ML21225A710

Transcript for TH23

ML21225A710
Person / Time
Issue date:	03/11/2021
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
References
NRC-1420
Download: ML21225A710 (63)

Text

Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Title:

33rd Regulatory Information Conference Technical Session - TH23 Docket Number:

(n/a)

Location:

teleconference Date:

Thursday, March 11, 2021 Work Order No.:

NRC-1420 Pages 1-58 NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC.

Court Reporters and Transcribers 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 234-4433

1 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

+ + + + +

33RD REGULATORY INFORMATION CONFERENCE (RIC)

+ + + + +

TECHNICAL SESSION - TH23 CURRENT FLEET 2050:

OPERATIONS, OVERSIGHT AND WORKFORCE

+ + + + +

THURSDAY, MARCH 11, 2021

+ + + + +

The RIC session convened via Video Teleconference, at 10:30 a.m. EST, Andrea Veil, Acting Office Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, presiding.

PRESENT:

ANDREA VEIL, Acting Office Director, NRR/NRC SCOT GREENLEE, Senior Vice President, Engineering and Technical Sciences, Exelon Generation BRUCE HALLBERT, Director, Technical Integration Office, Light Water Reactor Sustainability Program, Idaho National Laboratory TODD ALLEN, Chair and Professor, Nuclear Engineering

2 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 and Radiological Sciences, University of Michigan LAURA DUDES, Regional Administrator, RII/NRC ROBERT MURRAY, Senior Resident Inspector, Reactor Projects Branch, #1, Division of Reactor Projects, RII/NRC

3 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 P R O C E E D I N G S 10:41 a.m.

MS. VEIL: Good morning and welcome.

I'm Andrea Veil, Acting Director of NRR, and I'm your session chair for this engaging session.

As a

very brief

overview, nuclear industry and research organizations are pursuing certain initiatives for improving the sustainability of the existing fleet of plants. These initiatives include new technologies such as accident tolerant fuel, digital systems, more efficient operations, and large scale hydrogen production.

I'm excited to present a diverse panel who will provide perspectives on the future state of the operating fleet and discuss potential regulatory policy implications, as well as technical and workforce challenges in achieving sustainable, safe, and reliable operations into the future.

Some housekeeping notes, this session features a Q&A tab where you can submit questions for consideration during the discussion. We will also have two live polling questions where we will seek

4 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 your feedback. To respond to the poll question, you will need to click on the poll tab to the right of your screen above the Q&A window.

I'd now like to introduce this dynamic panel. First, we have Scot Greenlee, Exelon's Senior Vice President of Engineering and Technical Services Operation, Bruce Hallbert, PhD, Director of the Technical Integration Office, Light Water Reactor Sustainability Program at Idaho National Laboratory, Todd Allen, PhD, Chair and Professor, Nuclear Engineering and Radiological Sciences Professor at the University of Michigan, and Laura Dudes, a Regional Administrator for NRC Region II.

Thanks to all the panelists and I'd like to get right into the panel starting with Scot Greenlee.

MR. GREENLEE: Okay, good morning, everybody. And I see my slides are up, so I'd just like to introduce the slides.

This is a presentation that I gave back in 2016 at the ANS and Utility Working Conference and it was intended to get our industry to start looking forward into thinking about the future, and I'm just happy to say that we've made very good progress, so

5 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 next slide, please?

Back then, this was my new personal hero, Governor Cuomo, up in New York. We had just purchased the Fitzpatrick Plant, and I will tell you that Fitzpatrick is doing incredibly well. The upstate New York plants are doing very well, and, you know, thankful for his vision going forward and we're going to need that sort of vision into the future if we're going to maintain our nuclear fleet the way it is.

So, let's go to the next slide.

Next? And then flip to the next? Unfortunately, I can't see these slides very well. Hold on just one second. I got to pull my own slides up because I can't see them on this platform. Sorry about that.

MS. VEIL: No problem.

MR. GREENLEE: Just one minute, okay.

Sorry, I'm used to Microsoft Teams which is quite a bit different than this one.

Okay, so, the first slide is digital plant. And you know what? We have made a lot of progress in digital. If you look at the top left, so to speak, digital processes, when it comes to processes, EPRI has done an incredible job in putting together the processes that we are going to use going

6 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 forward.

And those processes, which I'll talk about in a subsequent session this afternoon, are just very advanced, and if we use them correctly, we will be able to be flawless in the implementation of our digital processes.

The processes are so good that the MIT professor who helped us put these together was actually able to find the problem with the 737 Max very quickly, so we have some really good processes.

Advanced digital and I&C, we've made good progress there too, and we are, at Exelon, looking at a demonstration of advanced digital and I&C at our Limerick plant where we're going to upgrade all of the safety systems at Limerick, and we're doing this as a partnership with DOE and NRC to show that we can actually upgrade our digital safety systems efficiently.

And the big thing here is what we've learned or what I've learned is that some of our safety systems are failing at an exponential rate and we are going to have to upgrade our safety systems if we're going to move our nuclear plants forward.

Digital worker, lots of good progress

7 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 there. We've got lots of digital systems where we can hook the worker into real-time information, electronic work packages.

We're starting on electronic procedures and the future is we're not going to use paper going forward, but lots of good progress there.

Drones and robotics, huge progress.

I'll give you one example. At Exelon, we use drones to go into our condensers when we get into an outage.

Instead of building all of this scaffolding, et cetera, the drones just go in. They identify any of the problems and we, you know, schedule the fixes, and we only build the scaffolding where we need to fix the plant versus inspect the plant.

Simplify regulatory processes is a big deal and NRC has done a great job on the digital front, and I'll talk about that more in the afternoon session, and monitoring.

Monitoring, you know, the more sensors we can install in our plants, the better, and most of our plants have Wi-Fi systems. We're installing digital or DAS, which is a monitoring system that is much more, much easier to use than the wireless programs that we have, and so, you know, the future

8 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 is coming there. Next slide? Next?

I got to get my program working here, sorry. Okay, next we have -- I'm just making sure I'm on the same page with Zoom -- okay, risk-informed regulation and thinking.

NRC has done a great job of moving us forward with risk-informed regulation, really, really good. If you look at the top bubble which is RICT, risk-informed completion times, that is one of the most amazing regulatory risk-informed programs we have because most of our tech spec completion times go to about 30 days, not all, but most, and that gives us amazing flexibility when we want to maintain our plants, so RICT is really, really important. We call it the TSTF-505 also.

And then we have 50.69, and I think in the industry, there's kind of mixed feelings about 50.69, but my view is it's really, really important because that 50.69 allows us to classify our safety systems based on risk.

And when you can do that, you can totally optimize your maintenance programs for all of your safety systems, and we're finding that it's just very, very valuable, and we'll get that for all of

9 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 our plants in Exelon.

Simplify regulatory framework -- hold on one second. NRC has done a really nice job with simplifying the regulatory framework when it comes to license amendments like we've been talking about, but also if you look at the low safety issue resolution process, and I probably said that wrong, and RIPE, when you look at those two processes, they're amazing because the first one allows us to take issues that are low safety significance and screen then out as needing more regulatory framework, and the second item, RIPE, allows us to, if we have a deficiency in one of our regulatory areas, we can ask NRC for a very expedited review of eliminating that issue, and those two items together are just amazing.

And if I go back to my first days in Exelon at the Byron Station, we ended up with a backfit, and the backfit was on a steam generator tube rupture, and the single failure proof-ness of the systems that were able to mitigate that event, we spent millions and millions of dollars upgrading those systems.

Under the new structure, we would never have spent a dollar, well, maybe dollars in getting

10 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 it licensed differently, but, you know, it's a great framework that we've put together.

FLEX, FLEX, of course, everybody knows about FLEX, and I think all of us are integrating FLEX into our day-to-day operations so that we can make sure that we keep risks low at our nuclear plants.

And I would also encourage those who have not integrated FLEX into your PRA models, please integrate it, because if you integrate FLEX, you're going to find you're going to lower CDF, you're going to lower LERF, and you're going to be able to structure how you use FLEX to keep risk low at your plants.

Materials, I won't spend much time on that, but lots of things going on in the materials world to optimize code requirements, et cetera, so we can make sure that we focus on the risk significant things and kind of eliminate the things that are not risk significant.

Surveillance frequency control program is the last one on this bubble and that, I think, most of us have that, and that program has been absolutely amazing in getting us to optimize how we

11 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 do maintenance at our plants, and in particular, moving the risk significant testing to an outage and then being able to take our outages to, you know, one train versus the other train, so you do one train during one outage and then you do the next train during the next

outage, so

very, very good implementation there.

And the last thing if you look at the top right is accident tolerant fuel. I am very, very pro accident tolerant fuel. We've got some challenges.

We've got some funding challenges with DOE and we're going to work through those, but the new cladding materials would have preventing TMI, at least theoretically, so, you know, just the chromium coating on the zircaloy tubes would have prevented TMI.

And then when you look at higher enrichment and higher burnup, those two items together will make our industry much more viable because it will lower fuel costs.

So, I'm very hopeful that we'll be able to move accident tolerant fuel forward, but we have a few challenges and we'll work through those, and that's it for me.

12 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MS. VEIL: Thank you so much, Scot.

Next, we have Bruce Hallbert.

MR. HALLBERT: Good morning. I'm happy to be here to participate in this session on nuclear 2050.

I'm Bruce Hallbert. I'm the National Technical Director of the DOE-sponsored Light Water Reactor Sustainability program, and I'm here to talk a little bit about what the LWRS program is doing to help sustain the existing fleet.

I don't see my slides up, but I'm going onto slide number two now if anybody's -- if those slides are -- I'm on slide number two now.

The Light Water Reactor Sustainability program is DOE's program for light water reactor research, development, and demonstration. The goals of the program are very straightforward. We work to enhance the safe, efficient, and economic performance of our nation's nuclear fleet so that we can extend the operating lifetimes of our nation's nuclear power plants.

We achieve these objectives by enabling long-term operation of the existing fleet. That's our first goal, and the way that we go about that is

13 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 by conducting research and deploying innovative approaches to improve economics and economic competitiveness of light water reactors in their existing and future energy markets.

Quite simply, we focus on sustaining the safety and security of nuclear power

plants, enhancing the economics, and notably, enabling revenue diversification, and I'll talk more about that.

We do that through a program of diverse research and development activities that are focused on five areas, and I'll discuss those five areas on the next slide.

The first area -- we refer to these as research pathways, but these are the five focus areas of the LWRS program. The first area is plant modernization and you heard Scot talk about that in his presentation. It's about going digital, but also going digital in a way that enables plants to become more efficient and following a strategy for long-term modernization.

So, we don't want to just conduct like for like replacements of analog technology with digital technology and end up with technologies that

14 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 perform the same thing, but just using a different technology to do so.

We're focused on how can we implement digital technologies using our current and future workforce to enable greater automation and reduce operating costs?

So, the LWRS program conducts research and develops technologies with owner operators, vendors, and suppliers to reduce the technical, financial, and regulatory risks of these modernization activities.

The next area where we're conducting research is called flexible plant operation and generation. I know that's a mouthful, but the focus of this research area is how to diversify the products from nuclear power plants and thereby increase the revenue of light water reactors using electricity from the plants and thermal energy to produce non-electrical products.

Most nuclear power plants or many nuclear power plants find themselves in markets that are rapidly becoming very renewable centric and also surrounded by inexpensive natural gas, and so at times of the day, times of the year, when the price

15 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 point for electricity drops below the production costs for producing electricity from a nuclear power plant, it would be great if we had options to produce other products using the energy from nuclear power plants.

So, our research in this area is working with owner operators in their regions to look at what other types of products they can produce and how they would produce them.

Most notably and most recently, I suppose some of you may have heard about our efforts with plants to produce hydrogen. So, hydrogen is a commodity that's used in a lot of markets.

One of the great things about producing hydrogen from a commercial nuclear power plant is it doesn't have a carbon associated with it, so using hydrogen from nuclear power plants is also a way of decarbonizing those industries that use the hydrogen products from nuclear power plants.

The other area that -- one of the other areas that we're working is called risk-informed systems analysis, and I suppose if you've had been attending the RIC sessions, you've heard a lot about risk-informed applications and risk informing a

16 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 variety of different processes.

So, the LWRS program has been working with industry to develop risk-informed, advanced risk-informed tools, and just like Scot was referring to in his discussion about FLEX, we've been looking into advanced tools for conducting PRAs that would look at FLEX, accident tolerant tools, paths of cooling technologies, and in order to understand just how much margin we would be able to recover, and then once we have that margin, how could we use it to improve the operability and the efficiency of these plants and enhance their economics?

Another area of the program is materials research, and I think for many, many years, this was really the hallmark of the LWRS program. First and foremost, long-term operation is based upon the key requirement that the most important structural materials that are used, the structure systems and components credited for safety will perform and perform their functions according to requirements in their in-service environments.

So, we've been conducting research for about ten years to understand and predict the long-term behavior of materials in nuclear power plants

17 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 and also to be able to detect and characterize mechanisms of aging and degradation.

The final area of the LWRS program is physical security. Of course, many people in the industry are familiar with many of the growing requirements in physical security since 9/11, and so the LWRS program is working with a number of organizations in the industry, including owner operators, to develop technologies and the technical bases for the use of those advanced technologies, which include weapon sensors and other types of things that DOE has worked to develop to improve protection postures and also to improve efficiencies.

Next slide, please?

So, you might be thinking that's a lot of research and a lot of activities. How do you do it?

Well, the most important thing that we do as we do our research is that we conduct our research in a very engaged manner.

We like to do our research with owner operators and with vendors and suppliers at nuclear power plants or with nuclear power plants to ensure that we can demonstrate near-term beneficial results from the applications of the research and

18 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 technologies that the LWRS program is developing.

So, on the right side of this page, you see a number of logos of organizations like the owner operators, as well as other research organizations, and research institutes, and industry organizations that we work with and coordinate with to not only conduct our research, but also to get feedback on the approach and ensure that as we increase the technology readiness level as is shown in the middle of the slide from basic research to very applied research, that the results can be used by industry, can be taken over and licensed by private companies, and so overall advantage the entire U.S. industry.

So, engagement is vital because it helps us to develop that approach and it also ensures that we're able to conduct effective cost-sharing activities.

Scot also mentioned in his presentation the digital upgrade project at the Limerick Station.

That is a project that we're conducting together with Exelon and it's a very highly cost shared and leveraged project between our organizations.

It's another example of some of the successes that we've carried out by coordinating our

19 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 research among research organizations, as well as with the owners, vendors, and suppliers.

So, that's a little bit about the LWRS program on the last slide. There's a gratuitous callout to our website, and if you'd like to learn a little bit more about the LWRS program -- again, last slide, thank you.

If you'd like to learn more about the LWRS program, what we do, who we're doing our work with, and how we do it, please visit our website or contact us directly. Thank you very much.

MS. VEIL: Thanks so much, Bruce.

Before I turn it over to Todd, I wanted to note that we're going to have another poll question during his remarks and to remind you that the poll tab is up above the Q&A window, and also a reminder to submit your questions using the Q&A portal. Todd?

MR. ALLEN: All right, thanks very much, Andrea, for inviting me to the interesting panel.

So, while Scot and Bruce tended to talk a bit from a technology perspective, I thought I'd frame my remarks more from a workforce, right? Who and how are you going to attract people to work on these plants?

20 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 And I'm going to try a

slightly unconventional approach which is I'm going to start by framing the history of fission plants versus the history of Mountain Dew, the carbonated beverage, all right, to show you how those differ and maybe even inform us going forward, so, and a lot of this I didn't realize until I studied it.

So, fission, discovered in 1938, Mountain Dew, invented in 1940. The first commercial formula for Mountain Dew was in 1958 and then upgraded in 1961, shipping port, first commercial power, 1957.

In 1964, the Mountain Dew brand expands across the U.S. In the same time frame, 1960 to '64, LWRs started to be built across the U.S., so Big Rock Point, Dresden, Elk River, Humboldt Bay, Indian Point.

And then between the 1940s and '80s, you've sort of established the product, right? We sold one type of carbonated beverage and we had light water reactors doing great across the country.

At that point, right, the stories appear to diverge, all right. The light water reactors appear to go steady state. They operate and nothing seems to change. Mountain Dew starts new products,

21 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Diet Mountain Dew, Code Red Mountain Dew, all sorts of flavors, energy things.

So, it appears as if the stories have diverged at that point, but in reality, I think, there was a ton of innovation visible, right, in the soft drink world, right, but I don't think it was obvious in the light water reactor world, but clearly it had to be going on, right?

We figured out how to operate our plants so much more efficiently, right, from 60 percent availability into the 90s, right, so things were happening.

And

lately, a

lot of competitive pressures have helped the industry continue to advance and you see a lot of the specifics in what Bruce and Scot talked about.

And I think the ability to attract people into the field is going to partly depend on recognition or being able to pass along to young people starting their career that there is excitement, and there is innovation, and there are possibilities for them to have an interesting and long, exciting career.

And I think you've already seen some of

22 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 those innovations in Scot and Bruce's talk, right, so critical work in sensors, and data, and data analytics, and using those to get more value out of the plant, right, and all of these get to how do you get more value out of the product line?

And the sensors, and data, and data analytics could be used for health of components.

Possibly that reduces or changes your staffing mix.

It could be that cyber type issues become more important than they have been in the past, advanced manufacturing maybe, right. Replacement parts get harder to find. It could be that there is space for new advanced manufacturing techniques for parts replacements.

Robotics were mentioned. Young people love robots. It seems very logical to use robots.

Scot had a great example on the condensers, but I think in general, the nuclear community is not visible in the robotics community, right.

So, at my institution, we've got a big, brand-new robotics facility co-funded by the University of Michigan and Ford Motor Company, and they're very unaware of needs in our field.

And I think Bruce pointed out these

23 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 alternative business cases, right, starting to look at hydrogen and other ways to get value from the plants.

So, in a lot of ways, these change some of the technical issues that we're looking at, and it means we need to figure out how to reach out and connect to young professionals coming up through the field so that we're tapping into all of their talent and convincing them, right, that there's a lot of interesting things to do in this field.

It may require us to think creatively about workforce arrangements. I think as a parallel or contrast, right, with the naval reactors program, a lot of classified work. You don't get to go out in public, but they always try to find ways to let their staff, right, go out and do things, the research staff, so they're visible, right.

And I think finding ways to connect all of the talent that we need to bring in to keep the current plants vibrant may require us thinking a little bit about how to keep them excited about being in the field.

One thing that strikes me is if we build a new generation of advanced reactor plants instead

24 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 of waiting for 30 years to think about the sustainability program like we did with the light water reactors, start at the beginning and try to get ahead of the problem. Look for those research opportunities.

The people that do sustainability for the light water reactor plants are probably great mentors, consultants, advisors to help the new generation figure out the types of programs they should install early on, right, to get ahead of this problem.

And lastly, I'd just like to say we need to very, very strongly be diversity champions.

There's a lot of interesting things we can do with the technology.

We need to bring in the most creative people regardless of their background, and I think we've not been great at that in the past up and down through the nuclear community, and we just have to be very thoughtful about how we do that.

So, you know, what are the competitors for workforce? Well, it's what's considered exciting new tech, and computer science attracts tremendous numbers of people. Our university, our college of

25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 engineering gets overwhelmed by students wanting to do computer science.

We have to make sure that the story is that there is a future, a long-term future for this current generation of plants. We have to convince people that the technology is exciting, all right.

Scot and Bruce just pointed out a lot of interesting things we're doing. I don't think that's well known yet.

And we are going to start shutting down some plants, right, so we're going to be competing against decommissioning, right, and so figuring out how to keep attracting people and convincing them, right, there is a long-term future here is going to be important, right.

So, hopefully that will generate some discussion later on and hopefully that's a slightly different take beyond the technology, but I think the human resources component of this is going to be as important as the technology advancements, so thanks again for inviting me.

MS. VEIL: Absolutely, thanks so much, Todd. And just to note on the poll questions, thanks to everyone who has participated thus far. We're

26 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 going to look at the results after Laura's remarks and we'll comment on some of the results that are in the poll. Thank you. Laura?

MS. DUDES: Thank you, Andrea, and thank you for this session. I'm really excited about this topic, and as part of the NRC's transformation efforts, both today and tomorrow, we often try and reach people in terms of what is the impetus for transformation?

And I

know advanced

reactors, and accident tolerant fuel, and all of the science and research that's going into that is very exciting, but there's also what we're talking about today, and I use a graphic similar to this when I'm talking to the folks in Region II about why are we transforming?

Where is the energy behind the change?

And if you look with subsequent license renewal and the advances that our panelists have talked about, we're in business with the large light waters up to 2050, 2060, and beyond based on the technology, and so we are not only transforming for the workforce of today, but it's the workforce of tomorrow.

And I really appreciate, Todd, your

27 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 comments, because we have recently brought on a new class of, we call them our nuclear regulator apprenticeship network, and meeting these folks, and their energy and their desire to get to work, right?

They want to be out. They want to be in the plants. They want to learn and they want to be part of these solutions as well. So, I think it's a fantastic topic and I think it's really indicative of the risk-informed modern regulator transformation that we're going through.

And I know Scot and Bruce, and we talked about some of the game changers, and I will thank Scot, because I think on three occasions, he talked about the amazing work that the NRC has done, whether it's risk-informed completion times, risk-informed surveillances, 50.69. Many of those things are in place in Region II. Our inspectors are reviewing it and we think it's working really well.

But I think it's also indicative of the fact that the NRC is adaptive and we can put things in place that maintain public health and safety, but also adapt to these game changers and move forward, and we look forward to more of those, accident tolerant fuel, being more digital in our environment,

28 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 and I think we have the workforce that can do it.

We want to be able to continue to attract that workforce, and if the class of new hires that we brought in recently is any indication, I think we'll continue to do that as long as we can get them out in the field and engaged in these important activities.

As the game changers come up, I think it is our responsibility as a regulator to adapt and to review these game changers and these new initiatives in a timely manner, but it's also important to have a common understanding of the engineering behind these changes.

And I think that's what our stakeholders, our public stakeholders expect of us as well is to do a thorough review of these game changers and be able to adapt them and really explain them in terms of our mission and our public health and safety.

So, the other thing I just wanted to comment on is the comment that was partnership with DOE and industry and the NRC to really look at these new technologies and these changes.

I think that partnership is essential, and getting early communication on the priorities and the technical subject matter evaluations is going to

29 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 be very important so that we can sustain a cadence of going forward with the large light reactors.

So, I really look forward to discussions about this topic, and I do think as we move forward

-- and Todd talked about engaging the workforce and some plants shutting down. I'd just offer a story.

When I began my career in nuclear, we did not have -- there was no license renewal. They were still working out the details of that. Power upgrades were not necessarily -- we weren't receiving any of those applications, and so it was a pretty steady time.

And in fact, someone offered, and this was 26, 27 years ago, well, you know, your work will largely be in decommissioning, and yet in my career, I have worked at the operating large lights. I have worked in the new reactor realm and some of the advanced reactor aspects.

I've worked in two regions and seen a tremendous amount of progress and innovation, and I look forward to going into 2050 and creating that workforce that is engaged and can adapt to the new technologies. So, let me pause there and I look forward to a dialogue with the audience.

30 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MS. VEIL: Thank you so much, Laura, and also to all of the panelists. And before we go to questions, if I could get the results of the first poll so we can have some dialogue on those results?

All right, the question was do you see a bright future for nuclear energy in this country?

And what you see is 41 percent maybe for advanced reactors, and the next is I see a future, but it's not that bright, so if any of our panelists want to comment on that poll result?

MR. GREENLEE: I'd be glad to comment since I put together this question. You know, I think there's a very bright future, a very bright future. We have to get the federal government and the states that we have our nuclear plants in to support nuclear, but nuclear is, quite frankly, if you look at the tie to the climate equation, there is no way we're going to get to the climate goals that we set forth, both federally and at the states, if you don't have the current nuclear fleet and you don't have an advanced nuclear fleet.

And so I'm -- you know, you probably have seen we announced recently that my company is splitting into two pieces. We're going to split the

31 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 generation from the utilities and I am so excited that that's happening because now that means we get to funnel our revenues into, you know, growth projects, and there's just a lot of things going on in the world where it's exciting. It's very exciting.

MR. ALLEN: Yeah, Andrea, if I can jump in there too, when I get asked this question, I like to say where were we a decade ago and where are we now, and what does that slope look like, right?

And if I go back ten years ago, we had no idea that there were all of these advanced reactor companies that wanted to build an advanced reactor, right?

And we weren't talking as much about risk-informed regulation and how you operate in that world. We did not have such strong congressional support. I mean, we are passing laws and we are passing appropriations that are positive in a way they never were.

We've seen, this is maybe slightly more than a decade ago, but the number of students wanting to study nuclear engineering jump by like a factor of four in the mid-2000s and generally stay up there.

32 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 There are organizations that are stepping in and saying you cannot meet climate goals without a nuclear component that I never would have anticipated saying that, and so I think that the idea that it's all over just doesn't recognize a lot of the things that I see happening.

And the last thing I'll point out is when I look at the students that are showing up at universities, they are not nearly the technology evangelists that you'll see in my age group, all right. For them, it's about climate. Fix it, right?

And they're very open to nuclear and things.

So, I just, I see the world sort of changing underneath my feet and that's what makes me pretty positive.

MR. HALLBERT: And Andrea, I would also add to what they both have just said and that is that we need nuclear energy as a big part of the global climate equation.

Our nuclear power plants are performing better than they've ever performed in history.

They're one of the best performing industries ever known. We have several projects at our laboratory, both the VTR project and the NuScale UAMPS project to

33 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 demonstrate new types of nuclear power plants.

At the same time, with all of the renewables coming on, it's going to be so important to have a large source of base level electricity like nuclear power to be able to firm the grid.

At the same time, nuclear power stands to really contribute to other industries and help them to decarbonize in ways that I don't think people have envisioned before.

So, I

think there's a

lot of opportunities and I think it all points to a very strong future for nuclear power.

MS. VEIL: All right, thank you. Any additional comments before we move to the second poll result?

MR. GREENLEE: Just that I totally agree with Todd and Bruce.

MS. VEIL: All right, can we have the second poll results, please? Okay, which of the following would be the biggest detriment to attracting young professionals into jobs with the current fleet? Overwhelmingly, 93 percent said lack of a new generation of plants, and then there was five percent decommissioning jobs, two percent

34 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Twitter.

So, if you have any reactions to that overwhelming, it's 94 percent now, lack of a new generation of plants?

MR. ALLEN: Yes, so let me -- I guess I'll start because I wrote this question. So, it doesn't surprise me that the lack of new generation of plants got a large number of votes.

I'm surprised that -- when I wrote Twitter, it was a shorthand for competition with tech companies, right? Students come in and they're like what can I do with my life? I'm surprised, yeah, that you see lots of that, right?

Because at least, you know, on my end, who am I competing with to bring people into the field? It's I'm competing with computer scientists and robotics people, and to my point before, they don't realize that they can do those things in this field.

So, yeah, I guess I'm not surprised that the one won. I guess I'm surprised that it dominated so much.

MR. HALLBERT: I think that it's natural that people want to work with the latest

35 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 technologies, especially people coming out of school.

One of the ways that I think we can make work at nuclear power plants, the existing fleet, for

example, more attractive is by deploying new technologies that a current and future workforce is more familiar with.

Moving away from, you know, analog to digital and more highly automated technologies, as well as using more machine learning and AI in day-to-day operations, I think, is one way where people will resonate with what they're learning in school with what they see at nuclear power plants.

At the same time, it's very important to continue working on deploying new types of reactor technologies, not only to attract the future workforce, but also to address the long-term climate change issues.

MR. ALLEN: Yeah, sorry to interrupt, but following up on what Bruce said, I mean, I think that that's important, right, because there's a different scenario if you think I can take a job at an existing nuclear power plant and I will specialize in data analytics or robotics, right, and you can clearly say if I get good at that, I can apply that skill

36 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 anywhere, right? I can move that to some other field, right? So, I think we can continue to bring people into the field as long as they feel that it's an exciting place to be, right, and that there's a future.

I mean, I don't think people think about 40-year careers as much anymore, right? It's what can I do that's interesting and gives me growth, right? And I think that's the opportunity.

MS. VEIL: Very, very true. I've had younger people say I can't imagine staying at a job for that many years, whether it's 25 or 30, so you're absolutely right with that, Todd. Laura?

MS. DUDES: It could also be -- so I think that conversations like this are really critical. When you look at that response, I mean, if you're looking at the headlines, you're seeing that power plants are closing and you're not -- it's not a very forward looking new story for the large lights, and yet when you look across the country and the number of large lights, the advancements that have occurred, but we don't talk about them.

And as the nuclear regulator, it's really not within our mission to be talking about these

37 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 advances, but there are others who can be having these conversations which tell people that there actually is an exciting and very complex and challenging career, not only with the advanced reactors and the new science, but within the current fleet of large lights.

There is a tremendous amount of digital capacity that we need to bring into those plants to make them, you know, competitive into 2050, 2060, but these conversations are really important to make sure that folks know what's out there and that it is a challenging career. We talk about drones and robotics, and I've seen that implemented within the Region II environment.

So, you know, the poll is probably indicative of the dialogue that's going on in the United States about the large lights and where the excitement is, and so perhaps the others, DOE and the other university partnerships could consider, you know, upping the dialogue on what exists today and what possibilities there are for, you know, advancing the technology of these very robust large electricity carbon-free generators.

MR. ALLEN: And Laura, I don't know if

38 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 you realize this, but you mentioned the conversation is important. While you were talking, Fortran (phonetic) went from zero to three percent.

(Laughter.)

MS. VEIL: Those are critical points, Laura, and thanks for providing them, and I like the dynamic poll because as you were explaining some of the things that, you know, what Twitter meant and all of that, you did see a couple of changes in the poll, so thanks for that, and thanks, everyone. Any other comments before we move to the first question?

MR. ALLEN: Yeah, sorry to jump in.

MR. GREENLEE: Yeah --

MR. ALLEN: Oh, sorry, Scot, just one point. Like even Scot's comment today, right, whenever I hear somebody talk about robotics in nuclear, it's normally, well, when we have a major disaster, we'll need to send robotics in to clean it up, right, so it's associated with a problem, right.

What he's talking about now, we're just flying drones around condensers, right. It's a normal operation, right. I mean, that's the kind of stuff I don't think people realize.

MR. GREENLEE: And you know, like this

39 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 conversation has really opened my eyes a bit because we are not having the conversations enough as just to how much technology we're using in the current fleet.

I mean, at Exelon, we have our own drone and robotics company. I mean, we use robotics and drones like every day throughout our fleet. And like Laura

said, I

don't think we're having the conversation enough, so that's a good point for me to take back to Exelon and make sure we're having those conversations.

MS. VEIL: That's wonderful when the synergy of the panel not only helps the audience, but helps each other, so that's a good thing that we're having this dialogue this way.

Now, the first three questions are for Bruce, so I will ask all three in order so that you can respond to each. So, the first one, Bruce, is there are several nuclear utilities that are working with INL for the demo projects to produce hydrogen, two percent power, et cetera, using different technologies.

Would you please explain the pros and cons of each technology? What's the upper limit of nuclear power percentage-wise in the plant that could

40 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 be used to produce hydrogen and what's the cost benefits for nuclear plants to produce hydrogen?

That's a long question.

MR. HALLBERT: Yeah, that's a great question and thank you. I want to clarify one thing.

It is true that INL is working on several of the demonstration projects. These are more broadly DOE-funded and sponsored projects from the offices of nuclear energy and energy efficiency and renewable energy.

And the two types of technologies that are being used initially focusing on hydrogen production as a commodity are low temperature electrolysis and high temperature electrolysis.

Low temperature electrolysis, which is going to be demonstrated at one of the Exelon plants as Scot knows very well about, uses the electricity from the plant to generate hydrogen in electrolyzers.

High temperature electrolysis usually takes energy, like perhaps in the form of steam, from another approach to getting energy from the plant, and they are usually a

little bit smaller electrolyzers, but they're more efficient. So, one involves electricity to produce hydrogen. The other

41 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 involves energy steam to produce them.

In terms of the cost-benefits, nuclear power plants can produce energy, you know, heat, competitively with any other type of energy source out there, packaged boilers notwithstanding.

So, you know, producing hydrogen from a nuclear power plant also has the added benefit of it being green. Green hydrogen is what they're calling this mostly.

And most hydrogen that's produced today involves some form of natural gas, so it has carbon associated with it, and states are now starting to value -- some states, particularly California, value hydrogen that doesn't have carbon associated with it.

So, the economics of it are tied up in some of those discussions, as well as the costs of operating the nuclear power plant, which is why it's so important for us to help plants reduce their operating costs.

In terms of, you know, the practical limit on how much hydrogen you can produce from a plant, there really isn't any. We've done some studies and we've looked at particular nuclear power plants, and it's just a matter of how far you scale

42 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 up hydrogen production and where those are sited. I mean, they're not going to be sited really, really close to the plant site, and also what the off-take users are in your markets.

So, that's one of the technical and economic assessments that we're doing with these utilities that are so very important for them to understand who the customers are in their regions, what they're currently paying for hydrogen, and also what they'd be willing to pay for clean hydrogen.

So, I hope that answers your question.

I know there was a lot in there, but please also visit our websites. We do have some technical reports out there that answer some of those questions.

MS. VEIL: All right, Bruce, the second question is shorter. How does cybersecurity fit into the LWRS research program?

MR. HALLBERT: Well, cybersecurity is vitally important, especially when we talk about digital technologies. DOE has a program in cybersecurity, as well as industry, NRC, NEI, organizations like that.

So, what we do in the LWRS program is rather than conduct research on cybersecurity, we

43 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 work with those other organizations who are already the lead organizations either in industry, or the regulators, or for the nation to ensure that cybersecurity aspects are addressed in the digital technologies that we work on developing.

MS. VEIL: Okay, and the next question for you is with regard to research pathways, Bruce.

How does your materials degradation study differ from the degradation matrix already completed by the working groups sponsored by NEI, EPRI, and owners groups that was performed for license renewal?

MR. HALLBERT: So, it doesn't differ.

That's the short answer. We've worked with NRC, with EPRI, NEI, and others on the expanded materials degradation assessment.

Our research, and LWRS's research that was conducted, and EPRI's research that was conducted was all part of a coordinated effort to focus on the highest priorities, you know, in the areas of reactor metals, concrete, cables, and things like that, and so they are coordinated.

We have monthly calls with NRC and EPRI or bimonthly calls in the area of materials to ensure that we remain coordinated.

44 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MS. VEIL: Okay, thanks, Bruce. You're off the hook for at least a little bit.

MR. HALLBERT: Okay.

MS. VEIL: The next question is for Scot.

Scot, in light of several recent plant shutdowns across the U.S., what does Exelon see as the main path forward to arrest the trend? Do you think a national policy for current reactors is necessary?

MR. GREENLEE: Absolutely, a national policy would be really good and we're very hopeful that President Biden is going to provide us eventually with a national policy.

You know, there's a lot of talk out there on a carbon tax, which is probably the best path forward, but at the moment, our focus is on the states. Illinois is our first focus. You know, New York has already been a good partner with us.

We're talking with Maryland and talking with Pennsylvania, but the states, you know, cannot meet their carbon goals if the nuclear plants don't survive, and I think they're beginning to recognize that, and personally, I think there's a bright future in front of us.

And I also think -- I don't think we'll

45 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 probably build a lot of big base load plants going forward given, you know, the struggles we've had in Georgia and South Carolina, but I believe there's a huge future in SMRs.

If we can get to the point where we can actually manufacture the components for an SMR, you know, in a manufacturing facility, and then take them to a site and just build them, huge possibilities, and I think that's where the focus will be going forward with the advanced reactors.

MS. VEIL: Okay, Scot, and the next question is for you as well. Do you expect a reduction of plant staff possible with all forms of planned digital upgrades and modifications, pursuant change in operations, maintenance, and engineering staff separately spelled out?

MR. GREENLEE: Okay, I think there's possibly -- there is a possibility that we could reduce staffing numbers based on technology because if you can get more digital technology into the plants

-- let's just take an example of Limerick where we're going to put in all of these safety system upgrades.

The goal for the system itself is to eliminate all of our surveillance testing, all of our

46 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 calibration needs unless the computer says go do it, and, you know, that's manpower or person power, so there is a possibility and I think it's an opportunity for us.

MS. VEIL: Okay, the next question is for Laura. How can the NRC become a more flexible and agile regulator to adapt to the changes in technology in particular?

MS. DUDES: Thanks. Well, I think I'm going to -- thanks, Scot, again, because you said how amazing we were three times during the presentation for our adaptation, for risk-informed completion, surveillances, 50.69.

But it is a valid question and I think that's why we're undertaking the efforts that we are to really be more intentional as a regulator to think through the risks of the technology that we're evaluating, and to be more proactive in our communications and being clear about what our concerns are as we're reviewing a

particular technology.

I think that our challenge often is not getting an equivalent sense of, common understanding is a better word, of the technology issue at hand,

47 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 right. What is it that our concern is from a risk to the public and then what is the engineering and the data that tells us that we can evaluate and approve the technology?

I think we're working on that. I think it should be -- it shouldn't be a transformation to an end. It should be a transformation to a culture that embraces the new ideas, but also remembers our mission and that we have to see the data. We have to see the analysis because ultimately, we're making decisions that affect more than just the utilities (audio interference) affecting the public that trusts us. So, it's being good engineers, sound engineers, and understanding the hazards, the source terms, the barriers, and then being able to articulate that in our decisions so that the public can understand.

MS. VEIL: All right, our next two questions are also for you, Laura. The first one is I can see that nuclear power is helpful to reduce carbon in our atmosphere, but what are we going to do with all of the radioactive waste?

Is NRC also looking on the results of decommissioning and who will be in charge of all that waste? Are safety guidelines for power stations in

48 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 place for waste areas near the decommissioned sites?

MS. DUDES: Yeah, well, and I really appreciate that question.

I understand that question. It's a very complicated problem that we have. There's many solutions to it.

I think from the Commission's perspective, they've established a policy that says that the waste can be stored on site for a period of time. I think the nation is looking for a solution, and so I would offer other panelists.

And I do believe that when we talk about nuclear being a carbon-free source of power, the waste does have to be addressed, and I truly think that that's a national problem that needs more than the NRC.

I mean, we can create regulations and policies that say it's safe to store on site and we can inspect that, but there's probably a broader answer that's beyond the NRC.

MS. VEIL: All right, and then the next one for you, Laura, is --

MR. GREENLEE: Hey, Andrea?

MS. VEIL: Go ahead. Go ahead.

MR. GREENLEE: I could weigh in on that

49 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 a little bit.

MS. VEIL: Sure.

MR. GREENLEE: And this is my personal opinion, not necessarily an Exelon opinion, et cetera, but I think we do ourselves a disservice when we talk about like Yucca Mountain and we have to store our waste, you know, 10,000 meters underground or whatever. I just think that's bad advertising from a nuclear perspective because that's absolutely not needed. We can safely store our waste.

For example, in the New Mexico facility that we're talking about, you don't have to have that waste so far underground, and I think we can safely and economically store it at a facility as long as a state's willing to take that waste or we can absolutely safely keep the waste on the sites if we need to.

Those canisters that we put our waste in, those are the most robust canisters on earth. You could probably drop one from a plane at 40,000 feet up in the air and you would not hurt that fuel.

So, you know, we just need to get the real science in front of people and start having some realistic conversations about what we're going to do

50 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 going forward because we've just gone way too far conservative on storing nuclear waste. That's my personal opinion, but, you know, I think we just need to start having those conversations.

MS. VEIL: Thank you, Scot, and anybody else before I go to the next question for Laura?

MR. ALLEN: Yeah, Andrea, if I can, so I see a couple of things. One, when people ask me this question, I like to point out that there's lots of nuclear waste we do handle, all right. We handle low level waste. We handle defense waste. So, the idea that it's impossible to dispose of nuclear things is first of all not true, all right. We have an issue in the U.S. with spent fuel.

And then I think it's important to note that it's not just a technical problem, right. It's very much a social and technical problem, all right.

I look at other countries, like Finland is the leading example where they've had a national conversation. They've looked at this problem and they have a path forward. They know what they want to do. There happens to be an underground depository.

A really nice report just came out of

51 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 Sweden maybe a month ago and it said in the beginning, we treated it like it was totally a technical problem, all right, and we asked geologists to give us an answer, and in the end, it wasn't until we treated it like a combination of a technical problem and a social problem, brought different skills in and had a conversation, all right, around how would you dispose of waste? Who would accept it, right, similar to what's been done in Finland?

And so I think it's not an unsolvable problem, right, but I think we approach it in a very limited way as if we will come up with a magic technology solution that's good enough without actually having sort of hard conversations with people, right.

And so I am a very strong advocate that this is a solvable problem, but we have to, I think, and I'm sort of echoing things that the Blue Ribbon Commission came up with a few years ago, these consent-based processes seem to be much more effective in the countries that are trying them, but that's not the path we started on, and I personally think we need to sort of reset the path we're on.

MS. VEIL: Right.

52 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 MR. GREENLEE: And the other part of the equation is if we had a national energy policy that really recognized the value of nuclear, we could close the fuel cycle, which means we could burn the rest of the nuclear waste and make energy out of it because there's 10,000 years of additional energy that we can get out of this fuel and we're just throwing it away because we're being shortsighted on, you know, how we actually use all of this energy, again, personal opinion.

MS. VEIL: All right, Laura, the next question for you, is there opportunity in expanding the risk-informed approach to traditional enforcement? Does that fall under the RIPE umbrella?

MS. DUDES: I might ask you to help me with the RIPE umbrella part of it, but I think if you read the Commission's policy statement on enforcement, that there is already circumstantial discretion, that the Commission recognized that the staff needs to look at each of these items and take enforcement in accordance with a specific situation.

So, I

do think that there's some opportunity there and there's, I think -- I don't want to speak for the Commission. It's their policy

53 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 statement, but I think they were thoughtful enough as they crafted it to make sure that throughout the statement, there is some sense of please, you know, use discretion and address the enforcement as it pertains to the specific circumstances.

One comment on traditional enforcement which, you know, I think we -- maybe my short answer is yes, there might be room there to risk inform, but I would look at the tenets of our oversight program, and I am speaking very specifically about the oversight program.

We sample various aspects of the nuclear plant operation and engineering, and so there are some fundamental tenets that we rely on in terms of access to information, and the quality of that information, and the integrity behind that information.

So, to the extent that we can rely on that, that is a very -- that's part of our program.

When we do have issues, and I'm not commenting on anyone specific, but I do think that there is a reason behind some of the traditional enforcement actions to say that, you know, the tenets of our oversight program require that you have a good corrective

54 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 action program, that the information you're giving us is accurate, that, you know, the professional exchange and the dialogue is you're giving us the answers that we're asking for and you're doing that truthfully.

So, there's two sides to that. I mean, my short answer is yes, there's opportunities there, but I would always ask that people remember that part of the traditional enforcement that we retained when we went to the ROP was to just bolster the fact that it's based on those fundamental behaviors and aspects at the utility sites.

MS. VEIL: Okay, and I'd note that the -

MS. DUDES: If someone else has a comment on that, I'm willing to entertain from the panelists?

MR. GREENLEE: Yeah, I would say I thought -- I really think RIPE is a great step forward. I mean, it's risk informed. There are a lot of things within the enforcement process that you can't risk inform, and so you use the traditional enforcement process or, you know, you're into the ROP other than for the RIPE process, but I personally think RIPE is a great step forward from a risk

55 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 perspective.

MS. VEIL: Any other panelists want to comment? All right, I am going to move to a question for Todd. Todd, in 2008, I led a study on the future workforce needs in the nuclear industry where I played a critical role in convincing DOE to reinvest in university nuclear science and engineering programs. Is it time for another exhaustive study of the future nuclear workforce needs?

MR. ALLEN: Yeah, I think that's a really interesting and timely question. I think, as I mentioned, the sort of 2008 time period, we did convince a lot of young people to come into the field, right, and we've sort of kept up those levels.

But I do think with the changes that you're hearing about

today, right, different technology approaches, different regulatory approaches, even the things I mentioned relative to sort of social science aspects of energy deployment, I think that what we need going forward likely is an expanded set of skills from what we would have thought about ten, 15 years ago.

So, I actually think that's a really good idea, and while the questioner is not specifically -

56 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433

- you know, I don't know who asked that question. I will certainly recommend that they lead the study.

As soon as I can figure out who they are --

(Laughter.)

MS. VEIL: And the next one, I'll start with you, Todd, but this is really for everyone. Can you comment more on the use of robotics?

The comment was made on the use of robotics exploring a cavity below the reactor vessel and going places humans do not wish to go such as the growing opportunity for robots at Fukushima.

MR. ALLEN: Yeah, so I think I'll let Scot talk more about where Exelon is using them in LWRs. I would just point out beyond that, I can see a ton of potential uses in decommissioning, but also advanced reactors.

Some of the advanced reactor designs I look at have places that are somewhat inaccessible or will need robotic or at least remote applications, so I think it's an area where we could do a lot and I'd like to find ways to encourage students to get involved.

MR. GREENLEE: Yeah, I would say at Exelon, everything we do, we look at whether robots

57 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 or drones can do the work and keep the humans from having to go into radiation fields, et cetera.

Right now, we're doing welding inside of some valves at one of our outages that is being done by, you know, remote welding technology. Now, could the technology be better? Absolutely, and as the technology gets better, we're going to continue to use it, but we use technology any place we think we can improve our operations.

MS. VEIL: Okay, now this next question is for everyone. The Naval Nuclear Power program has now been a talent source for the industry and NRC.

Has that relationship changed over recent years or is it changing?

MR. GREENLEE: I guess I probably ought to answer that one since I was in the Navy Nuclear Power program many years ago, and I left the program to go to NRC, and then I went from NRC into industry.

It has changed a bit because back when I got into the program, our main feeder was the Navy Nuclear Power program. I mean, it just was because that's where we got, you know, our best experts, but that's changed a lot over the years.

I would say -- I don't even know what the

58 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 numbers are. I would say ten percent of our folks come from the Navy and, you know, because we go out and we partner with colleges now because, you know, our partnership with the colleges allows us to improve our diversity hiring, and we've done a lot over the years in improving our diversity hiring by partnering with colleges.

And we're actually looking at the moment as to, you know, how do we change those partnerships to get even better at how we not only have diversity hiring, but how do we support our communities better?

That's a very important aspect for Exelon is community support.

MR. ALLEN: And I would say I'm also an ex-Navy nuc, so it's a commonality of the panel here, but I think from the university side, I think we still have a relationship with the Navy labs, mostly at the graduate level, right. Some of our students go off and engage with the Navy labs.

We still see some students coming out of the fleet and coming back to get a degree, but I don't see it changing a lot. It feels very steady state to me, right, so some fraction of the sailors coming out of the fleet want to get a degree and they'll

59 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 come to the programs.

MS. VEIL: Okay, Laura?

MS. DUDES: I'd just proffer that I think for the NRC, it's probably similar to what Scot was talking about. Thirty years ago, we probably hired a large percentage of our staff from the Navy Nuclear or ex-operators.

I think now we're looking at more of an all of the above solution. We still value a great deal the experience out of the Navy Nuclear program, as well as those who have commercial op experience, and so you want to balance that with other disciplines and going into the universities so that we can support our diversity and inclusion.

Because I've seen it firsthand in many instances, whether it was emergency response, or working in headquarters doing large projects on new reactors, or working through inspection findings in the region, that diversity, the differing views, the differing perspectives on a particular problem really does make the answers and the decisions better.

And so I think it's all of the above, and when you can combine the nuclear program, the commercial reactor

operator, the engineering

60 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 specialists, actually bringing in folks -- we had a really unique circumstance when we were standing up our construction organization and we brought in folks from other industries that were mid-career (audio interference) the nuclear experience, and I will say they add a

tremendous value coming from a

construction operation, and many of those folks have transitioned into our operations organization and they flourish because they do bring a different perspective on how to do things, and I think that's really important as we are focused on 2050, and 2060, and beyond.

MS. VEIL: We have about a minute left, so I will just comment, Todd, that someone said that your Mountain Dew comparison is brilliant. So, that's not a question, but I thought you should know that someone really liked your Mountain Dew comparison.

MR. ALLEN: You know what?

MS. VEIL: Go ahead.

MR. ALLEN: That makes it worthwhile that I got out of bed this morning and plugged away, so there we go.

MS. VEIL: Sure, and I'd really like to

61 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 thank the panelists. I said at the beginning that this was going to be a dynamic, you know, diverse panel, and it truly was. I liked how you guys learned things from each other. I'm sure the audience learned.

And just to circle back on RIPE, we never actually defined it. It's a risk-informed process for exemptions. So, the question that asked about RIPE, it's a fairly new process that the NRC has instituted that we use the acronym RIPE.

So, I want to thank again the panelists and thank the coordinators that helped us with this session, Rob Murray and Kenya Carrington. Thank you so much for all of your help. It takes a lot to do a RIC. And I want to, you know, give the last words to any of the panelists if you have any closing remarks.

MR. GREENLEE: I just want to say that Laura said we still value the Navy Nuclear experience, and we absolutely do. It's just a different pipeline today.

MS. VEIL: So, thanks again to the panelists and for everyone who has attended, and with that, we will conclude the session. Thank you very

62 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.

(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 (202) 234-4433 much.

(Whereupon, the above-entitled matter went off the record at 11:46 a.m.)