Eda Presentation Aug2009

Consulting with EDA Joe Miller’s Experience What is EDA The Future of Nuclear Energy

Joe Miller’s Experience (Joseph S. Miller is President of EDA)

Academics

BSIE University of Arkansas

BSME University of Arkansas

MSNE Kansas State University

Post Graduate Courses at Idaho State and America University

Joe Miller’s Experience

35 years of engineering, fuel, operations and maintenance support for nuclear power plants

15 years of nuclear/mechanical design

12 years of operation and maintenance support at operating plants

10 years of regulatory and licensing support

7 years of probabilistic risk assessment support

7 years of nuclear fuel support

NUS Corp; Rockville, MD

INEL/EGG Idaho; Idaho Falls, ID

Black & Veatch; Overland Park, Ks

Gulf States Utilities/Entergy; River Bend Station; St. Francisville, LA

Scientech; Rockville, MD

EDA Inc; Vienna, VA; 1996 to present

Certifications

Professional Engineer in Maryland and Louisiana

Microsoft Certified in Windows Server and Windows Professional

Cisco Network Certified

26 published papers

2 US Patents

2 Foreign Patents

Director of Communications for the ASME Nuclear Engineering Division executive committee.

Track Chair for ICONE14, ICONE15 and ICONE16.

Technical Program Chair for ICONE17

Technical Committees

Co-Chair of ASME/NED Systems, Structures and Components Design and Analysis Subcommittee

Co-Chair of ASME/NED Thermal Hydraulics Committee on System Software

Chair of ASME/NED Plant Operation and Maintenance Committee

Member of ASME Energy Committee

What Is EDA?

Engineering Design and Analysis

Founded in 1996

President and founder is Joe Miller

Specializes in Support to the Utilities and the NRC

EDA can Provide

Design Support

Design Reviews and Evaluations

Modification Packages Support

Root Cause Evaluations

Licensing Support for Design Submittals

Full Quality Assurance Support

Audit Support

EDA can Provide

Analysis Support

Analytical Simulation of Systems

Design and Support Calculations

EDA Clients/Projects

Exelon

Computer Code Training

Aux Feedwater Modeling

Audit of Fuel Vendor

Technical Specification Changes

NRC Inspection Support at Plants

Piping Loads on Reactor Fan Cooler

Evaluate RWCU Anomalies

Support Westinghouse on Safety Analyses for New Steam Generators

NRC

Inspection at Plants

Small Break Evaluation Using TRACE

Phase 2 & 3 b5b Security Inspections

New Plant Reviews

AmerGen Energy /Oyster Creek

Heater Drain System Simulation

I & C Sensitivity Study

Florida Power & Light

RHR Restart Evaluation

Licensing Support

Public Service Enterprise Group/Peach Bottom

Moisture Separator Drain Tank Evaluation

Plant Modification Recommendations

Boiling Water Reactor Owners Group

Audit of General Electric for BWR Stability Calculations

Licensing Support

NUPIC (Nuclear Procurement Issues Committee)

Audit General Electric on LOCA Analyses

Procedure Modification Recommendations

EDA

Establish Corporate QA Procedures

Calculation QA Procedures

Software QA Procedures

Develop Web Sites

Develop Intranet for Office

Example EDA Project M/S Reheater Simulation – Oyster Creek

EDA received Call from Engineer at Oyster Creek plant

An Exelon Engineer recommended EDA for the work that they required.

OC asked for a bid on the job.

OC paid $5000 so EDA could gather information from the site.

EDA developed a bid for $75,000 and sent it to the Utility.

The work was projected to be complete in 5 months.

EDA used Joe Miller and a associate engineer to perform the work.

The RELAP5 program was used to perform the simulation.

A model was developed and a simulation of the system was performed.

The results showed that the oscillations in two of the six pipe lines caused significant oscillations in the system piping.

EDA recommend that level instrumentation for these two tanks be modified with delays.

Further sensitivities were performed to determine the instrumentation settings that allowed these delays to occur.

Example EDA Project SNAP M/S Reheater Simulation – Oyster Creek

Status of Commercial Nuclear Power As of 2004, nuclear power provided 6.5% of the world's energy and 15.7% of the world's electricity, with the U.S. , France , and Japan together accounting for 57% of all nuclear generated electricity. As of 2007 , the IAEA reported there are 439 nuclear power reactors in operation in the world, operating in 31 different countries.

Status of Commercial Nuclear Power

Reactor Types Pressurized Water Reactors (PWR)

PWR (Pressurized Water Reactor)

Reactor Types Other Types of Reactors

PHW Candu: Pressurized Heavy Water Candu

BLW Candu: Boiling Light Water Candu

BHWR: Boiling Heavy Water Reactor

SGHWR: Steam Generating Heavy Water Reactor

PHWR: Pressure Vessel Heavy Water Reactor

LWCHWR: Light Water Cooled Heavy Water Reactor

GCR: Gas Cooled Reactor

MAGNOX: Magnox Type Gas Cooled Reactor

AGR: Advanced Gas Cooled Reactor

HTGR: High Temperature Gas Cooled Reactor

FBR: Fast Breeder Reactor

LWBR: Light Water Breeder Reactor

GCHWR: Gas Cooled Heavy Water Reactor

LWGR: Light Water Cooled Graphite Reactor

Annual Energy Outlook 2007 with Projections to 2030

Annual Electric Sales

Total electricity sales increase by 41 percent from 3,660 billion kilowatt-hours in 2005 to 5,168 billion kilowatt-hours in 2030.

The largest increase is in the commercial sector (Figure 53), as service industries continue to drive growth.

Electricity sales, which are strongly affected by the rate of economic growth, are projected to grow by 54 percent to 5,654 billion kilowatt-hours in 2030.

Status of Commercial Nuclear Power

Annual Energy Outlook 2007 with Projections to 2030

Global Fossil Emissions

Public Opinion

Feb 2005 opinion poll regarding nuclear power in the USA. Blue represents people in favor of nuclear power. Gray represents undecided. Yellow represents opposed to nuclear power

U.S. Electricity Production Costs 1995-2006, In 2006 cents per kilowatt-hour Production Costs = Operations and Maintenance Costs + Fuel Costs Source: Global Energy Decisions Updated: 6/07

Factors positively influencing the prospects of constructing new nuclear power plants: Presented in Speech by Chair of NRC

Support by the President and the Congress for expanding the use of nuclear power, including incentives for the first six plants

Concerns with the Nation’s energy security

High cost of oil and natural gas

Environmental considerations

Low and stable electrical production costs from nuclear

Low interest rates and inflation

Renewed interest by utilities in building new nuclear power plants

NRC’s establishment of an improved licensing process

Factors Negatively influencing the prospects of constructing new nuclear power plants: Presented in Speech by Chair of NRC

High capital cost of new nuclear power plants

Financing considerations

New licensing processes have not yet been fully tested

New infrastructure needed for new nuclear power plants: Presented in Speech by Chair of NRC

Improved reactor design and construction

Reliable suppliers

Well-qualified personnel

Licensing Process ITAAC Inspection, Test, Analyses, Acceptance Criteria

Roadmap to Commercial Operation

New Reactor Licensing Activities

New Plants as of Nov 2007 Company Site(s) Design, # of Units Early Site Permit (ESP) Construction / Operating License Submittal Alternate Energy Holdings Bruneau, ID EPR - FY 2009 Amarillo Power Vicinity of Amarillo, TX EPR - FY 2009 AmerenUE Callaway, MO EPR - FY 2008 Constellation (UniStar) Calvert Cliffs, MD plus two other sites EPR (3) Will go to COL but submit siting information early First submittal - FY 2008 Detroit Edison Fermi, MI Not yet determined Not yet determined FY 2008 Dominion North Anna, VA ESBWR (1) Under review, approval expected 2007 FY 2008 Duke William States Lee, Cherokee County, SC AP1000 (2) - FY 2008 Duke Davie County, NC Not yet determined Under consideration Not yet determined Duke Oconee County, SC Not yet determined Under consideration Not yet determined Entergy River Bend, LA ESBWR (1) - FY 2008 Entergy (NuStart ) Grand Gulf, MS ESBWR (1) Approved April 2007 FY 2008 Exelon Clinton, IL Not yet determined Approved March 2007 Not yet determined

New Plants as of Nov 2007 Company Site(s) Design, # of Units Early Site Permit (ESP) Construction / Operating License Submittal Exelon Matagorda and Victoria County, TX ESBWR (1) - FY 2009 Florida Power & Light Turkey Point, FL Not yet determined (2) Not yet determined FY 2009 NRG Energy / STPNOC Bay City, TX ABWR (2) - Under Review PPL Corp. Susquehanna, PA Not yet determined Not yet determined Not yet determined Progress Energy Harris, NC; Levy County, FL AP1000 (2); AP1000 (2) - Harris - FY 2008; Levy County, FL - FY 2008 South Carolina Electric & Gas Summer, SC AP1000 (2) - FY 2008 Southern Company Vogtle, GA AP1000 (2) Under review, Approval expected early 2009 FY 2008 Texas Utilities Comanche Peak, TX APWR (2) - FY 2008 TVA (NuStart ) Bellefonte, AL AP1000 (2) - Under Review

Advanced Reactors Scheduled for Review by NRC

Evolutionary Power Reactor (EPR)

Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR)

Westinghouse AP1000 Advanced Passive Plant

US-APWR is a 4451 MWt pressurized water reactor designed by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.

Evolutionary Power Reactor

EPR : The EPR is a large pressurized water reactor of evolutionary design, with design output of approximately 1,600 MWe.

Design features include four 100% capacity trains of engineered safety features, a double-walled containment, and a “core catcher” for containment and cooling of core materials for severe accidents resulting in reactor vessel failure.

The design does not rely on passive safety features. The first EPR is currently being constructed at the Olkiluoto site in Finland.

Evolutionary Power Reactor UniStar Nuclear will market a standard advanced design called the U.S. Evolutionary Power Reactor (U.S. EPR), a 1,600-megawatt evolutionary power reactor designed for America by AREVA Inc.

ESBWR

Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor ( ESBWR )

General Electric requested pre-application review of its design in a letter to the NRC dated April 18, 2002.

General Electric submitted its design certification application for the ESBWR on August 24, 2005.

The staff accepted the application for review in a letter dated December 1, 2005, and expects the certification process to continue through 2010.

Advanced Pressurized Water Reactor 1000 MWe

AP1000: This is a larger version of the previously approved AP600 design.

It is a 1,000 MWe advanced pressurized water reactor that incorporates passive safety systems and simplified system designs.

It is similar to the AP600 design but uses a longer reactor vessel to accommodate longer fuel, and also includes larger steam generators and a larger pressurizer.

NRC Design Certification Review Process

The review process for new reactor designs involves the certification of standard reactor designs by rulemaking (Subpart B of Part 52).

Design certification applicants must provide the technical information necessary to demonstrate compliance with the safety standards set forth in applicable NRC regulations (10 CFR Parts 20, 50, 73, and 100).

Applicants must also provide information to close out unresolved and generic safety issues, as well as issues that arose after the Three Mile Island accident.

NRC Design Certification Review Process

Currently there are four certified reactor designs that can be referenced in an application for a combined license. They are:

Advanced Boiling Water Reactor design by GE Nuclear Energy (May 1997);

System 80+ design by Westinghouse (formerly ABB-Combustion Engineering) (May 1997);

AP600 design by Westinghouse (December 1999); and

AP1000 design (pictured) by Westinghouse (February 2006).

Advanced Boiling Water Reactor

ABWR: The U.S. Advanced Boiling Water Reactor design uses a single-cycle, forced circulation, reactor with a rated power of 1,300 megawatts electric (MWe).

The design incorporates features of the BWR designs in Europe, Japan, and the United States, and uses improved electronics, computer, turbine, and fuel technology.

The design is expected to increase plant availability, operating capacity, safety, and reliability.

AP1000: This is a 1000 MWe advanced pressurized water reactor that incorporates passive safety systems and simplified system designs.

The passive systems use natural driving forces without active pumps, diesels, and other support systems after actuation. Use of redundant, non-safety-related, active equipment and systems minimizes unnecessary use of safety-related systems.

ABB Combustion Engineering System 80+

The System 80+ is a 1300 MWe advanced pressurized water reactor.

Like previous ABB-CE reactors, the System 80+ reactor coolant system has a two loop configuration, a major feature that has distinguished CE designed units.

Like other ALWRs, improved safety performance and operability are achieved, owing to sophisticated design features.

Another interesting feature of System 80+ is that it can run with Plutonium fuel, which could be a very useful mean to dispose the Weapon Graded Plutonium from dismantled nuclear warheads

Advanced PWR

The US-APWR is a 4451 MWt pressurized water reactor designed by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.

It is an evolutionary design with active safety features. The US-APWR is based on established APWR technology.

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd formally announced its intent to pursue a Design Certification on June 20, 2006 and formally requested a pre-application review of the U.S. APWR on August 31, 2006.

Advanced Reactors