On the Optimistic Bias of Core Damage Frequency, and why it should be excluded from nuclear regulatory requirements.

Abstract

Core Damage Frequency (CDF) is a risk metric often employed by nuclear regulatory bodies worldwide. Numerical values for this metric are required by U.S. regulators, prior to reactor licensing, and reported values can trigger regulatory inspections. CDF is reported as a constant, sometimes accompanied by a confidence interval. It is well understood that CDF characterizes the arrival rate of a stochastic point process modeling core damage events. However, consequences of the assumptions imposed on this stochastic process as a computational necessity are often overlooked. Herein, we revisit CDF in the context of modern point process theory. We will argue that the assumptions required to yield a constant CDF are typically unrealistic. We will further argue that treating CDF as an informative approximation is suspect, because of the inherent difficulties in quantifying its quality as an approximation.