7/27/2019 npi20130910-dl

1/28

A Publication

MORE INSIDE

Korea Market Overview

AREVAs Mike Rencheck talks nuclear opportunities

High Burn-Up Used Fuel Demo

Inside the Tennessee

Valley Authority

A preview of the NUCLEAR POWER International conference!

7/27/2019 npi20130910-dl

2/28

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 inrastructure; mining

and metals; oil, gas and chemicals; and government service

Since its ounding in 1898, Bechtel has worked on more tha

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 o

completed nuclear design and construction projects and

perormed services on more than 80% o the US nuclear fle

Building the WorldsEnergy Future

CIVIL

GOVERNMENT SERVICESMINING & METALS

OIL, GAS & CHEMICALS

POWER

7/27/2019 npi20130910-dl

3/28

A Publication

1 NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL > SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2013

SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2013

NUCLEUS 1Inside the Tennessee Valley AuthorityBill Johnson is a CEO with a purpose

NUCLEUS 2Market Overview: Republic of Korea

NUCLEUS 3Overcoming Verification and ValidationChallenges for Digital I&C System Upgrades

NUCLEUS 4Opportunity in Nuclear

12

15

18

21

2 ENRICHMENT

4 FUEL FOR THOUGHT

6

NEWS10 EVENTS

23 NUCLEAR WORLD

1421 South Sheridan Road

Tulsa, OK 74112P.O. Box 1260, Tulsa, OK 74101

Telephone: (918) 835-3161

Fax: (918) 831-9834E-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 60065Phone: (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 GrouPRichard 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 6times a year by PennWell Corp., 1421 S. Sheridan Rd.,Tulsa, OK 74112; phone (918) 835-3161. Copyright2011 by PennWell Corp. (Registered in U.S. PatentTrademark Office). Authorization to photocopy items forinternal or personal use, or the internal or personal useof specific clients, is granted by POWER ENGINEER-

ING, ISSN 0032-5961, provided that the appropriate feeis paid directly to Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rose-wood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 USA 508-750-5400.Prior to photocopying items for educational use, contactCopyright Clearance Center. If you would like to have arecent article reprinted for an upcoming conference or foruse as a marketing toll, contact Foster Printing for a pricequote. For more information, please call 866-879-9144 oremail us at pennwellreprints@fosterprinting.com.

DEPARTMENTS

NUCLEUS

http://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=1&exitLink=mailto%3Apennwellreprints%40fosterprinting.comhttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=1&exitLink=mailto%3Arichardb%40pennwell.comhttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=1&exitLink=mailto%3Arissellr%40pennwell.comhttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=1&exitLink=mailto%3Apoe%40omeda.comhttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=1&exitLink=mailto%3Ajessicag%40pennwell.comhttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=1&exitLink=mailto%3Ajennah%40pennwell.comhttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=1&exitLink=mailto%3Asharrynd%40pennwell.comhttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=1&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.power-eng.comhttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=1&exitLink=mailto%3Ape%40pennwell.com

7/27/2019 npi20130910-dl

4/28

2 NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL> SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2013

ENRICHMENT

My name is

S h a r r y n

D o t s o n ,

and I am the new editor of Nuclear

Power Internationalmagazine 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 anydifferent despite markets that some say

produce artif icially 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 earnProfessional Development Hours just by

coming to Orlando and listening to your

fellow colleagues.

There will also be networking break-

fasts available to al l 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 dif ferent per-

spective on what is important to other

generation sources such as renewables and

natural gas.

You also have the chance to see which ofthe 17 finalists wins a Project of the Year

award during the gala event the evening of

Nov. 11. The two nuclear f inalists 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 wi ll

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 ofNuclear 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-

neeringwebsite.

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, EditorSee You in Orlando!

7/27/2019 npi20130910-dl

5/28

NO COMPANY IS

MORECOMMITTEDTO SUPPORTING

OPERATING

NUCLEAR PLANTS

www.westinghousenuclear.com

http://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=3&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.westinghousenuclear.com

7/27/2019 npi20130910-dl

6/28

4 NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL> SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2013

FUEL FOR THOUGHT

U.S. Nuclear Power SurvivalBy Mary Jo Rogers, Ph.D., partner, Strategic Talent SolutionsN

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 Fukushimamodifications. 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 thePresident 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 ledto 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 indust ry leaders have begun to

recognize is that these unit reliability

and system performance gains have come

with a great deal of baggage, in termsof 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 correct ive 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 tomoderate 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 responseis that time spent on the computer and

dealing with documentation is part of the

job, because extensive correct ive 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, staf fing 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 eff iciency 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 eff iciency 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.

7/27/2019 npi20130910-dl

7/28

http://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=5&exitLink=mailto%3ANUCLEAR%40AEON.COMhttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=5&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2FAECON.COM%2FNUCLEAR

7/27/2019 npi20130910-dl

8/28

6 NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL> SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2013

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 morethan $4 bill ion.

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 DECOMMISSIONFUKUSHIMA; WATER LEAKS

DEEMED CONTAINEDSept. 19Following 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 theother 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 art icle 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 TAKESCONTROL OF NUCLEARPOWER PLANT

Sept. 24Russia 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 GENERATORDESIGN FLAWS TO BLAME FORNUCLEAR PLANT CLOSURE

Sept. 23

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commis-

sion (NRC) said it has identified f laws in

how Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI)

used its computer codes to design thesteam 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 signif icance, 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 KOREATO WORK ON NUCLEARENERGY 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 agreementbetween 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 RECEIVESNRC OK FOR NUCLEARSAFETY 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-

7/27/2019 npi20130910-dl

9/28

http://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=7&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.haleproducts.com

7/27/2019 npi20130910-dl

10/28

8 NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL> SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2013

NEWS

trol systems, and incorporates features

that allow for diagnostics, testability and

modularity.

GERMANY TO USE AREVA SPENTNUCLEAR 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 wil l help transport

and store used nuclear fuel. They are

also designed to withstand extreme

conditions.

NUCLEAR POWER PLANTSIMULATORS COMPLETEDIN 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 ful l scope simulator at the

site on Aug. 1.

2013 PROJECTS OF THEYEAR 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 COMPLETEYUCCA MOUNTAIN REVIEW

Sept. 10

Allison Macfarlane, chairwoman of theU.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 f iscal years 2012

and 2013. NRC suspended its review of thelicense 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-CYCLEASSESSMENTS 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 signif icance. 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 OnofreNuclear 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 MORETHAN $800MN FOR SONGS

Sept. 10

San Diego Gas & Electric is asking theCalifornia 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 PARTNERON NUCLEAR POWER PROJECTSIN 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 experti se, whi le ENP wi ll

provide operations and associated ser-

7/27/2019 npi20130910-dl

11/28

9NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL> SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2013

NEWS

AREVA TO PERFORM NUCLEARPOWER PLANT OUTAGE WORK

Sept. 4

Areva signed a long-term outage services

contract with PSEG Nuclear for outage andmaintenance work at Salem units 1 and 2

and Hope Creek nuclear power plants, both

in New Jersey.

Areva wil l 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 andan 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 NUCLEARBUDGET DECISION DELAYED

Sept. 4

Georgia regulators voted to delay a

decision on whether Georgia Powercould 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. Howeverif 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 AP1000nuclear plant technology.

ROSATOM, WW-ROYCE, FORTUMTEAM 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 NUCLEARFor more than a century, Fluor has placed a strong emphasis on employee education and development. Our employer employee synergyenables Fluor to assist clients with sound strategic innovation, implementing unique solutions that save money and meet regulatoryrequirements. Additionally, Fluors Subject Matter Expert Protg program provides a platform for long-term succession planning andaccelerated growth for Fluor employees and our clients. Active in the global nuclear community, Clay Smith and his proteges are sharingknowledge 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

http://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=9&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fuor.com

7/27/2019 npi20130910-dl

12/28

NUCLEAR EVENTS

10 NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL> SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2013

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 AsiaIMPACT Exhibition &Convention CentreBangkok, Thailand

http://www.powergenasia.com/index.html

6-9 IAEAGroupScientifcVisit touranium-graphite decomission-ing projects at the SibrianChemistry PlantTomsk and Seversk, Russian

Federation

http://www.iaea.org/OurWork/ST/NE/NEFW/WTS-Networks/IDN/

events.html

6-9 Nuclear Energy InstituteInternationalUraniumFuel SeminarThe Westin Riverwalk

San Antonio, TX

http://www.nei.org/Conferences/International-Uranium-Fuel-Seminar

13-18 World Energy Council22nd World Energy Congress

Daegu, South Korea

http://www.daegu2013.kr/eng/index.do

19-21 POWER-GEN Middle EastAbu Dhabi National Exhibition Centre

Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.

http://www.power-gen-middleeast.com/index.html

21-24 IAEAInternational Conference onTopical Issues in Nuclear

Installation SafetyVienna, Austria

http://www-pub.iaea.org/iaeameetings/43048/International-

Conference-on-Topical-Issues-in-Nuclear-Installation-Safe

25-27 NEIGovernmental AffairsConference

Farmington, PA

http://www.nei.org/Conferences/Governmental-Affairs-Conference

12-14 NUCLEAR POWERInternationalOrange County Convention

CenterOrlando, FL

http:/wwwnuclearpowerinternational.com

http://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=10&exitLink=mauilto%3Adatalogging%40acrsystems.comhttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=10&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.acrsystems.comhttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=10&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nuclearpowerinternational.comhttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=10&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nei.org%2FConferences%2FGovernmental-Affairs-Conferencehttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=10&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww-pub.iaea.org%2Fiaeameetings%2F43048%2FInternational-Conference-on-Topical-Issues-in-Nuclear-Installation-Safehttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=10&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww-pub.iaea.org%2Fiaeameetings%2F43048%2FInternational-Conference-on-Topical-Issues-in-Nuclear-Installation-Safehttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=10&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww-pub.iaea.org%2Fiaeameetings%2F43048%2FInternational-Conference-on-Topical-Issues-in-Nuclear-Installation-Safehttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=10&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.power-gen-middleeast.com%2Findex.htmlhttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=10&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.iaea.org%2FOurWork%2FST%2FNE%2FNEFW%2FWTS-Networks%2FIDN%2Fevents.htmlhttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=10&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nei.org%2FConferences%2FInternational-Uranium-Fuel-Seminarhttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=10&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nuclearpowerinternational.comhttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=10&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nei.org%2FConferences%2FGovernmental-Affairs-Conferencehttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=10&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww-pub.iaea.org%2Fiaeameetings%2F43048%2FInternational-Conference-on-Topical-Issues-in-Nuclear-Installation-Safehttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=10&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.power-gen-middleeast.com%2Findex.htmlhttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=10&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.daegu2013.kr%2Feng%2Findex.dohttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=10&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.daegu2013.kr%2Feng%2Findex.dohttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=10&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nei.org%2FConferences%2FInternational-Uranium-Fuel-Seminarhttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=10&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.iaea.org%2FOurWork%2FST%2FNE%2FNEFW%2FWTS-Networks%2FIDN%2Fevents.htmlhttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=10&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.iaea.org%2FOurWork%2FST%2FNE%2FNEFW%2FWTS-Networks%2FIDN%2Fevents.htmlhttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=10&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.powergenasia.com%2Findex.htmlhttp://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=10&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.powergenasia.com%2Findex.html

7/27/2019 npi20130910-dl

13/28

Whole Lotta Hydrogen ...

E/Ones GCM-X/Gen-TagsTM 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

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 CORPORATIONTel 1.800.944.6160www.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.

http://digital.nuclearpowerinternational.com/npi/20130910/TrackLink.action?pageName=11&exitLink=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eone.com%2Fsolutions

7/27/2019 npi20130910-dl

14/28

12 NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL> SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2013

NUCLEUS

Bill 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 ina 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 muchthe 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 talka 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 capitalcommitment. 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 theTennessee ValleyAuthorityA Q&A with TVA Presidentand CEO Bill Johnson

7/27/2019 npi20130910-dl

15/28

13NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL> SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2013

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 reallyimportant 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 aroundthe 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 readyor 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: fueldiversity, 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 thePresident 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 severalmeetings 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 dif ferent about us is that we do

On a visit to Raccoon Mountain Pumped-Storage

Plant, Bill Johnson meets employees while touring the facilities.

7/27/2019 npi20130910-dl

16/28

14 NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL> SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2013

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 tobe 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 est imated

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 wouldsay 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 leftwithin 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, whatshappening with usage, one of the

questions is: when do you need to do it?

And when can you af ford 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 wayto 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.

7/27/2019 npi20130910-dl

17/28

15NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL> SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2013

NUCLEUS

The 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 powerunits 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 certi fications surfaced. Subsequent news has revealed that the extent

of these problems was worse than f irst 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 SovietUnion 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 presentday, 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 IndustryA leader has stumbled. Whats the future?By Bill Linton, Principal, Linton Consulting

COURTESY: SHUTTERSTOCK

7/27/2019 npi20130910-dl

18/28

16 NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL> SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2013

NUCLEUS

PWRs (Westinghouse, Framatome,

Combustion Engineering) and PHWRs

(AECL), South Korea began developing

its own light water reactors through agovernment 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) tosupply two 1000 MWe LWRs in return for

abandoning nuclear weapons development.

According to Dr. HanKwon Choi1, 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 f ive under construction, with anadditional 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 profi le 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 $40-50billion 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 utilizat ion 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 majorconstruction 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 ableto 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 CRISISThis 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. Organizationssuch 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 scrutinyfurther 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 monthsof 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. Certif ication of components is akey 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

7/27/2019 npi20130910-dl

19/28

17NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL> SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2013

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 countr ies. South Korea

and the U.S. first signed this agree-

ment in 1956 and

while a few rev i-

sions have occurred,this agreement was

scheduled to expire

in 2014. A two-year

extension was agreed

upon earlier this

year to al low 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 difficult 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 fissile materials

in spent fuels. Further, in seeking to

become a full service supplier, SouthKorea 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 select ion by UAE in

2009 to build four APR1400 units

at their Barakah Nuclear site in the

Middle East.

The schedule is to bring units 1-4online, 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

part ners. 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 aremoving forward aggressively.

In August this year, another break-

through was announced. KAER Is 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

wi ll be overseeing the project and com-

pletion is scheduled for 2016. South

Korea hopes that this project will be aprecursor 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 indust ries

such as electronics, telecommunica-

tions, automotive, and now to nuclear

power, is clear. Not only has the coun-

try seen significant growth in nuclear

power on the home front, it is nowseeing success in the acceptance of its

nuclear technology outside of Korea.

The countrys energy policy strongly

favors nuclear. Whi le 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. Whileit 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 thisreason, It is very important for South

Korea to address these current issues

quickly and regain the full support of

the public.

Whi le recent cha llenges are ser ious ,

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: Bil l Linton is Principal of L inton 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. S trate-

gic View involves ongoing monitoring of indus-

tries through confidential executive interviews,

roundtables, tours, and conference activities1Dr. 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 hasdeveloped, South Korea has been

growing a strong and highlyself-sufficient nuclear supply chain.

7/27/2019 npi20130910-dl

20/28

18 NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL> SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2013

NUCLEUS

Overcoming Verification and Validation

Challenges for Digital I&C System UpgradesBy 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.

The 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 agingequipment 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, verif ication 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 1Reactor

regulatingsystem

Pressurizerpressure

control system

Coreneutron

andthermalkinetics

Steamgeneratorthermalkinetics

Pressurizerlevel control

system Steam dumpbypass control

system

Turbine loaddemand forcing

function

Feedwater control system

Valuedynamics

Feedwaterpumpdynamics

Feedwater steam hudraulics

7/27/2019 npi20130910-dl

21/28

19NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL> SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2013

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; themodel 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. Singlepoints 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 introducedto 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 sta rtup 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 PERSPECTIVEWestinghouse 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 Processand 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 testequipment

Model environment

Controlsystem

applicationsotware

Controlsystem

applicationsotware

Plant specifc model(S/g, piping, pumps,

valves, and otherControl systems)

Controlsystemmodel

7/27/2019 npi20130910-dl

22/28

20 NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL> SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2013

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 collectedfrom 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 softwareimplemented 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. TheSWIL 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 properlywithin 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. Normalplant 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 analysisand 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) ofnewly integrated I&C systems to operate

within the plant-specific environment inwhich they are being placed has beenone of the biggest challenges associated

with digital I&C system upgrades.

7/27/2019 npi20130910-dl

23/28

21NUCLEAR POWER INTERNATIONAL> SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2013

NUCLEUS

Opportunity in NuclearBy Denver Nicks

which was just selected for use in Turkey,

is a 1,100 MW pressur ized 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. Andlast 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

While 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 f leet

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 environmenta l

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 inspect ion area, plus

classrooms. We can even do electrical component reverse engineering.

We set this complex