[Senate Hearing 115-388]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 115-388
ADVANCED NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY: SAFETY AND ASSOCIATED BENEFITS OF
LICENSING ACCIDENT TOLERANT FUELS FOR COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR REACTORS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON
ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
SEPTEMBER 13, 2018
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
32-793 PDF WASHINGTON : 2018
COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming, Chairman
JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware,
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia Ranking Member
JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland
ROGER WICKER, Mississippi BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island
JERRY MORAN, Kansas JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon
MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, New York
JONI ERNST, Iowa CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
RICHARD SHELBY, Alabama TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland
Richard M. Russell, Majority Staff Director
Mary Frances Repko, Minority Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
SEPTEMBER 13, 2018
OPENING STATEMENTS
Barrasso, Hon. John, U.S. Senator from the State of Wyoming...... 4
Carper, Hon. Thomas R., U.S. Senator from the State of Delaware.. 6
WITNESSES
Furstenau, Raymond, Director, Office of Nuclear Regulatory
Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission................... 8
Prepared statement........................................... 11
Responses to additional questions from:
Senator Barrasso......................................... 17
Senator Markey........................................... 24
Taylor, Tina, Deputy Chief Nuclear Officer and Senior Director of
Research and Development, Electric Power Research Institute.... 27
Prepared statement........................................... 29
Response to an additional question from Senator Barrasso..... 36
Williams, John B., Nuclear Fuels and Analysis Director, Southern
Nuclear Operating Company...................................... 37
Prepared statement........................................... 39
Responses to additional questions from:
Senator Barrasso......................................... 44
Senator Markey........................................... 45
Back, Christina A., Ph.D., Vice President, Nuclear Technologies
and Materials, General Atomics................................. 46
Prepared statement........................................... 48
Response to an additional question from Senator Barrasso..... 53
Responses to additional questions from Senator Duckworth..... 55
ADVANCED NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY: SAFETY AND ASSOCIATED BENEFITS OF
LICENSING ACCIDENT TOLERANT FUELS FOR COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR REACTORS
----------
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 2018
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Environment and Public Works,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:03 a.m. in
room 406, Dirksen Senate Building, Hon. John Barrasso (Chairman
of the Committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Barrasso, Inhofe, Wicker, Ernst, Carper,
Cardin, Whitehouse, Gillibrand, and Van Hollen.
Senator Barrasso. Good morning. I call this hearing to
order.
Before we begin today's hearing, I would like to say just a
few words about America's Water Infrastructure Act.
This week we were able to reach a bipartisan agreement with
the House of Representatives on major water infrastructure
legislation. America's Water Infrastructure Act answers
President Trump's call to address our Nation's aging
infrastructure.
In this instance, the bill fixes America's water
infrastructure. It authorizes important projects to deepen
nationally significant ports, upgrades levees and dams,
maintains inland waterways and shipping lanes, increases water
storage for the arid West, fixes aging irrigation systems, and
enhances American made hydropower.
This is also the most significant drinking water
infrastructure bill in decades. It authorizes both new and
existing programs that will gives States and localities the
ability to better address their drinking water infrastructure
needs.
This legislation is especially important as Hurricane
Florence threatens the East Coast. Provisions in this bill will
boost flood control and increase water storage. Both are
critical in the preparation for and response to major storms.
The House of Representatives plans to pass the legislation
today. Then the Senate can take it up and send it to President
Trump for his signature.
America's Water Infrastructure Act is a major
infrastructure bill. It shows congressional commitment to heed
the President's call for action on infrastructure. The next
step is roads and bridges, surface transportation. I hope we
can have the same bipartisan success when we address America's
transportation infrastructure.
I would like to thank Ranking Member Carper, Subcommittee
Chairman Inhofe, Subcommittee Ranking Member Cardin, the House
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Shuster,
and Ranking Member DeFazio for all of their hard work on this
bill.
At this time, I would like to invite Senator Carper for any
additions you would make.
Senator Carper. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman.
I want to second the words of praise you have offered for
our colleagues in the House, for our colleagues sitting to our
left and to our right, Senators Cardin, Inhofe, and all of our
staff.
People at home say to me--and I am sure they do in your
States as well--why can't you just work together? Why can't you
work together and get something done? One of the most important
things we can do is create a nurturing environment for job
creation and job preservation. A big piece of that is
infrastructure. A big piece of transportation infrastructure is
water infrastructure.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your leadership. It has been a
pleasure to work with you and your staff and our colleagues and
their staffs in this effort.
As the Chairman mentioned, on Monday night we were able to
reach an agreement with our counterparts in the House to
advance America's Water Infrastructure Act of 2018, which the
Chairman and I co-authored, with the invaluable help of both
the majority and minority staffs of this Committee and our
colleagues over the better part of this last year.
As you may recall, our bill was reported out of this
Committee unanimously 21 to 0 a couple of months ago, and
hopefully, it will receive the same kind of support in the
House later today and then in the Senate in short order.
In the meantime, I would just like to highlight several
especially noteworthy provisions in this bill that will make
significant, positive differences in communities across the
country, including many in my home State of Delaware,
throughout the Delmarva peninsula, and well beyond our borders.
For the first time in over 20 years this bill reauthorizes
the program that provides Federal funding to States to help
clean up the water our families drink every day. The crisis
that unfolded in Flint, Michigan, several years ago was both
tragic and avoidable. We have seen it play out since in far too
many States across this country.
In this bill, we are making clear that we have learned our
lesson: that we need to devote more resources to the things
that are most important, like making sure every parent--no
matter what ZIP code they live in--can be confident that the
water coming out of their tap is safe for their kids and them
to drink.
Not only does this bill reauthorize this program, but we
actually double its funding by fiscal year 2021 to the tune of
nearly $2 billion. Importantly, this legislation also allows
States that detect contaminants in drinking water to assist
residents who depend on private wells for their drinking water,
rather than a public drinking water source.
For example, one in six Delawareans--it is similar in other
States as well--depend on private wells for their drinking
water. It is just not right that if contaminants end up in
their water, through no fault of the citizens or the residents,
those residents have to find a way to rectify that situation
solely on their own. That is just not fair.
Our bill helps to change that by helping States test and
treat underground sources of drinking water. Also of note, this
bill authorizes investments in the waterways that keep this
country moving, from the Ports of Wilmington to the Port of
Mobile to the Port of New York and the Port of New Jersey.
Over 99 percent of U.S. overseas trade volume moves through
waterways that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers maintains.
Think of that; 99 percent. Our bill will help to improve and
expand the harbors, channels, and ports on which our economy
depends.
With Hurricane Florence bearing down on the East Coast this
week, I would be remiss if I did not briefly mention the
important provisions in this bill that help coastal communities
better prepare for increasingly powerful and frequently extreme
weather events and enable those communities to rebuild more
quickly after disaster strikes.
Most notably perhaps, in light of the avoidable devastation
and tragedy we saw in the wake of Hurricanes Maria and Harvey,
our bill allows for the investment of $100 million in repairing
drinking water systems damaged by storms. It creates new
programs to protect this critical part of our infrastructure
from damage due to extreme weather events going forward.
While President Trump has made waves this week with his
comments about his ``unsung successes'' in Puerto Rico where
nearly 3,000 of our fellow Americans apparently lost their
lives, we have been working hard to pass a bill that will help
to ensure storm ravaged communities actually have the resources
they so desperately need.
There is much more in this bill that is worth highlighting,
and I am sure there will be time to do so in the days and weeks
to come.
For now, I want to again thank our Chairman. I want to
thank our colleagues, Senators Inhofe, Cardin and their staffs
for their hard work throughout this process.
I also want to thank our friends in the House,
Representatives Shuster, DeFazio, Walden, and Pallone, who were
great partners in the House.
Together, we are stronger. When we are together, so is
America stronger.
Last, I want to thank Secretary R.D. James, who sat right
here where you sit, Ms. Taylor, several months ago for his
confirmation hearing to be the Assistant Secretary to head the
Army Corps of Engineers, who made this legislation a real
priority and worked with the Senators on this Committee to
craft a bill that I think we can all be proud of.
I will end with an African proverb that I think is
particularly relevant here: ``If you want to go fast, go alone.
If you want to go far, go together.''
I think the fact that we have gotten a bill as substantive
as this one to this point is proof that, in this Congress, if
you want to get meaningful work done, you have to find some
common ground and find ways to work together. Kudos to
everyone.
As we say in the Navy, when something good is happening,
``Bravo, Zulu.''
Thank you.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you so much, Senator Carper, for
all your cooperation. As you say, 21 to 0 in this Committee.
Senator Inhofe, as Chairman of the Transportation and
Infrastructure Subcommittee, is there anything you would like
to add?
Senator Inhofe. No, I don't think so, but one of the best
kept secrets in America is that Oklahoma is navigable. The
NCARNS, we have that reauthorization assured even though we
have fallen behind. A lot of good things have not been
mentioned that are a part of this.
Senator Barrasso. Senator Cardin.
Senator Cardin. I just really want to add that under
Senator Barrasso's and Senator Carper's leadership, our
Committee worked very constructively on this. Under Senator
Inhofe, as Chair and Ranking Member, that was tradition in
regards to the WRDA bill and was continued. I just wanted to
acknowledge that.
I also want to point out, Mr. Chairman, as I was walking
over here, I was stopped by the National League of Cities. They
wanted to lobby me on one issue, the passage of the WRDA bill.
I gave a copy of the letter to Senator Carper.
I also want to acknowledge Secretary James, when he was
here, made commitments to visit some of our major facilities.
He went to Poplar Island with me. His engagement on this
process was extremely valuable.
This bill--the Water Resources Development Act--is going to
be important for our country. It is important in Maryland on
the Chesapeake Bay and our efforts to clean up the Chesapeake
Bay. It is important to Maryland for safe drinking water.
The work that is done here is important to help our schools
and public facilities with the vast connections with regard to
pipes that will no longer contain lead. It is important for our
economy and what it does in regard to the Port of Baltimore,
and by the way, other ports around the country and around
Maryland.
I am very proud to be a part of this, and congratulations
to all.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WYOMING
Senator Barrasso. Thank you to all of you.
This morning we are here to examine the safety and other
benefits associated with advanced nuclear fuels, known as
accident tolerant fuels, ATF. Accident tolerant fuels are for
commercial and nuclear power plants. These fuels have the
potential to greatly increase the safety and performance in
nuclear reactors.
When loaded into a reactor, this technology would further
protect uranium from melting if a plant loses the ability to
cool the fuel. In the event of an emergency, accident tolerant
fuels would provide significantly more time for power plant
operators to prevent the release of radioactive material.
Following the 2011 disaster in Fukushima, Japan, Congress
established a research program at the Department of Energy to
encourage the development of accident tolerant fuels. Seven
years later we are approaching the critical window for nuclear
power plants to reap the safety benefits of this technology.
In addition to safety benefits, accident tolerant fuels may
also provide meaningful economic benefits. For example, these
fuels would allow nuclear power plants to generate electricity
more efficiently.
In doing so, the plants would reduce costs and generate
less nuclear waste. To realize these benefits, these fuels must
be developed, tested, licensed, and deployed commercially. The
Nuclear Regulatory Commission plays the principle role in this
process.
The NRC has the exclusive authority to license and regulate
the civilian use of nuclear materials. Approving new nuclear
fuels can be a challenge. The fuel vendors must first test the
fuel in rigorous experiments. The NRC then must validate the
results of these tests through highly complex computer
modeling.
Finally, the NRC must ultimately license the new fuels for
use in a power plant. The NRC, the Department of Energy, and
the nuclear industry are all carefully considering ways to
facilitate this work.
In April of this year the NRC Commissioners held their
first public briefing on what needs to get done prior to
licensing these accident tolerant fuels. The briefing helped
the agency staff to develop a project plan for regulating
accident tolerant fuels, which the staff issued earlier this
month. Yesterday the NRC staff held a public meeting on the
plan.
The private sector is also taking steps to deploy accident
tolerant fuels on an aggressive schedule. Two fuel vendors have
already loaded test materials into two reactors to gather
critical data. This process is encouraging, though significant
hurdles remain.
One of the hurdles is the permanent closure of the Halden
Test Center, which Norway announced earlier this summer. Since
1958 the Halden Reactor provided critical information on
nuclear fuels and materials to organizations within 19
countries, including the NRC, the Department of Energy, and the
American fuel vendors.
The Halden Reactor would have provided key scientific data
to assess the performance of accident tolerant fuels. The NRC,
the Department of Energy, and the nuclear fuel vendors will now
need to adjust their existing research plans. In spite of
Halden's closure, it is imperative that the NRC and the private
sector stay on schedule to make an accident tolerant fuel
available commercially as soon as possible.
The operating licenses for over a third of our Nation's
nuclear power plants will expire between 2025 and 2035. If
accident tolerant fuels are available, American energy
utilities will be able to reap their safety and economic
benefits.
Such benefits may encourage utilities to make multiple,
multi-million dollar investment decisions to extend the
licenses for these nuclear power plants. These new technologies
would also help keep Americans employed. That includes workers
in my home State of Wyoming, which produces more uranium than
any other State in the country.
Preserving America's nuclear fleet is not only good for the
economy, but is also good for the environment. Nuclear power
provides a source of clean energy to millions of American
families and businesses.
As this week's issue of The Economist explains, ``Some
environmental activists don't like this source of zero carbon
energy, but nuclear power still provides more than twice as
much electricity globally as wind and 5.5 times as much as
solar.''
I look forward to the discussions this morning.
I will now turn to Ranking Member Carper for an opening
statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS R. CARPER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF DELAWARE
Senator Carper. I want to apologize to our witnesses.
Normally, we call this a hearing, and that is for us to hear
from you. Please bear with us as you hear from us for just a
few more minutes, and then we will put on our listening ears.
Again, Mr. Chairman, thanks so much for convening this
important hearing on advanced nuclear technologies,
specifically accident tolerant fuels. I spent a lot of years in
my life in the Navy and have a huge appreciation for nuclear on
ships and submarines.
We were scheduled to have the christening of the USS
Delaware, a fast attack, junior class nuclear submarine in
Newport News this Saturday. It has been postponed until October
for obvious reasons. I am one who fully realizes and
understands the importance of nuclear energy done well and done
safely.
I know my colleagues have heard me say this before, but I
will say it again: I believe there are few environmental
challenges more serious than climate change and the extreme
weather associated with it.
Our leading scientific agencies, NOAA and NASA among them,
tell us that climate change is causing rising global
temperatures, rising sea levels, and extreme weather events. We
witness them almost every month, sometimes every week. Weather
events, like the massive Hurricane Florence, is expected to
strike the East Coast in the next few days and threaten the
lives and well being of millions of Americans.
NOAA also tells us that extreme weather events that have
cost our country more than $1 billion apiece have doubled in
frequency over the past decade, with $425 billion in losses
occurring over the last 5 years. That is $425 billion with a B.
Think about that.
Whether it is a drought, a forest fire in the West, a
hurricane or a massive flood in the East, climate change
results in lost income, damaged properties, and sadly, in some
cases, lost lives.
As we send up prayers for those who live in Florence's path
and who are preparing for this massive storm, our Federal
Government has a moral responsibility, not only to help our
communities be better prepared for climate fueled events, but
to also address the root causes of these events.
To some of our friends across the aisle who are not yet
ready to join the rest of us in addressing climate action, let
me note that nuclear power is one of the many examples of how
our Nation can combat climate change, and at the same time,
grow our economy.
I want to say that again. Let me note that nuclear power is
one of the many examples of how our Nation can combat climate
change, and at the same time, grow our economy. We can do both,
and we must.
When nuclear power is produced responsibly, it does not
emit carbon and reduces our reliance on fossil fuels. Our
country can--and should--seize the opportunity to continue to
use nuclear energy in our national energy mix.
Today, nuclear power provides about 20 percent of our
Nation's energy, as well as 60 percent of our carbon-free
electricity, but as we know, the nuclear industry still faces
many challenges. We need to make sure reactors operate well and
safely, especially in the event of extreme weather.
Take what happened in Fukushima: nuclear power can lead to
devastating circumstances if the proper safety precautions are
not in place, not up to date, or not adhered to. Safety must
always be the top priority in our country's approach to
improving nuclear energy.
Today's costs for safety precautions at existing reactors,
along with the costs of construction, operation, and
maintenance, can be expensive, especially when compared to the
cost of other sources of energy, such as natural gas.
Fortunately, recent advancements in science allow us to
build and operate advanced nuclear technology that is safer,
cleaner, and cheaper. If we are smart, we will replace our
aging nuclear reactors with this new technology.
As we will hear today, advanced nuclear technology could
improve the safety and efficiency of our existing reactors over
the next 5 years. Using new materials for our nuclear fuel rods
in our existing reactors, known as accident tolerant fuel, may
allow our existing reactors to avoid the danger of overheating
during emergency situations, which is what happened at
Fukushima.
At the same time, accident tolerant fuel could enable our
current fleet of nuclear reactors to run more efficiently, and
therefore, be more cost competitive. This is situation in which
it is possible to do well and do good at the same time.
My colleagues know that I love win-win situations. They do,
too. Accident tolerant fuel has the potential to be a great
win, not only for the fight against climate change and severe
weather, but for industry, American jobs, and most importantly,
the safety of the American people. We might want to think of
this as a win-win-win-win situation.
As companies make advances in technology, we need to make
sure that our regulatory framework keeps pace. The Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, NRC, is still considered the world's
gold standard of nuclear regulatory agencies.
As science and technology evolve, so too must the NRC.
However, as I said before, we cannot afford to cut corners when
it comes to nuclear safety. I am interested--and I think we are
interested--in hearing today how the Federal Government can
ensure all the design testing needed is completed expeditiously
to help inform the NRC licensing process.
We also need to make sure that the NRC has the resources it
needs to review these new technologies and to ensure that our
current nuclear reactor fleet remains safe.
In closing, let me add that I strongly believe Congress has
a critical role to play in ensuring that our Nation invests
wisely in clean energy. That includes finding ways to support
advanced nuclear technologies, which allow our reactors to be
safer, more resilient, and more efficient.
Advances in nuclear energy can help us attain a more
nurturing environment for job creation along with cleaner air
for our people and planet. That is a pretty good combination,
one which most Americans would like to see us embrace, and I
hope we will do just that.
Thank you so much.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator Carper.
Senator Inhofe. Mr. Chairman, let me just make one comment.
We have been fighting this battle for a long time now. We
know how long it takes new technology to move. When you look at
countries like France and China, we have to figure out a way to
do it faster. It is obviously an answer that we need to
exploit.
Regretfully, we have all this competition for committees
this morning, and I will not be able to stay, but to me, there
is no single issue that is more important than this, further
exploiting the opportunity to come up with the clean energy
that is offered through our nuclear efforts.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator Inhofe.
Thank you and welcome to all of our witnesses. We are
delighted that you have joined us here today.
Today, we are joined by Raymond Furstenau, Director, Office
of Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission; Tina Taylor, Deputy Chief Nuclear Officer and
Senior Director of Research and Development, Electric Power
Research Institute; John B. Williams, Nuclear Fuels and
Analysis Director, Southern Nuclear Company; and Dr. Christina
A. Back, Ph.D., Vice President, Nuclear Technologies and
Materials, General Atomics.
I want to welcome all of you. I want to remind you that
your full written testimony will be submitted for the official
record. If you could, please keep your statements to 5 minutes
so that we have time for questions.
I look forward to hearing your testimony if we could start
with you, Mr. Furstenau.
STATEMENT OF RAYMOND FURSTENAU, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF NUCLEAR
REGULATORY RESEARCH, U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Mr. Furstenau. Good morning, Chairman Barrasso, Ranking
Member Carper, and distinguished members of the Committee.
My name is Raymond Furstenau. I serve as Director of
Nuclear Regulatory Research at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission. I am pleased to be here today to report to you on
the status of our preparations to license the safe use of
accident tolerant fuels.
I would like to start this morning by highlighting the
NRC's commitment to enhancing our regulatory infrastructure to
facilitate the safe use of new technologies.
A recent example of success in this area is the licensing
of new facilities using novel technologies for the production
of medical isotopes, an issue of national interest due to
periodic shortages of material used in diagnostic medical
procedures for millions of Americans each year.
Accident tolerant fuel, or ATF, is another area of new
technology, which has the potential to enhance safety at U.S.
nuclear power plants. ATF is a category of new fuels for
nuclear reactors that are expected to perform better than
currently licensed fuels under transient and accident
conditions.
The fuel in use today at U.S. nuclear reactors is comprised
of uranium dioxide pellets, encased in a metallic cladding
fabricated from a zirconium based alloy, and has remained
largely the same over the past several decades.
This is a plastic mock up of a fuel rod. This is a little
bit larger in diameter than an actual fuel rod. Inside the rod,
the cladding is zirconium based. The uranium dioxide pellets
are stacked in the fuel rods. In an actual reactor, active fuel
is about 12 feet in length. There are hundreds of elements in a
fuel assembly and about tens of thousands of these individual
rods put into assemblies in a nuclear reactor.
We expect that near-term ATF designs, defined as the
concepts that industry is pursuing for deployment by the mid-
2020s, will have relatively small departures from today's
nuclear fuel designs.
These small departures include specially designed additives
to standard fuel pellets and robust coatings applied to the
outside diameter of standard claddings intended to reduce
corrosion, increase wear resistance, and reduce the production
of hydrogen under high temperature, accident, conditions.
Nuclear fuel designs with an iron based alloy cladding,
also offering improved corrosion resistance, will likely be
submitted for NRC review shortly following these near-term
designs.
In the longer term, we expect ATF concepts to be submitted
for NRC review that utilize new fuel pellet materials that
operate at lower temperatures than current uranium dioxide fuel
pellets, and ceramic silicon carbide cladding, which
potentially offers significantly improved performance under
high temperature conditions.
We also expect solid metallic fuel ATF concepts, which
offer lower operating temperatures and decreased consequences
of cladding breaches, to be submitted for NRC review in the
years ahead.
To varying degrees, each of these ATF designs is expected
to offer power plant operators more flexibility in how they
operate their plants and provide more robust performance during
normal operations and under potential accident conditions.
Most notably, ATF designs may enhance the ability to
mitigate accidents due to the additional time available to
plant operators prior to the onset of potential fuel damaging
conditions. ATF designs may also have the ability to reduce the
amount of high level waste produced by operating reactors by
permitting extended operation of fuel assemblies in the reactor
core.
While the NRC can license these new fuels under the current
regulatory structure, we are taking steps to make our processes
more efficient and effective. To that end, the NRC has
developed a project plan to prepare for both near-term and
longer-term ATF designs. The plan addresses the complete fuel
cycle, including fuel fabrication, fresh fuel transport in
reactor requirements, and spent fuel storage and
transportation.
Throughout development of the plan, we have had extensive
engagement with our stakeholders including licensees, nuclear
vendors, industry groups, non-governmental organizations, and
our international counterparts. Some of those stakeholders are
on the panel today.
The plan outlines a new regulatory approach to fuel
licensing, in which the NRC is seeking engagement with
potential ATF applicants much earlier in the research and
development phase than it has in the past.
This early engagement is designed to identify potential
safety issues as early as possible so they can be addressed and
the overall safety conclusions can be reached within the
planned licensing timeline.
Throughout our preparations, we are monitoring the
Department of Energy's efforts to advance the technical basis
of ATF, both experimentally and computationally. This close
coordination is allowing the NRC and DOE to make progress
despite the closure of an internationally funded nuclear fuel
and materials research facility, the Halden Reactor in Norway.
The NRC and DOE staffs are also working on ways to leverage
DOE's testing capabilities and computational tools for use in
reaching our safety findings for ATF designs without
compromising the agency's regulatory independence.
In conclusion, with the issuance of the staff's ATF project
plan and the heightened engagement of nuclear fuel vendors,
DOE, and licensees, I believe the NRC has positioned itself
well to efficiently license the safe use of ATF.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Furstenau follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much for your testimony.
We will have questions in a little bit.
I would now like to turn to Ms. Taylor.
Thank you very much for joining us today.
STATEMENT OF TINA TAYLOR, DEPUTY CHIEF NUCLEAR OFFICER AND
SENIOR DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, ELECTRIC POWER
RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Ms. Taylor. Good morning, Chairman Barrasso, Ranking Member
Carper, and members of the Committee.
My name is Tina Taylor. I am a Senior Director for Research
and Development and Deputy Chief Nuclear Officer at the
Electric Power Research Institute, EPRI. I am pleased to be
here today to talk with you about EPRI's research related to
accident tolerant fuels.
EPRI conducts research and development relating to the
generation, delivery, and use of electricity for the benefit of
the public. An independent, nonprofit organization, EPRI brings
its scientists and engineers, as well as experts from academia,
government, and the industry, to help address challenges
related to electricity, including reliability, efficiency,
affordability, health, safety, and the environment.
EPRI's members represent approximately 90 percent of the
electricity generated and delivered in the United States,
including all of the U.S. nuclear reactor operators.
For the past 30 years EPRI has conducted research on
nuclear fuels for greater reliability, safety, and performance.
Our research on ATF is focused on evaluating the safety and
economic benefits. While we are not currently developing any
ATF technologies, our work is informing strategic
decisionmaking for ATF implementation.
Accident tolerant fuels have the potential to offer safety
and environmental benefits with more resilient and efficient
fuel and plant performance. Key improvements in ATF are higher
melting temperatures, improved strength and toughness, reduced
hydrogen generation, and better confinement of nuclear
materials during postulated off-normal events. Additionally,
ATF may also improve the underlying economics.
Getting these new technologies from design to
implementation is challenging and involves the collaboration of
many organizations. As you are hearing today, there is
currently great collaboration underway between DOE, NRC, fuel
vendors, industry, plant operators, the National Labs, EPRI,
and others.
EPRI's research is focused on how ATF performance
improvements translate into providing more plant resilience to
off-normal events and economic benefits during normal
operation.
In 2017 EPRI performed an initial assessment of ATF. The
performance of ATF concepts was evaluated for a number of
scenarios. The work concluded that safety benefits do exist and
vary among different ATF designs and plant designs.
Some ATF concepts may have mitigated the Three Mile Island
II accident. Other accident scenarios we evaluated showed that
accident tolerant fuels have the potential to provide
additional coping time.
A critical metric for decisionmakers is ATF deployment
timeframes. The sooner these ATF concepts can be deployed, the
sooner the safety and economic benefits will be realized.
Historically, the licensing of new fuels and cladding has taken
upwards of 20 years.
EPRI is researching approaches that could shorten this
timeframe. Advanced modeling and simulation with modern data
collection methods may be useful to reduce the number of time
consuming and costly tests that are needed. Development of new
examination techniques may allow quicker results from the tests
that are performed.
In conclusion, accident tolerant fuels have the potential
to provide increased safety margins over current nuclear fuels
while also providing enhanced fuel reliability, improved
economics, and reduced high level waste generation. Working
collaboratively with the other stakeholders, EPRI will continue
to conduct technical evaluation of accident tolerant fuels in
order to provide information needed to establish criteria,
provide safety analysis, and identify economic benefits.
I thank you for the opportunity to testify this morning. I
am happy to answer your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Taylor follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Ms. Taylor. I appreciate your
testimony.
Mr. Williams.
STATEMENT OF JOHN B. WILLIAMS, NUCLEAR FUELS AND ANALYSIS
DIRECTOR, SOUTHERN NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY
Mr. Williams. Good morning.
I am John B. Williams, Nuclear Fuels and Analysis Director
at Southern Nuclear Operating Company and am a member of the
Nuclear Energy Institute's Accident Tolerant Fuel Working Group
led by Mr. Danny Bost, Executive Vice President and Chief
Nuclear Officer of Southern Nuclear.
Southern Nuclear, a subsidiary of the Southern Company,
currently operates six nuclear reactors in Alabama and Georgia.
Southern Nuclear embodies the Southern Company's commitment to
creating America's energy future by developing new products and
services for the benefits of consumers through technological
innovation.
As such, we are proud to be taking a leadership role in the
development and testing of accident tolerant fuel.
It is an honor to appear before this committee to share my
views on the benefits of accident tolerant fuels and how we can
overcome the development and licensing challenges before us.
I thank Chairman Barrasso, Ranking Member Carper, and the
Committee members for taking the time today to discuss this
pivotal technology that has the potential to make our Nation's
nuclear fleet more reliable and efficient, as well as enhance
its safety.
America's nuclear power plants run 24 hours a day, 7 days a
week, providing 20 percent of the Nation's electricity and
nearly 60 percent of its clean, emissions-free power. The
nuclear fleet is a vital part of America's infrastructure and
is essential to a reliable and resilient national grid.
The sustainability of the U.S. nuclear fleet will depend,
in large part, on the industry's ability to innovate at a pace
which will allow the plants to remain economically competitive
with other rapidly advancing energy technologies.
One such innovation is accident tolerant fuels. ATF has
shown potential to increase safety as well as increase fuel and
system efficiency and performance.
The industry is making investments and moving forward.
Southern Nuclear loaded two kinds of ATF cladding in our Hatch
plant in February 2018. In 2019 three major fuel vendors in the
ATF program plan to insert additional lead test assemblies in
reactors operated by Southern Nuclear and Exelon Generating.
The results of this testing, and other tests being
conducted by the Department of Energy, will provide fuel
performance data and inform NRC fuel licensing. Testing and
licensing activities will be conducted in parallel, which will
help to accelerate the development timeline toward the goal of
beginning batch loads of ATF fuel in commercial reactors by
2023 and full deployment by 2026. This timing is intended to
support utility decisions regarding second license renewal.
The industry is appreciative of the NRC's plan to license
fuel in an innovative way, while maintaining the highest levels
of safety. Additionally, we are greatly benefiting from the
DOE's National Lab's vast expertise and world class testing,
modeling, and simulation capabilities.
We are grateful for the close attention and support
Congress has provided to ATF and for its recognition that this
program represents the cutting edge of innovation that will
help preserve America's technological and strategic leadership.
I, like you, Senator Carper, like win-wins. The successful
development of accident tolerant fuel has the potential to
provide a win for everyone, safety, the environment, consumers,
and plant operators by making light water reactors safer as
well as more efficient and reliable.
In the process, if we develop a model for the
transformation and modernization of the regulatory framework
for nuclear plants, even better. For this to become a reality,
we all--industry, regulators, the Department of Energy, and
Congress--must continue to work together without delay.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Williams follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. Thank you so much for your testimony, Mr.
Williams.
Ms. Back.
STATEMENT OF CHRISTINA A. BACK, PH.D., VICE PRESIDENT, NUCLEAR
TECHNOLOGIES AND MATERIALS, GENERAL ATOMICS
Ms. Back. Senators Barrasso and Carper, thank you for your
invitation to appear. I am pleased to discuss our perspective
on NRC's approach to accident tolerant fuel licensing.
We believe the NRC must be prepared to license new fuels
and claddings in the most timely way, while also ensuring that
public safety is not undermined. To stop the premature shutdown
of existing reactors, there is no time to waste.
In response to Fukushima, Congress appropriated funding for
the ATF program to support the development of a new breed of
nuclear fuels and claddings that provide enhanced safety
margins.
In the 6 years since, significant progress has been
achieved by three separate industry teams supported by the
Department of Energy. The Westinghouse-General Atomics team is
one of those. We are pursuing a highly innovative ATF
technology offering markedly enhanced safety features and
significantly improved economics for existing reactors.
It will do so by allowing operation at higher power and for
longer periods of time, thus enabling fuel recycles that can
last as long as 2 years, compared to the 18 months now
possible. Higher efficiency and less maintenance down time mean
a more economically competitive reactor.
Consequently, many utilities have been strongly supportive
of the development and expeditious deployment of these new
fuels. GA is developing the cladding material, made from a
novel advanced silicon carbide ceramic composite. The material,
named SiGA, was initially developed for our innovative Energy
Multiplier Module, EM \2\, an advanced high temperature, gas
cooled, small modular reactor concept.
We believe the future of nuclear energy depends heavily on
developing the new materials such as those that survive much
higher temperatures and are much less chemically reactive. That
is why we have invested significantly in SiGA material that
safely can withstand temperatures of up to 1,800 degrees
Celsius compared to metal claddings, such as Zircaloy, that
start to fail around 800 degrees.
I am holding an example of a rodlet that will be inserted
next year into the Advanced Test Reactor at the Idaho National
Lab. It will undergo irradiations that will provide important
data on the cladding performance in realistic reactor
conditions.
Incredibly, we make this cladding starting from silicon
carbide fiber. It is very flexible. The process we use creates
a kind of rebar into our material, transforming it from a
brittle ceramic into a fracture-tough material. Our results are
very promising, and if they hold up, we will revolutionize the
industry.
Ultimately, the same technology can be used in our EM \2\
and other advanced reactors. Whether for ATF or advanced
reactors, we must modernize our licensing processes before the
reactors are lost.
I view the ATF licensing as a key step toward establishing
good practices for advanced reactor licensing. Modernization
means we will develop new and accelerated NRC processes without
compromising the NRC's high safety standards. We must do this
quickly.
For example, GA is developing a new methodology that we
call Advance Fuel Qualification, AFQ. The idea, supported by
DOE for funding, is to leverage computer modeling and
simulation to reduce the amount of data needed for licensing.
Regardless of whether this methodology or another is
implemented, early and sustained NRC involvement is key. I am
pleased to see that the NRC draft project plan for the ATF
recognizes that the past licensing path, which relies primarily
on empirical data for fuel performance, cannot be the way of
the future.
Good progress in licensing has been made for near-term
technologies such as the metal coated claddings, but we also
have to achieve the same progress for our long-term
technologies, the more innovative technologies like ours that
will require different assessments and regulations.
Since our SiGA cladding is a ceramic and not a metal, this
revolutionary technology will be delayed until the NRC develops
technical acceptance criteria for licensing approval. The good
news is that the longer term technologies may be available only
2 to 3 years after the near term if the NRC moves promptly on
them.
We welcome engagement with the NRC so that we can assist
them fully in understanding these materials so they can develop
their validation plan and license in the most timely and safe
fashion.
We have been using technologies in the nuclear industry
that is over 60 years old. It is time that we adopt new
technologies, particularly those from materials sciences, not
because it would be nice to have, but because they are needed
for our industry's survival.
To be successful, the NRC, DOE, and industry must work
closely together. If we do, we will find new ways to produce
nuclear energy safely, cleanly, and at a much lower cost.
We hope this Committee will use its oversight and
legislative powers to ensure that the NRC continues to design
the new procedures it needs to license new technologies. Please
visit San Diego. Seeing the fabrication in action will bring
home to you the clear example of how ingenuity can transform
the nuclear industry.
I thank you for your interest and support.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Back follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. Thank you for your testimony. There is an
open invitation now to San Diego. Thank you.
I appreciate the testimony from everyone.
Mr. Furstenau, let me start with you.
Hurricane Florence is rapidly approaching the southeastern
United States. One of the news stories today showed a map of
North Carolina where the nuclear power plants were by the
coast.
Will you update us now on how the NRC nuclear power plants
and other NRC licensed facilities are preparing for the
hurricane?
Mr. Furstenau. Thank you for the question, Senator
Barrasso.
Based on available information, the impacts from the storm
surge, winds, and flooding at Brunswick and other plants in
Florence's path will fall well below the plant design
parameters. One reactor at Brunswick has started shutting down.
Both Brunswick reactors are expected to be fully shut down
hours before hurricane force winds could affect the site.
All U.S. nuclear power plants have the additional resources
like pumps, generators, and procedures required by the NRC
after the Fukushima accident to maintain key safety functions
during any severe event like this. Available information
indicates that the plants can remain safe during the storm
without the post-Fukushima equipment.
NRC inspectors are at every U.S. operating power plant,
following normal agency procedures. Additional inspectors have
been dispatched to the plants in the storm's path. The NRC will
continue to observe the plants' response in the storm and its
aftermath.
Senator Barrasso. We appreciate that update. Thank you. It
is very reassuring.
Moving to the topic of discussion today, last year the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission established an Accident Tolerant
Fuel Steering Committee. The steering committee just issued the
first version of a project plan for the licensing of the
accident tolerant fuels.
The plan serves as the strategic document for NRC and the
private sector to make accident tolerant fuels commercially
available. The plan includes multiple benchmarks and goals for
timely action by the NRC staff.
Do you believe the NRC can adhere to the scheduled outline
in the steering committee's plan, and will you commit to
notifying the Committee if the NRC is unlikely to achieve its
benchmarks?
Mr. Furstenau. Mr. Chairman, the NRC is committed to that
plan, and we do believe we can meet the milestones in that
plan. Of course, it is a living document, and I think the other
panel members would agree that if there are things that come up
during the progress on the plan that need to be changed, we
would do that with full and open participation of the
stakeholders.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
Ms. Taylor, the Electric Power Research Institute is
uniquely positioned as an independent, non-profit organization,
to collaborate on accident tolerant fuel research. We
appreciate that.
Can you explain how your organization's independence can
give policymakers and the public greater confidence about the
research the NRC, the Department of Energy, and commercial fuel
vendors are conducting on accident tolerant fuels?
Ms. Taylor. Yes. An example of that would be the work we
have done initially to assess the potential ATF concepts where
we have used modeling capabilities we have to model how those
fuels would perform during normal operation and during accident
scenarios.
That provides a base of information that is non-biased that
people can use for decisionmaking.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
Mr. Williams, can you explain how the economic benefits of
accident tolerant fuels could encourage utilities to renew
licenses for existing nuclear reactors?
Mr. Williams. Yes, sir. As utilities reach the end of their
operating license, they are beginning to evaluate whether or
not to make the significant investment of whether or not we
will renew our operating license.
There are a number of factors involved. One is the cost of
the energy that we will bring to the market and the available
market for that. If ATF is able to provide the economic
benefits it shows, then it makes our plants more effective and
improves the business case by which we would make those
decisions.
Senator Barrasso. Dr. Back, General Atomics is developing a
particularly innovative accident tolerant fuel. I understand
the new fuel would be suitable for today's commercial light
water reactors as well as tomorrow's advanced reactors.
Will you describe how this fuel differs from accident
tolerant fuels that other commercial vendors are currently
developing?
Ms. Back. Thank you.
The material we are working with is actually something you
could not have made 20 years ago. This is a ceramic, like your
coffee mug, which is very good at retaining the fuel. In this
particular case, because we have the fibers inside, it acts
like rebar cement. That is what we call fracture-tough.
Very important in these future scenarios to give added
safety margins is it goes up to very high temperatures. In
fact, this material does not melt. That is why the temperature
difference is so vast between metals and ceramics.
Also, it retains re-coolable geometry. This fuel, in an
accident, would not breach in the same way that a metal would.
Different metals have different behaviors than ceramics. These
materials can increase the performance.
Senator Barrasso. Let me follow up with that, if I can, the
difference between near-term and long-term. How is the NRC's
project plan addressing both, the near-term use of accident
tolerant fuels as well as longer term proposals like those that
General Atomics is developing?
Ms. Back. The plan has been very nice because it lays out
by category, for instance, thermal hydraulics, burn up, and so
on. The key difference, I think, is that for many of the near-
term concepts, Zircaloy is still the metal cladding that is
providing most of the function. There is a coating on top to,
for instance, decrease the hydrogen generation.
Fundamentally, that does not change the properties of the
cladding to allow it to have a higher margin in safety. The
fact is that we go up to much higher temperatures, can have a
coolable geometry, have orders of magnitude less in hydrogen
generation, and the corrosion is much different. In Fukushima,
there was an exothermic reaction, which is what caused the
hydrogen production. That would not happen with this material.
Those are the kinds of things that now require different
fuel performance calculations because the material is
fundamentally different. Those calculations have to be included
in the regulations and taken into account. The full benefits
will actually be seen there.
Some of the early calculations now do not fully take into
account some of these benefits. That is why there is a second
generation of the EPRI report that will be coming up. I think
those things will be reflected much better as we are able to
incorporate these into the fuel performance calculations.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you so very much, all of you.
Senator Carper.
Senator Carper. When my sister and I were little kids
growing up in Danville, Virginia, sometimes our family listened
to the news on ABC radio, a guy named Paul Harvey. We were just
little kids. When he finished the first part of his news, he
would say, page 2 and go on to the rest of the news, and
finally, page 3.
I want to ask you about page 2. There have to be some smart
folks around this country who are looking at this technology,
accident tolerant fuels, and also what Christina talked about
over at her company, and they are saying that makes no sense,
that is not very smart, that is not a good investment of
taxpayer dollars. Why would we do that?
I want to ask one or more of you to explain those arguments
against going down this path and then rebut them. Lay out
briefly the arguments against this technology and rebut them,
one or more of you, please. I do not care who goes first.
Ms. Taylor. I don't know that I can fully address that
question. However, one concern certainly is the ability to
develop and license these quickly enough to make a difference
in the existing reactor lifetime plants are currently licensed
to. There is concern that can these be licensed quickly enough?
Senator Carper. Others, please?
Mr. Williams.
Mr. Williams. Another concern is that it is going to
increase the cost of the fuel that we purchase for our plants
as we deploy new technologies. That is why the safety, and
therefore the economic benefits analysis, are important as we
try to make the business case that this is in the best interest
of our customers and results in an overall lower cost.
Senator Carper. Thanks.
Ms. Back.
Ms. Back. I would like to point out that we are in a new
world where materials are understood better. We can make
parallel improvements, and calculations can be taken into
account to really leverage the amount of data to help us
understand the behavior of the fuel.
The concern is that it will take too long to incorporate
these new materials. Really, the rebuttal is that if we do not
do this, we will not be able to make cost competitive nuclear
energy.
We will not be able to take advantage of new engineering
and science that has happened that, for instance, changes your
phone from something that used to be a rotary dial that is now
in everybody's pocket, which is really a little computer.
There are advantages in new technologies that are worth
waiting for and worth investing in. In this case, because we
can do parallel advances in the modeling, licensing, and
technology, all of these can come together if we work well
together.
Senator Carper. Thank you.
Second, I want to address work force.
I will start with you, Mr. Furstenau.
The NRC will recruit the talent it needs to keep up with
the new nuclear technology. What more could or should Congress
do to help overcome any skill gaps you are aware of?
Mr. Furstenau. Thank you for your question, Senator Carper.
I think the work force planning is very important; how are
we going to be ready for this in the future? I agree.
At the NRC, we have been doing strategic work force
planning exercises to adapt to that with an aging work force in
our own agency and the outlook ahead for what may be coming
down the line with accident tolerant fuel or other advanced
reactor concepts. We need to recruit that talent.
We are doing, like I said, strategic work force planning
exercises. There is the Integrated University Program that
NNSA, DOE, NRC, and Duke do complementary work on. Those types
of activities are important to grow that work force in the
future.
Senator Carper. Thank you, sir.
Dr. Back, as someone who works for a company that is a
client of the NRC, do you feel the agency has the necessary
work force to review the new technologies that you described to
us today or does more need to be done?
Ms. Back. I think it is a challenge, because the new
material and new technologies require new learning, but there
is a very eager and young group of engineers, nuclear
engineers, and scientists that really do want to make a
difference to clean energy.
I think the work force is eager to try and engage and put
together a licensing plan as well as develop the technology.
The skills that are needed I think can be found as long as we
work together to understand the material and to show the data.
The NRC has to make their independent judgment of the data.
We need to put together plans that take into account these
different behaviors. I think those are challenging questions
that the younger generation is eager to adopt and get involved
with. I think there will be people who can fill those skill
gaps.
Senator Carper. When I come back, I would like to ask some
questions about Halden, the test reactor and how the U.S.
Government is going to fill the gap when Halden is no longer an
option. Thank you.
Senator Barrasso. Senator Whitehouse.
Senator Whitehouse. Thank you, Chairman.
Welcome, all of you, and thank you for being here.
I am very interested in the prospect of advanced reactor
concepts that hold the promise of being able to repurpose spent
nuclear fuel. At present, we really do not have a plan for the
spent nuclear fuel stockpiles.
There are technologies emerging that would appear to be
able to--and are, in some cases, asserted to be able to
repurpose that stockpile and make some positive use of it. For
instance, General Atomics has a design for an energy multiplier
module that explores this potential.
I am wondering if I could get your comments on how far we
are in that direction and whether there are some early positive
indicators about nuclear technologies that could repurpose
existing nuclear waste stockpiles.
Why don't we go right across?
Ms. Back. Thank you for the question.
The EM \2\ Energy Multiplier Module is actually designed so
that it can burn light water waste as well as its own waste. We
really do not look at it as waste; we look at it as spent
nuclear fuel.
In the case of light water reactors, 95 percent of the
material that is in the fuel rod is actually Uranium 238, which
cannot burn. That is why you need an advanced reactor, in this
case a fast reactor, so that you can burn that material.
In that case, you can take a light water reactor core, do a
process to remove the fission products, and then reform that
fuel, and in a sense, recycle it. It is done with a process
which is not the conventional reprocessing. It is a dry
process.
That process has been demonstrated. Canada and Korea have
different aspects of it that have been successful. I think this
can be incorporated so that we generate new fuel cores for EM
\1\ or some advanced reactor. It burns over its period of time,
recycles, and over some 200 years, you can get rid of all of
the geological waste that would be in the light water reactor
spent fuel rod.
Senator Whitehouse. Mr. Williams, do you have anything to
add?
Mr. Williams. At Southern Nuclear, we are obviously paying
attention to the advanced reactor technologies and staying
abreast of the claims of those. At this time, we have not
pursued any action there.
Senator Whitehouse. Ms. Taylor.
Ms. Taylor. I cannot speak to any specific design, but I
will say that in the advanced reactor space, similar to the
accident tolerant fuel space, many companies are innovating
with different approaches. It is an area where we see a lot of
early career people contributing as well.
Senator Whitehouse. Mr. Furstenau.
Mr. Furstenau. The NRC is open to review new and innovative
designs as vendors prepare for that.
Senator Whitehouse. In the Committee, we have cleared the
Nuclear Innovation and Modernization Act, which is now running
hotlines for passage on the Senate floor. Senators Barrasso,
Inhofe, Crapo, Booker, and myself are the original co-sponsors.
Senator Crapo and I also have the Nuclear Energy Innovation
Capabilities Act, which has passed the Senate by unanimous
voice vote.
The first bill would reform the NRC licensing process to
open it up to more technologies than the light water reactors.
The second would help facilitate collaboration between the
private sector and our National Labs toward the development of
these technologies.
We also just passed in the Senate a third bill that I did
with Senators Crapo and Alexander that would allow and fund the
Department of Energy to use spent Navy fuel for research in
these advanced nuclear reactor technologies.
Do you see those three measures as positive steps in
freeing up the regulatory authority and the research capability
to move forward in this space of potential reactors that could
use our existing nuclear spent fuel stockpile as fuel, recycle,
or reuse it?
Start the other way with Mr. Furstenau first, and we will
go across.
Mr. Furstenau. Senator Whitehouse, I really cannot comment
on pending legislation from an NRC standpoint.
Senator Whitehouse. Fair enough.
Ms. Taylor. We are seeing some very positive results with
the innovative companies working together with the National Lab
capabilities to move a lot of technologies forward.
Senator Whitehouse. I think actually we are seeing kind of
a signal response thing. The National Labs have stepped forward
more. Seeing this legislation going forward and seeing its
support, they are actually a bit ahead of the actual bill,
which is a good thing. It is a good signal response.
Mr. Williams. Yes, sir, absolutely. Southern Nuclear
believes that any legislation that promotes innovation in
nuclear is a positive thing and will benefit the industry
overall.
Ms. Back. I absolutely think it helps because by nature,
nuclear energy needs to be conservative because we need to be
safe, and we want to keep the gold standard of the NRC.
That means that we have to change the regulations and the
ways we assess materials and develop the processes to meet the
need of bringing in new technologies. That means looking at how
we characterize the materials, developing new regulations,
which are not now based on a deterministic measurement over 30
years of data.
We have power in the computing codes that has been brought
to every other area. For instance, in developing your cars and
planes, all of those use modeling and simulations. This is
something where I think the regulations need to be accelerated
and changed. I think the legislation helps encourage
cooperation among the National Labs, the utilities, NRC, and
all of us. All of that is absolutely necessary for it to go
forward.
Senator Whitehouse. Thank you, Chairman. Again, thank you
for your support on these pieces of legislation.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you for your leadership as well. It
has been a good, cooperative effort.
Senator Carper, we were talking about what happened with
the Halden test reactor. I am going to ask a couple questions,
and I know you have a couple as well. I am going to start with
Ms. Taylor.
In June the organization overseeing the Halden test reactor
in Norway announced it would permanently close the reactor. The
reactor would have provided critical scientific data necessary
for licensing of accident tolerant fuels.
In July the Electric Power Research Institute participated
in a Department of Energy workshop at the Idaho National Lab.
The workshop assessed how to fill the gaps in testing capacity
that closure of the Halden reactor has left behind.
Could you talk about what the primary gaps in testing
capacity were that were identified, and what can we do to fill
the gaps?
Ms. Taylor. I can address that to some extent.
The Halden test reactor project is more than just a
facility. It is a facility that had been a multinational
collaboration to fund and plan testing. The reactor had some
unique capabilities, two of which were the ability to test the
large number of specimens in parallel, so it was very large for
a test reactor. It also had some looped capabilities.
Many of the stakeholders have come together. You mentioned
the July workshop. Idaho National Lab was the place to kind of
convene what the need was. A game plan has been laid out to
provide many of those capabilities through additional
capabilities at Idaho.
Senator Barrasso. Are there policies perhaps that the
Department of Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or
even Congress should consider to try to fill some of these
testing gaps, or do you think we will be OK as we are heading?
Ms. Taylor. I cannot really address the policy issues.
Senator Barrasso. OK.
Mr. Furstenau, what steps is the NRC taking to ensure that
the Halden closure does not really slow the progress on
licensing the accidental tolerant fuels?
Mr. Furstenau. At the NRC, we also participated in the
workshops at the Idaho National Lab. At this point, we think
there is no significant impact on the current test plans as we
know. I am confident that the Department of Energy, the
capabilities at the DOE sites, and possibly the universities
will really fill that gap in the longer term.
Senator Barrasso. By history, before joining the NRC in
your current position, you spent years at the Department of
Energy, so you have a pretty good understanding of what the
capacities are. You feel they are going to be able to fill
this?
Mr. Furstenau. Yes, sir.
Senator Barasso. OK. Thank you.
Senator Carper, do you have additional questions?
Senator Carper. I do have a few. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
Again, thanks very much for being with us today.
Mr. Williams, 10 or so years ago, we were talking about at
least 25 brand new light water reactors being built in this
country. Do you remember that? I do.
Mr. Williams. Yes.
Senator Carper. All were expected to come online maybe this
year or soon thereafter. In reality, our Nation is only
building now, as we know, two new light water reactors. Those
two are being built in Georgia by your company.
The effect of the Westinghouse bankruptcy on the nuclear
industry is troubling for us, and I am sure for you and others.
Can you take a moment and tell us how are things going at
Vogtle and what are some of the lessons learned that might help
the next generation of nuclear power?
Mr. Williams. Senator, I appreciate your question.
Unfortunately, in my role, I focus on our operating fleet
of reactors and am not aware of all of the issues associated
with the project. We would be happy to respond to your question
in writing.
Senator Carper. Does anyone have any insights briefly in
this regard? I think it is a pretty good question, better than
most of my questions. Does anyone else have any insight you
would like to share?
[All respond in the negative.]
Senator Carper. A response for the record from Mr.
Williams, but others would be welcomed.
Mr. Furstenau, with respect to NRC planning for accident
tolerant fuels, the NRC's draft plan on accident tolerant fuels
states, I believe, that the agency will use applicant provided
data or DOE data to determine the safety of a concept and that
the agency will not perform its own independent testing.
Would you elaborate on this point? Does the NRC do this in
other circumstances? Why does it now make sense to do it for
accident tolerant fuels?
Mr. Furstenau. Senator, you are correct about the project,
the current plan does not. The assumption is being made that we
will not do our own confirmatory testing. However, in the
testing programs that are developed by the vendors and
industry, we will use data that comes out of that testing
program and independently look at that and review it from a
confirmatory analysis standpoint.
However, at this point in time, we do not see a need for
additional confirmatory testing on these near-term concepts.
Senator Carper. Thank you.
Dr. Back, back to you. As I mentioned in my statement,
extreme weather events are expected to be more frequent and
more extreme due to climate change. Already nuclear power has
proven to be quite resilient in this country during these
extreme weather events. We are going to be closely watching and
be in close step with the NRC to make sure that is the case
during Florence.
Would you like to take a moment and discuss how the
technologies your company is developing will allow nuclear
power to be even more resilient and safe during extreme weather
events like Florence and those that follow?
Ms. Back. Yes. Thank you.
As you know, nuclear power performed very well during the
Harvey event. There are already advantages in nuclear energy,
for instance, of having all the fuel onsite. You do not have
pipelines or electricity lines.
For the advanced reactor, there has been a lot of thought
along making them more resilient. One, in particular, is the EM
\2\ that we envision is a smaller, more compact reactor.
Importantly, it is underground so there is protection from
things like Florence.
There are passively safe systems and built in redundancies
that are consistent with what are typical NRC regulations so
that we make sure it is safe in case of loss of power. For
instance, there is an important way that the power conversion
unit works with cooling and kicks in with natural convection,
if that does not pan out, if there is total loss of
electricity.
All of those aspects are thought through and incorporated
into the reactor as well as the other efficiencies to be able
to run the fuel at higher utilization so that you actually do
not need to access the core for 30 years.
Senator Carper. Thank you. I have one more.
This is kind of a wrap up question. I am going to ask each
of you on the panel to respond to this question if you would.
Mr. Furstenau, if you would go first.
If you had one piece of parting advice to give to us on the
Environment and Public Works Committee with respect to advanced
nuclear fuels, what would be that advice?
Mr. Furstenau. I think, in my opinion, it would be we all
need to be open and adaptive to enabling new technologies like
ATF and advanced reactor concepts that have the potential to
make nuclear power even safer.
Senator Carper. Thank you.
Ms. Taylor.
Ms. Taylor. I agree. Continuing to encourage innovation in
this space which has not always been innovative is yielding new
options.
Senator Carper. How should we express that encouragement?
Ms. Taylor. I do not have any suggestions.
Senator Carper. Really? All right.
Mr. Williams.
Mr. Williams. I think the way to encourage it is to
encourage the collaboration between industry and public-private
partnerships working together. This is a great example of
collaboration between the Department of Energy, the fuel
vendors, the utilities, and the Electric Power Research
Institute to rapidly advance an innovation to deployment.
Senator Carper. Thank you.
Dr. Back.
Ms. Back. My overriding concern is that we need to have
data, and that means irradiations, something like the advanced
test reactor at Idaho National Lab and as you were asking about
in Halden.
Those are expensive and need to be done well and be
instrumented so that we get the maximum amount of data so we
can push forward and make sure we have all the information
needed to make sure these materials are safe and perform as
they behave.
We need a prioritization and maybe another look at what we
can do to make more opportunities available for irradiation
testing.
Senator Carper. Let me ask, very briefly, would the other
panelists respond to what Dr. Back just said?
Mr. Furstenau. I think her point on needing irradiation
test data when you then use modeling and simulation codes, you
need to have data to verify those models and codes. I think
especially for the concepts like General Atomics referred to,
you do need some of that material that has not been used
before. You need that test data to help validate it. It also
helps with the licensing process as well as the safety case for
the licensees.
Senator Carper. Any other comment in response to what she
said?
Ms. Taylor. Just to understand how the fuel behaves in the
whole system of the plant, that data is needed to properly
model the behavior that you would expect.
Senator Carper. Mr. Williams, anything?
Mr. Williams. No.
Senator Carper. This has been timely and helpful. As the
storm bears down, this reminds us all the more that extreme
weather has been coming our way for some time, and it ain't
going to stop. We have to figure out how to respond to it, not
to just address the symptoms of the problem but also the root
cause of the problems creating all this bad weather for our
country and our world. This could be part of the solution, not
the whole solution but part of the solution. We welcome your
input today.
Thank you so much.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator Carper, and Senator
Whitehouse as well.
Thank all of you for being here to testify. Other members
may want to submit follow up questions for the record. The
hearing record will be open for 2 weeks.
I want to thank you all for being here, for your time, and
your testimony.
This hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:15 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.]