, especially equipment that could not be tested before fuel loading. |
| Stage B: Fuel loading tests, initial criticality tests and low power tests | 5.17. | A review of results from stage B is necessary before proceeding to stage C. These tests should confirm that the core design, including reactivity characteristics and neutronic performance, and the characteristics of safety systems and radiation protection systems are satisfactory. The information obtained from these tests should provide assurance that there is no significant disagreement between the measured parameters and those of the safety analysis report. Any deviations observed should be investigated and resolved. |
| Stage B: Fuel loading tests, initial criticality tests and low power tests | 5.18. | Stage B may be divided into two substages as follows:
|
| Prerequisites for substage B1: Fuel loading tests and initial criticality tests | 5.19. | Procedures for radiation protection (see Requirement 84 of SSR‑3 [1]) and procedures for emergency preparedness and response (see Requirement 81 of SSR‑3 [1]) should be established, and personnel should be appropriately trained in these procedures. |
| Prerequisites for substage B1: Fuel loading tests and initial criticality tests | 5.20. | Reactor shutdown systems and the necessary startup instrumentation should be fully operable and capable of meeting design requirements over the full range of operating conditions. There should be documented evidence of this capability that is satisfactory to the regulatory body (in particular, evidence of compliance with the established OLCs for commissioning). |
| Prerequisites for substage B1: Fuel loading tests and initial criticality tests | 5.21. | Neutron monitoring instruments for reactor startup should be operable before commencing the approach to criticality. Neutron sources should be used in an appropriate geometric arrangement to obtain an adequate neutron count rate for substage B1 to ensure accurate measurements and adequate control. |
| Prerequisites for substage B1: Fuel loading tests and initial criticality tests | 5.22. | A comprehensive list of prerequisites for substage B1 is given in the Appendix. |
| Tests for substage B1: Fuel loading tests and initial criticality tests | 5.23. | Fuel loading and removal of the absorber or addition of the moderator during the approach to criticality necessitate calculations or estimates to predict changes in core reactivity, as well as periodic measurements of subcritical multiplication to determine subsequent safe increments of reactivity. If the core subcriticality conditions measured during the approach to criticality (or during the subcriticality verification test for subcritical assemblies) deviate significantly from the predicted conditions, further loading of the core should be paused until the deviations are analysed, the reasons for the deviations are determined, the implications are understood and appropriate corrective actions are taken. |
| Tests for substage B1: Fuel loading tests and initial criticality tests | 5.24. | For subcritical assemblies, adequate subcriticality should be verified (e.g. through 1/M calculations, where M is the subcritical neutron multiplication factor). |
| Tests for substage B1: Fuel loading tests and initial criticality tests | 5.25. | During substage B1, anticipated future core configurations that may be needed for the utilization programme should be tested. |
| Prerequisites for substage B2: Low power tests | 5.26. | The results of the tests performed in substage B1 should be recorded and reviewed. A satisfactory review of results from substage B1 is necessary before proceeding to substage B2. |
| Tests for substage B2: Low power tests | 5.27. | Paragraphs 5.28–5.32 do not apply to subcritical assemblies (see para. 5.16 on stage B commissioning tests of subcritical assemblies). |
| Tests for substage B2: Low power tests | 5.28. | During substage B2, significant irradiation of fuel and activation of reactor components should be avoided to facilitate any subsequent inspections of the core and reactor components. |
| Tests for substage B2: Low power tests | 5.29. | The low power tests and measurements to be conducted include the following:
|
| Tests for substage B2: Low power tests | 5.30. | The information obtained from the low power tests should provide assurance that there is no significant disagreement between the measured reactor parameters and those of the safety analysis report. Any deviations observed should be investigated and resolved before continuing to the next stage. |
| Tests for substage B2: Low power tests | 5.31. | In many instances, tests specific to a particular reactor type are necessary, and these should be performed, where possible, during substage B2. |
| Tests for substage B2: Low power tests | 5.32. | To meet the requirements established in para. 7.54 of SSR‑3 [1], a review should be conducted following stage B to verify that the test programme has been completed and reported, that any deviations have been identified and corrected, and that the tests to this point have been adequate to demonstrate that power ascension tests and power tests can be performed in a safe manner. The review should confirm that the OLCs are adequate and practical and should identify any new constraints on the operation of the research reactor. Training plans and operating procedures should be reviewed and modified where necessary to take account of the results of commissioning. |
| Stage C: Power ascension tests and power tests | 5.33. | Tests conducted during stage C should, where practicable, confirm that the reactor can be operated at power in accordance with the OLCs, both for normal operation and during and after anticipated operational occurrences (e.g. power failure, loss of flow of the primary coolant). Power ascension tests and power tests are not applicable to subcritical assemblies and to some types of critical assembly, which usually have power levels of zero or of just a few watts. |
| Stage C: Power ascension tests and power tests | 5.34. | During stage C, baseline data should be established for all safety related parameters that are to be routinely measured and monitored during the operation of the research reactor, including initial system operating parameters and diagnostic data on components important to safety. These data will form a basis for the future assessment of component degradation or trends in performance. |
| Prerequisites for stage C | 5.35. | The following prerequisites should be met before commencing stage C:
|
| Prerequisites for stage C | 5.36. | Stage C may be divided into two substages as follows:
|
| Tests for substage C1: Power ascension tests | 5.37. | Power ascension should be performed in steps, as specified in procedures. At each step, a series of tests should be performed to confirm the design intent and the safety of continuing the power ascension. The results obtained in the tests should be reviewed, and any differences between the predicted and observed values should be reconciled before continuing to the next power level. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 5.38. | During substage C2, the following tests should be performed:
|
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 5.39. | Following the demonstration of full power operation, tests and investigations should be performed to demonstrate or verify various facility parameters associated with the utilization of the reactor and the optimization of protection and safety. Within the approved operating envelope, these tests and investigations may include the following:
|
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 5.40. | To meet the requirements established in para. 7.54 of SSR‑3 [1], a review should be conducted following stage C commissioning to verify that any deviations have been identified and corrected, that the test programme has been adequate to demonstrate that the research reactor can be operated in a safe manner, and that stage C commissioning has been completed satisfactorily and its results reported. The review should confirm that all measured parameters and conditions are within acceptable limits and that the OLCs are adequate. If necessary, any new constraints on the operation of the research reactor should be specified. Training plans and operating procedures should be reviewed and, where necessary, modified to take into account the results of commissioning. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 6.1. | Paragraph 7.53 of SSR‑3 [1] states that “Procedures shall be prepared, reviewed and made subject to approval for each commissioning test prior to the commencement of the tests.” Procedures should also be prepared as necessary for other commissioning tasks. The procedures may also be used as an aid for assessing and documenting the results of tests. The commissioning procedures should include the following:
|
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 6.2. | Commissioning procedures for testing equipment and systems in a research reactor should include the following:
|
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 6.3. | The test procedures should, as far as practicable, follow normal operating procedures for the research reactor in order to check and, if necessary, amend the normal operating procedures and to provide an opportunity for the operating personnel to become familiar with the normal operating procedures for the research reactor. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 6.4. | The commissioning procedures should state any changes from the normal operating configuration that are necessary for testing. In such cases, checks should be undertaken to confirm that these changes are made correctly before the start of the tests and that the components or systems are restored to their normal status after the testing has been completed. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 6.5. | Measures should be taken, where necessary, to prevent disruptive or adverse interactions between the SSCs of the research reactor and the equipment used for commissioning. In particular, care should be taken when connecting test equipment to instrumentation and control systems and when cross‑connecting fluid systems for commissioning purposes. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 6.6. | Procedures should include the arrangements for collecting and tabulating data and test results (e.g. test sheets and forms) in accordance with the management system. Methods of analysis should be stated and presented in a manner that allows further verification. The data and test results should be evaluated against acceptance criteria that clarify whether the design intent has been met. The uncertainties used in the safety analysis should be taken into account. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 6.7. | Paragraph 7.54 of SSR‑3 [1] states that “Provisions shall also be included for resolving any deviation or deficiency that is discovered during the commissioning tests.” |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 6.8. | The commissioning group should prepare summary reports after each commissioning stage or substage for which reviews and approvals are required and before proceeding with the commissioning programme. The reports should be submitted to the management group (or the operating organization) and, as necessary, to other participants in the commissioning programme. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 6.9. | Formal reports for each test should be prepared and should be subject to approval by the commissioning group. The format of commissioning reports may vary; however, para. 7.55 of SSR‑3 [1] states:
|
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 6.10. | Reports of each commissioning stage and a final commissioning report should be prepared by the commissioning group. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 6.11. | The management group should review the commissioning reports to ensure that the objectives of the commissioning programme have been achieved. In particular, the management group should ensure that the OLCs have been verified and that assumptions and predictions made in the safety analysis report about the performance of the research reactor have been confirmed. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 6.12. | A comprehensive commissioning report should be prepared by the management group upon conclusion of commissioning activities. This report should contain all the necessary information, including the collation and evaluation of test results. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 6.13. | In addition to the formal commissioning reports, para. 7.51 of SSR‑3 [1] states that “the results and analyses of tests directly affecting safety shall be made available to the safety committee and the regulatory body for review and approval, as appropriate.” |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 7.1. | Procedures should be established in accordance with the management system to identify, collect, maintain, review, approve, issue, revise and archive documents associated with the commissioning programme. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 7.2. | Paragraph 7.56 of SSR‑3 [1] states that “The results of all commissioning tests, whether conducted by a member of the operating organization or a supplier, shall be made available to the operating organization and shall be maintained for the lifetime of the facility.” Other documentation on commissioning (e.g. to describe the proposed commissioning activities, to evaluate results, to resolve deviations, to permit the transfer of responsibilities for systems between groups, and to ensure that all these activities have been correctly performed) should also be made available to, and should be retained by, the operating organization. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 7.3. | The commissioning documentation should include the following:
|
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 7.4. | Two categories of records — permanent records and temporary records — should be established within the commissioning programme for a research reactor. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 7.5. | Permanent records are required to be maintained for the lifetime of the research reactor (see para. 7.56 of SSR‑3 [1]). Permanent records are those records that meet one or more of the following criteria:
|
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 7.6. | Temporary records are those records that are necessary only to demonstrate the completion of activities in accordance with the commissioning stages. They need not be maintained after the completion of the activities, once such activities have been reviewed and are considered completed. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 7.7. | A summary of the commissioning programme and its results should be incorporated into the research reactor’s safety analysis report before the authorization of routine operation by the regulatory body. Further recommendations are provided in SSG‑20 (Rev. 1) [9]. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 8.1. | Proposals for experimental devices4 to be installed after completion of the research reactor commissioning programme, new experiments not considered during the commissioning programme and/or modifications to the research reactor are required to be reviewed (see Requirement 83 of SSR‑3 [1]). Recommendations on this subject are provided in SSG‑24 (Rev. 1) [10]. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 8.2. | All new experimental devices, experiments and modifications are required to be subject to an adequate commissioning programme to demonstrate functionality and safety prior to being placed in service (see paras 7.47 and 7.50 of SSR‑3 [1]). |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 8.3. | In accordance with para. 7.101 of SSR‑3 [1], new experimental devices, experiments and modifications that have major safety significance (see section 3 of SSG‑24 (Rev. 1) [10]) are required to be subject to commissioning procedures that are equivalent to those for the reactor itself, and the recommendations of this Safety Guide apply fully. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 8.4. | New experimental devices, experiments and modifications that do not have major safety significance should be commissioned in accordance with the recommendations provided in SSG‑24 (Rev. 1) [10]. Such devices, experiments or modifications should be brought into service with appropriate verification of safety by means of a commissioning programme involving checks, measurements and evaluations prior to and during implementation. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 8.5. | The basis for final approval of the experimental device, experiment or modification should be the successful completion of the commissioning. A commissioning report should be produced in which the results of the commissioning are presented and assessed. The report should be subject to review by the reactor safety committee and approval by the reactor manager and, if appropriate, should be submitted to the regulatory body for review and approval. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 8.6. | Following the commissioning of new experimental devices, experiments and modifications, the system documentation, drawings, safety analysis report and operating procedures should be updated to reflect the new status. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | 8.7. | For some new experimental devices, experiments and modifications, a certain period of operation may be necessary before sufficient information on their effects on the operation, reliability and safety of the reactor can be obtained and evaluated. SSG‑24 (Rev. 1) [10] provides further recommendations on this post‑implementation stage. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | A.1. | The number of commissioning tests and the order in which they are performed generally depend on the type of research reactor and the specific commissioning programme. Recommendations on commissioning tests for power reactors are provided in SSG‑28 [12]; these tests should be evaluated for their applicability to the commissioning of research reactors. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | A.2. | The commissioning programme usually includes tests for all SSCs of the research reactor. In accordance with Requirement 12 of SSR‑3 [1], a graded approach to testing needs to be adopted, in which the extent and type of tests to be performed are determined on the basis of the importance to safety of each item and the overall hazard potential of the research reactor (see also para. 2.17 of SSR‑3 [1]). Notwithstanding this, testing should be sufficiently comprehensive to establish the proper behaviour of the research reactor in all modes analysed in the design, including, to the extent possible, anticipated operational occurrences. Tests falling outside the range of assumptions used in the safety analysis report are not usually conducted. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | A.3. | In establishing the commissioning tests, the design and safety documentation should be used. The designers and the construction group should participate in establishing the test objectives and acceptance criteria. Normally, designers, vendors or suppliers will establish a minimum number of tests for contractual warranty purposes. These tests should be supplemented by additional tests, which should be discussed with the designer, vendor or supplier, to fulfil the objectives of the commissioning programme. However, the set of tests should be agreed by all the organizations involved in commissioning and should be acceptable to the regulatory body. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | A.4. | The performance of tests should be scheduled in accordance with the recommendations in paras 3.18–3.21 and Section 5 of this Safety Guide. In general, when conducting testing, emphasis should be placed on safety systems and engineered safety features that are relied on for the following:
|
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | A.5. | The commissioning programme should also include verification tests covering all other systems necessary for the intended operation of the research reactor, in particular the installed radiation monitoring system, the fire protection system and the communication system. Adequate consideration should be given to testing any experimental devices, and their auxiliary equipment, that will be commissioned together with the reactor. If computerized systems are used in performing tests, these systems should be validated (see SSG‑37 (Rev. 1) [8]). |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | A.6. | During commissioning substage B1 (see paras 5.19–5.25), the reactor core is loaded with fissionable material and becomes critical. The tests conducted during this substage should cover the typical core configurations that may be necessary during operation of the reactor. The measurement of reactor parameters in each of these core configurations should be made in a core of the minimum excess reactivity necessary for the measurement. The results of the tests should then be compared with the conclusions of the safety analysis and the neutronic calculations performed before beginning the commissioning process. |
| Tests for substage C2: Power tests | A.7. | The items in this appendix should be included, as appropriate, in the procedures for testing fuel loading and the approach to criticality. |
| Prerequisites for commissioning stage A | A.8. | Before the testing of any SSC in stage A, the following points should be considered:
|
| Tests for commissioning stage A | A.9. | The primary prerequisite for testing the performance of fuel loading and the approach to criticality is the completion of stage A tests. The testing of systems (e.g. electrical systems, instrumentation systems, ventilation systems, water purification systems, water cleanup systems, water service systems) should be sequenced to ensure the availability of those systems necessary for the further implementation of the commissioning programme. In some cases, repeating tests that have already been conducted (e.g. in workshops or during fabrication and construction) might not be necessary, provided the test methods, results and documentation meet the requirements of the commissioning programme. However, these tests should be verified. |
| Tests for commissioning stage A | A.10. | The tests conducted during commissioning stage A should demonstrate the operability of systems and, where appropriate, should verify redundancy. The following are examples of representative systems that should be tested, as well as tests and verifications that should be conducted during stage A:
|
| Prerequisites for commissioning stage B | A.11. | In addition to the completion of the stage A tests and verifications, administrative measures and precautions should be implemented as additional prerequisites for commissioning stage B.14 These measures and precautions should include the following:
|
| Prerequisites for commissioning stage B | A.12. | At a minimum, the following documentation should be available before the start of commissioning substage B1:
|
| Prerequisites for commissioning stage B | A.13. | Radiation protection procedures should be established for the commissioning programme and should be subject to approval by the operating organization. A radiation protection programme for the research reactor should be implemented as soon as radioactive materials, including neutron sources and fuel assemblies, are introduced at the facility. This programme should include consideration of the following:
|
| Prerequisites for commissioning stage B | A.14. | Emergency procedures for the commissioning programme should be established and made subject to approval by the operating organization and, if required, by the regulatory body. These procedures should address the following:
|
| Tests for commissioning substage B1: Fuel loading and approach to criticality | A.15. | The following are examples of tests and verifications that should be conducted during substage B1. (It is assumed that the approach to criticality is through progressive addition of fuel. For an approach to criticality through actions on the moderator, reflector or neutron absorbers, different steps and verifications may be appropriate.) Some of these tests (e.g. those marked with an asterisk (*)) might not be applicable to subcritical assemblies:
|
| Tests for commissioning substage B1: Fuel loading and approach to criticality | A.16. | The following are examples of additional tests and verifications that should be conducted, as applicable, for subcritical assemblies in substage B1:
|
| Tests for commissioning substage B2: Low power tests (not applicable to subcritical assemblies) | A.17. | The following are examples of tests and verifications that should be performed during substage B2:
|
| Prerequisites for commissioning stage C (not applicable to subcritical assemblies) | A.18. | The following activities should be performed before starting stage C:
|
| Tests for commissioning stage C (not applicable to subcritical assemblies) | A.19. | During stage C, the reactor power should be raised in steps until full power is reached. Hold points should be established at each step. The approval of the regulatory body might be required before proceeding. Tests and adjustments should be performed at each step, as necessary. Of particular interest will be the performance of the research reactor protection and control systems, the results of radiation surveys to confirm the provision of adequate shielding, the validation of analytical models used for design and safety analysis, and the response of the reactor to anticipated operational occurrences, including transients. |
| Tests for commissioning stage C (not applicable to subcritical assemblies) | A.20. | Testing should be sufficiently comprehensive to establish that the research reactor can be operated safely, without placing the reactor in operating modes or conditions that fall outside the range of assumptions used in the safety analysis. Consideration should be given to testing at the extremes of system operating modes, as well as to testing under simulated conditions of minimum availability of equipment if the facility is intended to be operated in these modes. |
| Tests for commissioning stage C (not applicable to subcritical assemblies) | A.21. | The following are examples of tests and verifications that should be performed at relevant power levels during stage C:
|
| Tests for commissioning stage C (not applicable to subcritical assemblies) | A.22. | Typical tests and activities that should be completed as research reactor operations proceed are as follows:
|