Some like to describe the movement towards smaller, simpler, more sophisticated nuclear energy systems as mere hype. But serious, committed, normally reserved … [Read More...] about Confidently building foundations for successful nuclear energy growth
Is nuclear reactor licensing process being improved as Congress mandated with NEIMA?
A panel of five experts and an experienced moderator addressed the progress being made in creating effective processes to license advanced and non-LWR (light water reactors) at an ANS Winter 2022 panel session titled “Licensing the Future: How the NRC is Approaching Advanced Reactors.” Four out of five of the panelists were cautiously positive and provided descriptions of actions being taken and objectives that are still aspirational.
Kati Austgen, Nuclear Energy Institute
Kati Austgen, who is leading the Nuclear Energy Institute’s efforts to coordinate the industry’s inputs for licensing process improvements, led off the presentations by laying out achieved progress and desired outcomes.
NEI’s primary goal for this effort is a process that enables the NRC to “approve safe designs as efficiently aa possible”. Objectives that will help achieve that overarching goal include the following:
- Streamline regulatory processes to achieve much more timely and efficient applications reviews and oversight of new and advanced reactors
- Resolve key generic technical or policy topics well before new and advanced reactor applications are submitted for NRC review
- Revise or establish new regulations as quickly as possible to achieve a much more modern and efficient regulatory framework
Austgen emphasized the important concept that environmental reviews, while important, must not be a barrier to the deployment of significant sources of carbon free power and heat. Her talk ended with a summary of the industry’s goals for Part 53
- Regulatory framework that is useful and thus used
- Risk informed
- Technology inclusive
- Performance based
- Safety without unnecessary regulatory burden
- Efficient and timely licensing approvals
- Greater licensee flexibility
- Long term regulatory stability (Aside:
Mo Shams, Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Mo Shams, director of Advanced Reactor Licensing at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, spoke after Austgen. It was hard to disagree with his early comment even if it was meant to be in jest. “Earlier Steve [the panel moderator] asked ‘Why do we need licenses?’ I don’t know, but it gives me a job, so let’s go with that.”
He included some important words in his talk. He said that he and his team are as excited about the opportunities provided by advanced nuclear energy as anyone and said that his goal was to perform his job “in an enabling way” while remaining cognizant that he is not supposed to be an advocate. The role of his organization is to make safe use of nuclear technology possible. They want to give the public additional options and want to do their job in a way that returns value to the public.
He offered the following statement: “Our Vision: Creating new paradigms to make SAFE. use of nuclear technology possible.”
He provided some statistical details about the number of applicants in pre-application review (15), in license review (1) and who have the potential to receive operating licenses by 2027 (6+).
He briefly described the NRC’s interagency relationships and its international cooperation efforts. He talked about the progress being made, especially with the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) to harmonize regulations and reviews. He concluded with a discussion about actions underway to strengthen the agency by focusing on the people that make it work. Their acronym is ADAPT
- Augment – add staff and managers at optimal staff/supervisor ratio
- Develop – train next generation of leaders and experts
- Analytics – drive efficiency and enable scalability
- Plan – future scenarios with bias towards agility
- Team – train people to work collaboratively and synergistically
Ted Nordhaus, The Breakthrough Institute
Ted Nordhaus, who spoke immediately after Mo Shams, described himself as “as a skunk at a garden party” and shared some sharply critical observations. Nordhaus, founder of the Breakthrough Institute, was introduced to the audience as the leader of an environmental NGO with the ability to provide an independent voice in wide ranging discussions about nuclear energy without having the taint of being dependent on income from the industry.
Nordhaus said that the Breakthrough Institute takes no donations from the nuclear industry and described its positions on nuclear energy as “advocating for nuclear in the public interest as a critical energy and environmental technology.”
Not only is Breakthrough able to provide an independent voice in public discussions about nuclear energy, but its representatives are also more free to level direct complaints about the NRC compared to people associated with companies that are regulated by the NRC or who plan to be regulated by the NRC. It’s well understood within the industry that it’s unproductive to upset or anger a regulator that can control your destiny.
Aside: I can testify that one can get into hot water with corporate leaders by making public comments that might offend regulators, even if the statements are true. End Aside.
Following the conventional advice to public speakers, Nordhaus began his talk with a humorous remark. Ted apologized to the NRC’s Mo Shams for disrupting his presentation by dropping his phone. “I’m sorry about my phone, I was getting it out so I could take a picture of the Part 53 Transformative [advanced reactor license] slide with its windmill in the background.” The audience and the panelists chuckled.
Nordhaus then noted that the NRC staff had recently released a Part 53 draft for public comments. He described how the document is 1200 pages long, contains many prescriptive requirements that were cut and pasted from existing regulations, moves ALARA (As Low As Reasonably Achievable) directly into the regulation from its current status as the subject of Regulatory Guide 8.10, and adds qualitative health objectives that are firmly rooted in the linear, no-threshold dose model for radiation health effects.
A survey of advanced reactor developers showed that the overwhelming majority of them do not intend to use Part 53, opting instead for either Part 50 or Part 52.
Aside: Though Nordhaus did not mention it, there were numerous critical comments submitted after the draft Part 53 was released. According to Mo Shams’s presentation, the staff had been operating for some time under the belief that they could produce a final rule by 2024, but they have pushed their stretch goal to 2025 as a result of the need to resolve the large number of comments. By the NEIMA law, the agency still has a 2027 deadline. End Aside.
From his point of view, establishing a burdensome licensing process that is not optimized for efficiently reviewing reactor safety results in “down selecting not on best designs or best business plans.” Instead it chooses winners that have the “most patient investors with the deepest pockets or the greatest talent for rent seeking and getting various sorts of federal or government support.”
Nordhaus concluded his remarks by explaining why he and his organization are so passionate about creating an effective licensing process that is focused on enabling regulators that allow radioactive material to be used to protect public health and safety, protect the environment and contribute to the common defense and security of the United States.
Every reactor that we don’t build, license or commercialize increases public health burdens associated with the electrical system. Further results in higher CO2 emissions intensity. It adds to climate risks and also increases economic and geopolitical risks by failing to commercialize economically viable advanced reactors. The result of that is increasing US and global vulnerability to price volatility associated with coal, oil and gas.
Ted Nordhaus, the Breakthrough Institute, ANS Winter Nov 15, 2022
Following Nordhaus’s sobering commentary, Drew Peebles, Sr. Licensing Manager, Kairos Power, and Travis A. Chapman, Manager, U.S Licensing — X-energy, each described their company’s licensing approach and their interactions with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Drew Peebles, Kairos Power
Kairos Power is well into the process of obtaining a construction permit – the first step of a Part 50 license application – to build its Hermes 35 MWth non-power reactor at a site near the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. When Kairos submitted its CPA (construction permit application) for Hermes in Sep 2021, it was the first non-LWR reactor CPA ever submitted to the NRC. Under the current schedule and the actual progress made to this point, the CP should be issued within 21 months after the application was submitted.
Aside: A CPA was reviewed and issued for the Ft. St. Vrain high temperature gas reactor in 1967, but that was approved by the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) about 7 years before the NRC was created. End Aside.
Peebles emphasized that the progress that his company is making with their application review is the result of careful preparation that included an extensive period of pre-application engagement with the NRC. That engagement included submitting a detailed product and licensing roadmap so the NRC could plan the necessary review resources, and exhaustive reviews of license requirements and design criteria that would be applied to the Hermes reactor. Kairos submitted topical reports for those two key areas as well as additional topical reports for licensing areas like methodology for a mechanistic source term determination.
Kairos has an interactive design and manufacturing process where they design, build, test and revise components and systems. Their representatives often point to Space-X as the inspiration for their design philosophy. They are applying that same thought process to their licensing interactions with the NRC.
Kairos is one of the advanced reactor developers that has no current plans to use the new Part 53 process. They have found a way to their desired goal through the existing process and will evaluated the option of shifting to Part 53 after it has been issued and has “some run time.”
Travis Chapman, X-Energy
X-Energy’s Xe-100 four pack power station design was one of the two major power plant recipients of the Advanced Reactor Demonstration Project. Under that program, X-Energy is tasked to begin operating its facility by the end of 2027, which is recognized throughout the nuclear community as a stretch goal that will need everything to go right the first time.
Chapman started off his presentation with a description of the Xe-100 and its technological pedigree. He pointed to the extensive testing and fuel qualification for “uranium oxycarbide, Triso-coated particle fuel” done by the Department of Energy’s Advanced Gas Reactor (AGR) Fuel Development Program.
Chapman provided a personal testimony about the NRC’s capability to understand and license high temperature gas reactors that use Triso coated fuel. He was on the NRC staff 15 years ago during preparations to review the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) and attended presentations from experts from General Atomics and PBMR. He has been involved with the industry’s continuing efforts to improve and modernize the advanced nuclear regulatory process since 2015. [You read that date correctly. Neutrons are the only thing that moves fast in the nuclear world.]
The technological maturity of the Xe-100 informed the decisions made for the licensing path chosen. Like the Hermes project, the Xe-100 licensing effort will use the two step Part 50 process.
The Xe-100 designers are confident that their plants are protected from damage that would release significant quantities of radioactive material by design based on physics, materials and dimensions. Their licensing challenge is to “prove the safety case assertions.” Chapman emphasized the word “assertions” in his presentation; until the safety case is proved and accepted, the NRC considers that its components are just applicant assertions.
Chapman’s then shared some thoughts and guidance for other potential applicants based on his interactions with regulators.
- Regulatory certainty is correlated to the level of detail in submissions
- Don’t be complacent based on positive regulatory feedback on high-level submissions
- Understand the benefits and challenges of “non-negative” forms of feedback
After watching this session, I remain cautiously hopeful that the NRC licensing progress is not going to be on the critical path for the early demonstration projects. Especially under Part 50, it is possible to effectively license a construction project that can be underway while obtaining an operating license.
With careful preparation, a licensee can produce documentation, probably in the form of a topical report, that lays out the requirements and design criteria that apply to its particular form of non-LWR. A good place for new developers to start is a review of the Kairos topical reports. You can find links to those documents and the NRC’s feedback on those reports on the Kairos page of the NRC’s Pre-Application Activities for Advanced Reactors.
The NRC position is that they are well on their way to improving advanced reactor licensing by their efforts to create a new Part 53, but it’s a good idea to approach this topic with the attitude of the Show Me state.
Confidently building foundations for successful nuclear energy growth
Some like to describe the movement towards smaller, simpler, more sophisticated nuclear energy systems as mere hype. But serious, committed, normally reserved scientists, engineers and investors are becoming more and more convinced that real progress is underway based on solid learning from prior experience.
Before the end of this decade, there will be a number of demonstration plants operating in the US and Canada that will open the floodgates to a commercial building program that is likely to see 20 or more nuclear plants under construction at any given time, with 10 or more being completed every year.
Those numbers might be underestimated but they are more likely to be reasonable estimates of the first steps in an accelerating boom with larger numbers being achieved after more practice and supply chain strengthening.
There is a lot of work to be done, but ANS leaders and members have accepted the challenge.
The above statements and predictions are my quick summary impressions from watching the opening plenary and several executive sessions from the 2022 American Nuclear Society’s (ANS) Winter Meeting yesterday. That meeting, underway in Phoenix, AZ through Thursday, Nov 17, is the latest in a long series of ANS meetings stretching back to 1954, when the premier nuclear technical society was founded.
That was a year of almost frantic activity after President Eisenhower announced his “Atoms for Peace” program to the United Nations during a famous speech in December 1954. Snippets from that speech were used during the meeting to help inspire the audience and to remind them of the promise of the technology on which they have chosen to focus their professional careers.
https://youtube.com/clip/Ugkxax6T6ef7OdZSg62gI5QxR8dFjuZ78lHA
It’s hard not to feel a few goosebumps hearing the President say the following:
Experts would be mobilized to apply atomic energy to the needs of agriculture, medicine and other peaceful activities. A special purpose would be to provide abundant electrical energy in the power-starved areas of the world.
Thus the contributing powers would be dedicating some of their strength to serve the needs rather than the fears of mankind.
From Atoms for Peace Dec 8, 1953 (21:21-21:26)
A panel discussion, moderated by John Longenecker of Longenecker and Associates, featured a range of responsible representatives from five important contributing sectors of the enterprise active in meeting the – as yet unfulfilled – promise inherent in atomic energy. It included Bradley Crowell, the newest NRC Commissioner; Steven D. Capps, Senior VP from Duke Energy; Karen File, President and CEO of Urenco; Jess Gehin, Associate Lab Director at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) and Pierre Paul Oneid, Senior Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer (CNO) Holtec International.
The group thus included a regulator, a utility customer, a uranium enrichment company, a national laboratory and a company that builds waste storage systems, decommissions closed nuclear units, has a SMR design whose initial unit will likely be built on the site of a decommissioned nuclear power plant and has a consolidated interim storage facility that is within about 2 years of being able to receive its first shipment of used fuel.
Here are a few bullets summarizing a 90 minute session that included short presentations from each panel member along with an extensive question and answer period.
- Bradley Crowell is a strong supporter of nuclear energy and believes in its potential to provide a growing portion of the world’s clean energy. He is “not anti-nuclear and did not graduate from Cornell.”
- Commissioner Crowell believes that a credible, publicly accepted nuclear waste solution must be implemented promptly or there is a risk that nuclear energy will continue to fall well short of meeting its promise.
- Duke Energy has been quietly including nuclear energy in its Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) for several years under the alias of ZELFR – Zero Emissions Load Following Resources
- After the October 2021 enactment of legislation in North Carolina that requires a 70% reduction in emissions from 2005 levels by 2030 and 100% by 2050, Duke began openly including new nuclear in its IRP.
- Under all of the scenarios in that IRP, all 11 existing plants are retained and between 7,500 and 8,000 MWe of new capacity in the form of small modular reactors (SMR) and advanced reactors must be built.
- Steve Capps explained that the public and the politicians in Duke’s service territory, which includes South Carolina, have too many scars from the V.C. Summer debacle to entertain any consideration of a new large nuclear plant construction project.
- Site evaluations are underway, with a special emphasis on sites that currently host retired or soon-to-be-retired coal or oil plants.
- Urenco has the experience, the work force and the technology to supply uranium enriched to 20% – commonly referred to as HALEU (High Assay Low Enriched Uranium)
- It has a project that is well underway to expand its product line to include a product called LEU+ – uranium enriched to between 5% and 10% U-235. That project can be done with a modification to URENCO’s current license and an investment of between $20-$30 M.
- It has performed supporting research and estimation, is conducting detailed engineering and will submit a license application in the next couple of years to build an additional facility on its current site to produce HALEU. That project will cost between $250-$400 M and will be delivering product in 6-7 years. Centrifuges have already been ordered.
- The INL has substantial research, development and demonstration projects that are supporting most of the active advanced nuclear projects. It has a proud history of hosting 52 demonstration and research reactors, but the last initial criticality of a new reactor at INL happened 50 years ago.
- Dr. Gehin showed a slide with a development timeline that showed its first new reactor, the MARVEL, will begin operating in 2024. By the end of this decade, at least a half a dozen new reactors should achieve their initial criticalities at INL.
- Dr. Pierre Paul Oneid gave an impassioned talk about the numerous contributions that Holtec is making to help the nuclear sector begin making large strides towards achieving President Eisenhower’s well articulated vision for atomic energy.
- Starting with a phone call from representatives of Lea and Eddy county New Mexico in 2015, Holtec has designed a Consolidated Interim Spent Fuel storage site.
- The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the site has been issued. The Safety Evaluation Report is expected in the first few months of 2023. The current plan is to begin accepting shipments of used fuel in 2024.
- Holtec has been successfully decommissioning retired nuclear plants and is preparing selected sites to host “a small modular reactor.” It’s not clear if the statements are purposely understated or if the company does not want to tip its hand too early, but it’s unlikely that the company plans to build only one SMR on a site. It’s more likely that each site would host enough SMRs to use the existing transmission capacity.
Later in the day, there were two executive sessions, one focusing how Kairos is using an iterative engineering and construction process to build up its capability of producing commercially viable products and one that described how the National Reactor Innovation Center (NRIC) is helping advanced reactor developers bridge the gap between research and development and commercially viable products.
One part of NRIC’s offered capability is a supporting infrastructure for nuclear power system demonstrations – its is difficult to call a project ready for commercial sales until after it has been adequately tested in a complete configuration. Another part of NRIC’s capability is helping to devise and test new construction techniques that are applicable to a wide range of nuclear designs. Ingredients like vertical boring, Steel Bricks™, and steel concrete composites are commercially available and proven in other industries, but the NRC has to be convinced that they can be used to provide reasonable assurance of adequate protection in a nuclear plant construction context.
The Kairos presentation was so interesting and so detailed that I am hoping to make it a focus for another post and/or an Atomic Show podcast. Per Peterson and Ed Blankford of Kairos have been welcomed guests for past interviews. Per provided a Kairos update in January 2021.
Atomic Show #301 – Matt Crozat, Executive Director for Strategy and Policy Development, NEI
The nuclear energy policy landscape in the US has changed significantly during the past 5 years. Once seen as an issue with enormous differences between the political parties, it has become one of the few topics on which both parties can have a civil discussion and agree on many key provisions in supportive legislation. Matt […]
Atomic Show #300 – Dr. Lindsay Krall, “Nuclear Waste from Small Modular Reactors”
Dr. Lindsay Krall is a geochemist currently working on projects characterizing the behavior of radioactive isotopes that will eventually be stored in a deep geologic repository being designed in Sweden for construction within the next decade. During a three year post doctoral period she worked under a MacArthur Foundation grant program to study the projected […]
Ontario leads the way to clean energy credit registry
On September 26, 2022, Microsoft Canada and Ontario Power Generation (OPG) announced an important agreement for clean energy credits (CECs). The most significant part of the deal was the fact that OPG would supply the credits from its nuclear and hydro-electric plants. Microsoft will procure the credits on an hour by hour basis to match […]
Atomic Show #299 – Dr. Chris Keefer, C4NE
Dr. Chris Keefer is one of the busiest and most successful nuclear energy advocates working today. He is a Canadian emergency room doctor, the founder of Doctors for Nuclear Energy, the founder and host of the Decouple podcast, the founder of Decouple Media, and the founder and President of Canadians for Nuclear Energy (C4NE). And […]
Oliver Stone’s “Nuclear” – An optimistic look at a powerful tool for addressing climate change and energy security
By early 2019, Oliver Stone, a successful filmmaker who has created a long list of popular works of art, had become increasingly concerned and even depressed about what he had learned about the risk climate change posed to humanity. He’d watched Al Gore’s “Inconvenient Truth” and paid attention to dire warnings coming from credible scientific […]
How Hot is Cold Fusion?
The 24th International Conference on Cold Fusion (ICCF24) was held at the lovely and spacious Computer History Museum in Mountain View, CA over four days in late July. As a venture investor looking at evaluating and investing in a wide range of advanced nuclear ventures, I was invited to participate and/or sponsor the event. While […]
Why are smaller reactors attracting so much interest?
Small modular reactors (SMRs) are gaining increased attention as a major opportunity in clean power production. They are a welcome tool in the necessary transition from an energy system dominated by hydrocarbon combustion to one that produces more power for more people with dramatically reduced greenhouse gas emissions. As a partner in Nucleation Capital, a […]
Atomic Show #298 – Marcus Seidl – Researching small modular reactors near Hamburg, Germany
Marcus Seidl is a German nuclear professional who received his PhD in nuclear physics in 2002, a year after his home country decided that it would exit nuclear energy in favor of investing in a large roll out of renewable energy sources. He has worked for German utility companies, for a vendor erecting a state-of-the-art […]
Atomic Show #297 – Krusty – The Kilopower reactor that worked
Patrick McClure and David Poston successfully developed, obtained funding, constructed and operated a new atomic fission power source that produced useful quantities of electricity during the period from 2014-2018. That puts them into a rarified, perhaps unique position. Few US-based technologists have been through that process in the past 40 years. Aside: Without some way […]
Nuclear energy growth prospects and secure uranium supplies
The 121 Mining Investment event held in Las Vegas on March 30 and 31 included a panel discussion with leaders from three uranium mining companies, each of which has an asset base of potentially lucrative mining prospects mostly located in North America. The fourth member of the panel was a managing partner at Nucleation Capital, […]
