Nuclear Plant Journal - SO 2014 by Nuclear Plant Journal

Fukushima Update page 24

Challenges to Plants page 28

Switching to Digital page 30

Plant Maintenance & SMRs

Benefits of Research page 32

Nuclear Plant Journal

September-October, 2014 Volume 32 No. 5

River Bend, USA ISSN: 0892-2055

SO14.indd 1

10/7/2014 5:03:33 PM

SO14.indd 2

9/30/2014 2:13:16 PM

YOU NEED A COMPANY WITH PROVEN NUCLEAR EXPERIENCE WITH MORE THAN 10,000 NUCLEAR CONTROL LOOPS IN OPERATION OF OUR NRC-APPROVED HFC-6000 PLATFORM

YOU NEED A SYSTEM APPROVED AROUND THE WORLD FROM TOTAL PLANT CONTROLS TO EDG CONTROLS YOU CAN BE CONFIDENT THAT HF CONTROLS CAN DELIVER COST-EFFECTIVE SYSTEMS

YOU NEED HFC-6000 CALL US TO SEE HOW WE CAN BE YOUR PARTNER IN YOUR JOURNEY OF I&C EXCELLENCE

HF CONTROLS A

1-866-501-9954 SO14.indd 3

COMPANY

WWW.HFCONTROLS.COM

SCAN QR CODE WITH YOUR SMARTPHONE FOR MORE INFO

9/30/2014 2:13:30 PM

got radiation? Imaging in radiation environments just got easier with our MegaRAD line of radiation hardened cameras. With superior capabilities for operating in radiation environments, they provide excellent image quality well beyond dose limitations of conventional cameras. MegaRAD cameras provide excellent signal-to-noise and sensitivity with wide spectral response, making the MegaRAD series of cameras well suited for radiation hardened imaging applications.

see what you’ve been missing • Learn more at thermoscientific.com/cidtec MegaRAD3 cameras produce color or monochrome video up to 3 x 106 rads total dose

MegaRAD1 cameras produce monochrome video up to 1 x 106 rads total dose

SO14.indd 4

KiloRAD PTZ radiation resistant camera with integrated Pan/Tilt/Zoom

9/30/2014 2:13:35 PM

Nuclear Plant Journal 

Plant Maintenance & SMRs Issue

September-October 2014, Volume 32 No. 5 32nd Year of Publication Nuclear Plant Journal is published by EQES, Inc. six times a year in January-February, March-April, MayJune, July-August, September-October, and November-December (the Annual Directory). The subscription rate for non-qualified readers in the United States is $210.00 for six issues per year. The additional air mail cost for non-U.S. readers is $30.00. Payment may be made by American Express, Master Card, VISA or check and should accompany the order. Checks may be made payable to "EQES, Inc." Checks not drawn on a United States bank should include an additional $45.00 service fee. All inquiries should be addressed to Nuclear Plant Journal, 1400 Opus Place, Suite 904, Downers Grove, IL 60515 U.S.A; Phone: (630) 858-6161, ext. 103; Fax: (630) 852-8787, email: NPJ@goinfo.com. 31 years of Journal issues are available online through the Journal website www. NuclearPlantJournal.com (search box on the right-top) for a nominal fee of $25 per issue. Contact: Anu Agnihotri, email: anu@goinfo.com

Articles & Reports SMR Update

Fukushima Update By Kenji Tateiwa, Tokyo Electric Power Company

Overcoming Challenges to Operating Reactors By J. Scott Peterson, Nuclear Energy Institute

Switching to Digital By Craig Irish, AZZ Nuclear | NLI

Benefits of Research By Neil Wilmshurst, Electric Power Research Institute

Commercial Grade Dedication By Marc Tannenbaum, Electric Power Research Institute

Sustaining Quality of Life By John Mahoney, High Expectations International

Sodium Cooled Fast Reactor By Yoon Il Chang, Argonne National Laboratory

Industry Innovations 65 Flood Evaluations by Spring 2015 By Patrick T. Brunette, ENERCON

Inspection of Reactor Internals By Janean Sealey, Dominion Surry Power Station

BMI Visual Examination By Edison Fernandez, Arizona Public Service

Plant Profile

ISSN: 0892-2055

Back2Basics Behaviors By Eric Olson, Entergy Nuclear

Nuclear Plant Journal is a registered trademark of EQES, Inc. Printed in the USA.

Journal Services

Departments

List of Advertisers

Editorial Calendar

Cost-free Digital

Advertiser Web Directory

New Documents

Advertising Benefits

Meeting & Training Calendar

2015 Directory

Research & Development

On The Cover

New Energy News

Staff

Utility, Industry & Corporation

Senior Publisher and Editor Newal K. Agnihotri, P.E.

New Products, Services & Contracts

Publisher and Sales Manager Anu Agnihotri Assistant Editor and Marketing Manager Michelle Gaylord Administrative Assistant QingQing Zhu

*Current Circulation: Total: 12,273 Utilities: 2,904 *All circulation information is subject to BPA Worldwide Business audit.

Entergy’s River Bend Station developed a decision-making procedure based on consequence and probability. See page 52 for a profile. Mailing Identification Statement Nuclear Plant Journal (ISSN 0892-2055) is published bimonthly; January-February, MarchApril, May-June, July-August, September-October, and November-December by EQES, Inc., 1400 Opus Place, Suite 904, Downers Grove, IL 60515 U.S.A. The printed version of the Journal is available cost-free to qualified readers in the United States and Canada. The digital version is available cost-free to qualified readers worldwide. The subscription rate for non-qualified readers is $210.00 per year. The cost for non-qualified, non-U.S. readers is $240.00. Periodicals (permit number 000-739) postage paid at the Downers Grove, IL 60515 and additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Nuclear Plant Journal (EQES, Inc.), 1400 Opus Place, Suite 904, Downers Grove, IL 60515, U.S.A.

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

SO14.indd 5

NuclearPlantJournal.com

9/30/2014 2:13:45 PM

List of Advertisers & NPJ Rapid Response Page Advertiser Contact

Fax/Email

23 9th International NPIC & HMIT Conference Dr. H.M. Hashemian

hash@ams-corp.com

2 AREVA Inc. Donna Gaddy-Bowen

(434) 832-3840

56 AZZ | NLI Greg Keller

gregkeller@azz.com

26 Birns Eric Birns

(805) 487-0427

27 CB&I Keith Mackert

kmackert@cbi.com

33 E. H. Wachs Co. Sherry Hedenberg

(847) 520-1147

11 ENERCON Michael Manski

(724) 733-4630

21 Flowserve Jim Cook 7 GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy Julia Longfellow

jcook@flowserve.com julia.longfellow@ge.com

3 HF Controls John Stevens

(469) 568-6589

45 HukariAscendent Matthew Hadacek

(303) 277-1458

8-9 HydroAire Service, Inc. Faisal Salman

fsalman@hydro-aire.com

19 Konecranes Nuclear Equipment & Services, LLC Cassandra Dale

(262) 364-5701

15 OTEK Corporation Otto Fest

sales@otekcorp.com

13 SGS Herguth Laboratories, Inc. J. Michael Herguth

(707) 554-0109

41 Tecnatom, s.a. Manuel Fernandez

34 91 6598649

4 Thermo Scientific- CIDTEC Tony Chapman

(315) 451-9421

55 Westinghouse Electric Company LLC Jackie Smith

(412) 374-3244

37 World Nuclear Exhibition Laurence Gaborieau

visitors.wne@reedexpo.fr

Advertisers’ fax numbers may be used with the form shown below. Advertisers’ web sites are listed in the Web Directory Listings on page 47.

Nuclear Plant Journal Rapid Response Fax Form

September-October 2014

To:__________________________ Company:___________________ Fax:____________________ From:________________________ Company:___________________ Fax:____________________ Address:_____________________ City:________________________ State:______ Zip:__________ Phone:_______________________ E-mail:______________________ I am interested in obtaining information on:___________________________________________________ Comments: ______________________________________________________________________________ 6

SO14.indd 6

NuclearPlantJournal.com

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 2:14:27 PM

The intelligent way to extend plant life cycle. EntelliGuard™ TU trip units bring smart design and smarter decisions to nuclear plant applications. For superior circuit protection without compromising on selectivity, EntelliGuard TU trip units are the intelligent solution for nuclear facilities. Designed for low-voltage circuit breakers, EntelliGuard’s advanced algorithms provide selectivity and flexible time current curves to create the right curve shape to meet each system’s specific needs. Plus, EntelliGuard programmable trip units retrofit into most legacy units for easy installation.

ge.com/nuclear

For detailed information and introductory pricing, call 1-910-819-1766

79610_entelliguard_ad_update.indd 1 SO14.indd 7

9/11/14 4:36 PM PM 9/30/2014 2:14:36

Weâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;re On It

Emergency response is what we do. Engineering expertise is how we do it. Hydro Provides Emergency Response Pump Services So You Can Be Back Online In No Time.

We understand that when an emergency occurs, you need to get your process or your plant back up as quickly as possible. Hydro is there with you on the job 24 hours a day, 7 days a week supporting you with both on site field service and emergency response capabilities in the shop. ITT Goulds Pumps and HydroAire have joined forcesâ&#x20AC;&#x201C;creating a powerhouse for pump reliability. HydroAire is now the exclusive licensee for manufacturing ITT Goulds pumps and replacement parts, providing the nuclear power industry with superior ASME code and safety related pumps, parts and aftermarket services.

HydroAire Inc., A Hydro Company l Chicago, IL 800.223.7867 l www.hydroinc.com

SO14.indd 8

9/30/2014 2:14:51 PM

Our Comprehensive Pump Services Pump Repairs l 24/7 Emergency Services l OEM Goulds Pumps, Parts & Accessories Field Service Support for Installation & Start-up l Nuclear Certified Performance Testing Pump System Reliability l Engineering Services l Customer Training

Authorized Distributor (Nuclear)

To learn more about Hydroâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s comprehensive services, please contact us at 800-223-7867 or visit us at hydroinc.com For information on Goulds products, parts or services contact us at GouldsProducts@hydro-aire.com

HydroAire, Inc.

A Hydro Company

SO14.indd 9

9/30/2014 2:15:07 PM

New Energy

well underway and this unit is scheduled to enter commercial operation in 2018. Contact: website: www.enec.gov.ae

Rostov NPP

Barakah 3

The Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation (ENEC) has achieved yet another milestone in the development and construction of the UAE’s first nuclear energy plant by pouring the safety concrete for the Reactor Containment Building for Barakah Unit 3. This milestone follows the receipt of the Construction License from the Federal Authority of Nuclear Regulation (FANR). More than 1,954 cubic-yards of concrete were poured during a Concrete Pouring ceremony attended by senior ENEC and KEPCO officials. This is the first safety concrete to be poured at Unit 3 and is the first stage in building the third reactor for the UAE’s nuclear program. Preparation projects have been carried out over a 12-month period to arrive at the stage where the concrete could be poured. This extensive preparation has included excavation works, concrete to provide a base, waterproofing and reinforcing steel installation. The safety concrete is the placement of the safety related concrete that forms part of the lower basement structure of the reactor containment building. Concrete placements will be a regular and ongoing process after the first placement is completed. Construction will now continue by concrete being completed in height increasing stages until the Reactor Containment Building wall will be installed. Construction of the reactor containment building will be completed over the next three years and Unit 3 is on track to enter commercial operations by 2019. Following an 18 month rigorous review by the UAE Federal Authority for Nuclear Regulation (FANR) and a team of international nuclear energy experts, the regulator granted ENEC approval last week to commence construction of units 3 and 4. Unit 1 is already more than 57% complete and due to connect to the grid in 2017. Construction of Unit 2 is also 10

SO14.indd 10

Izhorskiye Zavody, part of OMZ Group, successfully completed hydrostatic testing of VVER-1000 reactor vessel produced for the fourth power unit of Rostov Nuclear Power Plant in Russia. Hydrostatic test results were reviewed by a commission consisting of representatives of NIAEP (main contractor for plant construction project), Rostov NPP, OKB Gidropress, FSUE VO Safety and Izhorskiye Zavody specialists. In compliance with Programme and Methodology for Hydrostatic Testing the procedure was carried out on a special stand. Internal vessel pressure was set at a maximum of 24.5 MPa during the test. Hydrostatic tests verified the durability of main metal components and seams of the reactor vessel. Izhosrkiye Zavody specialists are currently preparing for control assembly of the reactor vessel and its internal components, which is one of the last stages of production process before the reactor is delivered to the customer. In 2013 Izhorskiye Zavody delivered equipment for third power unit to Rostov NPP. Izhorskiye Zavody is currently completing production of reactor equipment for the power unit 4, including reactor vessel with internal components and upper unit lid, as well as supporting and retaining rings and accumulators. Contact: telephone: (812) 322-88, email: pr@omzglobal.com.

Cernavoda 3 and 4

Societatea Nationala Nuclearelectrica S.A. (“SNN”), Romania, announces the completion of the first phase of the investors selection procedure in view of the continuation of the Project Cernavoda NPP Units 3 and 4 (“The Project”), procedure provided in the Strategy for the continuation of the Project, approved by the General Meeting of Shareholders on August 22, 2014. As per the instructions regarding the investors qualification process, up to September 8th, 2014, 16:00 hours, the deadline of the first phase, SNN received the Qualification Documentation submitted by China General Nuclear Power Corporation. NuclearPlantJournal.com

Following the analysis performed by the Negotiation Commission, the Board of Directors of SNN and the Interministerial Commission, the company China General Nuclear Power Corporation was declared a Qualified Investor. Contact: website: www.nuclearelectrica. ro

Green River

Westinghouse Electric Company and Blue Castle Holdings recently announced the signing of a memorandum of understanding to pursue the development of a two-unit AP1000® nuclear power plant at the Green River site in Utah. Under the agreement, the companies will work together to develop a scope of activities for enabling the Blue Castle Project under a definitive agreement, including marketing, nuclear safety licensing, permitting, design, engineering, procurement, construction, installation, commissioning, startup, testing, nuclear fuel, refueling, operation and maintenance of the two-unit plant. “This agreement continues the trend in the selection of AP1000 plant technology for new nuclear energy projects around the world,” said Jeff Benjamin, Westinghouse senior vice president, Nuclear Power Plants. “The safety and constructability of our advanced passive design, combined with the preparation and early siting work completed by Blue Castle, give customers assurance of licensability and project delivery that is unmatched by other alternatives.” “The Blue Castle Project is now moving to the next phase of its development by pursuing Westinghouse’s AP1000 reactor technology for the Green River site. The executed MOU continues to implement the Blue Castle stepwise approach to risk reduction and favorable economics for utilities and ratepayers,” said Aaron Tilton, Blue Castle CEO. “The Blue Castle Project success is rooted in the support we have received from the public, state and local governments to deploy clean, predictable, long-term nuclear electricity generation.” More than 2,500 jobs are expected to be created for construction of the two units and about 1,000 permanent, full-time employees will work at the

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 2:15:15 PM

plant during its 60-year operating life. The low-cost baseload power generated by the Blue Castle Project will support regional economic growth well beyond the immediate construction and operation jobs, while also providing the environmental benefit of zero carbon emissions. Contact: telephone: (412) 374-6379, email: westinghousepublicrelations@ westinghouse.com.

Watts Bar 2

conduct pre-project, design, construction, commissioning and operation of the new 800 MWe Candu 6 unit. Meanwhile, CNNC will provide technical support, services, equipment and instrumentation under a $2 billion long-term financing arrangement. In addition, China will also supply materials needed by Argentina to locally produce components for the unit. CNNC operates two Candu 6 units at its Qinshan plant in China’s Zhejiang province, which will be the reference plant for the new Atucha unit.

The Tennessee Valley Authority’s Watts Bar Nuclear Plant’s Unit 2 reactor is more than 90 percent complete and moving through key testing to become the nation’s first new nuclear generation of the 21st century. In the eighth quarterly report since TVA revised its Estimate to complete the project, TVA said recently that Watts Bar Unit 2 continues to meet safety and quality targets and remains on schedule and within budget to become the first U.S. reactor to generate “new” power in nearly two decades, and the first since Watts Bar Unit 1 in 1996. Watts Bar Unit 2 is projected to begin commercial operation between September 2015 and June 2016, with a most likely date by December 2015. The project has a projected completion cost between $4 billion and $4.5 billion, with a most likely target of $4.2 billion. Testing of individual and combined plant systems is under way, TVA said in the latest quarterly update, covering February to April 2014. The first major system test, called Open Vessel Testing (OVT), began ahead of schedule during the period and was completed earlier in the summer 2014. OVT involves pumping water into the reactor vessel through systems used when shutting down the reactor and in support of nuclear operations. Contact: telephone: (865) 632-6000.

Atucha 3

The commercial framework contract for the construction of a third reactor at the Atucha plant in Argentina has been signed between Nucleoeléctrica Argentina and China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC). Through the contract, the parties agree that Nucleoeléctrica, as the owner and architect engineer of the project, will Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

SO14.indd 11

The framework contract also calls for the creation of five commissions - including one on funding - that will meet in Buenos Aires to develop around 12 specific contracts related to the new reactor. These should be signed during the first few months of next year. The signing of the framework contract for Atucha 3 follows that of a high-level agreement towards the unit’s construction. That accord was signed in mid-July as part of a meeting in Buenos (Continued on page 39)

360º SUPPORT TWENTY-FOUR/SEVEN WE OFFER YOU A COMPLETE RANGE OF SERVICES. AROUND THE CLOCK. AND AROUND THE WORLD.

There are many professions that demand excellence during the workweek. That won’t suffice for our industry. With engineering services, there are no days off. And all the days have 24 hours. That’s why we have 28 strategically located offices and over 1500 employees available to assist our clients 24/7 on a wide range of technical issues. This is just one example of our culture at ENERCON, and it is best summarized by our credo: Excellence – Every Project. Every Day. With long term contracts in place to support a variety of engineering challenges for the power industry, we have become known as the “go to company” for resources and technical expertise. ENERCON is ranked as one of the largest providers of engineering design services in the US. With over 1500 experienced professionals, many with advanced degrees and significant operating plant experience, the company is ready to support clients with routine and complex engineering needs. Give us a call, visit our new website or email us directly.

info@enercon.com

NuclearPlantJournal.com

enercon.com

9/30/2014 2:15:22 PM

Utility, Industry & Corporation Utility Emergency Sirens

Exelon Generation completed the installation of a state-of-the-art siren system around Clinton Power Station. This effort is part of a multi-year, $2 million investment to upgrade sirens at Exelon’s six Illinois nuclear facilities. Clinton Station has 41 Exelonowned sirens within a 10-mile radius of the facility. Half were upgraded in a prior improvement project completed in 2008. The remaining 21 sirens were upgraded recently. All of these sirens are newer models that have a battery backup feature as well as enhanced remote monitoring capabilities. The sirens around Exelon’s Illinois facilities are in place to alert residents in the unlikely event of a station emergency. Exelon also allows counties surrounding the stations to use them to alert residents for weather-related events or other emergencies. Since 2010, counties around Exelon’s facilities have activated sirens 189 times for severe weather events. The sirens are a signal to tune to the local Emergency Alert System channels. Contact: Brett Nauman, telephone: (217) 937-4205.

Industry Prototype Reactor

The U.S. Department of Energy’s Argonne National Laboratory has teamed up with the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI) to develop the Prototype Generation-IV Sodium-cooled Fast Reactor (PGSFR). KAERI’s Sodium-cooled Fast Reactor Development Agency has provided $6.78 million funding to date for Argonne’s contributions through a Work-for-Others contract. Jong Kyung Kim, President of KAERI, visited Argonne to execute the memorandum of understanding between 12

SO14.indd 12

KAERI and Argonne for a broad field of technical cooperation on nuclear science and technology, including the PGSFR project. “The technical cooperation between KAERI and Argonne plays a critical role in advancing cutting-edge technologies in nuclear energy,” said Argonne Director Peter Littlewood. The PGSFR is a 400 MWth, 150 MWe advanced sodium-cooled fast reactor that incorporates many innovative design features; in particular, metal fuel, which enables inherent safety characteristics. With Argonne support, KAERI is developing the reactor system while the Korean engineering and construction firm KEPCO E&C is designing the balance of the plant. The PGSFR Project aims to secure the Korean licensing authority’s design approval by the end of 2020, and the schedule calls for PGSFR to be commissioned by the end of 2028. Contact: Angela Hardin, telephone; (630) 252-5501, email: media@anl.gov.

Bruce

Following a hearing held on September 10, 2014 in Ottawa, Ontario, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) announced its decision to approve the operation of the Bruce Power Nuclear Generating Stations Bruce B, Units 5 and 6 beyond the 210,000 equivalent full power hours (EFPH) threshold. The facility is located in the Municipality of Kincardine, on the eastern shore of Lake Huron, Ontario. The approval authorizes Bruce Power to operate the units, on a temporary basis, beyond 210,000 EFPH up to a maximum of 245,000 EFPH. The matter will be further considered as part of the relicensing hearings of the Bruce Nuclear Generating Station planned for February and April 2015. The Commission is satisfied that the Bruce B Units 5 and 6 can be operated safely beyond 210,000 EFPH until that time. During the hearing, the Commission received and considered submissions from Bruce Power and CNSC staff’s recommendations. The Record of Proceedings, including Reasons for Decision, is available, in both official languages, on the CNSC website. The CNSC regulates the use of nuclear energy and materials to protect the health, safety and security of Canadians NuclearPlantJournal.com

and the environment; to implement Canada’s international commitments on the peaceful use of nuclear energy; and to disseminate objective scientific, technical and regulatory information to the public. Contact: Aurèle Gervais, telephone: (613) 996-6860, email: mediarelations@ cnsc-ccsn.gc.ca.

MOU

The Organization of Canadian Nuclear Industries (OCI) announced the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Korean Atomic Industrial Forum (KAIF). The MOU was signed by Dr. Ron Oberth, President of OCI, and by Mr. Kye-Hong Min, Executive Vice Chairman of KAIF, during a reception on August 26, 2014 for Korean delegates to the Pacific Basin Nuclear Conference (PBNC-2014) in Vancouver. This Memorandum of Understanding outlines several ways that OCI and KAIF will work together including identifying opportunities at nuclear projects in Korea, Canada, or third countries on which OCI and KAIF companies can cooperate. The MOU supports and promotes innovation and cooperation associated with joint development, design, testing, licensing and construction on pressurized heavy water reactors, pressurized light water reactors, and small modular reactors in Korea, Canada, or in third countries. OCI and KAIF will organize seminars in Korea and in Canada to exchange information leading to enhanced collaboration and possibly the creation of joint ventures among OCI and KAIF companies. Another objective of the KAIFOCI MOU is to encourage and facilitate cooperation among Canadian and Korean nuclear research institutes and universities on nuclear research, development, and nuclear education. Contact: Ron Oberth, telephone: (905) 839-0073, email: ron.oberth@ociaic.org.

Corporation Co-operation

AMEC, the international engineering and project management company, announced the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding with China National Nuclear Corporation

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 2:15:27 PM

(CNNC) to cooperate across the civil nuclear sector, both in China and the UK. The agreement will see CNNC and AMEC work together to secure global opportunities in new build, nuclear power plant operational support and lifetime extension and decommissioning and waste management. Contact: Frank Stokes, telephone: 44 (0)1452 872121, email: frank.stokes@ amec.com.

Software Solutions

ETAP® a provider of software solutions for the design, analysis, optimization, and real-time operation of electrical power systems, today announced the release of a report by the ETAP Nuclear Utilities User Group (NUUG), summarizing the collaborative efforts among industry experts to accurately analyze the effects of openphase faults in electrical networks that result in improved safety and resilience of nuclear facilities worldwide. This collaboration and the resulting innovation was recognized by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in a public meeting held in Washington, D.C., as ETAP power system analysis software capability directly aligns with the guidance by NRC’s technical document on open-phase fault condition. Both the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) and the World Association of Nuclear Operators (WANO) also recognized the importance of this effort and praised the leadership of the ETAP NUUG. Contact: telephone: (949) 900-1000, email: pr@etap.com.

Two license applications referencing ESBWR technology are currently pending with the NRC. In 2008, DTE Energy selected ESBWR technology for a proposed nuclear power plant, Fermi 3, with the NRC license expected in 2015. Dominion Virginia Power has selected ESBWR technology for its North Anna Unit 3 Nuclear Power Plant project, with an NRC license expected in 2016. In addition to these domestic projects, the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd. has selected a site in the Kovvada region in the state of Andhra Pradesh for the eventual construction of multiple ESBWRs. Design certification also paves the way for the ESBWR to be built in other locations around the globe. Key global commercial projects include: Finland, Poland, Saudi Arabia, Sweden, Vietnam and others. Contact: Jon Allen, telephone: (910) 819-2581, email: jonathan.allen1@ ge.com.

PRISM Technology

GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy (GEH) and Iberdrola Generación Nuclear S.A. announced an agreement to cooperate towards advancing GEH’s PRISM technology as a credible long-term solution for the disposition of the UK’s plutonium stockpile. The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the companies allows the proposal for UK deployment of PRISM – which could potentially dispose the UK’s Plutonium stockpile swiftly and economically, whilst creating significant investment in UK jobs and skills – to be further advanced. The MOU builds on long-standing partnerships between Iberdrola and GEH (and its predecessor GE Nuclear) in the development and deployment of nuclear projects including the Cofrentes and (Continued on page 50)

ESBWR

GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy’s (GEH) Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR) design certification has been approved by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The commission’s action acknowledges the finding by NRC staff that the ESBWR design meets all safety and regulatory requirements. Per the NRC’s previously published schedule, the final ESBWR design certification rule is expected to be published in the Federal Register by the end of September 2014.

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014 MA14.indd 11 SO14.indd 13

NuclearPlantJournal.com

13 5/16/2014 4:52:25 PM 9/30/2014 2:15:33 PM

New Products, Services & Contracts New Products Specialized Training Options

Game-based, virtual reality options support training for complex tasks, evolutions and casualties to meet the unique needs of management and supervisory personnel during daily and specialized operations or emergency situations. General Dynamics offers customized options that provide the capabilities to develop complex system models and immersive simulations. General Dynamics’ human performance technologies assist in the development of metrics to assess the cost-effectiveness of training, staff proficiency and knowledge retention. Contact: Mark Nesselrode, telephone: (703) 995-8700.

Services I&C

Mesa Associates, Inc.’s Instrumentation and Controls staff are knowledgeable and experienced in analog and digital electronic process control systems, programmable logic controllers, distributed process control, data acquisition and monitoring, local panel and control panel design, Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems, and human-machine interface systems. Mesa has performed designs for batch and continuous process control systems. In addition, Mesa has experience in design of control systems for potentially hazardous environments, utilizing either explosion proof instrumentation or intrinsically safe instrumentation, or combinations thereof. Typical deliverables for our designs include Piping and Instrument System Diagrams (P&IDs), Loop Diagrams, Schematic Diagrams, Wiring Diagrams, Assembly

SO14.indd 14

Drawings, Instrument Tabulations, and Input/Output List. Contact: telephone: (256) 258-2100.

Contracts Outage & Fuel Services

AREVA has signed a series of contracts to provide nuclear fuel fabrication, outage services and used fuel management solutions to a major U.S. nuclear utility. These contracts represent an investment of more than $100 million by the utility to optimize the competitiveness of their power generation operation while meeting the ever-increasing safety requirements of the nuclear industry. These contracts span AREVA’s vast portfolio of energy solutions for the entire nuclear cycle. Contact: Julien Duperray, telephone: 33 1 34 96 12 15, email: press@areva. com.

Nuclear Fuel

AREVA Inc. has been awarded a contract by Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) for up to $250 million to provide nuclear fuel to the three boiling water reactors at the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant in Alabama. The scope of this contract includes nine nuclear fuel reloads of the ATRIUMTM 10XM fuel design, the supply of core monitoring technology and related services. The fuel will be fabricated at AREVA’s Richland, Wash., facility, with delivery beginning in 2017. TVA will also have the option to upgrade to AREVA’s next generation ATRIUMTM 11 fuel design that is currently being introduced to the U.S. market. Already in use in Germany, this advanced fuel product has been designed to improve fuel efficiency and operating flexibility for utilities. Contact: Mary Beth Ginder, telephone: (301) 841-1703, email: Marybeth.ginder@areva.com.

Steam Generators

AREVA signed a contract with South-African utility, Eskom to replace steam generators at the Koeberg nuclear power plant. Under the 4.3 billion rand order ($381 million), AREVA will

NuclearPlantJournal.com

design, manufacture and install six steam generators in the plant’s two reactors. The group will also provide associated engineering services. AREVA’s technological solutions can permit to increase the plant’s power yield by 10% and optimize its output. The group’s Services, Creusot Forge and Chalon/Saint-Marcel teams that count over 2000 employees in Burgundy, France, will manage production of the steam generators set to begin immediately, with installation scheduled in 2018. The Project will be deployed jointly with the full involvement of South African industrial partners to bring a maximum amount of local benefit. Contact: Julien Duperray, telephone: 33 1 34 96 12 15, email: press@areva. com.

Plant Upgrades

CB&I has been awarded contract orders by Entergy Operations, Inc. valued in excess of $100 million for project and construction management services related to the implementation of Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) ordered modifications and upgrades at multiple nuclear energy facilities throughout the U.S. “These contract orders underscore CB&I’s expertise and capabilities in both nuclear maintenance and construction as well as CB&I’s commitment to the nuclear power business,” said Patrick K. Mullen, President of CB&I’s Engineering, Construction and Maintenance operating group. Since the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear incident in 2011, the NRC has required U.S. nuclear plants to evaluate and upgrade equipment and safety plans to reduce the likelihood of damage from overheating and containment failure in the event of a complete loss of power. Contact: website: www.cbi.com

Cables

General Cable announced that the Republic of Korea has selected its 60year service life nuclear cables. In a new multi-year contract, General Cable will manufacture and supply ULTROL® 60+ Class 1E nuclear qualified cable to Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power (KHNP),

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 2:15:39 PM

a subsidiary of the Korea Electric Power Corporation (KEPCO). General Cable was awarded this business based on ULTROL’s innovative and performanceproven product design and 60-year-life qualification testing demonstrated via third-party documentation, as well as General Cable’s robust quality system and ability to meet project delivery requirements. General Cable’s ULTROL® 60+ cables have been designed and tested to meet the stringent requirements of GEN III+ reactor technology, including those outlined for APR 1400 and PWR units being deployed at the KHNP facilities. ULTROL 60+ cables’ superior predicted aging properties of more than 60 years, radiation resistance with margin that exceeds industry requirements, and completed thermal and radiation aging and Design Basis Events (DBE), will support the awarded project. Contact: Karen Ouellette, telephone: (860) 465-8777, email: kouellette@ generalcable.com.

Decommissioning

More than £1.5 billion of savings for the public purse are anticipated as The Cavendish Fluor Partnership (CFP) begins to implement its plans to decommission 10 of the UK’s first nuclear power stations, and two pioneering research facilities. All except one of the 12 sites have already embarked on the long-term decommissioning journey, and they will soon be joined by Wylfa Power Station on Anglesey, when it reaches the end of its electricity generation phase. The new contract, formally awarded today by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), will take all the sites through to the final stages of their decades-long programme of work. CFP will build on the progress already made, achieving the requirements specified by the NDA at a lower cost than previously envisaged. The NDA’s contract with CFP outlines a clearly defined programme of work and challenging financial targets, in line with the tender submission, that

will deliver real value for taxpayers. The Cavendish Fluor Partnership – a joint venture between the UK’s Cavendish Nuclear, part of Babcock International, and US-based Fluor Corporation – will own the shares in the two Site License Companies (SLCs) for the 14-year contract period. The SLCs will continue to operate the sites on behalf of the NDA. Contact: Deborah Ward, telephone: 44 01925 832280, email: Deborah. ward@nda.gov.uk.

Fuel Deliveries

Westinghouse Electric Company announced that it has been selected by OKG AB in Sweden to provide replacement nuclear fuel deliveries for all of their three reactors, Oskarshamn Units 1, 2 and 3. The contract includes yearly deliveries of fuel for their reactors during the five-year period of 2016 to 2020. Under the terms of the contract, executed between OKG and Westinghouse Electric Sweden AB, Westinghouse will produce the fuel at its facility in Västerås, (Continued on page 50)

NTM Series Key to Reliable Operation • 20 Standard Models / Custom Available • Loop, Signal or Externally Powered Units • Input Failure Alarm and Isolated Serial I/O • Only 10-80mW Power Required • Auto Tri-Color Bargraph • 1 to 4 Channels / Relays and DAC • Relays / Analog Output / Ethernet Model: NTM-9 6 x 1.74” Replaces GE 190

Model: NTM-M 4” ANSI Switchboard Replaces DB40

• Nuclear Qualified • Lifetime Warranty

For more information visit www.otekcorp.com or call (520)748-7900 Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

SO14.indd 15

NuclearPlantJournal.com

9/30/2014 2:15:44 PM

New Documents EPRI

1. BWRVIP-41, Revision 4: BWR Vessel and Internals Project, BWR Jet Pump Assembly Inspection and Flaw Evaluation Guidelines. Product ID: 300203093. Published July 2014. The Boiling Water Reactor Vessel and Internals Project (BWRVIP), formed in June 1994, is an association of utilities focused exclusively on BWR vessel and internals issues. This BWRVIP report provides information on potential failure locations in BWR/3–6 jet pump components and recommends an inspection program designed to ensure that the integrity of all jet pump safety functions is maintained. This Revision of BWRVIP-41 (Revision 4) is based on the previously published Revision 3 and incorporates the results of BWRVIP inspection optimization as documented in BWRVIP-266: BWR Vessel and Internals Project, Technical Bases for Revision of the BWRVIP-41 Jet Pump Inspection Program. 2. Materials Reliability Program: Investigation of Likely Local Primary Circuit Chemistries in PWR Plants (MRP387). Product ID: 3002002987. Published July 2014. Reviews of stress corrosion cracking (SCC) events of austenitic stainless steel components in the primary system of pressurized water reactors (PWRs) have shown that they typically occur in occluded or low-flow regions (dead legs). Such regions are prone to local concentration of contaminants such as oxygen and chlorides that contribute to SCC. These regions are relatively inaccessible and do not lend themselves to monitoring of local chemistries there. As a result, there is limited knowledge about the actual conditions in such locations. This knowledge gap has been identified in the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Materials Management Matrix Project Gap and Opportunity Assessment

SO14.indd 16

as a medium-high priority and is of interest to EPRI’s Advanced Technology (ANT) Program. Information from closing this gap is also needed to address a high-priority Materials Reliability Program (MRP) issue management table (IMT) gap on the SCC of stainless steels exposed to primary water. Accordingly, the work reported here was undertaken to improve understanding of the chemistry in primary-side dead legs or low-flow regions. This report presents the findings of a modeling effort to simulate those conditions. 3. Nondestructive Evaluation Program Highlights for June 2014. Product ID: 3002003684. Published June 2014. Nondestructive Evaluation Program Highlights is published monthly by EPRI to report on activities related to nondestructive evaluation. 4. Maintenance Rule Users Group Update, Summer 2014. Product ID: 3002004230. Published July 2014. The Maintenance Rule Users Group Update (MRUG) Update newsletter communicates issues and information important to Maintenance Rule Coordinators and those involved in supporting Maintenance Rule programs. Articles are provided by MRUG members, industry experts, regulators, and EPRI personnel. The MRUG Update is published twice a year and is available to all EPRI-member utilities, not just MRUG members. It encourages communication among all Maintenance Rule personnel. 5. Loss of Offsite Power at U.S. Nuclear Power Plants: Summary of Experience Through 2013. Product ID: 3002003115. Published July 2014. This report describes loss of offsite power events that occurred during 2013 at nuclear power plants operating in the United States and offers insights into the causes of such events for the 10-year period 2004–2013. 6. Maintenance Rule Implementation Self-Assessment Guidelines for Nuclear Power Plants. Product ID: 3002002867. Published July 2014.

NuclearPlantJournal.com

The information contained in this guideline represents a collection of industry knowledge that describes programmatic and process attributes, including techniques and good practices, to assist in the self-assessment of Maintenance Rule (MR) programs to determine their effectiveness in meeting the requirements of 10CFR50.65, Maintenance Rule. 7. Nuclear Maintenance Applications Center: Maintenance and Modification Work Planner Training Program Description. Product ID: 3002002821. Published August 2014. The purpose of this report is to provide guidance for the development of a training program for the qualification of maintenance and modification work planners. The training program is intended to provide them with the fundamental knowledge and skills required to prepare consistent, high-quality packages aligned with site-specific and industry standards. This report provides a standard approach for developing and implementing a work planner training program to facilitate the consistent and controlled transfer of important knowledge and skills to trainees enrolled in the program. 8. Azimuthal Power Distribution on BWR Fuel. Product ID: 3002002910. Published August 2014. This report describes the calculations of detailed azimuthal power profiles in nuclear fuel rods. The neutronics method used to determine the power profiles is the TRANSLAT lattice physics code, which is an advanced deterministic transport methodology featuring arbitrary geometry modeling, enhanced spatial variation resonance treatments, neutron and gamma particle transport, and detailed energy deposition and time-average depletion methods. The azimuthal power profiles calculated by TRANSLAT are generated in a form to facilitate their use in CORAL. The above EPRI documents may be ordered by contacting the Order Center at (800) 313-3774, Option 2, or email at orders@epri.com. 

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 2:15:50 PM

1. World Nuclear Exhibition, October 1416, 2014, Le Bourget, Paris. Contact: Claire de Berny, Reed Expo, telephone: 33 1 47 56 24 09, email: Claire.deberny@reedexpo.fr. 2. International Uranium Fuel Seminar, October 19-22, 2014, Hyatt Regency Atlanta, Atlanta, Georgia. Contact: Suzanne Phelps, Nuclear Energy Institute, telephone: (202) 739-8119, email: srp@nei.org. 3. India Nuclear Energy Summit 2014, November 6, 2014, Nehru Center, Worli, Mumbai. Contact: telephone: UBM India, 91-22-61727153, email: archana.shinde@ubm.com. 4. 2014 American Nuclear Society Winter Meeting and Nuclear Technology Expo, November 9-13, 2014, Disneyland Hotel, Anaheim, California. Contact: telephone: (708) 352-6611, fax: (708) 352-0499. 5. Advance EQ Training, November 1011, 2014, Sand Key Resort, Clearwater, Florida. Contact: Rose Kieffer, CurtissWright, telephone: (727) 669-3055, email: rkieffer@curtisswright.com. 6. 26th Annual EQ Technical Meeting, November 12-14, 2014, Sand Key Resort, Clearwater, Florida. Contact: Rose Kieffer, Curtiss-Wright, telephone: (727) 669-3055, email: rkieffer@curtisswright.com. 7. Facility Decommissioning Training Course, November 17-20, 2014, Las Vegas, Nevada. Contact: Lawrence Boing, Argonne National Laboratory, telephone: (630) 252-6729, email: lboing@anl.gov. 8. International Conference on Occupational Radiation Protection: Enhancing the Protection of Workers â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Gaps, Challenges and Developments, December 1-5, 2014, Vienna, Austria. Contact: Martina Khaelss, International Atomic Energy Agency, telephone: 43 1 2600 21315, email: M.Khaelss@iaea.org.

9. 9th Nuclear Plants Current Issues Symposium: Moving Forward, December 7-10, 2014, Marriott City Center, Charlotte, North Carolina. Contact: telephone: (919) 515-2261, email: continuingeducation@ncsu.edu. 10. 30th INMM Spent Fuel Seminar, January 12-14, 2015, Crystal Gateway Marriott Hotel, Arlington, Virginia. Contact: Institute of Nuclear Materials Management, email: inmm@inmm. org. 11. Nuclear Fuel Supply Forum, January 21, 2015, Renaissance Mayflower Hotel, Washington, D.C. Contact: Denise Bell, Nuclear Energy Institute, telephone: (202) 739-8039, email: registrar@nei.org. 12. 9 th International Conference on Nuclear Plant Instrumentation Control, and Human-Machine Interface Technologies, February 2126, 2015, Westin Hotel, Charlotte, North Carolina. Abstracts due July 10, 2014. Full papers due November 10, 2014. Contact: H.M. Hashemian, NPIC-HMIT-2015, telephone: (865) 691-1756, email: hash@ams-corp.com (see advertisement on page 23). 13. WM2015, March 15-19, 2015, Phoenix Convention Center, Phoenix, Arizona. Contact: Waste Management Symposia, website: www.wmsym.org. 14. World Nuclear Fuel Cycle, April 21-23, 2015, Marriott Prague Hotel, Prague, Czech Republic. Contact: Denise Bell, Nuclear Energy Institute, telephone: (202) 739-8039, email: registrar@nei. org. 15. 2014 International Congress on Advances in Nuclear Power Plants (ICAPP), May 3-6, 2105, Nice, France. Contact: Sylvie Delaplace, SFEN, email: icapp2015@sfen.org. 16. Annual Nuclear Industry Conference and Nuclear Supplier Expo: Nuclear Energy Assembly (NEA), May 12-14, 2015, Marriott Marquis, Washington, D.C. Contact: Denise Bell, Nuclear Energy Institute, telephone: (202) 7398039, email: registrar@nei.org.

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

SO14.indd 17

NuclearPlantJournal.com

Meeting & Training Calendar 17. 2015 ANS Annual Meeting, June 7-11, 2015, Grand Hyatt, San Antonio, Texas. Contact: American Nuclear Society, website: ans.org/meetings. 18. GLOBAL 2015, September 20-24, 2015, Paris, France. Contact: website: www.sfen.fr/global-2015.

Nuclear Plant Journal

Annual Editorial Schedule

January-February Instrumentation & Control March-April Plant Maintenance & Plant Life Extension May-June Outage Mgmt. & Health Physics July-August New Plants & Vendor Advertorial September-October Plant Maintenance & SMRs November-December Annual Product & Service Directory Contact: Michelle Gaylord michelle@goinfo.com telephone: (630) 364-4780 Nuclear Plant Journal 1400 Opus Place Suite 904 Downers Grove, IL 60515 USA 17

10/7/2014 4:40:56 PM

Research & Development Maintenance Rule

In the late 1980s, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission began to consider a rule to monitor the effectiveness of the maintenance programs at nuclear power plants in the United States. After extensive deliberations, the NRC decided that this need could best be addressed through a risk-informed, performancebased regulation. In July 1991, the NRC published the Maintenance Rule (10CFR50.65), which went into effect in July 1996 as the first performance-based regulation for the U.S. nuclear power industry. Because many of the people originally involved in the development and implementation of the Maintenance Rule have retired or left the industry, the “institutional” memory is at risk. In 2003, therefore, EPRI published a history of the rule through its Maintenance Rule Users Group. In 2013, in response to various changes in Federal rules affecting nuclear plants (10CFR50.65, Maintenance Rule), in applicable NRC Regulatory Guides, and in inspection procedures and interpretations, EPRI decided to revise the Maintenance Rule history and capture some of the reasoning behind these changes. This history is documented in A History of the Maintenance Rule, 10 CFR 50.65, Requirements for Monitoring the Effectiveness of Maintenance at Nuclear Power Plants - Revision 1 (3002002864). One significant issue addressed in the document is the change in regulatory position on whether components referenced in plant emergency operating procedures (EOP) need to be included in the Maintenance Rule scope. For years, as explained in industry reference NUMARC 93-01, the accepted position had been that if a component was listed in the EOP and provided “significant value” to accident mitigation, it would be in scope; likewise, components that provided no real mitigation purpose would not be in scope. Interpretation of

SO14.indd 18

“significant value” lacked consensus, however; and coupled with NRC retirements and reorganizations, this led to any component called out in the EOP as being in scope regardless of the degree of mitigation provided. Revision 4A to NUMARC 93-01 and subsequent NRC endorsement of the revision in March of 2011 removed the ambiguity to make compliance more consistent, clearly defining what equipment used in EOPs would be in Maintenance Rule scope. The Maintenance Rule history document thoroughly examines this evolution. Notably, the Maintenance Rule (or a similar regulatory construct) is used in several other countries, including Spain, Brazil and Mexico; and at least one utility, Korea Hydro Nuclear Power (KHNP), uses the rule for guidance even though it is not a national regulation. The history document provides background information and analysis that personnel in these countries can use to better understand how the rule got to where it is today and how it can be applied effectively. Contact: Marty Bridges, telephone: (704) 595-2672, email: mbridges@epri. com.

Microwave Technology

As nuclear power plants age, they must increasingly inspect components not originally designed for inspection. In many cases, this requires the use of nontraditional nondestructive evaluation (NDE) techniques. For example, rubber expansion joints historically have not been inspected, partly due to limited inspection options. At some plants, these components have been replaced at regular intervals – typically every five years – without a strong technical basis supporting the decision; at other plants, these joints have operated safely with no issues for 15-25 or more years. EPRI evaluated several NDE techniques, and identified microwave

NuclearPlantJournal.com

and millimeter-wave techniques as viable inspection options for rubber expansion joints. These techniques use light from the microwave region of the electromagnetic spectrum to penetrate and image dielectric materials (generally nonmetallic and nonconductive materials). They can identify internal structure in dielectric materials, measure material properties related to aging processes, and detect defects. Microwave inspection also may be applicable to other nonmetallic materials such as highdensity polyethylene (HDPE), which may gain greater use in nuclear power plants in the future. This work also has shown that microwave and millimeter- wave inspections can detect surface cracking and corrosion in metals. The resolution of these techniques is very fine, similar Microwave techniques can distinguish tight cracks in metals. Microwave technology also may be valuable in imaging cracks beneath nonmetallic paints or coatings, which is not currently possible with visual techniques. EPRI has fabricated a number of metallic and nonmetallic samples, and will be performing inspections to evaluate benefits and limitations, with a goal to initiate technology transfer to the nuclear industry within the next two years. Contact: Jeremy Renshaw, telephone: (70) 595-2501, email: teckert@epri.com.

Loss of Offsite Power Tool

Recent events, such as the earthquake and tsunami that led to the accident at Fukushima and the tornado at Browns Ferry, have highlighted the importance of reliable offsite power for nuclear power plants. Likewise, regional power outages, such as the one that occurred in September 2013 in Arizona-Southern California, show that the transmission grid can be vulnerable to large area disruptions. Through the Technology

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 2:16:02 PM

Innovation Program, EPRI is developing a methodology to identify vulnerabilities due to external events that could have major consequences to a nuclear plant or to the transmission system itself. The project combines the efforts of EPRI’s Power Delivery and Utilization sector, which has compiled a significant body of technical work in grid component performance and grid stability, and EPRI’s Nuclear sector, which has developed tools and techniques for the state-of-theart probabilistic risk assessments (PRAs) used throughout the nuclear industry. The goal is to apply PRA models and insights to improve grid reliability, resulting in a tool that operates in real time and responds to changing environments and system configurations. The tool will provide recommendations for reducing risk, restoring margin in grid reliability, and assisting in system recovery.

Because applying PRA tools such as the EOOS Risk Monitoring Software to the entire grid would not be feasible due to size and complexity, the methodology uses a “zone of vulnerability” (ZoV) concept. The ZoV defines areas of the grid where faults can propagate and impact nuclear plant operation. It also shows how faults originating at a nuclear power plant can affect transmission grid reliability. The ZoV concept helps identify “local” regions of the grid that can be further analyzed using PRA tools. A recent EPRI report (3002002765, Program on Technology Innovation: Grid Reliability Using Risk and Safety Management Tools: Phase I: Zone of Vulnerability Analysis for Nuclear Power) describes the first phase of the project, outlining the ZoV methodology and describing the type of contingencies and conditions that need to be included in

the analysis. The methodology was tested with a generic power system model, including a representative model of a nuclear power plant. Future research will develop PRA models within the ZoV module, integrating it with EPRI PRA tools such as Computer Aided Fault Tree Analysis System (CAFTA) software and EOOS. A simple example would be to determine the range in which a lighting strike on a transmission line would cause problems at a nuclear plant. When storms are in this area, the plant would take preemptive actions to minimize the effect of the lightning strike by putting the plant in a secure equipment configuration as determined by EOOS. Contact: Jean Francois Roy, telephone: (650) 855-2378, email: jroy@ epri.com. 

KONECRANES NUCLEAR EQUIPMENT & SERVICES LLC Worldwide suppliers of nuclear lifting equipment and services

EQUIPMENT Our wide range of products are designed specifically for operation in nuclear applications. MODERNIZATIONS We provide modernization services for all brands of cranes, hoists and material handling equipment. PARTS • Any OEM part for any brand of overhead crane or hoist • Re-engineered parts • Commodity/consumable parts • Remanufactured parts (motor rewinds, brakes, etc.) QUALITY Our quality control program ensures that each nuclear crane and component is designed to meet or exceed all mandated standards.

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

SO14.indd 19

NuclearPlantJournal.com

SERVICE We provide service for all brands of cranes, hoists and material handling equipment. Services include outage support, inspections, repairs, and maintenance. • RAILQ RailQ generates 3D and 2D graphs of the runway rails and identifies misalignment and other problems of your cranes. • ROPEQ Konecranes RopeQ wire rope inspection is a visual and NonDestructve (NDT) rope inspection service that examines what you cannot see with a visual only inspection. FIND OUT MORE: Toll Free: 1.866.261.9975 www.konecranes.com

9/30/2014 2:16:08 PM

SMR Update CEA SMR

Various low-power reactor projects are currently on the drawing board with the goal of meeting both electricity generation and heat production needs. These are called small modular reactors or SMRs. ‘Small’ refers to their low power which falls below the 300 MW mark according to the IAEA. ‘Modular’ means that the reactors can be manufactured in a factory in module-form and delivered as such to the site in question, generally via train. Their advantage lies in their moderate investment costs which are progressive over time. Several SMR projects are currently being investigated across the world. The US, Russia, South Korea, China, Argentina and France, nuclear-powered countries are looking into this technology, which raises questions of potential markets and related technological options. The most mature SMR projects are based on a pressurised water reactor (PWR) technology, though a few concepts are exploring the possibility of using a fast reactor technology. France set up a consortium comprising the CEA, EDF, Areva and the DCNS on April 11, 2012 to lead discussions on SMRs with the ultimate goal of validating the technical feasibility and economic competitiveness of SMR concepts which must meet safety, security, non-proliferation and protective military naval propulsion requirements. The consortium also studied the possibility of developing the various concepts and their related markets. The results of these studies led to choosing the PWR technology with a unit power of about 150 MWe. The studies focused on a land-based plant and related boiler design in the short term. Contact: Christophe Béhar, email: christophe.behar@cea.fr.

ASTRID

•

CEA, nuclear energy division (DEN) develops generation IV systems and specially fast neutron reactor, in order to offer a better solution to issues such as energy dependency, energy material supply security, or environmental concerns. The proposed technology permits plutonium multirecycling, and waste production minimization. CEA focusses its effort on two different types of fast neutron reactor : • Sodium cooled fast reactor, the reference option, with the ASTRID (advanced sodium technological reactor for industrial demonstration) program, CEA holding the lead. • Gas cooled fast reactor, which appears to be a more longer term option. CEA contributes to the V4G4 consortium (Hungary, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia) involved on the Allegro project. Astrid is a 600 MWe reactor, large enough to be quoted as an industrial size demonstrator, meeting the generation IV criteria, and encompassing the feedback experience of former worldwide sodium cooled fast reactors. It brings technological breakthroughs with the past reactors of the same type. The current pre-conceptual design phase is scheduled until the end of 2015. It will be followed from 2016 to 2019 by a preliminary detailed design, which will allow, if the decision to build is taken, commissioning around 2025 for an industrial deployment by 2040. For the initial design work, which began in 2010 and will be completed in 2019, the CEA received 650 million euros from the Investments for the Future program, out of a total of 1 billion euros allocated for future nuclear systems. The staff involved is about 500 people, 50% belonging to the Nuclear division of CEA, and 50% from industry side. Whereas the DEN keep the ownership of the overall architecture of the reactor, its core and fuel, other parts have been entrusted to industrial companies: • Airbus Defence and Space: reliability and dependability aspects; • Alcen: hot cells;

Alstom: water-steam and gas energy conversion system; • AREVA NP: nuclear steam supply system, instrumentation & control, and nuclear auxiliaries; • Bouygues: civil engineering and ventilation systems; • CEA: project leader responsible for designing the core; • Comex Nucléaire: innovation in robotics and handling; • EDF: project management assistance, operational feedback core design and safety studies, in-service inspection and materials lifetime inspection; • Jacobs France: shared resources and infrastructure; • JAEA, MHI, MFBR: design of Astrid safety systems and contribution to R&D in support of Astrid design options qualification; • Rolls-Royce: compact sodium-gas heat exchangers and fuel handling; • Toshiba: large electromagnetic pumps. Contact: Christophe Béhar, email: christophe.behar@cea.fr.

HTGR Reactor

Timeline for the HTGR The HTGR is planned to use tristructural-isotropic (TRISO) fuel which is in the final stages of testing at the Idaho National Laboratory with very favorable results so far. See “TRISO fuel development progresses at INL, ORNL” – Nuclear News, November 2013. Based upon current schedules and DOE funding, testing and post-irradiation examination will be complete by the end of 2020. In the meantime, technology development and siting option as well as national and international interest are being explored. An HTGR technology could be demonstrated and in production by mid to late 2020’s. This timeline could be accelerated if additional funding is secured and depending on siting for the first-of-a-kind (FOAK) unit. Who will be funding the major project? Recent business planning and market analysis indicate that the HTGR is competitive in several world markets. (Continued on page 22)

SO14.indd 20

NuclearPlantJournal.com

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 2:16:18 PM

PUMPS

PRIMARY SEALS

ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT

RE-RATES AND UPGRADES

AFTERMARKET SERVICES

We’ve been on the island since 1958. Providing full service to the nuclear industry, Flowserve is the supplier of choice for safety and non-safety related products. Through years of experience and knowledge, Flowserve offers a full complement of pumping solutions — from concept and design to upgrades, repairs, hot shop, field support and turnkey services. With this sophisticated and evolving array of engineering and aftermarket solutions, Flowserve will continue its legacy of nuclear industry leadership for years to come. For more information, email nuclear@flowserve.com.

Experience In Motion

SO14.indd 21 8027-Nuclear_Ad.indd 1

flowserve.com

9/30/2014 2:16:26 9/12/14 4:49PM PM

SMR Update...

(Continued from page 20)

Investment options today are available to support technology development which can be a combination of public and private funding and support design and pre-licensing work. Also, investment for siting and operation of a plant is another major option for investment capital. See HTGR Investor Business Plan NGNP Industry Alliance Limited, June 2014. What are the current activities going on and who is doing it? Alliance continues international collaboration with Japan and Korea. In 2014, we signed a cooperative agreement with the European Union (EU) Nuclear Co-generation Industrial Initiative (NC2I) to pool our resources and design efforts for design and licensing of HTGR in EU and U.S. and supporting EU HTGR R&D effort supported by NGNP Industry Alliance (NIA). We have continued interactions with potential investment communities to design, license and build the first commercial demonstration unit. These interactions have introduced us to new relationships and opportunities which include follow-up meetings in Saudi Arabia and trips to the Far East. With StarCore Nuclear becoming an Alliance member this year, we began initial discussions in Canada for design, license and construction of a commercial scale mini-HTGR (<50 MWth). For additional details see Nuclear Plant Journal May-June 2014 (Volume 32, Number 3) issue page 28. Contact: John M. Mahoney, PMP, High Expectations International, telephone: (601) 591-5431, email: jmahone.hei@att.net.

NuScale • •

Timeline Design certification submittal to the US NRC: second-half of 2016. Scheduled Design certification approval by NRC: NRC grants design certification 39 months after DCA submittal, so late 2019 or early 2020.

SO14.indd 22

•

A target date for construction commencement: 2020 (safety related concrete, upon receipt of COL by licensee). • A target dates for the first plant online: 2023. Who is funding the project? Fluor Corporation, a global engineering, procurement and construction company with a 60-year history in commercial nuclear power, is the majority investor in NuScale. To date, over $230 million has been spent on the project. What are the current activities going on and who is doing it? NuScale has been operating a one-third-scale prototype for 11 years. Facility upgrades are currently being installed to provide further measurements necessary for safety code and reactor design validation. Included in the upgrades is a state-of-the-art data acquisition and control system which interfaces with nearly 500 instruments. NuScale is approximately 50% complete with our design certification application. Any other current status information? During a time of uncertainty for other SMR developers, it has undoubtedly been a productive year for NuScale Power. Since winning the second round of the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) competitively-bid, cost-sharing program to develop nuclear small modular reactor (SMR) technology in December 2013, NuScale has been moving full-speed ahead. The company expects to submit its Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) application for design certification in the second half of 2016—meeting a commercial operation date of 2023 for its first planned project, in Idaho, with its partners, Energy Northwest and Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems. For additional details see Nuclear Plant Journal March-April 2014 (Volume 32, Number 2) issue page 27. Contact: James Mellott, NuScale Power, 6650 SW Redwood Lane, Suite 210, Portland, Oregon 97224; telephone: (503) 715-2233, email: jmellott@ nuscalepower.com.

NuclearPlantJournal.com

Westinghouse

The passive plant design of the Westinghouse Small Modular Reactor is based on our licensed AP1000® nuclear power plant technology. As such, it utilizes passive safety systems and proven components that will provide licensing, construction and operation readiness that no other SMR supplier can match when the domestic (U.S.) and international markets emerge. The current state of design definition and preliminary design of the Westinghouse SMR are to the point where sufficient technical information and the plant capabilities basis adequately and thoroughly answer questions from potential customers, regulators and investors. Although today’s market is still being driven primarily by flat electricity growth and low natural gas prices, the degree of design completion and shorter expected licensing timeline together provide Westinghouse an advantage in the market for deploying our SMR without need for further technical development in the near term. This provides Westinghouse a distinct and lower risk advantage for plant deployment when markets begin to open and potential new plant sales opportunities develop. A Westinghouse team remains assigned and committed to the SMR program to ensure that the Westinghouse technology and licensing development are ready for additional investment and licensing completion when the market presents the proper opportunities for our current and potential customers to purchase this advanced smaller-scale technology. In doing so, Westinghouse will remain a key force in the SMR arena and will continue to remain engaged in appropriate industry events to ensure our interests and experiences are represented and considered. Contact: Donna Ruff, Westinghouse Electric Company, 1000 Westinghouse Drive, Building 1, 517C, Suite 170, Cranberry Township, Pennsylvania 16066, telephone: (412) 374-4705, fax: (724) 940-8518, email: ruffdl@  westinghouse.com.

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 2:16:34 PM

th international ConferenCe on

NuCleAR PlANt INStRumeNtAtIoN, CoNtRol & HumAN–mACHINe INteRFACe teCHNologIeS

FEBRUARY 21–22, 2015 t r a i n i n g c o u r s e FEBRUARY 23–26, 2015 c o n f e r e n c e

THE WESTIN CHARLOTTE HOTEL CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA

CONFERENCE FEATURES

TRAINING COURSE

• Nearly 400 scientific and technical presentations in daily plenary and parallel sessions presented by utilities, academia, and suppliers.

Two-day training course on fundamentals of nuclear plant instrumentation, held on the weekend preceding the conference.

• Vendor exhibits showcasing the latest products in nuclear plant I&C and HMI.

Presented by H.M. Hashemian, Ph.D. President, AMS Corporation Conference General Chair

• Banquet dinner at the NASCAR Hall of Fame.

KEYNOTE SPEAKERS (All Confirmed)

Dr. Peter Lyons Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy DOE

The Honorable William C. Ostendorff Commissioner NRC

Mr. Stephen Kuczynski Chairman, President & CEO Southern Nuclear

Mr. Amir Shahkarami CEO Exelon Nuclear Partners, LLC

Mr. Mano K. Nazar Executive VP & CNO Nextera Energy

Mr. Preston Gillespie Senior VP of Nuclear Operations Duke Energy

Dr. Thom E. Mason Director Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Mr. Gary M. Mignogna President & CEO Areva

Mr. Neil M. Wilmshurst VP & CEO EPRI

Mr. David A. Howell Senior VP of Automation and Field Systems Westinghouse

Mr. David M. Czufin Senior VP of Engineering and Technical Services TVA

Mr. Jeffrey Merrifield Senior VP of Global Business Development CB&I

For more information or to submit a paper or presentation please visit www.npic-hmit2015.org or contact Dr. H.M. Hashemian at hash@ams-corp.com or call 865-691-1756.

SO14.indd 23

9/30/2014 2:16:40 PM

Fukushima Update By Kenji Tateiwa, Tokyo Electric Power Company.

Kenji Tateiwa

Kenji Tateiwa is Manager of Nuclear Power Programs at Tokyo Electric Power Company’s (TEPCO) Washington Office, where he leads collaborative efforts with U.S. organizations. Kenji received his BS and MS in nuclear engineering from Kyoto University. He began his career at TEPCO in 1996 at Fukushima Daini, then at the headquarters, specializing in severe accident analysis. After receiving an MBA from Stanford, Kenji led TEPCO’s involvement in the nuclear new build project at the South Texas Project site. Kenji has coped with the Fukushima accident from day one, playing a key role as liaison between TEPCO and nuclear experts around the world.

An interview by Newal Agnihotri, Editor of Nuclear Plant Journal, at the American Nuclear Society Utility Working Conference in Amelia Island, Florida on August 11 ,2014.

SO14.indd 24

1. What is the radiation level in the town of Naraha, which is within the initial evacuation zone of 20 km-radius from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant? I lived in Naraha 15 years ago when I was working at TEPCO’s Fukushima Daini nuclear power plant. When I visited Naraha this year in July, I saw a monitoring post in front of the local Tatsuta train station. It read 0.24 micro-Sievert per hour, which is slightly higher than what the natural background radiation in that area used to be prior to the accident. However, even if you were to stand there for an entire year, you would be exposed to 2.1 mSv (210 mrem), which is less than the worldwide average annual exposure from natural radiation. It is important to put the number into perspective so that people can make sensible decision of whether they need to be worried about radiation in that area. Restriction in Naraha has been gradually relaxed since the accident and currently people can stay in town during daytime. Reopening of the Tatsuta train station in June 2014 was a very positive event for the local community that is expecting complete lifting of the evacuation order and return of local residents sometime after spring of 2015. 2. Does the public have a say in what happens regarding decontamination and decommissioning of Fukushima Daiichi? Yes, TEPCO is working closely with the Japanese government in ensuring that the local community has a say in the decisions we make at Fukushima Daiichi. For example, the groundwater bypass is a system that we built to pump up the groundwater before it becomes contaminated by getting in contact with the reactor buildings and the turbine buildings. We had been consulting with the local fishermen’s association to obtain their consent in discharging the clean groundwater to the ocean, but that process had taken more than a year. We engaged them in numerous dialogues on how we NuclearPlantJournal.com

are going to operate this system, how we are going to monitor the groundwater, and what would be the criteria for the radioactivity in the groundwater that would be allowed for discharge to the ocean, etc. We finally agreed on a criterion that is more stringent than the drinkable water standard of the World Health Organization. Because of the very understandable distrust towards TEPCO, it took a long time before we were finally given the green light to start pumping up the water and discharging it to the ocean. 3. How is TEPCO taking advantage of the experience in Three Mile Island and Chernobyl? TEPCO has been working very closely with the experts in the US who have dealt with TMI, both from the government sector and the industry sector. For example, Lake Barrett, who was the Site Director for the US NRC at TMI during the recovery, is TEPCO’s advisor on D&D efforts and so we interact with him frequently. Also we work closely with EPRI, that has accumulated invaluable knowledge related to technical aspects of the TMI accident. The U.S. has abundant experience in the field of decontamination and decommissioning other than that related to TMI. TEPCO is working closely with Savannah River National Laboratory located at the Savannah River Site and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory located at the Hanford Site, among other organizations in the field of D&D. In addition, TEPCO has been tapping into the expertise of worldwide experts through the International Expert Group (IEG). The IEG currently advises the International Research Institute for Nuclear Decommissioning (IRID), but it was originally formed under the initiative of TEPCO. The IEG is comprised of experts from five countries: the US, UK, France, Russia, and Ukraine. TEPCO works in close collaboration with both IRID and IEG in order to learn lessons from the experiences in these countries, including that of Chernobyl. 4. Is Unit 4 the lead unit in the Fukushima Daiichi efforts? Unit 4 is the lead in terms of removing fuels from the spent fuel pool. There have been concerns that the

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 2:16:47 PM

and do not have clear plans for the future at this moment.

Radiation monitor in front of Tatsuta train station in Naraha town on 7/11/2014. Unit 4 reactor building may be unstable because of damage incurred from the hydrogen explosion, and that it was unsafe to keep the 1,500+ fuel bundles in the spent fuel pool. TEPCO conducted structural analysis of the Unit 4 reactor building and, despite the fact that the visuals are terrible due to the explosion, we have confirmed that there is sufficient structural integrity remaining in the reactor building and the spent fuel pool to withstand a large earthquake. We also added 20% additional margin by reinforcing the floor of the spent fuel pool just in case. However, in order to address the publicâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s concern we decided to remove the fuels from the Unit 4 spent fuel pool. The defueling structure was erected in November 2013, and as of September 2014, more than 75 % of the fuels have been transferred to the common pool located on site. All fuels from Unit 4 is planned to be removed by the end of 2014. As for Units 1, 2, and 3, much progress has been made in investigating inside the reactor buildings and torus rooms utilizing various robots. For example, robots played an instrumental role in identifying water leakage locations in the torus room of Unit 1 recently. Rubble removal from the spent fuel pool of Unit 3 is underway in preparation for removing fuels from the spent fuel pool.

5. Have any units at Fukushima Daini and Kashiwazaki Kariwa nuclear power station been approved by NRA for restart? No. Fukushima Daini and Kashiwazaki Kariwa are totally different stories. TEPCO has applied for the safety review of Kashiwazaki Kariwa Units 6 and 7, the Advanced BWRs (ABWR), to the Japanese regulator (NRA) back in September 2013. The NRA is currently reviewing our application to confirm compliance with the newly established

6. Please explain the function of emergency response center. In 2007, the Chuetsu-Oki earthquake struck Kashiwazaki Kariwa. Although there was no safety significant issue at the plant, we encountered difficulty using the emergency response center at the site since the entrance door got deformed and workers could not get in. Based on this lessons learned, TEPCO decided to build seismic isolation buildings to house the emergency response center at Fukushima Daiichi, Fukushima Daini, and Kashiwazaki Kariwa. This turned out to be an excellent decision since at Fukushima Daiichi, the seismic isolation building became the only safe haven that people could respond from during the accident. We have a system called the SPDS, the safety parameter display system, in our emergency response centers. SPDS provides all vital plant information for each unit that can be displayed (but not controlled) from the emergency response center. The control is all at the main control room for each unit. The emergency director and technical staff

Visit of US Ambassador to Fukushima Daiichi on 5/14/2014 (on the refueling floor of Unit 4). safety standard. We will also have to obtain at the emergency response center will consent from the local government prior provide advice to the main control room to restarting the units. As for Fukushima for the shift operators to take necessary Daini, with four BWR reactors, we are actions in the plant during emergency maintaining core shutdown of the units events. (Continued on page 26)

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

SO14.indd 25

NuclearPlantJournal.com

9/30/2014 2:16:55 PM

Fukushima Update... (Continued from page 25)

Currently at Fukushima Daiichi, since the main control rooms for Units 1, 2, 3, and 4 are nonfunctional, many of the control functions for the core cooling, water treatment, and other systems are located in the seismic isolation building. 7. Is TEPCO keeping a log of all the lessons learned from Fukushima Daiichi accident? Absolutely. Among the abundant information on TEPCO’s website, one of the most important reports is the TEPCO internal investigation report issued on June 20, 2012. It is a comprehensive compilation of the factual account plus lessons learned from the accident. It has been translated in English. There have also been many new findings since this report was issued and they are posted on our website as well. On August 6, 2014 the second progress report on unresolved issues was made public, in which we

SO14.indd 26

described in detail four major issues that we believe are important from a nuclearsafety point of view. One of the issues that is discussed in this report is the mechanism of Unit 3 RCIC (Reactor Core Isolation Cooling) that tripped on day 2 of the accident when there was DC power still available. 8.

Concluding remarks. It is TEPCO’s responsibility to share accurate facts and the lessons learned from the accident at both Fukushima Daiichi and Fukushima Daini. We are trying our best to be transparent and open not only about information during the time of the accident but also information on what is currently unfolding at Fukushima Daiichi and actions that we are taking. However, I understand that for most people it is very challenging to sort through all the information. There is simply too much information and it is difficult to identify the important information from the not so important one. Also, there is the language issue (not all information is translated in English.) Therefore, part of my job in DC is to go through all of the information everyday

NuclearPlantJournal.com

and understand what’s happening and then identify the information that I believe is most relevant to the US nuclear industry and share such information. Sharing information about Fukushima for the sake of enhancing nuclear safety is something, I feel personally passionate about. I truly appreciate all the people and organizations that have provided me with opportunities to share the story from TEPCO’s perspective and allowed me to do what is right for the nuclear industry and the global community. I have been hosting weekly teleconferences to inform people interested in this topic for the past two-and-a-half years. If there is anyone who wishes to learn more about Fukushima, please send me an email and I will be happy to add the person to my distribution list for the notification email that I send out prior to the call. Contact: Kenji Tateiwa, Tokyo Electric Power Company, Washington Office, 2121 K Street, NW Suite 910, Washington, DC 20037; telephone: (202) 457-0790 (ext.)116, email: tateiwa. kenji@tepco.co.jp.

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 2:17:06 PM

SETTING THE STANDARD IN NUCLEAR MAINTENANCE With the cooperation and close support of our clients, CB&Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s efficient and safe execution during facility refueling outages and while conducting ongoing facility maintenance has helped break industry records and define best practices. Our leading U.S. nuclear maintenance services, integrated project planning and execution are led by expert teams of mobile professionals providing superior performance to our fleet and site alliances. Contact CB&I for a full range of services in design, EPC, modifications and maintenance for your nuclear power project. EXTENDED POWER UPRATES

OUTAGE PLANNING AND EXECUTION PLANT MODIFICATIONS AND MAINTENANCE DECONTAMINATION AND DECOMMISSIONING

A World of Solutions

Visit www.CBI.com

cbi_nuclear_plant_journal_ad_sepoct_2014.indd 1 SO14.indd 27

8/13/2014 10:50:44 AM 9/30/2014 2:17:15 PM

Overcoming Challenges to Operating Reactors By J. Scott Peterson, Nuclear Energy Institute.

J. Scott Peterson

Mr. Peterson directs the Nuclear Energy Institute’s communications activities, including media relations, coalition management, advertising, editorial and creative services, public opinion research and industry communications. At NEI, Mr. Peterson also has served as senior director for communications. He has led major branding programs to promote the benefits of nuclear energy. Mr. Peterson also has directed public affairs programs that support enactment of federal legislation, including the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and congressional approval of the nation’s nuclear fuel repository site, and recognition of nuclear energy in international climate change policy. Mr. Peterson received a bachelor’s degree in journalism from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Additionally, he has completed the Reactor Technology Program for Utility Executives at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

An interview by Newal Agnihotri, Editor of Nuclear Plant Journal, at the American Nuclear Society Utility Working Conference in Amelia Island, Florida on August 13, 2014.

SO14.indd 28

1. How can we alleviate the merchant plant situation to turn that challenge into an opportunity? That will be challenging, but it’s possible given time and changes in some of the market rules on a state or regional level. Looking at the factors that are in play in these markets, every state is different, and there are different dynamics in each of the Regional Transformation Organizations (RTOs). Different states have varied pressures, in part because they have different rules and different renewable mandates. About half of the states have renewable mandates of up to 30 percent of that state’s electricity generation. In addition, there are pressures from low-priced natural gas. The more gas we bring out of the ground, the more pressure that puts on utilities with reactors in competitive markets. The only real chokepoint for natural gas is the delivery system. For example, in January 2014, with the polar vortex, we saw some of the disruptions in the gas supply that can happen for electricity generation. When you had the coldest temperatures in January, natural gas that normally goes to electricity production got diverted for home heating and other uses. So, while you have firm delivery of natural gas for electric generation on a normal day, when you hit the extremes, particularly in winter, you’re going to have chokepoints when you can’t get the gas you need, so you have to switch to oil at those power plants that can make that switch. In the PJM market in Mid-Atlantic states, they came very, very close to the point where they were going to have blackouts. And In South Carolina, they actually took customers offline for a number of hours because most heat down there is electric heat. And so, when you had record temperatures through the Tennessee Valley and into the Carolinas and you had coal plants and gas plants that were coming offline because of the cold temperatures, they simply couldn’t meet the electricity demand that they had because of the frigid temperatures. NuclearPlantJournal.com

We’ve learned from the polar vortex experience that our reserve margins in many regions are really, really low when you have extreme weather. In the next 10 years, most of the reserve margins in almost all markets will be below the minimum requirements, unless you start adding generation to the grid. So, you have the pressures of lowpriced natural gas, mandates for renewable electricity, plus the production tax incentives for wind and solar that may allow them to come in under the market price and then use that production tax credit to lift up their profitability. They’re undercutting the market, in some cases at very large volumes. In some markets, reactors face the triple threat of renewables, low-priced natural gas and low-priced coal. And that’s simply too many economic pressures even for a very efficient, welloperating plant to take in an open market. That was the situation with Dominion’s Kewaunee nuclear energy facility and the company simply had no choice but to shut down. If you could move that plant to a number of other states, it would still be operating today. Once you shut down a nuclear plant, you don’t bring it back. And in the case of Kewaunee, this is an interesting case study. Wisconsin is now looking for 700 megawatts, which is almost the exact rating of Kewaunee, to bring on to the system in two or three years because now they have a deficiency of power generation. So, we’re making shortsighted decisions based on short-term price signals and now those organizations that run the markets are starting to look at how they price some of the attributes of nuclear energy differently because they aren’t yet recognized or are priced too low. One example of that is capacity auctions in the regional markets. There are two prices established in those markets-- a capacity price that companies get simply to have the power plant there and available to produce electricity when needed and an energy price for the output. The capacity prices typically have been very low and are set by natural gas plants. What PJM is doing now, and we expect some movement on this in September 2014, is looking at energy capacity prices differently, to say: okay, what’s really going to be available when we need it in the most extreme periods. So, they’re taking the lessons learned from the polar vortex and applying them to their markets to ensure that

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 3:47:00 PM

generation is really going to be available when needed. If they think the answer is no, then they have to do something with the capacity price to ensure that they have enough generation there. So, look for capacity prices to go up. Another option that is available is for states to execute power purchase agreements for electricity production from nuclear power plants. That’s what has kept NextEra Energy’s Duane Arnold operating. Duane Arnold in Iowa was at risk of shutting down due in part to the increase of wind in that region. The governor’s office and others in the state saw the potential loss of hundreds of jobs if the facility were to close, so state leaders took steps to ensure that the reactor is continuing to operate and stimulate the state’s economy. Similarly, the Illinois House of Representatives has passed a resolution this year on the importance of keeping nuclear plants in Illinois operating. That’s nice and is helping to underscore the importance of those facilities, but it’s not good enough. There’s going to have to be a policy change in Illinois that either is going to mandate some similar power purchase agreement or is going to change the valuation of nuclear in that the market, by recognizing a higher price for capacity or some other way to value the carbonfree aspect or the grid stability aspects of nuclear energy. There are a lot of benefits of nuclear energy that aren’t recognized in those markets today. These steps are going to have to be done on a plant by plant basis. There’s no one fix that is going to lift all these plants up in every single market. That’s the challenge because we can do a lot of work from the industry perspective to bolster the awareness of these plants that are at risk and present some of the policy options that states can consider, but the companies are going to have to work with those states one-on-one to determine what can happen to keep these plants viable. 2. What is Nuclear Matters? Nuclear Matters is a campaign to educate opinion leaders about the benefits of nuclear energy and to raise the issue that some of the reactors in certain states are in jeopardy of closing due to market forces. Evan Bayh and Judd Gregg, former U.S. senators and governors, are leading this effort. There’s also a leadership council that includes former Commerce Secretary

Bill Daley, former Energy Secretary Spence Abraham, former White House Energy Czar Carol Browner, Senator Blanche Lincoln, two former public service commissioners, Vicky Bailey and David Wright, and Edwin Hill and Sean McGarvey, two leaders among the labor organizations that work at nuclear energy facilities. So, we have those 10 people right now as the face of a campaign that’s designed to raise awareness of the challenge of nuclear energy in competitive markets. We are taking the issue to the state level and starting the dialogue about possible solutions to keep existing reactors online. The U.S. public’s energy awareness is low. As long as they have power to turn the lights on, to charge their mobile devices, that’s all most really care about. What we’re trying to do is to enrich that conversation at the state level to include the challenges that we have with nuclear energy, which has a unique set of benefits in the electric sector that should be preserved. There is no other electric source that has large-scale power production, the reliability that we have at 90% capacity factor and is carbon free. You can’t find that set of attributes anywhere else. We are trying to drive an understanding that some of this power is at risk at the same time that EPA is developing climate change rules, at the same time we’re trying to jumpstart our economy in this country and create jobs. So, if you take nuclear out of the mix while you’re trying to do those two things on the state level, you’re not going to succeed. 3. What is the status of small modular reactor budget and certification? We are pleased with the budget allocation for the DOE cost-share program for small reactors with NuScale and B&W ($217 million in the House of Representatives). We see that as a good budget number to move those programs forward and develop two designs. The industry has been resolving some of the generic regulatory policy and technical issues with the NRC on small reactor development. The NRC staff now is preparing a memo to send to the commissioners that will finalize all the regulatory issues in advance of the licensing process starting for SMR designs. By the next year, we should start to see design certification applications going to the NRC for review of the first small reactor designs.

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

SO14.indd 29

NuclearPlantJournal.com

4. What is the status of used fuel management legislation? Used fuel management proposals have significant differences between the Senate and the House approaches-. In the Senate, Harry Reid does not want to move forward with Yucca Mountain, but in the House, John Shimkus from Illinois and Fred Upton from Michigan are driving toward progress on the Yucca Mountain repository. And so, the House appropriations bill provided $150 million for DOE and $55 million for NRC’s license review of Yucca Mountain. This year, there were real strong votes supporting Yucca Mountain as the appropriations process moved forward. The funding is important from an industry standpoint because we’re moving forward with a continued NRC review of the Yucca Mountain license application. We believe it’s important to finish the review of the license application, so that if at some point the administration policy changes, in terms of pursuing Yucca Mountain, all that technical review is completed and there is a decision from the NRC on whether that’s a good site. So, if the policy changes, you’ve got all that work completed, and you may be able to go forward with managing Yucca Mountain. From our perspective, one of the things we’d like to see is a different management concept for moving forward with a nuclear fuel management program. The industry doesn’t believe that the DOE has demonstrated effectiveness in that area. One of the industry’s principles is having Congress look at a different management process for the used fuel management program, so that you have this quasi-government board of directors management structure that would be much more efficient, have access to the nuclear waste fund so they have the budget to do the job they need to do, but take a lot of the bureaucracy out of the process. We want to change the DOE management model where you have a different director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. So every two years or so. There’s no program continuity there. So, what we want is efficiency and continuity in the management program so we can actually move to a solution. Contact: Scott Peterson, Nuclear Energy Institute, telephone: (202) 7398044, email: jsp@nei.org. 

9/30/2014 2:17:26 PM

Switching to Digital By Craig Irish, AZZ Nuclear | NLI.

Craig Irish

Craig is currently the Vice President, Sales & Marketing for AZZ Nuclear | NLI, Craig Irish graduated from University of Lowell with a Bachelor of Science in Nuclear Engineering in 1989. Craig has since been involved with material certification, dedication, qualification and custom manufacturing within the nuclear industry starting with the Navy, expanded upon at National Technical Systems and refined with Nuclear Logistics, Inc.

An interview by Newal Agnihotri, Editor of Nuclear Plant Journal, at the American Nuclear Society Utility Working Conference in Amelia Island, Florida on August 14 ,2014.

SO14.indd 30

1. What was the most challenging project in the last two years for AZZ | NLI? We’re just finishing up a specialized level instrumentation for Westinghouse. We developed these brand-new level transmitters, first of a kind, level measurement for core makeup tanks and containment flood-up for the new AP1000s. We worked with a partner company called Krohne and developed a brand-new first of a kind level transmitter for the Westinghouse AP1000 project for the plants in China and for Vogtle and VC Summer in the US. That’s a safety related ASME Section III, harsh environmentally qualified level transmitter for the core makeup tank. And then the other one is a safety related harsh environmentally qualified level transmitter for the containment flood-up. 2. What technology did you use for the level instrumentation? We actually used old technology on purpose because it was inside containment harsh environment. So, very high radiation and very high temperatures. Another project where we did use new technology is taking some analog controls off of chillers. In many cases the chillers have been installed since the early 1970s. The controls that control the chiller, start the chiller, stop the chiller, run the chiller, are very old analog controls. The old controls can be very problematic, a lot of nuisance trips. So, we changed them out with a new digital control system. Completely removed the entire old analog controls, the old transmitters, and transducers. Put all new equipment on the same chiller but digitally controlled. 3. What was your involvement on the mechanical side? We purchased the rights for an actuator design from a company called QTRCO, and now we build the actuators at our facility in Fort Worth, Texas. We made a version of it that has no soft NuclearPlantJournal.com

parts. It is good for very high radiation applications. There are no O-rings. There are no bushings. It’s all metallic parts. We developed it for the Department of Energy for their nuclear applications, like at Hanford, Savannah River, some of their weapons cleanup facilities where the radiation levels are just incredibly high, much higher than commercial power producing plants. It was originally developed for those very, very high radiation applications but the design is finding its way into commercial nuclear power plant applications. 4. What projects have you done that are related to Fukushima? Post Fukushima, most of the effort was spent on engineering studies, coping studies and beyond design basis event studies. There have been some equipment modifications, for example, the spent fuel level measurement. We are supplying spent fuel level measurement to plants that need it. We’re doing flood barriers and flood barrier doors. We’re doing electrical distribution to help with small generators. We are also offering small transfer switches and motor control center cubicles that have pigtails in them so you can connect them to small generators. Some valves, some hardened vent valves and some other types of valves. So, there’s been a mixture of equipment that we’ve got involved with as a result of post-Fukushima issues. 5. Is AZZ/NLI engaged internationally? We help the existing fleet in the United States and then new construction in the United States. And then outside the United States, Taiwan, South Korea, Spain, Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, Canada, and Slovenia to date. We have new marketing efforts in the UK, Belgium, Switzerland, Sweden, France and China. We do a lot of business with the older units in Spain. In China, we help with the new AP1000s. South Korea and Taiwan we’ve done business there for many years. We are expanding in some other places in Europe, like Belgium, Switzerland, and Sweden.

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 2:17:37 PM

6. Why do you think U.S. utilities are slow to upgrade to digital? The nuclear power plants would stay with the exact same analog equipment they were built with for as long as they could. And if they could buy the exact same relay switch, breaker, motor, valve, if they could buy the same thing until the end of life-time, they would. Doing a design change, specifically on a safetyrelated piece of equipment, is very costly because there’s a lot of investment to make that change. Digital equipment is something new to them. The majority of the plants were completely analog. And so, they’re still learning the failure modes of digital equipment. They’re still learning how to address using digital equipment in a system that was designed using analog equipment. The NRC, EPRI, and IEEE standards have all started to address doing software verification and validation using commercial grade developed digital equipment in safety-related applications. There are a lot guidelines and standards just in the last five years that the utilities the vendors, and the engineering companies are still getting used to. 7. Is there an interest in replacing analog controls by the digital controls? There are digital control systems for chillers. There are digital control systems for diesels. Even equipment like a regulating transformer will have a digital aspect for it. Virtually every piece of equipment you would buy today has some kind of digital aspect to it. And more and more of those products are starting to make their way into the industry, safetyrelated and non-safety-related. There are a few more qualification issues you need to address. They still need to do seismic qualification, for example, but then you need to do Electromagnetic Interference/ Radio Frequency Interference (EMI/RFI) testing. That can be very difficult. So, we have to modify the equipment to get it to pass correctly. Software verification and validation, making sure that the software is good, robust and it can handle perturbations. So, that’s something that NLI does more and more every year. And the industry is putting in much more digital equipment than they ever have. Just in the last five years, the industry has

addressed it much more than they did for the first 20 years. 8. Is circuit breaker replacement a priority for utilities? Low and medium voltage circuit breaker replacement is one of the larger products for NLI. What’s nice about the new breakers is that they’re maintenance free in most applications. They do not even need relubrication. The medium voltage breakers have minimal maintenance, whereas the existing breakers that the plants were built with are very maintenance intensive. They require maintenance every 5 to 7 years, sometimes complete overhauls, very expensive overhauls, very expensive parts. So the new breakers, the immediate benefit are no maintenance or reduced maintenance. The second immediate benefit is that it’s not an obsolete product. The plants were built with very old breakers, 1960s technology. And so, they’re obsolete or the parts that are needed to do overhauls are obsolete. 9. Are utilities considering replacing relays? Some of the protective relays require a lot of maintenance and surveillance testing to make sure that they work correctly or they’re calibrated correctly. The plants continue to buy products until the end of time, if they’re available, but a lot of those relays are becoming obsolete. They’re being replaced with a digital relay alternative. So, some of the protective relay lines are still made available from the OEMs, but they’re becoming very expensive, very long lead times, because they’re only selling them to the nuclear industry. So, at some point, probably in the next seven to ten years, they’re

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

SO14.indd 31

going to have to look at digital relay replacement. So, we’re going to have to take an analog relay and put a digital relay in its place because the old analog relay just is not going to be available or it’s just not going to be cost effective to buy it. Calibration can be very difficult to maintain on them. So, digital relays are better, but again, the utilities are slowly adapting to that technology. 10. Are analog instruments being replaced with digital? Most plants were built with modular electronic systems, instrumentation, and control and drive mechanisms. Even the reactor protective system was old electronic modules. Many of these old electronic modules are starting to be replaced with digital equipment solutions. Some of them triple redundant PLCs. So, digital technology is being used for replacing those old electronic modules, usually on systems like the RPS or digital rod controls or nuclear instrumentation. They’re slowly starting to address digital technology there because they just don’t have a choice. The digital technology provides a lot of benefits. It’s more accurate. It runs cooler, does not require calibration, is more accurate, etc. So, once you have an understanding of the new platform, it is a good choice. Note: On the WSI side, they’re specialized in specialty welding, remote welding, large equipment removal and installation. The NLI side offers equipment solutions. So, NLI is more products focused and WSI is more site service focused. Contact: Craig Irish, AZZ | NLI, 7410 Pebble Drive, Fort Worth, Texas 76118; telephone: (978) 618-6930,  email: craigirish@azz.com.

http://digitaleditions.nuclearplantjournal.com

NuclearPlantJournal.com

9/30/2014 2:17:42 PM

Benefits of Research By Neil Wilmshurst, Electric Power Research Institute.

Neil Wilmshurst

Neil Wilmshurst is Vice President of Nuclear for the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). He has overall management and technical responsibility for the more than $160 million in annual research activities conducted by EPRI with its global nuclear membership. Wilmshurst joined EPRI’s Plant Support Engineering Program in 2003, and became Director of the Plant Technology department in 2008. Before joining EPRI, Wilmshurst worked in a variety of nuclear utility engineering and maintenance roles with AmerGen and British Energy. Prior to joining the civil nuclear program, Wilmshurst served for 13 years in the Royal Navy as a Nuclear Submarine Engineer Officer. Wilmshurst received a bachelor’s degree in electrical, mechanical and control engineering from the Royal Naval Engineering College, Manadon, UK, a Post Graduate Diploma in nuclear reactor technology from the Royal Naval College, Greenwich, UK and a master’s degree in defense administration from Cranfield Institute of Technology, Shrivenham, UK. He was also certified as a Naval Nuclear Plant Operator. An interview by Newal Agnihotri, Editor of Nuclear Plant Journal, at the American Nuclear Society Utility Working Conference in Amelia Island, Florida on August 11 ,2014.

SO14.indd 32

1. How can a tablet be used in nuclear power plant maintenance? Over the years, our Nuclear Maintenance Application Center has been very successful in producing paper-based maintenance guides on dozens of different maintenance tasks, overhauling motors, replacing chemical seals, things as simple as torqueing flanges to make sure they’re leak tight. We’ve got a huge library and a huge amount of expertise that is paper based. So, when you sit back and look at the way the new generation is working, we came to the realization that we needed to transition our delivery to things like tablets. Because the nuclear industry is necessarily conservative, it takes time to move ideas like this along. We’ve had plants in the US and around the world that have started installing wireless networks. I think Comanche Peak was one of the first, and there are other plants around the country which also have wireless networks inside the plant. The full value is realized when you can link that wireless network to a tabletbased maintenance program, and have the capability to capture the procedures, the check sheets, the walk-down logs on a tablet, and then transfer that information in real time back to the plant’s computer systems. We’re even looking at doing things like using pattern recognition software, so that just by looking at a valve and the position of the handle, we can tell whether the valve is open or not. You have a picture in the database that shows where the handle is when it’s open and where the handle is when it’s shut. You then take a photograph of an area and the system gives you the valve alignments. It’s not ready to be deployed yet, but that’s an example of where things could go. We have a very close relationship with INPO, which identified some time ago that one of the components they were really concerned about was air-operated valve (AOV) maintenance. So, we picked that as the first one to look at for what could we do using a tablet or computerNuclearPlantJournal.com

based app. We actually went to a company that produces computer games to help us develop this app. We took the CAD information for the AOV, and we built a ‘game’ using an AOV, how you take it apart, how you put it together, how you test it, what tools you use. The ultimate goal is to help people understand the AOV before they go to the field, understand what the job is, and see how things work and how things fit together. It’s been very well received, and we’re doing a few more of those. EPRI’s role isn’t necessarily to be the source of these tablet applications for every component in the nuclear industry. Our role is to demonstrate to the world what is possible and what can be done. Then if someone wants to commercialize that and take it, our role is to basically enable whoever wants to take it and help the industry. We’re just looking to demonstrate what’s possible. 2. How is EPRI’s nuclear research funded? Our funding comes, traditionally, from utility members. We started 40+ years ago, and EPRI was a US-focused organization, but we are increasingly becoming a global organization. Our independence, objectivity, and the quality of our people and our research encourage companies to join. I wouldn’t say that we really sell anything. We live by our independence and our reputation. And people come to us wanting to join because of that. 3. What efforts are underway with respect to accident-tolerant fuel designs? People have talked about opportunities to remove zirconium from nuclear fuel assemblies for a long time. Some of the hydrogen at Fukushima was generated via zirconium oxidation; additional hydrogen likely came from corium-concrete interactions. Without zirconium, however, the operators may have had several hours longer to actually get water in the cores. So, while I don’t think the removal of zirconium would prevent a core melting, it would provide more time. Coming out of Fukushima, a number of organizations around the world started thinking about a zirconium-free core, including ceramic fuel and stainless steel fuel. EPRI’s concept is a molybdenum fuel cladding coated with a thin layer of zirconium.

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 2:17:50 PM

Other accident-tolerant fuel designs are being developed by a number of organizations around the world. It’s possible that with these different organizations doing different research, they could get in the way of each other because there will probably only be a few places in the world where certain tests can be done. And, even if you picked the winner on day one, it’s probably a 10year project, probably on a magnitude of a billion dollars to get from where we are now to the fuel being in a reactor. So, if you try and run with six or seven concepts, it’s going to cost a lot more than $1 billion. Also, without collaboration, we could have a situation where only one country or one vendor has the intellectual property and the understanding of how to produce the new fuel – that doesn’t feel like the best situation, just for everyone to sit back and say let’s race and see who gets to the fuel first. So, we are working with the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) and others to try and pull together a global forum to actually optimize this development. Conceptually, that means you bring your concept to the table, I bring my concept to the table, someone else brings their concept to the table, and the price of admission is that you accept that your concept might not get selected as one of the few that this effort takes forward. In such a global collaborative, all the resources and test facilities would be coordinated, and the accident tolerant fuel comes to fruition more quickly. So, that is the dialogue that’s happening at the moment, trying to coordinate multiple efforts into a concentrated plan to develop a new fuel.

then develop and implement the necessary aging management plans. And if some plants decide to pursue subsequent license renewal out to 80 years, these decisions will depend at least in part on what research can learn, for example, in terms of the effect of additional fluence on reactor material properties. Notably, our research is not done in a vacuum – our relationships with INPO, NRC, DOE, NEI, the utilities, and others helps ensure that we remain focused on the most important items. 5. How will the acoustic mouse help the industry?

4. How can research contribute to the improvement of nuclear power plant technology? The theme of ANS’ Utility Working Conference 2014 is cost-effective excellence. It’s very easy at a time like this, with the challenges the industry is facing, to think we don’t need research. Time and time again, however, we have shown that research is important to the safety, reliability, and cost-effective operation of nuclear plants. For example, it’s only through research that we’ve been able to identify the technical issues that might confront plants as they enter their license renewal phase (40-60 years) – and Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

SO14.indd 33

The acoustic mouse is an example of a product that could provide significant benefits compared to existing technology, but might not necessarily ever be developed by a vendor because of the lengthy research and development process involved. Consider a manual ultrasonic (UT) scan where you’re running your probe over an area of interest. You’re looking at a CRT display, you’re seeing the peaks and troughs in the signal, you’re using your judgment to understand what you’re (Continued on page 36)

THE EVOLUTION OF ONSITE MACHINING Our machine tools continue to evolve, delivering ever more precise and repeatable results. From the largest megawatt plants to the newest generation of SMRs, E.H. Wachs equipment and personnel offer superior solutions for cutting, beveling, facing and counterboring of tube, pipe and vessels prior to welding.

E.H. Wachs equipment is ideal for the fabrication and field installation of SMR piping systems.

Split Frame

End Prep

TO LEARN MORE CONTACT YOUR LOCAL WACHS REPRESENTATIVE, THE SALES CENTER NEAREST YOU, OR VISIT US ONLINE AT EHWACHS.COM +1.847.537.8800 | 800.323.8185 US | WWW.EHWACHS.COM | SALES@EHWACHS.COM

NuclearPlantJournal.com

9/30/2014 2:17:55 PM

Commercial Grade Dedication By Marc Tannenbaum, Electric Power Research Institute.

Marc Tannenbaum

Marc Tannenbaum is the Principal Technical Leader at the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). He is responsible for research in the areas of procurement engineering and supply chain management. His current research focuses on improving the quality of procured items, commercial grade item dedication, the technical aspects of materials management and proactive management of obsolescence and inventory to support equipment reliability. Tannenbaum joined EPRI in 2007. Prior to joining EPRI, he consulted with EPRI and delivered several of EPRI’s nuclear procurement training courses. Tannenbaum received a Bachelor of Science degree in Industrial Engineering and Business Administration from the University of Illinois.

An interview by Newal Agnihotri, Editor of Nuclear Plant Journal, at the American Nuclear Society Utility Working Conference in Amelia Island, Florida on August 12 ,2014. 34

SO14.indd 34

1. How is information related to Commercial Grade Dedication communicated to the utilities so that they may benefit from it? The best introduction to the nuclear procurement process in general, and to commercial grade dedication (CGD) specifically, is the EPRI Nuclear Utility Procurement course, which has been upgraded to address the updated CGD guidance. In addition, EPRI is developing an advanced course on dedication that will address each step in the dedication process, including implementation guidance, examples of past problems, and lessons learned. Key issues related to common areas of interest brought to EPRI’s attention by our members and our member’s suppliers will also be included. EPRI plans to roll out the guidance in workshops that review the dedication process, discuss known problem areas, and work through example scenarios. The first is scheduled for November 5 & 6 at EPRI’s facilities in Charlotte, NC. Our intent is to offer several more in different locations. The workshops will be open to suppliers and utilities. 2. What is the role of international lab accreditation cooperation (ILAC) and Mutual Recognition and Arrangement in Commercial Grade Dedication? Calibration services provided by accredited laboratories are commercial grade services. At present, the NRC allows the accreditation process performed by U.S.-based accreditation bodies to be used in lieu of a commercial grade survey for calibration (not testing) service providers. However, it’s important to point out that a commercial grade dedication is still required. The approach relies upon the supplier’s accreditation in lieu of performing a commercial grade survey of the supplier. A commercial grade dedication technical evaluation and an acceptance plan must still be prepared to dedicate calibration services. The following NuclearPlantJournal.com

activities are included in a dedication technical evaluation for services: 1. Identify and document safety function of the service. 2. Identify and document credible failure modes for the service. 3. Identify and document critical characteristics of the service. 4. Identify and document the acceptance methods that will be used to verify the critical characteristics. 5. Implement the acceptance methods. There are four dedication methods that can be used to verify the critical characteristics mentioned in 4 and 5 above: • Method 1 – Special Tests and Inspections. • Method 2 – Commercial Grade Survey of the Supplie. • Method 3 – Source Verification. • Method 4 – Acceptable Item/ Supplier Performance Record. Activities 1, 2 and 3 (above) are the same as they would be for a standard dedication. However, if the dedication is based upon Method 2, the accreditation process can be credited to accomplish activities 4 and 5 in lieu of performing a commercial grade survey of the supplier. The dedicating entity would document use of a supplier accredited to ISO/IEC 17025:2005 (General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories) by a U.S.based accreditation body in the technical evaluation. Documentation would include the following: a. Identification of the test methodology, including measurement parameters, ranges and uncertainty. b. Verification that the laboratory is accredited by a U.S.-based accrediting body and that the calibration services to be provided to the dedicating entity are included in the scope of accreditation. c. Identification of any additional technical and quality requirements, including certification that the calibration services were provided in accordance with the accredited ISO/ IEC-17025:2005, General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories. American National Standards Institute/ International Organization for Standardization/International Electrotechnical Commission,

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 2:18:00 PM

Washington, D.C.: 2005 program and scope of accreditation. NEI submitted NEI 14-05, Plant Engineering: Guideline for the Acceptance of Commercial-Grade Design and Analysis Computer Programs Used in Nuclear Safety-Related Applications: Revision 1 of 1025243, 3002002289 to the NRC on April 29, 2014. This document contains guidance on application of ILAC accreditation for commercial nuclear facilities. One objective of NEI 14-05 is to provide an acceptable approach for procuring commercial grade testing services as well as calibration services. Another is to enable the use of laboratories accredited by international accrediting bodies as well as U.S.-based accrediting bodies. 3. How are the characteristics necessary to perform “safety functions” measured? Methods that can be used to verify a critical characteristic depend upon the characteristic itself. For example, a dimensional characteristic would typically be verified using a measuring or test device appropriate for the type of measurement and required tolerances. Characteristics associated with material could be measured by testing physical properties such as tensile strength, yield strength, and hardness or by analysis of chemical composition such as Fourier transform infrared spectrometer (FTIR) for elastomers or optical emission spectrographic analysis for metals. Characteristics associated with services are typically accepted either by examination of the item upon which the service was performed (to verify the service produced acceptable results) or by verification that the service provider has appropriate controls in place to assure the service is performed correctly. 4. What is the progress in identifying fraudulent items in the last year? On July 30, 2014, EPRI published updated guidance on prevention of counterfeit and fraudulent items. EPRI 3002002276, Plant Support Engineering: Counterfeit and Fraudulent Items— Mitigating the Increasing Risk, Revision 1 of 1019163 is available to the public for download at epri.com. With respect to the EPRI Suspect

Counterfeit and Fraudulent Item (SCFI) database, three additional incidents have been reported so far in 2014. Two are confirmed to be fraudulent, and the third ended up being an authentic item with non-standard identification markings. 5. Can IEEE 323 and IEEE 344 seismic and environmental qualification requirements be met just by a dedication program? One of the basic premises related to commercial grade dedication is that the design process must be complete before dedication can begin. As defined in 10CFR Part 21, dedication is an acceptance process (not a design process). Acceptance is based upon establishing reasonable assurance that the item being dedicated is capable of performing its intended safety function(s). Seismic and environmental qualification are part of the design process. These qualification methods are used to establish suitability of design by proving that a component is capable of withstanding and functioning during and after exposure to seismic activity and harsh environmental conditions. Seismic and environmental qualification (and the rest of the design) must be completed before dedication begins. When an item is being dedicated for use in an application or component that is seismically and/or environmentally qualified, the dedication must include critical characteristics that establish reasonable assurance that the item is capable of performing its intended safety function during and after exposure to seismic activity and harsh environmental conditions. 6. What is the applicability of legacy 10CFR50, Appendix B-compliant QA programs in current day and age? Supplier can still use a 10CFR50, Appendix B-compliant QA program to deliver a basic component to the marketplace without using any dedication at all. The option for a supplier to design and manufacture (control) and sell basic components under an Appendix B-compliant QA program still exists. In this scenario, the supplier uses quality controls to ensure that all design requirements applicable to the item are met. Some suppliers have opted to

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

SO14.indd 35

NuclearPlantJournal.com

produce certain items outside of their Appendix B-compliant QA programs. For example, they may manufacture certain parts in a different facility that operates under a commercial QA program. If a nuclear facility orders a commercial item for safety-related use, the supplier would have to dedicate the commercial grade item before providing it to the facility as a basic component. If the supplier owns and is knowledgeable about the original design that was accepted by the nuclear facility, they can dedicate the item based on the original design requirements. In this case, the item’s design parameters and allowables become the critical characteristics and acceptance criteria used in the dedication. An important point is that all design requirements are verified to ensure that the item will perform its intended function. If the supplier does not have access to the original design or is not knowledgeable about the original design, the dedication would have to be based upon the intended safety-related function of the item and critical characteristics identified though a documented engineering analysis (such consideration of the item’s failure modes). 7. Has the updated EPRI guidance been accepted by US NRC and the industry? Throughout the development process, the EPRI technical advisory committee that developed the updated guidance (3002002289) had the opportunity to work closely with the NRC staff members experienced in commercial grade dedication. Several of them have been following dedication since the term was first introduced in the 1970s. The team members, including NRC staff, worked hard to ensure that the guidance is consistent with the NRC’s regulatory requirements and expectations. We believe the guidance is aligned with both the current version of 10CFR Part 21 and currently proposed changes to the dedication requirements in 10CFR Part 21. It is our understanding that the NRC is preparing a draft regulatory guide (DG1292, US NRC Draft Regulatory Guide, Dedication of Commercial Grade Items) that will include guidance on commercial grade dedication. An important objective throughout the development effort (Continued on page 36)

9/30/2014 2:18:05 PM

Commercial Grade... (Continued from page 35)

was to ensure that EPRI 3002002289, Plant Engineering: Guideline for the Acceptance of Commercial-Grade Design and Analysis Computer Programs Used in Nuclear Safety-Related Applications: Revision 1 of 1025243. 2013 could be endorsed by the NRC in the completed regulatory guide if NRC deems it acceptable. 8. What is the extent of international cooperation in Commercial Grade Dedication? The dedication process is driven by US regulatory requirements and was developed for use in the US. That said, the process has been adopted by some manufacturers and nuclear plants around the world. In some cases, adoption is based upon meeting requirements imposed by US customers. In others, the process has been implemented to address inability to purchase items needed to support safety-related plant systems and equipment suppliers that maintain a nuclear quality assurance program. Several of EPRI’s international members have adopted the process, and EPRI is currently participating in international efforts that include application of commercial grade dedication methodology. 9. What are the lessons learnt by EPRI, which may benefit the program? Many of the lessons learned as the result of experience with commercial grade dedication since 1979 are discussed in the updated EPRI guidance. Wide success and adoption of EPRI’s commercial grade dedication methodology, first published in 1988 (NP-5652, Guideline for the Utilization of Commercial Grade Items in Nuclear Safety Related Applications (NCIG-07). 1988), has resulted in it being used for applications never imagined by the team that wrote it. The update provides a more detailed look at the process and the ways in which it is currently used. Perhaps one of the most significant lessons learned is to focus on 36

SO14.indd 36

characteristics necessary for the item to perform its safety function(s) as opposed to “identifiable and measurable” characteristics discussed in NP-5652. Related to this is the lesson that a failure modes and effects analysis (or similar documented engineering analysis) is an effective means of determining critical characteristics. The importance of clearly documenting the basis for the dedication is also an important lesson learned. In addition to facilitating audits, good documentation helps an organization retain engineering knowledge and an understanding of the approach they take to dedicate an item. Another lesson learned was to address the supplier’s perspective. The original guidance was essentially written and intended for use by utilities. The updated document incorporates guidance based upon the supplier’s perspective such as how to proceed when the safety function is unknown, how to dedicate based on original design requirements, and so forth. 10. What is the utilities’ and vendors’ role in EPRI’s Commercial Grade Dedication program? Both utilities and vendors were instrumental in ensuring the success of the guidance update effort. A team comprised of EPRI member utilities met and discussed areas that should be addressed in the update. The team decided to solicit input from the vendors, and ideas were solicited from all of the vendors that have participated in EPRI’s Joint Utility Task Group on procurement engineering meetings over the past five years. Third party dedicators, nuclear steam supply system vendors, and engineering/procurement/construction suppliers were represented on the team. It’s safe to say that we challenged each other often, and I believe the end result is much more comprehensive guidance. Contact: Brian Schimmoller, Electric Power Research Institute, 1200 Research Drive, Charlotte, North Carolina 28262; telephone: (704) 595-2576, email: bschimmoller@epri.com. 

NuclearPlantJournal.com

Benefits of...

(Continued from page 33)

seeing, and you’re writing it down on a piece of paper. When you leave the field, you write a report, but there is no hard evidence about what, electronically, you scanned. It’s all on that written piece of paper. The other option is to do the inspection robotically. Bring the robot into a high-dose field and put it on a set of tracks to monitor its position. By knowing where it is on the metal and then using signal processing, you can now record in spatial terms where the device is, what it saw, and other relevant details. Very expensive, potentially high dose, but you now have this physical record. Our team wondered whether you could treat that ultrasonic probe like a computer mouse. Can we do the signal processing so that you could lift the transducer off the material surface and put it back on without the system forgetting where it was? We think we can do this by using the reflectors inside the metal sample to enable the probe to always know where it is. If successful, we won’t need robotics or tracks, just a technician equipped with a modified UT probe and specially developed software to track probe position and process data. So, it’s cheaper, it’s faster, it’s lower dose, and you can record it. And even better than that, the person doing the inspection, actually manipulating the probe on the component, doesn’t have to be a highly trained data analyst. He can be someone who’s been trained just to deploy this technique effectively. And the analysis can go on by someone else remotely in a low-dose more ergonomic environment. That is the type of thing we can develop in our R&D program. And we are about a year away from commercializing it. Contact: Brian Schimmoller, Electric Power Research Institute, 1200 Research Drive, Charlotte, North Carolina 28262; telephone: (704) 595-2576, email:  bschimmoller@epri.com.

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 2:18:15 PM

THE BENCHMARK EVENT FOR THE GLOBAL NUCLEAR ENERGY SECTOR OCTOBER 14-16, 2014 - PARIS LE BOURGET – FRANCE The 1st fully comprehensive nuclear business-oriented event More than 400 exhibitors from Europe, USA, Russia, Asia… 6,000 highly qualified professional visitors (decision-makers working for operators, utilities and governmental organizations) A wide-ranging program of business and technical-oriented conferences + panel discussions with most distinguished international speakers A unique platform for business-meetings and networking An event by

SO14.indd 37

Organised by

For more information wne@reedexpo.fr www.world-nuclear-exhibition.com 9/30/2014 2:18:28 PM

Sustaining Quality of Life By John Mahoney, High Expectations International.

John Mahoney

Retired from Entergy Nuclear in 2013, John is now a principal at High Expectations International, a business and management consulting firm. Mr. Mahoney holds a BBA from Northwood University and an MS in Management from Troy University. He has more than 35 years of experience in utilities including substation construction, power plant start-up and power productions. He worked for Science Application International Corporation in their energy sector supporting infrastructure engineering, information technology and telecommunications. John has worked as an innovation leader, business developer and project manager. He is certified as a Project Management Professional (PMP) by the Project Management Institute and is President Emeritus PMI Mississippi Chapter. He authored “Project Results in 10 Steps – A Pathway For Mastering Any Project” and regularly speaks on project and program management, volunteerism and leadership. He is the Incorporator of the NGNP Industry Alliance Limited, an industry consortium promoting the commercialization of High Temperature Gas-cooled Reactors. He is the Division Chair for the American Nuclear Society Human Factors I&C Division. John is also on the executive steering committee for Nuclear Hybrid Energy Systems supporting the Idaho National Laboratory. 38

SO14.indd 38

Utility decisions for plant closures include competition from wind, solar and natural gas; lower than expected and eroding demand affecting revenues and growth outlook for the future; expenses from current regulatory issues and industry events that require analysis or retrofit, repairs and rising operating costs; and regulatory environment that is indicating future tightening of regulation. Utilities are currently changing their portfolio mix due to the low cost of natural gas and new generation of wind and solar resulting from Government incentives and programs. Revenue pressures are the result of slower than expected power demand as they try to manage eroding profits due to increased regulation of coal and nuclear and weather conditions that affect seasonal revenues. Utilities are redistributing the load to assets that have been converted to natural gas or focusing their efforts on uprating existing assets in lieu of building new plants. Generation operators are seeing lower than expected requirements to build new generation for peak loads and are being successful managing load using existing generation assets and demand-side management programs for consumers. Retrofits and improvements to existing plants have remained a solid investment since capacity can be incremental and matches slow growth better than new and large assets that require billions of dollars of investment and can put entire company at risk. Utility executives are still spending capital, but are investing in projects that provide operational efficiency and include three major areas of spending and investment: 1) next-gen customer engagement; 2) advanced data analytics; and 3) grid optimization. Customer-facing capabilities that improve the customer experience and provide capabilities to predict installation and restoration services (operational analytics) are focused on younger customers using mobile devices to keep current and manage their accounts NuclearPlantJournal.com

[including bill payment processing]. They are taking advantage of the lull in load growth to modernize other parts of the electric systems to help them manage the new reality of wind and solar generation management as well as personal “self-generating micro-grids” that are popular in some parts of the U.S. that reverse customer electric meters and require credits to electric customers from electric distributors. The industry has been built on survival of the fittest and the future looks as though this will be a sustaining conviction for the future. In the 1990’s utilities were focused on industry consolidation with asset purchases to get bigger and to isolate themselves from cyclic pressure resulting from economic pressures, and to allow investment in an asset portfolio that has mixed technologies and fuel mixes. Larger enterprises with larger portfolios have been able to manipulate their assets to remain profitable, but recent disturbing news of good performing nuclear plants being shut down for economic reasons indicated trouble for the industry. While some sites have been closed due to plant material issues, recently Vermont Yankee and Kewaunee which are owned by different operators have been targeted for closure because of their lack of economic viability in the marketplace. Others closure such as the two-unit San Onfre plant in California were fueled by material conditions and improvements gone bad with large investment required to repair and restart operations. Their fate seems similar to that of the Trojan Station that was closed early due to a combination of major investment due to failing equipment, economic risk and cheap replacement power from other sources. Survival in the future will require not only effective operational performance and reliability, but also will require convictions from energy policy that will sustain nuclear as one of several alternatives important to the security and sustainability of the nation. The longterm public good will be serviced by including nuclear power assets as a part of the national infrastructure to sustain citizen’s quality of life. Based upon history, we see the utility management model transforming with consolidation of assets through acquisitions and long-term “operations

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 2:22:46 PM

for others”, partnering with co-generators and bundling with other suppliers to provide services to individual consumers, commercial business and industrial customer groups. New projects are moving toward natural gas assets that have a consistent and mature design and are predictable in time-to-market 24 – 30 month schedules. An accelerated investment to modernize customer systems and smart technologies for distribution and transmission systems will change emphasis and incentive programs for consumers. All plants [regulated and unregulated] have had regulatory requirements for improvement in physical security, cyber security, and post-Fukushima analysis and readiness. In addition, nuclear plant owners are implementing projects that improve reliability and efficiency. Some of these have been long-term challenges like copper condenser, feedwater heaters and steam generator replacements. Others are tied to reduce human performance errors, reliability improvements or Predictive end-of-life replacements required within the nuclear island and supporting safety and control systems. Even with the limping economy [no foreseen up-tick on the near-term horizon], regulations are continuing to create burden for the electric generating industry. There are opportunities to include nuclear owners in clean energy incentives that would cost-share safety improvements and license renewal costs with the Fed (regulated and Merchants). Also, local government incentives to reduce tax burdens during extended life operations [beyond initial licensing period] could increase after-tax revenues to keep plants open. This is not a new thought as State economic development tax deferrals were common during initial start-up and the first 5 – 10 years of operation. State economic development initiatives should provide for tax incentives for major improvements and retrofit projects that will extend the life of the existing fleet of plants and reduce the job losses over the next decade. Federal funding for at-risk assets that are long-term investments in the country’s energy security and provide energy for the common good of U.S. citizens need to be reviewed for emergency funding that

will enable sustainability. The alternative is a market that is driven by short-term thinking and puts the future mix of energy at risk. A fair return on investment can be worked out and cost-sharing for regulatory-driven investment could be worked out to improve implementation of new standards and economic viability of current plant operators. The bigger issue is the plants currently at risk. Research indicates six single-units and four dual-unit sites have some indications that they are at risk. Some of these indicators are based upon the merchant market and competition as well as fixed higher cost to operate and the political environment and public views of the risk of nuclear power. Population density is encroaching on some site and this growth especially in the Northeastern U.S. has increased by triple digits from census data comparing Year 2000 to 2010. With views of nuclear power remaining mixed among Americans, the ones that may be most at risk are those in densely populated areas of the country. Those that have had an increase in population with an economy fueled by diverse business interests may be most capable of sustaining a plant closure and early decommissioning. Other local and sustaining technical market sectors may require skilled workers left unemployed by such an event. Job availability and workforce transition may be significant challenges for areas of the country still recovering from the recession of 2008 and population is in decline. Annual local spending will shrink by millions as payroll in a plant declines in the closure/ decommissioning phase. The decommissioning phase is financed by funds that have been set aside for this purpose. The local economy will be impacted over time though unless the geographic location can pick up and absorb the loss in jobs. Contact: John M. Mahoney, PMP, High Expectations International, telephone: (601) 591-5431, email:  jmahone.hei@att.net.

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

SO14.indd 39

NuclearPlantJournal.com

New Energy...

(Continued from page 11)

Aires between Chinese president Xi Jinping and Argentine president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner. Nucleoeléctrica Argentina and CNNC signed two agreements in February 2014 covering operations and technology, as well as the use of Chinese goods and services in Argentine exports. Under the first of those agreements, Nucleoeléctrica and CNNC will cooperate on issues related to reactor pressure tubes, including engineering, fabrication, operation and maintenance. It also covers the manufacture and storage of nuclear fuel, licensing, life extension and technological advances. This agreement is aimed at both operating and future nuclear power plant projects. The second agreement calls for the transfer of Chinese technology to Argentina. Under the accord, Argentina could act as a technology platform, supplying third countries with nuclear technology incorporating Chinese goods and services. Contact: Source: World Nuclear News, website: http://www.worldnuclear-news.org/

Leningrad 2

Installation of the first of the four steam generators at the Leningrad II nuclear power plant in western Russia will be completed within the next few days, general designer of the new plant Atomenergoproekt (AEP) said today. Installation of the remaining three steam generators - manufactured by Atomenergomash subsidiary ZIOPodolsk - is scheduled to be completed by the end of September 2014, AEP said. Leningrad Phase II is a new nuclear power plant adjacent to the existing Leningrad nuclear plant site. Two AES2006 design nuclear units are being built there, which should begin operation in 2016 and 2018 respectively. Two further AES-2006 units are planned for the site. Each AES-2006 unit will employ four steam generators. Contact: Source: World Nuclear News, website: http://www.worldnuclear-news.org 

9/30/2014 2:22:52 PM

Sodium Cooled Fast Reactor

By Yoon Il Chang, Argonne National Laboratory.

Yoon Il Chang

Dr. Chang joined Argonne National Laboratory in 1974 and has been responsible for leadership of advanced reactor design and fuel cycle technology development activities in position of increasing responsibility including: Director of Large Pool Plant Project, General Manager of the Integral Fast Reactor Program, Associate Laboratory Director for Engineering Research, and Interim Laboratory Director. He has a Ph.D. in nuclear science from University of Michigan.

Responses to questions by Newal Agnihotri, Editor of Nuclear Plant Journal.

SO14.indd 40

1. Does the PGSFR have any affiliation to the International Generation Four project coordinated by the Nuclear Energy agency/OECD? Although Prototype Generation-IV Sodium-cooled Fast Reactor (PGSFR) is so designated to represent a prototype of Generation-IV reactors, the project is not affiliated with the Generation-IV International Forum.

and intermediate heat exchangers, which are all submerged in the sodium pool. In such an arrangement, a passive decay heat removal system based on natural convection can be easily implemented. These two features combined allow PGSFR to survive and maintain safe conditions, even after a station blackouts, for several days without operator intervention.

2. Who will fund the cost for prototype development? The South Korean government is responsible for funding the project.

4. Where will the PGSFR be located? United States or South Korea? PGSFR will be constructed in South Korea.

3. Describe the inherent safety characteristics of the metal fuel design? During an unprotected loss-of-flow event, which can be initiated by a station blackout, the coolant temperature rises rapidly. The rising temperature causes thermal expansion of fuel assemblies which introduces negative reactivity, prompting the automatic shutdown of the reactor without operator action. Such inherent safety potential was demonstrated in landmark tests conducted at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Experimental Breeder Reactor-II (EBR-II) in April 1986. The key factors making this possible are: 1) sodium coolant with large margins to boiling temperature, 2) pool configuration with large thermal inertia, and 3) metal fuel with low stored Doppler reactivity. Another important characteristic stems from the fact that sodium’s boiling temperature is very high, 881 degrees Celsius. The coolant system does not need to be pressurized and can be operated near atmospheric pressure. Instead of a pressure vessel, a large pool configuration is possible. The reactor vessel is large enough to accommodate primary system components -- the core itself, primary piping, sodium pumps,

5. Why was the metal fuel technology not applied to current reactor designs after its success in April 1986? As a matter of fact, GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy changed its PRISM Generation IV sodium-cooled reactor fuel system from oxide to metal following EBR-II’s inherent safety tests. Toshiba’s 4S (Super Safe, Small and Simple) reactor and TerraPower’s TWR (Traveling Wave Reactor) also use metal fuel. Why others haven’t yet? A European colleague once commented, “Our horse is in the middle of a river. We will sink or swim with it. We cannot switch horses in mid-stream.” They have so much invested in the conventional technologies -- on the order of tens of billions dollars -- and cannot afford to abandon their infrastructure and start from scratch to develop a new technology base.

NuclearPlantJournal.com

6. Describe the, “innovative design features” of PGSFR. Obviously metal fuel and its inherent safety potential are the most important design features. With such inherent safety features, the designers can emphasize prevention of severe accidents rather than adding mitigation features to deal with the consequences of severe accidents. In addition, PGSFR’s innovative design features include advanced cladding material to achieve high core outlet temperature (545°C), diversity and redundancy in passive decay heat removal systems, electromagnetic pumps for higher reliability, a pantograph invessel fuel handling system to eliminate the double rotating plug hence reducing the reactor vessel diameter, failed fuel

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 2:18:48 PM

7. Provide any other details. Korea has 23 commercial reactors in operation and five reactors under construction. In addition, the country is constructing four reactors in United Arab Emirates. Korea is approaching a pinch point on spent fuel storage. It is proceeding with a plan for central interim storage, while simultaneously considering PGSFR to demonstrate actinide burning as a longer-term option. PGSFR is scheduled to be commissioned in 2028. Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI) has provided a Work-for-Others contract for Argonneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s contributions to the PGSFR Project. Argonne has a long history in fast reactor technology development and still maintains a cadre of engineers with fast reactor design capability. Argonne is supporting KAERI in the reactor design, safety analysis and licensing support. Schematic View of PGSFR. detection and location system based on Xe/Kr tag gas of unique isotopic combinations, modified 9Cr-1Mo steel

for most structures for higher temperature strength, smaller component/piping sizes, and so on.

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

SO14.indd 41

NuclearPlantJournal.com

Contact: Yoon Chang, Argonne National Laboratory, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Illinois 60439; telephone: (630) 252î&#x192; 4856, email: ychang@anl.gov.

9/30/2014 2:18:53 PM

65 Flood Evaluations by Spring 2015 By Patrick T. Brunette, ENERCON.

Patrick T. Brunette

Patrick T. Brunette, P.E., is a National Engineering Lead with ENERCON and has over thirty years’ experience as an environmental professional with extensive experience in risk/cost control, project management, design/build for engineering projects and regulatory compliance. Mr. Brunette specializes in Risk/Cost Control, project management, Quality Assurance/ Quality Control (QA/ QC), and design build for engineering, consulting, and construction projects. He has provided hydrologic engineering support for U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) projects, including Probable Maximum Flood (PMF), Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP) and hydrologic modeling. He is active in Nuclear Industry Institute (NEI) Flooding Task Force that interacts with the NRC Staff. He is currently providing overall engineering management oversight on NRC related “Flooding Analysis.” Mr. Brunette holds a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Oklahoma and is a Registered Professional Engineer in over 20 states. He is a Corrective Action Project Manager as well as a Certified Remediation Consultant.

SO14.indd 42

Industry Response to Flood Hazard Re-Evaluations

The NRC issued a 10 CFR 50.54(f), Requirements for Renewal of Operating Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants information request letter on March 12, 2012, to all nuclear power reactor licensees asking them to perform a reevaluation of the flooding hazards for each of their facilities. This request came as a result of the events that occurred in Japan following the 2011 tsunami that crippled the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear facility. In response to the NRC’s request, re-evaluated flooding hazard results are being compared to the plants’ current licensing basis. Importantly, the NRC’s current guidance for flooding hazard reevaluation is different than that used prior to 2011, often producing modeled flood elevations above design basis flooding events. Among the significant differences from older methodologies are the use of updated Hydro-Meteorological Reports (HMRs) as inputs to the models and the modeling of river floods resulting from collapse of all upstream dams. It should also be noted that the NRC-approved re-evaluation methodologies do not include a method to report return periods (i.e. flood frequency) – providing no information for use in probabilistic risk assessment of the modeled flooding events. For cases in which the re-evaluated model results are found not to be bounded by a plant’s Current Licensing Basis (CLB), the NRC requires the licensee to develop an Integrated Assessment of the plant’s response to flooding hazards. The Integrated Assessment must consider all modes of plant operation that could be affected by a flood, including shutdown,

NuclearPlantJournal.com

and take into account other events that could reasonably be expected to occur at the same time as a flood. When licensees report the results of these assessments to the NRC, they must outline the measures that have been taken, or are planned, to deal with the re-evaluated flooding hazard. For an Integrated Assessment, the upgraded protection systems must be able to withstand the flood event with margin. If any Structures, Systems and Components (SSC) important to safety are compromised, the licensee must have mitigation capabilities in place. Mitigating strategies acceptance criteria are to maintain or restore capabilities for core cooling, containment and spent fuel pool cooling. The Integrated Assessment uses many methods, including design features, structures, and procedures, to address protection of nuclear plant safety functions against flooding. Depending on the site, these elements have included: • Mitigation Strategies, such as switching plant’s cooling, power, and controlling operations to planned temporary systems such as are used in Diverse and Flexible Coping Strategies referred to as FLEX. • Placement of essential systems and structures at elevated levels. • Exterior barriers that protect safety equipment from flooding and the various dynamic forces created by wave run-up and current. Such barriers include levees, seawalls, bulkheads, and breakwaters. In some cases existing barriers are upgraded. • Plant designs that incorporate sealed engineered barriers, including reinforced concrete walls and watertight access openings for personnel and equipment to keep water from penetrating into areas containing safety-related equipment. • Site grading designed to cause water to flow away from buildings and equipment. • Site procedures and training to guide plant staff in their response to a flood. To estimate the level of effort taken to comply with the NRC information

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 2:18:59 PM

request, the Nuclear Energy Industry (NEI) Flooding Task Force conducted an industry poll which indicated that production of Flooding Hazard Reevaluation Reports (FHRRs) took approximately 2,600 utility man-hours with an additional 6,100 man-hours performed by vendor/consultants, (i.e. 8,700 man-hours). The NEI Flooding Task Force poll also addressed the industry’s estimates of the effort to be taken to prepare the Integrated Assessments not including any new construction. The average effort to be performed by the utilities and their vendor/consultants was estimated to be 11,360 man-hours for plants requiring protection and mitigation. The cost for

Figure 1. new protection features would be in addition to this and was not estimated in this polling. To process the required FHRRs in a timely manner, the NRC divided licensed facilities into three groups and staggered their submittal deadlines. Members of the first group were required to submit their evaluations, or reschedule their submittals, by March 12, 2013. There were reportedly six requests for extensions that were granted by the NRC. At the time of this article there has been one reported finalized/completed NRC staff assessment of an FHRR returned to the licensee. The NRC has mentioned a dozen more will be forthcoming by

November 2014. It should be noted that the Integrated Assessments will need to incorporate the NRC staff assessments of the FHRRs. In this initial group, 18 of the 22 plants found their FHRR results exceeded their Current Licensing Basis (CLB) or that the CLB itself was missing an element, such as Local Intense Precipitation (LIP), which was called for in the 50.54(f) Letter. These 18 plants are now required to perform Integrated Assessments within two years of their FHRR submittal, typically by March 2015 if no extension was granted by the NRC. The Integrated Assessments must include and address the NRC staff assessments of the FHRRs. The FHRR submittals for the second

Contact: Peggy Striegel, Striegel & Associates, telephone: (918) 740-5584,  email: peggy@striegela.com.

Figure 2. group of 24 plants were due March 12, 2014, and there were 11 extensions granted by NRC. In this second group, 16 of the 24 plants found their FHRR results exceeded their CLB. These 16 are now required to perform Integrated Assessments within two years of their FHRR submittal, typically by March 2016. Again, these Integrated

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

SO14.indd 43

Assessments may necessitate plant modifications—e.g. watertight doors for certain compartments, or moving essential equipment to higher ground or other mitigation processes as mentioned above. The third and final group of 19 plants have their FHRR submittals due on March 12, 2015. There is no collected group information yet to report on how many will be moving into the Integrated Assessment process. If that number is consistent with the first two groups, 74% (i.e. 48) of the 65 nuclear power plants will proceed into Integrated Assessments. Note that the precipitation amounts from Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Sandy, shown in Figures 1 and 2 respectively, are significantly below the minimum levels used in FHRR models or required as a basis for protection levels during Integrated Assessment. A significant portion of the US nuclear fleet will be subject to Integrated Assessment with associated flood hazard protection and mitigation requirements. No estimate is yet available for the costs associated with the protection and mitigation measures to be taken. However, the costs may easily run into tens of millions of dollars. Whatever costs are incurred under the current guidance will be incurred without regard to the potential frequency of the flooding events against which plants are being protected – since no probabilistic risk assessment is approved for use at this time.

NuclearPlantJournal.com

www. NuclearPlantJournal. com

9/30/2014 2:19:04 PM

Inspection of Reactor Internals By Janean Sealey, Dominion Surry Power Station.

Janean Sealey

Janean Sealey is a Generation Project Manager at Dominion Surry Power Station in Surry Virginia. Janean received her Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering from Old Dominion University, and proceeded to earn her Masters of Business Administration from Averett University and Master of Mechanical/Nuclear Engineering from Virginia Commonwealth University. Janean started her career as a mechanical designer in the shipbuilding field. Upon graduation and with encouragement from her former boss John Lockstamper she pursued a career in the utility industry.

Nuclear Energy Institute’s Top Industry Practice (TIP) Awards highlight the nuclear industry’s most innovative techniques and ideas. This innovation won the B. Ralph Sylvia “Best of the Best” award. The Dominion team members who participated included: Janean Sealey, Generation Project Manager; Ed Turko, Engineering NDE Supervisor; Christopher Allmond, Programs Specialist III; Mike Wells, Health Physics Supervisor; David Germano, Civil Engineer II. 44

SO14.indd 44

Summary

Inspections of the reactor internals affected by aging mechanisms are required to satisfy License Renewal Commitments, as specified in SER NUREG 1766, Safety Evaluation Report Related to the License Renewal of North Anna Power Station, Units 1 and 2, and Surry Power Station, Units 1 and 2 and to support Surry Power Station’s (SPS) License Renewal Amendment (LRA). Dominion’s Surry Power Station Unit 1 and 2 are Westinghouse-designed pressurized water reactor (PWR), and have entered the Period of Extended Operation (PEO). The PEO for SPS was May 26, 2012 for Unit 1 and January 30, 2013 for Unit 2. To support the Surry-1 LRA commitments, examination of the Reactor Vessel (RV) internals are required in accordance with the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Materials Reliability Program (MRP) Pressurized Water Reactors Internals Inspection and Examination Guidelines (I&E) document MRP-227, Materials Reliability Program: Pressurized Water Reactor Internals Inspection and Evaluation Guidelines and to fulfill the requirements of MRP Inspection Standard for Reactor Internals document MRP-228, Materials Reliability Program: Inspection Standard for PWR Internals. This TIP Award nomination presents the success of a special First-of-a-Kind (FOAK) examination and automated tooling development. This crucial task required overcoming challenges of an exposed Core Barrel (CB) section as well as very high dose rates. In addition, there was no access to the area for tool installation because of the temporary use of radiation shield tanks. For example, when the CB is placed in the stand for examinations, the assembly protrudes out of the Reactor Vessel Cavity (RVC) water surface, 40 inches. This configuration significantly elevates dose rates on the refueling floor and increases dose rates for personnel who require access to perform the CB examinations. Based upon the elevated dose rates for this plant configuNuclearPlantJournal.com

ration, traditional underwater component examination techniques (manually delivered cameras on poles) would not be acceptable. Dominion established a Project team with AREVA to address the unique plant configuration and the elevated dose rates to overcome the challenge and fulfill the LRA required examinations. The specific examinations to be performed on the CB during the U1R25 Fall 2013 outage were: (1) the Upper Circumferential Weld (or Upper Girth Weld), (2) the Lower Circumferential Weld (or Lower Girth Weld), and (3) the Lower Flange Weld. The most challenging examination of all the CB examinations, the “Lower Girth Weld”, established the basis for the project and the tooling design requirements. The challenges presented are due to Surry Power Station’s access to the Lower Girth Weld examination area through a 2.00 2.25 inch annular gap. Located between the thermal shield and CB, this gap contains numerous obstructions that the tool must circumvent. The Dominion Team at SPS was the first to successfully perform the MRP 227/228 CB examination on a PWR nuclear reactor with this plant configuration. The Project Team overcame a significant plant configuration and examination area access challenge to successfully complete the project below cumulative exposure estimates. There were no safety issues or Personnel Contamination Events encountered during the inspection process.

Safety

No Safety issues and no personal contamination events or Human Performance errors were experienced in completing the FOAK Core Barrel examination. This exceptional safety performance is attributed to the Team’s rigorous focus on Safety, the number one priority established during all stages of the project. In fact, the Safety priority set the objectives to minimize personnel radiological exposure (ALARA) and incorporate industrial safety into the tooling systems. Personnel access to install and remove the tool onto the CB in the SPS unique configuration was a challenge because of temporary water shield tanks installed around the core barrel. High dose rates within the tool installation area envelope required an innovative tool design to enable one

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 2:19:17 PM

time installation, minimal installation and removal time, remote controlled automated fail safe operation of the tool delivery platform, and a camera designed to withstand the extremely high dose rates in the weld examination areas. To support personnel safe tool installation/ removal, the Project Team used a questioning attitude towards the original plan to use the Core Barrel Lift Rig platform for CB access. Access to the

Elevations of Reactor Vessel Internals and Lifting Rig in Storage Stand. Lift Rig would have been by use of a 25 foot ladder placed on the Refueling floor and the Lift Rig assembly. The project Team pushed back that this was unsafe for personnel to access the component with large tooling in the high dose rate area. The Project Team identified the critical need for a shielded work platform to meet the project’s radiological and industrial safety objectives. Dominion designed and fabricated the special shielded platform with input from the vendor on the required interfaces. The SPS water shield tanks also required modifications to support installation of the shielded platform on top of the tanks. The shielded work platform provided the inspectors with safe access to the top of the water shield tanks, stable access to 360 degrees of the core barrel assembly, and supported the need for timely tool installation/removal activities. The shielded platform design eliminated trip hazards by utilizing decking plate to enable walking above the shielding. This design also protected workers by incorporating separate hand rails for personnel safety and mounting of inspection tool accessories. This also eliminated the need for fall protection harnesses. Staging of the shielding facilitated timely tool installation without impeding the motion of the technicians. To remove additional safety

risks, innovative technical features were built into the examination that enabled simultaneous deployment of multiple tooling components (two camera systems for different examination areas and onboard hydro lazing wand for cleaning). The remote control operation and highly automated nature of the tool minimized or eliminated Human Performance issues by using encoders to track both the circumferential and axial position of the weld areas being examined and recorded. Once installed onto the CB, the automated tool platform allowed the performance of three inspection tasks. These features removed personnel from the reactor building who typically would be required to manipulate and perform the visual examinations from pole delivered cameras. The on-board hydro lazing system removed personnel from “line of fire” risk of high pressure energy release by automatically positioning the wand and performing the hydro laze cleaning of weld areas remotely. Once the tool was installed, the automated tool features contributed to removing personnel from the reactor building and the corresponding radiological and industrial safety risk of the work environment. Once installed the use of the tool also eliminated multiple independent teams performing the three individual tasks (Lower Girth Weld inspection, Hydro Lazing, and Lower Flange weld inspection). Mock-ups to duplicate the Surry unique Core Barrel configuration were fabricated at the vendor facility and used extensively for both tool development and personnel training. Extensive use of mock-ups supported personnel efficiency training and tool performance testing. The tool was operated in “run to failure mode” to determine weak links in the design and components were replaced accordingly. This was important in establishing the fail safe feature of the tool to eliminate unnecessary removal and installation activities. Personnel performance efficiency training was conducted on the mock-up for the safe and timely installation and removal of the tool. This repetitive performance efficiency training resulted in a 66% improvement of the installation and removal times, eliminating stay times in the high (Continued on page 46)

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

SO14.indd 45

NuclearPlantJournal.com

When it matters most. . .

Who would you want to be tied to?

HukariAscendent Supporting the Nuclear Science and Technology Industry in: • Engineering • Nuclear Safety Analysis • Licensing • Quality Assurance • Project Management • And many related technical disciplines. 303-384-9079 www.h u ka ri.c om

HukariAscendent is a Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Please email your resume to: resumes@hukari.com In addition, please submit an on-line application at: w w w. h u k a r i . c o m HukariAscendent is an Equal Opportunity Employer

9/30/2014 2:19:21 PM

Inspection of..

(Continued from page 45)

dose area. The vendor used the same personnel to execute the performance training and the tool installation and removal at Surry; thus maximizing dose savings. The Dominion Project Team at Surry also conducted full scale mock-ups of the water shield tanks and the shielded work platform to address personnel access and tooling installation and removal requirements . This enabled the Team to identify and promptly correct any safety and technical concerns before the shielded work platform was installed in the high dose area and became contaminated. The safe execution of the Core Barrel Examination Project was a direct result of the Team’s commitment to operational excellence. Contributing quality measures included: extensive pre-planning for tool development requirements, the use of mock-ups for tooling optimization and personnel training performance, and the execution of detailed pre-job briefs as well as supervisory oversight and management reviews on the use of Human Performance tools.

Cost Savings

The total cost savings to Dominion for the SPS -1 automated CB examination project is approximately $1,065,220. Overall cost savings of $4,260,880 will be realized by Dominion for use of the automated examination tool at all four Dominion units that have this unique CB configuration (Surry Units 1 & 2 and North Anna Units 1 & 2). This cost savings was realized as a result of the unique automated tool design and the resulting overall dose saving for the tool operational performance. This design also enabled per unit cost savings of approximately $655,620 by the elimination of three separate task teams that are usually required to perform parallel operations while on critical path. Automated tool operation, use of the special shielded platform, and operational efficiencies enabled the per unit total dose savings contribution of approximately $409,625. The per unit dose cost savings 46

SO14.indd 46

from minimizing personnel exposure by the use of the automated tool and the efficiencies in the Project execution were: 13.741 Rem ($343,525) and 2.643 Rem ($66,100) respectively. The Dominion cost basis estimate is one man Rem equals $25K. The dose/cost saving was achieved by the following means: • Using the automated examination tool to minimize personnel in the examination area. • Conducting the upper girth weld inspection while the core barrel was still in the vessel, thus taking advantage of more water shielding. • Using mock-ups of the water shield tanks and work access platform. • Using dedicated RP Support and RP Supervisory Oversight. • Placing support equipment in low dose areas. • Applying Lessons learned from previous outages (location of sub operator, changing out of the crane operator during the Core Barrel lift). • Maintaining reactor cavity water level control 4 inches from the top of the operations deck; this is about 1 foot higher than required. (Dose rates are reduced by half for each 5.5 inches of water). • Using the shielded work platform (a calculated 26% reduction in dose rates from shielding). • Adding a second hand rail on the work platform for tool and camera accessories, so crews would not lean over the shielded railing.

Innovation

The Project Team’s efforts resulted in the Lower Girth Weld Inspection Tool (LGWIT); designed to work with the Surry unique core barrel configuration. The core barrel extends out of the water by 40 inches; the lower girth weld is behind a thermal shield, and when Surry’s core barrel is in the stand, approximately 15% of the examination area is against the wall and is not accessible. AREVA designed the Lower Girth Weld Inspection Tool (LGWIT) to obtain the maximum examination area coverage. The LGWIT was designed to be easily installed on and removed from the Core Barrel safely while minimizing personnel exposure. The tool cart platform attaches itself to the Core Barrel NuclearPlantJournal.com

by vortex suction devices with sufficient suction to maintain stability, while allowing it to travel circumferentially on the top of the thermal shield by a drive wheel that obtains its drive force friction by the tool weight. Axial positioning is performed by the rigid segmented mast to position the camera and traverse the examination area. Positioning of the high radiation tolerant camera is maintained and recorded by encoders for both the axial position on the weld and the circumferential location on the core barrel. This important feature provided encoded EVT-1 examination data to support future examination location repeatability. The tool cart platform has multi-motion capabilities to clear obstacle on the component to maximize examination coverage. The multi-motion features include the following: • Pneumatic tilt to position itself away from the Core Barrel to gain clearance while traversing under the outlet nozzle boss area. • Z-motion to lift the camera up over alignment pins and thermal shield hangers. • Hydraulic tilt to extend examination coverage to shielded areas of weld below obstructions. The Lower Flange Weld Examination Tool also attaches to the cart platform, extending down to the examination area, and utilizes the same remote operated features and encoding to accurately position and record the examination area for future repeatability. The Lower Flange weld end effector tool utilizes a Pan/Tilt/Zoom camera and integral resolution card to support continuous remote controlled examination and picture quality resolution checks once installed. The cart platform contains a hydro laze cleaning nozzle for remote operated automated cleaning of both weld examination areas for the required EVT-1 examination. Special testing was conducted to establish the optimum reaction force nozzle to maintain the tool rigid and stable during all high pressure water cleaning evolutions. The new FOAK Lower Girth Weld Tool successfully completed the required License Renewal Amendment (LRA) examinations of the Lower Girth Weld and Lower Flange Weld with exceptional picture quality and repeatability as noted

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 2:19:26 PM

by the Dominion Visual Testing (VT) Level III. Use of the tool eliminated the need for a large number of personnel that directly resulted in the personnel exposure and cost savings to Dominion.

were utilized at Surry Unit 2 Spring 2014 outage and at both North Anna Unit 1 and 2 to fulfill the License Renewal Amendment required examinations. This

developed during the tool mock-up testing for equipment reliability, and evaluating use of the tool platformâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s innovative multi-motion systems and

Productivity/Efficiency

Application of both the innovative automated examination tool and special shielded work platform contributed in a 72% decrease in task personnel. The reduced personnel needs resulted in 66 man-week savings for the SPS-1 project. Dominion will realize an overall total of 264 man-weeks savings for application of the Core Barrel (CB) examination technique and equipment at all four units (Surry Units 1 & 2 and North Anna Units (1 & 2). Water shields are required for the 10 YR ISI inspections at Surry Units 1 & 2 and North Anna Units 1 & 2 due to the high general area dose rates on the refueling floor area when the core barrel is placed in its storage stand.

Transferability

The Core Barrel Examination tool platform that has the capability to provide remote operated Lower Girth Weld Inspection, Lower Flange Weld Inspection and on board hydro lazing system is directly transferable and beneficial to all plants with protruding Core Barrels. The tool and special shielded work platform

Lower Girth Weld Inspection Tool. innovative tool has full transferability to all Westinghouse design plants requiring similar Core Barrel weld inspections in accordance with the MRP227/228 requirements. These design plants will receive the Safety, dose savings and cost savings benefits from the automated remotely operated tool and the encoded weld inspection area repeatability. In addition, the NDE vendor is transferring the equipment hardening techniques

robust component design for use in Boiling Water Reactor in Vessel Visual Inspection (IVVI) examination tooling systems. Contact: Janean Sealey, Surry Power Station, 5570 Hog Island Road, Surry Virginia 23883; telephone: (757) 3652452, email: janean.sealey@dom.com. î&#x192;

Nuclear Plant Journal Advertiser Web Directory 9th International NPIC & HMIT Conference

www.npic-hmit2015.org AREVA Inc. www.areva.com AZZ | NLI www.azz.com/nli Birns www.birns.com CB&I www.CBI.com

Flowserve www.flowserve.com

SGS Herguth Laboratories, Inc. www.herguth.com

GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy www.ge-energy.com/nuclear

Tecnatom, s.a. www.tecnatom.es

HF Controls www.doosan.com

Thermo Scientific- CIDTEC www.thermo.com/cidtec

HukariAscendent www.hukari.com

Westinghouse Electric Company LLC www.westinghousenuclear.com

HydroAire Service, Inc. www.hydroinc.com

E. H. Wachs Co. www.ehwachs.com

World Nuclear Exhibition www.world-nuclear-exhibition. Konecranes Nuclear Equipment com & Services, LLC www.konecranes.com

ENERCON www.enercon.com

OTEK Corporation www.otekcorp.com

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

SO14.indd 47

NuclearPlantJournal.com

9/30/2014 2:19:34 PM

BMI Visual Examination By Edison Fernandez, Arizona Public Service.

Edison Fernandez

Edison Fernandez received his BS in Metallurgical Engineering from University of Illinois. Prior to working at Arizona Public Service, he worked at Taussig Labs, Chicago, Illinois where he acquired expertise in NDE, metallurgy, welding and failure analysis. Currently, he is a Metallurgist at the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station focused on Alloy 600 and 690 materials, Reactor Internals and Reactor Vessel Integrity Issues. He has participated in three INPO review visits as an industry peer. His professional activities include: past Chairman of the PWROG Materials Subcommittee and is currently the Chairman for the EPRI MRP Inspection Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). He is a two time TIP award recipient and authored or co-authored over 30 publications and technical papers.

Summary

For Bottom Mounted Instrumentation (BMI) nozzles, 10CFR50.55a, Code of Federal Regulations requires a visual examination every other outage. If a visual examination determines that leakage is occurring from a specific BMI, additional examinations must be performed to characterize the location, orientation, and length of cracks. This could include Ultrasonic (UT) examinations or other non-visual techniques. If an axial flaw is detected, additional examinations of other BMI’s are not regulatory driven. However, if a circumferential flaw is detected, then addition examinations are required and expanded to 100% if another circumferential flaw is detected. Palo Verde is the only CE plant in the US with BMIs and the design is unique in comparison to the industry (i.e. Westinghouse and B&W units). There were no NDE capability for characterizing if a flaw existed for the Palo Verde BMIs prior to U3R17 outage in the fall 2013. In February 2013 Arizona Public Service (APS) in partnership with EPRI proceeded to perform a

of the demonstration. With the Mockup nearly complete, Palo Verde entered U3R17 in October 2013 and during the remote visual examination of the reactor pressure vessels bottom head surface; a leak was discovered surrounding the annulus of bottom mounted instrumentation (BMI) Penetration #3. As a result, APS contracted Westinghouse to demonstrate their capability to collect and analyze data from the APS mockup. The mockup information was strictly maintained and secured at the EPRI NDE Center and Westinghouse personnel were monitored at all times by APS and EPRI NDE staff. During the initial analysis of the ten flaws, two flaws were not identified and three flaws were characterized with the wrong orientation. APS and EPRI staff then recommended procedure enhancements to Westinghouse and using the additional procedure guidance, all of the flaws in the mockup were detected and correctly orientated. Westinghouse proceeded to inspect penetration #3 at Palo Verde Unit 3 and detected several axial orientated cracks. Because of the successful demonstration and the concern that there could be some part thru-wall cracks in other nozzles, APS elected to perform UT examinations of all 61 BMI penetrations (100%). The examination resulted in no other unacceptable indications (cracks) in

Nuclear Energy Institute’s Top Industry Practice (TIP) Awards highlight the nuclear industry’s most innovative techniques and ideas. This innovation won the Engineering Vendor award. The Arizona Public Service team members who participated included: Brad Berles, Director Plant Engineering; Mike Dilorenzo, Dept Leader; Edison Fernandez, Sr Metallurgist; Douglas Hansen, Sr Consulting Engineer; Ken Schrecker, Section Leader Program Engineering. 48

SO14.indd 48

The Palo Verde BMI Mock-up. capability study for the Palo Verde design BMI. This consisted of fabricating, and ultrasonically (UT) fingerprinting a BMI mockup to replicate the Palo Verde BMI configuration used for conducting ultrasonic examinations (for a chosen inspection vendor) then documenting the results NuclearPlantJournal.com

any other nozzle. It should be noted, this is above and beyond the requirements of 10CFR50.55a.

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 2:26:11 PM

Safety

Primary water stress corrosion cracking (PWSCC) of Alloy 600 material and 82/182 weld metals has had serious consequences. A pressure boundary leak in a bottom mounted instrumentation (BMI) nozzles could lead to serious degradation concerns such as nozzle ejection and significant boric acidinduced head wastage if through-wall cracking were to occur. The current requirement for examination of bottom mounted instrumentation (BMI) nozzles is CC N722 as required by 10CFR50.55a which consist of direct visuals every other outage. There are no requirements for volumetric or surface examinations of BMIs for the presence of part thru wall flaws from Primary Water Stress Corrosion Cracking (PWSCC). Prior to October 2013, the capability to inspect the Palo Verde BMI nozzles (CE System 80) did not exist. In February of 2013 Arizona Public Service (APS) thru the EPRI NDE center proceeded to design, fabricate, and ultrasonically (UT) fingerprint a BMI mockup to replicate the Palo Verde BMI configuration and in October 2013 proceeded to perform a vendor demonstration. A successful demonstration lead to accurately characterizing the leak and enabled APS to efficiently interrogate the remaining nozzles eliminating the potential for false calls and avoiding the need for unnecessary repairs and associated potential radiation dose. Additionally, APS was able to confirm the condition of the remaining BMI nozzles and thus ensuring that the Unit can be safely operated.

Cost Savings

In 2003 a BMI leak occurred at the South Texas Project (STP) nuclear generating station. This was the first ever BMI leak. No demonstrated technology existed for ultrasonically testing or repairing of BMI nozzles. As a result the Unit was shutdown for approximately 6 months. Because of the prior work with EPRI (i.e. capability study) APS was able to efficiently inspect all 61 nozzles in a timely manner and subsequently repair the leaking nozzle. The impact to the outage schedule was only 30 days. If APS elected a “do nothing approach” this

would have added an additional 90 days to the outage schedule. The cost avoidance (estimate value using $300,000/day) was approximately 27 million dollars. Additionally, any false calls leading to just one (1) additional repair would cost an additional 2 million dollars.

Innovation

APS is the only Westinghouse CE US plant in the United States with BMI

Time of Flight Diffraction (TOFD)Ultrasonic Testing of the Palo Verde Mock-up immersed in a tank of water. nozzles. Prior to the U3R17 outage in the fall of 2013, there was no NDE capability for characterizing a flaw in the Palo Verde BMI nozzles. The capability study allowed APS to develop the probe design, scanning techniques and determine limitations if any. Performing the capability study well in advance, also enabled APS to efficiently interrogate the Unit 3 BMI nozzles, minimizing the impact to the U3R17 outage and eliminate false indications that could have been interpreted as actual primary water stress corrosion (PWSCC) cracks. This avoided costly repair/mitigation activities, associated radiation dose and significant outage delays.

Productivity/Efficiency

By performing the capability study well in advance of the U3R17

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

SO14.indd 49

outage, APS was able to efficiently characterize the flaw of the leaking nozzle and subsequently interrogate all the remaining nozzles in a timely manner. The alternative would be a “do nothing” approach and this would have added approximately 90 days to the outage. This also eliminated potential false calls resulting in unnecessary repairs adding additional work order cycle time, outage delays and HP surveys.

NuclearPlantJournal.com

Transferability

Although Palo Verde is the only CE plant in the United States with BMI nozzles, there are several CE plants outside the US with BMI nozzles that would benefit from this work (i.e. capability study), namely the CE plants in Korea. Additionally, there are several plants in the US with BMI designs that have known limitations, such as the Westinghouse 2 loop and B&W design BMI’s. Performing a capability study would allow these plants to determine the needed technology to design a probe, scanning techniques and accurately document the limitations. Contact: Edison Fernandez, Arizona Public Service, telephone: (623) 3936111, email: Edison.fernandez@aps. com. 

9/30/2014 2:19:48 PM

Contracts..

Corporation..

Sweden. Westinghouse has been a main fuel supplier to OKG, having delivered nearly 8,500 fuel assemblies to the plants. All three boiling water reactors (BWR) in Oskarshamn were designed and built by ASEA-ATOM, acquired by Westinghouse in 2000. Contact: telephone: (412) 374-6379, email: westinghousepublicrelations@ westinghouse.com.

Santa María de Garoña nuclear power plants in Spain. Contact: Jon Allen, telephone: (910) 819-2581, email: jonathan.allen1@ ge.com.

(Continued from page 15)

Reactor Internal Pumps

Westinghouse Electric Company received a contract in excess of 40 million euros from Teollisuuden Voima Oyj (TVO) to deliver 12 advanced reactor internal pumps for Finland’s Olkiluoto Units 1 and 2 boiling water reactors. This investment, a prerequisite for TVO to secure a long-term, safe and reliable operation of their nuclear reactors, also will allow for possible future power uprates. Under the terms of the contract Westinghouse Electric Sweden AB will be responsible for managing the overall project, as well as installation and commissioning. Westinghouse will partner with KSB Aktiengesellschaft (KSB) for the manufacturing and testing of the pumps and valves, and equipment testing, including a full-scale test which will be performed by Toshiba Corporation in Japan. The reactor internal pumps are part of the main circulation circuit that provides the rotation of water through the reactor core. Each reactor vessel has six internal pumps. Installation and testing is scheduled during the 2016, 2017 and 2018 maintenance outages. Contact: telephone: (412) 374-6379, email: westinghousepublicrelations@ westinghouse.com. 

SO14.indd 50

(Continued from page 13)

Part-Task Trainer

L-3 MAPPS announced that it was selected by Florida Power & Light Company (FPL) to supply a St. Lucie Plant Unit 1 part-task trainer. The trainer will be used by FPL for just-in-time training for Unit 1 shutdown cooling operations scheduled to take place in the first quarter of 2015. The project is underway and is expected to be completed by the end of this year. L-3 MAPPS will develop a new Unit 1 shutdown cooling system model, which includes the containment spray and safety injection systems, utilizing its Orchid® Modeling Environment. The plant operators will be trained in a classroom environment by interacting with Unit 1-specific control room virtual panels using L-3 MAPPS’ popular Orchid Touch Interface solution. The operators will use the actual plant procedures to operate the part-task trainer the same way they are exercised in the plant control room. At the completion of this project, St. Lucie will be equipped with a total of eight Orchid Touch Interface bays deployed in a number of classrooms for various purposes. L-3 MAPPS will also develop special-purpose active schematics, allowing the instructor to monitor the shutdown cooling system parameters, inject malfunctions and trigger remote operator actions. Contact: Sean Bradley, telephone: (514) 787-4953.

Award

Structural Integrity Associates, Inc., an engineering consulting company to the Energy and Power Industry, was presented the Corporate Appreciation Award by J. Robert Sims, Jr., the President of American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), at the annual ASME PVP Conference on July 23, 2014. The ASME selected Structural Integrity due to their significant leadership in the NuclearPlantJournal.com

ASME and industry since their founding in 1983. Structural Integrity supported approximately 40 ASME Codes and Standards Committees, and been an active supporter of the Pressure Vessels and Piping Division (PVP) by authoring or co-authoring over 55 papers in the past five years in addition to three tutorials, developed sessions related to high pressure technology, materials and fabrication, design analysis, and fatigue, and participated in Software and NDE Forums. Their industry expertise is recognized by the organization and industry through the leadership as Technical Committee Chairs, Conference Chairs, and in 2011, Laney Bisbee, the company CEO, was a plenary speaker. Contact: Vicki Douglass, telephone: (877) 474-7693, email: info@structint. com.

I&C Agreements

Westinghouse Electric Company LLC signed two instrumentation and control (I&C) system cooperation agreements with China’s State Nuclear Power Automation System Engineering Company (SNPAS). Danny Roderick, president and CEO, Westinghouse Electric Company, and Wang Binghua, chairman, State Nuclear Power Technology Corporation (SNPTC) witnessed the agreement signings that will enable Westinghouse to sustain its Automation and Field Services business growth in China’s nuclear energy market. One of the agreements extends an I&C systems cooperation signed in November 2010 for China AP1000® nuclear plant I&C systems. The extension covers the strategic relationship of Westinghouse and SNPAS in supplying I&C systems for AP1000 new-plant projects into the future. The second agreement covers I&C systems for future global SNPTC nuclear power plant projects, using designs derived from the AP1000 design by SNPTC. Earlier this year, Westinghouse and SNPTC signed a Memorandum of Understanding covering a broad range of areas of cooperation; this second agreement falls under that strategic nuclear technology partnership. Contact: Sheila Holt, telephone: (412) 374-6379, email: holtsa@ westinghouse.com. 

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 2:20:06 PM

• Lowest per thousand reader advertising cost. • Digital distribution of sales leads for advertisers.

Nuclear Plant Journal

Product & Service Directory–2014

November-Decmeber, 2013 Volume 31 No. 6

• Bonus distribution of all issues at several trade shows throughout the year. • Free vendor advertorials in the July-August issue. Buy one ad space, get one free. • Annual Product & Service Directory published in December.

Kozloduy NPP, Bulgaria

ISSN: 0892-2055

For additional details, please contact Michelle Gaylord via telephone at (630) 364-4780 or email michelle@goinfo.com. You may also visit:

SO14.indd 51

9/30/2014 5:19:41 PM

Back2Basics Behaviors By Eric Olson, Entergy Nuclear.

Eric Olson

Eric Olson is site vice president at Entergy’s River Bend Station in St. Francisville, La. He came to River Bend in April 2007 as the general manager of plant operations and later took the position of vice president. Olson has 33 years of experience in nuclear power. He served in the Nuclear Navy and became an instructor at the Nuclear Navy Prototype in Idaho Falls, Id. He served on board the USS William H. Bates (SSN 680), a fast attack submarine. Olson worked at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating and Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, and with Boston Edison Company at the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station. Olson is a graduate of the Wentworth Institute of Technology. He holds a bachelor of science in Mechanical Engineering Technology. He was also a Nuclear Regulatory Commission-licensed senior reactor operator and graduate of the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations’ Senior Nuclear Plant Management Course.

SO14.indd 52

Entergy’s River Bend Employees Credited Organizational risk, or any risk, can be represented by a Greek equation: E(µΙΡ,χ) = ΣχεχΡ(X)µ(X). Problem is, that’s a little hard for practical application. In English, this translates to: Expected Value = (odds of gain) x (value of gain). Harvard psychologist Dan Gilbert introduced me to this equation when I watched his presentation, “Why We Make Bad Decisions.” Gilbert said that Daniel Bernoulli, a Greek mathematician who formulated the equation in 1738, gave the world a gift by providing a method to evaluate how to do the right thing at all possible times. While watching Gilbert’s presentation, I realized that we had been effectively using Bernoulli’s process at Entergy Nuclear’s River Bend Station since August 2012. There, we used the equation to transform a struggling 600-plus employee station into a winning culture in a short period of time. The River Bend equation looks only slightly different than the translated Bernoulli equation. At River Bend Station, our own version of the equation translated to Risk = Consequence x Probability – Mitigating Actions. The credit for our successes goes to the 630 nuclear professionals who come to work every day striving to reach new levels of excellence. They are hardworking individuals who understand that our job is to safely and securely produce power for customers. Our job is to help make the lives of those in our community better. Bernoulli’s equation helped convert River Bend Station from a reactive workforce to a team that is constantly and proactively looking for new and creative solutions to our challenges and opportunities. Bernoulli’s equation also helped us differentiate required work from work that could be given a lower priority, which in turn mitigated unanticipated issues. This allowed our team members to have a significantly improved work/ life balance. But, most importantly, it NuclearPlantJournal.com

allowed our organization to align around a fundamental approach so that we could come together as a team to do the right work at the right time to prevent unanticipated issues. In recent years, River Bend Station had experienced inconsistent performance that did not meet expectations. We needed a game-changer.

River Bend Station employees celebrate Earth Day. The plant’s leadership team initially conducted a common cause evaluation for critical component issues over a twoyear period. The analysis revealed that the River Bend Station organization did not exhibit an aligned, operationally focused, risk-based culture. We did not execute well, and our leaders were not intrusive in their organizations and in understanding the actual standards that existed, rather than the ones they expected to exist. The plant did have a good integrated risk process that was working to protect the plant from active work. Our issue was around the work we were not doing which we termed ‘passive’ risk. Passive risk is found in the plant’s backlogs: unmitigated single point vulnerabilities; first time high critical preventive maintenance; deferred, late or deepin-grace preventive maintenance; and extent of condition actions buried in the corrective actions backlog. The majority of our equipment reliability issues were found in these backlogs. Using the risk equation, the plant’s leadership ranked backlogs by highest risk and applied the appropriate mitigation actions, such as appropriate preventive maintenance activities, to prevent failures before they occurred. We needed strong communication tools to align the organization. Also, we needed team building initiatives to break (Continued on page 54)

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 2:20:21 PM

Were your organization’s products and services listed in Nuclear Plant Journal’s Product & Service Directory–2014?

Nuclear Plant Journal

Product & Service Directory–2013

November-December, 2012 Volume 30 No. 6

The Directory–2015 will be published in December of 2014. Organizations may advertise in and list their products and services in the Directory. Advertisers receive additional cost-free listings. Deadline for the Directory is November 17, 2014.

Arkansas Nuclear One, United States

ISSN: 0892-2055

For additional details, please contact QingQing Zhu via telephone at (630) 313-6739 or email qingqing@goinfo.com. You may also visit:

SO14.indd 53

9/30/2014 5:10:58 PM

Back2Basics..

(Continued from page 52)

down the cross functional barriers that were keeping us from doing the right work at the right time, which in turn prevented us from catching unanticipated issues and reducing our backlogs. To communicate the needed change, River Bend demonstrated organizational alignment through a simple pyramid. It was called Back2Basics. Plant workers focused on four behaviors: • Commit to do it right. • Do not walk away from a challenge. • Accept feedback. • Act as a team. Three additional behaviors championed by the River Bend Station leadership team also were key in changing performance: • Organizational Risk Management and the understanding that Risk is proportional to the product of Consequence and Probability minus the Mitigating strategy. • Leadership Oversight through intrusive ownership of their functional area. • Execution Rigor through trust and teamwork. We tied these behaviors to the following value statement: What is the right thing for River Bend? This simple value statement ensured our decisionmaking focused on the station’s needs, not on budget or how hard the right actions might be. This made a step-change in the effectiveness of our corrective action process. The station then developed a decisionmaking procedure based on consequence and probability. Training emphasized the understanding and mitigating strategy of both active and passive risk. The site then added team building skills. River Bend’s senior leadership team also focused on effectively holding an organization accountable for results. The leadership team collectively reviewed a case study written by Super Bowl winning NFL coach Bill Parcells for the Harvard Business Review titled “Teamwork through Accountability.” Station leadership also embraced “The Oz Principle” to engrain a culture of execution throughout the plant. The Oz Principle posits that a personal choice is required to rise above one’s circumstances 54

SO14.indd 54

and demonstrate the ownership necessary for achieving desired results – to See It, Own It, Solve It and Do It. More team building was conducted with the senior leadership team to enhance teamwork. The moral of the story is that a simple Greek equation E(µΙΡ,χ) = ΣχεχΡ(X)µ(X)

on the benefits of nuclear energy. These opportunities range from elementary school visits and presentations to state university tours, Baton Rouge Earth Day, Girl Scout and Boy Scout Nuclear Science Days, St. Francisville Summer Fest and National Nuclear Science Week.

Entergy’s VP Eric Olson hosts LSU students from 1738, which can make a difference in today’s world, especially when you have an outstanding work force, focused on excellence. About Entergy Nuclear’s River Bend Station: In June of 1986, River Bend Nuclear Station in St. Francisville, La. became the second nuclear power plant to produce electricity in Louisiana. June 2011 marked River Bend’s next milestone as it celebrated 25 years of safe and reliable operation. River Bend Station received a power upgrade of approximately 52 megawatts in 2003 and now generates 974 megawatts of electricity. River Bend’s output meets approximately 10 percent of the total energy demand of Louisiana. At River Bend, it has always been a goal to continuously serve the community in which the plant operates. Through grants from Entergy, River Bend has been able to promote tourism, afterschool development, drug and alcohol awareness and recreational opportunities in St. Francisville, West Feliciana Parish and East Feliciana Parish. River Bend employees maintain a strong presence within the community by giving of their personal time through volunteer efforts as well as educating the public NuclearPlantJournal.com

About Entergy: Entergy Corporation is an integrated energy company engaged primarily in electric power production and retail distribution operations. Entergy owns and operates power plants with approximately 30,000 megawatts of electric generating capacity, including more than 10,000 megawatts of nuclear power, making it one of the nation’s leading nuclear generators. Entergy delivers electricity to 2.8 million utility customers in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas. Entergy has annual revenues of more than $11 billion and approximately 14,000 employees. With more than 6,000 nuclear employees, Entergy today is recognized as a global leader among nuclear companies. Entergy Nuclear owns, operates, supports and provides management services to a national fleet of 12 reactors in 10 locations in the United States. Contact: Mike Bowling, Entergy Nuclear, 1340 Echelon Parkway, Jackson, Mississippi 39213; telephone: (601) 368-5650, email: mbowlin@entergy.com or Mary Broussard, Entergy River Bend Nuclear Station, St. Francisville, Louisiana 70775; telephone: (225) 635-5038, email: mbrous3@entergy.com. www.entergy.com 

Nuclear Plant Journal, September-October 2014

9/30/2014 2:20:42 PM

W E S T I N G H O U S E E L E C T R I C C O M PA N Y L L C

WESTINGHOUSE DELIVERS GENUINE REPLACEMENT PARTS

Westinghouse DB-25 Breaker

Westinghouse supplies more than 100,000 genuine nuclear replacement parts and components yearly to the global nuclear fleet. Our cost-effective, high-quality, nuclear grade replacement parts provide global operators of various reactor designs solutions for electrical, mechanical and instrumentation and control systems. Westinghouse has a rigorous commercial-grade dedication process and a robust quality assurance program for detecting and monitoring counterfeit, fraudulent and suspect replacement parts or components. And our industry-leading experts are available 24/7 to support your plant needs. Count on Westinghouse to deliver genuine replacement parts and components to help keep your operating plant operating ... safely, efficiently and cost-effectively. For more information, visit us at www.westinghousenuclear.com

Westinghouse Electric Company

SO14.indd 55

@WECNuclear

9/30/2014 2:20:34 PM

An Amazing

Display of Power offers loop-powered digital meters to replace old analog displays. OTEK has been offering digita digital meters for years and has recently developed looppower meters thanks to lower lowe power consumption LEDs. Loop-Power meters will display as long as there is a signal signa and will notify operators when the signal is lost. Unlike old electro-mechanicalanalog d displays, OTEK meters are not susceptible to vibration, shock, or magnetism, and cannot stick. s OTEK meters are accurate to 0.1% and display both O graphically and numerically, offering decimal readings not g possible to read on analog meters.They offer 90 degrees p visibility from long distances and can be programmed to v change color when limits are approached or exceeded c using a green-yellow-red logic. u AZZ Nuclear | NLI has qualified OTEK meters for A nuclear applications.They use the existing wiring, and externally powered meters are also available to match the existing configuration. Numerous OTEK meters are installed at operating nuclear plants in the US and overseas.

NLI offers plants choices. It’s why we’re your single source.

azznuclear.com • 800.448.4124

79785_AZZ_NLI_2013_OTEK_ad.indd 1 SO14.indd 56

9/19/14 9:47PM AM 9/30/2014 2:20:42