AP/WideWorld Plant design certifications and construction license reviews could be simultaneous.

Proponents of a resurgent U.S. nuclear power industry, anxious to speed research, development and new construction domestically as well as abroad, are encouraged by regulators’ promises to expedite technology reviews and reduce construction risks with more focus on up-front design. But uncertainties related to pol-itics and policy, plant licensing workloads, spent fuel disposition and Wall Street’s appetite for new investment permeate the marketplace.

Industry executives earlier this month addressed 200 attendees of an Alexandria, Va., conference in support of the hoped-for nuclear “renaissance,” emphasizing the need for government support in expediting license review, subsidizing new technology development and rebuilding U.S. capability in the burgeoning global nuclear marketplace. “America’s nuclear leadership is critical if we are to play in the international sandbox,” said Raul Deju, president of EnergySolutions, the Utah-based nuclear energy and waste management firm.

MATTHEWS

Executives pointed to continuing unknowns in how nuclear power fits into overall U.S. energy strategy on the eve of an administration change, and they also noted the growing struggle of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to keep up with a growing load of applications for plant construction, operating licenses and design certifications for the 104 operating reactors in the U.S. and new units and technologies.

“It’s coming at the NRC like a hurricane,” said Tom Christopher, president of AREVA NP, a U.S. unit of a French nuclear technology firm. He and others noted that NRC licensing decisions, including approvals that may precede the official license, are becoming critical to plant economics now. “A nuclear vendor is not in the position to fix the cost of a plant until the licensing is clear,” he said.

NRC Chairman Dale Klein acknowledged the agency’s challenges, saying “We believe we can handle it,” and claiming the agency “has gotten the funding it needs.” But he acknowledged that NRC is moving slower than it had hoped in approving more design certifications. Those approvals are now “moving in parallel” with construction license review, Klein said. “The NRC needs to be a tough regulator, but predictable,” he said.

David Matthews, director of NRC’s division of new reactor licensing, emphasized the new “design-centric approach. ” He noted the long-term importance of design certifications. “The entire legacy of a plant hinges on never shortchanging this even with the onslaught of new applications,” said Matthews. “Once a design is certified, there is a high threshhold for the NRC or any of the parties to change it. It is virtually sacrosanct.”

“The Yucca Mountain facility can be licensed, built and be operating in my lifetime.” —Ward Sproat , DOE Civilian Rad. Waste Director

Among design issues that could soon be considered is a proposed rule that would require an assessment of the impact of a commercial airliner hitting a nuclear facility and the resulting damage. Facilities that have not yet received design certifications or construction licenses would have to include such assessments.

Matthews noted that design certifications are not to be challenged or questioned during licensing hearings. He cautioned, however, that the new complexities are making it tough for NRC staff to meet the goal of a 30-month review for new reactor applications, with 33 months “the reality now.”

Attendees acknowledged the more intensive and expensive up-front design effort now being required in the relicensing process, but hoped it would reduce construction costs and added risk. George Davis, manager of new plant government programs for Westinghouse, noted that its simplified AP1000 reactor design will generate a smaller plant footprint and simplified operations and maintenance. Component modularization is another critical part of its strategy. “There is a bigger commitment to the details of standardization now than before,” he says. “We don’t have the resources to custom design.”

How to handle spent nuclear fuel will also continues to challenge the building process. Ward Sproat, director of DOE’s Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste, was optimistic that the planned Yucca Mountain storage site in Nevada would become a reality despite technical challenges and strong state opposition. DOE’s building license for the site was filed to NRC on June 3.

“Yucca Mountain can be licensed, built and be operating in my lifetime,” he said. “It could receive fuel eight years after construction authorization if it gets funding.” Sproat claims that the repository’s host county favors it.

But Sproat noted that major differences in fiscal 2009 House and Senate funding for Yucca Mountain’s NRC review must still be reconciled. “If the [repository’s] application is withdrawn, it will agitate 39 states with spent fuel destined to go there,” he said.

The Bush administration’s push for an international partnership to develop fuel reprocessing technologies also continues to suffer under the weight of congressional budget cuts and negative studies. The Global Nuclear Energy Partnership was criticized in a 2007 National Research Council report. “GNEP has become somewhat of a four-letter word,” acknowledged Dennis Spurgeon, assistant DOE secretary for nuclear energy. “But it has been viewed too narrowly domestically. GNEP will be expanding around the world, whether we participate in it or not.”

The July 22-25 event was sponsored by Exchange Monitor publications.