Inside The Tennessee Valley Authority

A Publication
MORE INSIDE
Korea Market Overview
AREVAs Mike Rencheck talks nuclear opportunities
High Burn-Up Used Fuel Demo
S
E
P
T
E
M
B
E
R
/
O
C
T
O
B
E
R

2
0
1
3

V
o
l
u
m
e

6

N
o
.

5
Inside the Tennessee
Val ley Authority
A preview of the NUCLEAR POWER International conference!
1309npi_C1 1 10/1/13 1:21 PM
Bechtel is among the most respected engineering, project
management, and construction companies in the world.
Bechtel operates through five global business units that
specialize in power generation; civil infrastructure; mining
and metals; oil, gas and chemicals; and government services.
Since its founding in 1898, Bechtel has worked on more than
22,000 projects in 140 countries on all seven continents.
Today, our 53,000 employees team with customers,
partners and suppliers on diverse projects in nearly 50
countries. Bechtel has contributed over 74,000 MW of
completed nuclear design and construction projects and
performed services on more than 80% of the US nuclear fleet.
Building the Worlds
Energy Future
CIVIL
GOVERNMENT SERVICES
MINING & METALS
OIL, GAS & CHEMICALS
POWER
1309npi_C2 2 10/1/13 1:21 PM
A Publication
1 NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL
>
SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2013
NUCLEUS 1
Inside the Tennessee Valley Authority
Bill Johnson is a CEO with a purpose
NUCLEUS 2
Market Overview: Republic of Korea
NUCLEUS 3
Overcoming Verification and Validation
Challenges for Digital I&C System Upgrades
NUCLEUS 4
Opportunity in Nuclear
1 2
1 5
18
21
2
ENRICHMENT
4
FUEL FOR THOUGHT

6
NEWS
10
EVENTS
23
NUCLEAR WORLD
1421 South Sheridan Road
Tulsa, OK 74112
P.O. Box 1260, Tulsa, OK 74101
Telephone: (918) 835-3161
Fax: (918) 831-9834
E-mail: pe@pennwell.com
World Wide Web:
http://www.power-eng.com
Nuclear Power INterNatIoNal
Sharryn Dotson, Editor
(918) 832-9339 sharrynd@pennwell.com
GraPhIc DesIGNer/seNIor Illustrator
Kay L. Wayne
ProDuctIoN MaNaGerDaniel Greene
NatIoNal BraND MaNaGerJenna Hall
(918) 831-9249 jennah@pennwell.com
seNIor MarketING MaNaGerJessica Grier
(918) 832-9272 jessicag@pennwell.com
suBscrIBer servIce
P.O. Box 3271, Northbrook, IL 60065
Phone: (847) 559-7501
Fax: (847) 291-4816
E-mail: poe@omeda.com
Power eNGINeerING MaGazINe
Russell Ray, Managing Editor
(918) 832-9368 rissellr@pennwell.com
auDIeNce DeveloPMeNt MaNaGerLinda Thomas
seNIor vIce PresIDeNt, auDIeNce DeveloPMeNt & Book
PuBlIshINGJune Griffin
sr. vIce PresIDeNt, North aMerIcaN Power
GeNeratIoN GrouP Richard Baker
(918) 831-9187 richardb@pennwell.com
chaIrMaNFrank T. Lauinger
PresIDeNt/ceoRobert F. Biolchini
cheIf fINaNcIal offIce/seNIor vIce PresIDeNt
Mark C. Wilmoth
PresIDeNt/ceoRobert F. Biolchini
chIef fINaNcIal offIce/seNIor vIce PresIDeNt
Mark C. Wilmoth
corPorate heaDquartersPeNNwell corP.
1421 S. Sheridan Road, Tulsa, OK 74112
Telephone: (918) 835-3161
NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL is published 6
times a year by PennWell Corp., 1421 S. Sheridan Rd.,
Tulsa, OK 74112; phone (918) 835-3161. Copyright
2011 by PennWell Corp. (Registered in U.S. Patent
Trademark Office). Authorization to photocopy items for
internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use
of specific clients, is granted by POWER ENGINEER-
ING, ISSN 0032-5961, provided that the appropriate fee
is paid directly to Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rose-
wood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 USA 508-750-5400.
Prior to photocopying items for educational use, contact
Copyright Clearance Center. If you would like to have a
recent article reprinted for an upcoming conference or for
use as a marketing toll, contact Foster Printing for a price
quote. For more information, please call 866-879-9144 or
email us at pennwellreprints@fosterprinting.com.
DEPARTMENTS
NUCLEUS
1309npi_1 1 10/1/13 1:20 PM
2
NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL
>
ENRICHMENT
M
y name is
S h a r r y n
D o t s o n ,
and I am the new editor of Nuclear
Power International magazine and com-
mittee chair of NUCLEAR POWER
International conference and exhibition.
While I may be new to the magazine and
the show, Im not new to the power gen-
eration industry, though I know there is
still much for me to learn. I am looking
forward to talking to many of you.
With that said, I also wanted to share
a little about the upcoming show, co-lo-
cated with POWER-GEN International,
Renewable Energy World Conference
& Expo and the Financial Forum. This
year, we promise an informative and in-
sightful show like in years past. Unfortu-
nately, the show will have been preceded
by negative news from around the world.
With the recent announcements of four
U.S. nuclear power plants closing, cost
overruns of new nuclear builds at two
other U.S. plants, scandal in South Korea
over questionable parts, and radioactive
water leaks at Fukushima in Japan, many
believe that the nuclear industry is down
and out.
But the industry has seen this before.
Each time tragedy hits, the industry
bounces back and keeps on moving. This
time around probably will not be any
different despite markets that some say
produce artificially low prices and regula-
tions that may not help boost the favor-
ability of nuclear.
These issues and more will be discussed
during Power Generation Week, five days
of pre-conference workshops, technical
tours, panel discussions and more. The
week covers all four shows in Orlando,
and gives everyone a chance to expand
their knowledge while also networking
and doing business with your peers.
During NUCLEAR POWER Interna-
tional, there will be four mega sessions
available, covering a range of topics from
a global outlook of nuclear to improving
operations and performance to an update
on nuclear projects around the world. At-
tendees still have the opportunity to earn
Professional Development Hours just by
coming to Orlando and listening to your
fellow colleagues.
There will also be networking break-
fasts available to all attendees. Enjoy a hot
breakfast with a side of good conversation
about issues in the nuclear industry, or
join any of the tables for a different per-
spective on what is important to other
generation sources such as renewables and
natural gas.
You also have the chance to see which of
the 17 finalists wins a Project of the Year
award during the gala event the evening of
Nov. 11. The two nuclear finalists are the
Waterford 3 Steam Electric Station, Steam
Generator and Reactor Vessel Closure
Head Replacement Project in Louisiana,
and Florida Power & Lights Extended
Power Uprate program.
The keynote session, titled Planning
for the Future, will be held Nov. 12. Fea-
tured speakers are Jim Rogers, chairman
of Duke Energy; Peter Delaney, chairman,
president and CEO of OGE Corp.; Amy
Ericson, president of Alstom U.S.; and
David Dunning, group executive of Fluor.
It promises to be an exciting and informa-
tive speech.
In addition to four great speeches, be
sure to see who the power generation in-
dustry voted as the industrys most influ-
ential person. We will be giving the award
during the keynote session.
Is the nuclear industry down?
That answer depends on whom you ask.
Is the industry out? I dont believe so.
Nuclear is still an integral piece of the en-
ergy whole, and it is just as important in
helping to keep emissions low (just look
at the rising carbon levels in Japan and
Germany).
Nuclear produces more than 19 per-
cent of the total electrical output in the
U.S., according to the Nuclear Energy
Institute. And the World Nuclear Asso-
ciation says that the U.S. produces more
than a third of the worlds nuclear output.
But these are stats that you already know.
What you really want to know is how will
the industry address brain drain in the
near future? How will nuclear compete
with natural gas in markets that some
say produce artificially low prices? Are
small modular reactors any closer to be-
ing commercialized, and will they even
help? We will answer these questions and
more when we sit down with some of the
industrys top experts during our Nuclear
Executive Roundtable. Featured speakers
include Bill Johnson, president and CEO
of the Tennessee Valley Authority; Mike
Rencheck, CEO of AREVA; Marvin Fer-
tel, CEO of the Nuclear Energy Insti-
tute, Neil Wilmshurst, Vice President of
Nuclear for the Electric Power Research
Institute; and Joe Zwetolitz, President of
Nuclear Energy with Babcock & Wilcox.
The roundtable will run in the Novem-
ber/December issue of NPI. A preview
of the article will run on the Power Engi-
neering website.
So, that is whats happening between
now and the next issue. I hope I get the
chance to meet some of you either in per-
son in Orlando in November or online
through social media.
By Sharryn Dotson, Editor
See You in Orlando!
1309npi_2 2 10/1/13 1:20 PM
NO COMPANY IS
MORE
COMMITTED
TO SUPPORTING
OPERATING
NUCLEAR PLANTS
W
E
S
T
I
N
G
H
O
U
S
E

E
L
E
C
T
R
I
C

C
O
M
P
A
N
Y

L
L
C
www.westinghousenuclear.com
1309npi_3 3 10/1/13 1:20 PM
4
>
FUEL FOR THOUGHT
U.S. Nuclear Power Survival
By Mary Jo Rogers, Ph.D., partner, Strategic Talent Solutions
N
uclear power
in the US is
facing un-
precedented eco-
nomic challenges
at the same time
regulatory burdens
on the industry con-
tinue to increase,
as highlighted by looming Fukushima
modifications. Early hopes that relief
would eventually come from rising gas
prices have faded. Environmental regu-
lations (real and proposed) have only
managed to dampen the coal power
business with no perceptible detriment
to natural gas. Meanwhile, natural gas
reserves appear endless while fracking
and horizontal drilling continue unabat-
ed. In short, prices for electricity and
natural gas have remained low.
Despite an occasional nod from the
President and his administration on the
importance of nuclear power leadership
in the US and internationally, relief from
the current conditionswhich have led
to the shuttering of four reactors so far
this yearhas not been forthcoming.
Merchant nuclear power plant own-
ers with the tightest margins have been
forced to plan for more shutdowns and
regulated utilities continue to squeeze
their operations.
This challenging environment has led
to calls for the industry to re-invent itself
and make innovative changes to become
more competitive and resilient. Some
people have pointed to the successes of
the post-deregulation period where the
industry as a whole made large gains in
reliability and safety. The Institute for
Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) and
the industry should be proud of such
improvements, which were made through
relentless attention to operational
focus and nuclear safety culture. Unlike
now, however, the turn of the century
operators had much more cash and much
less sustained pressure from electricity
prices. The need for a new approach is
even more urgent.
What industry leaders have begun to
recognize is that these unit reliability
and system performance gains have come
with a great deal of baggage, in terms
of a multitude of large and small pro-
grams and processes. INPO has openly
acknowledged that some of the addi-
tional burden that has accumulated over
the years may be low value-added, and
groups have been formed to see if there
are changes that can be made, starting
with corrective action, work control, and
human performance programs. The NRC
has stated that it is looking at the cumu-
lative impact of regulation to determine
if there is anything that can be done to
moderate such a trend.
From the perspective of plant workers
and supervisors, in both regulated and
un-regulated markets, it is a struggle to
feed the information hungry programs
and processes. For years, nuclear first-line
supervisors have complained of admin-
istrative burden preventing them from
spending more time in the field with
their people and the work. Although
these types of complaints have gotten
louder, the companys typical response
is that time spent on the computer and
dealing with documentation is part of the
job, because extensive corrective action
and work control processes are the way
the plants must be run. Supervisors just
need to be more efficient and demanding
of workers.
At the same time, staffing levels have
been steadily reduced based on bench-
marking studies of other departments in
other plants. With sustained low electric-
ity prices, nuclear plant ownersmer-
chant and regulatedhave relied on these
studies to cut costs by reducing staff.
While efficiency and worker productivity
are appropriate goals, time in the plant
reveals daily breakdowns in the model
when critical staff are sick, on vacation, or
re-distributed to special teams, such as a
root cause team, or sent to another plant
to support emergent work there.
Communications from INPO and the
NRC about potential future reductions in
low value-added programs and processes
are welcome signs. It may be that these ef-
forts will ultimately significantly improve
the efficiency of the plants operation. Or
it may be that a significant paradigm shift
is necessary.
Perhaps the industry desperately needs
truly new thinking that finally strips away
excess work so people can focus on run-
ning the plant and supervising people.
Perhaps the industry needs an approach
that builds on and leverages safety culture
but avoids babysitting processes and over-
blown data collection. In order to do so,
you need a leadership team and a culture
to lead and guide the organization. Such
a leadership team would be truly cross-
functional, high performing, and market
savvy. They would be intentional about
fine-tuning safety culture. The plants
approach to cost management must then
reflect a new balance between unit gen-
eration and rationalizing the asset. Such
a business-minded nuclear organization
would also need a scorecard that re-
flects real economic and market pressure
and success. In all, this approach would
achieve business results for the plant.
Such an approach may be too radical,
not radical enough, or the timing may be
off. Or it just may be that nuclear power
plants need this approach to remain
relevant.

1309npi_4 4 10/1/13 1:20 PM
1309npi_5 5 10/1/13 1:20 PM
6
>
NEWS
tors at four other nuclear plants, though
none have had the leaks that caused
SONGS to shut down. The decommis-
sioning process is expected to cost more
than $4 billion.
Pete Dietrich, SCE senior vice presi-
dent and chief nuclear officer, said SCE
takes its licensee oversight responsibilities
seriously, and that the utility relied upon
MHI to meet specifications. Dietrich
also said in a statement that MHI assured
them that the design and models were
correct, and that SCE did question MHI
about its design and use of computer
models on multiple occasions.
The generators showed signs of prema-
ture wear and were shut down in Janu-
ary 2012 before SCE decided in June to
permanently close the plant. In July, SCE
served MHI with a Notice of Dispute for
breach of contract and warranty for sup-
plying defective steam generators. MHI
fought back against that claim only days
later.
TEPCO TOLD TO DECOMMISSION
FUKUSHIMA; WATER LEAKS
DEEMED CONTAINED
Sept. 19
Following a visit to the Fukushima
Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan, the
countrys prime minister ordered that all
of the reactors be shut down in order to
concentrate on urgent issues.
According to the Associated Press,
Prime Minister Shinzo Abe told Tokyo
Electric Power Co. to decommission the
Nos. 5 and 6 reactors at the plant. The
two reactors survived the March 2011
earthquake and tsunami that caused the
other three reactors to melt down. A
TEPCO official told Abe in the article
that a decision on the two reactors would
be made by the end of the year.
Abe also said in the article that radio-
active water that had been leaking from
storage tanks into the Pacific Ocean had
been contained and that he would coun-
ter rumors about the plants safety. The
government reported earlier this month
that it would give TEPCO 47 billion yen
IRAN TEMPORARILY TAKES
CONTROL OF NUCLEAR
POWER PLANT
Sept. 24
Russia temporarily handed over control
of the 1,000 MW Bushehr nuclear power
plant to Iran on Sept. 24, according to
World Bulletin.
Chief of the Iranian Atomic Energy
Organization Ali Akbar Salehi said in the
article that the plant would remain under
Russian guarantee for two more years or
7,000 hours. The complete handover will
not happen until two years later.
The two countries also said they will
continue to work together on more nucle-
ar power plants, and that construction is
expected to begin soon on a second plant,
the article said.
NRC: MHI GENERATOR
DESIGN FLAWS TO BLAME FOR
NUCLEAR PLANT CLOSURE
Sept. 23
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commis-
sion (NRC) said it has identified flaws in
how Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI)
used its computer codes to design the
steam generators used at the San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) in
California. NRC classified Unit 3 as a
white or violation of low to moderate
safety significance, while Unit 2 was clas-
sified as a green violation.
NRC issued a Notice of Non-Confor-
mance against MHI for the flawed com-
puter modeling, and also cited plant op-
erator Southern California Edison (SCE)
for failing to ensure that the modeling
and analysis were accurate. In June 2012,
NRC said during a public meeting that
MHI did not properly test the generators
prior to installation and that the company
was to blame for the leaks.
NRC said that MHIs use of computer
codes in the design inaccurately predicted
thermal hydraulic conditions in the steam
generators, leading to tube vibration and
wear, and then a tube leak. The NRC
also found that MHI embedded the same
modeling error in the design of genera-
($473 million) to help stop the leaks and
build an underground ice wall to block
groundwater from leaking into basements
at the plant.
U.S., REPUBLIC OF KOREA
TO WORK ON NUCLEAR
ENERGY COOPERATION
Sept. 18
The U.S. House of Representatives ap-
proved extending a civil nuclear energy
cooperation between the U.S. and the
Republic of Korea.
The House approved H.R. 2449,
which authorized a two-year extension
of the current Section 123 agreement
between the two countries to mid-March
2016. The Senate must now vote.
The news comes just days after the
U.S. signed an agreement to cooperate on
nuclear research and development with
Russia. It will complement provisions of
the U.S. Russian Agreement for Coop-
eration in the Field of Peaceful Uses of
Nuclear Energy, which started in January
2011.
WESTINGHOUSE RECEIVES
NRC OK FOR NUCLEAR
SAFETY I&C SYSTEM
Sept. 18
Westinghouse Electric announced that
it received a final Safety Evaluation Re-
port from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) for the companys
Advanced Logic System (ALS) platform.
The ALS technology is a next generation
safety system instrumentation and con-
trol solution for operating plant safety
system upgrades and new nuclear builds.
ALS is a logic-based platform that uses
simple hardware architecture instead of a
microprocessor or software for operation.
The NRC approved it as an acceptable ap-
proach to address diversity and defense-
in-depth concerns within digital safety
system applications. The platform is also
scalable in order to provide single-system
replacements or full safety instrumenta-
tion and control replacement.
The solution targets safety-critical con-
1309npi_6 6 10/1/13 1:20 PM
1309npi_7 7 10/1/13 1:20 PM
8
>
NEWS
trol systems, and incorporates features
that allow for diagnostics, testability and
modularity.
GERMANY TO USE AREVA SPENT
NUCLEAR FUEL STORAGE CASKS
Sept. 12
Areva signed contracts in Germany for
the delivery of more than 70 used fuel
storage casks totaling more than 200 mil-
lion euros ($266.3 million).
The steel containers will help transport
and store used nuclear fuel. They are
also designed to withstand extreme
conditions.
NUCLEAR POWER PLANT
SIMULATORS COMPLETED
IN S. AFRICA
Sept. 12
L-3 Mapps completed two major proj-
ects for Eskoms 1,800 MW Koeberg nu-
clear power plant in South Africa. Work
included the completion of a refurbished
plant model for the existing operator
training simulator, and putting into ser-
vice a second full scope simulator at the
site on Aug. 1.
2013 PROJECTS OF THE
YEAR FINALISTS NAMED
Sept. 11
The editors of Power Engineering and
Renewable Energy World magazines and
their respective websites named 17 finalists
for the annual Projects of the Year Awards
program. The finalists were named in eight
categories: Nuclear, Coal, Solar, Wind,
Hydro, Natural Gas, Geothermal and Bio-
energy.
The finalists for Best Nuclear Project are
Florida Power & Lights Extended Power
Uprate Project in Florida and the Waterford
3 Steam Electric Station, Steam Generator
and Reactor Vessel Closure Head Replace-
ment Project in Louisiana.
Voting for the Readers Choice awards
is now open. You, the reader, pick which
project out of the 17 finalists is your favor-
ite. Cast your vote by clicking here.
NRC LACKS FUNDS TO COMPLETE
YUCCA MOUNTAIN REVIEW
Sept. 10
Allison Macfarlane, chairwoman of the
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, told
The Hill that, while the NRC will continue
to move promptly in its review of the Yuc-
ca Mountain nuclear waste site license, the
commission did not have enough money to
do so.
Macfarlane said in a written statement to
the House Energy and Commerce Com-
mittee that there is not enough cash in
reserves, and no additional funds were re-
quested or appropriated in fiscal years 2012
and 2013. NRC suspended its review of the
license in 2011.
A federal appeals court ruled in August
that the NRC was wrong to halt the review
of the Energy Departments application for
the spent nuclear fuel site in Nevada.
NRC RELEASES MID-CYCLE
ASSESSMENTS FOR U.S.
NUCLEAR PLANT FLEET
Sept. 10
A majority of the U.S. nuclear power
plants are performing at the highest stan-
dards, according to the NRCs mid-cycle
assessments.
Out of 102 operating power plants, 92
rank in the two highest performance cat-
egories. Out of that total, 75 fully met all
safety and security performance objectives,
while 17 reactors needed to resolve one or
two items of low safety significance. Crystal
River 3 and Kewaunee nuclear plants began
decommissioning before the June 30 re-
porting period deadline and, therefore, did
not receive assessments. The San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station entered decom-
missioning in July, so the plant did receive
an assessment.
Browns Ferry 1 in Alabama requires in-
creased oversight because of a safety viola-
tion of high significance, while Fort Cal-
houn in Nebraska is in extended shutdown
and is currently under a special NRC over-
sight program. Neither plant received a mid-
cycle assessment.
SDG&E ASKS TO RECOVER MORE
THAN $800MN FOR SONGS
Sept. 10
San Diego Gas & Electric is asking the
California Public Utilities Commission to
allow the utility to recover $808 million
from ratepayers for investments made in the
closed down San Onofre Nuclear Generat-
ing Station (SONGS), according to the As-
sociated Press.
The CPUC will see whether it is reason-
able for customers to pay for decommission-
ing the plant. SDG&E, which owned 20
percent of the plant, said it could use money
set aside in a decommissioning fund so cus-
tomer rates would not go up.
Southern California Edison, the majority
owner of SONGS, asked the commission to
recover more than $2 billion from customers.
EXELON NUCLEAR TO PARTNER
ON NUCLEAR POWER PROJECTS
IN SAUDI ARABIA
Sept. 9
GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy and Ex-
elon Nuclear Partners signed a memo-
randum of understanding to discuss
the feasibility of collaborating on fu-
ture nuclear projects in Saudi Arabia.
The MOU calls for both companies
to explore the feasibility of using GE
Hitachis boiling water reactor, en-
gineering, procurement and project
management expertise, combined with
Exelons operational best practices and
other services.
The Saudi Arabian government is
launching a nuclear energy program
that will add 17.6 GW of nuclear power
generation by 2032.
In a separate announcement, West-
inghouse, Toshiba and Exelon Nuclear
Partners are teaming to create a pro-
posal for the construction of nuclear
power plants for King Abdullah City
for Atomic and Renewable Energy
(K.A.CARE).
Toshiba and Westinghouse will pro-
vide nuclear expertise, while ENP will
provide operations and associated ser-
1309npi_8 8 10/1/13 1:20 PM
9
>
NEWS
AREVA TO PERFORM NUCLEAR
POWER PLANT OUTAGE WORK
Sept. 4
Areva signed a long-term outage services
contract with PSEG Nuclear for outage and
maintenance work at Salem units 1 and 2
and Hope Creek nuclear power plants, both
in New Jersey.
Areva will cover refueling, inspections
and steam generator services for two pres-
surized water reactors and a boiling water
reactors. Services are expected to begin in
the fall of 2013.
commission to develop a solution to the
leaking issue. The funds will go toward an
underground ice wall to block groundwater
from leaking into basements at the plant and
an improved water treatment plant.
Tokyo Electric Power estimates that more
than 300 tons of contaminated water a day
had been leaking from storage tanks into the
ocean. Regulators have called the leak an
emergency.

PLANT VOGTLE NUCLEAR
BUDGET DECISION DELAYED
Sept. 4
Georgia regulators voted to delay a
decision on whether Georgia Power
could increase its budget for two new
nuclear reactors at Plant Vogtle until the
first reactor is completed, according to
Bloomberg.
The first reactor is scheduled to
be completed in January 2018, the
article said. Georgia Power requested a
construction budget increase by $737
million, bringing the total up to $6.85
billion. The state approved a budget of
$6.1 billion, and the utility could pass
on the overruns to customers. However
if the PSC had voted to increase the
budget, the utility would be allowed
to charge customers for the extra
costs unless regulators could prove the
spending was reckless of the result of
fraud.
vices for the project.
Toshiba and ENP were partners on an
earlier team formed in July 2010. Adding
Westinghouse will help the companies
ability to draw on Westinghouses AP1000
nuclear plant technology.
ROSATOM, WW-ROYCE, FORTUM
TEAM UP TO BUILD U.K. NUCLE-
AR REACTORS
Sept. 6
Russias state-owned nuclear power entity
signed a memorandum of understanding
with the British energy minister and Finnish
utility Fortum to win regulatory approval to
sell and build nuclear reactors in the U.K.
Fortum said it would examine for Ro-
satoms reactor technology could be tailored
to the U.K.s energy needs. The utility oper-
ates nuclear plants in Finland and Sweden.
Nuclear energy in the U.K. provides
roughly one-fifth of the countrys electric
power.
BUILDING THE NEXT
GENERATION OF NUCLEAR
For more than a century, Fluor has placed a strong emphasis on employee education and development. Our employer employee synergy
enables Fluor to assist clients with sound strategic innovation, implementing unique solutions that save money and meet regulatory
requirements. Additionally, Fluors Subject Matter Expert Protg program provides a platform for long-term succession planning and
accelerated growth for Fluor employees and our clients. Active in the global nuclear community, Clay Smith and his proteges are sharing
knowledge and driving innovation in the industry. www.fuor.com
Visit Clay and the Fluor team at the 2013 Power-Gen conference booth #3901 in Orlando, Florida.
Fluors Power Business: Nuclear, Renewables, Alternate Technologies, Fossil Generation, Transmission, and Operations & Maintenance.
2013 Fluor Corporation. All Rights Reserved. ADGV093813
1309npi_9 9 10/1/13 1:20 PM
NUCLEAR EVENTS
10
>
OCTOBER
NOVEMBER
S M T W TH F S
S M T W TH F S
1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
2-4 POWER-GEN Asia
IMPACT Exhibition &
Convention Centre
Bangkok, Thailand
http://www.powergenasia.com/
index.html
6-9 IAEA
GroupScientifcVisit to
uranium-graphite decomission-
ing projects at the Sibrian
Chemistry Plant
Tomsk and Seversk, Russian
Federation
http://www.iaea.org/OurWork/ST/
NE/NEFW/WTS-Networks/IDN/
events.html
6-9 Nuclear Energy Institute
InternationalUranium
Fuel Seminar
The Westin Riverwalk
San Antonio, TX
http://www.nei.org/Conferences/
International-Uranium-Fuel-Seminar
13-18 World Energy Council
22nd World Energy Congress
Daegu, South Korea
http://www.daegu2013.kr/
eng/index.do
19-21 POWER-GEN Middle East
Abu Dhabi National Exhibi
tion Centre
Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.
http://www.power-gen-middleeast.
com/index.html
21-24 IAEA
International Conference on
Topical Issues in Nuclear
Installation Safety
Vienna, Austria
http://www-pub.iaea.org/
iaeameetings/43048/International-
Conference-on-Topical-Issues-in-
Nuclear-Installation-Safe
25-27 NEI
Governmental Affairs
Conference
Farmington, PA
http://www.nei.org/Conferences/
Governmental-Affairs-Conference
12-14 NUCLEAR POWER
International
Orange County Convention
Center
Orlando, FL
http:/wwwnuclearpower
international.com
1309npi_10 10 10/1/13 1:20 PM
Whole Lotta Hydrogen ...
E/Ones GCM-X/Gen-Tags
TM
Systems have saved millions for utilities worldwide. Early detection
and location of potentially dangerous hotspots minimize expensive repairs and costly downtime.
And now the Generator Gas Analyzer provides instantaneous online monitoring of your
|ydroer's pur|ly, erao||r ever rore prollao|e perlorrarce l|rou| rax|r|zed |ydroer-
coo|ed rac||re ellc|erc|es.
ll you are ar |rslrurerls ard corlro|s proless|ora|, lrd oul |oW E/0re ul|||ly 3yslers car
help safeguard and improve your power plant performance. You could qualify for a cool E/One
Zeppelin t-shirt. Contact us today at:
ENVIRONMENT ONE CORPORATION
Tel 1.800.944.6160
www.eone.com/solutions
A Precision Castparts Company
You need cooling,
and hydrogen aint foolin,
but undetected hot spots can lead to
catastrophic failure or expensive outages for
hydrogen-cooled generators.
1309npi_11 11 10/1/13 1:20 PM
12
>
NUCLEUS
B
ill Johnson is a man of many
interests. He enjoys spending time
in the garden and tinkering on
home improvement projects and will just
as easily slide into the kitchen to bake
you a pastry. A lawyer by training, his
penchant for varied hobbies is echoed in
a breadth of expertise across the power
industry that is rare in todays world of
specialization. As a partner at a Raleigh
law firm, Johnson represented varied
utilities. As President and CEO of Progress
Energy, he oversaw a diverse power
generation portfolio and helped engineer
a merger with Duke Energy that created
the countrys largest utility. Along the way
he served in leadership roles in both the
Nuclear Energy Institute and the Edison
Electric Institute.
Johnsons diversity of experience in the
power generation industry makes him
uniquely positioned to serve as president and
CEO of an $11 billion historic institution
like the Tennessee Valley Authority, a role
he assumed in November 2012, with the
TVAs expansive dominion over everything
from hiking trails and hydropower projects
to windmills and nuclear power plants.
Power Engineering caught up with Johnson
to discuss the gamut of issues he thinks
about as CEO of the largest public power
utility in America.
Power Engineering: Tell me about one
or two of the most exciting projects
going on right now in energy research
and development.
Johnson: Yea, we have a couple things
that I think are pretty interesting. Obviously
our work on the small modular reactor,
our partnership [ed note: with Babcock &
Wilcox mPower Inc.] on that. I sort of grew
up in the nuclear business and Ive been
hanging around it thirty years and I think
thats a pretty exciting idea.
And some of the work on smart grid,
in terms of congestion, demand-response
activity, things that are really on the
transmission side of the grid, not so much
the customer side. I would say those two
areas are probably the most exciting things
that were seeing.
Power Engineering: How are things
proceeding with the plans for two
mPower SMRs at the Clinch River site?
Johnson: Thats the ultimate plan. We
are proceeding into the licensing process
at the NRC, and thats probably first and
foremost what has to happen. There is work
being done at the site, site-characterization,
meteorology, those kinds of things. But
really the labor more at the moment is the
NRC licensing process for a new design and
product.
Power Engineering: Can you talk
a little bit more generally, bigger-
picture, about the potential futures
you see for SMR technology in the US
or even globally?
Johnson: Yes, both. There are a couple
things about them that are attractive.
One of the things thats happened across
the country and here, is reduction or
flattening of demand, so the idea that you
can add generation or resources in smaller
increments, instead of the large increments,
thats attractive. Its a much smaller capital
commitment. So instead of building
1,000 megawatts, youre going to 180 or
200 megawatts at a time. So the capital
commitment and, hence, the risk, is a lot
smaller. And one of the things I like about
the technology is the export capability. If
you think around the world, new entrants
into the nuclear field, it would be a great
technology to start with, right? So, you
start with a small plant and sort of work
up to the big one. Thats what happened in
By Denver Nicks
Inside the
Tennessee Valley
Authority
A Q&A with TVA President
and CEO Bill Johnson
1309npi_12 12 10/1/13 1:20 PM
13
>
NUCLEUS
this country. And I think that would be a
good export product.
Power Engineering: Nuclear power
has taken a string of tough blows
in the U.S., with the closing of San
Onofre and other events. Whats the
non-sugar-coated future look like for
nuclear power in the U.S. Is it on its
way out?
Johnson: Absolutely not. You know,
today, world-wide, something like 12% of
power comes from nuclear. In the U.S.,
its about 19%, and here in the Tennessee
Valley, about 38 to 40%. It is a really
important resource. The recent events
youve mentioned really are very location
specific, where at a single plant an operator
is making decisions in a
market where power prices are
depressed. That explains some
of that.
I really think if we want
to continue to have low-cost
power, and deal with the
environmental issues, and have
a say in nuclear matters around
the world, we need to plan on
having nuclear as part of our
future. And I think one of the
triggering events that will lead
us in that direction is that the
retirement of many nuclear
plants, on an age-basis, will
start in about 2030. I think
we have had some bumps in
the road here, but when those
plants start retiring wed better
have replacements either ready
or on the drawing board.
Power Engineering: With natural gas
so inexpensive right now, why build
a nuclear plant?
Johnson: A couple reasons: one, if
youre an old-timer like me, you still
believe in something called fuel diversity.
I know that natural gas is pretty cheap,
and Im a believer in natural gas. I also
saw it go over ten dollars in BTU three
times, I think, in the 2000s. The volatility
has flattened, but there are still events
that could increase volatility. So: fuel
diversity, the fact that coal is really not
much of an option anymore to build, and
the longevity of nuclear plants. I think
those support the idea that we should
have a diverse mix, a balanced portfolio,
and nuclear ought to be a big part of it.
Power Engineering: Have you spoken
to the President about the possibility
that TVA may some day in the future
be sold off?
Johnson: No, I have not spoken to the
President about that or any other topic.
Im fairly certain the President doesnt
know who I am.
Power Engineering: Haha, fair
enough. Has that proposal affected
things at TVA to this date?
Johnson: Ill answer those questions
in a series. We have met with OMB [ed
note: US Office of Management and Bud-
get.Though TVA is a nominally publicly-
owned utility, it is self-supporting and
does not receive funds from the federal
government.]. OMB prepares the admin-
istration budget, so they are the people
leading the review. Weve had several
meetings with them to sort of figure out
what the schedule and the process and the
program are, but theyre still in the early
days, so theres not a lot to report.
The proposal has had several impacts
on us. The first one is the element of dis-
traction. You know, in any operation, but
particularly in one where you engage with
hazardous activities, distraction is a bad
thing, uncertainty is a bad thing, so weve
spent a lot of time, every day, making sure
that people are not distracted, and fo-
cused on the task.
The other thing that the announcement
has done is affected our bond spread, so that
the value of our investors bonds has de-
creased. Which is not a surprising outcome.
Power Engineering: Over the long
term, how would a privatization like
that affect operations at TVA?
Johnson: Theres nothing we do at
TVA that somebody else couldnt do.
Whats different about us is that we do
On a visit to Raccoon Mountain Pumped-Storage
Plant, Bill Johnson meets employees while touring the facilities.
1309npi_13 13 10/1/13 1:20 PM
14
>
NUCLEUS
this in an integrated way across state
boundaries. So, for example, we run a
very large utilities system of 38,000-
39,000 megawatts of generation, 15,000
miles of transmission lines. We also
manage the Tennessee River, which is a
massive job and very important. We do
tremendous economic development and
new technology innovation. We have
campgrounds and hiking trails. So a lot
of these things that are currently done
out of the electricity revenues, someone
else would have to do. If you think about
somehow changing TVA, you have to
think about all these other activities:
who would do them, and what the cost-
elements would be.
Power Engineering: Tell me about
the cutbacks at the Bellefonte plant?
Johnson: What were doing is
looking at the load forecast, looking at
the customer usage patterns, and trying
to determine when that plant will be
needed. In the meantime, we are focused
entirely on finishing the other nuclear
plant, Watts Bar 2, which really has to
be our primary focus. And at the same
time, our revenues and usage are down
considerably over the past couple of years.
I will say that the fundamentals of the
business are very uncertain here at the
time, as they are across the country, and
really we are husbanding our capital and
our options as we work through this
uncertainty. So we are preserving the
option of Bellefonte, and have to focus
our resources on the immediate needs,
the biggest of which is Watts Bar 2.
Power Engineering: Is Watts Bar 2 on
track? How are things going there?
Johnson: Watts Bar 2 has an estimated
cost of $4 to 4.5 billion, and a commercial
operation date in the 4th quarter of 2015.
We are tracking on both the budget
and the schedule. This project gets the
utmost scrutiny from management, from
the board, from external experts. So I
have a fairly high degree of confidence
in our schedule and
cost performance at
this point. I would
say that, like every
other project of that
size, there are always
challenges, but I
think it is in good
shape, and moving at
the pace and at the
cost we expect.
Power Engineering:
How much oppor-
tunity is there left
within the TVA fleet
for uprates? Does
that reach a satu-
ration point eventually?
Johnson: You would eventually,
but we havent done many uprates, and
we have those three BWRs at Browns
Ferry, which are the usual place you
would start on the uprates, so there are
several hundred megawatts of potential
there. And again, if you go back to
whats happening with demand, whats
happening with usage, one of the
questions is: when do you need to do it?
And when can you afford to do it? And
were not at those points yet.
Power Engineering: What, in
your eyes, are the prospects for
something like a carbon-emissions
tax, putting a price on carbon
that would presumably affect the
market for nuclear power in the
United States?
Johnson: This is a great question
with no clear answer. Obviously, I think
theres not sufficient political appetite
for it. I think you would have to see a
significant rebound in the economy, back
to 2007 levels, where people would start
talking about this again. I dont think its
a near-term phenomenon. I suspect that
in the long term its a possibility, but I
dont think that near term theres much
impetus for it.
Power Engineering: I wanted to go
back to the SMR picture real quick.
You mentioned exporting SMRs and
what an export opportunity that is.
Where is the United States positioned
compared to SMRs being developed
other countries?
Johnson: To my knowledge, the only
real project is the one were engaged in
with B&W and the DOE. Most of the
overseas market is building AP1000s
or BWRs. I think B&W will have to
demonstrate the technical and financial
aspects of this that are attractive. I do
think that, if you think about places that
are talking about new nuclear, I think
that Vietnam or some of the Middle East
states, starting with something smaller
and inherently safe would be a great way
to go. Do you remember when you learned
to ride a bike? You started on a little bike
and got a bigger bike. Its sort of the same
concept here. We learned a lot of lessons
in this country when we first started
building nuclear. We used to tend to think
that it was just like running a coal plant. I
think the same can be said of this sort of
SMR technology: it would be a great place
to start if you actually wanted to be in the
business.
Bill Johnson talks with employees at the
Kingston Fossil Plant during his first 100 days
on the job.
1309npi_14 14 10/1/13 1:20 PM
15
>
NUCLEUS
T
he Republic of Korea (ROK) or South Korea, has been a growth story for nuclear
power in recent decades. Not only has in-country nuclear construction continued
throughout the time when North America and Western Europe did not grow, but
technology advancement and a government-level commitment to export has propelled
ROK into an emerging position in the global nuclear industry, challenging rivals in
several countries.
The story of nuclear power in Asia, overall, has been one of consistency and growth
during the first decades of the 21st Century. Japan, China, India and South Korea have
been leaders in nuclear
construction and tech-
nology development. In
the future, they plan to
be leaders in export also.
In 2009, Korea Elec-
tric Power Corp. (KEP-
CO) won the competi-
tion to provide and build
four new nuclear power
units in the United Arab
Emirates (UAE), the
first of many anticipated
units to be constructed
in the Middle East in
the coming decades. Its
APR1400 is now consid-
ered a leading design for
the future in Asia, as well
as other global locations.
Now the bad news.
Over the past year, ru-
mors of safety-violation
cover-ups and safety
culture issues have sur-
faced. A CEO of Kore-
an Hydro and Nuclear
Power (KHNP) resigned over this issue. Then in late 2012, problems with nuclear
plant component certifications surfaced. Subsequent news has revealed that the extent
of these problems was worse than first thought and some five or more plants have been
taken off-line. resulting in electric power shortages through a serious summer heat
wave with harsh results.
This article further examines the history, current state, and future of nuclear power for
the Republic of Korea.
HISTORY
A brief review of Korean history offers a
helpful perspective on the story of nuclear
there. In 1910, a united Korea (1897-
1910) was conquered by Japan and became
part of the Japanese Empire through 1945
when Japan was defeated
by Allied Forces at the
conclusion of World War
II. In 1948, the Republic
of Korea (South) and
the Democratic Peoples
Republic of Korea (North)
were formed. At that
time, North Korea was
dominated by the Soviet
Union and South Korea
by the U.S. In 1950, the
Korean War erupted when
North Korean forces
invaded the South. UN
and Chinese forces also
entered the war, which
lasted until 1953 when
an armistice was reached.
While tensions between
North and South Korea
continue until the present
day, much has changed.
Both North and South
Korea have had nuclear
programs since the 1950s
and 1960s. North Korea
continues nuclear development focused on
weapons to this day, while South Korea
has a very progressive commercial nuclear
power program for generation of electric
power in-country and for technology
export. While early reactors included
Market Overview: The Outlook for
the Korean Nuclear Power Industry
A leader has stumbled. Whats the future?
By Bill Linton, Principal, Linton Consulting
COURTESY: SHUTTERSTOCK
1309npi_15 15 10/1/13 1:20 PM
16
>
NUCLEUS
PWRs (Westinghouse, Framatome,
Combustion Engineering) and PHWRs
(AECL), South Korea began developing
its own light water reactors through a
government driven nuclear technology
self-reliance program since the mid-
1980s. These investments have led to the
APR1400, which is now being utilized
in-country as well as exported to the
UAE as the first commercial reactors in
the Middle East.
North Korea still has no operating
nuclear power plants, despite historical
efforts by an international consortium
called Korean Peninsula Energy
Development Organization (KEDO) to
supply two 1000 MWe LWRs in return for
abandoning nuclear weapons development.
According to Dr. HanKwon Choi
1
, an
executive with U.S.- based URS Corp.
who was a Special Technical Advisor in that
program, the LWR Project sponsored by
the U.S., Japan, and the European Union
was halted in 2006 due to North Koreas
clandestine nuclear weapons program
discovered in the middle of the project.
South Korea now has 23 operating
units and five under construction, with an
additional six units planned. These plants
generate some 30 percent of the countrys
electric power today and the national
energy plan calls for nuclear to grow to 60
percent by 2035.
A profile of the two countries is useful
here. North Korea has a population of
about 25 million; South Koreas is 50
million. South Koreas GDP has reached
some $1.6 trillion with strong growth
rates. GDP is not reported for North
Korea, but believed to be in the $40-50
billion range, with little or no growth.
While Koreans consume significant energy
resources, the countries are energy-poor.
Some coal deposits exist, but there is little
indigenous oil and gas. As a result, nuclear
power is very important.
South Koreas vibrant economy has seen
electricity consumption growth rates that
have exceeded 8 percent for some years and
are expected to continue in the 2.5 percent
range through 2020.
Today, South Koreas 23 licensed plants
comprise a strong nuclear industry that has
a good safety and reliability record and op-
erates at high utilization rates. The gov-
ernment-controlled (51 percent owned)
KEPCO owned all of the fossil, nuclear
and hydropower operating plants until a
few years ago. A government-restructur-
ing program moved the operating plants
under KHNP. Other organizations af-
filiated with the industry include KEPCO
NF (nuclear fuel), KEPCO Engineering
and Construction (previously KOPEC),
and Doosan, a private company and equip-
ment provider, as well as several major
construction companies such as Hyundai,
Samsung, Daewoo, Dongah, etc. The Ko-
rean Institute of Nuclear Safety (KINS)
and Korea Atomic Energy Research In-
stitute (KAERI) are two other important
government-controlled nuclear entities
that are responsible for nuclear regulation
and R&D.
As its nuclear industry has developed,
South Korea has been growing a strong
and highly self-sufficient nuclear supply
chain. Companies such as Doosan are able
to provide large forgings and many other
components required by its industry.
The government sees the potential for
nuclear power technology to provide for
the countrys energy needs as well as a
growing export. With this background,
we see that it was quite a victory for South
Koreas government-sponsored KEPCO to
win in the competition for the UAEs first
four units in 2009.
THE CRISIS
This history helps to understand the se-
riousness of the recent crisis in South Ko-
reas nuclear industry over both safety cul-
ture and nuclear component certifications.
Troubles began to surface in South
Koreas industry in early 2012 when it was
discovered that a safety-related incident
occurred at the Kori Unit 1 NPP due to a
worker not following procedures. Further,
a manager deleted the records in order
to avoid reporting the incident. South
Koreas nuclear regulator brought charges
against the plant owner, KHNP, leading to
the resignation of its CEO. Organizations
such as the World Association of Nuclear
Operators (WANO) and the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have
expressed concerns over safety culture
issues in a number of countries and offer
help to their members, including KHNP.
While the details of such discussions
are confidential, it is clear that KHNP,
WANO, and IAEA are actively addressing
the problems.
If these troubles were not enough, in
May 2012, renewed regulatory scrutiny
further uncovered a number of component
certification issues, called forged certifi-
cations, in multiple South Korean plants.
These discoveries have resulted in taking a
series of plants offline for inspections and
replacement of parts. However, it is not an
issue of substandard quality components
and parts, but possibly a matter of com-
mercial grade dedication, that is, of certi-
fications and documentation. At least five
plants have been taken offline, and some
remained so during the summer months
of 2013, creating significant electricity
shortages and difficulties for the popula-
tion during the hot, humid summer. The
public is being asked to conserve electric-
ity by avoiding use of air conditioning, for
example.
Components affected include cabling,
and reportedly over 200 others ranging
from fuses and cooling fans to switches.
Many have been called non-safety-related
parts installed in the plants over a 10-year
period. Certification of components is a
key part of the safety/quality strategy for
the nuclear industry. Even if it is only a
problem of falsified documentation, there
are serious implications to the scandal.
While most do not expect these
developments to halt the growth of South
Koreas nuclear industry, it has become
a time of introspection and correction
of regulatory and compliance problems,
perhaps analogous to those in Japan
1309npi_16 16 10/1/13 1:20 PM
17
>
following Fukushima. Japan decided to
completely restructure its nuclear regulator
over the past few years due to lessons
learned from the Fukushima accident.
BI-LATERAL NUCLEAR AGREEMENT
On another issue, South Korea is
facing a renegotiation of its bi-lateral
nuclear cooperation agreement with
the U.S. The U.S. maintains bi-lateral
nuclear agreements (1-2-3 Agreements)
with over 20 countries. South Korea
and the U.S. f irst signed this agree-
ment in 1956 and
while a few revi-
sions have occurred,
this agreement was
scheduled to expire
in 2014. A two-year
extension was agreed
upon earlier this
year to allow further
consideration of a
desire by South Ko-
rea to liberalize the
agreements terms. (eds. note: The U.S.
House on Sept. 18 approved extending
the agreement until mid-March 2016).
The diff icult issues have to do with
spent fuel management, among others.
South Korea has a growing inventory of
spent fuel that is reaching maximum ca-
pacity and the country must take steps
to deal with this in the near future. Its
options for storing spent fuel are grow-
ing more limited and the country wants
to explore a form of mechanical separa-
tion for partial reuse of f issile materials
in spent fuels. Further, in seeking to
become a full service supplier, South
Korea wants advance agreement for fu-
ture activities.
EXPORT SUCCESSES
South Korea has been aggressively
marketing its reactor designs and
capabilities in many regions where
nuclear power is being considered. As
mentioned already, its greatest success
was KEPCOs selection by UAE in
2009 to build four APR1400 units
at their Barakah Nuclear site in the
Middle East.
The schedule is to bring units 1-4
online, one each year from 2017
through 2020. Site and concrete work
are now well along and Unit 1 is rising
out of the desert. A number of unique
challenges had to be met by all project
partners. The APR1400 design had to
be adapted to both the unique climate
of the Middle East and to the desert
site. The challenges of summer heat,
desert sand, and warmer-than-typical
cooling water were not trivial for the
KEPCO design team. The projects are
moving forward aggressively.
In August this year, another break-
through was announced. KAERIs 30
MWt research reactor design was se-
lected by the country of Jordan to be
built north of Amman as part of the
Jordan Research and Training Reac-
tor at the Jordan University of Science
and Technology. Daewoo Engineering
will be overseeing the project and com-
pletion is scheduled for 2016. South
Korea hopes that this project will be a
precursor to the development of two
new commercial nuclear units for the
country to be operating by 2020 and
2025, respectively.
SUMMARY
The amazing growth and progress
of South Korea as a contributor to the
world economy in multiple industries
such as electronics, telecommunica-
tions, automotive, and now to nuclear
power, is clear. Not only has the coun-
try seen signif icant growth in nuclear
power on the home front, it is now
seeing success in the acceptance of its
nuclear technology outside of Korea.
The countrys energy policy strongly
favors nuclear. While public opin-
ion is not as strong a force there as in
some other democratic nations, there
is a growing anti-nuclear sentiment
and the voice of the people is gaining
greater inf luence. Nevertheless, the
South Korean public
has generally favored
nuclear power. While
it is certainly pos-
sible that the winds
of change could slow
the growth of nuclear
in South Korea, at
this point, it seems
unlikely.
According to Dr.
Choi of URS Corp.,
South Korea lacks other energy re-
sources and has no choice but to con-
struct more nuclear plants. For this
reason, It is very important for South
Korea to address these current issues
quickly and regain the full support of
the public.
While recent challenges are serious,
having witnessed South Koreas
amazing progress, it would be quite a
surprise if the country does not quickly
overcome these and move on to even
greater success.

Author: Bill Linton is Principal of Linton Con-
sulting, a professional practice that is active
in energy, power, nuclear, and manufacturing.
Lintons ongoing Strategic View process has
focused on nuclear for the past 5 years. Strate-
gic View involves ongoing monitoring of indus-
tries through confidential executive interviews,
roundtables, tours, and conference activities
1
Dr. Choi stated that statements attributed to
him are his personal views and do not neces-
sarily represent the views of URS Corp.
As its nuclear industry has
developed, South Korea has been
growing a strong and highly
self-sufficient nuclear supply chain.
1309npi_17 17 10/1/13 1:20 PM
18
>
NUCLEUS
Overcoming Verification and Validation
Challenges for Digital I&C System Upgrades
By Donna Ruff, Westinghouse Electric Company Institute
to a new digital I&C system prior to manu-
facturing and installation.
COMPLICATIONS WITH MAINTAINING
ANALOG I&C SYSTEMS
When the majority of analog I&C sys-
tems were installed three to four decades
ago, they were the most advanced technol-
ogy available. They were, and remain, safe
for monitoring plant operations and main-
taining reliability. However, with time,
their capabilities have been trumped by the
digital I&C systems available now. Coupled
with the growing challenge of maintaining
analog systems, many plants have chosen to
upgrade. The oft-discussed impact of the
nuclear industrys changing workforcein
occupations from engineers to operatorsis
a factor in I&C as well. The waning numbers
of vendor personnel with expertise in ana-
log I&C systems and decreasing availability
of spare parts for them are serious impedi-
ments to continued cost-effective operations
with analog systems.
Knowledge transfer at vendors and at
nuclear plants for operators learning how
to work with and maintain analog systems
is happening, but it is in an age where new
employees have grown up using digital tech-
nology in every other aspect of their lives.
And while support of the analog systems
is being continued, simply trying to main-
tain the hardware is becoming, in some
cases, more costly than upgrading to an ad-
vanced digital system. Manpower estimates
for maintenance, calibration and surveil-
lance for a typical analog system versus a
digital system is a factor of 20 times more
labor intensive for the analog controls. Ad-
ditionally, many plants have a preventative
maintenance program to replace all of their
existing analog control modules over time,
with the cost of the replacement modules
being equivalent to the cost of a new digital
control system.
T
he U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issues initial licenses for commer-
cial nuclear power plants for 40 years of operation a period originally based on
economic and antitrust considerations, rather than on limitations of nuclear tech-
nology, per the NRC. Licenses can be renewed in the U.S. under current regulations for
an additional 20 years, following the regulatory review and approval process of license
renewal applications. In anticipation of their original licenses due to expire, most by 2015,
nearly all U.S. nuclear power plant owners have renewed their licenses, or are in the pro-
cess of doing so.
In support of license extensions, plant owners have invested significant capital in nuclear
power plant upgrades. In many cases, the driving force for an upgrade is obsolete and aging
equipment and systems that have become difficult and expensive to maintain. The latter is
perhaps especially true for aging analog instrumentation and control (I&C) systems.
Yet two main concerns have slowed the progress of implementing new digital I&C sys-
tems: digital I&C systems reliance on software and plant trips at startup with the new
systems. The former concern is addressed with diversity and defense-in-depth solutions,
as well as through non-software based technology that continues to be improved and
advanced. The latter is addressed by at least one nuclear plant Original Equipment Manu-
facturer (OEM) with an advanced, verification and validation (V&V) process that incorpo-
rates a modeling software capable of simulating a specific plants environment and response
The Westinghouse Plant-specific Process and Control System Model is integrated into the overall design and verification and
validation process when upgrading the I&C systems of the major nuclear steam supply system components depicted to ensure
smooth and error-free integration when installed in the plant.
Figure 1
Reactor
regulating
system
Pressurizer
pressure
control system
Core
neutron
and
thermal
kinetics
Steam
generator
thermal
kinetics
Pressurizer
level control
system
Steam dump
bypass control
system
Turbine load
demand forcing
function
Feedwater control system
Value
dynamics
Feedwater
pump
dynamics
Feedwater steam hudraulics
1309npi_18 18 10/1/13 1:21 PM
19
>
NUCLEUS
tional enhancements or involve higher level
physical phenomena, this model has proven
invaluable.
Operational experience has confirmed the
benefit of applying this process model dur-
ing I&C system retrofit/upgrade projects.
The results of having performed V&V test-
ing using the plant-specific process model
has led to: minimized field tuning and sys-
tem modifications, reduced scope of critical
path testing, and the ability to anticipate op-
erational challenges and adjust for smooth
transitions to full power ascension without
plant trips.Westinghouse I&C System De-
sign Validation with Plant-specific Process
and Control System Model
The Westinghouse Plant-specific Process
and Control System Model is part of the
overall control system design approach; the
model begins with data collection from the
plant.
This plant data includes systems informa-
tion representing the characteristics of the
I&C system being replaced and the design
basis for the existing or upgraded system.
Process information representing the char-
acteristics of field devices, process compo-
nents and operational plant performance
data are also collected for input into the
model. The design input is used to begin
BENEFITS AND UNIQUE
CHALLENGES OF I&C
Among the many benefits digital I&C
system upgrades offer, the potential to avoid
single points of failure ranks high. Single
points of failure can cause one component
to fail and, in some cases, lead to a plant
trip or transient, and potentially hundreds
of thousands of dollars lost in downtime.
Digital I&C systems also offer diagnostic
and monitoring capabilities unavailable with
analog systems.
But for all digital I&C systems have to
offer, there are some challenges unique to
implementing a digital I&C upgrade, in-
cluding the chief concern of digital I&C
systems reliance on software, with its nu-
merous discrete logic steps and complex al-
gorithms, which can generate a wide range
of operating characteristics that would be
challenging to verify. Common mode fail-
ure, one error affecting multiple I&C sys-
tems, is another concern that didnt exist
with analog systems, though it is properly
addressed in the nuclear industry with di-
versity and defense in depth, design attri-
butes OEMs in the nuclear market are well-
versed in accommodating. Other related
concerns, such as the complexity introduced
to achieve defense in depth and potential cy-
ber security threats are addressed in various
ways, including field programmable gate
array (FPGA) technology, which allows
integrated circuit chips to be programmed
by customers after manufacturing, provid-
ing more control since the FPGA will re-
peatedly execute and link only to what was
programmed, reducing the complexity risks
inherent with microprocessors.
Designers and manufacturers will con-
tinue to address challenges through ap-
plied technologies, and this is also the
case for nuclear power plant owners con-
cern about plant trips at startup with new
digital I&C systems.
Verification and validation (V&V) of
newly integrated I&C systems to operate
within the plant-specific environment in
which they are being placed has been one of
the biggest challenges associated with digital
I&C system upgrades, and, therefore, one of
the biggest hesitations owners have concern-
ing implementation. Many such installations
which have not employed a V&V process that
includes plant-specific modeling have result-
ed in costly reactor trips.
ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT
MANUFACTURER PERSPECTIVE
Westinghouse has been designing I&C
systems since commercial nuclear powers
inception. When the company began design-
ing and marketing more complex integrated
protection and control system architecture
for nuclear power, the need to develop ad-
vanced comprehensive validation models and
methods for the newer I&C systems became
readily apparent.
The company developed an important
component of its overall V&V process, the
unique Westinghouse Plant-specific Process
and Control System Model, which is capable
of simulating plant-specific processes and
associated control systems in a test bed en-
vironment that simulates the specific plants
environment and response. Refined during
the past 25 years, the Westinghouse Plant-
specific Process and Control System Model
analyzes dynamic/transient behavior in a
computer simulation. When Westinghouse
performs a plant control system upgrade for
more complex systems that introduce func-
The Software-in-Loop (SWIL) validation testing uses a test bed environment that replicates the control functionality of the
target system to be provided to the plant, enabling the plant-specific software to be tested and validated in an environment
similar to the actual plant.
Figure 2
Platform test
equipment
Model environment
Control
system
application
software
Control
system
application
software
Plant specifc model
(S/g, piping, pumps,
valves, and other
Control systems)
Control
system
model
1309npi_19 19 10/1/13 1:21 PM
20
>
NUCLEUS
configuring the Plant-specific Process and
Control System Model, which allows for the
detailed plant-specific modeling and analysis
unique to this approach.
The design and process data collected
from the plant is reviewed for accuracy,
completeness and to verify there are no dis-
crepancies. The verified plant data is used
to develop a clear profile of the I&C system
being upgraded, and of any associated inter-
facing I&C systems and plant processes, to
design the control system
application. It is on this
plant-specific process and
control system model that
setpoints for the major nu-
clear steam supply system
(NSSS) control systems
are determined.
Using the Plant-spe-
cific Process and Con-
trol System Model, the
setpoints are optimized
based on evaluating system performance
over a range of plant-specific transient
scenarios and plant evolutions. Various
open and closed loop response tests are
performed to demonstrate that the major
NSSS control systems performance is ad-
equate for both steady-state and transient
operation. Dynamic setpoints are chosen
for responsiveness and for near steady-state
conditions to eliminate the need to tune
them during plant startup. The open and
closed loop test responses are recorded for
use in the next level of hierarchical testing.
This next level of testing is called software-
in-loop (SWIL) validation testing. During
SWIL validation testing, the plant-specific
model and the I&C system platform with
the newly developed application software
implemented are interfaced together in a test
bed environment (see figure). This setup en-
ables the plant-specific software to be tested
and validated in an environment similar to
the actual plant. The SWIL testing is con-
ducted in real time.
The SWIL testing is a closed-loop-vali-
dation test with the plant-specific model for
realistic plant operational response. It allows
integration tests of graphics, alarms and con-
trols with plant operators to occur before the
system is manufactured and sent to the site
for commissioning. The setpoints that were
determined with the Plant-specific Process
and Control System Model are verified. The
SWIL testing, with its incorporation of the
plant-specific model and virtual controllers
in the real-time, closed-loop validation test-
ing, verifies that the delivered system will
contain the proper setpoints and that the
control logic responds as presented in the
functional requirements. The SWIL testing
is performed with a plant subject matter ex-
pert present to assist with detailed checks of
the control logic tuning and to verify that
the setpoints and plant response match the
intended design.
In addition to system verification, the
unique approach of the SWIL test process
is the opportunity for plant personnel to ob-
serve dynamic system performance for plant
evolutions similar to actual plant operation.
In essence, it is a test drive of the system
through interaction with the human-system
interface and, for certain plant evolutions, an
opportunity to perform select procedures. It
allows relevant plant personnel to acquire a
degree of familiarity with the upgraded I&C
systems operation well in advance of its in-
stallation and startup.
The complete database and graphics are
saved from the SWIL testing so they can be
loaded on the target system when it is ready
for pre-factory acceptance testing.
The factory acceptance testing is per-
formed by Westinghouse at one of its fa-
cilities. The scope of the hardware testing
includes all power supplies, failover opera-
tion between redundant components and a
100-percent input/output validation. The
validated software from the SWIL testing is
installed into the plant-specific hardware on
the factory floor, and the formal factory ac-
ceptance testing is conducted. The integrat-
ed plant-specific software and hardware are
thoroughly tested for expected functioning;
this is typically witnessed by an appropriate
plant representative.
Immediately following power-up of the
shipped and installed hardware onsite, a
series of preoperational
tests are conducted to
ensure no damage was
incurred during shipping
and installation and that
it is interfaced properly
within the plant. For ma-
jor NSSS controls, final
testing occurs throughout
power ascension, during
which functional testing
of the system is performed
with Westinghouse test engineers onsite for
support. Control system tuning tests are
performed at various plant power levels to
verify that the controller parameters are set
properly for actual plant conditions. Minor
adjustments are made if necessary. Normal
plant operations and transient performance
tests verify system performance.
CONSISTENT PERFORMANCE
Since 1987, Westinghouse has been ap-
plying and refining the Plant-specific Pro-
cess and Control System Model as part of its
overall I&C system design V&V process for
complex systems. Using this plant-specific
approach to I&C system software integra-
tion has proved to be significantly beneficial
for supporting real-time engineering analysis
and SWIL testing. The approach minimizes
or eliminates the need for field tuning and
system modifications during plant startup
and evolution to full power.
In more than 30 applications of
this model for digital I&C system up-
grades, plants have experienced 100-per-
cent successno plant trips have oc-
curred at startupa huge success for the
industry.

Verification and validation (V&V) of
newly integrated I&C systems to operate
within the plant-specific environment in
which they are being placed has been
one of the biggest challenges associated
with digital I&C system upgrades.
1309npi_20 20 10/1/13 1:21 PM
21
>
NUCLEUS
Opportunity in Nuclear
By Denver Nicks
which was just selected for use in Turkey,
is a 1,100 MW pressurized water reactor,
and we have small reactors. Here in North
America, our high-temperature gas reac-
tor design has been selected by the Next
Generation Nuclear Plant Alliance, and
were involved with several companies
developing small modular reactors. So we
have a full product range offered by reac-
tors and services group.
We also specialize in keeping the exist-
ing fleet running and are one of the in-
novators in license renewal. We also have
a back-end division, which basically does
dry-cask storage, as well as technologies
for decommissioning and recycling. And
last but not leastour front-end division
has a fuel plant in Richland, Washing-
ton, where we make both boiling water
reactor and pressurized water reactor
fuel. Were capable of making many other
styles of fuel there as well. Were also pur-
suing the Eagle Rock Enrichment Facil-
ity in Idaho; we already have a license for
the facility from the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, and were working to find
W
hile Mike Rencheck was finishing up a degree in electrical engineering at
Ohio State University, there was trouble back home in Pittsburgh, where
the closure of a steel mill sent his familys finances into a tailspin. The
entire family lost their jobs in a matter of about six monthsbrother-in-laws, cous-
ins, unclesit was pretty devastating, he says today, his irrepressible smile tinged
with a hint of solemnity around what was clearly a serious event. I was asked by my
parents to come back home to help out.
Fortunately, hed been a summer intern at the Beaver Valley Power Station located
near Pittsburgh, back when its Unit 2 reactor was still under construction. After fin-
ishing school he was offered a job at the plant, and so began a career in the nuclear
industry that has led to where he is today: president and chief executive officer of ARE-
VA Inc., a leader in one of the most dynamic and future-oriented industries on earth.
Power Engineering: What is the AREVA Solutions Complex and why is it
important?
Mike Rencheck: The AREVA Solutions Complex is basically an innovation cen-
ter. Its a collection of areas where we produce technologies to make the nuclear fleet
safer, more reliable, and more economical. For nuclear applications, we have a 7-GHz,
ten-thousand pound shaker table. Its one of the largest, if not the largest, in this hemi-
sphere. We have ovens to commercially test equipment. We have other environmental
chambers. We have metallurgical labs, and a full chemistry lab. We have one of two
electron microscopes in the world there, where we can turn the electron beam on a
piece of either contaminated or non-contaminated metal and it will tell you the chemi-
cal composition of the metal; then you can start to peel back the grain boundaries. We
have machine shops, refurbishment areas, a motor area, and a fuel inspection area, plus
classrooms. We can even do electrical component reverse engineering.
We set this complex up so that we could continue to keep the existing fleet running,
looking at plant life extensions to eighty yearswe have all the tools available to analyze
an existing plant system and make sure it is capable of running for eighty years. Were
also developing repair techniques and inspection techniques, which we are deploy-
ing. Its a unique facility in the industry and we think it will help the existing fleet of
nuclear plants stay in business.
Power Engineering: Where do you see AREVAs future in North America?
Mike Rencheck: AREVA is vertically integrated across the entire nuclear foot-
print, so we have mining, enrichment, we make fuel assemblies, service existing plants
and we build new reactors. We have reactor designs that start with the EPR at 1,600
MW. We also have a boiling water reactor, KERENA, at 1,200 MW; the ATMEA,
A Conversation with Mike Rencheck,
President & CEO, AREVA Inc.
Mike Rencheck, President & CEO, AREVA Inc
1309npi_21 21 10/1/13 1:21 PM
22
>
NUCLEUS
So, when we look for leaders within
a region were looking for people with
people skills, with the ability to both
take a risk, be kind and gentle, and at
the same time be f irm and make deci-
sions when needed. Were looking for
these people as they come through the
ranks, to help shape the next genera-
tion of leaders here within the indus-
try and within our company. When you
look at the top f ifty innovative com-
panies in the world, AREVA is ranked
number thirty-eight, and we view that
as a responsibility in the industry.
Nuclear is our business. Without
nuclear we have very little business,
although now were getting into re-
newables and also medical
isotopes. Its a tough business
in that you have to have high
standards, be able to articu-
late those standards, and have
others adopt and follow those
high standards while keeping
everything in balance. This
industry is all about safety
and for us, when we inno-
vate, that has to be f irst and
foremost. We always say we start with
excellence in mind, and then we frame
everything around safety, quality, high
performance, and delivering results.
Power Engineering: Prospects for
nuclear fusion power?
Mike Rencheck: On a global ba-
sis, were part of the ITER team. Were
working on the cooling systems and
have a very keen interest in whats hap-
pening in California at the Lawrence
Livermore National Lab (LLNL) where
fusion is being tested in the U.S. Weve
had a number of people visit and really
take a good hard look at what theyre
doing at LLNL, and they seem to be
making progress. Fusion is probably
still out there in the future, but we have
folks that are actively working on dif-
ferent projects for it.
an investor for the early years and are still
in discussions with the Department of
Energy for a loan guarantee.
Power Engineering: Whats the climate
for nuclear build or nuclear activities
in general in the U.S.?
Mike Rencheck: There are a few things
that electric utilities need to factor in. One
is fuel diversity. If we start focusing on one
source of fuel, such as natural gas, well
be setting ourselves up for failure at some
point in the future. Now whats causing
that sentiment is probably a better question.
When you look at whats happening in the
economy right now, its low energy demand
that is driving pricing to a point where,
whether its a new gas plant, coal
plant, nuclear plant, solar plant,
wind plant, that price isnt high
enough to send a signal to build
new generating plants. Its also
not high enough to cover both
the operating cost and, in some
cases, the capital investment
costs to keep some of the facili-
ties operating, be they gas, coal,
or nuclear.
How long will this last? If it lasts too long
well see decisions made around short-term
profitability, especially for investor-owned
utilities in the marketplace. So we could be
in for the perfect storm where we retire
too much capacity in the near-term because
of market pricing signals and some market
distortions due to weak demand. Then,
when the economy recovers and the elec-
tricity markets pick up, we find ourselves in
an upside-down position, with real electric-
ity shortages and the need to build capac-
ity fast. That could force us in a direction
of very volatile fuel sources, typically fossil
fuel sources.
Power Engineering: What about the
prospect for something like a carbon
tax?
Mike Rencheck: A carbon tax would
have a big impact on how nuclear is
viewed within the industry. It would send
a signal for cleaner forms of generation.
However, with energy demand down as
a whole, unless the tax is very high, it
would not likely be enough to stimulate
new build.
So youre looking at a merchant mar-
ket condition that is somewhat tenuous.
The Electric Reliability Council of Texas
(ERCOT) is a perfect example of that
right now. If you watch ERCOT and how
theyre going about dealing with capacity
shortages or potential capacity shortages,
you see a marketplace that is struggling
to add new sources of generation, time
and time again, without the proper price
signals.
Power Engineering: What do you
look for in hiring people?
Mike Rencheck: Theres a lot to be
said about how one behaves as a leader.
One, you have to be willing to make de-
cisions, sometimes very difficult ones.
Other times, you have to be the kind face,
the gentle face, to make sure that people
are inspired and motivated to do new
things. You have to be creative. You have
to be willing to take risks and understand
that those risks are manageable, and you
have to be able to help folks manage risks.
There are a lot of people, especially in the
engineering world, that are risk-adverse,
but true innovation wont happen with-
out taking some risks. So, as a leader, you
have to make it okay for that to happen,
because you fail nine times before you
find the one true success thats going to
help the industry.
Nuclear is our business.
Without nuclear we have very
little business.
1309npi_22 22 10/1/13 1:21 PM
23
>
NUCLEAR WORLD
I
n April, the U.S. Depart-
ment of Energy (DOE)
announced a $16 million,
five-year award to a team led
by the Electric Power Re-
search Institute (EPRI) to
conduct a High Burn-up Fuel
Cask Research and Devel-
opment Project. The EPRI
team includes AREVA Fed-
eral Services, Transnuclear In-
ternational (TN), Dominion
Virginia Power, AREVA Fuels,
and Westinghouse Fuels. The
objective of the demonstration is to observe and confirm the long-term characteristics
and behaviors of high burn-up fuel under real conditions in a full-scale dry storage system.
The term burn-up refers to the amount of power extracted from the fuel, typically stated
in gigawatt-days per metric ton of uranium (GWd/MTU). Nuclear plants have been shift-
ing from lower burn-up (less than approximately 45 GWd/MTU) to higher burn-up fuels
(above 45 GWd/MTU) in recent years, and continued research is needed to better under-
stand the impacts, if any, of high burn-up fuels on storage, transportation, and disposal. The
demonstration project will load a Transnuclear TN-32 bolted lid used fuel dry storage cask
with high burn-up fuel at Dominion Virginia Powers North Anna nuclear plant.
The characteristics of the high burn-up fuel to be loaded into the demonstration cask
will be measured prior to initiation of the demonstration so that fuel collected after the cask
is re-opened can be compared to the initial fuel conditions. Fuel cladding properties to
be measured include: zirconium hydride concentration and orientation, cladding metal and
oxide thickness, internal gas pressure, and ductility, including the amount of creep that the
cladding will experience prior to rupture. These properties relate to the ability of the fuel
cladding to withstand potential structural challenges during storage, transportation, and
disposal.
The cask will be specially instrumented to collect detailed temperature data from inside
the cask during the initial cask drying and subsequent storage period. The cask also will be
designed so samples of gas inside the cask cavity can be taken to determine if fuel has failed
during drying or storage, if residual water after the drying process is present, if any of the
helium backfill gas has escaped, and if oxygen is present. At the end of the multi-year stor-
age period, detailed fuel property data will be collected again on the high burn-up fuel to
determine if any property changes occurred during storage.
This demonstration will be similar in concept to those conducted at the Idaho National
Laboratory (INL) in the mid 1980s through the early 1990s to assess degradation of lower
burn-up fuels. Because fuel burn-ups into the 1990s were primarily low, less than approxi-
mately 45 GWd/MTU, the cask demonstrations at INL involved low burn-up fuel. After
about 14 years of storage at INL, one of the low burn-up fuel storage casks was reopened
to determine if there was degradation of the fuel or the cask internals during storage. No
By John Kessler, Program Manager, Electric Power Research Institute
degradation was found.
The data collected during this cask re-
opening project provided a significant
amount of the technical bases to support the
low burn-up dry storage system license re-
newals that have been granted nuclear plant
operators to date.
Since the 1990s, almost all used fuel be-
ing removed from the reactors have burn-
ups in excess of 45 to 50 GWd/MTU. This
is considerably higher than the burn-up of
the PWR assemblies in the initial demos at
INL. The higher burn-ups have generated
regulatory interest regarding the ability of
used fuel that has undergone prolonged stor-
age to remain intact during transportation;
there are some concerns that high burn-up
fuel could become critical after a transpor-
tation accident. The U.S. Nuclear Regula-
tory Commission (NRC) has asked for more
long-term, high burn-up fuel property data
to support the license renewal requests for
high burn-up storage.
NRC and regulators in other countries
also are investigating whether dry storage
of higher burn-up used fuel beyond even
20 years would require evaluation prior to
receiving a certificate of compliance (CoC)
extension. A CoC is the document granting
permission to proceed with dry storage sub-
ject to limitations listed in the plants accom-
panying technical specifications (e.g., cask/
canister type, fuel types). To date, NRC has
granted few transportation CoCs for the
dual-purpose casks (designed for both stor-
age and transportation) containing higher
burn-up used fuel. Moreover, NRC has yet
to grant a storage CoC extension beyond 20
years for higher burn-up used fuel dry stor-
age systems.
Therefore, if very long-term dry storage
and transportation of nuclear fuel both
low and high burn-up are required, it will
be necessary to establish technical bases for:
Workers put a nuclear waste container in place on a dry cast storage
pad. Photo courtesy of the U.S. Department of Energy.
Briefer on the DOEs High Burn-Up
Used Fuel Demonstration Project
1309npi_23 23 10/1/13 1:21 PM
24
>
NUCLEAR WORLD
completion of the standard drying process
and measured for the presence of residual
water. This will provide information to de-
velop models to better quantify the amount
of residual water remaining after a normal
drying cycle.
In a manner similar to the earlier low
burn-up dry storage cask demonstrations at
INL, the high burn-up demonstration cask
will include a specially modified lid with
penetrations for insertion of thermocouples
to measure the axial and radial distribution
of temperatures inside the cask during dry-
ing and subsequent transportation. An ad-
ditional lid penetration will be designed to
obtain period cask cavity gas samples.
Additional work required after the initial
five-year period will include periodic tem-
perature and gas sample measurements, and
reopening of the cask to examine the cask
and fuel for signs of degradation. While no
specific storage time has been set, a stor-
age time on the order of a decade may be
appropriate to determine the evolution of
high burn-up spent fuel properties. After
that time, the demonstration cask would be
reopened and the cask internals and high
burn-up fuel would be examined to look for
degradation during drying and storage.
The target date for loading fuel into the
instrumented cask is early 2017. This year,
EPRI will be developing a draft test plan,
scheduled for release for public comment by
DOE by September. Following an approxi-
mately month-long public comment period,
a final test plan will be completed by the end
of the year. Activities in 2014 through 2016
will focus on designing the instrumented
lid, obtaining a license for the modified lid,
identifying the fuel rods to be included in
the test program, procuring the cask, and
conducting a dry run.
Thus, the proposed demonstration, in
conjunction with separate effects testing
and predictive models, will provide the
complete technical bases for understand-
ing the behavior of high burn-up fuel
during storage and subsequent transpor-
tation. All of these data will be used in
the development of effective aging man-
agement programs to ensure safe, long-
term management of low- and high-burn-
up used fuel.

wet and dry storage of lower burn-up used
fuel beyond 60 years; wet and dry storage of
higher burn-up used fuel beyond 20 years,
preferably beyond 60 years; transportation
of lower burn-up used fuel after very long-
term storage; and transportation of higher
burn-up used fuel at all time periods.
DEMONSTRATION DETAILS
The primary focus of the current dem-
onstration co-funded by DOE is to ini-
tiate a long-term dry storage demonstra-
tion using high burn-up fuel to provide
data on the fuel and cladding behavior of
high burn-up fuel assemblies in dry stor-
age. The five-year project will culminate
in the loading of the TN-32 storage cask
with three different kinds of high burn-
up fuel, and initial collection of data.
Different fuel types display somewhat
different mechanical properties after high
burn-up and subsequent drying prior to
storage. One of the primary reasons why
EPRI proposed the demonstration to be
conducted at the North Anna site was that
there are three different kinds of high burn-
up fuel in the North Anna spent fuel pool:
Westinghouse Fuels Zircaloy-4 and Zirlo,
and AREVA Fuels M5. The demonstration
will serve the same role in forming the tech-
nical bases for regulatory decisions of high
burn-up fuel that the previous confirmatory
studies at INL (reference 2) served for low
burn-up fuel: providing the data to evalu-
ate the fuels ability to comply with various
regulations governing confinement, retriev-
ability, and physical form (including 10 CFR
72.122(h) and (l), and 10 CFR 71.33 (b)(3).
In addition to collecting fundamental
property data on the high burn-up fuel in
the demonstration cask, other data will be
collected to support cross-cutting ex-
tended storage data needs. The collection
of data to improve thermal modeling of the
cask internals during drying and storage is
the highest priority of the cross-cutting data
needs. Improved thermal models would
lead to more efficient use of existing and fu-
ture dry storage systems while still providing
confidence that regulatory thermal limits
will be met.
Another cross-
cutting issue of
interest is the ad-
equacy of existing
drying methods
to ensure suf-
ficient water is
removed from
the cask/canister
internals to avoid
significant degra-
dation of the fuel
or cask internals.
Thus, cask cav-
ity gas samples
will be collected
in the hours after
Nuclear fuel assembly. Photo courtesy of EPRI.
Workers inspect spent nuclear fuel in dry cask storage. Photo courtesy of the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.
1309npi_24 24 10/1/13 1:21 PM
Owned & Produced by Presented by Supported by
Co-located with
NOVEMBER 1214, 2013 | ORANGE COUNTY CONVENTION CENTER | ORLANDO, FL, USA
NUCLEARPOWERINTERNATIONAL.COM
Global demand for energy continues to grow. So do concerns related to the environment, greenhouse gas emissions and
climate change. Emission-free, baseload nuclear power can be a viable option to address these concerns and meet growing
demand for energy. Nuclear energy remains a viable, clean and safe option for meeting demand around the world.
Now in its seventh year, NUCLEAR POWER International 2013 provides the nuclear power industry the perfect venue to gather
and exchange information about nuclear powers role in todays changing world. Visit www.nuclearpowerinternational.com for
more information or to register today.
1309npi_C3 3 10/1/13 1:21 PM
POWER GENERATION WEEK
NOVEMBER 1214, 2013 | ORANGE COUNTY CONVENTION CENTER | ORLANDO, FL, USA
Covering every aspect of the power generation industry, POWER-GEN International, NUCLEAR POWER International,
Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America and POWER-GEN Financial Forum converge in 2013 to
form POWER GENERATION WEEK. Beneft from fve days packed with pre-conference workshops, technical tours,
over 70 conference sessions, panel discussions, three exhibition days and multiple networking events. Like never
before, youll have access to nearly every facet of the market all under one roof.
4 Events. 5 Days. 1 Roof.
Owned & Produced by Presented by Supported by
www.PowerGenerationWeek.com
1309npi_C4 4 10/1/13 1:21 PM

Inside The Tennessee Valley Authority

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Inside The Tennessee Valley Authority

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Publication

FUEL FOR THOUGHT

You might also like