Nuclear Energy: Safety, Radiological Protection and Physical Security in the post-carbon era

1. Nuclear Energy: Safety, Radiological Protection and Physical Security in the post-carbon era (Energía Nuclear: Seguridad, Protección Radiológica y Seguridad Física) By Dr. Nils J. Diaz The ND2 Group, LLC Santiago, Chile January 28, 2010

2. Nuclear Electricity Generation:Policies and Infrastructure Internally Consistent Policies for • Energy • Climate • Environment • Economy • Quality of Lifeand Well-Being • National Security • Social and Political Stability - and -the financial, industrial and regulatory infrastructure to make it happen

3. Global Deployment Status for New Nuclear Generation • Multiple favorable socio-political, environmental and economic factors, and the need to add carbon-free, base-loaded electrical capacity. • Mature nuclear industry, with a strong and sustained record of safe, reliable and economic electrical generation. • Advanced, standardized LWR reactor technologies with proven modular construction techniques for schedule and cost control. • Safe and secure used fuel management. New policies for comprehensive resolution of fuel storage, recycling and final disposal of radioactive wastes are needed but do not have to be implemented soon. • Mature regulatory structures, with the capability to discharge their licensing and regulatory authority for predictable safety on schedule. • The major difficulty remains the financing of the high initial capital cost and complex contracting issues between buyers/vendors/AE-constructors

4. Role of Regulation in a Democracy • To regulate or not to regulate, a democratic choice. • Regulation must result in a benefit or it will result in a loss. • “Government can and must provide opportunity, not smother it; foster productivity, not stifle it” (President Ronald Reagan). • The regulation of nuclear electrical generation should serve the public interest by enabling the safe, secure and environmentally responsible use of nuclear power in meeting the nation’s energy needs. • Nuclear regulation must be credible and open: there is no credible regulator w/o a credible industry and there is no credible industry w/o a credible regulator. • New reactor deployment requires regulatory bodies with the capacity to establish a predictable framework that will serve the nation, now and in the future.

5. Nuclear Regulation • Objective: Enable the use and management of radioactive materials and nuclear fuels for beneficial civilian purposes in a manner that protects public health and safety and the environment, promotes the security of the nation, and provides for regulatory actions that are open, effective, efficient, realistic, and timely. • Mandate: to license and to regulate. The licensing activity is completed first and requires a highly technical effort that will be continued during the life of the plant(s). It becomes a schedule-critical activity and the cornerstone of the overall regulatory framework. A “certified design” technology selection is manageable in today’s global environment, with available international tools. Each country retains final regulatory decision-making authority.

6. U.S. Policies and Status of New Nuclear Power Atomic Energy Act of 1954 established a 40 year license term, later considered as design life. It also specified that licenses “ .... may be renewed upon the expiration of such period.” The license is still issued for 40 years, renewable for an additional 20 years, for a 60 year useful or design life. Energy Policy Act of 1992 provides for a new effective and efficient licensing process to minimize financial risk and enhance safety reviews. Energy Policy Act of 2005 provides multiple incentives for new nuclear power, including Federal Loan Guarantees, Production Credits and Protection from Unnecessary Licensing Delays. Major regulatory changes made by USNRC from 1992 to 2006, many using risk-informed and performance-based regulation, to improve effectiveness, accountability and predictability. Major improvements made in physical security since 2001. 6

7. US Nuclear Plant Licensing 3 primary components of 10 CFR Part 52 • Design Certification • NRC approval of the safety of vendor nuclear plant designs. • Rulemaking valid for 15 yrs. Not adjudicated – Renewable. • Early Site Permit (ESP) • Environmental protection, site characterization, physical security and plans for coping with emergencies. • Valid for 10-20 yrs, adjudicated – Renewable. • Combined License (COL) • Authorizes construction and operation prior to construction, with or w/o ESP/Design Certification. • Valid for 40 yrs, adjudicated. Renewable, 20 yrs additional.

8. “New” Licensing Process for U.S. Nuclear ReactorsCombined Construction Operating License (COL) 8 8

9. Pre-Construction Early Site Permit Construction Verification Combined License Review, Hearing, and Decision Verification of Regulations with ITAAC Reactor Operation Decision Optional Pre-Application Review Standard Design Certification • Licensing decisions finalized before major construction begins • Utilities would order plants when regulatory/financial risks are reduced by COL license • Limited work may be authorized before COL issuance • Inspections, Tests, Analysis and Acceptance Criteria done to confirm plant is a “as licensed” New NRC One-Step Licensing Processes

10. Scope of USNRC Design Reviews 10 CFR Part 52 • Design of Structures, Systems and Components • Reactor Systems and Fuel Design • Reactor Coolant System and Connected Systems • Engineered Safety Features • Electrical Power Systems (AC and DC) • Auxiliary Systems • Fire Protection • Steam and Power Conversion Systems • Radiation Protection

11. Scope of USNRC Design Reviews 10 CFR Part 52 (cont.) • Radioactive Waste Systems • Conduct of Operations • Initial Testing Programs • Inspection, Testing, Analysis, and Acceptance of Criteria • Accident Analysis • Dose Assessment • Quality Assurance • Human Factors Engineering • Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA)

12. Standardization and Design Safety Review • Majority of nuclear power plants to be built in the next 25 years will be Standard Light Water Reactors, to be purchased from a limited number of corporations and existing designs • Strong multinational/international initiatives would strengthen and facilitate the most difficult technical processes in nuclear power deployment, beginning with the design safety review, and including common Codes and Standards, QA, Vendor and Suppliers Inspections and Certification, global secure I&C • National Regulators should be empowered to verify and accept “certified and accredited” designs, while retaining sovereign authority for licensing and regulatory decisions

13. The MDEP and the CORDEL Initiatives • The MDEP is a multinational initiative to develop approaches for leveraging resources and expertise of national regulators with “country of origin” designs or FOAK user country for sharing comprehensive safety design evaluations, harmonizing Codes and Standards, conducting joint Vendor Inspections, Digital I&C cooperation, and other tasks. • OECD/NEA holds the MDEP Secretariat with 10 member countries with participating regulatory authorities and now an EPR and AP1000 WG • CORDEL (Cooperation in Reactor Design Evaluation and Licensing) is a WNA initiative closer to and more definitive than even the original Multinational Design Approval Program proposed by NRC in 2006 • CORDEL final goal is to achieve an International Design Certification owned by the certified Vendor for the entire reactor life • Vendor maintains design authority and operator is “intelligent customer” monitored by “smart regulator”.

15. Status of U.S. New Licensing Activities • Standard Light Water Reactor certifications will be completed by 2012-2013 for all current applicants (AP1000, ABWR, ESBWR, EPR and USAPWR). • 4 Early Site Permits have been issued, after adjudication. • 18 COL’s under consideration, with 6-8 to be completed by 2013. Comment: the siting of the plant(s) is undoubtedly the dominant initial licensing issue.

16. Proposed Global New Nuclear Build Paradigm • New reactor build activities shall not interfere nor take resources from operating reactors, and other related obligations. • New reactor build activities shall be done openly and on schedule, relying on high quality and complete applications from industry, using best global experience, with established regulatory frameworks. • Major licensing activities and decisions, commencing with siting and environmental decisions, shall be done before major investments are made. • ONE LICENSE issued to construct and operate, as licensed. Inspect to ensure compliance during construction and operation (ITAAC) • Most (about 80%) of the final design shall be completed before major construction work is started. • Reactors with US certified designs or equivalent are preferred. • Major project interfaces, including the utility/vendor plus the architect/engineer, constructor and interrelations shall be clearly defined by contractual arrangements. • Bottom line: activities are strongly coupled yet done by independent parties. They require active coordination of milestones and interfaces, in accordance with established frameworks and schedules.

17. Summary • Many major predictability components are favorable to the deployment of new nuclear power plants. • Licensing processes must place the risk at the front end, prior to construction and the major financial investments. • Infrastructure should consider incorporating design acceptance of candidate reactor technologies from existing tools (NEA’s MDEP or CORDEL equivalent agreements). • High initial capital cost needs to be considered in the full context of plant life generation costs, the added value of fuel diversification and low stable kW-hr price to the economy. Carbon taxation legislation would favor renewables and nuclear. • Base-loaded fission-powered electrical generation should be seriously considered for Chile’s energy portfolio. The key task is to develop the requisite infrastructure for the security, long term economic benefits, sound environmental stewardship and the people’s well-being.