ML20029C987

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Submits Comments Re Draft Rept 5-year Plan for Advanced Reactor Activities Under Energy Policy Act of 1992
ML20029C987
Person / Time
Site: 05200001, 05200002, 05200003, 05200004
Issue date: 04/26/1994
From: Taylor J
NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
To: Dreyfus D
ENERGY, DEPT. OF
References
PROJECT-672A, PROJECT-674A NUDOCS 9405030173
Download: ML20029C987 (3)
v • d • e


Text

[)-Q0l f)f00A I

A Mot,q'o Q. 0 ()

h" O C:

E UNITED STAi dS 5

'E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION k

_,/

WASHINGTON. D.C. 20555-0001 April 26, 1994 Project Nos. 672 and 674 Mr. Daniel A. Dreyfus Acting Director Office of Nuclear Energy Department of Energy Washington, D.C.

20585

Dear Mr. Dreyfus:

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff has reviewed DOE's March 30, 1994, draft report, "5-Year Plan for Advanced Reactor Activities Under the Energy Policy Act of 1992," enclosed in your letter of March 30, 1994.

It has the following comments from our licensing and research offices regarding DOE's estimates for the NRC licensing milestones for the DOE advanced light water reactor (LWR) program, actinide recycle program, and gas turbine-modular helium reactor program.

For the evolutionary and passive LWRs, the NRC licensing milestones in the DOE program appear to be based on the estimates in SECY-93-097, " Integrated Review Schedules for the Evolutionary and Advanced Light Water Reactor Projects,"

April 14, 1993. Although these estimates remain essentially correct (within one month) for the design certification reviews of the evolutionary plants (i.e., the Advanced Boiling Water Reactor and the System 80+ design), the staff is reevaluating the licensing milestones for the design certification reviews of the passive plants (i.e., the AP600 and the Simplified Boiling Water Reactor). This reevaluation, necessitated by delays in the two applice.ts programs, could affect the estiinated dates for the final design approvals, and subsequent design certifications, for the latter two designs.

The revised schedules for these reviews are expected to be forwarded to the Commission by the end of April 1994. We will provide you with the revised dates as soon as the Commission paper becomes publicly available.

For the actinide recycle program, the staff issued NUREG-1368, " Preapplication Safety Evaluation Report [PSER] for the Power Reactor Innovative Small Module (PRISM) Liquid-Metal Reactor," in February 1994. This completes NRC's review of the PRISM design.

Regarding the gas turbine-modular helium reactor program, we stated in our letter of March 31, 1994, to Mr. E.C. Brolin of DOE that the September 1994 date for the draft PSER for the modular high temperature gas-cooled reactor was not achievable. A new date for the draft PSEP will be determined and provided to you after we have reviewed the information that we requested in our letter of March 31, 1994.

(( h hk r n.,s

'*lbvg 7

es@S S$ 5 $ $5001

'hh PDR

_f

i A

r Mr. Daniel.A. Dreyfus'

' 2-Because we are reviewing these designs for design certification or for licensability, we do not have any comments on the other parts of the program plans; We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the NRC licensing milestones for the DOE advanced reactor programs.

Sincerely, Originalsigned by JJfmYs M.N % or Executive Director for Operations Distribution:

Docket File (w/ incoming)

(Project Nos. 672 and 674, and Docket Nos.52-001,-

NRC PDR (w/ incoming)52-002, 52-003, and 52-004) q ED0#9960 EDO R/F JMTaylor, ED0 JMilhoan, ED0 JLBlaha, EDO HLThompson, EDO WTRussell/FJMiraglia, NRR LReyes, NRR ACThadani, NRR FPGillespie, NRR DMCrutchfield, NRR WDTravers, NRR l'

GHMarcus, NRR JNDonohew, NRR PWShea, NRR EBeckjord,RES KDCyr, 0GC NRR Mailroom - EDO#9960 (w/ incoming)

BJSweeney, NRR - ED0#9960 PMMagnanelli, NRR - ED0#9960 PDAR R/F (w/ incoming) l SECY OGC

. pg-OCK

  • See previous concurrence 0FC PM:PDAR*

LA:PDST*-

TECH ED*

PD:PDAR*

ADAR:NRR*

i NAME JNDonohew:bs PWShea MMajac GHMarcus DCrutchfield DATE 04/19/94' 04/19/94-04/18/94-04/19/94~

04/20/94-0FC DD:RES*

d D:NRR,vi.

EDO -

j NAME TKing TWTRuIsell JTaklor DATE' 04/20/94 04/t)/94 04/h/94 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY DOCUMENT NAME:

GT9960.JND

a t

C

,g U E MMN EDO Principal Correspondence Control i

FROM:

DUE: 04/25/94 EDO CONTROL: 0009960 DOC DT: 03/30/94 FINAL REPLY:

D:niel A. Dreyfus DOE TO:

f q

Gail Marcus FOR SIGNATURE OF :

Executive Director DESC:

ROUTING:

REQUEST COMMENTS ON DRAFT 5-YEAR PLAN FOR ADVANCED Taylor REACTOR ACTIVITIES UNDER THE ENERGY POLICY ACT OF Milhoan 1992 Thompson Blaha Beckjord, RES Cyr, OGC DATE: 04/12/94 ASSIGNED TO:

CONTACT:

NRR Russell

~

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS:

COORDINATE WITH RES.

NRR RECEIVED:

April 12, 1994 ACTION NRR ACTIOY:

DAR:CRUTCHFIELD NRR ROUTING:

RUSSELL DUE TO NRR D: RECTOR'S OFFCE MIRAGLIA l

l THADANI BY r20. [/ / '

REYES E

GILLESPIE

//

B0HRER I

e e

9

[D i

D:ptrtmant of En:rgy s

j Washington, DC 20585 g

. g March 30, 1994 w

Project Nos. 672 and 674 Dr. Gail Marcus U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission PDAR-llD23 Washington, D.C.

20555-0001

Dear Dr. Marcus:

Enactment of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 requires that the Office of Nuclear Energy submit to Congress a 5-Year Program Plan to meet the Act's requirements. The Act requires that comments on the draft plan be solicited from appropriate representatives of industry, institutions of higher education, Federal agencies, national laboratories, and professional and technical societies.

Enclosed for your review and comment is the " Draft 5-Year Plan for Advanced Reactor Activities under the Energy Policy Act of 1992,"

including schedules, milestones, and funding plans. The enclosed plan is based on the Administration's submittal for the fiscal year 1995 budget. Congress is expected to debate the proposed budget submission later this year.

We have informed Congress that we will submit the plan by May 15, 1994.

In order to support,this schedule, it is requested that U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commi~ssion review the enclosed draft plan and return comments to us by mail or fax (301-903-5993) before April 11, 1994.

We will be in touch by telephone once you have received and reviewed this package to gauge your interest in attending a possible briefing (in Washington, DC) on the 5-Year Program Plan for Advanced Reactor Activities under the Energy Policy Act of 1992.

Your cooperation and prompt response to this request would be greatly appreciated. A list of those organizations from which comments are being solicited and a copy of section 2122 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 are also attached for your information.

Sincerely r-.

f

/ y aniel A. Dreyfus 7

Acting Director Office of Nuclear Energy Enclosure r

f$OS

, Excerpt from the Energy Policy Act of 199r E.R.776-307 I

src. stas. rnocmAM. coals, AND FLAN.

(a) PsiocaAM DIRECTION. 'The Secretaty shall conduct a pro-j gram to encourage the deployment of advanced nuclear reactor wwwies that to the mazunna extent

-t" (1) are cost e5ectrve in enspan' son to alternative sonroes of commercial electne power of comparable availability and reliability, taking into consuleration his cycle environmental r

. easts:(2) facilitate the design, Hanaing construction, and oper-ation-of a nuclear namg a standardased demsn; (3) exhibit -ah==e=d features;and (4) incorporate featmos t advance the objectives of the Nuclear Non Proliferation Act of 1978.

(b) PaooaAM GoAIA 'Ibe goals of the program estahh=had under sAa*6 (a) shallinclude-(1) for the near-term-for eartaficatire by the = "- y September 30,1996, (A) to facilitate the aanpletion,b of standarthsed advanad light water reactor. technology designs that the Secretary determines have the characteristics described in subsection (a)(1)thrensh(4);-

(B) to facilitate the esenpletion of --6:- by Sce% 30,1996, for pr htaa dem*an approvals by tlE ('a'avai==iaa of standa'dised for thie modular high-temperature gas. cooled reactor and the lig-uid metalreactor technologr,and (C) to evaluate by September 30,1996, areiald= born technology to determine if it can reduce the volume of long lived fissionb,, 4 :.6, (2) lor the mid-term-(A) to facilitate increased =N' y of *ah===d safety, advanced light water reacters to produce electric power at the lowest cost to the costoemer; (B) to develop advanced reactor concepts that are pas 7 sively safe and enviran>= natally acceptable; and (C) to complete research and development on high-temperature reactor and lig-mid metal reactar to an the

-by SehW 30,1998, of one er of those technologies as appropriate far prototype A-vaaaa+ ration; and (3) for the long-term,to

^ nosarch and development and demonstration to support tb design of advanced reactar mark wies capable of electrie power to a utility grid as soon as, #

but no later than the year 2010.

(c) PmocaAM PLAN.-Within ISO days aRar the date of enact-ment of this Act, the Secretary sha!! prepare and submit to the Congress a 5-year program to guide the activities under this section. 'Ibe program plan include schedule mit van,: Fed-eral funding requirementa, and non-Federal cost sharCroquire-menta. In prepanng the pregram plan, the Secretary snan take into consider 3 tion--

(1) the need for, and the potential for future adoption by electric utilities or other entities of, advanced nuclear reactor tarhaalogies that are av=i1=hle, under development, or have s

the potential for being aci for the generation ef energy from nuclear fission;

~

ADDRESSEE LIST Mr. Cordell Reed Senior Vice President Commonwealth Edison Company P.O. Box 767 Chicago, Illinois 60690 Mr. David P. Hoffman Vice President of Nuclear Production Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201 Mr. M. S. Tuckman Senior Vice President of Nuclear Generation Duke Power Company P.O. Box 33189 Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 Mr. John J. Taylor Vice President of Nuclear Power Electric Power Research Institute 1019 19th Street, N.W.

Suite 1000 Washington, D.C.

20036 Mr. Jerome H. Goldberg President of Nuclear Division Florida Power & Light P.O. Box 14000 Juno Beach, Florida 33408 Mr. L. Dan Hears Gas-Cooled Reactor Associates 10240 Sorrento Valley Road Suite 300 San Diego, California 92121 Mr. Corbin McNeill President and Chief Operating Officer Philadelphia Electric Company 2301 Market Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101

... ~

' Mr.: Gregory M. Rueger LSenior Vice' President

.and' General Manager of Nuclear Power Pacific Gas & Electric Company 32nd Floor 77 Beale ' Street San Francisco, ' California 94106 Mr. Steven Miltenberger Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer Public Service Electric & Gas' Company MCT-4B P.O. Box 570 Newark, New Jersey 07101 Mr. Bill Cahill Group'Vice President of Nuclear Licensing Texas Utilities Electric Company Mail Stop 1900 - BT 2001 Bryan Tower Dallas, Texas 75201 Mr. Robert Lindk Vice President of Nuclear Power Wisconsin Electric Power Company Mail Code P314 P.O. Box 2046 Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53201-2046 Mr. William F. Countiss Senior Vice President Oak Ridge Associated Universities P.O. Box 117 Oak Ridge, TN 37831-00117 Mr. Sherwood H. Smith, Jr.

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Carolina Power and Light' Company P.O. Box 1551 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Mr. Joseph Santucci Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) 3412 Hillview Avenue Palo Alto, California 94303 7-A

n Mr. J. C. Okeson General Manager Idaho National Engineering Laboratory EG&G Idaho, Inc.

P.O. Box 1625 Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415 Mr. N. P. Samios Director Brookhaven National Laboratory Associated Universities, Inc.

Upton, New York 11973 Mr. Albert Narath President Sandia National Laboratories P.O. Box 5800 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185-5800 Mr. Siegfried S. Hecker Director Los Alamos National Laboratory University of California P.O. Box 1663 Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545 Dr. Alan Schriesheim Director Argonne National Laboratory 9700 South Cass Avenue Argonne, Illinois 60439 Mr. John H. Nuckolls Director Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory University of California 7000 East Avenue P.O. Box 808, L-1 Livermore, California 94550 Mr. Roger McCandless General Electric Nuclear Mail Code 781 175 Curtner Avenue San Jose, California 95125

[?

Mr. Sten Caspersson Project Manager Commercial GT-MHR Combustion Engineering 1000 Prospect Hill Road Windsor, Connecticut 06095 Mr. Ray Hills

-Director GT-MHR Plant Design Control Office 3206 Tower Oaks Boulevard Suite 300 Rockville, Maryland 20852 Mr. Phil Rittenhouse Director, GT-MHR Programs Oak Ridge National Laboratory P. O. 2009, Building 4500-S Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831-8038 Mr. James E. Quinn Manager, ALMR Projects General Electric Company 175 Curtner Avenue, M/C 465 San Jose, California 95125-1088 Mr. Sunil Ghose Project Engineering Manager Bechtel National Incorporated 50 Beale Street San Francisco, California 94119 Dr. Yoon Chang General Manager, IFR Program Argonne National Laboratory (East) 9700 South Cass Avenue Argonne, Illinois 60439 Dr. Alan E. Waltar Manager of Nuclear Applications Westinghouse Hanford Company P. O. Box 1970 Richland, Washington 99352 l

7

1; Mr. Robert D. Pollard Union of Concerned Scientists 1616 P Street, Northwest Suite 310

-Washington, D.C. 20036 Mr. Gary L. Vine Electric Power Research Institute 2000 L Street, Northwest Suite 805 Washington, D.C.

20036 Dr. Peter B. Ulrich Cassini Program Manager National Aeronautics and Space Administration Code SSED, NASA Headq,reters Washington, D.C.

2054_-

Mr. Bill Magavern Director Critical Mass Energy Project Public Citizen Company 215 Pennsylvania Avenue, Southeast Washington, D.C.

20003 Ms. Jennifer A. Schafer Van Fleet, Metzner & Meredith 499 South Capitol Street, Southwest Suite 520 Washington, D.C.

20003 Mr. Richard A. Becker Manager, Nuclear Energy Projects General Electric Nuclear Energy 12300 Twinbrook Parkway Suite 315 Rockville, Maryland 20852 Mr. M. Tsutsumi Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel Development Corporation 2600 Virginia Avenue, Northwest Suite 715 Washington, D.C.

20037 Mr. Patrick MacDonald Executive Director Advanced Reactor Corporation SCS Building. Room 518 ARC Bin B854 Post Office Box 2625 Birmingham, Alabama 35202 1

i

Advanced Reactor Research and Development Programs L

i DRAFT i

May 1994 U.S. Department of Energy l

0 Office of Nuclear Energy geurce 1

~

4 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY OFFICE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY CIVILIAN REACTOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS 5-YEAR PI AN FOR ADVANCED REACTOR ACTIVITIES UNDER THE ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 1992 t

May 1994 i

DRAFT

TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary Program M ission................................................... 2 2

Ngram Objectives 2

Program Milestones The Advanced Light Water Reactor Prop-n Program Mission...................

3 Ngram Relationships................................................ 3 Plan ning Assumptions................................................ 3 Program Plan..................................................... 3 5-Program schedule Resource Requirements............................................... 5 Ngram Progress..............................

6 Contingenci es..................................................... 6 Figure l - ALWR Program Milestone schedule................................ 7 Figure 2 - Annual ALWR Program Projected Costs to Meet Energy Policy Act Milestones 8

The Actinide Recycle Program Ngram M ission................................................... 9 9

Termmation Justification................,.............................

Ngram Relationships and Termination Impacts................................ 9 Pi n n n mg Assumptions............................................... 10 Ngram Plan..................................................... 10 Ngram Schedule

.................................................12 Resource Requirements............................................... 12 Contin gencies.................................................... 12 Figure 3 - Actinide Recycle Ngram Milestone Schedule.........................

14 Figure 4 - Annual Actinide Recycle Program Projected Costs to Meet Energy Policy Act Milestones..............................

15 The Gas Turbine. Modular Helimn Reactor Program Program Mission.................................................. 16 Termination Justification

.............................................16 Ngram Relationships and Termination impacts...............................

17 Planning Assumptions............................................... 17 Program Plan................................................

17 Program schedule

.................................................18 Resource Requirements.............................................. 18 Contingenci es.................................................... 18 Figure 5 - GT-MHR Program Milestone Schedule..............................

19 Figure 6 - Annual GT-MHR Program Njected Costs to meet Energy Policy Act Milestones............................. 20 Appendices Appendix A - Narrative Program Summary Tables 21 25 Appendix B - Program Schedules and logic 2....

Appendix C - Resource Requirements..................................... 30 Appendix D - Acronyms List........................................... 33

b U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY CIVILIAN REACTOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS 5-YEAR PLAN FOR ADVANCED REACTOR ACTIVITIES UNDER_TIIE ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 1992 EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

His five-year plan for the Department of behind schedule, any funding shortfalls, and any Energy's (DOE) Civilian Reactor Development other circumstances that might affect the ability Program is based on both the Department's and of the Secretary to meet the goals set forth in the Office of Nuclear Energy's Strategic Plans, subsection 2122(b). In conformance with this as well as the requirements of the Energy Policy requirement, this Plan reflects the Act of 1992 (EPACT). The time frame covered Administration's policy to focus on research and by this Plan is FY 1994 through FY 1998.

development programs that have near-term commercial applications, such as the Advanced Among its other provisions, EPACT codifies the Light Water Reactor program, and to place Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) Part greater budgetary priority on other energy 52 licensing reform rule, which provides for supply and conservation options.

cenification of standardized designs, issuance of combined construction and operating licenses, Consistent with EPACT requirements, the and informal hearings on new nuclear plant ALWR design cenification program is designed construction. The Act also authorizes the NRC to achieve NRC pre-certification of four ALWR to allow interim operation of completed reactors designs. In addition, for two of these designs, under certain conditions.

the First-of-a-Kind Engineering (FOAKE) program will provide cost and schedule certainty In addition, EPACT provides multi-year to the marketplace by ensuring standardization of authorization for DOE's Advanced Light Water plant components not covered under the program Reactor (ALWR) design certification and First-to achieve NRC design certification, of-a-Kind engineering programs to support commercialization of ALWR reactor designs Design activities for the Advanced Liquid Metal during the 1990s. De Act also supports Reactor (ALMR) and MHTGR (now known as programs focused on continued research and the Gas Turbine-Modular IIelium Reactor or development of the Actinide Recycle system and GT-MHR) are scheduled for termination the Modular High-Temperature Gas-cooled beginning in 1995, in conformance with the Reactor (MBTGR). EPACT also requires the Administration's policy to restrict reactor Secretary of Energy to recommend to Congress research to the more near-term advanced light by 1998 one or both of these technologies for water reactor activities.

.l construction of a prototype demonstration reactor.

Continued support of the Actinide Recycle program is inconsistent with the Administration's EPACT subsection 2122(c) requires the position concerning the use of plutonium for Secretary of Energy to update the Office of civilian power production in - the future.

Nuclear Energy's Five-Year Program Plan Derefore, termination of the Actinide Recycle annually and to submit such updates to program is proposed, starting in FY 1994.

Congress, describing any activities that are E

In compliance with the Energy Policy Act and These objectives are:

&c Administration *s directives, this Plan details the current mission, relationships, activities,

  • Assisting utilities in maintaining operatio milestone schedule, and resource requirements of current nuclear units as long as they for each of DOE's civilian advanced reactor can be operated safely and economically.

research and development programs, as well as Making available to the marketplace the budgetary appropriations approved by the Congress.

certified, standardized advanced light water reactors that meet customer Program Mission requirements and offer significant advances in safety.

DOE's advanced reactor programs are managed DOE,s c Dian reactor development programs iv through its Office of Nuclear Energy (NE). The are now bemg restructured to focus on primary mission of these programs is to meet the Advanced Light Water Reactors that have near-projected future need for new baseload term commercial applications, generating capacity by enabling safe, economical nuclear power technologies as an option for the Nation's electric utilities. In addition to EPACT, this mission is based on the Atomic Energy Act Program Milestones of 1954, the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-438), and the DOE Organization To meet its mission objectives, the Department Act (Public Law 95-91),

of Energy has established the following milestones:

Activities in progress to support this primary mission include: (1) encouraging institutional Milestone Date Milestons reform to reduce the initial financial risk of new nuclear plant construction; (2) continuing (September 1997)

Complete design of two interaction with the NRC and the public; standardized ALWRs.

(3) assisting in research and development of competitive, innovative reactor designs for (December 1997)

Achieve NRC certification eventual commercial deployment; (4) ensuring of four ALWR designs.

that all nuclear testing and research facilities overseen by NE are operated in a safe and In accordance with the Energy Policy Act of environmentally sound manner; and (5) 1992, the Department will carry out its civilian emphasizing cost-sharing with industry to spread nuclear programs, within budgetary limits, to development risles and lower costs.

foster the continued availability of nuclear power as a clean, safe, and economical alternative option for electricity generation.

Program Objectives As an adjunct to current program activities, the Office of Nuclear Energy reconunends that long-To meet the EPACT requirements and fulfill its term nuclear energy research and development legislative mandate under current and projected needs be examined by an organizat,on such as i

budgetary constraints, the DOE Office of 6e National Academy of Science, m

Nuclear Energy has identified several objectives consultation with other outside experts.

related to the operation of existing nuclear power plants and the development of new, advanced plants as a viable option for near-term commercial application.

2

4s' A

B

.-H 4

4 1

v

~

---24

--a&,

Qb---4,$.

-Qn,u<-

+S.,,.3 h,i_,

b i

I i

e d

d THE-ADVANCED LIGHT WATER REACTOR PROGRAM 1

5 T

.v.-

1 THE ADVANCED LIGHT WATER REACTOR PROGRAM Program Mission expertise is beneficially applied to the development of ALWRs.

He mission of the Advanced Light Water gg gg Reactor (ALWR) program is to make available Regulatory Commission (NRC) is maintained in l

to the marketplace certified, standardized areas related to the safety and licensing of ALWRs that meet customer requirements and current and Advanced Light Water Reactors offer sigmficant advances in safety. Successful (ALWRs). This coordination is ParticularlY completion of this mission would enable nuclear power to contribute to projected future electrical imp,ortant in meet.mg program goals such as the design certification of evolutionary and mid-generating capacity requirements by 2010. This sized ALWR plants, goal is consistent with the U.S. utility industry and plant vendor goal of obtaining new nuclear Recognizing that effectiveness in design and powerplant orders later in the 1990s to allow the Perat.ional safety are common global concerns, first new plants to enter service near the turn of cooperative international programs are the century, maintained with a number of organizations in the Far East, Europe, and in countries of the former

{

Soviet Union. Cooperative arrangewits have Program Relattonslu.ps dso been established with severd Organization l

for Economic Cooperation and Development DOE has coordinated its ALWR activities member countries, as well as with the j

closely with those of the private sector. All of International Atomic Energy Agency.

the ALWR programs are cost-shared with the private sector (e.g., utilities and vendors) to ensure their relevance. In addition, day-to-day Planning Assumptions management responsibilities for several of the programs are placed with the private sector to The private Sector will continue its ensure a marketplace orientation.

implementation of the Nuclear Power Industry cooperation includes program cost-sharing with U.S. utilities through the Advanced Current cost-sharing arrangements will be Reactor Corporation (ARC), the Electric Power maintained with the private sector.

Research Institute (EPRI), and odier utility groups; and with reactor plant designers (ABB NRC will maintain its schedule for Combustion Engineering, General Electric (GE),

certifying ALWR designs through 1996 and Westinghouse). ne program also maintains and 1997.

coordination with industry associations such as the lastitute of Nuclear Power Operations and the Nuclear Energy Institute, to ensure overall Program Plan consistency between government and industry approaches to policy issues.

Light water reactors are utilized throughout the De progran utilizes national laboratories, such world to provide safe, depen 3ible electric as those i. Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and Sandia, power. The ALWR program builds upon this New Mexico, to ensure that their specialized experience by working to incorporate the lessons learned from over three decades of plant 3

operation into simpler plant designs. Greater Reactor, have been submitted to the NRC for simplicity of design will make ALWRs easier to certification. In addition to building on the construct and operate and enable a lower core experience of currently operating plants, these damage probability than current plants.

designs incorporate significant advances in safety, component and systems performance, and Major ALWR program elements include:

instrumentation and controls.

  • Demonstration of an improved regulatory The ABWR and System 80+ designs are process through certifying standardized, currently under intensive review by the NRC.

evolutionary ALWR designs that meet Agreement has been reached with the NRC on utility requirements.

the level of design detail required for certification, and agreement on technical issues Pevelopment and certification of simpler, and acceptance criteria is near. DOE anticipates standardized, mid-sized ALWR plants that the NRC will issue its final design approval with. passive / innovative safety features.

for the ABWR and System 80+ during 1994.

Certification of the ABWR and System 80+ is

  • Encouragement of industry-wide plant expected in 1996.

standardization.

Passive Plant Develooment and Certification Assistance in resolving institutional and economic regulatory impediments to

%e Department of Energy also is collaborating nuclear power.

with industry in a program to design and certify two simplified, mid-sized (600 MWe) ALWRs These activities are scheduled to be completed which employ passive safety systems. These by the late 1990s to allow utilities to consider a plants would require a smaller capital investment new plant order for operation around the turn of and, therefore, involve a reduced financial risk.

the century.

They also would be more flexible, allowing the incremental matching of supply with growth in ALWR life-cycle costs are expected to be demand. In addition, these mid-sized ALWRs competitive with alternative, base-load offer the prospect for significant simplifications technologies, such as coal and natural gas and innovations in design, constniction, and combined-cycle plants.

ALWR design operation, all made possible by their reduced standardization is primarily responsible for size. His, in turn, permits much shorter reducing such costs to below the level of current construction schedules and competitive nuclear powerplants, economics.

Certification of Evolutionary Plants Rese simplified ALWR designs will primarily employ passive features to ensure essential safety During the certification process, the NRC functions. Use of these passive features will performs a complete safety review of a design result in greatly increased time for operator and, when results are acceptable, certifies the response and an improved level of safety design. A utility can then elect to construct this compared to currently operating plants.

certified design with a reduced risk of redesign or retrofit after the start of construction.

Applications for certification of these mid-sized designs, the Westinghouse AP600 and the Two large (1300 MWe) evolutionary ALWR General Electric Simplified Bbiling Water designs, the GE Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (SBWR), were submitted to the NRC in Reactor (ABWR) and the ABB Combustion mid-1992. Certification is scheduled for 1997.

Engineering System 80+ Pressurized Water 4

Standardization Program Schedule In 1992, DOE initiated a standardization ne Energy Policy Act of 1992 provides a program in which the utility mdustry is taking a multi-year authorization for ALWR design strong leadership role. This cooperative, cost-certification and FOAKE programs to support shared program focuses on completing First-of-commercialization of ALWR designs by the a-Kind Engineering (FOAKE) on selected mid-1990s. The following milestones have been ALWR design concepts. These designs w,l g established to achieve the ALWR program:

d beyond the level of detail required for certification and will be sufficiently detailed t Desien Certification provide the cost and schedule certainty necessary to permit the consideration of new nuclear

  • Receive NRC design certification of the powerplant orders by the marketplace later m the ABWR and System 80+ designs by 1990s. His level of FOAKE will be performed August N generically and applied to all plants of the same design. The design can then serve as the basis Receive NRC design certification of the for a series of standardized plants.

AP600 and SBWR designs by December The ARC has selected two designs for this program, the Westinghouse AP-600 (a 600 MWe Standardization PWR) and the General Electric ABWR (a 1300 MWe BWR). Contracts with Westinghouse and Develop key equipment and procurement General Electric have been signed.

specifications by July 1995.

Total costs for this cost-shared program are Complete First-of-a-Kind Engineering projected at more than $200 Milh,on, Maximum activities by December 1997.

Federal Government funding for this program is set at $100 Million. Private sector contributions A detailed ALWR program Milestone Schedule melude nearly $50 Milhon from the utility is provided in Figure 1.

mdustry, and more than $100 Milhon from nuclear suppliers, ne program will be completed by 1997.

Resource Requ.irements Institutional and Reculatory Activities Annual projected funding (government and DOE sponsors several programs aimed at nongovernment) required for the ALWR improving the institutional and regulatory Program to meet the Energy Policy Act environment to promote the stability necessary milestones is summarized in Figure 2. FY 1993 for a new plant order. An improved institutional DOE program funding for the ALWR program and regulatory climate requires a stable, was $57.8 Million. Additional DOE funding of predictable safety regulatory process in which

$186 Million is required through FY 1998 (see final decisions are made with full public Figure 2). After FY 1998, when NRC-certified, panicipation prior to plant construction, standardized ALWR designs are expected to be Codification of the NRC's rules for future available in the marketplace, further research reactor licensing (10 CFR 52) in the Energy and development is ppected to be performed by Policy Act of 1992 was a significant step the private sector, with DOE-providing forward in this direction.

assistance where needed.

5

Program IYogress All program activities are underway under agreements with the private sector.

Required private sector cost-sharing has been pledged and industry organizations are in place for all programs.

  • All cenification reviews by the NRC are underway, and certifications for all designs are expected by the end of 1997.

The standardization program began design-specific activities in early 1993.

Completion of the program is scheduled for 1997.

  • Enactment of the licensing reform provisions required by the Energy Policy Act of 1992 is expected to provide the regulatory stability required to enable new plant orders.

In summary, all major ALWR elements are expected to be completed in accordance with the EPACT directives.

Contingencies ALWR Program cost and schedule estimates assume that no major design changes will be required as a result of NRC design reviews.

'Ihis assumption is based on NRC/ industry interactions on the ALWR Utility Requirements Document, which have resolved most of the ALWR technical and safety policy issues.

Should unforeseen technical policy issues arise during NRC reviews, program costs, and schedule estimates would have to be reevaluated.

6 4

l

1 FIGURE 1 ALWR PROGRAM MILESTONE SCHEDULE FY 1993 FY 1994 FY 1995 FY 1996 FY 1997 FY.1998 9

ABWR System ABWR and Revised 80+

System 80+

AP600 & SBWR FDA FDA Design Cert.

Design Cert.

(6/94) (8/94)

(8/96)

(12/97)

~ !

VV V

V ALWRs H

L Key Complete initiate Design Standardization Equipment First-of-a-Kind Work Plan Specs Engineering l

(3/93) f12/93) '

(7/95)

(12/97)

Commercial

. y y

y y

I Standardization -

I.

~

+

i

+

1 b

a a iwa e.ry a

v-w w---

w

+

w

.mr w

ri evadw ri

,"'vWe e"C1-i uw e-v'-'

e.%..vs+

w

-ev-es,-ee-e e*

, mer e w

ww*'s-

FIGURE 2 ANNUAL ALWR PROGRAM PROJECTED COSTS TO MEET ENERGY POLICY ACT MILESTONES 200 r

TotalRequirements 150 -

Cost Non-Govemment l9

.1.

Millions 100 - ': :..i :::. :: ::.

.,,.-::. i:...

l m

Govemment

-......:. i:... :? :::..::?

i::?.i:i..:::i::.:*::?.

^: ? : :-

- ~ ~

50 -

31W @n l,

w~

e%gg*pyg jkx agWswlk k

CL 4

' :~...,..

s P

$. "Nl

%'M&h..,

n u..

z m e t ;

'y. M 5d h,..o.e, is g y e 5

.rM.,$'d @p..R W. cE$7DM$..a..ww&.

dh ji 4

w

's

., y unwL v

w %n s w a g g:~

s

@ dW - y j!R g;j 9e t

0 1994-1995 1996 1997 1998 TOTAL Fiscal Year Government R&D 57.6 51.0 51.5 15.9 10.0 186.0*

Non-Goypment:

98.8 117.6 51.5 15.9 10.0 293.8 Total Requirements:

156.4 168.6 103.0 31.8 20.0 479.8

  • Figure includes funding for current and advanced reactor safety and licensing support '

4

=

+e e

v

THE ACTINIDE RECYCLE PROGRAM 7h b

e

THE ACTINIDE RECYCLE PROGRAM Program Mission plutonium, the Department hts recommended termination of the Actinide Recycle Program.

Continuation of the program is inconsistent with The mission of the Actinide Recycle program the Administration,s views concerning the use of has been to conduct the research, development, plutonimn for givt power product,on.

Furthermore, termmatl ion of the program is i

and testing activities required to demonstrate by 1997 the technical and economic feasibility of an c nsistent with the Admmistration's pohey to innovative and highly diversion-resistant nuclear restrict reactor research to the more near-tenn fuel cycle technology. If successfully developed, advanced light water reactor certification actinide recycle could significantly contribute to activities, placing greater budgetary priority on radioactive waste management by producing alternative energy supphes and conservat,on i

electricity from material that would otherwise Ptions.

require disposal in the planned geologic repository.

He program has been focused on development Program Relationships of a synergistic system comprised of three and Termmation Impacts technology components: (1) an advanced liquid metal reactor, (2) an integral fast reactor / closed In conducting the Actinide Recycle program, metal fuel cycle processing and fabrication coordination is maintained between contractors, system, and (3) a pyroprocessing system capable national laboratories, associations, universities, of recovering actinide elements from spent Light federal agencies, and foreign participants.

Water Reactor (LWR) fuel. In addition to providing electric power, this system has the Actinide recycle technologies were being potential to extract the most toxic and long-lived developed as an extension of the metal fuel cycle clements (actinides) from LWR spent fuel and to technology development conducted at Argonne economically recycle this " waste" material as National Laboratory (ANL).

ANL had fuel in an integral fast reactor to produce implemented a metal fuel cycle research and i

electricity.

development. program that includes demonstration in ANL's Fuel Cycle Facility of The Administration has made a serious review of pyroprocessing technologies that provide the Actinide Recycle technology program, efficient actinide recycling and enhanced including the Integral Fast Reactor and ALMR proliferation-resistance. These actinide recycle programs as part of the FY 1995 budget technologies utilize pyrochemical processes to discussions. The Department believes that the extract actinides directly from LWR spent fuel program's continuation is inconsistent with the for use as fuel in an integral fast reactor. Other Administrations's position concerning the use of national laboratories, including Oak Ridge plutonium for civilian power production in the National Laboratory (ORNL) and Lawrence future, and, therefore, has proposed terminating Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), as well the program in FY 1995-as an industrial team led by General Electric Company, were also involved in supporting the Actinide Recycle program.

Termination Justification Independent studies have also been underway, Consistent with Presidential Decision Directive such as the National Academy of Sciences' 13 of September 27,1993, which states that the three-year study (initiated in 1991) to eva'uate United States does not encourage the civil use of the impacts of waste partitioning and 9

transmutation technologies on radioactive waste

  • Congress will provide the FY 1995 management, including a review of the actinide termination funding needed to meet the recycle system. In addition, Japan has been program's close-out obligations.

cooperating with the U.S. on metal fuel cycle demonstration, including actinide recycling. In Program Plan June 1992, DOE and. Japan initiated a cooperative multi-year program to develop LWR spent fuel pyroprocessing. In October 1992, Program activities will be funded in FY 1994 as DOE and Japan also extended a cooperative authorized and appropriated by Congress.

agreement, signed on July 7,1989, for a jomt Efforts will continue through September 30 to pyroprocessmg development program that complete ongoing evaluations, studies, and includes significant financial and manpower critical research and development needed to support from Japan.

support a technical and economic feasibility Concurrently, DOE has been participating in actinide recycle information exchange programs Activities currently scheduled for FY 1994 with the Orgamzation for Economic Cooperation include (1) demonstration of high burnup and Development s Nuclear Energy Agency, as potential and fuel performance characterization; well as exploring possible enhanced bilateral (2) engineering-scale demonstration of cooperation with Agency members. Contmumg electrorefming prototype equipment at ANL-technical exchanges have been conducted with East; (3) development of a safety data base to the European Fast Reactor group.

support design team interactions with the NRC; National laboratory and industry participants affected by termination of the Actinide Recycle

".ranium-zirconium and uranium-plutonium-program include Argonne National Laboratories in Illinois and Idaho, EG&G in Idaho, Lawrence Orderly program closecut activities will begin by Livermote National Laboratory and the General October 1,

1994, contingent on receiving Electric Company m California, Oak Ridge Congressional approval by that date.

National Laboratory in Tennessee, and Westinghouse Hanford Company in Washington.

Actinide Reevele Develonment With termination of the Actinide Recycle As of the beginning of 1994, the Actinide program, Japanese contracts with CRIEPI, Recycle program had investigated. several MITSUI, and JAPC would be terminated.

process flow sheets that are considered attractive for processing LWR spent fuel. One that uses lithium as the reducing agent was chosen for the Planm.ng Assumpt. ions 20-kg process development test that began operation in October 1993.

  • Termination of the Actinide Recycle program is contingent upon Congressional Actinide Recycle program activities include:

approval.

  • Completion of small-scale testing with
  • Termination activities must begin by simulated LWR spent fuel; October 1,1994, in order to minimize termination and severance cost liabilities.
  • Completion of engineering-scale equipment design; 10

1 i

l Preparation of a draft waste qualification disposal in a long-term geologic repository.

strategy; and Following completion of these fuel processing activities, the FCF will be placed in an Documentation of the behavior of high-industrially and radiologically safe condition, actinide fuel irradiation to less than or equal to 5 atom-percent burnup.

Analytical Laboratory Facilities he Analytical Laboratory contains six small, shielded hot cells that are used to conduct fuels The Department will work with Congress to and materials examinations. This facility is being redirect the valuable intellectual and physical presently modified to conduct the sample resources from this program to support one or analyses required for processing of EBR-H more of the Department's higher priority blanket and driver fuel in the FCF.

programs. The Administration is committed to mitigating any job loss associated with Following completion of activities necessary to termination and to utilizing this highly trained support the EBR-H blanket and fuel processing workforce.

in the FCF, the Analytical Laboratory will be placed in an industrially and radiologically safe Termination plans for IFR/ LWR Actinide condition and transferred to EM.

Recycle facilities include the following:

Transient Reactor Test Facility (IREAT)

Experimental Breeder Reactor-ll (EBR-il)

He TREAT facility is an air-cooled, pulse-type The EBR-Il is a 62.5 MWt, liquid metal fueled reactor used to simulate postulated reactor reactor that has been in continuous operation transients and transient undercooling events.

since 1964. His reactor has been used to conduct a variety of test programs, including The TREAT facility will be defueled, and the metal and oxide fuel irradiation tests, reactor reactor building will be placed in an industrially safety tests, m%erials tests, and instrumentation and radiologically safe shutdown condition for and control tests.

transfer to EM in FY 1999.

Starting in FY 1995, EBR-II will be shut down, Not fuel Examination Facility (HFEF) defueled, and placed in an industrially and radiologically safe condition in preparation for De HFEF consists of an air-atmosphere hot cell transfer of the reactor to the Office of and an argon-atmosphere hot cell that provides Environmental Restoration and W aste capabilities for remote assembly, disassembly, Management (EM) in FY 1999.

and examination of irradiated subassemblies, materials, and other experiments. He HFEF Fuel Cycle Facility (FCF) will be placed in an industrially and radiologically safe condition for transfer to EM He FCF is a shielded, hot cell facility that in FY 1999.

consists of an air-atmosphere hot cell and an argon-atmosphere hot cell. %is facility is Fuel Manufacturing Facility (FMF) adjacent to EBR-II and is presently in the final stages of preparation for demonstration of metal ne FMF consists of materials vaults and fuel fuel processing technology.

fabrication equipment. He facility-is used to manufacture driver fuel, control rods, blanket, The FCF will be used to process EBR Il blanket and experimental assemblies for EBR-H.

and driver fuel into an acceptable form for 11

He FMF will be utilized to fabricate stainless IFR Metal Fuel Cvele Develonment steel ' dummy" subassemblies for insertion into Begin process equipment testing in ANL's the EBR-II to replace the blanket and fuel subassemblies that are removed for processing.

Fuel Cycle Facility by April 1994.

Insertion of these dummy elements is required to Complete Fuel Cycle Facility maintain EBR-II core integrity during the blanket and fuel handling and removal construction in FY 1994, operations.

LWR Actinide Recycle Development Following fabrication of the stainless steel Complete design and construction of all

" dummy' subassemblies, the FMF will be placed in an industrially and radiologically safe components of the 20-kg simulated LWR shutdown condition for transfer to EM in spent fuel process demonstration facility.

FY 1999.

Be prepared to initiate hot-operation by the end of FY 1994.

Actinide Reevele System Reactor Desien The IFR/ Actinide Recycle schedule is provided He actinide recycle system reactor design effort in Figure 3.

was in the final stages of advanced conceptual design. De design had evolved over the five-year design period (FY 1989-93) to a passively Resource Requirements safe, modular, metal-fueled, actinide-consumlag reactor system. International cooperation had FY 1994 research and development funding for provided several million dollars in design the IFR/ LWR Actinide Recycle Program totals research and development. The reactor system

$30.4 Million. Facility costs total $6.7 Million.

had been reviewed by the NRC and the Termination costs for FY 1994 total $82.2 Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards.

Million, which includes $5.7 Million for ALMR

  1. 8'8" "#

A favorable " Preapplication Safety Evaluation Report" on the Power Reactor Innovative Small During FY 1995, the Department will require Module (PRISM) design is expected from the

$28.1 Million to fund personnel salaries and NRC in FY 1994. FY 1994 program activities severance pay, as well as environmental include final,zmg the advanced conceptual design restoration obligations. An additional $76.6 t

to enable a sound technical and econonue Million of termination funds will be required to decision for prototype development and begin shutdown of attendant facilities.

establishing a basis from which a preliminary design phase can be restarted without loss of Figure 4 details the funding requirements for the information. Fore,ign contribution to research Actinide Recycle program close out.

and development efforts will cont, ue m FY m

1994, as will interaction with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

During the upcoming months, the Department Program Schedule will develop a proposal to Congress, after extensive consultation on howJ2e valuable Actinide Recycle program activities will continue intellectual and physical resources from this through FY 1994. De following milestones program can be redirected to support one or have been established for the Actinide Recycle more of the Department's higher priority program.

12

programs. The Administration is committed to mitigating any job loss associated with termination, and to utilizing this highly trained workforce.

Possible applications include:

Processing spent DOE reactor fuel to put it into a form suitable for disposal in the repository.

  • Testing the feasibility of denaturing weapons-grade plutonium by mixing it with fission products prior to disposal.
  • Improving the stability of DOE spent nuclear fuel now in storage.

13

FIGURE 3 ALMR ACTINIDE RECYCLE PROGRAM MILESTONE SCHEDULE FY 1993 FY 1994 FY 1995 FY 1996 FY 1997 FY 1998 Comp.

Comp.

Start NRC Advanced FuelTest Safety Eval. Concept Program ALMR Design Program-Report Design Termination and Development (8/93)

(12/93)

(9/94)

Completed VV V V (12/94)

, EBassTecNDeveloptnett Initiate Fuel Irradiation IFR Metal Fuel (2/93)

Initiate Initiate Program Cycle

_ Recycle Program Termination Development Testing Termination completed (4/93)

(10'34)

(9/98) 1N

'T V

[MetalFeelCycis.Demonstratleds:

!!s!h g f

us o

Select Process initiate LWR Actinide Testing 20kg Commence Program Recycle Flow Processing Program Termination Developr$ent

. Sheet Test Closecut Completed (7/93)

(10/93)

(10/94)

(9/95)

Y Y Y

Y We

!! Simulated FuelDevelopment ^'-

m..

._.-__._.._____._____._-.________._______._______,________.__.________-___.__t___..____________._____.__.__m_

_____.____.--__________,a

- z M

^

FluuRE 4 ANNUAL PROJECTED COSTS FOR THE ACTINIDE RECYCLE PROGRAM (including ANL-E and ANL-W Termination Costs) 140 Non-Govemment

  • ^&'

ANL-W TotalRequirements Tarmination

,99 _

Cost Mil ons Govemment 60 -

R&D 40 --

20 --

3 q.

. =-,:.

AD

's 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 TOTAL Govemment R&D:

30.4 28.1 7.1 0

0 65.6 ANL-W Termination Costs 82.2*

76.6 71.6 69.8 78.8 379.0 Total Govemment 112.6 104.7 78.7 69.8 78.8 444.6 Non-Governq;ent 10 0

0 0

0 10 Total Requirements 121.6 104.7**

78.7 69.8 78.8 453.6

  • Includes $5.7 million of termination funding to fund ALMR design activities
  • The FY 1995 Congressional Budget does not include funding for a!! required termination activities. $104.7 million will be required.

4 3m_a e

a-d.m se,

j 3

i e

h THE GAS TURBINE-MODULAR HELIUM REACTOR PROGRAM 9

f M

e

+

d e

w-r N

i THE GAS TURBINE -

MODULAR HELIUM REACTOR PROGRAM Program Mission have prompted the program to redirect its efforts towards developing a direct-cycle, gas-turbine variant of the plant design. While preliminary The mission of the Gas Turbine-Modular Helium stugies have shown that the revised GT-MHR

)

Reactor (GT-MHR) program has been to design promises to improve efficiency and conduct the design, research, technology economics, it would also result in a more development, and testing required to establish extensive, costly, and uncerta,m development the GT-MHR as a cost-and risk-competitive program. Commercialization and cost-generat,on i

nuclear option for a broad range of owners and estimates completed by the program in operators. This program was a continuation of November 1993 project that government funding both worldwide and domestic efforts to bring the f approximately S800 Million would be safety advantages and high-temperature required to continue the GT-MHR program capabilities of gas reactors to the commercial through completion of prel,mmary design in FY i

nuclear industry.

1999. His level of nuclear energy research and development funding is not available in the near Recent events and studies, Lowever, have tem.

indicated that, in this current budgetary climate, such a program must be given a low funding A 1992 National Academy of Sciences (NAS) priority. Accordingly, the program is bemg

study,

" Nuclear Power-Technical and teminated.

Institutional Options for the Future," concluded that the gas-cooled reactor had a low market potential. His study recommended that, with the Termination Justification exception of fuel particle development, government funding for the gas-cooled reactor Termination of the GT-MHR Program is program should be discontinued, consistent with the President's proposal to curtail long-term nuclear reactor research and In view of present budgetary constraints, fuel development, as well as the Administration's development has been designated as a top desire to redirect DOE's research and priority, and funding has been allocated development priorities. To date, the government accordingly. Recent fuel irradiation tests of both has spent in excess of $900 Million to advance commercial and NPR design fuels have indicated gas-cooled reactor technology. With the close-that fuel coating integrity was about two orders out of the New Production Reactor program of magnitude less than needed for design (NPR) in FY 1993, commonality benefits once objectives.

Extensive post-irradiation obtained from the NPR Modular High examinations and analyses have indicated that Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor (MHTGR) additional testing and associated funding will be design no longer exist. He commercial program required. The' GT-MHR fuel program, once must now bear the enttre cost of commercial viewed as confirmatory, must now be considered GT-MHR development, developmental, with attendant schedule and cost Furthermore, program cost estimates have indicated that the steam-cycle design is not economical or cost-effective. Dese findings 16

Uncertainties related to waste management Program termination will result in termination of concerns, such as disposing and packaging spent program support of nuclear research and GT-MHR fuel, have yet to be addressed and will applications at the Massachusetts Institute of ultimately escalate established cost estimates.

Technology (MIT), which has been engaged in work on the gas turbine concept since 1984.

Consequently, given the current budgetary Smaller efforts at the University of Tennessee climate, the GT-MHR's low market potential, and University of West Virginia will also cease.

cstimated high development costs, and the Administration's desire to focus on nuclear With the termination of the GT-MHR program, research and development that has near-term participation in International Atomic Energy commercial applications (such as the ALWR),

Agency-sponsored cooperative research the current GT-MHR program is being programs and working groups will also terminated, and technical development and terminate. Additionally, a recently extended gas-deployment should be deferred until a cooled reactor implementing arrangement commercial need exists.

between DOE and the Japanese Atomic Energy Research Institute (JAERI) will no longer receive funding.

Program Relationships and Termination Impacts Planm.ng Assumptions The GT-MHR program is involved in cooperative efforts with a number of

  • Termination of the GT-MHR program is governmental, private sector, and international contingent upon Congressional approval.

organizations.

  • Termination activities will begin by October 1,1994.

Private industry contracts for gas-cooled reactor development, initiated in 1986, have been Congress will provide additional FY 1995 extended through June 1994 in order to evaluate whether to continue with GT-MHR termination funds for the Office of development. The program anticipates that an Nuclear Energy to fund completion of additional no-cost extension through September close out obligations.

j 1994 will provide ample time and funds for an orderly contract and program close-out.

Program Plan j

Industry participants affected by the program's j

termination will include corporate entities such Program activities will be funded at the FY 1994 as General Atomics and Bechtel National in level approved by Congress. Efforts will California, ABB Combustion Engineering in continue through September 1994 and will 4

Connecticut, and Stone and Webster in concentrate on completing ongoing evaluations, Massachusetts. Gas-Cooled Reactor Associates, studies, and conceptual design. Major activities a California-based, nonprofit association of that will be funded include:

utilities and energy users that provides utility / user design requirements and assessments Development of an optimized gas turbine and overall program development support will plant layout and power level.

also be affected. 'Ite program's lead technology 4

contractor, Oak Ridge National Laboratory Evaluation of special development and (ORNL), is located in Tennessee-technology

needs, including heat exchangers, rotating machinery, and the code-acceptability of proposed materials.

17

  • Evaluation of fuel failure mechanisms and Contingencies preparation of a fuel development strategy.

The GT-MHR program could continue with Support to the NRC in providing required Administration and Congressional support.

a information for completion of the draft Minimal funding at levels similar to that Preapplication Safety Evaluation Report appropriated in past years, however, would not (PSER) for the MHTGR scheduled for be sufficient. $800 Million will be required to September 1994.

continue the program through detailed design in FY 1999.

Orderly program close-out activities will begin on October 1,1994, contingent on receiving Industry and international organization Congressional approval by that date.

contributions could offset some projected costs.

Significant cost-sharing through detailed design, however, is unlikely.

Program Schedule Program activities will continue at a reduced level through September 30, 1994. Contract close-out will begin on October 1,1994, and will culminate with program termination. Close-out requirements, including document and technology archiving, will be completed in 1995.

Hot ce!! cleanup at ORNL and fuel line and hot cell cleanup at General Atomics will continue into mid-FY 1995.

The GT-MHR program close-out schedule is provided in Figure 5.

Resource Requirements FY 1994 funding for the GT-MHR program includes a combination of advanced reactor research and development and termination appropriations totalling $13.5 Million.

To complete termination obligations, an additional $10.5 Million will be required in FY 1995. This will require appropriation of additional FY 1995 termination funds.

Figure 6 and Appendix C detail the funding requirements for an orderly GT-MHR program 7

close-out commencing on October 1,1994.

18

FIGURE 5 GT-MHR TERMINATION SCHEDULE FY 1993 FY 1994 FY 1995 FY 1996 FY 1997 FY 1998 Termination Schedule Program Closecut Extend Contracts Begin (10/94)

'through December Reduced (12/94)

S Pe Complete Hot Cell (2S4) and Faci 5 ties Y

Y Ylf Cleanup G

I' (3/95)

Program Contracts Termination Expire (9/94) (12/94)

'f

FIGURE 6 GT-MHR PROJECTED COSTS 14 TotalRequirements 12

.!.!../.'.s.'.

.!.!.s.!.!;

' 5::::5::5::5::::$::5:::!.

10 - /// lllllll:.,

.!,?, ',./,.!,.s,.!,.!,;

Cost

'e:<:<:e:<:/:/:e:e:e:<:e:<.

Termination s///////////,

in 8-e:<:e;<:<:e:s:<:s;e://.,

/////////

i

<:/ :<:/:e:<:<:<:/:<:<.

Millions

/

isisis//////,

g 6-

<:<:<:e:e:/.<:<:<:,;:,;:e

.s.s.s.s.t./././! !,.s.

/:!:!/!:i//!!!!.

Govemment R&D

/

!.!.s #.s.!.!.!/.!/.<

4-

! s.!.!.!:.!; !

  • s.!;;.* #. ;;;;

.!!!.. f.!,!llll.

'/.!;/ */.!/ '

2-

.*!/!!!!!!!!!

-f isississis

/:/f:e<:<:<:e:e:<:/.

/ !:!!:!s s.s!.r.

f f.f 2 1 f /.1. f f.1 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 TOTAL Govemment R&D:

9.0 0

0 0

0 9.0 15

.10.5 0

0 0

15.0 Terminqon:

Total Requirements: 13.5*

10.5**

0 0

0 24.0 Figure reflects reductions for SBIR, M&O pay freeze, and FY 1994 general reduction.

The FY 1995 Congressional Budget does not include funding for termination activities. $10.5 million is required.

e-2..

A.. --

m

2. -

e.

m-o v

3

e APPENDICES e

M e

APPENDIX A NARRATIVE PROGRAM

SUMMARY

TABLES THE ALWR PROGRAM

[ALWR Design Certification]

ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION OBJECTIVES OUTPUT / BENEFITS PROGRAM PROGRESS Demonstrate the 10 DOE is co-sponsoring To obuin certification for the Make two plants with NRC Final Design Approval CFR Part 52 design certification of two evolutionary designs.

improved safety available of the ABWR is expected in regulatory process by two evolutionary 1300 as options for orders and 1994.

certifying standardized MWe plants, the GE demonstrate the process to evolutionary ALWR ABWR and the certify plant designs.

NRC Final Design Approval designs with greater Combustion Engineering of the System 80+ is safety features.

System 80+.

expected in 1994.

d An NRC decision on ABWR certificatica is expected in 1996.

An NRC decision on System 80+ certification is expected in 1996.

Develop and certify Development of two To obtain final design approval Make two plants with Submission of Standard Safety simpler, standardized, advanced mid-sized and NRC certification.

improved safety and lower Analysis Reports to the NRC mid-sized ALWR designs with passive power levels available as in 1992.

plants with greater safety systems is To develop plant designs that options for orders.

safety features.

underway to enable meet NRC requirements for NRC decisions en passive certification by 1997.

ITAAC.

Demonstrate the plant certifications are certification process for expected in 1997.

To develop plant designs that plants with passive safety meet the passive ALWR Utility features.

Requirements Document.

THE ALWR PROGRAM

[ALWR Design Certification (continued ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION OBJECTIVES OUTPUT / BENEFITS PROGRAM PROGRESS Encourage industry-DOE has initiated a To complete design of selected Enable vendors to market A cooperative agreement with wide plant First+f-A-Kind ALWRs, except for site-specific standardized plants on a the U.S. utility industry has standardization. engineering program and and procurement-specific firm-price basis, using been negotiated. is working to provide a features. well-justified construction basis for plant schedules, reducing risk, Program designs wue selected standardization. and providing greater by utilitiesin 1993. financial certainty. Detailed designs, plant cost estimates, and construction schedules will be completed in

1997, d

Y

E TIIE IFR/ LWR ACTINIDE RECYCLE PROGRAM [IFR/ Actinide Recycle Tennination] ACTIVITY ~ DESCRIPTION OBJECTIVES OUTPUT / BENEFITS PROGRAM PROGRESS i Termination Consistent with the Commence an orderly close-out Program close-out Termination efforts are President's policy to ofIFR/ LWR Actinide Recycle hastation; organized contingent upon Congressional focus on nuclear energy activities on October 1,1994, archived documents; cost - approval. research and. with the objective of saving measure. Consistent l development that has terminating the program by with the Administration *s near term applications, September 30,1995. position concerning the use and the Administration's of existing plutonium for desire to redirect DOE civilian power production in l research and the future. development priorities, termmate the IFR/ LWR Actinide Recycle-f program. f ' ? o ..~a. e a ...i e.. w r

TIIE GT-MIIR PROGRAM [GT-MIIR Terrrdnation Costs] ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION OBJECTIVES OUTPUT / BENEFITS PROGRAM PROGRESS Termination Consistent with the Commence an orderly close-out Program close-out Termination efforts are President's policy to of GT-MHR activities by documentation; organized contingent upon Congressional focus on nuclear energy October 1.1994 with the archived documents; cost

approval, research and objective of terminating during saving measure.

development that has FY 1995. near term applications, and the Administration's desire to redirect DOE research and development priorities, terminate the GT-MHR program. N '/

a APPENDIX B PROGRAM SCHEDULES AND LOGIC ALWR PROGRAM [ALWR Design Certification] MILESTONE DATE DESCRIPTION ACTIVITIES Submit final General Electric I/94 Develop technical, design and licensing documents to . Develop Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and Advancal Boiling Water Reactor support submittal of final SSAR Amendment for Acceptance Criteria for all plant systems SSAR Amendment ultimate Final Design Approval

  • Develop description of Tier I design to be certified
  • Resolve open items from NRC reviews
  • Revise Safety Analysis Report to reflect the above Develop Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and Submit final Combustion 2/94 Develop technical, design and licensing documents to d

Engineermg System 80+ Standard support submittal of final SSAR Amendment for Acceptance Criteria for all plant systems Develop description of Tier I design to be Safety Analysis Report (SSAR) ultimate Final Design Approval certified Amendment Resolve open items from NRC reviews Revise Safety Analysis Report to reflect the above Receive Nuclear Regulatory 5/96 Finalize certified design and licensing documents.

  • Complete analyses and calculations Commission Design Certification Obtain Final Design Approval. Obtain Nuclear
  • Complete system design description for the Advanced Boiling Water Regulatory Commission certification for the Advanced
  • Complete test demonstration (i.e.,

Reactor Concept Boiling Water Reactor passive systems)

  • Complete Probability Risk Assessment / Reliability, Accessibility,

,y Maintainability, and Inspectability 3

  • Complete cost estimate for new construction
  • Obtain Final Design Approval
  • Submit Final Safety Analysis Report

ALWR PROGRAM [ALWR Design Certification (continued)] MILESTONE DATE DESCRIFTION ACTIVITIES Receive Nuclear Regulatory 8/96 Finalize certified design and licensing documents.

  • Complete analyses and calculations Complete system design description Commission Design Certification Obtain Final Design Appmval. Obtain Nuclear Complete test demonstration (i.e.,

for the Combustion Engineering Regulatory Commission certification for the System System 80+ Concept 80 + passive systems) Complete Probability Risk Assessment / Reliability. Accessibility, Maintainability, and Inspectability Complete cost estimate for new construction Obtain Final Design Approval Submit Final Safety Analysis Report Develop Inspections. Tests, Analyses, and Receive Nuclear Regulatory 12/97 Develop and finalim technical, design and licensing Commission Design Certification documents to support submittal of advanced passive Acceptance Criteria for all plant systems Develop description of Tier I design to be p for the Westinghouse AP600 and plant designs certified the General Electric Simplified Resolve open items from NRC reviews Boiling Water Reactor Revise Safety Analysis Report to reflect the above Complete analyses and calculations Complete system design description Complete test demonstration (i.e., passive systems) Complete Probability Risk Assessment / Reliability, Accessibility, Maintainability, and Inspectability Complete cost estirnate for new constmetion 8 f i Obtain Final Design Approval Submit Final Safety Analysis Report e t

ALWR PROGRAM [ALWR Standardization] MILESTONE DATE DESCRilrrlON ACTIVITIES Initiate Specific Design Work for 3/93 Complete negotiation and award of the program

  • Select major contractors Standardization contracts
  • Develop statement of work Define test program milestones Perform retrospective revien ui'p=~ious Standardization Plan for First-Of-12/93 Define and develop scoping for the design basis, testing A-Kind Engineering prograrm and interface requirements to suppert the plant performance Determine engineering a sproaches to Westinghouse AP-600 approach to standardization simplify design, mainterance, and GE ABWR operational requirements
  • Target key plant features requiring further analysis, test, or demonstration Develop milestones to implement standardization plan Develop functional structural and physical Develop Key 7/95 Perform engineermg analyses and calculations and

-4 Equipment / Procurement develop drawings to ensure long lead time and critical design details for critical systems. g Specifications equipment availability structures or components Examine manufacturing, both domestic and foreign, to ensure infrastructure exists to support design approach Perform cost and schedule analysis Preliminary N : clear Steam Supply System Design for First-Of-A-Kind 12/97 Additional development of the technical and design Engineermg documents and drawings for two ALWR concepts component design Complete turbine-generator design Initial system schematic / logic drawings Initial major component procurement and other mechanical specifications Complete contairunent vessel design 'f Mechanical Modularization Plan Electrical and instrumentation / control modularization plan Complete balance of turbine-generator system design i e

i ACTINIDE RECYCLE PROGRAM [IFR Metal Fuel Cycle Development] MILESTONE DATE DESCRIPTION t._ ACTIVITIES Program Termmation 9/98 Complete program termination efforts, including rmmate contracts / subcontracts shutdown of facilities, by September 30,1998. [ LWR Actinide Recycle Development] MILESTONE DATE DESCRIPTION ACTIVITIES Initiate 20-kg. process 10/93 This test will utilize simulated LWR spent fuel and is Trovide Data ce-p development test. considered a key component in providing 0 thermochemical data for the technical feasibility Reduction evaluation milestone.

  • Waste streams Uranium Recovery Product Purity Program Termination 9/98 Complete program termination efforts by September 30
  • Terminate contracts / subcontracts 1998.

'f

s GT-MIIR PROGRAM R MILESTONE DATE DESCRIPTION ACTIVITIES Extend current contracts through 4/94 Extend contracts from June 1994 to December 1994 to

  • DOE OAK initiate no-cost contract 12/94.

allow for conduct of orderly close-out activities. extensions. Publish reports. Commence program close-out 10/94 Commence program close-out activities os October 1, Archive information. 1994, pending Congressional approval. Cleanup hot cells. Shut down laboratosy facilities. Cleanup fuel lines. Dispose of fuel and equipment.

  • Terminate contracts.

Complete program termination. 12/94 Complete program termination efforts on December, Continue hot cell and fuel line clean up 1994. activities. Dispose of fuel. Complete hot cell and fuel line 3/95 Complete hot cell cleanup and fuel line cleanup Dispose of equipment. cleanup activities. responsibilities at ORNL and General Atomics. Decommission and decontaminate p facilities. 'f =

APPENDIX C RESOURCE EQUIREMENTS R ALWR PROGRAM COST ACTIVITY FY 94 FY 95 FY 96 FY 97 FY 98 TOTAL DESIGN CERTIFICATION COSTS Evolutionary Plants 8.7 5.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 15.7 Passive Plants 11.8 6.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.1 TOTAL (CERTIFICATION) 20.5 11.8 1.5 0.0 0.0 33.8 FIRST-OF-A-KIND ENGINEERING (FOAKE) COSTS Total First-of-a-Kind Engineering Costs 31.7 34.2 25.0 3.9 0.0 94.8 Minimize Premature Plant Retirements 0.0 0.0 20.0 7.0 5.0 32.0 Other Project Costs 5.4 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 25.4 TOTAL PhO".T COS'IS 57.6 51.0 51.5 15.9 10.0 186.0 b t D . m-.. n m

ACTINIDE RECYCLE PROGR AM COST ACTIVITY FY 1994 FY 1995 FY 1996 FY 1997 FY 1998 TOTAL Actinide Recycle Research and Development 30.4 28.1 7.1 0.0 0.0 65.6 Termination / Operation Costs 82.2 76.6 71.6 69.8 78.8 379.0 l ~ TOTAL PROJECT COSTS 112.6 104.7 78.7 69.8 78.8 444.6 GT-MIIR PROGRAM COST ACTIVITY FY 94 FY 95 FY 96 FY 97 FY 98 TOTAL h! R&D COSTS Design costs 5.4 3.1 (October 1993 - April 1994) Fuel / Technology Development costs 7.6 4.6 (October 1993 - April 1994) Licensing costs .5 .1 (October 1993 - April 1994) TOTAL (R&D) 13.58 7.8 'l

  • Reflects reductions for Small Business Innovative Research, Management and Operating pay freeze, and Fiscal Year 1994 general reduction.

GT-MIIR 1.'.0 GRAM (continued'# COST ACTIVITY FY 94 FY 95 FY 96 FY 97 FY 98 TOTAL TERMINATION COSTS Disposition of excess equipment 1.2 Cleanup of GA fuel line/ facilities 4.5 Disposal of irradiated fuel and hot cell 3.0 cleanup at ORNL COMEDIE materid disposal (Note 1) 0.5 ORNL subcontract closcout (COMEDIE) 0.5 ORNL subcontract closeout (KFA) 0.2 ORNL subcontract closecut (MIT) 0.1 ORNL irradiated graphite disposal 0.1 ORNL laboratory shutdown (Note 2) 0.2 Report publication 0.2 TOTAL (TERMINATION) 10.5* Note 1: Materials from CoMEDIE BD-1 experiment will be returned to the U.S. from CENG in France for packaging and disposal. Note 2: Creep laboratories in Buildings 2011 and 45005, Materials Aging laboratory in Building 45005

  • The FY 1995 Congressional Budget does not include funding for termination activities. $10.5 Million is required.

'f ~ m.. m. 1 c.

APPENDIX D ACRONYMS LIST ABWR Advanced Boiling Water Reactor ADM Action Description Memorandum ALMR Advanced Liquid Metal Reactor ALWR Advanced Light Water Reactor ANL Argonne National Laboratory APWR Advanced Pressurized Water Reactor ARC Advanced Reactor Corporation CE ABB Combustion Engineering CENG Centre d' Etudes Nucleaire de Grenoble CDD Certified Design Description CY Calendar Year DEIS Draft Environnental Impact Statement DOE Deparunent of Enerty EBR-Il Experimental Breeder Reamr-II EIS Environmental Impact Statemmt EPRI Electric Power Research Institute ER Environmental Report FCF Fuel Cycle Facility FDA Final Design Approval FOAKE First of-a-Kind Engineering FSAR Final Safety Analysis Report FY Fiscal Year GCRA Gas-Cooled Reactor Associates GE General Electric Corporation HTGR High-Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency IFR Integral Fast Reactor ITAAC Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria Kg Kilogram LWR Light Water Reactor MHTGR Modular High-Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor MIT-Massachusetts Institute of Technology M&O Management and Operating MWe Megawatts Electric NE Office of Nuclear Energy NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NES National Energy Strategy NOI Notice ofIntent NPR New Production Reactor 1 NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission 7 OAK Oakland Operations Office ORNL Oak Ridge National Laboratory j PDA Preliminary Design Approval 33 4

ACRONYMS LIST (continued) PEIS 1 grammatic Environmental Impact Statement PIE Post Irradiation Examination PSAR Preliminary Safety Analysis Report PSER Preapplication Safety Evaluation Report PSID Preliminary Safety Identification Document QA Quality Assurance R&D Research and Development RCCS Reactor Cavity Cooling System RFP Request for Proposals SAR Safety Analysis Report SBIR Small Business Innovative Research SBWR Simplified Boiling Water Reactor SER Safety Evaluation Report SSAR Standard Safety Analysis Report TDP Technology Development Plan TREAT Transient Reactor Test (Facility) ~ i 34 .}}

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20029C987&oldid=4607724"