Yesterday, Terrestrial Energy USA (TEUSA) informed the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) that they planned to begin pre-license application discussions … [Read More...] about Terrestrial Energy Announces Plans To License Their Integral Molten Reactor In The U.S.
History Made as NuScale Files First SMR Application With U.S. Nuke Regulators
Two years ago, NuScale committed to filing a license application for its eponymous SMR design with U.S. regulators by the end of 2016.
Just three months before two company executives used a custom pen on the cover letter of the ~12,000 page design certification application, even NuScale insiders were doubtful that the task could be completed by the self-imposed deadline.
Experienced and jaded observers from outside the company thought the task impossible, given the publicly available information about the status of the effort.
The final actions required to complete and check the document were finished a couple of hours after the famous New Year’s Eve ball had dropped in Times Square.
But NuScale is, and always has been, a West coast company. By the clock in the conference room, the DCA was signed with nearly an hour to spare before 2016 ended.
In an interview, Chief commercial officer Mike McGough described the scene in the Corvallis, Ore., conference room where a small signing ceremony was conducted.
Tired but happy and legitimately proud faces gathered around COO and chief nuclear officer Dale Atkinson and vice president Tom Bergman to witness their signing of the letter that formally requested the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to review, approve and grant a standard design certification for the NuScale design.
“As you recall, we had the NRC in to conduct a DCA readiness assessment in September,” McGough said.
“When they departed, they gave us a list of 85 items where they felt that we had provided incomplete information that might prevent docketing,” he continued. “Our DCA submission includes a response matrix listing every one of those 85 items and what we did to address the concern.”
On the morning of Jan. 12, company executives piled into a van for the short trip from a Washington, D.C., hotel to NRC headquarters in Rockville, Md.
After hand delivering the DCA and supporting documentation, they held a press conference with brief remarks by company executives, elected officials and nuclear industry leaders at the Newseum near Capitol Hill.
McGough and I spoke about the company’s progress several times during the month of December. The NuScale official repeatedly emphasized that the company had numerous protocols in place to ensure that the submission would be high quality and complete, even if the decision had to be made to miss the self-imposed deadline.
Recent history of DCA submissions at the NRC have shown that there are severe cost, schedule and credibility issues associated with an incomplete submission.
McGough said that his company’s leaders were ready to take several weeks to a few months longer if needed to avoid a docket rejection and DCA resubmission that might require another year or more of effort before getting to the point where the NRC began the review.
Aside: Following NuScale’s press conference announcing the DCA submittal, I spoke with John Hopkins, NuScale’s CEO. He reiterated the company’s firm commitment to submit a complete, high quality DCA as a higher priority than one that met a self-imposed deadline.
He also expressed his appreciation and gratitude to the people who worked so diligently to make the application both timely and complete. He told me that the Fluor board was impressed that a nuclear project met a deadline; it was a relatively rare event. That reinforced their confidence in NuScale designers and managers. End Aside.
The current expectation is that the agency will take about two months to review the application and determine if it is complete or if additional information is needed before the staff can begin its work that, under a recently refined schedule, is projected to take three and a half years.
UAMPS Is First Customer
NuScale’s application provides complete technical details for the standard plant design, which consists of 12 identical modules that could each be a standalone 50 MWe power plant.
Each module has a reactor heat source that uses light water circulated without any pumps to transfer fission heat from the reactor, an integral steam generator and pressurizer, a sealed containment vessel and a complete Rankine cycle steam plant.
All 12 modules will be installed inside a common pool and will be controlled from a single control room.
The modules are sized so they can be completely manufactured and delivered to a site ready to be installed and connected.
This concept provides economy of series production, scalabil- ity and maintenance exibility that is impossible in monolithic power plants designed to produce 1,000 or more MWe per unit.
The first commercial NuScale power plant will be built on a site within the reservation of the Idaho National Laboratory.
It will be owned by the Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (UAMPS), whose member companies will use the 600 MWe of clean electricity from the facility to supply retail and commercial customers in their service territories. UAMPS has a target date for commercial operation by the end of 2026.
Energy Northwest, an experienced nuclear plant operating company, will operate and maintain the plant for UAMPS.
Primary Funder Is Fluor
The NuScale power module evolved from a design first conceived in 2000 by Dr. Jose Reyes while working as a nuclear engineering professor at Oregon State University. OSU continues to play an important role in hosting several testing facilities and providing a strong pipeline of engineers.
NuScale started pre-application reviews with the NRC in 2008. The firm has purchased 43,000 hours of professional staff time at a cost of more than $11 million to resolve concerns about the design approach and safety case.
The company has also invested in more than 2,000,000 staff hours supplied by a staff of more than 800 people. NuScale worked with more than 50 vendor partners to design and test components, conduct full system tests and develop licensing documentation.
In 2013, the SMR designer competed for and won a grant from the Department of Energy that provided $217 million. NuScale investors have matched those government funds — and then some — to pay for design and licensing efforts.
In 2011, Fluor (FLR:NYSE), the giant multinational construction and contracting company, purchased a majority of the company’s shares and has been the primary source of funds for the project.
Fluor has also been a major participant in the design effort and the establishment of the supply chain for the unique components that form the plant.
Note: A version of the above was first published in Fuel Cycle Week, issue number 690 dated January 12, 2017. It is republished here with permission.
Terrestrial Energy Announces Plans To License Their Integral Molten Reactor In The U.S.
Yesterday, Terrestrial Energy USA (TEUSA) informed the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) that they planned to begin pre-license application discussions with a goal of being ready to file a design certification application no later than Oct 2019.
Here is a brief video that provides an overview of Terrestrial Energy‘s Integral Molten Salt Reactor (IMSRTM
TEUSA filed a 7 page letter with the NRC that provides a detailed response to the NRC’s request (in RIC 2016-08) that companies with plans to request NRC regulatory services in fiscal year 2019 provide sufficient details about their plans to allow the agency to produce its budget for that year.
Quoting from TEUSA’s press release:
TEUSA recognizes that the USNRC is developing a specific licensing framework for Advanced Reactor designs. The Company has confidence in the capability of the USNRC to review and reach safety, security, and environmental findings on the IMSR™ design, in a timely manner.
Simon Irish, CEO of TEUSA commented, “This is a very exciting time for the nuclear power industry. We are moving forward with the design and regulatory actions needed to allow the Company to bring the IMSR™ to market in the 2020s. The IMSR™’s design choices will result in an Advanced Reactor that delivers clean, cost-competitive and high-grade industrial heat. This capability can serve the many and varied heat requirements of industry, and as well as those of the electric power sector where the IMSR™’s dispatchablity will be greatly prized.”
The Company is currently examining four sites for its first commercial plant. These sites include the Idaho National Laboratory (INL), near Idaho Falls, ID, as well as additional sites east of the Mississippi River. In all cases, TEUSA has begun to investigate the commercial prospects for an IMSR™ power plant for both electric-power and industrial heat co-generation.
Of course, it wouldn’t be very strategic for a company that is already engaged in a lengthy and expensive regulatory process to publicly criticize the agency whose approval they will need in order to begin obtaining a return on their massive investment of private capital.
That caution doesn’t apply to a pestering blogger who doesn’t need the NRC’s permission to continue publishing.
Though I, like TEUSA, have confidence that the NRC has the capability to prepare and to be ready to properly evaluate the IMSRTM, I think it is important to add a critical caveat. The NRC isn’t ready today and will not be ready in FY2019 unless they promptly receive the proper direction and resources from Congress to become ready.
If the NRC does not make the investment now, or within a very short period of time, they will not have the expertise to independently and properly evaluate TEUSA’s innovative, but simple and evolutionary design. There are experts, documents and other resource materials available to support the learning processes, but humans are not Vulcans. It will take time and focus to enable the talented people at the NRC to become molten salt reactor experts.
TEUSA isn’t the only company that is pursuing this kind of technology; the investment in the capability to properly understand and review liquid fueled, molten salt cooled reactors is not promotional or “picking winners” in any way.
TEUSA’s announcement also offers a tiny window into the NRC’s current regulatory paradigm.
Reading Regulatory Issue Summary (RIS) 2016-08 and Terrestrial Energy’s response helps to provide support for the frustration that is often expressed here with the NRC’s processes as developed over the decades. Those legacy processes have evolved with heavy influence from legislators, established companies and intensely active opponents.
These documents are just one of many such interactions that will be taking place during the next 5-8 years before the design certification is complete.
Nothing moves quickly in the nuclear energy area, but there are ways to help speed the processes and lower the costs for everyone.
Note: I should have checked my in-box to see TEUSA press release before republishing NRC Vision And Strategy For Licensing Advanced Reactors Needs Improvement without modifying it to acknowledge TEUSA’s announced plan. That plan makes the following statement obsolete.
Not surprisingly, none of the 50 companies that are working on advanced reactors in the U.S. have announced any plans to apply to the NRC for permission to build their designs in the U.S.
Press Release: Advanced Reactors Technical Summit IV & Technology Trailblazers Showcase
Sometimes I get lazy and simply copy and paste a press release. This is one of those times. For Immediate Release: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 Contact: Caleb Ward caleb.ward@usnic.org 202-332-8845 Top U.S. Advanced Reactor Developers to Summit At Chicago Technology Showcase NRC Chairman Burns, DOE Deputy Assistant Johnson, GAIN’s Baranwal, Industry Leader and Former NRC […]
NRC Vision And Strategy For Licensing Advanced Reactors Needs Improvement
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has published its vision and strategy for preparing to review applications for permission to begin building reactors that do not use light water as the coolant. Policy makers who are interested in ensuring that American reactor developers have the opportunity to lead in the nascent – but potentially very lucrative field – of […]
Nuclear highlights of Rick Perry’s confirmation hearing plus a suggested action
The Senate Energy and Environment committee, chaired by Senator Lisa Murkowski, held a confirmation hearing yesterday for former Texas Governor Rick Perry, the Trump Administration nominee for Secretary of Energy. Sam Britton, the nuclear waste specialist from the Bipartisan Policy Center, produced a valuable resource by watching the full hearing and producing a series of […]
Eduardo Porter says states that close nuclear are going in wrong direction for climate
In a recent New York Times column titled On Climate Change, Even States in Forefront Are Falling Short, Eduarto Porter begins by lauding California’s claimed position as a leader in environmental consciousness. He points to recent political statements by the state’s elected officials indicating they plan to stubbornly resist any Trump Administration efforts to interfere […]
History and promise of high temperature gas cooled reactors
By: Diarmuid Foley A small modular nuclear reactor to replace coal plants could be on the market within 5 years. In 2014, the Generation IV international forum[1] confirmed the Very High Temperature Reactor (VHTR) as one of 6 promising reactor technologies that should be pursued in order to develop advanced reactors suitable for deployment in […]
Jimmy Carter never served on a nuclear submarine. Was not a nuclear engineer
Initial version posted Jan 27, 2006 A recent conversation about the dangers of false claims of expertise stimulated me to revise and republish a nearly 11 year-old post. It provides documented proof that Jimmy Carter was not a “nuclear engineer” and never served on a nuclear submarine. He left the Navy in October 1953, about […]
Value for value support for atomic energy research and information
Note: This is a rerun that was originally published on January 9. The response has been underwhelming. Please consider the message that sends me about the value of the work being done on Atomic Insights. As an exciting New Year begins, I hope that readers are finding useful insights here at Atomic Insights. If you […]
Journal of Nuclear Medicine article: Fear of medical radiation is based on bad science
Radiology and nuclear medicine subject matter experts have published an article in the January 2017 issue of The Journal of Nuclear Medicine that provides numerous reasons why people should never worry about properly controlled radiation doses used in medical imaging. The doses used are many times lower than the lowest dose at which harm might […]
Weatherwax: Preference for biofuel dev led to low dose radiation research demise
The following video is extracted from the House Science, Space and Technology joint oversight and energy subcommittee hearing examining misconduct and intimidation of scientists by senior executives in DOE chain of command. It features the opening statements from Dr. Sharlene Weatherwax, a plant microbiologist serving as the Director, Biology and Environmental Research for the Department […]
Obtaining scientific cover for preordained policy decision
I’m working on a story about the demise of the Department of Energy’s Low Dose Radiation Research Program. It’s a lengthy, complicated saga that isn’t yet ready to be published as a complete piece. There is a part of the story worth telling now because it may be valuable to others. It illustrates the way […]