2012 Status of U S2012 Status of U.S. Nuclear Industry
Tony PietrangeloTony Pietrangelo
Senior Vice President and Chief Nuclear
Officer
March 16, 2012
Today’s BriefingStatus and outlook for nuclear energy in the United StatesUnited States
Industry response to Fukushima
C l iConclusions
Status and Outlook for Nuclear EnergyNuclear Energy
in the United Statesin the United States
Snapshot of U.S. Nuclear PerformanceU.S. Nuclear Capacity Factor, Percent
89 3% in 200589.3% in 200589.6% in 200691.8% in 200791.1% in 200890 5% i 200990.5% in 200991.2% in 201088.9% in 2011
Sources: Energy Information Administration, Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Steady Output From the Operating PlantsSteady Output From the Operating Plants
U.S. Nuclear Generation (billion kilowatt‐hours)
Highlights
789 in 2011
66 refueling outages in 2011 ( i ) 789 in 2011
807 in 2010799 in 2009806 in 2008806 in 2007
(55 in 2010)Several plants affected by 806 in 2007
787 in 2006782 in 2005754 in 2000
affected by natural phenomena
Sources: Energy Information Administration, Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Investing for the Future:Li R l d U t C tiLicense Renewals and Uprates Continue
Approved
71License Renewals
15
Under NRC Review
Intend to Renew
Unannounced 117
Cumulative Power Uprates Total Capital Spending Billions of Dollars
Sources: Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Electric Utility Cost Group
Impact of License RenewalU.S. Nuclear Capacity
120,000120,000 Capacity with 100% license renewal – 60 years
100,000100,000
Capacity without license renewal – 40 years
60,00060,000
80,00080,000
40,00040,000
00
20,00020,000
S N l E I tit t
7
Source: Nuclear Energy Institute
License Renewal StatusPlant Applications for License RenewalPlant Applications for License Renewal
1998 - 2017
13
111112
Extensions Granted
Applications Filed/Scheduled for Filing
71 Licenses Renewed71 Licenses Renewed15 Applications in Review15 Applications in Review9
8 8
10
9
~83% of U.S. nuclear plants~83% of U.S. nuclear plants
5
7
5
7
6
54
5
4
3
4
3
4 4
2 2
3
1 1 1
0
1
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
8
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Aging Management :The Focus of License Renewal
P g • Program scope
• Preventive actions
• Parameters monitored or inspected
• Detection of aging effects
• Monitoring and trending
• Acceptance criteriap
• Corrective actions
• Confirmation processConfirmation process
• Administrative controls
Operating experience• Operating experience9
Generic Aging Lesson Learned Report (GALL) NUREG-1801, Rev. 1
Catalog of generic aging management programs
Builds on previous aging studies
Reviews aging effects
Identifies relevant aging programs
Evaluates program attributes to manage aging effects
Evaluation conclusionEvaluation conclusion
Program is adequate and no further evaluation is needed should be augmented or a new program needed, should be augmented or a new program considered
10
Subsequent License Renewal(Long-Term Operation to 80 years)
• DOE/EPRI & NRC research into potential technical issues that may challenge long-term safe operationissues that may challenge long term safe operation
• Research areas include:
Reactor vessel and internalsReactor vessel and internals
Electric cable insulation
B i d/ b d t tBuried/submerged structures
Concrete exposed to high temperature and radiation
NEI/EPRI Comprehensive Review of GALL
11
Vogtle and Summer Projects Well Underway
Vogtle 3 & 4Photo courtesy Southern Company
Summer 2&3Photo courtesy SCANA
Other Designs, Licenses Under Review NRC
10 COLs and 2 early site permits under NRC review
at NRCy p
Design certification for Westinghouse AP1000 and GE Hitachi/Toshiba ABWRGE Hitachi/Toshiba ABWR
Final design approval for GE Hitachi ESBWR
AREVA’s EPR and Mitsubishi's US-APWR under NRC review
Industry Response to Fukushima
14
Immediate Industry ActionsImmediate Industry Actions
Verified that equipment procedures and Verified that equipment, procedures and staffing are in place to respond to threats
Verified capability to cope even during a complete loss of power p p
Verified each plant’s capabilities to protect g i t fl d d fi ft th kagainst floods and fires after earthquakes
Enhanced capability to protect spent fuel p y p ppools against extreme natural events
15
Fukushima Response: Industry ObjectivesFukushima Response: Industry Objectives
Prime focus is continued safe operation
Implement strategies and actions that provide the greatest safety benefit first
Focus on prevention of fuel damage (core and spent fuel pool) and containment integrity
Response to Fukushima:Response to Fukushima:Primary Focus Areas
Improved ability to cope with extended loss of AC power
Additional spent fuel storage pool instrumentation
Reliable containment ventingg
External hazard (seismic and flooding) evaluationsevaluations
Enhanced emergency planning for multi-reactor events events
Diverse and FlexibleCoping Capability (FLEX)
Additional layer of safety to mitigate beyond design bases events and prevent fuel damage
Focuses on maintaining key safety functions– Core cooling, containment integrity, SFP cooling
Multiple supplies of power and cooling water
Portable equipment reasonably protected
Symptom-based guidance and instructions
Programmatic controlsg
Regional support centers
18
Specific Actions Taken at U S ReactorsSpecific Actions Taken at U.S. Reactors
More than 300 major pieces of equipment acquired or orderedq– 66 large portable generators
62 di l d i – 62 diesel-driven pumps
– 59 small load diesel generators
– 13 fire trucks
11 portable ventilation units – 11 portable ventilation units
19
FLEX Provides Additional SafetyFLEX Provides Additional Safety
Public Opinion RecoveringPublic Opinion Recovering
Slight increase in favorability of nuclear energy:
– February 2011: 71%
– April: 46%
– September: 62%
82% agree U.S. should learn from Japan and license new plants rather than stop progress entirelyp p p g y
61% said it would be acceptable to build a new reactor at the nuclear energy facility closest to where gy ythey live
Sources: Bisconti Research Inc./GfK Roper Sept. 2011Luntz Global April 2011
Perceptions of Nuclear Plant Safetyp yUnchanged From February
2011
Feb.
Sources: Bisconti Research, Inc. with GfK Roper
Responsible, Measured Response toResponsible, Measured Response to Fukushima In the United States
Disciplined regulatory response from NRC
Measured political response
“In spite of the worst atomic accident in 25 years, nuclear power is here to stay.”
Public attitudes (particularly opinion
— December 29, 2011, editorial
leaders) remain strong
Reasoned editorial reaction “Nuclear power remains an
indispensable part of the U.S. energy mix.”
— December 12, 2011, editorial
Nuclear Energy TodayNuclear Energy TodayNuclear energy benefits – Clean
– Safe and secure Gas
– Affordable and reliable
– Economically beneficial
24% Nuclear20%
Economically beneficial
Forward-looking actionsF k hi f t
Coal45%
Hydro6%
R bl– Fukushima safety enhancements
Renewable and Other
4%Oil1%
– License renewal
– New plant licensingU.S. Electricity Production
24
ConclusionsConclusionsU.S. plants continue to operate safely and reliably
License renewal and new plant licensing License renewal and new plant licensing extend the benefits of nuclear generation
U S k i di i fi U.S. took immediate action to reconfirm safety and response capability
Diverse, flexible coping strategy will meet NRC requirementsNRC requirements
Safe nuclear energy remains vital part of U.S. l t i it tf lielectricity portfolio
25
2012 Status of U S2012 Status of U.S. Nuclear Industry
For more information visit:For more information, visit:
www.nei.org