A Publication

8 How 2015 Could

Impact Nuclear’s Future NEWS BRIEFS 3
ENRICHMENT 8
FUEL FOR THOUGHT 9
No. 1

NUCLEUS 1
2015 In Review 10
Volume 9

NUCLEUS 2
Vermont Yankee’s Spent Fuel Challenges 14
NUCLEUS 3
16
JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2016

Safety Upgrades Prolong Plant Life

NUCLEAR EVENTS 20

Senior Vice PreSident, north AmericAn Power
GenerAtion GrouP —Richard Baker
(918) 831-9187 richardb@pennwell.com
nucleAr Power internAtionAl mAGAzine
editor—Sharryn Dotson
(918) 832-9339 sharrynd@pennwell.com
Power enGineerinG mAGAzine
chief editor—Russell Ray
(918) 832-9368 russellr@pennwell.com
GrAPhic deSiGner—Deanna Taylor
Production mAnAGer—Daniel Greene
nAtionAl BrAnd mAnAGer—Jenna Hall
(918) 832-9249 jennah@pennwell.com
Senior mArketinG mAnAGer—Rachel Campbell
(918) 831-9576 rachelc@pennwell.com
Senior Vice PreSident, Audience deVeloPment
& mArketinG—June Griffin
Audience deVeloPment mAnAGer—Jesse Fyler
corPorAte heAdquArterS—Pennwell corP.
1421 S. Sheridan Road, Tulsa, OK 74112
Telephone: (918) 835-3161
Fax: (918) 831-9834
E-mail: pe@pennwell.com
World Wide Web: http://www.power-eng.com
A Publication
for ASSiStAnce with mArketinG StrAteGy or Ad creAtion,
PleASe contAct Pennwell mArketinG SolutionS
Vice PreSident: Paul Andrews
Phone: 240.595.2352
Email: pandrews@pennwell.com
chAirmAn – Robert F. Biolchini
Vice chAirmAn – Frank T. Lauinger
PreSident/chief executiVe officer – Mark C. Wilmoth
executiVe Vice PreSident, corPorAte deVeloPment
And StrAteGy – Jayne A. Gilsinger
Senior Vice PreSident, finAnce And chief finAnciAl
officer – Brian Conway
SuBScriBer SerVice
P.O. Box 3264
Phone: (847) 763-9750
Fax: (847) 763-9607
rePrint SAleS — Rhonda Brown
Tel: 866.879.9144 ext 194 • Fax: 219.561.2023
rhondab@fosterprinting.com
NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL is published
six times a year by PennWell Corp., 1421 S. Sheri-
dan Rd., Tulsa, OK 74112; phone (918) 835-3161.
© Copyright 2016 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 grant-
ed by POWER ENGINEERING, ISSN 0032-5961,
provided that the appropriate fee is paid directly to
Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive,
Danvers, MA 01923 USA 978-750-8400. Prior to
photocopying items for educational use, contact
Copyright Clearance Center. For reprints, contact
Foster Printing for a price quote. For more informa-
tion, please call 866-879-9144 or email us at pen-
nwellreprints@fosterprinting.com.
go.asme.org/ICONE REGISTER BY MARCH 31 WITH CODE IC16BNPI01 AND
RECEIVE UP TO $400 OFF THE STANDARD RATE (ONLY $770)*
Call for
Presentation-only
Abstracts
Submissions Due March 28, 2016
CONFERENCE EXHIBITION
June 26-30, 2016 June 28-29, 2016
24th International Charlo2e Convention Center, Charlo2e, NC, USA
POWER
& ENERGY
Conference on Conference & Exhibition
Nuclear Engineering Co-located with ASME’s 2016 Power & Energy Conference
Don’t miss your opportunity to share your expertise with an international Co-sponsored by ASME,
CNS (Chinese Nuclear
audience of nuclear engineers! We invite you to make a presentation on contemporary technical Society) and JSME (Japan
Society of Mechanical
and commercial matters as well as cutting edge technology that will move the industry forward. Engineers).
For information on topics and to submit your abstract, visit go.asme.org/ICONE.
The International Conference on Nuclear Engineering Program topics include:
(ICONE) is the premier global conference on nuclear • Operations & Maintenance, Aging Management and Plant Upgrades
reactor technology. Join us for industry forums, technical, • Nuclear Fuel, Fuel Cycle, Reactor Physics and Transport Theory
• Plant Systems, Structures, Components and Materials
Keynote, plenary and poster sessions, plus workshops
• I&C, Digital Controls, and Influence of Human Factors
where international subject matter experts present their
• Smart Grids, Grid Stability, and OMsite & Emergency Power
views and expertise on current topics of importance to
• Advanced and Next Generation Reactors, Fusion Technology
the world-wide nuclear community. Network with leaders • Safety, Security, and Cyber Security
from industry, government and academia while exploring • Codes, Standards, Licensing, and Regulatory Issues
cutting edge technical issues and solutions for the • Thermal-Hydraulics
challenges that the nuclear industry faces today. • Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) and Coupled Codes
• Decontamination & Decommissioning, Radiation Protection, Shielding,
and Waste Management
• Workforce Development, Nuclear Education and Public Acceptance
*Discount applies to non-ASME members only. Discount must be used • Mitigation Strategies for Beyond Design Basis Events
• Risk Management
on full-conference registration only. Discounts cannot be combined with
any other oMers. • Student Paper Competition
The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) go.asme.org/ICONE

UK Study Shows NuScale
SMR Can Use MOX Nuclear Fuel
Jan. 20
NuScale Power completed a study supporting
the suitability of the company’s small modular
reactor to effectively dispose of plutonium in
the U.K.
The study commissioned by the U.K. Na-
tional Nuclear Laboratory evaluated scenarios
with partial and full-core loading of mixed
uranium-plutonium oxide (MOX) fuel. The
study confirmed that MOX could be used in
the NuScale core with minimal effect on the
reactor’s design and operation. The study dem-
onstrated that a 12-module NuScale plant with
100 percent MOX cores could consume a 100
metric-ton stockpile of discharged plutonium
in about 40 years.
The NuScale Power Module is a technol-
ogy with the potential to be fueled by either
conventional light water reactor fuel or MOX
fuel. More than 100 metric tons of civil
plutonium is managed at the Sellafield site
in northwest England, but the U.K. govern-
ment has been looking for ways to either dispose
of or reuse it.
NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL
Amec Foster Wheeler
to Maintain Nuclear
Fusion Project
Jan. 20
Amec Foster Wheeler signed a
framework agreement to supply
maintenance and remote handling
services to the ITER nuclear fusion
research project in France.
The four-year, $4.4 million con-
tract will cover critical complex ar-
eas such as the hot cell, where irra-
diated components are dismantled
and treated, and the Cryostat, the
second-largest high-vacuum pressure
chamber ever built at 3,850 tonnes.
Amec Foster Wheeler will also ana-
lyze reliability, control costs, carry
out virtual and physical mock-ups to
test procedures, and produce mainte-
nance documentation.
In May 2015, an Amec Foster
Wheeler-led joint venture won a
$76.5 million, seven-year contract
to carry out all activities ranging
from design, manufacturing, factory
NEWS
> JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2016 3
testing, delivery, on-site integration,
commissioning and final acceptance
tests for ITER’s natural beam remote
handling system.
U.S. Nuclear Power Plants
Set Average Capacity Factor
Record in 2015
Jan. 19
U.S. nuclear power facilities oper-
ated at a record high level of reliabil-
ity in 2015, according to preliminary
estimates from the Nuclear Energy
Institute (NEI).
NEI said 99 operating power plants
in 30 states posted an estimated av-
erage capacity factor of 91.9 percent,
based on preliminary 2015 data. That
number surpasses the industry’s pri-
or record set in 2007 by one-tenth of
a percentage point. Capacity factor
measures the total electricity gener-
ated as a percentage of potential gen-
eration for the entire year.
Electricity production from
nuclear plants last year was an
 CONTINUED
estimated 797.9 billion kilowatt-hours
(kWh). The industry’s record was in
2010 when 104 reactors produced
806.9 billion kwh of electricity while
posting an average capacity factor of
90.9 percent.
The amount of electricity generated
last year surpassed the amount
produced in 2014, though there was
one less power plant with the closure
of the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant.
“The 2015 data confirm yet again
what a tremendous asset nuclear
energy technology is,” said NEI Chief
Nuclear Officer Anthony Pietrangelo.
“U.S. nuclear power plants continue
to operate at exceptional levels of
safety and reliability, while generating
affordable electricity that consumers
and our economy rely on. This is due
to the hard work and dedication of the
highly skilled men and women who
work at these facilities and the reactor
vendors and suppliers who provide
support services.”
Final 2015 data will be available in
about two months.
Deadlines Set for Nuclear,
Renewable, Fossil Fuel Loan
Guarantee Applications
Jan. 19
The U.S. Department of Energy
(DOE)’s Loan Programs Office an-
nounced upcoming deadlines for loan
guarantee solicitation applications for
fossil fuels, nuclear and renewable en-
ergy projects.
DOE also finalized $1 billion of
additional loan guarantee authority
available for applicants. The guidance
adds $500 million to the Advanced
Fossil Energy Projects solicitation,
totaling up to $8.5 billion. The re-
maining $500 million was added to
the Renewable Energy and Efficient
Energy (REEE) Projects solicitation,
bringing that total up to $4.5 billion.
The President clarified that distribut-
ed energy projects are eligible for loan
guarantees under the Advanced Fossil
Energy and REEE solicitations.
Part I application deadlines for the
fossil fuel and renewable energy appli-
cations are:
NEWS
NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL > JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2016 4
March 16, 2016
May 18, 2016
July 13, 2016
Part II application deadlines are:
Feb. 17, 2016
April 13, 2016
June 15, 2016
Aug. 17, 2016
Oct. 19, 2016
Part I deadlines We sweat the [small] stuff.
for nuclear applications are:
March 16, 2016 Rising demands. Aging assets. Shrinking workforce. Water
chemistry. Regulatory compliance. Corrosion control.
May 18, 2016 The stuff that costs you time, money and resources.
July 20, 2016 [It’s not such small stuff after all.]
Part II application deadlines are: What if you could outsource these issues to experts? Experts
who could let you know what you needed to do and when,
April 13, 2016 cost-effectively?
Oct. 19, 2016 You can. AquatiPro® support & service offers the only certified
service program for sample conditioning and analysis systems
Nov. 23, 2016 from multiple vendors. We handle startup, commissioning and
training for new systems while keeping installed systems in peak
performance with preventative maintenance, upgrades, retrofits,
Hinkley Point C Power parts and consumables – a complete range of lifecycle solutions
no other company offers.
Line Approved And that’s no small thing.
Jan. 19
Learn more at sentry-equip.com/support.
The British government approved
a power line project at the Hinkley
Point C nuclear project.
When completed, the project
will carry power 37 miles from the
 CONTINUED
Entergy Sues New York Over
Indian Point Nuclear Plant
Jan. 19
Entergy (NYSE: ETR) filed suit against
the state of New York, saying two actions
taken at the end of 2015 encroached on
federal regulation at the Indian Point nu-
clear power plant.
Entergy filed with a federal court to in-
validate a Nov. 6 decision from the New
York Department of State to object the
plant’s coastal consistency certification,
a move the utility says is an attempt to
block the license renewals for both reac-
tors. Entergy’s application for 20-year li-
cense extensions has been held up with
the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
since 2007 because of opposition from the
state. The NRC allows plants to continue
operating while license extensions are un-
der review under the federal government’s
“timely renewal” provision until the NRC
makes a final determination. A decision is
not expected for several years.
“While states have the right to partici-
pate in the federal regulatory stakeholder
process relative to nuclear power plant
operations, well-established federal law
– including a 2013 ruling related to En-
tergy’s Vermont Yankee facility – clearly
precludes any state from using presumed
nuclear safety issues as a basis for decision
making in a state regulatory review, as
NYSDOS has done with its Nov. 6 objec-
tion,” said Patricia Kakridas, spokeswom-
an for Entergy.
Entergy says an investigation launched
after an electrical disturbance in trans-
mission lines caused Unit 3 to shut down
in December encroached on federal reg-
ulation as well.
“Aside from the coastal management
objection, the latest example of the state’s
NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL
attempts to encroach on the federal gov-
ernment’s nuclear safety management
of Indian Point is an investigation of the
plant, launched last month by the New
York Department of Public Service,” Kak-
ridas said. “Entergy has written a letter to
the New York State Public Service com-
mission objecting to that probe in part be-
cause it pre-empts federal regulation.”
Gov. Andrew Cuomo wrote in a letter
to the chair of the state PSC, dated Dec.
16, 2015, to look into the plant’s capital
and maintenance budgets and their im-
pacts on the outages and operations.
“Indian Point operates today without
a timely license for Unit 2 or Unit 3,”
Cuomo said. “New York State continues
to argue vehemently before the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission that it is time to
retire this aging facility.”
Indian Point provides about 25 percent
of the electricity used in New York City
and Westchester annually. The state says
the plant’s close proximity to New York
City makes it difficult to implement an
efficient emergency evacuation plan.
NEWS
> JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2016 5
planned 3.2-GW plant to the south-
west of England. The power line will
use a new generation of pylon called
the T-pylon, according to an article
from Reuters Africa.
Owner EDF plans to build the nu-
clear plant for 18 billion pounds ($25.5
billion) and start operations in 2025.
EDF and Chinese utility CGN agreed
in October to jointly build Hinkley
Point C but have not finalized funding.
Hitachi Forms UK Nuclear
Development Company
Jan. 19
Hitachi Ltd. announced the forma-
tion of a company that will lead its
work on development of a nuclear pow-
er plant in the UK.
The company incorporated a new com-
pany called Hitachi Nuclear Energy Eu-
rope Ltd., as well as further progress with
potential joint venture partners Bechtel
Management Company Ltd. and JGC
Corp. The new Tier 1 company and joint
venture are expected to help Hitachi
[CONTINUED ON PG. 7]
CONTINUED NEWS
NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL > JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2016 6

Toshiba Debris Removal the FRS will lift

System Installed at Fukushima the TV to an
Daiichi 3 Nuclear Unit ab ove - g r ou nd
Jan. 18 floor of the reac-
Toshiba Corp. revealed a remotely tor building for
operated system to remove debris and transportation
fuel from the spent fuel pool at Fuku- to a temporary
shima Daiichi nuclear Unit 3 in Japan. storage site.
The Fuel Removal System (FRS) The FRS con-
will be installed at the Fukushima site sists of a fuel han-
starting now. Testing and training had dling machine
been performed up to last December, for removing
and fuel removal is expected to begin the debris and
in fiscal year 2017. fuel and cranes
During the 2011 accident, a hydrogen for bringing in
explosion inside Unit 3 destroyed the up- the TVs, clos-
per part of the reactor building and lit- ing their lids and
tered the operation floor and spent fuel hoisting them up to ground-level floor. appropriate cutting or gripping jig via
pool with debris. The debris and all of The fuel handling machine is equipped remote control, depending on the state
the fuel must be removed in order to re- with two manipulators capable of cut- of the debris in the pool. The cranes
turn the unit to stable condition. ting and grabbing debris and a mast and section consists of the main hoist with
The FRS developed by Toshiba is de- fuel grapple tool for taking out fuel. the TV lifting rig – which transfers
signed to remove the debris, and to place The manipulator tips, auxiliary fuel to the TVs – and an auxiliary hoist
fuels in a transfer vessel (TV) that can be hoists and fuel grapple tool attached for removing and securing the TV pri-
securely sealed. Once that is completed, to the mast can be replaced with an mary lid.
CONTINUED
NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL
[CONTINUED FROM PG. 5]
enhance its UK presence for the en-
gineering, procurement and construc-
tion of Horizon Nuclear Power’s Wylfa
Newydd nuclear plant. The companies
have all signed the memorandum of
understanding.
Hitachi-GE Nuclear Energy Ltd.
will provide the UK ABWR design, and
will operate under contract to the Tier 1
team, once fully established. Construc-
tion on the two ABWRs is scheduled to
begin in 2019.
DOE Funds Pebble Bed, Molten
Chloride Fast Reactor Designs
Jan. 15
The U.S. Department of Energy
(DOE) chose two companies to fur-
ther develop advanced nuclear reactor
designs as part of an up to $80 million
multi-year cost share agreement.
DOE will fund cost-shared
research and development activities
with industry to support both
companies with performance-based
advanced reactor concepts for further
development in the areas of safety,
NEWS
> JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2016 7
operations and economics. The reactor
Register Early!
designs will have the potential for
demonstration in the 2035 timeframe.
Initially, DOE’s investment will be august 23-25, 2016
$6 million for each project and both greater columbus convention center
Columbus, Ohio, USA
companies will provide cost share,
with the potential value of research to
be up to $80 million.
The two projects receiving awards are:
REGISTER BY JULY 18 AND SAVE $105
• X-energy, partnering with BWX ON FULL CONFERENCE REGISTRATION.
Technology, Oregon State Uni- Join over 1,500 oil and gas, and power professionals for the second annual POWER-GEN Natural
Gas conference and exhibition targeting gas-fired generation related to the development of natural
versity, Teledyne-Brown Engi- gas reserves in the Marcellus and Utica shales of the Appalachian Basin. Participate in this
neering, SGL Group, Idaho Na- event and join some of the top names in the energy industry to discuss the issues surrounding
tional Laboratory and Oak Ridge
technology, operation, construction and maintenance of gas-fired power and production from
unconventional hydrocarbon resources.
National Laboratory, to solve de-
TOPICS OF INTEREST
sign and fuel development chal-
OIL & GAS POWER
lenges of the Xe-100 Pebble Bed Growth in Gas Markets Large Frame Gas Turbines
Advanced Reactor. Contracts and Regulation Operations and Maintenance
Logistical Developments Siting and Construction
• Southern Company Services, Evolution of Appalachian Basin Gas Supply Small Gas Turbines and Gas Engines
partnering with TerraPower, Political Issues
Electric Power Research Institute,
Vanderbilt University and Oak
FOR DETAILS ON REGISTRATION TYPES AND RATES,
PLEASE VISIT WWW.POWER-GENNATURALGAS.COM.
Ridge National Laboratory, to
perform integrated effects tests PRESENTED BY: OWNED & PRODUCED BY:
and materials suitability studies
to support development of the
Molten Chloride Fast Reactor. p o w e r - g e n n a t u r a l g a s . c o m

COP21 vs. Clean Power Plan:
Which Benefits Nuclear More?
BY SHARRYN DOTSON, EDITOR
T
wo plans were released in 2015 aimed at cutting emissions. The
plans have different requirements and methods of reducing pol-
lutants resulting from power generation, and they also have dif-
ferent potential impacts on the present and future of nuclear power.
While one may be a boon for nuclear new builds, the other may be a
hindrance, according to some in the industry.
President Obama and the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency in August revealed the Clean Power Plan, which seeks
to cut carbon emissions 32 percent below 2005 levels by 2030,
and allows states to create and implement their own plans to cut
carbon emissions. A federal appeals court in January denied an
attempt to delay the start of the plan, though 27 states continue
to challenge the rule through lawsuits.
Some say the plan does nothing to boost the U.S. nuclear indus-
try because it does not recognize the value of nuclear’s zero-carbon
generation. According to the Nuclear Energy Institute, the rule also
does not give credit for license extensions. The rule does say, however,
that more premature shut downs of nuclear plants are expected in the
future, which would actually increase emissions if that lost capacity is
replaced with natural gas. The final rule does not include the five reac-
tors currently under construction in the U.S. in the goal-setting calcu-
lation. When they are operational, they will count toward compliance.
NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL
The second plan was reached during
the COP21 climate change talks in Paris.
Almost 200 countries agreed to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions to a level that
will limit the rise of the global average
temperature to well below 2 degrees C
(3.6 F) of pre-industrial levels by 2030.
The reductions mean nations will have to
reduce their use of fossil-fueled generat-
ing sources and rely more on low-carbon
emitters, such as solar, wind and nuclear.
The agreement also calls for developed
countries to fund $100 billion a year to
developing countries starting in 2020 that
is expected to increase over time. Every
five years, the nations will be required to
assess and report on their progress.
“The message from COP21 is clear: it’s
time to redirect investment and financ-
ing from carbon-intensive fossil fuels to
building a new generation of nuclear pow-
er plants for security of future energy sup-
ply,” said Danny Roderick, president and
CEO of Westinghouse.
He pointed out that these investments
need to be well thought out and planned.
“We cannot risk creating a situation
ENRICHMENT
> JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2016 8
in which we want clean, reliable and af-
fordable electricity, but we are not able to
provide it because we failed to plan, invest
and build when we could,” Roderick said.
“New energy infrastructure that will last
for 50 years or more cannot be built over-
night. We need careful, long-term plan-
ning of investments and construction.”
Both plans have one major goal in
mind: reduce emissions generated by
power plants around the world. Where
nuclear fits in these plans is up for debate,
though common sense would say nuclear
power is one of the best zero-emission
and reliable sources to build. However,
neither plan gives any financial help to
offset the high upfront costs to build a nu-
clear power plant, nor do they supply any
answers to the issue of market prices not
fairly compensating nuclear in some re-
gions. Plant operators say the increase of
renewables on the grid and low natural gas
prices have led to artificially low electric-
ity prices that do not cover the benefits of
nuclear, much less normal operating costs.
When those issues are fixed, then we can
see nuclear power’s true benefits.
 FUEL FOR THOUGHT
NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL > JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2016 9

Grassroots Growing? Seabrook’s initial license does not expire

until 2030, but NextEra applied for a 20-year
BY BRIAN SCHIMMOLLER, CONTRIBUTING EDITOR extension in 2010. Opposition has emerged,

I
t’s getting harder and harder to be an optimist when it comes to the prospects for U.S. nuclear but so has support. As reported in the Eagle-
power. Despite the pending startup of Watts Bar Unit 2 and the progress at Vogtle and Summer, Tribune in mid-November, town officials have
the economic pressures on smaller nuclear plants competing in wholesale markets are acute. pledged “unconditional support” for the license
Entergy’s double-barreled death blows in late 2015 to the Pilgrim Station in Massachusetts and extension, and have sent a letter to the Nuclear
the FitzPatrick Station in upstate New York were the latest announcements to shake the nuclear Regulatory Commission saying that the plant
power industry. While not entirely unexpected, the pain and disappointment that these decisions has “become, quite simply, an irreplaceable re-
provoked are pronounced, especially with respect to FitzPatrick, which was a well-run unit by most gional asset.” The letter also stated: “It’s almost
measures. unimaginable to think of where we would be
From afar, it’s easy to forget that there are real people affected by these decisions – hundreds of today without the plant…The continued im-
individuals who will be forced to find other work and reduce or stop investing in their communities. provements and economic expansion of our
But there are nascent signs that grassroots efforts to sustain nuclear power are gaining momentum. town is due in large part to Seabrook Station.”
For example, the communities surrounding the FitzPatrick plant in northern New York used both One letter on behalf of one plant, of
political and media channels to try to save the facility. They got state politicians from the district to course, does not guarantee success across the
publicly lobby on behalf of the plant, they appealed to the governor to intervene, they coordinated U.S nuclear fleet. But the hundreds of jobs,
union support, and they organized public rallies. Business leaders from Oswego County, N.Y., even and the tens of millions of dollars in proper-
created a touching YouTube video extolling the importance of FitzPatrick to their community. ty taxes generated by nuclear power plants,
The ramifications of the FitzPatrick closure are spreading to other communities. NextEra En- have a way of making politicians listen.
ergy Resources owns the Seabrook nuclear station in coastal New Hampshire. Like FitzPatrick, this In the end, it truly is a business decision.
is a single-unit site that bids its power into wholesale power markets. While younger and larger than The ongoing question is whether grassroots
FitzPatrick, Seabrook also could be at risk as it considers life extension, particularly in light of the efforts can alter the calculus a bit, and help
rancorous debate that surrounded its construction and startup back in the late 1980s. Public and others recognize that penalizing a healthy
political opposition delayed construction for many years, and ultimately led to the cancellation of a asset for operating in an unhealthy market is
second planned unit. not in anyone’s best interests.
 NUCLEUS
NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL > JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2016 10

2015 In Review
BY SHARRYN DOTSON, EDITOR

B
y the time 2015 started, the U.S. nuclear industry was unstable. On one hand,
Entergy’s Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant had just shut down, unfavorable
market conditions were threatening other merchant plants to close, and the White
House had cancelled the Yucca Mountain waste repository project. On the other hand,
five nuclear reactors were under construction, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) had started renewing operating licenses after a two-year hiatus, and advanced
reactor design applications were working their way up the certification approval ladder.
By the time the year ended, much of the big news was the same, with the addition of
some recent issues and announcements.
Here is a look at some of last year’s stories that could have an impact on the industry
today and into the future.

ENTERGY ANNOUNCES PILGRIM, FITZPATRICK POWER PLANTS TO CLOSE When FitzPatrick closes, Entergy will replacement power when they close, the
Entergy Corp. said in October it made the “difficult decision” to shut down the 680- own just one operating nuclear plant in plants are the latest casualties of market
MW single-unit Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station in Massachusetts by 2019. Poor market New York, the dual-unit Indian Point. conditions that have led to the closures
conditions, an increase in operating costs and a decline in revenues were the main rea- State lawmakers have heavily opposed the of two other plants – including Vermont
sons behind the announcement. A few weeks later, the utility announced yet another plant due to its close proximity to New Yankee in 2014 -- and threaten future op-
closure, the 838-MW single-unit FitzPatrick plant in upstate New York by 2017 for the York City and want it shut down. Both erations of more single-unit merchant nu-
same reasons. New York lawmakers have been fighting to keep the plant open to save units can continue to operate while their clear plants. MISO posted an issues state-
the local economy, but Entergy said the costs are too great. license extensions are under review. ment in October that said reforms to its
“We recognize the consequences of the shutdown for our employees and the sur- FUTURE IMPACT: Besides the obvi- capacity market process may be required
rounding community and pledge to do our best to support both during this transition,” ous job losses, impact to the local econ- to drive future investments and ensure re-
said Leo Denault, Entergy’s chairman and CEO. omy, and finding at least 1,518-MW of liable electricity supply.
 CONTINUED
WYLFA 1, UK’S OLDEST
OPERATING REACTOR, PERMANENTLY
SHUTS DOWN
The 1,000-MW Wylfa 1 nuclear reac-
tor in Wales shut down Dec. 30 after 44
years of operation. The unit was sched-
uled to shut down in September 2014,
but Magnox Limited received a 15-month
license extension. The company also used
an innovative method of moving partly
used fuel from one reactor to the other
since the manufacturing of Magnox fuel
ceased in 2008.
In 2014, the Wylfa 1 reactor shut down
for a planned maintenance outage but re-
pairs were needed in a turbine and a gas
circulator that delayed the restart twice.
FUTURE IMPACT: Wylfa 1 was the
last operating Magnox reactor in the
UK. The government is now focusing
on waste management, potential plu-
tonium reprocessing, and attempting
to build new nuclear plants at Hinkley
Point, Sizewell, and the Wylfa Newydd
power plant. Hinkley Point B 1 & 2
and Hunterston B 1 & 2 are scheduled
to shut down in 2016. Westing-
house recently announced that
its Springfields facility in the UK
can manufacture SMR fuel, part
of the company’s agreement with
the government to deploy its 225-
MW SMR technology. NuScale
also said that if it’s design review is com-
pleted in the normal timeline, it could
deploy its 50-MW SMR in the UK by
2025. That will help to make up the lost
power from units closing.
WESTINGHOUSE BUYS CB&I NUCLEAR
BUILD UNIT, SETTLES LAWSUITS
In October, Westinghouse suddenly
announced it would take over the nucle-
ar construction business of co-contrac-
tor Chicago Bridge & Iron (CB&I) for
NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL
$229 million. Westinghouse purchased
CB&I Stone & Webster, which includes
the business of engineering, construc-
tion, procurement, management, design,
installation, start-up and testing of nu-
clear plants. The new subsidiary is called
WECTEC.
Westinghouse and CB&I were build-
ing two AP1000 reactors each at Plant
Vogtle in Georgia and the Summer
plant in South Carolina. However, the
contractors were embroiled in lawsuits
over who was responsible for cost over-
runs and construction delays at both
sites. When the deal was finalized at the
beginning of 2016, Westinghouse cov-
ered CB&I for past, current and future
liabilities, and all lawsuits were dropped.
The closure of the deal led to a set-
tlement between Westinghouse and
Plant Vogtle co-owners Georgia Power,
Oglethorpe Power Corp., the Munici-
pal Electric Authority of Georgia and
Dalton Utilities for $350 million, sig-
nificantly less than the claims in liti-
gation. The closure also put Fluor in
NUCLEUS
> JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2016 11
charge of construction management for
both projects.
After the initial announcement,
South Carolina Electric & Gas Chair-
man and CEO Kevin Marsh said the
amended contract provided for “signifi-
cantly higher liquidated damages” linked
to completion of the plants. SCE&G
also negotiated a fixed price option that
would limit the construction cost of the
new plants if exercised.
“We are excited about the changes in
the structure of the construction team
and the amendment to the EPC contract
for the new nuclear plants and see these
changes as very positive,” Marsh said.
All four reactors are set for comple-
tion in 2019 and 2020.
FUTURE IMPACT: Westinghouse’s
 CONTINUED
purchase of CB&I Stone & Webster not
only helped revamp the Summer and
Vogtle projects, it also means Westing-
house no longer contracts out the work
of current AP1000 projects in the U.S.
and China, a potential money saver.
CHINA, UK AGREE TO
BUILD HINKLEY POINT C
China General Nuclear Power,
through its new company, General Nu-
clear International, agreed to buy a 33.5
percent stake in the two European Pres-
surized Reactors planned for Hinkley
Point C for $9.3 billion. EDF will own
66.5 percent, but plans to bring in other
investors to bring its ownership stake
down to 50 percent. Construction is ex-
pected to cost $27.8 billion and is sched-
uled for completion by 2025.
The UK government approved a con-
troversial $3.1 billion loan guarantee for
the construction of Hinkley Point C.
“There is a role for new nuclear power
stations to provide us with low-carbon
power supplies, but not at any cost,” said
Lisa Nandy, the UK’s Labour Shadow
Energy Secretary. “It is especially trou-
bling that the Government is agreeing to
these extra nuclear subsidies at the very
time it is cutting support for more af-
fordable clean energy technologies.”
The European Commission set a
strike price at $143.85/MWh because
the Sizewell nuclear project is also mov-
ing forward. The strike price is fully in-
dexed to inflation through the Consum-
er Price Index and the contract will last
35 years.
FUTURE IMPACT: The incentives for
the project continue to divide Britain,
and future project developers will either
have to find different and less expensive
NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL
forms of financing or use
lessons learned from EDF
to get funding approved
faster for new nuclear proj-
ects. The project is now
on hold as EDF works to
finalize funding. The UK
is planning new reactors
at Sizewell C, Bradwell B,
Wylfa Newydd and Moor-
side.
CLIMATE AGREEMENT
REACHED DURING PARIS TALKS
More than 190 countries agreed on
requirements to set a goal of limiting the
world’s increase in average temperatures
to “well below 2 degrees Celsius
above preindustrial levels” by 2030,
and limit the temperature increase
to 1.5 degrees Celsius. The devel-
oped world must also provide $100
billion a year in funding to under-
developed countries so they can
move from fossil fuel generation to
cleaner burning alternatives. The
NUCLEUS
> JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2016 12
plan calls for updates every five years to
see how it is being instituted.
FUTURE IMPACT: It’s hard to say at this
point what impact the agreement will
have on new and current nuclear power.
Even if developed countries give fund-
ing to underdeveloped countries to stop
burning fossil fuels, there is no guarantee
that nuclear would be their first choice to
build, particularly since some countries
do not have an established industry and
would have to start from the ground up.
TVA’S WATTS BAR
2 NEARS COMPLETION
The Tennessee Valley Authority’s
 CONTINUED
(TVA) 1,150-MW Watts
Bar 2 in Tennessee complet-
ed construction in October
when the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission
(NRC) approved its oper-
ating license. The unit is
a Westinghouse pressur-
ized water reactor built by
contractor Bechtel. Final
construction costs are esti-
mated at $4.7 billion, and
TVA said the unit should
be completed by June. The
unit is the first to comply with Fuku-
shima-related safety requirements on
mitigation strategies and spent fuel
pool instrumentation.
“This achievement signifies more
than a stage in construction for TVA,”
said Bill Johnson, TVA president and
CEO. “It demonstrates to the people
of the Valley that we have taken every
step possible to deliver low cost, car-
bon-free electricity safely and with the
highest quality.”
Unit 2 had been maintained in an
incomplete state since 1985. TVA ex-
tended the construction permit and re-
started efforts to complete the unit in
August 2007. TVA updated the operat-
ing license application in March 2009.
Loading of the 193 fuel assemblies was
completed, and pre-operational test-
ing of major systems, structures and
important components were finished.
Hot Functional Testing and the Con-
tainment Integrated Leak Rate Testing
were completed in August, and the In-
tegrated Safeguards Test was finished
NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL
in September. Power ascension testing
has started, and that is expected to be
completed at the end of 2016. Units 1
and 2 at Watts Bar will generate 2,300-
MW of electricity, enough to power 1.3
million homes in the TVA service area.
FUTURE IMPACT: Watts Bar 2 will
be the first new nuclear reactor in the
U.S. in almost three decades. The fact
that the project started, stopped, then
restarted with updated equipment 22
years later is a testament to the fact
that one can never say a project is truly
over until it’s over.
EX-IM BANK REAUTHORIZED
The charter for the U.S. Export-Im-
port Bank lapsed July 1, 2015, and many
companies and industry groups spoke in
support of its reauthorization due to its
importance in the nuclear industry. It took
until October for the U.S. Congress to re-
instate the charter for the bank through
Sept. 30, 2019. President Obama signed it
into law December 7.
“Exporters and their supply chains
are critical to the country’s economic
health,” said Fred Hochberg, chairman
NUCLEUS
> JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2016 13
and president of the Ex-Im Bank. “Ex-
port focused businesses bring a host of
benefits to their communities and local
economies, including generally paying
higher wages to their employees than
non-export businesses.”
General Electric announced in Sep-
tember that it was sending 500 jobs
overseas due to a lack of funding from
the Ex-Im Bank.
FUTURE IMPACT: Future funding
should hopefully stop other U.S. com-
panies from moving jobs overseas or
eliminating them all together. The Ex-
Im Bank is a big funder of vendors for
nuclear power projects worldwide, and
is seen as a major contributor to the
global nuclear industry.
 NUCLEUS
NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL > JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2016 14

Nuclear Spent Fuel Challenges

BY MARTIN COHN, SR. COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST, VERMONT YANKEE

W
ithin the next four years, Entergy has announced that it plans
to close two more of its nuclear power plants. James A. Fitz-
patrick Nuclear Power Plant in Oswego County, New York,
and Pilgrim Nuclear Power Generating Station in Plymouth, Massachu-
setts, will join Vermont Yankee in Vernon, Vermont, in moving towards
decommissioning.
Among the challenges Entergy will face is spent fuel storage.
Entergy built a dry storage pad at Vermont Yankee and has plans for a second.
According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office, commercial
nuclear power production in the U.S. has generated over 70,000 metric tons of spent or horizontal dry storage system. The of the outer cask are not blocked so that
nuclear fuel—fuel that has been irradiated and removed from nuclear reactors—and cooled fuel is then loaded into canisters, air can circulate and therefore remove the
the inventory is increasing by about 2,200 metric tons per year. This high-level waste which are then filled with helium, sealed heat generated by the fuel.
is extremely radioactive and needs to be isolated and shielded to protect human health and tested to confirm that the canister is At the Vermont Yankee plant, for ex-
and the environment. In 1982, Congress passed the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, assigning leak tight in accordance with ASME pres- ample, the spent fuel pool began nearing
the federal government’s long-standing responsibility for disposal of spent nuclear fuel to sure vessel standards. A loaded canister maximum storage capacity in the mid-
the U.S. Department of Energy. Although the DOE was to begin accepting spent fuel is transferred from the transfer contain- 2000s, and Entergy needed to construct
by January 31, 1998, the nation remains without a repository for disposal after spending er into a storage overpack or cask (large a dry storage facility in order to continue
decades and billions of dollars to research potential sites for permanent disposal, includ- steel cylindrical structures) that contains plant operations. Under Vermont state
ing Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Instead, it is currently being stored primarily at the sites high-density concrete for radiation shield- law, the Vermont Public Service Board
where it was generated. ing and ventilation openings for cooling of has the authority to review proposals for
In the absence of a national repository and as spent nuclear fuel continues to accumu- the canister. The casks are placed on a the construction of any new spent nuclear
late at individual reactor sites, Entergy and other power plant owners have been forced concrete storage pad that is part of an in- fuel storage facilities in the state. This re-
to contend with the continued on-site storage of spent nuclear fuel in spent fuel pools dependent spent fuel storage installation, quired plant owner Entergy Nuclear Ver-
and dry cask storage when the pools’ storage capacity is reached. Spent nuclear fuel or ISFSI. The casks are monitored to con- mont Yankee (ENVY) to apply to the
usually cools for at least several years in a pool before it is transferred into either a vertical firm that the vents at the top and bottom Public Service Board for a Certificate of
 CONTINUED
Public Good (CPG) to construct a dry
fuel storage facility at Vermont Yankee.
In 2006, after a litigated administrative
proceeding, the Vermont Public Service
Board issued an order approving ENVY’s
petition to construct a dry fuel storage fa-
cility at Vermont Yankee. A concrete pad,
76 feet by 132 feet, was subsequently con-
structed that could accommodate 36 dry
casks supplied by Holtec International.
Dry loading campaigns occurred in 2008,
2011 and 2012 in which 13 dry casks were
placed on the pad.
On August 27, 2013, Entergy an-
nounced that it would permanently cease
operations at Vermont Yankee by the end
of 2014. The reactor shutdown occurred
on December 29, 2014. By mid-January
of 2015, all nuclear fuel was removed
from the reactor and placed in the spent
fuel pool.
In June, 2014, ENVY filed another
petition before the Vermont PSB to con-
struct a second ISFSI storage pad to store
the spent nuclear fuel that remained in
the VY spent fuel pool. The need for the
second pad continues due to the absence
of Department of Energy performance in
transferring the fuel from VY to a federal
repository. Entergy expects to complete
transferring fuel from the spent fuel pool
to the ISFSI in 2020. Once the final load-
ing campaign has been completed, ENVY
expects to reduce the protected area to
the area surrounding the two ISFSI pads
to reduce the security costs that will be
funded from the nuclear decommission-
ing trust. The proposed second ISFSI stor-
age pad would be 76 feet by 93 feet and
built 30 feet immediately to the west of
the existing ISFSI storage pad and would
continue to use the same system that was
previously approved by the PSB for dry
cask storage of spent fuel on site.
ENVY has asked that the approval of
the Certificate of Public Good be granted
in May 2016. If this occurs, then con-
struction of the second ISFSI can be com-
pleted in 2017 at the same time casks are
being loaded on the first ISFSI pad. This
will ensure complete transfer of all spent
fuel to dry casks by the end of 2020.
ENVY is funding the costs for the
construction of the second ISFSI pad,
NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL
procurement of dry storage systems and
transfer of the fuel from the spent fuel pool
to the ISFSI through two revolving credit
facilities totaling approximately $145 mil-
lion. ENVY plans to repay borrowings on
these credit facilities with funds recovered
in litigation from the DOE for breach of
its contract to remove spent nuclear fuel
from the VY Station.
Franklin Orr, Under Secretary for
Science and Energy, recently wrote,
“According to consensus in the scientif-
ic community, geological repositories-
-which would store nuclear material
deep within the earth’s surface in safe,
scientifically proven locations--repre-
sent the safest and most cost-effective
method for permanently disposing of
spent nuclear fuel and high-level radio-
active waste. The first step for commer-
cial spent fuel begins with developing
a pilot interim storage facility that will
mainly accept used nuclear fuel from
reactors that have already been shut
down. The purpose of a pilot facility is
to begin the process of accepting spent
fuel from utilities, while also developing
NUCLEUS
> JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2016 15
and perfecting protocols and procedures
for transportation and storage of nucle-
ar waste. It is our goal that throughout
the process of developing a pilot interim
facility that the Department of Energy
builds trust with all of the local com-
munities involved.”
Full decommissioning and site restora-
tion of the VY and other shutdown plant
sites cannot take place until the used fuel is
removed by the DOE. The DOE has col-
lected over $10 billion from nuclear plant
owners to construct and operate a spent
fuel repository without taking any spent
fuel. In 1987, Congress designated Yucca
Mountain in Nevada as a national dispos-
al site. Over twenty years later, however,
President Obama abandoned the project.
It is imperative that Congress acts to find
a solution for the used fuel issue because
a reactor licensee cannot fully decom-
mission a licensed reactor site until the
spent fuel has been removed from the
site. In the meantime, Entergy and other
plant owners must continue to store the
spent fuel on-site in a safe, cost effective
manner.

NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL
Nuclear Energy Institute. With many
OPG’s Bruce Power Station had systems installed operating plants reaching their end of
for hydrogen control to help prevent BDBAs. life in the coming decade, major refur-
bishments and life extension projects
will play a critical role in the stability
of nuclear power generation.
Continued operation beyond origi-
nal design operating life presents a
number of technical and regulatory
challenges. Plant refurbishments re-
quire replacement and/or rehabilita-
tion of major components, including
steam generators, turbine generators,
instrumentation and control or process
computers and reactor components.
Obsolescence is a continuous problem
and replacement of components of-
Nuclear Power Plant Safety Upgrades ten requires significant design changes
to accommodate current production
for Extended Continued Operation models. Qualified components with
a finite service life must be replaced,
SEAN DONNELLY - MANAGER, STATION OPERATIONS AND LICENSING,
NUCLEAR CANADA, AMEC FOSTER WHEELER sometimes with great difficulty and
M
ost operating nuclear power plants were designed for an operating life of cost. However, these types of replace-
30 or 40 years after which the units would be permanently decommis- ments are required for the mainte-
sioned. The global nuclear energy industry has seen marginal growth in nance of nuclear safety and efficient
recent years with approximately 67 new plants under construction as of July 2015, operation with minimal downtime
in comparison to 438 operating nuclear reactors, according to numbers from the due to forced outages. Despite these
NUCLEUS
> JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2016 16
significant investments in plant life ex-
tension, maintenance of nuclear safety
margin from the initial plant design
and licensing may not be sufficient for
extended operation.
REGULATOR INTERFACE
The regulatory regimes worldwide
are adapting to the concept of life ex-
tension and longer operating lives. In
the United States, plants are initially li-
censed to operate for 40 years. Current
rules allow for life extensions of an ad-
ditional 20 years and guidance is under
development for operating licenses of
up to 80 years. In Canada, license re-
newals for periods up to 10 years have
been granted. However, approval of
life extensions require that the power
plants are deemed to be safe to operate
during this period in compliance with
modern standards and safety goals.
PLANT DESIGN, THE DESIGN
BASIS AND BEYOND
Modern new build plants have the
benefit of the lessons learned from the
 CONTINUED
existing fleet. Next generation and ad-
vanced reactor designs include safety
designs that provide emergency core
cooling and containment features to
deal with beyond design basis accidents
(BDBAs) and severe accidents, particu-
larly those involving a total loss of on-
site electrical power. Existing plants
must rely on inherent design safety
features and may require modifications
to improve robustness in order to meet
modern standards and safety goals.
The initial licensing of nuclear pow-
er plants worldwide considered de-
sign basis accidents which ultimately
define the range of analyzed accident
conditions; these are considered to be
the more probable accident sequences.
These accidents consisted of initiating
events, coupled with a failure of a safe-
ty system that resulted in an accident
with its associated consequences (i.e.,
possible radioactive release). While
BDBAs, including severe accidents,
were considered in some jurisdictions
prior to the Fukushima-Daiichi ac-
cident in Japan, after the accident,
utilities and regulators worldwide en-
deavoured to provide increased capabil-
ity to deal with such events. Utilities
and regulators conducted assessments
and analysis to analyze the capability of
plants to cope with these severe events.
Examples include the use of Review
Level Conditions in Canada and the
European Union Stress Tests. Nuclear
safety practitioners have been chal-
lenged to identify those sequences that
are outside the plant design basis but
represent those events that could occur
due to initiating events or failures not
postulated through conventional deter-
ministic safety analysis. While some of
these sequences can be defined, such
as more challenging seismic events or
floods, others cannot be easily defined.
Most utilities have adopted a combina-
tion of plant modifications and dedicat-
ed portable equipment that provide ad-
ditional mitigation options for defined
BDBAs, and even for more extreme
events whose progression cannot be
predicted in advance.
Portable equipment, often called
NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL
FLEX equipment or Emergency Miti-
gating Equipment (EME), can be
highly effective to mitigate BDBAs,
particularly extreme natural disaster
events. Portable pumps, generators and
uninterruptible power supplies can be
stored on-site, but remote from other
emergency water and power supplies,
or may also be stored in a centralized
location, such as the two centers built
in the U.S. The physical separation of
and independence of EME/FLEX from
the plant and its structures, systems,
and components provides added con-
fidence that an event which disables
all mitigating capability (i.e., similar to
the Fukushima event) would not occur.
Centralized FLEX storage sites have
been established in the U.S. to pro-
vide the ability to deploy resources to
a number of plants within a geographic
area. This minimizes costs for indi-
vidual plants and maximizes the avail-
ability of equipment for use should the
need arise. Similarly in Canada, sup-
port agreements have been reached be-
tween utilities and within utility fleets
NUCLEUS
> JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2016 17
to share their equipment if the need
arose. EME/FLEX provides a highly
beneficial set of options and helps to
bridge the gap between installed ac-
cident mitigation capability for DBAs
at existing plants and the modern ap-
proach to accident management.
Procedural changes have also been
made to better address BDBAs. Op-
erating procedures have been extend-
ed to provide instructions relevant to
these types of events. Symptom-based
procedures provide valuable diagnostic
capability and flexible accident mitiga-
tion actions to cater to such events.
Other modifications have been
incorporated worldwide to cater to
BDBAs. These events present unique
challenges for multi-unit containment
designs such as those at the Ontario
Power Generation and Bruce Power
CANDU stations in Ontario, Canada.
At these plants, new systems have been
developed and installed for hydro-
gen control (for example, Passive Au-
tocatalytic Recombiners). Dedicated
Containment Filtered Venting Systems
 CONTINUED
for BDBAs have also been installed at
certain plants and new techniques for
depressurizing containment have been
developed. Events that may occur
from a shutdown or low power state,
or events affecting multiple units or
multiple stations are now considered
in accident management guidance and
emergency procedures.
The Fukushima event also taught
the nuclear industry that attention
must be given to irradiated fuel bays
during extended periods without pow-
er for cooling and water makeup. The
effects of hydrogen accumulation and
bay boil off are severe, and although
events tend to develop slower than re-
actor events, mitigation actions can also
be very challenging.
While the concepts of BDBA and
Severe Accident mitigation represent
a new evolution in accident manage-
ment, the overall principles remain
consistent with longstanding nuclear
safety principles. Controlling reac-
tively, cooling the fuel, and containing
the radioactivity remain fundamental.
Enhancements that provide robust ca-
pability for fuel cooling without reli-
ance on in-plant supplies (e.g., EME/
FLEX) and containing the radioactiv-
ity (e.g., procedural enhancements,
containment venting systems, hydro-
gen control measures) help to maintain
these safety principles for BDBAs and
serve to mitigate the consequences of
such events.
SAFETY IMPROVEMENT
OPPORTUNITIES AND PRIORITIZATION
Compliance with modern codes
and standards, as well as meeting more
stringent safety goals is likely to require
significant capital investment by opera-
tors of most plants. Environmental re-
quirements also play a significant role
for continued operation. Generally, en-
vironmental and safety considerations
have a strong correlation; an improve-
ment in one often improves aspects of
the other. Safety improvements and
upgrades form a large portion of capital
investment for plant life extensions and
should be carefully strategized in order
NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL
to maximize return on investment.
Utilities typically employ cost-benefit
analysis (CBA) tools to assist with this
strategy and the prioritization of im-
provements. The CBA process provides
for a structured and systematic ap-
proach for evaluating alternatives and
ensures that the costs of implementing
proposed alternatives are commensu-
rate with the benefits gained.
There are many established meth-
odologies for quantifying and ranking
safety improvements; most utilities
will employ plant Probabilistic Safety
Analysis (PSA) models to provide key
insights; typically at least a Level 1 and
Level 2 PSA will have been conduct-
ed. A Level 1 PSA is intended to esti-
mate the frequency of core damage and
models all safety functions and postu-
lated failures, whereas a Level 2 PSA
is intended to estimate the radioactive
release magnitude and timing by ana-
lyzing accident progression phenome-
nology. Some plants may also develop a
Level 3 PSA for which the effect of the
postulated release and plant damage
NUCLEUS
> JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2016 18
is assessed. These consequences are
monetized and consider injuries and
economic losses as well mitigating and
aggravating factors such as atmospheric
dispersion. By interrogating the plant
Level 1 PSA to identify risk-dominant
sequences, high-value opportunities
can be determined. Utilizing the Level
3 PSA where available, these “offsets”
of plant risk can be directly correlated
to economic benefit. Utilizing the re-
sults of these interrogations and poten-
tial risk benefit, conceptual options can
be quantitatively evaluated and ranked,
providing a valuable tool to utilities
when prioritizing capital investments
in their plants.
The benefits realized from a safety
improvement opportunity (SIO) are
typically estimated by calculating the
monetary value of the consequences
averted by reducing the frequencies of
the Fuel Damage Categories (FDCs)
and Release Categories (RCs) impacted
by the SIO. FDCs and RCs are cat-
egories of consequences dictated by the
Level 1 and Level 2 PSAs, respectively;
CONTINUED
NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL
certain jurisdictions may use other
terminology for these quantities but
the intent is the same. The benefits
are compared against the costs associ-
ated with implementing the change to
determine the acceptability of the SIO
based on acceptance criteria such as a
benefit-cost ratio greater than one. It
is possible to help increase the benefit-
cost ratio by considering non-safety
aspects such as improved economic
risk. Any modification which may re-
duce the forced loss rate, increase gen-
erator output, decrease maintenance or
operator burden, or minimize outage
duration can be highly beneficial and
provides added justification for gain-
ing even a modest safety improvement.
The CBA is usually expressed in terms
of total estimated benefits, total esti-
mated costs, net present value of the
SIO and the overall benefit-cost ratio.
A good CBA considers the entire life
cycle of the SIO, including any asso-
ciated ongoing deltas in maintenance
or decommissioning. Favourable op-
tions are then progressed for further
NUCLEUS
> JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2016 19
CLEAN ENERGY
development, funding approval, design
and implementation as appropriate.
FOR THE FUTURE
CONCLUSIONS
The nuclear power industry is faced
with an appropriately high degree of
public and regulator scrutiny. Contin- www.nuclearpowerinternational.com
ued safety improvements are key to
maintaining public trust and reduce
the likelihood and severity of possible
accidents. Watershed events such as the
Fukushima-Daiichi accident threaten
to shake public confidence and it is up
to the regulators and industry world-
wide to provide transparency, educa-
SAVE THE DATE
tion and appropriate improvements to
maintain and improve safety margin
against safety goals. Life extensions DECEMBER 13–15, 2016
provide a unique opportunity to ex-
ORANGE COUNTY CONVENTION CENTER | ORLANDO, FL USA
amine risk significance and develop
appropriate safety improvements to
better attain and surpass safety goals.
Effective assessment of options and OWNED PRESENTED BY: SUPPORTED BY:
& PRODUCED BY:
planning of safety improvements is
critical to the success of any nuclear
plant life extension and long term eco-
nomic viability. CO-LOCATED WITH:
Plan today to attend NUCLEAR POWER International in Orlando, Florida, NUCLEAR EVENTS
U.S.A., Dec. 13-15, 2016. Register at www.nuclearpowerinternational.com. NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL > JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2016 20

S M T W TH F S

8-11 EPRI: Nuclear Power Council Advisory Meeting 18-19 EPRI: Maintenance Rule Users Group Winter 2016
1 2 3 4 5
FEBRUARY 2016 JW Marriott Austin, Austin, Texas
http://www.cvent.com/events/nuclear-power-council-advisory-
Arizona Public Service - Palo Verde
Energy Education Center, Buckeye, Arizona
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 meeting/event-summary-fb60fb7e73b844da832f47ef56da4b99.aspx http://www.cvent.com/events/maintenance-rule-users-group-winter-2016/
event-summary-b9a758da7448471e9c8a8c8069910974.aspx
9-10 NEI: National Operator Licensing
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 WorkshopAgency / IAEA 22-24 EPRI: Flow-Accelerated Corrosion Program Owner Training
InterContinental Hotel Tampa, Tampa, Florida EPRI Charlotte Office, Charlotte, North Carolina
20 21 22 23 24 25 26 http://www.nei.org/Conferences/National-Examiners-Workshop http://www.cvent.com/events/flow-accelerated-corrosion-program-owner-
training-formerly-flow-accelerated-corrosion-201-training-c/event-summary-
15-16 EPRI: Boiling Water Reactor Chemistry
27 28 29 Technical Strategy Group
a1dd77304d444a61acdb4001c90a1a82.aspx
Hilton St. Petersburg Bayfront Hotel, St. Petersburg, Florida
22-26 IAEA: International Conference on Human & Organizational
http://www.cvent.com/events/boiling-water-reactor-chemistry-technical-
Aspects of Assuring Nuclear Safety - Exploring 30 Years of
strategy-group/event-summary-1928bed9a726445c96d88adf2e818
Safety Culture
aa6.aspx
Vienna, Austria
17-18 EPRI Power Plant Process http://www-pub.iaea.org/iaeameetings/50800/International-Conference-on-
Water Treatment Conference Human-and-Organizational-Aspects-of-Assuring-Nuclear-Safety-Exploring-
Hilton St. Petersburg Bayfront Hotel 30-Years-of-Safety-Culture
St. Petersburg, Florida
http://www.cvent.com/events/epri-power-plant-process-water-treatment-
conference-formerly-known-as-epri-condensate-polishing-conf/event-summary-
f765e10b65d149d2a62f783fa7169bbf.aspx

S M T W TH F S

1-3 NEI: Cyber Security Implementation Workshop 22-24 EPRI: Pressurized Water Reactor Secondary Water
1 2 3 4 5
MARCH 2016 Westin Seattle, Seattle, Washington
http://www.nei.org/Conferences/Cyber-Security-Implementation-Workshop
chemistry Guidelines Revision 8 Meeting #3
EPRI-Charlotte, Charlotte, North Carolina
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 http://www.cvent.com/events/pressurized-water-reactor-secondary-
14-18 EPRI International Foreign Materials Exclusion water-chemistry-guidelines-revision-8-meeting-3/event-summary-
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Coordinators Training and Workshop 50505e0d3cd2475aab46794e4fdabd8e.aspx
Ringhals Nuclear Power Plant, Varobacka, Sweden
http://www.cvent.com/events/epri-international-foreign-materials- 29-31 EPRI: 2016 International ChemWorks Workshop
20 21 22 23 24 25 26 exclusion-coordinators-training-and-workshop/event-summary- EDF R&D, MAI Building, Moret-Sur-Loing, France
e394040d34704010ada0ac8327e2e62f.aspx http://www.cvent.com/events/2016-international-chemworks-workshop/
27 28 29 30 31 event-summary-702030aa8ce74d3089a36323c46779dc.aspx
15-17 EPRI 2016 Generation Australian
Workshop and User Group Meeting
Intercontinental Sanctuary Cove
Sanctuary Cove, Australia
http://www.cvent.com/events/epri-2016-generation-australian-
workshop-and-user-group-meeting/event-summary-7973a415478d463
19b2348633c9efe39.aspx