INIS-mf —14880

34E CONFÉRENCE ANNUELLE DE L'ASSOCIATION NUCLÉAIRE CANADIET

15E CONFÉRENCE ANNUELLE DE LA SOCIÉTÉ NUCLÉAIRE CANADIENNE

5-8 JUIN 1994 - MONTRÉAL, QUÉBEC CA9600750 - CA961

ANC

COMPTE RENDU ISSN 0706-1293

Association nucléaire canadienne

Compte rendu de la 34e conférence annuelle

5-8 juin 1994, Montréal

Éditeur A.-M. GIRARD (AECL CANDU) Editor

Canadian Nuclear Association

34th annual conference proceedings

June 5-8, 1994, Montréal AVANT-PROPOS

Ce volume contient les actes des séances techniques de la 34&ne Conférence de l'Association nucléaire canadienne. Comme dans les années passées, la Conférence annuelle de la Société nucléaire canadienne s'est tenue en même temps que la Conférence de l'Association nucléaire canadienne.

Les communications ont été rédigées, autant que possible, selon un format standard et sont généralement publiées telles que soumises par les auteurs. Le contenu de chaque communication n'engage que la responsabilité de son auteur.

Les actes de la Conférence sont protégés par un droit d'auteur détenu par l'Association nucléaire canadienne. Pour toute demande de renseignements sur ces actes, pour obtenir l'autorisation d'en reproduire une quelconque partie ou pour en commander un exemplaire, s'adresser à:

Association nucléaire canadienne 144 me Front ouest, suite 725 Toronto (Ontario) Canada M5J 2L7

FOREWORD

This volume contains the Proceedings of the Technical Sessions from the 34th Annual Conference of the Canadian Nuclear Association. As in previous years, the Annual Conference of the Canadian Nuclear Society was held in conjunction with the Canadian Nuclear Association Conference.

The papers of these Proceedings were prepared as much as possible based on a standard format and are generally published as submitted by the authors. Responsibility for the content of each paper rests solely with the author.

These Proceedings are copyrighted by the Canadian Nuclear Association. Requests for further information concerning these Proceedings, permission to reprint any part of these Proceedings, or orders for copies of these Proceedings should be addressed to:

Canadian Nuclear Association 144 Front Street West, Suite 725 Toronto, Ontario Canada M5J 2L7 Remerciements

L'éditeur remercie toutes les personnes qui ont contribué à la cueillette des différentes communications réunies dans ce compte rendu et, plus particulièrement, Messieurs Henri Bordeleau et Hong M. Huynh d'Hydro-Québec pour leurs précieux conseils quant à la réalisation de ce même compte rendu.

Acknowledgements

The editor would like to thank all those who gathered the papers published in these Proceedings and, in particular, Mssrs Henri Bordeleau and Hong M. Huynh of Hydro-Québec for their most valuable advice regarding the production of these Proceedings. COMPTE RENDU DE L'ANC/CNA PROCEEDINGS

OUVERTURE DE LA CONFÉRENCE DE L'ANC/SNC - OPENING OF THE CNA/CNS CONFERENCE

SESSION 1 - Plénière / Plenary

DINER DE L'ANC - CNA LUNCHEON

SESSION 2 - La nouvelle réglementation en matière d'environnement et ses répercussions sur l'industrie énergétique / New Environmental Regulations and Their Effects on the Energy Industry

SESSION 3 - Nouvelles CANDU / CANDU Update

SESSION 4 - Gestion du cycle de vie des centrales nucléaires / Life Cycle Management of Plants

SESSION 5 - Évolution de la technologie nucléaire / Evolution of

SESSION 6 - La technologie de demain / Technologies for Tomorrow

SESSION 7 - Combustible nucléaire irradié et stockage des déchets de faible activité / Nuclear Used Fuel and Disposal of Low-Level Waste

SESSION 8 - L'économie mondiale et la consommation d'énergie / World Economies and Energy Consumption TABLE DES MATIÈRES / TABLE OF CONTENTS

OUVERTURE DE LA CONFÉRENCE DE L'ANC/SNC - OPENING OF THE CNA/CNS CONFERENCE

C. Grandmaison - Mot d'accueil/Opening Remarks (Hydro-Québec, Canada)

Conférenciers d'honneur/Keynote Addresses:

A. McClellan (Minister of Natural Resources of Canada)

T.E. Rummery - "Power and the Future Generation" (AECL, Canada)

SESSION 1 - Plénière / Plenary

T. Going - "Economie Effects of the Canadian Nuclear Industry" (Ernst & Young, Canada)

R. Émard - "Economic Impact of Hydro-Quebec's Nuclear Activities" (Hydro-Québec, Canada)

N. Ladoux et al. - "Nuclear Energy in France: Assessing its Impacts on the Economy and the Environment" (CEA, France)

DÎNER de l'ANC / CNA LUNCHEON

G. Saint-Pierre - "Canada's Nuclear Industry - A Leader in the Global Market" (SNC-Lavalin Inc., Canada)

SESSION 2 - La nouvelle réglementation en matière d'environnement et ses répercussions sur l'industrie énergétique / New Environmental Regulations and Their Effects on the Energy Industry

T. Meadley - "Environmental Assessment: Industry Perspective" ( Saskatchewan, Canada)

J.G. McManus - "Environmental Regulations and their Effects on the Nuclear Regulator" (Atomic Energy Control Board, Canada)

R.G. Connelly - "The Canadian Environmental Assessment Process: Current Process, Expected Reforms, and Implications for the Nuclear Industry" (Federal Environmental Assessment Review Office, Canada) SESSION 3 - Nouvelles CANDU / CANDU Update

Hong J.B. - "CANDU in Korea, Present and Future" (Korea Electric Power Corporation, Korea)

R. Boucher - "June 1994, Update on Cernavoda" (AECL CANDU, Romania)

B.K. Kakaria - "CANDU Market Prospects" (AECL CANDU, Canada)

M. Poissonnet • "Uranium Industry Update" (COGEMA Resources Inc., Canada)

D.R. Anderson - "Going Global - Growing Small Businesses" (Canatom Inc., Canada)

SESSION 4 - Gestion du cycle de vie des centrales nucléaires / Life Cycle Management of Nuclear Power Plants

J.-P. Combes et al. - "Lifetime Management of the Nuclear Units in France" (EDF, France)

R.W. Durante - "Nuclear Plant Life Cycle Costs" (AECL Technologies Inc., USA)

M.H. Ross - "Plant Life Management and the Single Reactor Utility" (Hydro-Québec, Canada)

SESSION 5 - Évolution de la technologie nucléaire / Evolution of Nuclear Technology

T.S. Andersen - "Westinghouse Advances in Passive Plant Safety - AP600" (Westinghouse Electric Corporation, USA)

R.S. Hart - "The CANDU 9" (AECL CANDU, Canada)

SESSION 6 - La technologie de demain / Technologies for Tomorrow .v\\ V R. Décoste - "Contributions of the T de V to the International Fusion Effort" (Centre canadien de fusion magnétique, Canada)

D.P. Dautovich et al. - "CFFTP Development in Fusion Technology" (CFFTP, Canada)

E.D. Earle - "Observing the Sun from Two Kilometers Underground" (AECL Research, Canada) SESSION 7 - Combustible nucléaire irradié et stockage des déchets de faible activité / Nuclear Used Fuel and Disposal of Low-Level Waste

K.W. Dormuth et al. - "Disposal of Canada's Waste" (AECL Research, Canada)

D.R. Champ et al. - "A Perspective on the Management of Low-Level " (AECL Research, Canada)

R. Ahenakew - "Self-Determination and Economic Development: The Storage of Used Nuclear Fuel - Community Consultation and Participation" (Meadow Lake Tribal Council, Canada)

SESSION 8 - L'économie mondiale et la consommation d'énergie / World Economies and Energy Consumption

M.T. Tremblay - "Energy Consumption and Economie Development" (Royal Bank, Canada) D.P. Ward et al. - "Meeting the World Energy Needs - The Economie and Environmental Aspects of the Nuclear Option" (Sargent & Lundy, USA) OUVERTURE DE LA CONFERENCE DE L'ANC/SNC - OPENING OF THE CNA/CNS CONFERENCE

C. Grandmaison - Mot D'accueil/Opening Remarks (Hydro-Québec, Canada) Conférenciers d'honneur/Keynote Addresses:

A. McClellan (Minister of Natural Resources of Canada) T.E. Rummery - "Power and the Future Generation" (AECL, Canada) NOTES POUR UNE ALLOCUTION DE M. CLAUDE GRANDMAISON VICE-PRÉSIDENT, RÉGION MAURICIE HYDRO-QUÉBEC

CONFERENCE ANNUELLE DE L'ANC ET DE LA SNC

MONTREAL LE 6 JUIN 1994 SALUTATIONS D'USAGE.

PERMETTEZ-MOI D'ABORD DE VOUS SOUHAITER À TOUS

LA PLUS CORDIALE DES BIENVENUES À MONTRÉAL JE

SUIS CONVAINCU QUE CETTE RENCONTRE ANNUELLE

SAURA RÉPONDRE AUX ATTENTES DE TOUS LES

REPRÉSENTANTS DE L'INDUSTRIE NUCLÉAIRE QUI SONT

ICI PRÉSENTS. I WOULD PARTICULARLY LIKE TO EXTEND

THIS WARM WELCOME TO THE NUMEROUS PARTICIPANTS

FROM ABROAD. INDEED, AS YOU MAY HAVE NOTICED

WHILE READING THE PROGRAM, WE WILL ENJOY THE

OPPORTUNITY OF EXCHANGING IDEAS WITH SPECIALISTS

FROM THE FOUR CORNERS OF THE WORLD.

AT THIS TIME, I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO THANK THE

MEMBERS OF THE ORGANIZING COMMITTEE, FOR HAVING

ENTRUSTED ME AS HONORARY PRESIDENT OF THIS PRESTIGIOUS CONFERENCE. IT IS WITH GREAT

PLEASURE THAT I ACCEPTED THIS RESPONSIBILITY IN

HYDRO-QUEBEC'S NAME AND AS THE VICE-PRESIDENT

RESPONSIBLE OF THE ONLY NUCLEAR FACILITY IN OUR

NETWORK.

AS YOU MAY WELL KNOW, NUCLEAR ENERGY IS

MINIMALLY EXPLOITED IN QUÉBEC. INDEED, WE STILL

HAVE ABUNDANT HYDRAULIC RESOURCES AT OUR

DISPOSAL THAT CAN BE IMPLEMENTED AT A COST THAT

IS INFERIOR TO ALL OTHER MEANS OF PRODUCTION.

NEVERTHELESS, HYDRO-QUÉBEC WISHES TO MAINTAIN

ITS TECHNICAL EXPERTISE IN THE NUCLEAR ENERGY

FIELD AND IS ALWAYS ON THE LOOKOUT FOR NEW

TECHNOLOGIES. IT IS IN THIS SPIRIT THAT WE HAVE

BEEN OPERATING OUR GENTILLY-2 NUCLEAR POWER

PLANT, A CANDU-PHW TYPE PLANT, FOR THE LAST TEN

YEARS. THIS PLANT PLAYS AN IMPORTANT ROLE IN

HYDRO-QUEBEC'S EQUIPMENT POOL. ALTHOUGH IT

SUPPLIES BUT 3 PERCENT OF OUR TOTAL PRODUCTION -

WHICH REPRESENTS SOME 45 TERAWATTHOURS OVER

10 YEARS -, ITS RELIABILITY ASSURES IT A CONSTANT

PRESENCE ON THE NETWORK. HENCE, SINCE THE

BEGINNING OF ITS COMMERCIAL OPERATION, GENTILLY-2

HAS ATTAINED A PRODUCTION COEFFICIENT OF OVER

76 PERCENT.

LIKE ALL OTHER SOURCES OF ENERGY, NUCLEAR POWER

HAS ADVANTAGES AND INCONVENIENCES. ON THE

TECHNICAL SIDE, THIS FORM OF ENERGY IS PROVEN AND

WIDESPREAD THROUGHOUT THE INDUSTRIALIZED

COUNTRIES. IT ALLOWS FOR INSTALLATIONS THAT

REQUIRE MINIMAL SPACE AND THAT CAN BE LOCATED

CLOSE TO MARKET, WHICH AVOIDS LONG TRANSPORT

LINES. ENVIRONMENTALLY SPEAKING, NUCLEAR POWER HAS NO ATMOSPHERIC EMISSIONS. THE IRRADIATED

COMBUSTIBLE MUST HOWEVER BE STORED FOR LONG

PERIODS OF TIME. THIS IS OFTEN PERCEIVED

NEGATIVELY BY SURROUNDING POPULATIONS WHO FEAR

THE ACCIDENT RISK RELATED TO THE STORAGE OF

THESE BY-PRODUCTS. THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY IS THUS,

AS MANY OTHERS, CONFRONTED WITH AN IMAGE

PROBLEM.

INCIDENTALLY, VERY INTERESTINGLY AND NEW THIS

YEAR, THE CONFERENCE WILL GIVE WAY TO A DEBATE

REGARDING INFORMATION ON THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY.

THIS DISCUSSION WORKSHOP WILL BRING TOGETHER

MEMBERS OF THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY,

REPRESENTATIVES OF THE MEDIA AS WELL AS

PROFESSORS AND STUDENTS OF JOURNALISM. AN

ACTIVITY THAT WILL SURELY ALLOW TO BETTER GRASP THE DIFFICULTIES WE ENCOUNTER IN SERENELY

DEALING WITH NUCLEAR QUESTIONS.

ON ANOTHER MATTER, THE CONFERENCE'S PROGRAM IS

WELL LADEN. UNDER THE THEME "POWER AND THE

FUTURE GENERATION", WE WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY

TO EXCHANGE KNOWLEDGE AND DISCUSS OUR

CONCEPTIONS OF THE FUTURE OF THE NUCLEAR

INDUSTRY.

OUR LECTURERS WILL PRESENT A WIDE ARRAY OF

IMPORTANT SUBJECTS. AMONGST OTHERS, LET US

MENTION THE ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

OF NUCLEAR ENERGY, THE EVOLUTION OF TECHNOLOGY

IN THIS FIELD AS WELL AS THE PROMISING

TECHNOLOGIES OF THE FUTURE SUCH AS FUSION. THE NEXT THREE DAYS CONSTITUTE A UNIQUE

OPPORTUNITY FOR INDUSTRY REPRESENTATIVES TO

EXCHANGE IDEAS WITH EACH OTHER. HOPING THAT YOU

WILL SEIZE THIS OPPORTUNITY, I WISH YOU ALL THE

BEST OF EXCHANGES AND A VERY PLEASANT STAY HERE

IN MONTREAL EN TERMINANT, JE SOUHAITE À TOUS LES

PARTICIPANTS UNE CONFÉRENCE DES PLUS

ENRICHISSANTES ET UN SÉJOUR TRÈS AGRÉABLE.

JE VOUS REMERCIE.

THANK YOU. NOTES FOR REMARKS

BY

ANNE McCLELLAN MINISTER OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT FOR EDMONTON NORTHWEST

AT

THE ANNUAL CONFERENCE OF THE CANADIAN NUCLEAR ASSOCIATION AND THE CANADIAN NUCLEAR SOCIETY

MONTREAL, QUEBEC JUNE 6, 1994 Mr. Lloyd, ladies and gentlemen, please accept my sincere apologies for not being able to participate in your annual conference. I would have very much liked to have taken part in your deliberations and to share with you my views on nuclear energy.

I consider it an honour to have been assigned the portfolio of Minister of Natural

Resources which includes responsibility for AECL and the AECB. Nuclear energy is a particularly exciting field. It brings together important policy questions pertaining to energy strategy, the future of Canadian R&D, technology transfer, environment, industrial and social development.

For over forty years the Canadian government has been committed to the development and safe regulation of nuclear technology. Since assuming my responsibilities as Minister of Natural Resources, I have had the opportunity to review a number of issues pertaining to the nuclear option. I have concluded that on balance we are fortunate to have a variety of energy options at our disposal, including nuclear energy, and that it is necessary to continue to develop a mixture of energy sources in our supply system. I believe that within this supply system, there is an important role for the nuclear option.

One can say with confidence that there have been economic benefits to Canadians from the investment in nuclear energy. It is an important ingredient in Canada's -2- secure and reliable energy supply, providing about eighteen per cent of Canada's electricity needs and sixty percent of Ontario's.

While all of you here today are well aware of the successes and advantages of nuclear energy, there are a number of important challenges ahead that must be met. I am very pleased to have been able to appoint Dr. Agnes Bishop as President of the AECB and Mr. Robert Nixon as Chairman of AECL. I am sure that those of you who do not already know Dr. Bishop and Mr. Nixon will soon recognize that we are fortunate indeed to have found people of this level of excellence to take such important leadership positions in our nuclear sector. I will work with them in addressing our future challenges to help ensure that we will have a viable, long term nuclear option for Canada.

There are challenges but there are also opportunities. The sales of three CANDU

6 reactors to South Korea in 1990 and 1992 are a good example of the kind of opportunities that exist for Canada's nuclear industry. These sales are doing much to promote CANDU in other markets as well as Canada's image abroad as

an exporter of high tech goods and services. Our expertise in all aspects of the

, from to building and servicing nuclear power

stations to the management of nuclear fuel wastes, positions us well for an

increased share of the world nuclear business. -3-

I look forward to working with you as we address these important challenges and opportunités. I wish you an exciting and productive conference. "Power and the Future Generation" Canadian Nuclear Association CNA/CNS Annual Conference

Keynote Address by

Dr. T.E. Rummery Acting President and CEO AECL

Montreal, 1994 June 06 Bonjour, mesdames et messieurs. Il est toujours agréable de revenir à Montréal, pas seulement parce que Montréal est une grande ville, mais aussi parce qu'elle est associée à la naissance même de l'énergie nucléaire au Canada. As many of you know, Canadian nuclear research began here in Montreal in 1898 at McGill University, with Dr. Ernest Rutherford's pioneering work on the atom. Forty-two years later, the Montreal laboratories of the National Research Council were home to Canadian scientists experimenting with fission. From the Montreal laboratories eventually emerged the in 1945 and the Crown Corporation Atomic Energy of Canada Limited in 1952. So, at least professionally speaking, I feel "at home" in Montreal.

J'ajouterai mon mot de bienvenue à ceux des autres conférenciers. En particulier, je tiens à signaler la présence des délégués d'autres pays, qui feront profiter notre Conférence de leurs perspectives et de leur expertise particulières.

The nuclear industry is a rich repository of technical knowledge. We share that knowledge, not only among our peers and colleagues, but with a wider community. I am particularly pleased to welcome the educators who are attending the conference. They are professionals in the business of sharing and imparting knowledge and values, and we appreciate our partnerships with them.

Je souhaite aussi la bienvenue aux membres des médias qui sont ici. Je sais qu'un grand nombre d'entre vous assisterez et participerez aux débats qui se dérouleront à la séance de mercredi sur la couverture médiatique des questions concernant l'industrie nucléaire.

In preparing this talk, I was drawn to an advertisement that you have probably seen in the Financial Post, the Globe and Mail or Le Devoir. It's the one that has the "two-headed" financial consultant looking in one direction with a telescope and in the other with a magnifying glass. It symbolizes the need to do strategic "big-picture" thinking in concert with detailed tactical considerations.

My talk is similarly structured: I will first discuss the "big picture" - the strategic global picture for energy and electricity. However, I will also take a closer look at the Canadian scene and more specifically, the implications of the recent announcements regarding AECL. -2-

Let's look at the "big picture" first. Those of you who attended INC 93 will have heard first hand a consensus view of the energy future. Electricity has brought prosperity to people who have had the good fortune to live in the developed nattons of the world. But there are billions ot others living in poverty. What these people desperately need is a reliable source of electricity.

If we look back on the history of world energy use, the burning of fuels such as wood dominated energy utilization until 200 years ago. Since then, we have learned how to use fossil fuels, specifically coal, oil and gas. Only relatively recently, about 100 years ago, did wo dovolop practical applications of electricity.

Today, ftlftrtrtrity powers industrial processes and cities...home appliances and hospitals...telephones and computers. In fact, electricity pervades virtually everything we do.

However, even now, the path to prosperity is not clear for the billions of people who live in the shadow of under-development. In many parts of the world today, wood is still the principal source of heat and light. For them, the picture hasn't changed much in the past 200 years.

The global energy dilemma is simple, but immensely challenging: potentially huge demands in the next century set against concerns about a healthy environment.

Consider

The developed nations have a population of about 1.5 billion people. According to the United Nations, that population is projected to increase to approximately 1.9 biHion by the middle of the next century.

The newly developing nations, by contrast, have a population of about 4.2 billion people. By the middle of the next century, that population is projected to rise to approximately 9.5 billion. -3-

To put this another way, by 2050, the population increase in the developed and affluent nations will increase by about 400 million people. By the same year, the population in the developing and poorer nations will increase by 5.3 billion people.

No matter how many times I hear the numbers, I find these population projections staggoring. Quite naturally, the people of the developing nations aspire to the comfortable lifestyle that we in the developed world take for granted. And they will seek to attain this lifestyle in the only way that they can - by industrializing their economies as rapidly as possible.

Where is the energy to power all this development, more than doubling the current global requirements, to come from? We can look at a simple, but rather telling analysis.

There is no doubt that the world will continue to rely on fossil fuels for a large proportion of its energy production, perhaps 60%. The burning of coal, oil and gas will expand in Asia, India, Africa and South America. Coal and other fossil fuels make sense to emerging nations because they are readily accessible, use off-the-shelf technology, and the resources to supply them are readily available.

Developing nations can and will opt for hydro-electrical power to meet some of their needs. But the amount of hydroelectric capacity that remains to be developed is about the same as that which we currently use. So, as the world population doubles, Ihe pi ©portion of energy supplied by hydroelectricity will not increase; it will continue to constitute about 5% of the total world-wide electricity requirements.

Renewable sources, such as biomass, wood, solar and wind could gain importance, but their proportional contribution will remain small - possibly 10% for biomass, 5% for the other renewable*.

Whatever the future mix of energy supply, two points are abundantly clear:

Firstly, we cannot meet the realistic energy needs of the developing nations for a sustainable standard of living without turning to alternatives such as nuclear power. -4-

Secondly, if we don't choose alternatives to a massive increase in the burning of fossil fuels, future generations will bear a heavy environmental burden.

Therefore, the developed nations must collectively do all that they can to foster an orderly growth in electrical supply ... based on a mix of energy sources, including nuclear power... so that emerging nations can attain economic self- sufficiency. It is the right thing to do as good neighbours and responsible citizens of this planet.

From Canada's and AECL's perspective, the "right thing" also provides us with significant opportunities to export our nuclear technology abroad. I would like to summarize some of these "opportunities"!

Turkey represents a good short-term prospect, where in excess of 15,000 megawatts of electrical capacity is expected to be needed by the year 2002.

Over the same period, Korea projects a need for approximately 28,000 megawatts of additional electricity.

By 2002, the Philippines will require about an additional 6,000 megawatts more of electricity.

In Indonesia, electricity demand is expected to increase in excess of 13,000 megawatts by 2002.

In Thailand, 10,000 megawatts more electricity will be required over the same period.

And in China, a "whopping" 135,000 megawatts of electricity will need to be added to that nation's generating capacity by 2002.

In total, approximately 220,000 megawatts of increased electrical capacity is estimated to be needed over the next decade in these six countries alone. This need will not be met exclusively by nuclear power, but nuclear will play a significant role in helping to meet these energy demands! -5-

Clearly, there are many opportunities out there, but I must emphasize that the competition will be fierce. And it's not only new reactor sales for which the competition will be intense - we will need to continue to provide the very best services to existing reactors. As there will be a detailed market update later in the conference, let me turn now to the Canadian picture.

Deux études récentes sont extrêmement positives pour EACL et pour l'industrie nucléaire canadienne dans son ensemble. Je suis sûr que vous connaissez déjà l'étude d'Ernst & Young sur «Les retombées économiques de l'industrie nucléaire canadienne». Il ne fait pas mal, toutefois, de rappeler les importantes retombées pour notre industrie :

Nuclear energy supplied 15% of Canada's electricity in 1992, valued at $3.7 billion.

The nuclear industry directly employed approximately 30,000 people in Canada in 1992.

It created a minimum of 10,000 jobs in 1992 in other sectors indirectly dependent on the nuclear industry.

The nuclear industry also generated federal tax revenues of $700M in 1992.

And had a trade surplus of $500M in 1991.

Furthermore, by supplanting coal and oil imports, it is estimated that the nuclear industry provided foreign exchange savings of approximately $1 billion in 1992.

Quite a story. And we have a recent • late 1993 - Angus Reid poll showing continued strong support for the nuclear industry in Canada, support that has weathered the Three Mile Island and Chernobyl accidents. No fewer than 70% of Canadians believe that nuclear power will be important as a source of electricity in the future, and a similar figure supports the sale of CANDU -6-

reactors to other countries. One might speculate that our successes in Korea and Romania are, in fact, being recognized by Canadians as having a positive impact on the Canadian economy. Indeed, although the domestic market for reactors will remain flat in the near-term, it is these export opportunities, coupled with high-quality services for operating CANDU reactors, that will help secure our investment in the nuclear industry and maintain the nuclear option for Canada's future use.

Now for AECL itself. Most of you are aware that in the latter part of 1993, a Corporate Task Team was examining ways to promote operational efficiencies within AECL. I'll remind you that this isn't a new situation. In the 1970's and 1980's, AECL had a workforce close to 10,000, which we reduced to the current 4,300 to match our changing workload and responsibilities. In any event, the flat domestic market to which I referred earlier, the completion of AECL's portion of some of our overseas projects, and the fiscal restraint measures familiar to us all, would not enable AECL to sustain its current staffing levels.

La haute direction et le Conseil d'administration d'EACL ont fait une évaluation poussée des constatations du Groupe de travail. Le résultat de cette évaluation a été l'annonce de la semaine dernière.

The basic AECL structure remains unchanged, with AECL CANDU and AECL Research as the Corporation's two operating divisions. To match our staff numbers to our workload, and to reduce overhead, we are streamlining management positions and support services - for example: human resources, finance, administration, public affairs - by consolidation or amalgamation, to eliminate duplication, operational boundaries and redundant effort. Our staff numbers will be reduced by about 600 positions over the next two years, with the majority occurring this fiscal year. About one-third of the reductions result from matching staff levels with commercial workload. The balance is attributable to the streamlining of management and support functions. -7-

AECL will continue to evolve and change as we position ourselves strategically. This evolution will involve increasing and advancing the CANDU Business, with a continuing close focus on both our domestic and off-shore customers. It will also include the development of new products that will position us to pursue one quarter of the emerging world reactor market. The evolution will also entail maintaining a strong research and development program to ensure appropriate support for product development and the advancement of nuclear science in general.

How does all this fit with the industry as a whole? Currently, AECL bears most of the cost of international marketing and sales efforts and assumes most of the risk on big projects. The overall benefit to the industry and to Canada, as shown by Ernst & Young, is substantial. I invite greater private sector involvement in the CANDU Business, thereby ensuring an equitable sharing of risks and rewards. We could jointly benefit from a more efficient utilization of our resources in the areas of marketing, financing and project execution.

To gain access to the financing required for CANDU projects, international partnering will be an increasing part of our business development.

On the domestic front, we also need to examine closely complementary and overlapping skills and resources, particularly in the services field. Is there a place for some constructive consolidation of resources that would give more cost-effective, reliable and responsive services to all operating CANDU stations? For the benefit of our industry, we can't shy away from these tough decisions.

Similarly, I'd like to see all CNA members review their level of support for CNA programs which contribute positively to the public's view of the nuclear industry. I ask you the question: Is support for these programs appropriately distributed or is AECL carrying too big a load? 1 suggest the latter. -8-

Notwithstanding our past achievements, we have only just begun to realize CANDU's potential. It's easy for me to become enthusiastic when I consider our R&D programs on future fuel cycles. I can see that CANDU's natural attributes - high economy, high thermal flux, and on-power fuelling - position CAN DU as the technology of the future in terms of fuel cycle flexibility and security of fuel supply. These attributes are beginning to gain increasing attention around th'£world.

In summary, there are both opportunities and challenges ahead for our industry. In continuing to secure the nuclear technology to provide electricity into the next century for the developing countries, we can be both altruistic and self-serving; altruistic in the sense that we know the technology complements the environment, compared with the alternatives; and self-serving in the sense that AECL, and the nuclear industry can help re-invigorate and stimulate Canada's economy. But this won't come easily. I look forward to all segments of the industry working together to share equitably the load and the benefits. AECL is willing to take the lead, but we need the support and active involvement of all of you if our industry is to continue to be as successful in the future as it is today.

Thank you. Merci. SESSION 1 - Plénière / Plenary Impact économique de l'énergie nucléaire / Economie Impact of Nuclear Power

Présidente de session/Chair: R. Dionne-Marsolais (Price-Waterhouse, Canada)

T. Going - "Economic Effects of the Canadian Nuclear Industry" (Ernst & Young, Canada)

R. Émard - "Economic Impact of Hydro-Quebec's Nuclear Activities" (Hydro-Québec, Canada)

N. Ladoux et al. - "Nuclear Energy in France: Assessing its Impacts on the Economy and the Environment" (CEA, France) Economie Effects of the Canadian Nuclear Industry

by

Tony Going Ernst & Young Economie Effects of the Canadian Nuclear Industry

November 1993

A Presentation From Ernst & Young on Behalf of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Economie Effects of the Canadian Nuclear Industry

Study Objective

To document the economic contribution of the nuclear industry to the Canadian economy

To provide a better understanding of the nuclear industry vis-à-vis other energy sectors

A Presentation From Ernst & Young Economie Effects of the Canadian Nuclear Industry Definition

The industry: the research and development, engineering, manufacturing, uranium mining and refining, and maintenance services that directly relate to the design, construction, equipment supply and operation of nuclear power facilities

A Presentation From Emst & Young Economie Effects of the Canadian Nuclear Industry

Major Players

Utilities - Ontario Hydro - New Brunswick Power - Hydro Quebec Private Sector Suppliers (includes uranium producers) AECL Equipment manufacturers Uranium mining companies Engineering companies A Presentation From Ernst & Young Economie Effects of the Canadian Nuclear industry Major Findings

Numerous Economic Benefits Quality of Life

A Presentation From Ernst & Young Economie Effects of the Canadian Nuclear Industry

Federal Government's Role

Since 1952, a net amount of $4.7 billion in as-spent dollars has been appropriated by the federal government to AECL

A Presentation From Ernst & Young Economie Effects of the Canadian Nuclear Industry Impact on Canadian Economy (conservative estimates)

Total contribution of the nuclear industry to Canada's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) from 1962 -1992 was at least $23 billion Total impact on Canada's GDP was approximately $3.5 billion in 1992

A Presentation From Ernst & Young Economic Effects of the Canadian Nuc ir Industry Energv Supply

3% The Canadian nuclear industry has played a significant role in the provision of energy in Canada.

[ Presentation From Erns«aung Economie Effects of the Canadian Nuclear Industry

Private Sector Suppliers Revenues

$9.4 billion 1988 -1992 $2 billion in 1992 $350 million in 1977 real compounded annual growth of 17% over past 16 years

A Presentation From Ernst & Yoi Economie Effects cfthe Canadian Nuclear Industry 10

(1992)

Over 15Ccompanies, across six provinces suppiied Tianufacturing and engineering productsand/or services 30,000 dtect jobs (3,200 engineers and scientists m 90% are FJII time employrent has increased by 9% over the last 3 veers a minimm of 10,000 indirect jobs

A Presentation From Ernst & Young Economie Effects of the Canadn Nuclear Industry Exports

A Presentation from Ernst & Young Efiomic Effects of the Canadian Nucleai dustry 14 ositive Tract Balance

Total exports = $550 million Total imports = $50 million Net trade balance = $500 million

A Pisentation From Ernst & Young Economie Effects of the Canadian Nuclear Industry 15 Trade Balance (1991)

Industry $ millions Aerospace $900 Nuclear $250 Biotechnology ($60) Opto-electronlcs ($190) Weapons ($280) Material Design ($500) Computer Integrated Manufacturing ($1,300) Electronics ($1,500) Life Sciences ($1,900) Computers ($2,900) Telecommunications ($3,800)

Source: Industry and Science Canada, 1992 A Presentation From Emst & Young Economie Effects of the Canadian Nuclear Industry 16

International Sales of CANDU Units

n 13 CANDU reactors sold to 5 countries a Sale of 2 CANDUs to South Korea was Canada's single largest export order in 1992 n AECL CANDU was 7% of worldwide market for nuclear reactors and more than 10% of world market share for nuclear reactors under construction

A Presentation From Ernst & Young Economie Effects of the Canadian Nuclear Industry Total Foreign Exchange Savings (1965 - 1989)

Nuclear energy has saved $17 billion (1989 dollars) Foreign exchange savings in 1990s will amount to approximately $1 billion per year

A Presentation From Ernst & Young Economie Effects of the Canadian Nuclear industry "

Tax Revenues

$700 million in tax revenues annually from the nuclear industry Corporate taxes

A Presentation From Ernst & Young Economie Effects of the Canadian Nuclear Industry 19

Spin-off Benefits

Environment Medical sciences Competitiveness

A Presentation From Ernst & Young Economic Effects of the Canadian Nuclear Industry 20 Related Spin-off Benefits (Environment)

Annual Carbon Dioxide Emissions in Canada Nuclear power is a Million Tonnes clean form of Natural Gas 140 energy Coal 85 Gasoline 80 Accounts for the Diesel Oil 45 lowest lost days of Fuel Wood 25 life expectancy, Aviation Fuel 10 the lowest land use Coke 10 and the lowest CO2 emissions Nuclear 0 Source: Environment Canada, 1990 A Presentation From Ernst & Young Economie Effects of the Canadian Nuclear (nduëy 21 Related Spin-ofl Benefits (Medical)

Canada spplies more thin 80% of world's Co>alt-60, most Videly used radioactive isotope in coicer treatment AECL was hstrumental indevelopment of Cobalt-60 featment of cancer Estimated >ne-half millid people annually in 70 countries teated for cancer using Canadian ivention

A Presetation From Ernst & Yong Economie Effects of the Canadian Nuclear Industry " Related Spin-off Benefits (Medical) (cont-d)

Approximately 30% of all disposable medical supplies used worldwide sterilized by Cobalt- 60 produced in Canada More than 50 million medical diagnostic procedures using Canadian-produced radioisotopes conducted since 1977-78

A Presentation From Ernst & Young Economie Effects of the Canadian Nuclear Industry 23

nhemced Competitiveness

Improved quality of products and services Increased access to foreign nuclear markets Increased access to non-nuclear areas Increased safety standards

A Presentation From Ernst & Young Economie Effects of the Canadian Nuclear Industry 24 Summary of Effects (1992)

Produced energy valued = $3.7 billion Direct and indirect employment = 40,000 Trade surplus - $500 million Foreign exchange savings = $1 billion Private sector sales = $2 billion AECL revenues = $500 million Tax revenues = $700 million

A Presentation From Ernst & Young ECONOMIC IMPACT OF HYDRO-QUEBEC'S NUCLEAR ACTIVITIES

Presented by R. Emard, Nuclear Operations Director, at the -i Canadian Nuclear Association/Canadian Nuclear Society's ' annual conference held in Montreal, June 5 to 8, 1994. Introduction

I proudly accepted this invitation to discuss the economic and social spin-offs generated by Hydro-Quebec's nuclear activities. It seemed quite appropriate, in these times of economic uncertainty and high unemployment, to give an account of the nuclear activities in Quebec, most of which are generated by the operation of the Gentilly 2 nuclear station.

During the next few minutes I will summarize the economic impact and high- quality jobs created on a regional, provincial and international basis.

(Main stages of nuclear development at Hydro-Québec)

Nuclear Development at Hydro-Québec

Nuctear technology was first introduced at Hydro-Québec in the mid sixties with the construction of Gentilly 1, an AECL prototype power plant operated by Hydro- Québec personnel.

During this period, expertise in nuclear station planning, commissioning and operation was transferred from AECL to untried Hydro-Québec staff recruited from the community. Also, at that time, nuclear technology was being introduced at various universities in Québec.

As a result of the decision to stop operating the Gentilly 1 plant, about 25 million dollars were put into research and development to design a safe decommissioning process for nuclear power plants. This not only produced significant economic spin-offs for the community, but Hydro-Québec and AECL gained a valuable expertise in nuclear plant decommissioning.

The Arrival of Gentilly 2

Construction work on Gentilly 2 started in November 1973. The project's overall cost, including commercial operation startup, was nearly 1.4 billion dollars. A total of 8350 person-years were required to complete the work.

It is mostly during this period that the infrastructure and technology required for nuclear plant construction, operation and maintenance were developed in Quebec.

Gentilly 2 is Hydro-Quebec's only nuclear plant. Its 675 megawatt generating capacity provides nearly 3% of Hydro-Quebec's total power output. It is located halfway between Montreal and Quebec City, on the south shore of the St. Lawrence River, near the Bécancour Industrial Park.

All nuclear activities take place at the Gentilly site. These activities fall under the Nuclear Operations Directorate and they are divided along operational, functional and support lines. To underscore their diversity, I have listed below the main activities falling under this directorate. (Slide #1 : Nuclear Operations Organization Chart)

Operation. The operation group is composed of the shift crews, the operator trainees, the fuelling machine operating team and a chemistry team. The operation and maintenance team from the Bécancour Gas Turbine Power Plant was recently added to the operation group.

Radiation Protection and Maintenance. This group is comprised of the various mechanical, electrical, instrument and service, and maintenance teams. It also deals with protection, both functional and support, and industrial safety.

Technical Services. This group is the guardian of the Gentilly 2 design concept and has complete technical responsibility. It includes all system engineers and it is responsible for safety and licensing activities. It also carries out projects and modifications. Technical Services also coordinates all nuclear research and development.

Technical Training. It supervises technical training on operation, radiation protection, industrial safety, etc. It also supervises and coordinates any personnel training authorized by government agencies and it conducts control room simulator training.

Support Services. This group is being reorganized but it is mainly responsible for budgeting, procurement, documentation and automatic data processing services. It is also involved in quality assurance and the implementation of the audit program. In addition, it provides a planning, coordination and control team; one of the responsibilities of this team is to integrate and coordinate work programs initiated by the various Nuclear Management units, based on current objectives.

Gentilly 2: One of the Region's Main Employers

To perform these activities, 664 permanent jobs were created along with about 70 temporary person-years. As a result, Gentilly 2 has become one of the region's main employers. As shown on the next slide, over 70% of these jobs are highly specialized and multi-skilled: (Slide #2: Job Distribution in Various Classifications) 123 professional engineers from various specialties, i.e. civil engineering, physics engineering, , mechanical engineering, process engineering, electrical engineering, and probably others. These engineers have also received extensive training on nuclear and conventional system supervision;

131 technicians trained in various fields such as computer science, electronics, instrumentation and control, chemistry, environmental science;

214 specialists including control room operators, fuelling machine operators, system maintenance specialists and service maintainers;

89 office workers responsible for clerical work, accounting, budget control support, drafting;

53 specialists in the fields of basic and applied science, all university and college graduates;

finally, 54 managers holding jobs ranging from supervisor to senior executive officer; these employees have diverse backgrounds, i.e. tradesmen, technicians, former shift supervisors and also professional engineers.

Economic Impact

The preceding two slides show the type of activities performed by our employees and the type of jobs they hold.

(Slide #3)

We will now look at the economic impact of the station. I will use the station expenditures for 1993, including those related to the Bécancour Gas Turbine Power Plant.

Out of a total of 99 million dollars in expenditures, nearly 58% or 57.3 million are used for wages paid to Nuclear Management personnel.

Equipment and supplies, including heavy water and fuel, cost a total of 16.3 million dollars. Another 18 million was allocated to pay for a wide range of professional services, such as training and engineering consultants provided by AECL and other firms. Nearly two million dollars out of a total of 4.5 million, under "Miscellaneous Expenditures", were used for various fees and permits, and almost half a million dollars was spent on contract work.

Distribution of Regional Economic Spin-Offs from Nuclear Operations

The above economic data reflect overall outlays from Gentilly 2. However, to better portray Gentilly 2 as a driving force in the economy of the region, I will describe the location and types of spin-offs generated by the station.

Gentilly 2: A Major Economic Driving Force in Two Regional Municipalities

The Bécancour Regional County Municipality encompasses the Gentilly site. It basically includes the town of Bécancour and its immediate surroundings.

The Francheville Regional County Municipality encompasses the greater Trois- Rivières area on the north shore of the St. Lawrence River.

The Bécancour MRC (Slide #4)

The following is based on 1993 data:

Wages paid to the 191 employees living in the Bécancour area total slightly more than 15 million dollars a year. Also, the station spent about 2.4 million dollars in the Bécancour area for various purchases, including municipal and school taxes.

The Bécancour Gas Turbine Power Plant

A gas turbine plant was built on the Gentilly site for two key reasons. First, Hydro-Québec needed a plant to meet peak power requirements. Second, Gentilly 2 needed a plant to restore power to its auxiliaries in the event of a grid failure. The Bécancour plant generates nearly 400MW.

Plant construction generated an initial investment of 311 million dollars. In addition, to support its commitment to environmental development, Hydro-Québec allocated 3.8 million dollars to three regional agencies. This money will be used to design and implement environmental initiatives related to natural resources, heritage sites and public education. The Francheville MRC (Slide #5)

The 452 employees residing in the greater Trois-Rivières area receive over 35 million dollars in wages every year.

Also, about 1.8 million dollars were spent in the greater Trois-Rivières area in 1993 for a variety of professional services. As a result, this provided a major boost to our consultants and suppliers.

Nearly 1.8 million dollars were spent for contract work in 1993, and local purchases alone generated over 1.6 million dollars in business. To sum up, economic activities in the area surrounding the station total more than 50 million dollars a year.

Spin-Offs at the Provincial Level (Slide #6)

Most expenditures within the Province of Quebec, outside the two regions mentioned above, were for wages, equipment and supplies and for professional services. Such expenditures totaled about 31 million dollars.

Purchases Outside Quebec (Slide #7)

Nearly 10 million dollars were paid out to various suppliers outside Quebec for such things as fuel and heavy water.

Gentilly 2 Fosters Technological Development

Although it is not easy to quantify, Gentilly 2's technology and Quality assurance requirements, in its business dealings, create a need for specialized training and, as a consequence, high wage jobs.

Gentilly 2 also spurred the expansion of several private businesses. Our special requirements gave the opportunity to various suppliers to develop leading edge technologies and train highly qualified personnel. This new expertise has allowed many of these businesses to expand into national and even international markets.

During the 1986-1988 period, we invested about 21 million dollars for the design, manufacture and installation of a control room simulator and related infrastructures. Gentilly 2 is also active on the international scene. Several of our experts have been sent to Rumania to supervise the construction and commercial startup of the Cernavoda . Technical exchanges were established with Électricité de France to assess the feasibility of a long-term maintenance project and the preservation of the station's life cycle potential. This subject will be covered by Michel Ross later on during this conference.

We have signed a cooperation agreement with the Blayais nuclear site and we have been exchanging data with them for five years.

We provide simulator training services to the Embalse Nuclear Generating Station in Argentina, a station with characteristics similar to Gentilly 2. This station periodically sends personnel to Gentilly to train on our simulator in order to develop their operating skills in normal and abnormal situations.

Valuable Technological Innovations

R & D activities aimed at solving specific station problems have led to the development of a wide range of high-quality products which, in many cases, can be exported to CANDU sites or other industries.

To give one example, our experts designed the equipment and procedures required to conduct reactor building containment tests without shutting down production, i.e. low-pressure testing. A patent was issued for this innovation and Gentilly 2 also received a quality award (Méritas) from Hydro-Québec.

Also, Gentilly 2 employees gained a unique experience in flux detector replacement; as a result, we modified original equipment and tools and we revamped flux mapping and calibration analyses. This experience was put to use in 1992 when flux detectors were replaced at another CANDU 600 site.

We have many more projects on stream and numerous challenges which will help stimulate the local economy and also create more high-quality jobs.

In closing, I would like to point out that these achievements were made possible by the remarkable determination, motivation and initiative shown by all Gentilly employees. I also wish to emphasize that Gentilly 2 employees have always given priority to safety over production. I thank you for your attention. ANNEXES NUCLEAR OPERATIONS ORGANIZATION CHART

DIRECTOR NUCLEAR OPERATIONS

ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY ASSISTANT DIRECTOR NUCLEAR OPERATIONS

QUALITY ASSURANCE AND AUDIT PLANNING COORDINATION AND CONTROL

RADIATION PROTECTION TECHNICAL OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE SERVICES

SUPPORT TECHNICAL SERVICES TRAINING NUCLEAR OPERATIONS DIRECTORATE JOB DISTRIBUTION (TOTAL: 664)

TRADESMEN 214

TECHNICIANS 131 —i ENGINEERS 123

SPECIALISTS 53 MANAGERS 54 OFFICE WORKERS 89

YEAR 1993

(POST93A.CH3) NUCLEAR OPERATIONS DIRECTORATE DIRECT ECONOMIC IMPACT

CONTRACT LABOUR COSTS 457,800$ PROFESSIONAL SERV. 17 892,400$

PERSONNEL EXR 981,900$ MISCELLANEOUS EXR 4 542,7Of)|$ RENTAL 1 077,800$-

WAGES 57 295,000$

EQUIPMENT PURCHASES 16 260,

MUN.AND SCHOOL TAXES 337,700$

DISTRIBUTION BY TYPE OF EXPENDITURES: 98 846,100$

YEAR 1993

(GRAPH6A.CH3) NUCLEAR OPERATIONS DIRECTORATE ECONOMIC IMPACT - BECANCOUR MRC

PERSONNEL EXPENDITURES 257,900$

PROFESSIONAL SERV. 44,900$ MISCELLANEOUS EXP. 262,500$

CONTRACT LABOUR 8,700$ MUN./SCHOOL TAXES 337,7(

RENTAL 28,700$ EQUIPMENT PURCHASES 463,800$

DISTRIBUTION BY TYPE OF EXPENDITURES: 1 404,200$

YEAR 1993

(GRAPH2A.CH3) NUCLEAR OPERATIONS DIRECTORATE ECONOMIC IMPACT - FRANCHEVILLE MRC

CONTRACT LABOUR COSTS 194,800$ EQUIPMENT PURCHASES 1 677,200$

MISCELLANEOUS EXR 950,20

— RENTAL 147,900$

PERSONNEL EXR 610,500$

PROFESSIONAL SERV. 1 795,900$ DISTRIBUTION BY TYPE OF EXPENDITURES: 5 376,500$

YEAR 1993

(GRAPH4A.CH3) NUCLEAR OPERATIONS DIRECTORATE ECONOMIC IMPACT - YEAR 1993

RENTAL 607,500$ EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES 9 847,200$

WAGES 6 620,000$

-CONTRACT LABOUR 25,800$

MISCELLANEOUS EXR 2 231,000$ PERSONNEL EXR 113,500$ PROFESSIONNAL SERV. 11 977,600$ EXPENDITURES WITHIN QUEBEC*: 31 422,600$

•PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC (OUTSIDE THE BECANCOUR & FRANCHEVILLE MRCs)

(GRAPH9A.CH3) NUCLEAR OPERATIONS DIRECTORATE ECONOMIC IMPACT

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES 4 292,600$

RENTAL 293,700$

MISCELLANEOUS EXP. 1 099,000$

CONTRACT LABOUR COSTS 228,500$ PROFESSIONAL SERV. 4 074,000$

PURCHASES OUTSIDE QUEBEC: 9 987,800$

YEAR 1993

(GRAPH8A.CH3) Q'vHoOO'

CNA/CNS ANNUAL CONFERENCE JUNE 5-8, 1994 MONTREAL, CANADA

NUCLEAR ENERGY IN FRANCE : ASSESSING ITS IMPACTS ON THE ECONOMY AND THE ENVIRONMENT

Alain CHARMANT Jean-Guy DEVEZEAUX de LAVERGNE Norbert LADOUX Marc VIELLE Division of Strategy and Evaluation Commissariat à l'Energie Atomique Paris France As environmental issues (particularly questions associated with the greenhouse effect) become a matter of increasing current concern, so the French nuclear power programme can, in retrospect, be seen to have had a highly positive impact upon emissions of atmospheric pollutants. The most spectacular effect of this programme has been the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions from 530 million tonnes per annum in 1973 to 387 million tonnes per annum today. Obviously, this result cannot be considered in isolation from the economic consequences of the nuclear power programme, which have been highly significant. The most obvious consequence of nuclear power has been the production of cheap electricity, while a further consequence has been the stability of electricity prices resulting from the increasing self-sufficiency of France in energy supplies (from 22% in 1973 to 47% in 1989) . The French nuclear industry is also a source of exports, contributing FF 20 billion to the credit side of the balance of payments in 1989. We therefore feel that a numerical assessment of the macroeconomic impact of the nuclear power programme is essential to any accurate evaluation of the environmental consequences of that programme. This assessment is set out in the pages that follow, using the Micro-Mélodie macroeconomic and energy supply model developed by the CEA (Atomic Energy Commission). In the final section of this report, we shall attempt to assess the role of nuclear power in combatting the greenhouse effect, using a worldwide exploratory study as our source.

I - COAL: AN ALTERNATIVE TO NUCLEAR POWER

Had a programme for the replacement of nuclear power plants by fossil fuel-fired power stations been initiated from 1970 onwards, the first unit to be completed (corresponding to Fessenheim I) would have been brought into service in 1977. The date of commissioning would have fallen immediately after the increase in crude oil prices, thus invalidating any option for the use of fuel oil as fuel. The fuel used would have been coal.

1. Brief description of the coal scenario

In order to secure a relatively high level of independence in energy supplies, the French authorities would have been required to develop coal mining. Taking account of the technical characteristics of coal deposits, we have envisaged an increase in production of 5 million tonnes per annum in the Lorraine region. This represents 20% of national production in 1977. Four 600 MWe coal-fired units would have been constructed in the vicinity of pit-heads, while any remaining coal would have been shipped in from those countries which generally supply France (particularly Australia and the USA).

Initially, coal-fired units would all have been constructed with grate furnaces. The initial capacity of these units would have been 600 MWe, increasing rapidly to 900 MWe. The construction of a large series of units with this increased capacity would have allowed substantial economic benefits to be realised, particularly in terms of increased efficiency and the extension of the operating lifetime of units to forty years. Even though environmental concerns were undoubtedly not the main priority of the public authorities fifteen years ago, we have assumed that all coal-fired units, with the exception of the four constructed in the Lorraine, would have been fitted with effective desulphurisation plant, in the form of flue gas scrubbers, operating at 90% efficiency. Fluidised bed technology would have been introduced progressively between the year 2000 and 2005 (date of entry into service).

The more prominent role of the coal-fired electric power plant industry would have an impact upon exports of plant abroad. The substantial levels of coal-fired plant exports already- achieved by Alsthom (who held 12% of the world market in the early 1980s) might have been higher still, increasing from two 600 MWe units per annum to three. However, eight 900 MWe nuclear power plant units would not have been exported.

2. Investment costs

Any comparative analysis of the nuclear and coal scenarios must be based upon an evaluation of the respective investment costs involved. Our study has been based upon figures published by the Ministry for Industry, information drawn from the study by Moynet [1] and information from the EDF plant division. Table 1 shows unadjusted standard investment costs published in 1986 by the Gas, Electricity and Coal Division (DIGEC) of the Ministry for Industry. However, the actual cost of investment recorded for a coal-fired power plant has been adjusted in order to take account of the various effects arising from the development of a major programme for the production of electricity from coal (table 2).

The nuclear option is characterised by the high levels of industrial investment involved in the nuclear fuel cycle. A proportion of these investments (approximately FF 30 billion at 1990 values, mainly for the construction of UP2 and prospecting) had already been committed prior to 1970, and may be classified as investments involved in the operation of graphite gas units. However, the major part of investment in the nuclear fuel cycle took place after 1970. In our coal scenario, this expenditure (calculated at FF 100 billion at 1990 Values) would not have been required (see table 3) . In terms of power plant units themselves, attention should be drawn to the substantial drift in investment costs (in terms of both price and volume) from 1970 to the present day. Taking account of this factor, the total cost of investment in nuclear power plants ordered from 1970 to the present day, i.e. thirty- four 900 MWe PWR units, twenty 1300 MWe PWR units, two 1400 MWe PWR units and one FBR unit has been estimated as FF 360 billion (at 1990 values) on a plant by plant basis. Between 1970 and 1993, the cost of the nuclear programme will have totalled FF 460 billion.

The coal option, like the nuclear option, must be considered initially in terms of investment in the fuel cycle, i.e. the cost of increased coal production in the Lorraine and the extension of harbour capacity (see table 4) . In our coal scenario, France uses the services of foreign shipping companies for the transport of imported coal. Although the construction of the requisite ore carriers in French shipyards was also considered, this scenario does not have any significant impact upon results obtained, as shown in [2]. In order to provide the same net capacity, 58 GWe of coal-fired capacity would have been required to replace 60 GWe of nuclear capacity (since approximately 2 GWe is required to supply the Eurodif plant). This investment would have totalled FF 285 billion at 1990 values. For the same net capacity, the total cost of the programme for the production of electricity from coal would have been FF 330 billion.

3. Operating costs

The major difference between the coal and nuclear options is the cost of fuel. In the early 1980s, the cost of fuel per kWh produced stood in favour of nuclear power by a ratio of 1 to 5. Since this item accounts for approximately 30% and, 60% of the accounting cost per kWh of nuclear power and electricity from coal respectively, it is important to specify the assumptions which have been applied to coal prices.

We have assumed a 10% increase in the international coal price from 1980 to 1986. Increased demand from France in a restricted international market during a tense period for energy prices would undoubtedly have led to an increase in prices (in response to increased French demand, world demand on the international steam coal market would have increased by some 20%). After 1990, our assumptions on coal prices (shown in table 5) are based upon the low and high scenarios applied by Energy Research Group (GPE). Other running costs comprise operating costs (mainly direct or associated staff costs), which will be determined on the basis of average earnings (some 1.5% higher in the nuclear industry than in the coal industry).

II - IMPACT ON THE ELECTRICITY MARKET

1. The structure of electricity supply

The actual past development of the structure of electricity supply is shown in figure 1. Figure 2 shows how this structure would have developed under the "no nuclear power" option. The nuclear capacity of France would effectively have been eliminated with the shutdown of the last graphite gas unit (Bugey 1), scheduled for April 1994. Table 6 shows an international comparison of results for the same scenario. In terms of electricity supply, a "nuclear free France" would have been comparable to the UK, with 70% of electricity produced from coal-fired thermal plants, and approximately 25% produced from nuclear and hydroelectric plants.

2. Impact on electricity prices

Tariffs applied by EDF are theoretically based upon the concept of long term marginal costs. Each consumer pays a standing charge, which represents subscribed demand, and a variable charge, which is proportional to electricity used (subject to possible adjustment at pre-determined periods of the day).

If the movement of primary energy prices proceeds as expected, it is possible for EDF to balance its budget each year. However, there was no verification of the fulfilment of this condition between 1973 and 1980, nor even after the fall in coal prices in 1986. During periods of changing prices, long term marginal cost tariffs will therefore run up against the obstacle of budgetary fluctuations. However, this tariff system will retain its substantial theoretical value, both as a reference system, and as a system for the assessment of differences between tariffs (standing charges and prices per kwh for the various parties concerned). Movements in electricity prices will be limited by trading accounts (sales, less the cost of variable resources used for production) and the capital account (used as a reference value for the balance of the financial budget). Variations in operating costs may be regarded as the main factors governing average electricity tariffs, while the balance of the capital account (provided that operating accounts can be balanced in practice) may be regarded as the product of investment policy. However, in order to avoid an approach which penalises the coal scenario (with its lower investment costs, in relation to the nuclear scenario), we have assumed that average electricity tariffs will be based upon a balanced budget (i.e. with a constant deficit for EDF) . This approach is also consistent with the concept of long term marginal costs (for the average level of tariffs), where movements in economic parameters (particularly fuel prices) are stable.

At present, the price per kWh of electricity under the coal scenario would be some 15% higher. However, during the late 1970s and early 1980s (a period of substantial investment in the electricity sector), this price would have stood below its historical value (this mechanism is closely linked to the assumption that charges are based upon a balanced budget. If charges are based upon long term marginal costs, this temporary fall in prices would not occur, regardless of the accuracy of forecasts). This temporary advantage would have been lost by the mid-1980s, while the increase in electricity prices would have reached 20% in 1986 (before the fall in the international price of coal) . By now, the price of electricity would have been highly sensitive to fluctuations in the international price of coal. Consequently, by the year 2000, the price of electricity would increase by 16% or 30% in accordance with the low and high scenarios for the price of coal applied by the GPE respectively (see table 7 and figure 3).

At present, electricity prices in France are among the lowest in Europe (see figure 4). In a "nuclear free France", the price of electricity would be close to the level found in the UK, but would remain substantially below the price applied in Germany.

3. Impact upon electricity demand (see table 8)

In a "nuclear free France", the increase in electricity prices would lead to a fall in a consumption and the replacement of electricity by other forms of energy.

In the energy sector, this fall in consumption would stem mainly from the absence of the Eurodif plant, which accounts for annual consumption of 20 TWh. In industry, the impact of higher electricity prices would vary according to the industrial sector concerned, the application in question, and tariffs applied. A technical and economic study based upon individual applications (manufacture, heating, motive power etc.) and sectors [3] shows that the most affected sectors would be paper and cardboard, iron and steel, the foundry industry, metallurgy and metal working, chemicals, and (to a lesser extent) agri-foodstuffs industries The impact upon other sectors would be extremely limited. In the services sector, there would only be a significant drop in electricity consumption for heating. In the residential sector, heating would also be most affected by electricity prices. In particular, high electricity prices would lead to far less growth in electric central heating, with an estimated fall in consumption of 10 TWh. Net exports of electricity would be close to the level of supplies delivered under contracts which are based upon long term cost differentials. In a nuclear free France, the comparative advantage of French costs would be considerably reduced, and would lead to the total disappearance of these exports. The total drop in national electricity production would be close to 90 TWh (23%), while final consumption would fall by 24 TWh (8%) .

Through the practice of energy substitution, the fall in final energy consumption would be lower than the drop in final electricity consumption. On the basis of studies conducted by Devezeaux [4] and Roudergues [5] , it may be reasonably argued that the main fuel sources to benefit from this substitution process would be oil (with consumption increasing by 2.4 Mtoe, particularly in the industrial sector) and gas (with consumption increasing by 1.7 Mtoe, mainly for space heating), with only an extremely limited increase in coal consumption (0.1 Mtoe, mainly for industrial use). The overall structure of final energy consumption in a "nuclear free France" would be close to the pattern which we see today. The same can certainly not be said of the primary energy balance. National fossil fuel consumption would be almost 55 Mtoe higher than its current value, with coal for electricity production accounting for the major proportion of this figure (approximately 51 Mtoe).

Net production of primary electricity (hydroelectric and nuclear power) would- fall by 63 Mtoe which, in terms of overall energy production in France, would only be offset by an increase in coal production (3.1 Mtoe).

Independence in energy supplies, as shown in figure 5, would currently stand at approximately 20% (as against its actual level of nearly 48%), which is close to the figure for 1973. Without nuclear power, France, which is currently on a par with major coal producing countries such as the Federal Republic of Germany, would be reduced to the level of Italy or Japan (see figure 6).

IV - MACROECONOMIC EFFECTS '

The impact of substitution upon the primary energy balance is

1 Measured using the Micro-Mélodie model, c.f. [6] and table 9. such that the macroeconomic effects of this substitution (see table 10) will need to be assessed in terms of the current position of electricity production in the overall economic activity of France (where the electricity sector now accounts for an added value of approximately 2.4% of commercial GDP, with 166,000 persons in direct employment).

The structure of the economy will be modified by the following three factors:

- Falling investment in the electricity sector and the fuel cycle, - Rising electricity prices, - A substantial reduction in independence in energy

Chronologically, the first of these factors to have any impact would be the fall in investment in the electricity sector resulting from the discrepancy between the cost of investment per kWe of installed nuclear and coal-fired capacity, and from the reduction in total net capacity required (which, in itself, would result from reduced demand for electricity). The macroeconomic impact of this factor would be equivalent to a keynesian multiplier. In outline terms, there would be two main consequences, namely, a significant reduction in economic activity (see figure 7 and 8) and a reduction in pressure on the trade balance towards the mid-1970s.

The remaining two factors would have a significant effect from the early 1980s onwards, their sudden impact exacerbated by the fact that this was a period of high prices on international coal markets.

Higher electricity prices would increase the production costs of companies, who would then pass on these increased costs in the form of higher selling prices. Households would be affected by the increase in the cost of domestic electricity itself, and by the increased price of goods and services involving electricity. In wage negotiations, these increases would only be offset to a limited extent by increased earnings, since index linking would be limited by a significant rise in unemployment. By the present day, there would have been a 0.8% reduction in purchasing power. By the year 2000, this reduction would reach 1.2% or 1.9%, depending on whether the low or high scenario for coal prices is applied. The main effect of this loss of purchasing power would be a fall in household consumption (0.9% in 1990), which would have a negative impact upon economic activity (-1.3% in 1990). Nearly 100,000 jobs would be lost.

Reduced independence in energy supplies, quite apart from exposing the French economy to the effects of an increase in coal prices, would lead to a substantial increase of over FF 30 billion (see figure 9) in national energy costs for 1990 (actual energy costs totalled FF 83.2 billion in 1989). There would be a very substantial increase in coal imports (by almost 80 million tonnes in 1988). The substitution of energy sources would also lead to an increase in imports of energy, petroleum products and natural gas, while electricity exports would disappear.

There would be a negative impact on the trade balance (see figure 10) , with a loss of some FF 15 billion in 1990 (there was a FF 93 billion deficit in the cif/fob trade balance in 1989) . In the mid-1980s (a period of high coal prices) , this annual negative impact would have been almost half the deficit actually recorded for the cif/fob trade balance. The fall in final demand (investment and household consumption) would have a positive impact upon the external trade balance (by reducing imports and releasing capacity for exports) , but this would not, in itself, be sufficient to offset major increases in national energy costs. The cumulative deficit over ten years from 1981 to 1990 would exceed FF 100 billion at 1990 values. Over the following decade (from 1991 to 2000), this cumulative deficit would reach FF 190 or 230 billion at 1990 values, depending on whether the low or high scenario for coal prices is applied.

At present, the impact of the French nuclear programme (in terms of economic activity, employment and external trade) is generally positive. If this programme had not been implemented, the impact might be broadly compared to that of an oil crisis, with a long term increase in the price of oil from 20 to 30 dollars a barrel.

V - IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT

In this section, we shall consider the consequences of the French nuclear programme in terms of emissions of atmospheric pollutants (carbon dioxide, sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxide) associated with human activity. In the coal scenario considered, these gases are generally emitted by generating plant. However, significant economic changes brought about by the use of coal for electricity production would certainly have had some impact upon these emissions, particularly through the substitution of energy sources within overall energy demand. All emissions of atmospheric pollutants (including indirect or induced emissions) have been recorded, particularly those arising from the manufacture of construction materials for 10 generating plant units. However, we have taken no account of changes in the primary energy balance of foreign countries (such as the FRG or Italy) , who would have been required to increase their electricity production (probably by burning coal in the majority of cases) had French power plants (with their associated capacity for exports) not been available.

1. Sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions

Sulphur dioxide emissions would exceed their current value by 230,000 tonnes per annum, an increase of 18% in terms of the level of annual emissions (1,270,000 tonnes in 1989). This increase (which, after all, may be regarded as relatively modest) is closely linked to the assumption that effective desulphurisation measures would be applied to all coal-fired power plant units constructed (otherwise, sulphur dioxide emissions would reach 11,450,000 tonnes per annum, an increase of over 100%) . This would not apply to units constructed in the Lorraine, since the percentage content of sulphur by weight of coal mined in this region is only 0.3%, as against 0.8% in the case of imported coal. The substitution of energy sources used to meet final demand would have a significant impact upon this result, in the form of a perceptible increase in industrial consumption of heavy gas oil (low sulphur content fuel oil, 2.0% sulphur by mass). In a 'nuclear free France", sulphur dioxide emissions would reach 220,000 - 250,000 tonnes per annum by the year 2000. In absolute terms, this would be comparable to the result obtained in 1990, given that, while economic growth would tend to lead to an increase in emissions, the more widespread use of extra low sulphur content fuel oil (1.0% sulphur by mass) would tend to restrict emissions.

By the present day, nitrogen oxide emissions would exceed their current value by 510,000 tonnes per annum, an increase of 29% (annual emissions reached 1,760,000 tonnes in 1989). This is an important figure, bearing in mind that the transport sector now accounts for nearly 75% of these emissions. In a nuclear free France, these extra nitrogen oxide emissions would reach 650,000 - 720,000 per annum by the year 2000 (a difference of a comparable order of magnitude to that assumed for the present day) .

2. Carbon dioxide emissions

Carbon dioxide emissions would exceed their current value (387 million tonnes per annum in 1989) by 230 million tonnes per annum, an increase of 60% (see figures 11 and 12). By the year 2000, these extra emissions would reach 310 - 340 million tonnes per annum. Considered on a cumulative basis over the next twenty years, this result represents 6 billion tonnes of 11 carbon dioxide emissions.

It may be useful to consider these figures in the context of current discussions regarding the environment. In response to the potential threat of the greenhouse effect (possibly leading to global warming), discussions have focused on the initiation of appropriate action to limit the level of annual carbon dioxide emissions. At the Toronto Conference held in June 1988, the scientific community alerted political leaders to this problem, and urged industrialised countries to cut carbon dioxide emissions by 20% by the year 2005.

In 1973, annual carbon dioxide emissions stood at 530 million tonnes per annum. In a nuclear free France, these emissions would have increased by now to 620 million tonnes (a relative increase of 17%). As a result of the development of French nuclear power plants, carbon dioxide emissions now stand at only 3 87 million tonnes per annum, a reduction of over 27% over the 1973 figure. This reduction has been achieved in sixteen years, with all the positive macroeconomic consequences which we have described.

VI - THE NUCLEAR QUESTION AT WORLD LEVEL

For a number of years, the Atomic Energy Commission has conducted regular studies on prospects for the development of nuclear power [7]. These studies are used to assess the impact of the greenhouse effect upon the development of worldwide nuclear power plant capacity.

1. Method used

The method used in these studies is shown in figure 13, and is based upon a two-stage process. In the first instance, forecasts for primary energy and electricity consumption are established for each of the 57 countries concerned. These forecasts are based upon estimated econometric models for each country for the period 1970 to 1987, in which energy and electricity consumption per inhabitant are linked to GDP per inhabitant, energy prices, and an indicator of economic structure. During the second stage, on the basis of forecasts prepared using econometric models, scenarios for the development of nuclear power programmes will be developed on the basis of the current situation and specific factors affecting each country. Initial factors considered will be those relating to the energy sector, i.e. demand for energy and electricity, energy resources and the current mix of generating plant. In the second instance, consideration will be given to 12 factors of an economic and technical nature, such as the competitiveness of various forms of energy, funding capacity, foreign debt, the interconnection of electricity systems, etc.. Finally, political, institutional and social factors, such as legislation, licensing procedures and the ecological movement will be taken into account. Consideration will be given to past performance, in terms of choice of power plant series, time required for construction, shifts in power plant project policy and the performance of power plant units. On the basis of these scenarios, technological strategies will be developed which will specify types of power plant used (PWRs, BWRs, AGRs, PHWRs), together with technologies which are liable to achieve their full development, in economic terms, by the year 2020 (FBRs and ATRs). The ELECNUC [8] data base and the EPATAN model will then be used to simulate the operation of electricity generating plants, incorporating the main operating parameters concerned (capacity, availability coefficient, lifetime, type of fuel management, characteristics of fuel cycle plants, etc.) In this way, the model will be used to determine installed capacity, units to be constructed, fuel requirements, etc.

2. Main results

Assumptions and the main results drawn from the standard reference scenario are shown in table 11. World energy consumption is expected to double by the year 2020, with anticipated growth of 3% in GDP. The increase in demand for electricity will be considerably more rapid, rising from 11,000 TWh in 1989 to 25,000 TWh in 2020. These results are comparable to those published by the WEC [9] . We have considered two scenarios for the production of electricity from nuclear power: a low scenario, based on the assumption that the current stagnation in the construction of nuclear power plants will continue, and a high scenario, based on the assumption that the construction of nuclear production capacity will begin again early next century. On the basis of these two scenarios, production from nuclear power plants, which currently account for 18% of electricity consumed worldwide, would be no more than 15 - 16% by the year 2000. If the current aversion for nuclear power persists, its share of world electricity production will be less than 11% by the year 2020, with a particularly marked decline in Western Europe and . At best, a progressive resumption of the construction of nuclear power plants would only allow nuclear power to regain its current position by the year 2020, in terms of its share of world electricity production. At the same time, the contribution of nuclear power to the energy requirements of developing countries should remain low.

3. Nuclear power and the greenhouse effect 13

Worldwide emissions of carbon dioxide associated with the consumption of fossil fuels now stand at 22 billion tonnes per annum (equivalent to 6.2 billion tonnes of carbon). By the year 2020, this figure will virtually have doubled to 40 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide. In 1990, the use of nuclear power prevented the emission of 1.8 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide per annum, or 8% of worldwide emissions. By the year 2020, according to the low scenario described above, this figure would fall to 6%. The impact of the progressive resumption of the construction of nuclear power plants may be determined on the basis of the difference between the high and low scenarios. By the year 2020, a resumption of this policy would account for an extra 300 GWe of nuclear generating capacity, which is only slightly less than the current figure for installed capacity. This would allow the emission of 1.7 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide to be avoided, which represents a 4% reduction in worldwide carbon dioxide emissions by the year 2020.

CONCLUSION

As environmental matters become the focus of increasing concern, the implementation of major nuclear power programme has allowed Prance to enjoy the benefits of a comfortable position. Emissions of carbon dioxide per head in France are among the lowest in the industrialised world.

On a worldwide level, Atomic Energy Commission forecasts have shown that the impact of the resumption of nuclear power programmes on the greenhouse effect would be limited. This resumption would allow carbon dioxide emissions to be reduced by 1.7 billion tonnes by the year 2020, or 4% of worldwide carbon dioxide emissions per annum. The contribution of nuclear power to any efforts made to stabilise worldwide emissions would therefore be modest. Nevertheless, nuclear power might have a useful role to play in the achievement of a more realistic reduction of these emissions. Finally, it should be noted that the responsibility for any such contribution to the reduction of emissions lies chiefly with industrialised countries, who account for 70% of potential capacity for the resumption of nuclear power programmes. TABLE 1 DIGEC 1986 (FF per kWh as at 1.1.86)

NUCLEAR COAL (*) (N4 - 2 units) (600 MWe - 2 units per annum)

Construction 5,624 4,840 Contractor's costs 619 290 Pre-operaCional phase 224 90

TOTAL 6,467 5,220

(*) v>ithout desulphurisation

TABLE 2 IMPACT OF A MASSIVE PROGRAMME FOR THE PRODUCTION OF ELECTRICITY FROM COAL UPON THE COST OF INVESTMENT IN INSTALLED CAPACITY (REFERENCE UNITS: CORDEMAIS 4-5)

Before» 1975 1975 onwards

Impact of large scale production - 72 - 92

Number of units per site - 32 - 32

Technical series 02 - 42

Difficulty of siting + 32 + 52

Desulphurisation (902) 0% + 202

TOTAL - 72 + 92 TABLE 3

INVESTMENT IN THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AFTER 1970 (FF billion at 1990 values)

MINES : 3 PROCESSING: 2 ENRICHMENT: 31 MANUFACTURE: 2 REPRqÇESS,ING: 62

TOTAL: 100

TABLE 4

INVESTMENT IN THE COAL CYCLE (FF billion at 1990 values)

MINES: 7 PORTS; 38

TOTAL: 45

TABLE 5

PROJECTED VALUES FOR STEAM COAL PRICES (SOURCE: CPE) IN $ 89/TONNE

SCENARIO 1989 1995 2000 2010 Low 46 40 40 44

High 46 52 56 60 STRUCTURE OF ELECTRICITY PRODUCTION 100 France with nuclear power FIGURE 1

Oil, gas & others N. 80- \\

Nuclear

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Source: EDF Handbook & GPE scenario C STRUCTURE OF ELECTRICITY PRODUCTION FIGURE 2 France without nuclear power

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Source: Micro-Mélodie model TABLE 6 - STRUCTURE OF ELECTRICITY PRODUCTION

I 198a F MFF (*) FRG UK I E NL B GR DK P IRL L loidi EC USA Japan 1 Prediction in luh 280.0 198.0 285.1 194.5 121. S 65.0 60.9 30.2 29.7 19.9 12.3 1.2 1586.4 2 872.0 ni.7 breakdown: Hydro x 19.0 25.0 4.8 2.3 23.9 28.3 0.0 2.2 10.3 0.0 60.8 8.9 62.9 12.1 S.2 12.9 Nuclear x 72.6 0.7 33.7 19.8 0.0 37.1 6.2 66.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 34.5 19.5 23.7 Coal x S.6 71.7 49.2 70.8 15.1 34.3 33.8 19.2 75.5 90.3 26.1 58.6 0.0 36.9 57.J K.9 Oil, gas, other / 2.8 2.6 12.3 7.1 61.0 0.3 60.0 12.5 14.2 9.7 13.1 32.5 37.1 16.3 15.0 48.5

(») NFF: Nuclear free France

Sources: UNIPEDE/EG (for the EC), OECD (for the USA & Japan) TABLE 7

INCREASE IN ELECTRICITY PRICES IN 2000 (relative percentage movement in nuclear free France/France with nucLear power)

GPE SCENARIO FOR PRICE PER KWh: PRICE PER KWh: INTERNATIONAL DOMESTIC COMPANIES COAL PRICE

LOW 14% 21X

HIGH 28% 362

TABLE 8

ELECTRICAL ENERGY BALANCE (TWh in 1989)

SECTORS CONSUMPTION IN 1989 IMPACT ON CONSUMPTION

ENERGY 56.6 - 23.3 (incl. EURODIF) (20.0)

AGRICULTURE 2.0 0

INDUSTRY 114.0 - 6.2

RAIL TRANSPORT 6.6 0

SERVICES (h.v. + l.v. 73.1 - 1.6 OCCUPATIONAL + l.v. FOR PUBLIC SERVICES)

DOMESTIC USE 93.1 16.3

TOTAL FOR FRANCE 345.2 47.3

EXTERNAL BALANCE 42.2 42.2

PRODUCTION 387.4 89.5 PRICE OF ELECTRICITY IN FRANCE

(industrial use, centimes per kWh at 1990 values) FIGURE 3

Nuclear free France

Actual price & CPE forecast CPE coal price scenarios

25 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Sources: EDF statistical handbook; GPE for future values

PRICE OF ELECTRICITY FOR INDUSTRIAL USE 100 -, As at 1.1.1990, 1000 kW contract, 2,500 hours; centimes per kWh

FIGURE 4

80- NFF: Nuclear Free France 1 60- 1 40- 20- I I 0 I Dk F NL B IRL NFF UK IL FRG GR E I P Source: "Electricity prices in France and EC countries", EDF INDEPENDENCE IN ENERGY SUPPLIES

FIGURE 5 50- FRANCE

40-

30-

20- -' Î NUCLEAR FREE FRANCE 10-

0 1 M 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 Source: "Key Energy Statistics", 1981; GPE (scenario C)

INDEPENDENCE IN ENERGY SUPPLIES (Z)

1988 FIGURE 6

NFF: Nuclear Free France

Jap I NFF E F FRG EC USA UK

Source: "Key Energy Scatiscics", 1981, DGLMP TABLE 9: MICRO-MELODIE MODEL

Part of this study has been completed using the Micro-Mélodie model. This model, which is based upon the Melody model, was entirely developed by the CEA/DSE. Initial tests were conducted in 1986. The main features of the model are as follows:

CHARACTERISTICS Long term model taking account of all aspects of the energy sector. Accurate representation of electricity production.

AREA France

FREQUENCY Annual

PERIOD OF OPERATION 1970 - 2010

OPERATIONAL MODE Dynamic simulation (by forecasting or variants)

NUMBER OF SECTORS Five sectors, including electricity and the nuclear fuel cycle

NUMBER OF ECONOMIC AGENTS Four, namely, households, undertakings, government authorities and foreign countries

NUMBER OF EQUATIONS 150

MAIN (INTERNAL) GDP, employment, inflation, energy consumption & VARIABLES imports, the trade balance, the budget deficit, CALCULATED the energy balance, EDF accounts, emissions of atmospheric pollutants (CO., NO , SO_, etc.)

MAIN (EXTERNAL) Population, the international economic COMMAND VARIABLES environment, technical variables

RECENT Impact of a tax on fossil fuels'(greenhouse APPLICATIONS effect); impact of the 900 MWe PUR programme TABLE 10: MAIM MACROECONOMIC INDICATORS

Two figures are shown for future years, representing the low and high coal price scenarios respectively BREAKDOWN OF GDP Volumes - relative percentage deviations from base figure Year 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Gross Domestic Product 0.0 0.0 -o.* -1.6 -1.3 -1. 3 - -1.5 -1.3 - -1.7 •1, 6 - 2.0 1.6 - - 2.2

Household consumption 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.9 •0.9 -1. 1 - •1.3 •1.2 - -1.9 -1, 4 - 2.2 •1.6 _ 2.i

Investment o.o 0.5 -1.9 "2.* •1.1 •o. '- -0.9 -0.5 - •0.6 -1. 7" 2.1 -1.1 - 1.6

Imports o.o •0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 •o. 1 - 0.2 0.1 - •0,4 o. 1 - 0.8 -O.J - o.a

Exports 0.0 0.0 0.2 •0.2 •0,4 o. 4 - •0.4 0.2 - O.J o. 2 - 0.1 0.2 - ». J

MOVEMENT OF PRICES Relative percentage variations from base figure Year 1970 1975 1900 19SS 1990 1995 2000 200b 2010 Household consumer prices 0.0 •0.4 -0.4 0.9 0.4 0.7-1.0 0.7- 1.5 o.a - i,6 1.0 - 1.9 Producer prices (excluding energy) 0,0 -0.2 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 - 0.3 -O.t - 0.2 -0.1 - 0,1 0.1 - 0.1 Earnings (nominal) o.o -0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 -0.4 - -0.3 -0.5 - -O.« •0.5 - -0.5 -0,5 - -0.6 TOTAL EMPLOYMENT Absolute deviations from base figure (1,000s)

Year 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 21)05 2010

Total employment 0 -4 -25 -75 -96 •91 - -95 -91 - -101 -114 - 15 -110 - 15/

EXTERNAL TRADE BALANCES Values - Absolute deviations in FF billion (current values) Year 1970 1975 1980 19BS 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Energy costs 0 -1 9 58 32 «5 r 51 5« - 72 t>T - 91 AT - IIV Trade balance 0 1 0 -19 -15 -IB - -21 -21 - -Jl •21 - 29 •Jl - 4V

Source: Micro-mélodie model MAIN RESULTS: STRUCTURE OF GDP

(Total volume; deviations from actual movements expressed in points of GDP; GPE low scenario for coal prices)

Imports FIGURE 7

\ Exports

Investments -0.5, o Household consumption i-J C o a. -1.0-

-1.5-

-2.0 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Source: Mélodie model

IMPACT OF A NON-NUCLEAR SCENARIO UPON GDP

GDP by volume; percentage deviations from actual figures

FIGURE 8

GPE coal price scenarios

-2.5 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Source: Mélodie model ENERGY COSTS FF billion at 1989 values 200 FIGURE 9

Nuclear free France

200- France: actual figures 150-

100-

50 1975 1980 1985 1990 Source: Mélodie model & "Key Energy Statistics"

IMPACT OF A NON-NUCLEAR SCENARIO UPON THE TRADE BALANCE FF billion at 1990 values

FIGURE 10

GPE coal price scenario

-30 1970. 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Source: Mélodie model Source: "Key Energy Statistics", 1991, DGEMP TABLE 11: ASSUMPTIONS AND RESULTS FROM FORECAST STUDY FOR 2020 (Reference scenario)

Population GDP Primary energy National electricity (millions) (billion $ 89) consumption demand (TWh) (Mtoe) 1989 2000 2020 1989 2000 2020 1989 2000 2020 1989 2000 2020 North America 275 291 313 5711 7471 12684 2217 2640 3703 3261 4155 6162 Western Europe 457 475 496 5696 7431 12739 1461 1671 2244 2326 3124 4662 South east Asia 538 614 738 3834 5763 11240 778 1022 1524 1271 1913 3192 Former planned economy 1607 1813 2106 1263 1814 3804 2422 3026 4619 2682 3674 6390 countries Developing countries 2395 2982 4159 1988 2992 6125 1150 1784 3606 1375 2355 5182 WORLD 5272 6176 7812 18492 25472 46591 8028 10144 15695 10915 15220 25588 Economie, energy Assumptions: & populacion data Economie growth Energy prices Population

Econometric model for each country

Résulta ; Primary energy consumption (1986 - 2020) Electricity consumption (1988 - 2020) Establishment of Scenarios! Energy context Economic context Technical context Political, social ELECNUC institutional data base context

Nuclear power programmes in each country

Installed capacity Units to be constructed Fuel cycle requirements (1988 - 2020)

FIGURE 13 TABLE 12: NUCLEAR POWER PROGRAMME

REGIONS Nuclear power Installed nuclear generation (TWh/a) capacity (GWe)

1990 2000 2020 1990 2000 2020 L 660 700 840 114 120 131 North America H 660 740 1 300 114 124 206 L 725 780 665 120 125 107 Western Europe H 725 800 1 270 120 128 205 C O o L C N 440 620 43 68 94 South east Asia H 460 840 43 70 128 O C O Developing ^ 65 130 6 10 23 countries H 75 330 6 13 58 L 275 336 510 42 50 76 Former planned economy countries H 275 367 884 42 56 138 L 1 970 2 321 2 765 325 373 431 World total H 1 970 2 442 4 624 325 391 735

B: low scenario H: high scenario

TABLE 13: CARBON DIOXIDE EMISSIONS

Impact of return to Annual CO. emissions (*) luclear power on annual CO2 emissions^

1989 2020 2020 North America 5.9 9.0 -0,41 Western Europe 3,8 5,3 -0,54 South east Asia 2J 3,7 -0,20 Former planned economy 7,4 13,6 -0,34 countries Developing countries 3,1 8,7 -0,18 World 22,3 40,3 -1,67

("•) Reference scenario, billion tonnes of CO. under low nuclear scenario

(**) Return to nuclear power = high nuclear scenario - billion tonnes of CO. under low nuclear scenario BIBLIOGRAPHY [1] Moynet G. , "Development of the cost of nuclear power in France over the past ten years", Revue Générale Nucléaire, 2 (1984), pp 141-153

[2] Charmant A, Devezeaux J.G., Ladoux N., Vielle M., "Nuclear or coal strategy: impact upon the economy and atmospheric pollutants", CEA/DSE document (1990)

[3] DEVEZEAUX J.G., "Nuclear power plants without REP 900 : impact upon tariffs?", Mimeo CEA/DSE (1989) .

[4] Devezeaux J.G., "Nuclear power plants without REP 900: possible reduction in electricity demand?", Mimeo CEA/DSE (December 1989)

[5] Roudergues J.M., "Macroeconomic aspects of the French nuclear programme", Revue Générale Nucléaire, 1 (1988) pp 53 - 55

[6] Charmant A., Devezeaux J.G., Ladoux N., Vielle M., "Energy scenarios and the macroeconomy : an example of integrated modelling applied to French nuclear power plants", CEA Document (1992)

[7] CEA, "World forecasts for nuclear power in 2020 in the context of overall energy supply", CEA/DSE document, (July 1992) [8] CEA, "The world's nuclear power plants", CEA/DSE document (1992) [9] WEC, "Energy for tomorrow's world" Draft Summary, Global Report, World Energy Council (September 1992) DÎNER de l'ANC / CNA LUNCHEON

G. Saint-Pierre - "Canada's Nuclear Industry - A Leader in the Global Market" (SNC-Lavalin Inc., Canada) SNOLAVALIN

NOTE FOR AN ADDRESS BY

GUY SAINT-PIERRE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER SNC^LAVALIN GROUP INC. |>

"CANADA'S NUCLEAR INDUSTRY - A LEADER IN THE GLOBAL MARKET"

Canadian Nuclear Association Canadian Nuclear Society CNA/CNS Annual Conference

Queen Elizabeth Hotel, Montreal June 6,1994 THIS JOINT ANNUAL CONFERENCE OF THE CANADIAN NUCLEAR ASSOCIATION AND THE CANADIAN NUCLEAR SOCIETY PROMISES TO BE ONE OF THE MOST STIMULATING IN MANY YEARS. ITS THEME OF "POWER AND THE FUTURE GENERATION" COMES TO GRIPS WITH SOME OF THE MOMENTOUS ISSUES THAT FACE US ALL IN A FAST-CHANGING AND TURBULENT WORLD.

YOU HAVE ALREADY HEARD A DISCUSSION OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF NUCLEAR POWER. LATER TODAY YOU WILL BE HEARING ABOUT NEW ENVIRONMENTAL REGUUTIONS AND THEIR IMPACT ON THE ENERGY INDUSTRY -- WHICH MAY WELL HAVE SOME GOOD NEWS, FOR A CHANGE, FOR YOUR SECTOR OF IT.

YOU WILL EXPLORE THE EVOLUTION OF NUCLEAR POWER TECHNOLOGY AND TECHNOLOGIES OF TOMORROW AND WILL BE BROUGHT UP TO DATE ON THE GREAT STRIDES MADE RECENTLY, HERE IN CANADA, IN THE LONG-TERM DISPOSAL OF SPENT FUEL. ANOTHER SESSION WILL GIVE A BROAD VIEW OF THE ROLE OF NUCLEAR POWER IN MEETING ENERGY NEEDS IN THE WORLD ECONOMY. THESE ARE LARGE AND IMPORTANT ISSUES, AND I BELIEVE THE DISCUSSIONS AT THIS CONFERENCE WILL POINT TO A BRIGHTER FUTURE FOR THE INDUSTRY.

IT IS NO SECRET TO AIWONE HERE THAT NUCLEAR POWER, WHICH HELD SUCH GREAT PROMISE FOR THE FUTURE WHEN IT WAS INTRODUCED, AND IN THE DECADES THAT FOLLOWED, HAS COME UNDER HEAVY FIRE FROM CRITICS IN RECENT YEARS. YET, IN SPITE OF VOCIFEROUS OPPOSITION, NUCLEAR POWER HAS CONTINUED TO PROVE ITS WORTH.

ONE MIGHT WELL CONSIDER, FOR A MOMENT, WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE CONSEQUENCES, IN ECONOMIC GROWTH, IN LIVING STANDARDS, AND IN AIR POLLUTION, FOR THOSE COUNTRIES AND REGIONS WITHOUT OTHER READILY AVAILABLE POWER SOURCES, HAD THEY NOT HAD NUCLEAR POWER IN THE COURSE OF THE PAST 20 YEARS.

JAPAN, SOUTH KOREA, FRANCE AND THE UNITED STATES COME TO MIND.

HERE IN CANADA, FOR INSTANCE, NUCLEAR GENERATING STATIONS SUPPLY 15 PER CENT OF THE NATION'S ELECTRICITY. IN NEW BRUNSWICK THE PROPORTION REACHES 30 PER CENT, AND IN ONTARIO, 48 PER CENT.

THE ECONOMIC SPIN-OFF FROM THE INDUSTRY IS IMPRESSIVE. IN CANADA ALONE, IT ACCOUNTED IN 1992 FOR 30,000 DIRECT JOBS AND 10,000 ADDITIONAL INDIRECT JOBS. ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY FOUR PRIVATE SECTOR COMPANIES EMPLOYED 8,500 PEOPLE IN SUPPLYING GOODS AND SERVICES TO THE NUCLEAR POWER INDUSTRY.

FROM 1962 TO 1992, THE INDUSTRY'S CONTRIBUTION TO CANADA'S GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT WAS AT LEAST $23 BILLION, WITH A RATIO, IN RECENT YEARS, OF 60 DOMESTIC TO 40 EXPORT BUSINESS. OVER THE NEXT FEW YEARS WE EXPECT THIS RATIO TO CHANGE STRONGLY IN FAVOUR OF EXPORTS.

THE OPPOSITION TO NUCLEAR POWER IN RECENT YEARS HAS BEEN SPARKED LARGELY BY ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVISTS, AND FANNED BY MEDIA THAT WERE NOT ALWAYS AS BALANCED IN THEIR COVERAGE AS THEY MIGHT HAVE BEEN. NOW, WITH CONCERN ABOUT AIR POLLUTION AND THE SO-CALLED GREENHOUSE GASES MOUNTING, AND WITH HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENTS COMING UNDER INCREASING ACTIVIST FIRE, EVEN WHERE WATERPOWER IS ABUNDANT AND CAN BE TAPPED ON REMOTE SITES, NUCLEAR POWER GENERATION IS MERITING A CLOSER LOOK.

AND, ACCORDING TO A RECENT REPORT IN THE ECONOMIST. EVEN IN THOSE YEARS WHEN OPPOSITION WAS STRONGEST, NUCLEAR POWER CONTINUED TO MEET A GROWING SHARE OF THE WORLD'S POWER NEEDS.

FRANCE IS ONE COUNTRY THAT HAS DEPENDED PREDOMINANTLY ON NUCLEAR POWER FOR SOME YEARS. IT IS WORTH POINTING OUT THAT AIR QUALITY TESTS HAVE SHOWN FRANCE TO BE MUCH MORE FREE OF AIR POLLUTION THAN COUNTRIES DEPENDING TO A MUCH GREATER EXTENT ON FOSSIL FUELS FOR POWER GENERATION.

FRANCE SETS ANOTHER GOOD EXAMPLE. AT LEAST, I HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT THE PREDOMINANCE OF NUCLEAR POWER IN THAT COUNTRY CAN BE TRACED TO SOMEONE IN THE NATIONAL POWER UTILITY WHO, BACK IN THE FORTIES, WAS ASTUTE ENOUGH TO FORESEE OPPOSITION, AND SUGGESTED THAT COMMUNITIES THAT ACCEPTED NUCLEAR PLANTS BE OFFERED A TASTE OF HONEY WITH THE MEDICINE ... A NEW BRIDGE, SAY, OR A PARK, OR A SPORTS CENTRE. THIS SWEETENING OF THE PILL DID MUCH TO ENCOURAGE FRENCH COMMUNITIES NOT ONLY TO ACCEPT NUCLEAR PLANTS BUTTO COMPETE WITH OTHCiR COMMUNITIES TO HAVE A NUCLEAR PLANTS WITHIN THEIR BOUNDARIES!!

WELL, ITS A THOUGHT TO BEAR IN MIND.

ALTHOUGH ELECTRICITY DEMAND HAS LEVELLED OFF IN SOME PARTS OF THE INDUSTRIALIZED WORLD, DEMAND IS FAST OUTPACING SUPPLY IN RAPIDLY INDUSTRIALIZING COUNTRIES SUCH AS INDONESIA AND CHINA. NUCLEAR POWER IS BECOMING THE ELECTRICITY SOURCE OF CHOICE IN COUNTRIES THAT HAVE NO OTHER OPTION BUT THE IMPORT OF FOSSIL FUELS. IN SOUTH KOREA, NINE PLANTS ARE NOW OPERATING AND SEVEN ARE UNDER CONSTRUCTION, FOUR USING CANADA'S CANDU TECHNOLOGY. CHINA HAS RECENTLY ACCEPTED CANDU TECHNOLOGY AND NEGOTIATIONS ON NUCLEAR COOPERATION AGREEMENTS ARE NOW UNDER WAY AND SHOULD BE CONCLUDED IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS.

ACCORDING TO NUCLEONICS WEEKLY, CHINA PLANS TO ADD 150,000 MEGAWATTS TO ITS PRODUCTION CAPACITY BY 2050, ALL FROM NUCLEAR SOURCES.

IN THE CANDU REACTOR WE HAVE A PRODUCT THAT, THROUGH THE FORESIGHT OF THE GOVERNMENT AND OF ATOMIC ENERGY OF CANADA LIMITED, THROUGH SUBSEQUENT INTENSIVE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, THROUGH THE COOPERATION OF PUBLIC UTILITIES AND THE PRIVATE SECTOR, IS EMINENTLY MARKETABLE ABROAD.

AROUND THE WORLD CANDU REACTORS HAVE AN ENVIABLE RECORD OF PERFORMANCE.

NOT ONLY DO CANDU PLANTS APPEAR CONSISTENTLY IN THE TOP TWENTY- FIVE, BUT THE POINT LEPREAU POWER STATION IN NEW BRUNSWICK AND WOLSONG 1, IN SOUTH KOREA, HAVE LED THE WORLD IN CAPACITY UTILIZATION RATING.

IF WE SOMETIMES QUESTION WHETHER GOVERNMENT SUPPORT OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT IS JUSTIFIED, I THINK WE HAVE THE ANSWER IN CANDU. AND, LOOKING TO THE FUTURE, IT IS WORTH NOTING THE ADVANCES MADE IN FUSION RESEARCH AT HYDRO-QUEBEC'S RESEARCH ESTABLISHMENT AT VARENNES, WHERE RESEARCHERS HAVE CONTRIBUTED GREATLY TO THE WORLD'S FUSION DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.

ABOVE ALL, IN AN ENVIRONMENTALLY CONSCIOUS WORLD, CANADA IS IN THE LEAD IN SOLVING THE PROBLEM OF LONG-TERM SPENT FUEL DISPOSAL, WHICH HAS REMAINED UNTIL NOW ONE OF THE MAIN DRAWBACKS TO THE NUCLEAR POWER OPTION. WORK AT WHITESHELL, MANITOBA, IS WELL ADVANCED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF SAFE STORAGE METHODS DEEP IN THE ROCK OF THE HIGHLY STABLE CANADIAN SHIELD. THE TECHNOLOGY AND METHODS ARE NOW BEING REVIEWED BY FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL AUTHORITIES. THE HIGH-PERFORMING CANDU REACTOR, COMBINED WITH A METHOD OF SAFE SPENT FUEL STORAGE, ADDS UP TO A CANADIAN-DEVELOPED HIGH TECHNOLOGY OF THE FUTURE -- A TECHNOLOGY THE WORLD WILL INCREASINGLY NEED. IT IS, MOREOVER, THE KIND OF DISTINCTIVE TECHNOLOGY THAT WE NEED TO SURVIVE AND GROW IN WORLD MARKETS.

CANADA CAN BE JUSTLY PROUD OF ITS NUCLEAR ACHIEVEMENT, AND FOR ITS SUCCESS, TO DATE, IN MARKETING ITS PRODUCT AND KNOW-HOW INTERNATIONALLY.

THAT SUCCESS CAN, I SUGGEST, BE SURPASSED IN FUTURE IF AECL AND THE PRIVATE SECTOR INTEGRATE THEIR SALES FORCES EVEN MORE CLOSELY TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE PARTICULAR STRENGTHS OF EACH.

BUT IT WOULD BE A MISTAKE TO BE TOO OPTIMISTIC. THERE ARE TWO CAUTIONARY POINTS TO BEAR IN MIND. SCIENTIFICALLY, WE MAY BE ABLE TO PROVE THAT OUR PRODUCT IS SAFER AND MORE EFFICIENT. BUT, UNFORTUNATELY, FACTS AND FIGURES ARE NOT ENOUGH TO PERSUADE THE GENERAL PUBLIC. IT IS RATHER AS IT IS WITH COUNTRIES.

CANADA MAY BE RATED THE BEST COUNTRY TO LIVE IN BY THE UNITED NATIONS AND OTHER BODIES THAT BASE THEIR CONCLUSIONS ON FACTS ... BUT AS LONG AS ITS OWN CITIZENS DO NOT PERCEIVE IT TO BE SO, AS LONG AS THE CONCEPT OF THE NATION FAILS TO GRIP THEIR EMOTIONS, AS LONG AS THEY LACK CONVICTION THAT WHAT THEY HAVE IS GOOD, EVEN THE BEST, ... WELL, WE HAVE SEEN IN RECENT YEARS TO WHAT A PASS WE CAN COME.

JUST SO, THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY FACES THE DAUNTING AND DIFFICULT TASK OF CHANGING THE PUBLIC PERCEPTION OF ITS TECHNOLOGY.

I CANNOT PROPOSE A SOLUTION. I MERELY STRESS THAT IT IS A PROBLEM YOU MUST ALL CONSIDER.

THE SECOND POINT CANADA'S NUCLEAR INDUSTRY MUST BEAR IN MIND IS THAT WE LIVE IN A FAST-CHANGING WORLD. GOVERNMENTS AND GOVERNMENT UTILITIES ARE LOOKING MORE AND MORE, WORLDWIDE, TO PRIVATE INDUSTRY TO PERFORM FUNCTIONS THAT WERE FORMERLY THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE STATE. SOME OF YOUR COMPETITORS, LIKE WESTINGHOUSE AND OTHER GIANT PRIVATE COMPANIES, ARE ALREADY MOVING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE OPPORTUNITIES OF THE TREND TO "BUILD-OWN-OPERATE AND TRANSFER" PROJECTS. I DO NOT BELIEVE THE CANADIAN INDUSTRY IS FULLY EQUIPPED TO COMPETE AS LONG AS IT FOLLOWS ITS TRADITIONAL PATTERN OF AD HOC CONSORTIUMS OF AECL, PRIVATE ENGINEERING FIRMS AND PRIVATE SUPPLIERS (LIKE CGE), BACKED BY GOVERNMENT FINANCING. THIS IS A CHALLENGE THAT THOSE OF YOU GATHERED HERE MUST SURMOUNT - AND THIS CONFERENCE IS AN EXCELLENT VENUE FOR DISCUSSING HOW IT MIGHT BE DONE.

YOU MAY BE TIRED OF HEARING OF THE GLOBALIZATION OF TRADE, BUT IT IS A FACT WE MUST LIVE WITH. CANADIAN ENTERPRISES MUST, TO SUCCEED IN FUTURE, MOVE FULLY INTO THE GLOBAL MARKET.

THERE, WE MUST BE ABLE TO OFFER BETTER PRODUCTS AND SERVICES THAN OUR COMPETITORS IN EITHER THE DEVELOPED OR DEVELOPING WORLD. IN MANY INSTANCES, IF NOT ALL, THIS MEANS SUPERIOR TECHNOLOGY AND SUPERIOR SKILL IN THE MANAGEMENT OF THAT TECHNOLOGY.

I WOULD VENTURE TO SAY THAT THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY SETS AN EXAMPLE. AS SNC-LAVALIN IS A JOINT PARENT, WITH MONENCO-AGRA, OF CANATOM, I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY LAST YEAR TO VISIT THE WOLSONG SITE IN KOREA, WHERE THREE 700 MEGAWATT CANDU PLANTS ARE NOW UNDER CONSTRUCTION.

I WAS IMPRESSED WITH THE WOLSONG PROJECTS AS AN EXCELLENT EXAMPLE OF CANADIANS - FROM AECL, CANATOM AND NPM - AND KOREANS WORKING IN PARTNERSHIP TO ACHIEVE EXCELLENCE IN THE APPLICATION OF ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY.

SUCH PARTNERSHIP, IN AN EVEN MORE ADVANCED FORM, IS, IT SEEMS TO ME, THE PATTERN FOR THE FUTURE FOR ALL ENTERPRISES THAT WISH TO SURVIVE AND GROW, IN DOMESTIC MARKETS AS MUCH AS ON THE INTERNATIONAL SCENE.

WITH THE FORMATION OF LARGE TRADING BLOCS, WITH THE NEW GATT AGREEMENTS, IT IS NO LONGER ENOUGH SIMPLY TO MARKET OUR PRODUCTS AND SERVICES ABROAD. COMPANIES THAT ARE TO BE SUCCESSFUL MUST BECOME TRULY GLOBAL THEY MUST SET UP OPERATING BASES, NOT JUST MARKETING OFFICES, IN THE COUNTRIES OR REGIONS THEY WISH TO SERVE.

AT THE SAME TIME THEY MUST, I BELIEVE, ENTER INTO TRUE PARTNERSHIPS WITH NATIONALS IN THOSE MARKETS. BUT THIS WILL NOT MEAN SIMPLY EMPLOYING NATIONALS IN LOCAL MANAGEMENT AND THE WORK FORCE.

IT WILL MEAN MAKING SOME OF THOSE NATIONALS PART OF THE EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT OF THEIR HEADQUARTERS OPERATIONS HERE AT HOME. THIS IS NOT MY VIEW ALONE. A LITTLE OVER A YEAR AGO, THE CONFERENCE BOARD ASKED ITS DIRECTORS TO DISCUSS THE ISSUES OF GREATEST CONCERN TO THEM AS BUSINESS LEADERS. MANY SPOKE OF THE PROBLEMS OF COPING WITH CHANGE, WITH MANAGING CHANGE, WITH RESTRUCTURING FOR CHANGE AND RESTRUCTURING THE ECONOMY. BUT ONE THEME OCCURRED AGAIN AND AGAIN.

ONE SAID: HOUR COMPANY WILL HAVE TO GO OUTSIDE CANADA IF IT IS TO GROW. THERE IS NEED TO DEVELOP PEOPLE AND CAPABILITIES OF DOING BUSINESS OUTSIDE OF CANADA."

ANOTHER STRESSED THE NEED TO INCREASE THE INTERNATIONAL COMPETITIVENESS OF CANADIAN COMPANIES. ONE MENTIONED THE GLOBALIZATION OF MANAGEMENT AND ANOTHER SPOKE OF MANAGING DIVERSITY, OF BUILDING A COMPETITIVE WORKFORCE WITH A DIVERSE GROUP OF EMPLOYEES, INCLUDING THE RECRUITING AND TRAINING OF THIRD COUNTRY NATIONALS.

THE LARGEST GROWING MARKETS TODAY ARE IN ASIA. AND, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, I BELIEVE PARTNERSHIPS IN SUCH COUNTRIES ARE THE KEY TO SUCCESS IN THESE MARKETS.

PARTNERSHIPS OFFER MANY ADVANTAGES: OF BEING ON THE SPOT, OF HAVING ACCESS TO REGIONAL FINANCING, OF PROVIDING CANADIAN TECHNOLOGY IN THOSE INDUSTRIES FOR WHICH WE ARE NOTED, SUCH AS POWER, MINING AND METALLURGY, AND OF BRINGING IN CANADIAN EXPERTISE IN THE MANAGEMENT OF LARGE AND COMPLEX PROJECTS. PARTNERSHIPS WITH LOCAL FIRMS ALSO ENABLE THE CANADIAN PARTNER TO COMPETE ON PRICE IN MANY MARKETS.

WHAT CANADIANS HAVE TO OFFER, ABOVE ALL, IS EXCELLENCE IN TECHNOLOGY. HERE, I BELIEVE, THE CANADIAN NUCLEAR INDUSTRY SHOWS THE WAY.

THE GOVERNMENTS FORESIGHT IN DEVELOPING THIS TECHNOLOGY, THROUGH AECL, ITS INVESTMENT IN RESEARCH, THE ROLE OF PUBLIC UTILITIES IN PROVING THE TECHNOLOGY, CONTINUED INVESTMENT IN IMPROVING SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS. AND THE IMAGINATIVE ENTREPRENEURSHIP SHOWN BY PRIVATE COMPANIES IN RECOGNIZING A FORWARD-LOOKING OPPORTUNITY, HAVE ALL COMBINED TO MAKE CANADA'S NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY A WORLD WINNER AND A POTENTIAL WORLD LEADER IN QUANTITY AS WELL AS QUALITY. THIS SUSTAINED EFFORT, EVEN THROUGH THE YEARS WHEN THE NUCLEAR POWER INDUSTRY WAS BATTERED BY VOLUBLE CRITICISM HAS PAID OFF IN OTHER WAYS. THE EXCEPTIONALLY HIGH STANDARDS OF QUALITY AND SAFETY DEMANDED BY THE NATURE OF THE INDUSTRY HAS LED ITS SUPPLIERS, WHETHER OF GOODS OR SERVICES, TO GREATER ATTENTION TO HIGH QUALITY AND THE ACHIEVEMENT OF HIGH STANDARDS APPLICABLE NOT ONLY TO NUCLEAR POWER BUT TO OTHER INDUSTRIES, AND THE GOODS AND SERVICES SUPPLIED TO OTHER CLIENTS.

SO THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY HAS MADE A REAL AND LASTING CONTRIBUTION TO CANADIAN COMPETITIVENESS, AND ON THE VERY POINT WE MUST DEPEND UPON, ABOVE ALL, TO SUCCEED IN THE WORLD MARKETS OF TODAY AND TOMORROW.

THE RECORD OF THIS INDUSTRY SHOWS, THEREFORE, NOT ONLY HOW SUSTAINED INVESTMENT IN TECHNOLOGY CAN CONTRIBUTE TO THE GENERAL ECONOMY, TO THE GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT AND TO EXPORTS, BUT HOW IT CAN ENLARGE THE NATIONAL TECHNICAL COMPETENCE BEYOND ITS OWN RELATIVELY NARROW SPHERE.

I UNDERSTAND THAT TOWARDS THE CLOSE OF THIS CONFERENCE, YOU WILL BE HAVING A "MEET THE PRESS" SESSION, WHICH SHOULD ENCOURAGE SOME LIVELY DEBATE AND, LET US HOPE, GET ACROSS SOME STRONG MESSAGES. I KNOW THAT SOME OF YOU WILL BE STRESSING SUCH POINTS AS THE ENVIRONMENTAL ADVANTAGES OF NUCLEAR POWER GENERATION VERSUS FOSSIL FUEL GENERATION. OTHERS WILL DWELL ON THE GREAT PROGRESS MADE IN A SAFE SOLUTION TO SPENT FUEL STORAGE AT WHITESHELL, AND NO DOUBT THE TECHNOLOGY'S EXPORT POTENTIAL

I AM SURE SOME OF YOU WILL SPEAK OF ECONOMIC SPIN-OFFS AND THE STIMULATION OF CANADIAN EXPORTS. AND I HOPE SOME OF YOU WILL MAKE THE POINT OF THE WIDER TECHNOLOGICAL SPIN-OFF FROM ONE HIGH TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY ... WHEN THAT INDUSTRY IS BACKED BY THE CONCERTED COOPERATION OF GOVERNMENT, INDUSTRY AND THE EDUCATIONAL COMMUNITY.

IN THE CASE OF CANDU, FAITH IN A TECHNOLOGY OF THE FUTURE, AND DETERMINED PURSUIT OF ITS PERFECTION, HAS ALREADY PAID DIVIDENDS.

NOW, WITH POWER DEMAND RISING IN MANY PARTS OF THE WORLD, I VENTURE TO SAY THAT ALL THAT EFFORT, ALL THAT CONCENTRATION ON EXCELLENCE IN EVERY WAY, IS ABOUT TO COME INTO ITS OWN AND REAP GREATER BENEFITS IN THE YEARS TO COME. DARE I SUGGEST THAT SOMEONE ALSO MAKE THE POINT THAT SIMILAR INVESTMENTS OF TIME, TALENT, FUNDS AND, YES, FAITH, IN OTHER ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES MIGHT DO THE SAME?

I WISH YOU ALL A VERY GOOD CONFERENCE - AND, SUCCESSFUL AS YOUR UNITED ENDEAVOURS HAVE BEEN SO FAR, DOUBLE OR TRIPLE THAT SUCCESS IN THE FUTURE.

8 Canadian Nuclear Association Conference Panel presentation - Montreal, 1994

Environmental Assessment: Industry Perspective

Tim Meadley, Uranium Saskatchewan /

In recent years, society has become increasingly concerned about protecting the environment. In many ways this has been good for the nuclear industry because, as we all know, the use of nuclear power offers a number of environmental benefits for society, when compared to other sources that are readily available for the generation of electricity. Society's increased concern with environmental matters has lead to the development of the environmental assessment process. This process is designed to allow the advantages and disadvantages of proposed projects to be evaluated and then compared to determine if, by allowing the project to proceed, society will receive a net benefit.

The Saskatchewan uranium mining industry has had considerable experience with the environmental assessment process, particularly recently when a number of proposed projects have been subject to panel reviews. This experience has identified a number of concerns with the assessment process as it is currently practiced. In the future, it is to be expected that a large number of government decisions, including those relating to approval of nuclear facilities, will be subject to panel hearings. By articulating the concerns that have been identified during our experience, it is to be hoped that they will be addressed by those responsible for the process. As most of you will be aware, the federal government is currently developing a new environmental assessment process. It is our hope that the new process will be designed to rectify many of the problems that exist with the current process. The uranium mining industry has recognised that there is a need for the evaluation of its projects and acknowledges that, in theory at least, the environmental assessment process is a reasonable approach to performing such evaluations. It follows, therefore, that the uranium mining companies support the concept of environmental assessment. It is to be hoped that other sectors of the nuclear industry will share the position that we have taken.

However, concept and practice are not always the same, and it must be said that the uranium mining industry has some serious reservations about the way in which the environmental assessment process is currently working. Uranium mining is subject to regulation by both the federal and provincial governments;

File: [SPEECHES] CM-9406 Environmental Assessment: Industry Perspective Tim Meadley - page 2 a situation that the industry has found to be entirely unsatisfactory, and something that we hope will not be continued indefinitely. However, the reality of the current situation is that proposed uranium mining operations can be subject to environmental assessment by two levels of government. Fortunately, the Saskatchewan and the federal governments have been able to operate a joint assessment process for a number of proposed uranium mining operations that were recently reviewed and are currently under review.

I shall limit my remarks today to matters that are relevant to the federal assessment process, since this is the process that is of general concern to the nuclear industry. The criticisms that I make are intended to be constructive.

Process

As a result of decisions of the Federal Court of Appeal regarding the Rafferty Dam in Saskatchewan and the Oldman River Dam in Alberta, the 1984 Environmental Assessment and Review Guidelines Order has been interpreted as requiring that essentially every government decision be subject to the environmental assessment process.

As some of you will be aware, the assessment process allows for the creation of an exclusion list, i.e. a list of those decisions that are deemed not to have any environmental impact. The rumour is that at least one government department decided that this meant they had to make a list of all decisions that could be made by department staff without having to initiate an environmental impact assessment. An item that was included on the list was trips to the washroom. This was rather unfortunate from industry's point of view, because I am sure that, had such decisions been subject to detailed review, we would, today, have an environmental assessment system that would reach decisions much more quickly!

Among other things, the Environmental Assessment and Review Guidelines Order specifies that assessment must be carried out on any project where a federal board or agency has a regulatory approval function. One consequence of this has been a sudden interest in mining projects in the middle of the Prairies by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans!

Each time the federal government has to make a decision relating to a project, there can be an environmental assessment. Clearly such a situation is tailor-made for those who oppose development in general, and the nuclear industry in particular. The more times that a project has to be reviewed, the more chances there are that a project will be stopped.

Industry opponents have been quick to take advantage of the situation. This was well illustrated during the first round of hearings conducted by the Joint Federal/Provincial Panel on Uranium Mining Developments in Northern Saskatchewan. These hearings, which were only intended to assist the panel in developing guidelines for what should be included in

File: [SPEECHES] CM-9406 Environmental Assessment: Industry Perspective Tim Meadley - page 3 the environmental impact statements for the Cigar Lake and McArthur River Projects, ended up as a forum for attacks on the whole nuclear industry and pleas for the industry to be charged with solving all the social problems of the province.

The environmental assessment process has developed into a major burden for Canadian industry. Something of which our competitors are well aware. At the risk of boring those of you who have heard the story before, I must tell you about a set of cuff links that I own. While attending the Uranium Institute's annual symposium in London two years ago, I was given a set of cuff links by an Australian. He gave them to me in recognition of the fact that, in his opinion, the Canadian environmental assessment process is the best thing that ever happened to the Australian uranium industry!

Canada's strength is its resources, and the more difficult it is for us to utilize those resources the weaker the country becomes.

Problems

There are a number of problems with the current environmental assessment process, at least from an industry point of view. Here are some suggestions for changes to the process that will address the major problems that have been encountered by the uranium mining industry: (1) The environmental assessment process for individual projects should be separated from policy issues. One way in which this could be done would be to have generic assessments in which the principle behind certain types of projects could be reviewed. Then it would be possible to limit the review of a specific project to the technical aspects of that project.

(2) There should be full-time staff from which panel members are drawn. This might be seen as weakening the assessment process, since one of its current strengths is that the panel members are drawn from a broad cross section of society. However, if taken in conjunction with the previous suggestion, full time staff could be used for the review of specific projects, while policy issues would still be reviewed by panels drawn from outside the review process. The use of full time staff on review panels would help to ensure that the public hearings focus on the panel's mandate. (3) There needs to be better referral criteria to determine which projects require full scale assessments, including public hearings. With every decision of a federal government agency potentially subject to the assessment process, the system must be such that projects are not subjected to repeated public review. Once a decision is made to allow a project to proceed,

File: [SPEECHES] ciu-9406 Environmental Assessment: Industry Perspective Tim Meadley - page 4 the numerous approvals required for the various stages of the project should be exempted from the assessment process.

(4) Either the government or project opponents should participate in the assessment process, but not both. Currently, the process favours project opponents. There are four participants in the assessment process: the panel, the proponent, the government, and the opponents. The opponents are a particular segment of the public, and the public interest is represented by the government. As a result, opponents get two inputs to the process - this seems to bias things in their favour. A proponent should be subject to only one challenge from the "public interest."

(5) An effort needs to be made to reduce the financial burden that the assessment process places on proponents. While the uranium mining industry views the not insignificant cost of assembling information for the review process as a legitimate cost of doing business, the validity of other costs, such as intervenor funding and fees charged by regulatory agencies when they act as consultants to a panel, represent an unreasonable burden for industry.

It should be noted that it is not only industry that must bear the cost of the assessment process. There is a public cost too. I would expect that the public is prepared to give financial support to the work of assessment panels, but is it willing to spend money on dealing with the same issues time and time again?

(6) Intervenor funding should be controlled. If project opponents are to participate in the assessment process and receive funding to facilitate their participation, then there needs to be assurances that the funding is directed at a critical review of the project. During the recent review of a uranium mining project, a well know industry opponent admitted that he had spent all of the funding that he had received on investigating the connection between uranium mining and nuclear weapons. This subject was outside of the panel's mandate and the intervenors submission was rejected by the panel chair. As far as I am aware, no attempt was made to recover the money from the individual in question, nor was any action taken against him for misuse of the funds.

In connection with this, I would note that there seems to be little critical evaluation made of the submissions of intervenors. They are certainly not subject to the same sort of evaluation that is applied to the proponents' submissions. Nor are the credentials of intervenors assessed.

(7) A definite time frame should be established for the assessment process. Currently it is of indeterminant length. This creates an uncertainty over and above the uncertainty associated with the possibility of the project not being approved. When submitting a project for review a proponent should have some understanding of the time that the review will

File: (SPEECHES) cni-9406 Environmental Assessment: Industry Perspective Tim Meadley • page 5 take. Such an approach is essential if society wants to encourage development. After all, development is progress, and I have not seen any signs that society as a whole is prepared to stop progressing!

I do not think it was ever intended that the assessment process should stand in the way of development or that it should be a tool for industry opponents. As I said at the beginning, the intention behind the assessment process is a reasonable one: society needs to know that its resources are being used legitimately.

One reason for slowness of the review process is the problem of finding qualified persons to sit on the panels. This would be cured by having panels composed of full-time staff, as previously suggested.

Summary In summary, the uranium mining industry supports the concept of environmental assessment as a reasonable way of ensuring that the proposed activities results in a net benefit for society. However, the current environmental assessment process has a number of problems that the industry feels should be addressed.

The revision of the federal assessment process that is currently underway provides an excellent opportunity for the problems to be rectified. We hope that the difficulties that have been experienced in the review of proposed uranium mining projects for northern Saskatchewan will serve as an indication to the government of what needs to be changed.

The environmental assessment process does not need to be a hurdle that the industry has to struggle to get over. There is no good reason why it should not be a smooth path, with turn-offs for projects that do not measure up to the standards.

File: [SPEECHES) ciu-9406 /•' 1-••"<(, ()(' f\ '•- Environmental Regulations and their Effects on the Nuclear Regulator Notes for an address at the Canadian Nuclear Association Annual Meeting Montreal, Quebec June 6, 1994

J.G. McManus Ob Secretary General Atomic Energy Control Board

AECB and the environment

It has long been a basic tenet of radiological protection that if one protects the human organism, then generally speaking the environment will also be protected. In this vein, the environment may be said to be a beneficiary of the regulatory regime designed to limit worker and public radiation exposure in this country. Perhaps this was one of the reasons why the environment was rarely mentioned overtly as a concern for the Atomic Energy Control Board in the first few decades of the Board's existence.

This changed in 1989 when the AECB adopted a mission statement that explicitly speaks of the environment. The AECB's mission is: to ensure that the use of nuclear energy in Canada does not pose any undue risk to health, safety, security or the environment.

The mission statement reflects the fact that by the mid-80s, the AECB had become extensively involved in direct environmental protection activities, both radiological and "conventional", as an adjunct to its basic function of protecting people. It was felt that the mission statement should reflect this involvement, which arose largely due to the conduct of joint regulatory efforts with the provinces. The concepts of consultation, cooperation, collaboration and non-duplication are most clearly seen at work in the environmental aspects of the federal-provincial regulation of nuclear projects.

The EARP Guidelines Order

Adding further challenge to the situation is the federal Environmental Assessment and Review Process Guidelines Order. The Guidelines Order came into effect in June 1984. For a considerable time, its implications for the nuclear regulatory field were not clear, and it was not a primary factor in the AECB's decision-making process. This ended in 1991 when decisions in a number of key court actions effectively raised the authority of the Guidelines Order to that of a statute. Since then, the Guidelines Order has had a major influence on the way the Board conducts its business.

...21 -2-

Simply put, a significant number of projects to be authorized by the AECB first have to be environmentally screened and the degree of public concern about them assessed, with a view to whether or not they should be referred to the Minister of the Environment for public review by a panel. If the project is referred, the AECB approval or licensing decision must await the outcome of the public review, as well as any position the government may take on the proposal as a result.

The AECB has no choice in the matter. Though it retains the ultimate responsibility for authorizing nuclear works, it has an obligation to ensure the requirements of the Guidelines Order are carried out as part of its decision-making process. We recognize that this presents resource and timing problems for our licensees and proponents of new projects, particularly if referral for public review by a panel is deemed to be warranted. This can introduce a considerable delay to the approval process, not to mention uncertainty for the proponent, since he does not know up-front whether the additional public review period will in fact be required. It is clearly a further factor driving the need for federal-provincial cooperation so that delay is not compounded by multiple processes of a similar nature.

Cooperation with the provinces

Examples of collaboration between the federal and provincial governments in the nuclear field are very evident in Saskatchewan. Regulation of the nuclear industry there is currently being carried out by the AECB and provincial agencies under their respective statutes, the objectives of which are very similar, i.e. protection of health, safety and the environment. Coordination of regulatory activities is expedited by a Joint Regulatory Process which brings together representatives of the agencies involved when a specific project is presented for approval. The process promotes a collaborative approach, which is intended to ensure that the interests of all the agencies are taken into account prior to approval being granted.

Since all aspects of the nuclear industry have been declared to be federal works, the ultimate responsibility for regulation is federal. This means that application of provincial statutes must be done through the federal statutes, usually by incorporation of parts of provincial legislation or by making compliance with provincial laws of general application a condition of any approval, as long as they are not in conflict with federal laws.

To formalize matters, there is a Memorandum of Understanding between the AECB and Saskatchewan Environment and Resource Management which commits the parties to cooperate in all areas of mutual interest, and provides a mechanism for specifying administrative arrangements to implement such cooperation. One of the major reasons for this accord document was to clarify roles and identify and agree on which activities would be carried out by each agency.

We regulators are far from perfect in the area of reduction of overlap, but we have had some

...3/ -3- successes. It is worth noting that of the six mining projects now under consideration by the AECB, all six have been subject to the AECB-provincial Joint Regulatory Process, and five of the six have been or will be reviewed by the Joint Federal-Provincial Panel on Uranium Mining in Northern Saskatchewan.

We are currently conducting a further public consultation in Saskatchewan arising from a recent court decision on the application of the Guidelines Order, and this has been done very much as a joint federal-provincial activity.

The situation is that Cogema Resources has applied to the AECB for permission to proceed with the next stage of development at its Guff Lake mining facility, but the proposal is different than that considered by the Joint Federal-Provincial Panel, which last year recommended the original project be allowed to proceed subject to certain conditions.

The significant changes in the proposal mean that the AECB has had to consider the application as a new one, and therefore subject to environmental screening and assessment of public concern under the Guidelines Order. Interestingly, the revised proposal will have significantly less effect on the environment than the original that the Panel approved, but it cannot be automatically assumed that public concern will be lessened. This has to be assessed independently.

Saskatchewan Environment and Resource Management also has reason to review Cogema's revised proposal pursuant to the province's Environmental Assessment Act. Accordingly, to avoid duplication, the AECB and the provincial department collaborated on the news release, newspaper advertising, and mailing and distribution of study documents. We will also be exchanging responses received from those submitting comments. In essence, the federal, AECB assessment is being conducted in parallel with Saskatchewan's. The province has been most appreciative of our cooperation on this, a;jo there are indications of strong industry support for such efforts.

Collaboration in nuclear matters is not confined to Saskatchewan. At the present time, a proposal by Hydro-Quebec to store spent fuel in dry canisters at the Gentilly-2 Nuclear Generating Station is in the preliminary stages of an environmental assessment emphasizing public input. The AECB has been working with the Federal Environmental Assessment Review Office and the Quebec office for public hearings on the environment (BAPE - Bureau d'audiences publiques sur l'environnement) to ensure that the requirements of each agency are met with no duplication or unnecessary delay.

Future developments

The federal Guidelines Order will ultimately be replaced by the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and its regulations. The Act was passed in June 1992 but not proclaimed,

...AI -4- pending the regulations which are now on the verge of being finalized. It is the AECB's view that the Act and regulations, without amendments, is sound legislation that will not drastically affect the way we have been operating as dictated by the Guidelines Order. There is a possibility that the process could be somewhat more onerous than at present, but we expect that this can be worked out.

In any case, it is clear the formal assessment of environmental impacts and public concern will remain a fundamental component of the nuclear regulatory process. The challenge will be to ensure that this important social responsibility is discharged effectively and, just as much to the point, efficiently. This will call for extensive cooperation among all the players, including federal and provincial agencies and the proponents - the applicants and licensees.

One thing that would greatly enhance the AECB's abilities in the environmental protection area is a replacement for the nearly 50-year old Atomic Energy Control Act. About a year ago, in the context of a regulatory review, our previous Minister announced in Calgary that a new Act was being considered.

There have been marked changes since 1946 in the extent and nature of nuclear activities in Canada and abroad, and in society's expectations of government regulation. The mandate of the AECB has evolved from one chiefly concerned with security, to one which also focuses forcefully on the control of the health, safety and environmental consequences of nuclear pursuits.

The deficiencies of the Atomic Energy Control Act have been noted by the courts, the media, special interest groups, and parliamentary committees. They include the lack of formal powers for AECB inspectors, an inadequate ceiling of $10,000 on fines, no stated provision for public hearings, lack of explicit power to recover the costs of regulation from the users, and inability to hold polluters financially accountable for their actions or for the AECB to initiate remedial action and recover the costs.

In today's environment, where consultation and public involvement in decision-making is the rule, not the exception, the AECB is handicapped by its statutory underpinnings which reflect the needs of another age.

As contemplated, the new Act would directly reference the environment as an AECB concern, something the old statute does not. It would empower the AECB to ensure environmental protection through such things as guaranteed financial assurances from licensees for decommissioning, eliminating the liability to the taxpayer that currently exists in situations where a licensee becomes insolvent, or ceases to be a viable entity that may be pursued for redress.

The nuclear regulator would also be able to recover from responsible parties the costs of

...5/ -5- decontamination and other remedial measures, and to take or order remedial action in hazardous situations. The new Act would also provide an umbrella under which the AECB could cooperate with the provinces not only in spirit but legally, by adopting or prescribing by reference provincial laws, for example, and by paying provincial agencies for work done on the Board's behalf.

Finally, the new Act would make legal provision for public hearings, which in the environmental protection area have become the fundamental vehicle for ensuring consultation and public participation in decision-making. In this regard it is significant that in the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act there is a provision (s.43) that would allow for substitution of the nuclear regulator's hearing process for a review panel as defined in the Act. This is clearly intended to avoid duplication and delay.

Appearance of the new nuclear safety Act on the Parliamentary agenda will provide an opportunity for input on how the industry will be regulated for perhaps the next half-century. In conjunction with the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, the new statute would establish a human and environmental protection regime that should fully meet the expectations of all Canadians.

00O00 TEE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS:

CURRENT PROCESS, EXPECTED REFORMS, AND IMPLICATIONS FOR THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY.

PRESENTED TO

THE CNA/CNS ANNUAL CONFERENCE JUNE 6, 1994 MONTREAL, QUEBEC

by Robert G. Connelly iJ Vice-President Policy and Regulatory Affairs Federal Environmental Assessment Review Office 1. Introduction

Je vous remercie de m'avoir invité à partager avec vous l'état de la situation concernant le processus canadien d'évaluation environnementale.

It is timely that we pause in June 1994 to consider the current environmental assessment system and to look ahead to the advent of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA). June seems to be a benchmark month in the evolution of the Canadian environmental assessment process.

It was in June 1984 that the federal Cabinet adopted the Environmental Assessment and Review Process Guidelines Order, or EARP, which outlines the current environmental assessment process for projects. In June 1990, the federal government introduced its environmental assessment reform package, featuring a policy assessment process, a participant funding program, and Bill C-78 - the draft CEAA. June 1992 saw CEAA receive Royal Assent. And now, in June 1994, we continue to work toward CEAA's proclamation and subsequent implementation. 2. The Impetus For Reform

The underlying impetus behind the drive to reform the Canadian environmental assessment (EA) process is the growing understanding - and concern - among Canadians about the relationship between our economic activities and our natural environment.

With increased awareness has come a greater appreciation of EA as an essential tool to effectively integrate economic and environmental imperatives. over the past few years, about seventy court cases on EARP have heightened the need to reform the current system. These court decisions reflect shifting public values about the environment.

In addition, it has been clear for some time that modernization of the federal EA process is required in order to implement a truly workable system that is more efficient, effective, harmonized, and fair.

The government's announcements on the need to implement EA reform are a major impetus for action. The government signalled its determination to promptly implement CEAA in its September 1993 "Creating Opportunity" (the Red Book) and related documents. The Red Book also revealed the government's intention to "green" CEAA1s regulations, demonstrated its interest in creating a CRTC- style model for the Agency, and indicated its intent to legislate intervenor funding. The recent Speech from the Throne confirmed the government commitment to proclaim CEAA. 3. The Present EA Process EARP. the Environmental Assessment and Review Process Guidelines Order, is the current federal process governing EAs of projects. The nuclear industry has had considerable experience with EARP and the earlier federal EA procedures. Examples of proposals subject to public review under these procedures include Lepreau I and II, uranium mining and refining in Ontario and Saskatchewan, aspects of low level waste management at Port Hope, and the concept of high level waste disposal. Focusing on public reviews under EARP may reinforce the misconception that EARP is synonymous with " FEARO" panels. In fact, less than .1% of projects screened under the process are referred to the Minister of Environment for public review. This translates into 4 or 5 referrals per year. The fact behind these figures is that EARP is primarily a self-assessment system administered by federal authorities such as the Atomic Energy Control Board (AECB). A few words about the history of EARP will help us understand the current situation. In 1984, Cabinet approved the EARP Guidelines Order which codified the EA procedures that had evolved informally under earlier Cabinet directives dating back to 1974. At that time, politicians and EA administrators alike assumed that the key element of EARP was "guideline"; that is, EARP represented a set of preferred EA procedures which federal authorities were encouraged, but not compelled, to follow. The courts, however, have offered different, and not entirely consistent, interpretations of EARP.

EARP has been subject to misinterpretations that have prompted some seventy court cases across Canada including two Supreme Court decisions. It is fair to say that a number of key court rulings have modified EARP significantly and have created considerable uncertainty about what is required under the process. The Raffertv decision held that EARP is a law of general application, created a "superadded duty" that departments must respect before making decisions about proposals, and stipulated that assessments triggered by section 35(2) of the Fisheries Act should examine fully the potential destruction of fish habitat. The Qldman decisions directed departments to consider the environmental effects of a proposal on all areas of federal jurisdiction. The Oldman Supreme Court's ruling set aside the Rafferty judgment relating to the Fisheries Act and expanded the scope of EARP dramatically by requiring that it be applied whenever a department is about to exercise an "affirmative regulatory duty" (ARD). Many questions remain about what exactly ARD means. Similarly, the Supreme Court ruling in the Grand Council of the crée v the NEB case directed the NEB to consider environmental effects of power production as well as the transmission facilities required to export electricity. Interestingly enough, there have been virtually no court cases contesting the application of EARP in the nuclear industry. This would suggest that the industry and the AECB are doing something right in managing EAs. EARP applies to all "proposals" which, in the words of the Order "include any initiative, undertaking or activity for that the Government of Canada has a decision-making responsibility". Proposals which would produce "no adverse effects" can be excluded from the process as can those undertaken, in certain circumstances, by Crown Corporations. However, all other federal proposals are subject to EARP. These include proposals undertaken by any federal department; those likely to have an environmental effect on an area related to the exercise of federal affirmative regulatory responsibility; those for that the federal government makes a financial commitment; or development on lands or territories administered by the federal government. It is important to note, however, that this does not mean that every decision of the government of Canada is subject to EARP. Initiating departments must screen proposals into one of four categories, specifically where a proposal: • has impacts that are not significant, and can be mitigated; the proposal can proceed with needed mitigation. • would cause significant, adverse, unmitigable impacts; it must therefore be either modified or ended. • requires further study; then an IEE (initial environmental evaluation) is needed before a decision can be made. • could have potentially significant environmental impacts or cause public concern; then a panel referral is required. Panels are independent advisory bodies, comprised of three or more non-government members, supported by a secretariat usually provided by FEARO staff. Strict rules governing conflict of interest apply to the selection of panel members, and every effort is made to ensure that panels contain a broad range of relevant expertise and perspectives. Where proposals entail decision-making at both levels of government, joint federal/provincial panels are commonly established. Terms of reference, developed by FEARO in consultation with the initiating department (and with the affected province where appropriate), are issued by the Minister of Environment to the panel to outline the scope of the review.. After consultation with the public, the panel provides guidelines to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Following completion of the EIS, and its review by the panel, public hearings are held to allow all interested persons and agencies to express their views on the proposal and its impacts. After the hearings, the panel submits its report to the Minister of the Environment and to the minister of the initiating department. In the case of a federal/provincial panel, the report will, of course, go to the provincial government as well. The panel's report is released to the public by the Ministers, usually within a few days. The Government's response normally follows somewhat later. 4. The CEAA and its Regulatory Framework (a) The CEAA The reform of EARP began in 1987 with the release of a discussion paper. Bill C-78, the product of this reform exercise, was tabled in the House of Commons in June 1990. CEAA was subjected to extensive scrutiny during its two-year legislative review. For example, over 100 witnesses made presentations on the draft law. This detailed review produced numerous amendments to the Bill, including entrenching the concept of sustainable development, eliminating unnecessary discretionary powers, and strengthening the Act's federal- provincial co-operative provisions. As noted earlier, the Act will replace EARP which has prompted numerous court challenges, high costs, and dissatisfaction because of its somewhat vague and evolving requirements. CEAA is designed to redress these problems. It features greater clarity and a number of efficiency provisions, such as federal- provincial harmonization agreements, class screening, comprehensive study, and mediation. Several examples of CEAA1s features demonstrate how the Act will clarify the process and make it more effective. CEAA makes it very clear that federal authorities who initiate, fund, grant land or issue specific regulatory approvals for certain projects will ensure that these proposals undergo EAs before they proceed. CEAA clarifies the EA process by supplying more than twenty detailed definitions of basic terms in order to minimize misinterpretations of the Act. Similarly, CEAA carefully specifies which projects are subject to the Act. The Act applies to two classes of projects: physical works and physical activities, only those physical works that are not on by the Exclusion List are covered by the Act. Similarly, only those physical activities, such as low level flying, on the Inclusion List are subject to the Act. These provisions will help reduce the uncertainty experienced under EARP. The Act stipulates what kind of an EA is required. Almost all projects subject to the Act would be screened by federal authorities. This process is similar to screening under EARP except for two changes. First, the Act eliminates much of the guesswork in the screening process. Second, it could streamline screenings of similar projects under the Class Screening mechanism. This mechanism could alleviate a real bottleneck under

The Act's Comprehensive study List (CSL) identifies the major projects a federal authority will subject to a more extensive EA. The CSL will yield a number of benefits, including the possibility of a federal authority conducting a full EA without incurring the time and expense of a panel review, and increased certainty for proponents, investors, and EA administrators. CEAA will permit more focused, flexible, and consistent public reviews. More focused because the Act provides greater detail on the panel review process. More flexible because CEAA introduces a mediation option to expedite and resolve EA concerns involving a limited number of issues and participants. More consistent because CEAA ensures that the Minister of Environment is involved in all decisions to refer a project to a review panel. This procedure will safeguard against ill-advised panel referrals. Disagreements and misunderstandings about the scope of assessments are cause for continued concern under EARP. The Act will help eliminate confusion in this area. It clearly identifies the factors to be considered in conducting an environmental assessment. CEAA can also work to reduce confusion since it allows for the development of a regulation to entrench the principle of "one-project, one-assessment". The Act will assist decision-makers by spelling out their options after an EA is completed. CEAA indicates that a project can proceed once a decision-maker concludes that it is not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects. Similarly, a project can proceed if a decision-maker determines that it is likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects, but they can be justified in the circumstances. A project cannot proceed if a decision-maker determines it has significant adverse environmental effects that can neither be mitigated nor justified. The Act encourages streamlined EAs by enabling federal authorities to delegate screenings and comprehensive studies to provinces as well as by promoting joint review panels. CEAA recognizes that the federal and provincial governments share responsibility for the environment. It authorizes the Minister of the Environment to sign harmonization agreements with the provinces to minimize delays and duplication. In 1992, the Canadian Council of Ministers of Environment outlined the framework that has been adopted for harmonization agreements under CEAA. The federal and provincial governments have made progress in establishing such agreements. For example, the Canada-Alberta Agreement for Environmental Assessment Cooperation was signed in August 1993, and it is already in use. Work is under way on similar accords with most of the other provinces. A number of harmonization agreements could well be finalized and implemented soon. CEAA contains additional provisions to eliminate duplication in conducting assessments. For instance, the Act empowers the Minister of Environment to approve the substitution of another federal, or land claims, process for a panel review where she is satisfied that the alternate process meets CEAA's basic requirements. Discussions continue with land claims authorities and certain federal regulators on how to achieve substitution. There is reason to believe that our recent work with the NEB could culminate in a MOU permitting its process to replace panel reviews under CEAA. (b) CEAA's Regulatory Framework The four regulations needed to implement CEAA are the Law, Exclusion, Inclusion and Comprehensive Study Lists. The first three help shape CEAA1s scope, while the CSL identifies the major projects which will be assessed more fully. There have been extensive consultations with parliamentarians, departments, industry, provinces, environmentalists, aboriginals, and the general public on these regulations over the past 30 months. The Regulatory Advisory Committee (RAC) has played a key role in refining the four regulations. RAC is a multi-stakeholder Committee with representatives from industry - including the Canadian Nuclear Association, the Mining Association of Canada, and the Canadian Electrical Association - as well as provinces, aboriginal groups and environmental organizations. The proposed regulations were also prepublished in the Canada Gazette for further public scrutiny during the fall and winter of 1993. The draft regulations are now being reviewed in light of the comments received from all the parties consulted. It is expected that other CEAA regulations will be developed on a priority basis following consultations and discussions. There is broad support by industry and provinces for a regulation to ensure that there is only one federal assessment for any given project. A " one project - one assessment11 regulation is seen as another way to increase the efficiency of federal EAs. In addition, just last week RAC stressed that there is a pressing need for a procedural guideline spelling out time lines for EAs. It is highly likely that such a guideline will be developed in the very near future in order to meet this need. 5. Implications for the Nuclear Industry There are a number of implications for the nuclear industry flowing from the advent of CEAA and its key regulations. First, the Act will promote more efficient EAs in the nuclear industry. Class screening, federal-provincial harmonization agreements, comprehensive study, and mediation are specific CEAA provisions that can reduce EA costs and.delays. For example, mediation could offer a glimmer of hope for projects similar to the recent Rabbit Lake uranium mining proposal. It may well be advisable to refer such projects, involving a small number of issues and concerned groups, to mediation under CEAA for a highly focused and expedited environmental assessment. Second, CEAA will supply greater clarity for EAs of federal projects. These clarifications will generate greater legal certainty which will reduce the need to rely on the courts for guidance on EA matters. Greater clarity will permit EA practitioners and administrators to conduct and review assessments more quickly. Third, the Act will require us to adjust to its new terms and procedures. Thus, for example, there will no longer be an automatic referral list. There are a number of ways to ease the conversion to CEAA. It is important that there will be enough time between the Act's proclamation and its effective date to let all of us get our bearings and to make the required adjustments. It is very probable that there will be a "period of grace" between proclamation and implementation. similarly, there is a need for federal authorities to apply CEAA in a consistent manner. CEAA certainly promotes this. In addition, FEARO is now revising a draft final guide for federal authorities that will clearly spell out how they can discharge their responsibilities under CEAA in a timely and cost-effective manner. It is recognized that education on CEAA is required to ensure that we all understand how to work with the Act. CEAA educational sessions for stakeholders and departments are planned for the transition period. 6. Conclusion The increased efficiency and certainty that CEAA will provide are likely to yield benefits even in the short term. These improvements will allow for less expensive, and more timely, EAs. More generally, CEAA will enable us to integrate environmental concerns into federal decision-making. This will make project planning in the nuclear industry more predictable and manageable. Je vous remercie et serais heureux de répondre à vos questions sur la Loi canadienne sur l'évaluation environnementale ou sur les principaux règlements qui baliseront son application.

- 30 - SESSION 3 - Nouvelles CANDU / CANDU Update

Président de session/Chain D.S. Lawson (AECL CANDU, Canada)

Hong J.B. - "CANDU in Korea, Present and Future" (Korea Electric Power Corporation, Korea)

R. Boucher - "June 1994, Update on Cernavoda" (AECL CANDU, Romania)

B.K. Kakaria - "CANDU Market Prospects" (AECL CANDU, Canada)

M. Poissonnet - "Uranium Industry Update" (COGEMA Resources Inc., Canada)

D.R. Anderson - "Going Global - Growing Small Businesses" (Canatom Inc., Canada) !••> /

CANDU IN KOREA, PRESENT AND FUHJRE

- Operating Performance of Wolsong 1 and Construction of Wolsong 2, 3 4 4-

Hong, Joo Bo

Director Wolsong Nuclear Power Division Korea Electric Power Corporation "A/r^l

1. INTRODUCTION

It is my great pleasure and honor to be with you at this Annual Conference of the Canadian Nuclear Association and Canadian Nuclear Society (CNA/CNS) which is one of the most important events in the international nuclear scene, and to present this paper on CANDU in Korea, especially to the leaders of the nuclear industry in Canada.

As you are well aware, during the past 40 years, the nuclear industry has continued its growth, sometimes speedily and sometimes steadily. Today we see that 17 percent of the world's electricity generation cones from nuclear energy.

Nuclear power is becoming more significant than ever, specifically in the areas of resource utilization, environmental conservation, energy economics, manpower development, mitigation of traffic congestion and so on, in the global dimension.

Nuclear energy has established its specific significance in Korea since 1978 when the first nuclear unit, Kori 1 started commercial operation. National policy to diversify its energy resource as the critical means of economic assurance has kept the country to build nuclear stations which counts up to 9 in operation. Last year these units, representing 28 percent of a total installed capacity of 27,153 MWe, supplied 40.3 percent of total generation based on the average capacity factor of 87.2 percent. This national nuclear program played a major role in stable electricity supply and environment protection.

We are proud of the fact, while most of the western hemisphere remains idle in developing nuclear power, that the Korean nuclear sector has been holding the nuclear candle high and keeping it afire by constructing seven more nuclear power reactors. Thus, the Korean nuclear industry is devoted to the continued development of nuclear technology which may have otherwise been soaewhat rusty. 2. OPERATING PERFORMANCE OF WOLSONG 1

Wolsong 1 is a CANDU-6 unit, constructed by the Korea Electric Power Corporation (KEPCO) near Kyong-Ju city on the South East coast of the Republic of Korea. As you may know, Wolsong 1 is the sole CANDU unit among 9 operating nuclear units in Korea. This plant has been operating for more than 10 years after it was brought into the grid in April 1983.

Table 1. OPERATING NPPs IN KOREA

Unit Output Gross Reactor Commercial Operation (MW) Type in month and year

KORI 1 587 MW PWR Apr. 1978 2 650 MW PWR Jul. 1983 3 950 MW PWR Sep. 1985 4 950 MW PWR Apr. 1986

WOLSONG 1 679 MW PHWR Apr. 1983

YOUNG KWANG 1 950 MW PWR Aug. 1986 2 950 MW PWR Jun. 1987

ULCHIN 1 950 MW PWR Sep. 1988 2 950 MW PWR Sep. 1989

Table 2. HIGHLIGHT OF WOLSONG (WS) 1, 2, 3 & 4

JAN. 1975 WS 1 CONTRACT SIGNED BETWEEN KEPCO AND MAY. 1977 EXCAVATION WORK STARTED NOV. 1979 REACTOR INSTALLATION COMPLETED APR. 1983 COMMERCIAL OPERATION DEC. 1990 WS 2 CONTRACT FOR A/E & NSSS SIGNED BETWEEN KEPCO 4 AECL OCT. 1991 EXCAVATION WORK STARTED SEP. 1992 WS 3&4 CONTRACT FOR A/E AND NSSS SIGNED BETWEEN KEPCO AND AEa AUG. 1993 EXCAVATION WORK STARTED APR. 1994 WS 2 REACTOR INSTALLATION COMPLETED 2.1 PLANT MANAGEMENT PHILOSOPHY

First of all, I would like to brief you about our basic philosophy on operating and maintaining the plant.

Figure 1 illustrates the Structure of Plant Management Philosophy in Wolsong.

GOALS: o Assure Safety and Reliability o Achieve High Capacity Factor

• • • A A A A A A

STRATEGY: o 0CTF Operation (One Cycle Trouble Free Operation) o +1 0 h M (Plus one, Operation and Maintenance)

A A A A A A

FOUNDATION: o Traditional Virtues - Diligence and Devotion o Excellent CANDU Features and Facilities

Figure 1 STRUCTURE OF PLANT MANAGEMENT PHILOSOPHY

2.1.1 GOALS

The ultimate goal of plant management is to assure high reliability and safety as well as to improve the plant capacity factor. Nuclear safety and reliability is the primary road to public acceptance and to successful development of nuclear power. Once we are confident with plant safety and reliability, we pursue higher capacity factors, which will maintain nuclear power as a more economical and competitive energy resource. 2.1.2 STRATEGIES

In order to maintain a high capacity factor we have mobilized the so-called One-cycle-trouble-free or OCTF program. The OCTF operation means continuous operation without any trip or shutdown of the plant between planned outages. OCTF program includes KEPCO-wide mind rehabilitation as well as physical activities. Wolsong-KEPCO is continuing a campaign with a slogan '+1, 0 & M'. That is to say, Plus One percent of an endeavor in Operation and Maintenance is needed for effective and excellent performance.

2.1.3 FOUNDATIONS

CANDU reactors build on an enviable record of high capacity factor, safety and operator radiation exposure. A record unequalled by any other reactor type. The fundamental characteristics of the CANDU-PHW reactor have determined the evolution of the reactor systems comprising the use of , heavy water moderator, pressure tubes and on-power refuelling. Traditional Korean virtues of diligence and devotion from the Oriental culture, contribute to the achievement of management goals. Strong support has been provided by a motivated and competent staff. In addition, on-power refuelling, the unique feature of CANDU, has also contributed to this success. Excellent CANDU features and traditional Korean virtues contributed to acconplishing sound managerial objectives.

2.2 INITIAL DIFFICULTIES

At the beginning, we had a lot of difficulties. It was a challenge to overcome the early stage problems arising from the lack of operating experience and qualified manpower. Furthermore, the plant was quite different from other domestic PWR units. However, both plant management and operators have made great efforts to overcome these initial difficulties. These early challenges stimulated the plant staff to develop their own procedures well reflecting CANDU characteristics.

2.3 PLANT PERFORMANCE RECORDS

Today, Wolsong 1 shows outstanding records. In 1993, the plant achieved a capacity factor of 100.81 percent and reached the top rank among nuclear power plants worldwide. Similar records were achieved twice during the period April 1985 to March 1986 and October 1991 to September 1992. Life-time capacity factor is as high as 85 percent, which is far higher than other Korean nuclear units. The past achievements of Wolsong 1 were an important factor that helped KEPCO to decide on the construction of Wolsong 2, 3 and 4. I believe that the high performance of Wolsong 1 and the successful conoissioning of folGong 2, 3 and A now under construction will guarantee the necessity to continue nuclear development in Korea. Table 3. PLANT PERFORMANCE OF WOLSONG 1 (from Nuclear Engineering Int. )

UNITS PERIOD CAPACITY FACTOR RANK WORLDWIDE

85. 04. 01 - 86. 03. 31 98.40 * 1 ( 277 ) 89. 04. 01 - 90. 03. 31 99.13 * 2 ( 341 ) 91. 07. 01 - 92. 06. 30 98.30 * 2 ( 356 ) 91. 10. 01 - 92. 09. 30 98.00 * 1 ( 360 ) 93. 01. 01 - 93. 12. 31 100.81 * 1 ( 421 )

Table 4. SUMMARY OF WOLSONG 1

REACTOR CAPACITY 2,156 MWth GENERATOR CAPACITY 678.7 MWe Gross (628.7 MWe Net) REACTOR TYPE CANDU PHWR TURBINE TYPE TANDEM COMPOUND MAIN STEAM PRESS / TEMP 45.48 BAR / 258 t; COOLANT PRESS / TEMP 98.8 BAR / 310 t PLANT NET EFFICIENCY 29.2» FUEL NA.JRAL URANIUM(0.7* U-235) MODERATOR AND COOLANT HEAVY WATER DESIGN BASIS EARTHQUAKE 0.2g

2.4 NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SAFETY

Nuclear energy facilities in Korea have been operated very safely, and their safety levels are assessed to satisfy international standards. However, It is ny conviction that the safety of operating NPPs can be further inproved by upgrading the quality of operating personnel through training and education, and by strengthening the nuclear safety culture. 2.4.1 SAFETY FEATURES OF CANDU

Basically, I believe, the CANDU plant is a very safe facility. The CANDU safety philosophy is based on the defence in depth against release of radioactivity: the first line of defence being the fuel matrix itself, the second the sheathing, the third the coolant system envelope, with the final defence being the containment. The internal shielding of the containment is arranged to provide operating personnel with access to the fuelling machines and other equipment for maintenance.

2.4.2 AUDITS

Wo 1 song NPP is subject to many safety audits from many organizations such as national and international regulatory authorities. At the request of the Korean Government, an international team of 12 nuclear safety experts, assembled and co-ordinated by the International Atonic Energy Agency (IAEA), visited Wolsong from 24 July to 11 August 1989. The official report identified that folsong had a highly qualified and dedicated management, who were aware of their responsibilities for ensuring the health and safety of plant personnel and the general public.

Safety inspection of the reactor and related facilities are carried out during each annual planned outage by the Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety (KINS) which is the government regulatory agency assigned by the Korea Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST). These audits have provided an excellent opportunity to look into safety aspects of plant activities and operating procedures and have been very effective in identifying potential problem areas.

2. 5 EXAMPLES TO IMPROVE SAFETY AND RELIABILITY

In order to assure plant safety and reliability, the management of KEPCO-Wolsong emphasizes the following job activities:

- plant improvement, - quality control program, - high quality maintenance crew.

I would like to present some examples of how KEPCO has inproved plant safety and reliability. Efforts to assure safety were made through the improvement of equipment such as the modification of the steam generators and exciter panels, backfitting of main steam pipirg system and the component cooling systea. 2.5.1 MODIFICATION OF STEAM GENERATOR

The most important equipment improvement has been the modification of steam generators. During plant commissioning, the moisture contents «ere higher than the design value of 0,25 percent. Accordingly, we installed an additional separator in the steam generators, which lowered the moisture content down to 0.16 percent at full power operation.

2.5.2 MODIFICATION OF RSWS AND RCWS Another example is the modification of the raw service water system (RSWS) and recirculated cooling water system (RCWS). Both are of single loop design. When we wanted to do any maintenance or inspection activities, we had to seek an alternative heat sink. As a result, this led to long maintenance periods and inadequate cooling. Therefore, we modified these systems to have dual loops, allowing easy inspection and maintenance while operating the systems. We believe these dual loops are very effective against the rupture of piping and heat exchangers, which is detrimental to reactor cooling and plant safety.

2.5.3 QUALITY CONTROL

We believe that quality control is very important to safety and reliability. Therefore, Wo1song management emphasizes quality control in operation and maintenance activities: all the operating and maintenance crews and support staff have been trained to think 'quality first'. We have also established a quality verification program for those systems which are critical to plant safety. Repair jobs on these systems and components are performed and verified in strict accordance with this program. High quality of crew is very important for high quality maintenance. Therefore, we repeat and repeat the training and education in their specialty and on advanced technology. We have a crew qualification program which exposes them to advanced skills and to deepen their specialty. Only qualified crews are allowed to perform maintenance activities of selected systems and equipment. In addition, every year we hold a quality rally, where excellence slogans and quality-best crews are selected and prizes awarded.

2.6 HIGH CAPACITY FACTOR

In order to maintain a high capacity factor, extensive and effective maintenance programs are conducted, such as:

- preventive maintenance, - management of unplanned outage causes. 2.6.1 PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE

It oust be pointed that emphasis was put in order to increase the availability. The first key is plant maintenance. Timely corrective maintenance has been the central policy to stable operations. As the plant ages, this concept is required to be changed to preventive and predictive maintr lance systems. The best maintenance is, as you know, not to correct the problem but to prevent a problem from occurring. Our goal is that preventive actions shall be as high as 70 percent of all maintenance activities. In order to meet this goal, we have developed a systematic and integrated preventive maintenance program.

2.6.2 MANAGEMENT OF UNPLANNED OUTAGE CAUSES

The second key is the integral management of potential trip causes. The selected elements are equipment failures, natural phenomena and human errors, in that order. Specific measures are applied to each category. Similar practices of other plants provide a good reference for this program. Plant statistics have identified that unscheduled plant shutdowns or trips result largely from equipment failures, external events, and human error. As the ultimate goal of maintenance is continuous operation without any trips, weak and sensitive points of each system are listed, where failure or degradation may lead to system malfunction and even a plant trip. Based on this list, special programs are developed to monitor and inspect these points.

2.7 SPECIAL PLANT MAINTENANCE PROBLEMS

Major concerns of plant maintenance at fol song 1 can be categorized into the following groups;

- pressure tube integrity, - delayed neutron tube maintenance, - inadequate supply of spare parts and system components.

2.7.1 PRESSURE TUBE INTEGRITY

One of the most importart problems we face is how to keep the Integrity of pressure tubes. At the beginning of plant startup, there was an intensive discussion whether the plant should have its own inspection and maintenance tools/technology in order to check the integrity of pressure tubes. The conclusion was to lease tools and technicians in close cooperation with Canadian entities. This would lower the economic burden while maintaining technical compatibility with other overseas CANDU units. However, inspection and maintenance tools such as CIGAR (Channel Inspection Gauging and Apparatus for the Reactor), SLAR (Spacer Location and Repositioning), and SFCR (Single Fuel Channel Replacement) had not always been in our hands when we absolutely needed them. During this year's planned outage, 14 channels were inspected using CIGAR and 3 of them were replaced using SFCR. Domestic capability at present is not sufficient for us to develop the technology and to perform inspection activities by ourselves. The necessity of development will be studied in the preparation of Wolsong 2, 3 and 4. Thus, the manufacturers including AECL are requested to take a more positive attitude for technology development and support in this area.

I believe that cooperative efforts in the field of inspection and replacement tools as well as a shared data base would help greatly to remove the problems of pressure tubes.

2.7.2 DELAYED NEUTRON TUBE MAINTENANCE

The maintenance of Delayed Neutron tubes i6 another important problem. DN tubes are a part of the failed fuel location system. Adequate maintainability is insufficient because of the location of these tubes and coaiplicated surroundings in a high radiation area. The tubes are installed at such an elevated height that it is not easy to install the lighting fixture for them. Furthermore, there exist many crossings and interferences among and between tubes. In other words, 380 tubes are installed with disorder, which makes the tube inspection and repair very difficult. In addition, very high radiation does not allow maintenance crews to work with sufficient time, which lowers the job quality. I expect this problem will be solved in future construction projects.

2.7.3 SPARE PARTS AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT

We still need external technical support and appropriate levels of spare parts inventory for equipment which is on the verge of production termination or already obsolete. I present you a few examples.

Firstly, the plant control computer. The plant computer is specially designed for CANDU plant control. It has little compatibility with other commercial products. Computer maintenance cannot be considered without overseas participation. It IF almost impossible to modify or update the computing system without the designer and manufacturer's advice. To make things Wurse, several spare parts are rare and hard to purchase. Secondly, aging fuelling machines. The ram ball screw, a critical component in the fuelling machines, has a life time limitation. Therefore, every year, the standby machine has to take the place of an operating machine. Consequently, maintenance crews receive an internal radiation dose during the disasseujling and reassembling job.

2.7.4 INFORMATION EXCHANGE

I think these concerns will be more or less the case for all CANDU plants. So closer relationships between CANDU owners and information exchange through the COG network will bring mutual benefits.

2.8 PLANT OPERATION

In order to prevent unplanned outages and to maintain high availability, plant operations should be carried out in a highly professional manner. Transition from a five to a six shift crew was carried out in 1992 to satisfy all requirements of operations daytime work, training, absence and recovery. Also, all Safety Supervisors, who are expected to provide support, particularly under emergency conditions, have the same qualifications as the Shift Supervisors. In the operating section, 16 staff have Reactor Operator Licences and 21 staff have Senior Reactor Operator Licences.

3. CONSTRUCTION OF WOLSONG 2, 3 4 4

As I mentioned before, 10 yearB of success at Wolsong 1 encouraged KEPCO to introduce three more CANDU plants, Wolsong 2, 3 and 4. These plants are all 700 Mle PHWR. Wolsong 2 is a replication of Wolsong 1, subject to updated codes and standards and other specified design changes. The Vol song 3 h 4 units will be duplicates of Wolsong 2, subject to some further design changes which AECL will retrofit to unit 2 if the schedule permits. Therefore, one integrated project will be used for all three units. Wolsong 2, 3 & 4 will have a nominal gross output of 713.2 Mfe each and a nominal net output of 663 MWe each. The design changes/improveaents represent changes due to evolution of the CANDU-6 design. 3.1 CONTRACT

AECL is supplying A/E and NSSS services and KH1C is supplying the turbine generator system for all units. The Architect Engineering and Related Services Contract for Wolsong 2 between KEPCO and AECL was signed 28 December 1990. The Contract for Wolsong 3 and 4 was signed 18 September 1992. This scope of work includes the design of the Balance of Plant (BOP),and procurement services for BOP equipment in Canada. KEPCO issued the authorization to proceed with Wolsong 2 to AECL 10 January 1991 and the scheduled date of completion is 30 June 1997. KEPCO issued the authorization to proceed with Wolsong 3 & 4 to AECL 30 September 1992. The scheduled completion date for Wolsong 3 is June 1998, and for Wolsong 4 is June 1999. AECL is the lead engineering and supply prime contractor, KEPCO and AECL have developed a strong nul ti-company team of Canadian and Korean subcontractors to execute the Wolsong 2, 3 & 4 project. This project is realized under KEPCO leadership. The construction is performed by Hyundai Co. for unit 2, and Daewoo Co. for units 3 and 4. The construction site is adjacent to unit 1.

Figure 2 illustrates the Wolsong Project Contract Organization.

KEPCO

AECL KHIC Hyundai W2 Daewoo W3&4 Prime Contractor T/G Contract Construction Construction Design & Supply Contractor Contractor

Figure 2 WOLSONG PROJECT - CONTRACT ORGANIZATION

3.2 NSSS PROJECT ORGANIZATION

One integrated project organization manages the NSSS scope on Wolsong 2, 3*4. AECL is retaining its key personnel from Wolsong 2 in all functions in order to utilize the experience gained on Wolsong 2 and provide the greatest benefit to KEPCO. The organization to implement the Wolsong 2, 3 k 4 A/E Services consists generally of the Wolsong 2 organization, supplemented to accommodate the additional requirements of units 3 and 4. This group reports to the Engineering Management group located in Korea. Simultaneously, the Wolsong 2 team in Seoul will be strengthened to handle the extra workload in integrating unit 3 and 4 in the present scope of work. Site preparation and design work is reduced by utilizing this experience. KEPCO expects a better plant will result due to enhanced licensing requirements, equipment and updated technology on the project.

3.3 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER

A Technology Transfer Agreement was signed on 18 September 1992 for NSSS Design and NSSS Component Design between KEPCO, KHIC (Korea Heavy Industries and Construction Co., Ltd.) and AECL. Under this agreement AECL agrees to transfer to the other parties, technologies relating to CANDU 6 NSSS design. This separate contract between KEPCO and AECL for the purpose of technology transfer will promote a degree of self reliance. The Korean portion will be 58 percent on unit 2 and 69 percent on unit's 3 and 4. These are a much higher index compared to the 14 percent on Wolsong 1.

3.4 WOLSONG 2, 3 AND 4 STATUS AND SCHEDULE

For Wolsong 2, first concrete was poured on September 25, 1992, and the calandria was installed on April 14, 1994. The total construction progress is now showing 46.1 percent. After fuel loading in August 1996, the unit will be completed in June 1997. The time spent from first concrete to completion is 57 months, five months shorter than the schedule of Wolsong 1. For Wolsong 3, first concrete was poured on March 17, 1994, the calandria will be installed in August 1995, and fuel loading will begin in November 1997. Commissioning will start in June 1998. Wolsong 4 will start R/B Base Slab in July 1994 and will finish construction in June 1999. The construction period of Wolsong 3 is 52 months, another five months of reduction compared to unit 2.

In 1999 KEPCO will have 4 CANDU totalling 2779 MWe bearing a considerable portion of our overall nuclear power capacity.

Table 5. WOLSONG 2 PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS

'89. 04. 24 : Established Long Tern Power Development Prograa by MTI&E '89. 05. 02 : Established Construction Master Plan '90. 01. 25 : Issued ITB for A/E '90. 03. 30 Issued ITB for NSSS and T/G '90. 12. 28 Signed A/E and NSSS Contract with AECL '91. 03. 20 Signed T/G Contract with KHIC '91. 07. 08 Obtained Site Approval from MOST '91. 07. 25 Signed Construction Contract with HDEC '91. 09. 11 Submitted Application for Construction Permit to MOST '91. 10. 09 Started Excavation with LWA from MOST '91. 10. 23 Held Ground-Breaking Ceremony '92. 08. 28 Obtained Construction Permit from MOST '92. 09. 25 Started the First Concrete Pouring '92. 12. 07 Signed Fuel Contract with Zircatec '92. 12. 16 Completed R/B Perimeter Wall '93. 05. 14 Started R/B Basement Wall '93. 06. 11 Started T/B Structural Steel Erection '93. 07. 11 Completed T/B Raft Foundation '93. 09. 26 Completed R/B Slab at El.100 '93. 10. 10 Arrived Calandria on the Spot '93. 10. 22 Completed R/B Dome '94. 03. 20 Started S/B Structural Steel Erection '94. 04. 14 Installed Calandria in R/B '96. 10. Scheduled Fuel Load '97. 06 Scheduled Commercial Operation

Table 6. WOLSONG 3 4 4 PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS

'91. 10. 25 : Established Long Term Power Development Program by MTI4E '91. 11. 22 : Established Construction Master Plan '91. 12. 21 : Issued ITB for A/E, NSSS and T/G '92. 02. 20 : Signed Construction Contract With Daewoo '92. 09. 18 : Signed A/E, NSSS Contract and Technical Agreement with AECL '92. 09. 18 : Signed T/G Contract with KHIC '92. 09. 18 : Started Site Grading '92. 10. 13 : Started Trench Excavation for Mapping (IS 4) '92. 10. 09 : Agreement on the Environnent Report Issued by EPA '92. 12. 31 : Submitted Application for Construction Permit to MOST '93. 01. 13 •' Started Trench Excavation for Mapping (IS 3) '93. 03. 31 : Obtained Site Approval from MOST '93. 04. 20 : Started Additional Geological Survey '93. 04. 28 : Obtained Construction Plan Permit from MTI&E '93. 08. 11 : Obtained LWA from MOST '93. 08. 12 : Started Excavation '94. 01. 12 Started R/B Sub-Base (WS 3) '94. 01. 23 Completed R/B Sub-Base (WS 3) '94. 02. 26 Obtained Construction Permit from MOST '94. 03. 17 Started the First Concrete Pouring (WS 3) '94. 04. 13 Completed R/B Base Slab (WS 3) '94. 05. 25 Started R/B Slipforn Assembly (WS 3) '95. 09. Scheduled Calandria Installation (WS 3) '97. U. Scheduled Fuel Load (WS 3) '98. 06 Scheduled Commercial Operation (WS 3) '99. 06 Scheduled Commercial Operation (WS 4)

Table 7. PROGRESS OF WOLSONG 2, 3 AND 4

( AS OF APR. 30 1994 )

UNIT #2 # 3, 4 TOTAL

PROGRESS 46.17 * 13.77 * 24.57*

4. FUTURE OF CANDU IN KOREA

4.1 LONG-TERM DEVELOPMENT PLAN

The average growth rate of electricity demand has been more than 10 percent per year for the last 5 years, because elevation of the national income level results in increasing the consumption of electricity which is clean and convenient to use. It is forecast that a stable increase will continue until 2006 at a rate of 6.4 percent per year. In order to meet this demand, KEPCO needs to install additional capacity of 26000 MWe. Additional 14 new nuclear plants including 7 plants under construction will be responsible for 12800 MWe. In 2006, the number of nuclear plants will be 23, generating over 20000 MWe, occupying 37.7 percent of total installation, thus to be supplying 47.5 percent of total electricity to the nation at that time. Among the new nuclear plants, there will be 4 CANDU reactors including 3 currently being constructed at Wolsong site. An additional new CANDU unit is planned to be completed in 2006. According to the government's long-ter» development plan for electricity generation, the peak power demand of Korea is expected to increase to 45.330 MWe in 2006. In 1S93. NPPs in Korea generated 58,138 GWh, which was 40.3 percent of the total power generation. The fraction of nuclear power in total power plant capacity should be maintained around 40 percent beyond 2001.

Between the years 2007 to 2031, an additional 18,900 MWe of nuclear power facilities will be constructed and capacity of 7,617 MWe will be decommissioned.

Table 8. COMPOSITION RATIO BY NUCLEAR POWER SOURCE IN CAPACITY

(MWe,*)

1983 1987 1990 1993 1996 2001 2006

NUCLEAR 1,916 5,716 7,616 7,616 9,616 14,716 20.416 SOURCE (14.6) (30.0) (36.2) (27.5) (29.3) (32.7) (37.7)

TOTAL 13,115 19,021 21,021 27,654 32,751 45.061 54,098 (100) (100) (100) (100) (100) (100) (100)

Table 9. COMPOSITION RATIO BY NUCLEAR POWER SOURCE IN GENERATION

(GWh,*)

1983 1987 1990 1993 1996 2001 2006

NUCLEAR 8,965 39,314 52,887 58,138 67,101 102.181 144,959 SOURCE (18.3) (53.2) (49.1) (40.3) (36.5) (41.2) (47.5)

TOTAL 48,850 73,992 107,671 144,437 184.020 247,614 305,009 (100) (100) (100) (100) (100) (100) (100) 4.2 STRATEGY FOR REACTOR TYPES

The basis for Korea's reactor-type strategy is that Pressurized Water Reactors (PWR's) and Pressurized Heavy-Water Reactors (PHWR's) will serve as the main and complementary reactor type, respectively, for the short and intermediate tern, while Liquid Metal Reactors (LMR's) will be developed for the long term. Until the year 2006, Korea's nain reactor type will be the PWR, while the PHWR will play a role as the complementary reactor type. After 2007, the main and complementary reactor types will be the next-generation PWR and the advanced PHWR, respectively, whose safety and economics will be significantly improved. By the year 2006, three new PWR nuclear sites and one PHWR nuclear site will be required. The new PHWR site will be adjacent to the present fol song site. In addition, one LMR site will be required by 2025. Technology related to the reuse of nuclear sites after plant life-time and decommissioning will be investigated from the long-term viewpoints.

5. CONCLUSION

On-power refuelling and the flexible power management are the strong points of CANDU over other reactor types, and will be the driving force to maintain very high capacity factors of CANDU in the future as in the past. Excellent performance of various control mechanisms at low pressure and temperature, and early detection and removal of failed fuels are only two examples of CANDU unique safety features. Based on these features, CANDU is expected to be competitive with other reactor types. In brief, Wolsong is a well designed and well operated plant, having good Management and experienced staff to ensure safe and reliable operation, comparing favourably with other nuclear power plants. The good record of the past makes it an obligation to do even better in the future.

The nuclear industry in Korea will undoubtedly grow along with the country's long term development plan. But the current conditions call for more attention to barriers such as public acceptance and site selection as many other countries are confronted. There are various public opinions on nuclear energy.

It is clear that for the nuciear industry it is hard to survive this era without full acceptance and support of the public. Public acceptance and cooperation are prerequisites for future development and utilization of nuclear energy. Acceptance can be obtained through continuous increases in safety, economy and technology standards which will secure the reliability of the nuclear industry. To enhance public acceptance of nuclear facilities, accumulation of excellent safety records of operating nuclear facilities and the enhancement of safety related technology are required. Strengthened international co-operation and continuing public support are essential ingredients to meet these expectations. In that sense, I am sure this conference will contribute to make the CANDU system the most safe and reliable in the world. I hope that this arena may be harnessed to activate the nuclear renaissance and our gathering will be a positive step forward for our industry.

Dae Dan He Gam Sa Hap Ni Da.

Merci beaucoup.

Thank you very auch. CNÀ/CNS ANNUAL CONFERENCE JUNE 5-8, 1994 MONTREAL, CANADA JUNE 1994, UPDATE ON CERNAVODA

By Roland Boucher AAC Project Director A.E.C.L.-CANDU ROMANIA Introduction

The Cernavoda Project is under construction in Romania on a site located on the Danube River, some 160 kilometers from Bucharest. The site is made of 5 CANDU-6 units, with a rated capacity of 700 MWe each. The station is owned by the Roma- nian state-owned utility, RENEL. The installed capacity of the Romanian grid is approximately 22 000 MWe comprising a mix of hydraulic and fossil-fuelled units. Project History

Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (A.E.C.L.) started discussions with Romania in I960's. In October 1977, the Canadian and Romanian governments signed a bilat- eral safeguards agreement. Following a joint A.E.C.L.-Romanian study on the CAN- DU-6, A.E.C.L. signed contracts covering Licensing, Engineering, and Procurement Services. Subsequently, ANSALDO S.p.A. of Italy was contracted for a role similar to A.E.C.L. for the balance-of-the-plant (B.O.P.) and General Electric- USA for the supply of the turbine-generator and associated technical assistance. Construction at the Cernavoda site started in 1991 under Romanian management. From 1981 to 1989, slow progress was registered on all five units of the station. In December 1989, the Ceaucescu government was overthrown. The new government declared Cernavoda NPP a national priority and requested the International Atomic Energy Agency (I.A.E.A.) to perform a Pre-Operational Safety review (PRE-OSART) on the project. The review covered Project Management, Quality Assurance, Con- struction Works, Radiation Protection and Emergency Planning and Preparedness. The review team concluded that the project had suffered from the constraint of central management which stifled personal initiatives and from the imposition by the government of an unrealistic project schedule with the result that staff be- came de motivated. it also strongly suggested that considerations should be given to asking a utility or a company v/ith experience with this type of project to manage the whole project. This review prompted the signature in August 1991 of a Project Management Con- tract (P.M.C.) covering the Cernavoda NPP between RENEL and A.E.C.L.-ANSALDO Con- sortium (A.A.C.) which contract became effective only in August 1992. This con- tract gave A.A.C as an agent of RENEL, the management over the engineering, con- struction, commissioning, initial operation and training of operation staff of Unit 1, remedial work required on Unit 2 and preservation work on Units 3, 4 and 5. Funding were made available from Canada through the Export Development Corpora- tion (E.D.C.), from Italy through MedioCredito and from the Romanian government. Project Schedule As of June 1994, the project schedule shows a criticality date on February 1995 with a connection to the national grid the following month. This is equivalent to nine months ahead to the contractual date but three months away from the ob- jective specified on the day of the signature of the P.M.C. . A mobilisation clause restricted the works to be performed by A.A.C. until the contract became effective.

Construction Progress Status On September 1991, the date of take-over of the project by A.A.C., the construc- tion progress was estimated at 55 %. By May 1992, it achieved more than 61 % and as of May 1994, the overall construction progress hit 93,4 %. The progress was impeded by a large amount of reworks to be done in many areas, mainly in piping. In addition, decisions had to be taken in early 1993 to change the supplier of the stand-by diesel generators which required the complete rework of that area. Civil works consist mainly in finishing works in the different buildings. Most of the workshops and laboratories have been transferred to operation. Final painting in the reactor building is on going on walls and ceilings as well as on structural steel. Thermal insulation is well on schedule with more than 24 000 square meters completed out of a projected 44 000 for an overall progress of 55 ï. .-.i-buiit documentation and final quality surveillance activities on piping systems has slowed progress. Present forecast is to have all of the thermal in- sulation done by the end of September. The same applies to pipe, equipment and supports painting where progress is over 34 % with a projected completion by Oc- tober. The main discharge channel to the Danube is nearly completed. The under- ground tunnel no. 2 is completed and ready to receive the discharged water. Some works still have to be terminated at the Danube River outlet but all of those works shall be finished by the end of July. The other major activities still to be completed include the physical security system already underway and the waste management facility which progress is 60 % completed. Mechanical works are well underway. The main activities are concentrated in fi- nalising supports and HVAC equipment installation. Work is progressing well in the D20 upgrader tower, on the chillers and on the stand-by diesel generators, some complementary works are going on to allow all lifting equipment to be ac- cepted by the regulatory authority (I.S.C.I.R.) . More than 60 % have already been accepted. The erection of the turbine-generator is well advanced and the only major activities left consist of the replacement of the generator retaining rings and main leads scheduled for October. In the nuclear area, the installa- tion of the Spent Fuel Transfer Canal is completed. Work on the calandria insu- lation cabinet is going on as well as the lapping of the fuel channel end fit- tings which is already completed on face C. Nearly all mechanical equipment are installed, 996 out of 1012. In the electrical, control and instrumentation area, the process and control tubing is more than 99 % completed. Cable pulling is in the same situation with more than 97 % completed for a total of 1 712 302 meters. On the other hand, terminations are 93 % completed for a total of 219 000 in the NSP area and 128 000 in the BOP area. The total devices calibrated up to now is 15 197 out of 17 266. Work continues on the lighting system and communication system. A large part of activities left to do is related to loop and logic pre-commissioning ac- tivities to support turnover to commissioning Turnover of systems to commissioning is well under way with more than 282 turn- overs submitted. This activity progresses at a rate of more than 30 a month. Systems already turned over include most of the electrical systems, the cooling water systems (condensate cooling water, raw service water and recirculating cooling water), the instrument air system, the main heat transport system and most of its auxiliaries, the same for the moderator system and some parts of the fuel handling system.

Engineering-Quality Surveillance Status The activities in this area consist mainly in supporting the construction works and specially in the closure of site dispositions and non-conformances. The work related to completion and acceptance of documentation to allow design registra- tion of systems and authorisation for operation by the regulatory authority (ISCIR) represents without any doubt the last big effort on the part of engineer- ing in cooperation with the 15 sub-contractors involved in the works. This cov- ers such areas as original design registration, procurement QA documentation, QA documentation verification, construction work as-built drawings, site disposi- tions, non-confon ances, design changed notices and piping route card verifica- tion, pressure tt it data and boundaries definition, as-built stress analysis verification, histui-y dockets and pipe books. An other area of work is related to the homologation of Romanian supplies. Out of a total of 10 075 items, 9 939 are already homologated. The ones that are left will be homologated during the different phases of the commissioning. No major difficulty is expected. A very small number of items had to be replaced by imported goods. The only major one was the replacement of the 2 x 8.8 MWe stand-by diesel generators which were re- placed by 4 x 4.4 MWe supplied by GAIC of Canada.

Cominissioning-Operation Status The Quality Assurance Program has been approved by the Licensing Regulatory Authority (CNCAN). In the electrical systems, commissioning progress is well above 80 % completed. The high voltage section consisting mainly of the 110 Kv system is energised. The same applies to the medium voltage were the .10 Kv ani 6 Kv class IV and class Ill are energised. Work is progressing on energisation of the different lighting transformers and on supporting the bumping and running of the major loads of the plant. Rework of the 400 Kv switchyard under the responsibility of RENEL pre- vents the commissioning of the fast transfer system which is now planned for later in October. The stand-by diesel generators commissioning will start in September to allow the lost of class IV test to follow in January 1995. The low voltage commissioning is well under way and field works are progressing in the 0.4 Kv class IV and class III lighting systems, in some auxiliary service panels as well as on motor control centers. Regarding the support systems, activities are nearly completed on the fire water system. Major works on the system are consisting on upgrading its availability and reliability. Major problems were encountered and are presently being ad- dressed. The system is fully operational. The water treatment plant is already commissioned and provides the required water quality to meet commissioning needs. One train is in service at full capacity and three are operating at half capac- ity. Extensive rework and design changes are going on at the present time to add to the operation ability and reliability of the plant. Mainly the pre-treatment plant is targeted by these modifications as well as an upgrading of the generic instrumentation related to the déminéralisation beds. As far as the cooling water systems are concerned, the raw service water system commissioning is progressing slowly following pumps and valves problems in addi- tion to design change implementation. The recirculating cooling water system commissioning as been hindered by pumps problems also but is available to meet load requirements. Cooling water to main pumps in the reactor building is al- ready in service while the rest of the loops will follow filling of the primary side of the main heat transport system and moderator system. The condenser cooling water system has been plagued with poor quality of the as-built equipment and extensive reworks had to be performed on the pumps and auxiliaries. Correc- tions have already been made and the system run-up is due at any time now. The condensate system flushing was performed earlier in 1994 and will be followed by the feed water flushing in the middle of June. The feed water flushing was partly delayed by problems related to the raw service water system and to some problems related with the lubricating system of the pump motor assembly. The chilled water system went through an extensive redesign following a reliabil- ity study review. Pre-commissioning is almost completed on the chiller panel control rewiring. Even pumps have been turned over and commissioned. All out- standing pressure tests were completed. Flushing of the system is in progress, some of the pump motors require balancing which is being performed at the present time. The heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems have been partly trans- ferred. Pre-operational checks are in progress on fans and on electrical sup- plies in the reactor building and turbine building. Generic flaws have been en- countered on all 39 fans which required balancing and stiffening of the bearing supports. 10 have already gone through the rework and another 12 will follow in the next two weeks. The instrument air system is operational. A total instrument air outage is planned in the coming days to allow completion of remaining works which will then be followed by its transfer to operation. The Heat Transport System and Auxiliaries commissioning is progressing well. Early turnover strategy of all main motors and their C&I has allow four hours runs on all motors with good vibrât ion/température results. 10 motors were com- missioned within a 24 days program. Coordination and control program implemented last fall to track completion of systems has allowed 6 major system transfers in April and four auxiliary ones in early June. Pre-operational checks are well ad- vanced in all systems. Strategic plans to stroke test all NSP motorised valves prior to fill is under way while packing verification and replacement is going on. The pressuriser/degasser heaters installation is to start next week while PHT pump seal assemblies installations are in progress. Feed and Bleed and Pres- sure and Inventory Control System C&I work for solid mode is also progressing well. Filling of the system is plan to start early July while hot conditioning will follow in August. The moderator system commissioning has had a very good start. The main system w=-s turned over in April and both main pump motors were run successfully. All •; re-oi'-erat ional checks are completed as well as the system air hold te&t. Mod- erator piping, calandria fill and calibration are also in progress. The hydro test is planned by June 15 followed by pump tests the following week for a period of three weeks. The moderator collection tank calibration is completed and first pump run-up is in progress. Moderator purification C&I checks are well under way and moderator cover gas is following closely. Heavy water fill is planned for October, The liquid injection shut-down system test fire and reactivity mechanisms rod drop tests should be completed by end of July. The heavy water management sys- tems light water calibration of equipment has started and first delivery of heavy water is scheduled for August 15. The emergency core cooling water system motorised valves turned over is presently being reviewed to allow early verification. A total of 79 snubbers have to be installed prior to flushing scheduled for August. Full turnover of the system is planned by end of June. The fuel handling system commissioning is started and five turnovers are planned this month. The fuel machine bridges, carriages, cateneries and heavy water supply as well as the shielding doors are forecast to be turned over in the com- ing weeks. Work has already started on the power distribution system as well as on the fuelling machine oil hydraulic system. Pre-operational checks on fuelling machine #1 and #2 are completed. The fuelling machine cold test facility com- missioning is completed as well as for the head transportation cart. Work is also progressing satisfactorily on the start-up instrumentation. Pre-operational tests continue on modules in instruments chassis. The calandria guide tube in- spection is in progress. The fuel channel movement test is completed in the dedicated guide tube. The Digital Control Computers System commissioning is progressing well and all software related activities are progressing according to schedule. The shut-down system no.l is already turned over to commissioning. Cabling and wiring verifi- cation are ongoing on channels D, E and F. Functional checks have started on the programmable digital computers (PDC). As a complement to those activities mentioned previously, commissioning documen- tation is making good progress. 543 flow sheets have already been produced as well as most of the commissioning procedures level 2, 3 and 4. A large effort is still required to complete the operation manuals but progress is made regularly and target should be met.

Licensing Status

Romanian licensing regulations governing design/operation of power reactor were written in 1975 and closely resembles the US NRC 10 CFR 50. This is far from normal licensing on previous CANDU-6 and creates additional constraints that add nothing to the safety of the plant in addition to create unreasonable challenges to the Romanian engineering which has no previous experience in such activities. The regulator has required the safety report to be prepared along the lines of US Safety Reports following US NRC Regulatory Guide 1.70. Most of the chapters of the Final Safety Assessment Report (FSAR) have already been issued. The regula- tor has shown some flexibility in adapting its position to the Canadian approach but significant and problematic departures still exist. It has also agreed to use the Canadian Operation Policy and Principles (OPP) method of documentation for operating limits under the proviso that it will be eventually complemented or replaced by the US style Technical Specifications approach. Again, this approach has the negative result of distracting valuable resources without adding to the safe operation of the plant. Regarding fault tree/event tree analysis, recent progress were made in shifting the short term emphasis away from an elaborate PSA approach in favour of the more pragmatic SDM approach. The issue of authorisation for Canadian/Romanian operators still carries consid- erable uncertainty. Continuous discussions between the parties show encouraging signs. Seven particular licensing design changes arising from CANDU-6 operation feedback are being implemented. Those are: complete coverage for loss of one HTS pump on both shut-down systems, automation of conditioning of SDS parameters, containment integrity monitoring system, post-LOCA ECC leakage collection, de- sign changes to optimise ECC availability, recirculation of the annulus gas and popt-LOCA trip on HTS pumps. Training Status

Following an early agreement reached between AAC and the New-Brunswick Power Commission, 92 Romanians staff from the operation group were trained in Canada at the Pointe-Lepreau NPP between February 1992 and December 1993 for a total of 1112 man-months. The main core of senior operators spent 18 months there and re- ceived class room and on-the-job training complemented with full scale simulator training. This training in a nuclear plant aimed at transmitting the safety cul- ture required for safe operation. This staff has since joined the commissioning and operational team at Cernavoda to upgrade their skills. In August of this year, a new training centre will open at Cernavoda site which will house a full scale plant simulator supplied by CAE Industries of Montreal. Complementary training is in progress at site for all operation staff ranging from electrical qualification to radiation protection in addition to system familiarisation. Conclusion

Even though Romania's environment whether political, social and economic is going through major modifications, the Cernavoda project under the management of the A.E.C.L.-ANSALDO Consortium is progressing well, Several Pre-Operational Safety Reviews performed by I.A.E.A. have concluded to the high quality of its manage- ment. The main constraints to a successful finish are still present. Lack of local currency has caused numerous cash flow problems that have and are still causing worries to the management of the project. Romanian suppliers and con- tractors are greatly affected by this even so more due to the fact that most of them lack proper assets and financial strength. Foreign currency shortages on the part of RENEL have also hit the project in several ways. The Project has up to now survived all of those constraints but not without any pain. Many deliver- ies were delayed and have impacted on the schedule increasing the peak loads during the construction phase but more so during the present commissioning phase. The centralisation of decision making that has clogged the project from 1981 to 1989 is making its way back through governmental decrees and through decisions emitted by RENEL which prevent the proper and fast decision making needed to meet project requirements. It is imperative that the project management be allowed to make proper and timely decisions if one can expect the present target of grid connection in March 1995, NINE MONTHS AHEAD of the contractual target. "CANDU MARKET PROSPECTS"

B. K. Kakaria, / Vice-President, Marketing & Sales AECL CANDU

CNA Montreal, June 6, 1994 An Overview of Market Prospects for CANDU

INTRODUCTION

It is a pleasure to have this opportunity to provide an overview of the market prospects for CANDU. Before describing some of the specific marketing and sales initiatives AECL is pursuing, a few facts regarding the role of nuclear power around the world may help to set the scene and provide a better perspective of what the future may portend.

Reactors in Operation

There are, today, some 429 nuclear power plants in operation around the world. The majority are located in the G7 type countries like USA, France, UK, Germany, where nuclear power has evolved over the last 30 years and already plays a significant role in the generation mix, ranging from 20 % to 78 %. This, together with the slowing down of economic growth has led to a reduction in the rate of new commitments in these countries, which is not too surprising.

However, it is important to note that, in the interim, some of these countries are continuing to invest in the development of new reactor designs for future use, when there is an economic upturn and demand starts to increase. The situation in Canada is also somewhat similar.

Another perspective is provided by the fact that there are over 40 nuclear power plants under construction today in over 15 countries. So far from there being a global hiatus, nuclear power plants are continuing to be constructed, especially in the high growth areas of the world.

Although there are presently no new build projects in Canada, there are, as described earlier, CANDU units under construction in Romania and South Korea representing almost 15 % of the international total.

By far the highest growth area is the Asia Pacific region where recent GDP growth rates have averaged 6 to 7 % and are expected to continue at these levels well into the future. There is no doubt that the countries in this region represent significant opportunities for new nuclear power plants.

In looking at CANDU export prospects in Asia Pacific, our current activities will be briefly highlighted in some of the countries in the region. But first, an overview of Turkey, which is looking to make a commitment to its first nuclear power plant in the short term.

TURKEY

In Turkey, AECL is vigorously pursuing the revived interest in the Akkuyu nuclear power plant project. AECL's involvement in Turkey goes back to 1983 when we competed head to head with Siemens/KWU and successfully negotiated a contract for a conventionally financed CANDU 6 project. However, late in the process Turkey changed the contract basis to a BOT model, which did not achieve the support of the international financing community and the project did not proceed. But over the last decade/ electricity demand in Turkey has increased by an average of more thnn 8% per year. In 1992 alone/ installed capacity/ mostly hydro and coal, increased by 8.7% to 18.7 GW, and electricity production increased by 11.8%. Based on this growth, the Turkish utility's plan shows that 1500-2000 MWe of capacity additions will be required each year after the year 2000.

Turkey has been getting ready for nuclear for some time now and has made significant investment in the Akkuyu site. This is a fully licensed site, which is large enough to house four CANDU 6 units — a site that could generate the 1500-2000 MWe of extra capacity Turkey needs at the turn of the century.

Turkey - Current Situation in 1991, under the Prime Minister Dimerel's direction, Turkey once again revived interest in the nuclear option. In October 1992 TEK, the Turkish utility, requested preliminary proposals from all nuclear vendors for a 100% financed turn-key nuclear power plant at the Akkuyu site with a target of a project contract in place by October 1993 as identified in the governments investment plan for major projects.

However, in April 1993 the sudden death of President Ozal led to a chain of political events that saw PM Dimerel become President and Mrs. Ciller become the new PM. These events seriously delayed Turkey's aggressive schedule for the acquisition of its first nuclear power plant.

In October 1993, the new government, headed by Mrs. Ciller, reviewed the country's energy requirements and reaffirmed the need to proceed with nuclear.

In response to Turkey's request, AECL submitted a preliminary proposal in December 1992, offering the CANDU 6 for the Akkuyu site. We believe that this offer affords certain advantages:

a product already known to Turkey; it was the basis of the 1984/85 contract.

a mid-3ize unit with better prospects for being financed and more suited to the Turkish grid.

economic benefits of replication based on the Wolsong CANDU 6 units under construction in Korea.

From the outset it was clear that the most difficult task was to put together the 100 % financing required by Turkey, and that it would not be possible to do this from Canada alone. Therefore, very early in the process, AECL undertook to put together an international consortium so as to be able to access world wide financing resources. Over the last year we have made very good progress on the financing package. AECL wants to acknowledge the support and participation of our Canadian private sector partners in this effort, especially NPM (Nuclear Power Managers) and Canatom, who worked closely with the consortium members in putting together a full scope priced proposal ready for submission..

So, what is the situation today ? In January of this year, TEK took a major step forward in the procurement process by issuing an international tender for consulting services. Eighteen international companies submitted bids on April 26 which are currently under evaluation. TEK1s target is to select a consultant by end of July and proceed to the preparation of bid specifications and an Invitation To Bid. Based on this process the expectation is for Turkey to complete negotiations for a project contract in 1995. However, it is important to note that Turkey is currently in the midst of dealing with some severe economic problems with the help of the IMF, but the international financial community is cautiously optimistic that this is a short-term issue.

The competition for this project is intense with the strongest challenge being from Nuclear Power International, the joint venture company of Siemens and . This group has proposed the German Konvoi 1300 MW unit design with most of the heavy equipment manufactured in France. Their sales effort is being led by Siemens which brings very strong trade and political ties between Turkey and Germany.

Other competitors like Westinghouse, and ABB-CE are also present.

With good progress on the international financing package and the excellent record of the CANDU 6 in the export market, CANDU is seen as a strong contender for Turkey's first nuclear power plant.

ASIA PACIFIC REGION

In the Asia Pacific region, the high growth countries of China, Indonesia, Thailand, and Philippines represent potential new prospects for CANDU nuclear power plants.

THAILAND

In Thailand and the Philippines AECL is mainly supporting their early planning and policy formation activities for the nuclear option.

Electricity demand in Thailand is forecast to grow from about 11,000 MW at present to about 20,000 MW by 2002. EGAT's (Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand) planning document calls for 6000 MW of nuclear capacity installed during the period 2005 to 2010. The initial units are likely to be committed in 1996/97.

The decision to proceed with nuclear program is yet to be taken by the Thai government although just last month, the Prime Minister of Thailand announced the formation of the Nuclear Facilities Regulatory Centre which will oversee all future nuclear power plant activities. This move signals the seriousness with which Thailand is pursuing the nuclear option.

AECL has been active since 1992 in Thailand, building awareness of the nuclear option, especially CANDU. AECL's current program is focused on market development and developing support for the nuclear infrastructure. THE PHILIPPINES

Power shortages continue in the Philippines. At least 4000 MW electricity is required by 2000, a growth of 6 % over their current grid size of 7000 MW. Westinghouse's BATAN nuclear power plant, built in the 1980s, remains mothballed. The Philippines is formulating plans for new nuclear plants, separate from the issue as to what to do with the Westinghouse plant at BATAN. A preliminary Philippines study last year, recommended proceeding with nuclear and identified CANDU as one option that should be considered.

AECL is offering input to the Philippines' government's nuclear public information coordination team, and we will continue to be active in this market.

KOREA

The success of the recent sales of Wolsong ?,3 & 4 in Korea has once again focussed world attention on the CANDU option. Korea's dramatic economic growth and successful experience with nuclear power is seen as a model by many countries in the region for the development of their own nuclear programs.

Korea's long-range energy plans include about 12,000 MW of new nuclear capacity required in the next decade. One of the new challenges emerging in Korea is securing additional nuclear sites. KEPCO has therefore identified the need to maximize the electrical output from the existing nuclear sites, including Wolsong.

As a result, one of the options being looked at in a joint program is the potential for a large CANDU unit, suitable for the Wolsong site. The studies are targeted to ensure that AECL is ready to respond to KEPCO1s needs with the right product at the right time.

For the longer term, technical work continues with Korea on the fuel cycle flexibility of CANDU, with particular emphasis on the synergy with the PWR. The ability of CANDU to burn spent PWR fuel can provide strategic benefits. The Canada/Korea/US "DUPIC" (Direct Use of PWR Fuel in CANDU) program, which is looking at the direct use of spent PWR fuel in CANDU is progressing well.

INDONESIA

AECL worked ir the Indonesian market in the mid-1980s, when AECL was awarded a contract to supply an electro-mechanical laboratory to the BATAN Research Centre at Serpong just outside of Jakarta.

Indonesia, with a population of about 200 million and sustained high economic growth (approximately 6%), has an energy plan that includes 7000 MW of nuclear capacity to be committed between the years 2000 and 2015, with the initial unit commitment planned for 1995/96.

A detailed feasibility study has been underway for some time of the Mauria site in North Central Java carried out by a Japanese consultant NEWJEC in conjunction with BATAN, the Indonesian Atomic Energy Authority. In March 1992, Indonesia launched an additional feasibility study to assess the available reactor types and their suitability for Indonesia's nuclear needs. BATAN invited all nuclear vendors/ including AECL, to submit comprehensive information packages for their evaluation in conjunction with NEWJEC of Japan. This study was completed in late 1993 and concluded that nuclear is economically and technically feasible for implementation on the island of Java. In addition, it recommended a mid range unit size of 600 MWe in service by 2004, as the preferred option for Indonesia to start its nuclear program.

BATAN is now embarked on the next step of preparing the bid specifications and an Invitation To Bid, that is expected to be issued within the next 2 years.

The competition is tough, with a strong Japanese presence and interest in this market. The Mitsubishi/Westinghouse combination is expected to be the strongest competition supported by an attractive Japanese financing package. Others in the field are the Hitachi/Toshiba/GE combination, ABB-CE, and Siemens/Framatome.

Given Indonesia's preferred unit size of 600 MWe, the CANDU 6 certainly provides the basis for a strong challenge from Canada. To strengthen CANDU's position in this market and pursue this potentially large opportunity, AECL has formed a joint marketing team with major Canadian private sector companies, who have been successfully doing business in Indonesia for many years. These include Babcock & Wilcox Canada, General Electric Canada, and Canatom which also represents Agra/Monenco and SNC/Lavalin.

The team is now actively preparing plans to pursue this opportunity in Indonesia.

CHINA with its economic reforms and modernization program, China by far represents one of the largest markets in the world given its high growth rate in electricity demand. Just in terms of electricity demand alone, most provinces in China are "equivalent" to countries. The high growth areas include southern and eastern coastal regions, which are remote from China's hydro and coal resources located mostly in the north and west.

China's current installed capacity is 165,000 MW. It requires another 40,000 MW just to ease today's severe shortages plus, on average, another 15,000 MW per year this decade !

As China decided to base its nuclear power program on PWR technology, the nuclear power plants to date comprise only PWR designs/ both indigenous and imported. Currently there is one Chinese 300 MW PWR in operation at Qinshan and two 900 MW Framatome units at Daya Bay. In addition there are two 600 MW Chinese PWR units under construction at the Qinshan site.

China's plans include some 15,000 to 18,000 MW of nuclear capacity to be committed before the year 2000. At the moment, the provinces of JiangsU/ Shandong, Guangdong, Jilin and Hainan Island offer the most potential for new nuclear plants, because of their high growth and coastal locations. Each of these provinces requires is looking at a possible commitment within the next 2 to 3 years. AECL's marketing efforts in China go back to the 1980s, when an agreement was signed with Jiangsu province to carry out a feasibility study for a CANDU unit. However in the intervening period, political developments and China's PWR only policy precluded completion of this work.

In 1993 China showed a renewed interest in examining the potential use of CANDU, and a number of senior level delegations visited Canada for exploratory talks. This led to the signing of agreements between AECL, the China National Nuclear Corporation and the Provinces of Jiangsu, Shandong and Jilin to assess the feasibility of introducing CANDU into these areas.

This work has yielded positive results regarding the suitability of the CANDU option, and the attractiveness of its fuel cycle flexibility. In addition CANDU1s synergy with China's existing PWR program provides the longer term prospect for the use of spent PWR fuel in CANDU units, a strategic benefit.

The process is now underway for putting in plf.ce a nuclear cooperation agreement between the Governments of Canada and China. This is an important prerequisite to open the door to the large opportunity that exists for CANDU in China.

However, this will be quickly followed by the enormously challenging task of structuring comprehensive CANDU projects, and the supporting financing packages that will be required to realize this opportunity.

OTHER PROSPECTS

Egypt

Peak electricity demand in Egypt is projected to grow at 700 - 900 MW per year to 2015. The Egyptian government included a nuclear unit in its 1992-1997 five year plan.

AECL and Bechtel have been working together since the early 1980s in Egypt, focusing on localization studies relative to the introduction of a CANDU 6 at the El Dabaa site.

A 2-year AECL study on Technology Transfer of CANDU 6 nuclear power plant components was launched in July 1993. AECL's Localization and Implementation Planning Phase portion of the Technology Transfer study is currently underway with NPPA (Nuclear Power Plants Authority) of Egypt and AECL.

Fuel Cycles

CANDU has recently captured increasing international attention with recognition of its unique ability to handle advanced fuel cycles. There is growing interest in our fuel cycles from around the world, including the Netherlands, Korea, Germany, the U.S. and others.

In particular, technical discussions are underway with Dutch and German research institutes to demonstrate CANDU as a candidate for burning and the use of fuel; this will partially alleviate the nuclear waste problem. Russia/Former Soviet Union

When the Former Soviet Union's structural changes occurred in the early 1990s, Canada and AECL were one of the first to offer assistance that focussed on improving the safety of the RBMK reactors. As part of this program, a Canada- Russia Government-to-Government Memorandum of Agreement on Safety Programs will be finalized shortly with Russia.

The Ukraine is interested in the CANDU 6 and Spent Fuel Dry Storage but talks are of a preliminary nature. Since the political and economic transition is taking longer than expected, AECL will continue to focus on safety initiatives with Russia.

Argentina

Argentina's Embalse plant, a CANDU 6, went into service in 1984. Since then AECL has maintained an active marketing and service support effort to CNEA, the Argentine National Nuclear Commission.

AECL and CNEA recently signed study agreements to look at the potential for a small CANDU 3 type reactor in Argentina and the potential for collaboration in R&D. The Canadian-Argentine Nuclear Co-operation Agreement is expected to be signed shortly, thus facilitating increased AECL-CNEA co-operation and work opportunities.

SUMMARY

In summary, not only is nuclear "alive and well" but the prospects for CANDU are significant, especially in the high-growth markets of the Asia Pacific region.

The competition will be fierce. With slow growth in their domestic markets, all major nuclear vendors are targeting the international arena.

To win, we need the backing and support from all parts of the Canadian nuclear industry and the Canadian government, "Team Canada".

This 'domestic' support is vital, but we will also need to complement this with 'international partners', so as to access the much-needed financing required for CANDU projects around the world. URANIUM INDUSTRY UPDATE

Michel Poissonnet ; / ' ' '' President, Cogema Resources Inc. ;K

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I would like to make it clear from the beginning, that I do not profess to be a specialist on CANDU's, and will therefore limit my discussion to the "U", as in uranium, of this Candu session. As I am sure you already know, the uranium industry in Canada is much more than a by-product of the development of Candu's. Since the mid-eighties, Canada has been the world's premier uranium producer, and it appears will retain this leadership for many years to come. Canadian uranium serves as a fuel not only to Candu reactors but also to many other reactors all over the world, mainly in the United States, Asia, and Europe. Because of the strict time limits, you will be spared the classic discussion about supply and demand and the presentation of the habitual pessimistic and optimistic scenarios. Nevertheless, a few comments: for several years now, consumption of uranium has far exceeded production, and in fact consumption was about double the amount of production last year in the western world. We expect that inventories in the west will be consumed by the end of this decade. Imports from the CIS countries and uranium obtained from weapons-grade highly enriched material will not be sufficient to fill the gap. Therefore, we believe that new sources of production will soon be needed. Canada, being blessed with high grade deposits is, more than any other country, in a favourable position to develop these new mines. I will now review the situation of the Canadian uranium mining industry in three stages - discussing the past, the present, and the future. The past is mainly in Ontario, in the Elliott Lake area where the mining of very low grade ore is no longer viable given current market conditions. Denison Mines has completely stopped production, and Rio Algom has already scheduled the shutdown of its last mine, Stanleigh, in the first half of 1996. These two companies will be faced with the challenge of reclaiming and decommissioning their mining sites. They will be required to do so under the strict control of the Atomic Energy Control Board and the Provincial Regulatory Agencies of Ontario. They will also be exposed to very stringent public scrutiny. URANIUM INDUSTRY UPDATE page 2. Michel Poissonnet President, Cogema Resources Inc.

Demonstrating its financial and technical ability to reclaim its operations is critical to the mining industry. This is true not only for the uranium industry but for the mining of all commodities We have to accept that we must now face this kind of responsibility in order to be allowed to develop new mines in the future. To this end, a system of financial guarantees will be set up to ensure the public that the resources for decommissioning exist when the time comes to do the job.

The uranium mining industry is supportive of this concept of financial guarantees, provided that they be implemented in a flexible and realistic manner. We are already in discussions with our regulators concerning these guarantees.

(SLIDE 1 - ATHABASCA REGION)

The present of the uranium mining industry is essentially in Northern Saskatchewan - for the following reasons:

Firstf there are three operating mines which are mainly responsible for Canada's premier position in the world as a uranium producer: Key Lake which is owned by and Uranerz remains, by far, the largest single operation in the world producing approximately 12 million pounds of uranium in 1992. Rabbit Lake, also owned by Cameco and Uranerz is also in production and will soon begin the development of several new orebodies. Cluff Lake owned and operated by Cogema Resources, continued in 1993 to mine and mill uranium without any technical or environmental problems. Production from a new orebody is expected to commence this summer.

The second reason for the fact that Northern Saskatchewan leads the way relates to major reorganizations and transfers of ownership:

In January 1993, Cogema Canada Ltd. acquired from Cameco, its 20% interest in the Cluff Lake operations, and thus became the sole owner of the Cluff Lake project. URANIUM INDUSTRY UPDATE Page 3. Michel Foissonnet Presidenti Cogema Resources Inc.

In April 1993, Cogema Canada Ltd. changed its name to Cogema Resources Inc. to reflect the reorganization of its North American mining activities, the management of which has now been consolidated in Saskatoon. The U.S. activities involve reclamation operations and in-situ leaching production in Wyoming. In July 1993, Cogema acquired all the uranium mining assets of the French oil company TOTAL. In this move, Cogema acquired Minatco Ltd. the majority owner and operator of the McClean Lake and Midwest projects in Northern Saskatchewan.

The third reason is the completion of assessments by governments of four new projects in 1993: Public hearings were conducted throughout the Province of Saskatchewan, and extensively in Northern Communities by a joint Federal Provincial panel for: an extension to the - by Cogema; the new McClean Lake project - by Minatco; the new Midwest project - initially presented by Denison and assessment by a federal Panel alone for - an underground mine and two open-pit mines at Rabbit Lake - operated by Cameco. Government decisions generally followed the Panel's recommendations, and the Cluff, McClean and Rabbit Lake projects were eventually approved, while the Midwest project, as described in its Environmental Impact Statement, was rejected. The three approved projects are currently being reviewed by the Atomic Energy Control Board and will likely receive their operating licences (for Cluff and Rabbit Lake) and construction licence (for the new McClean project) at the end of this month. URANIUM INDUSTRY UPDATE page 4 . Michel Poieeonnet

President, Cogema Resources Inc.

(SLIDE 2 - WESTERN CANADA & )

Finally the Future .... The future of the Canadian Mining industry is two-fold, short term in Saskatchewan, and long term in Saskatchewan and the Northwest Territories. The short term future is being actively pursued: Following completion of successful test mining in late 1992, the Cigar Lake project, operated by Cigar Lake Mining Corporation on behalf of its owners Cameco, Cogéra, Kepco and the Japanese oil company Idemicsu, is in the final stages of completing its Environmental Impact Statement. Negotiations continue between the owners in order to determine if a new mill will, or will not be built at Cigar Lake. Several options exist regarding the utilization of available or expanded milling capacities at Key Lake, Rabbit Lake and McClean. In any case, the Cigar Lake EIS should be submitted to the Assessment Panel in October of this year. At McArthur River, a project which is owned by Cameco, Uranerz and Cogema, shaft sinking commenced in July 1993 in order to provide access close to the orebody and to conduct a complementary underground drilling program in the second half of this year. Once this is complete, Cameco, the operator, will prepare the mining project and its related Environmental Impact Statement which is expected to be submitted to the Joint Assessment Panel by mid-1995. As it now stands, a mill will not be built at McArthur River. The ore will be trucked to, and processed at existing mills: Key Lake for Cameco1s and Uranerz1 share of production, and McClean for Cogema's share of production. URANIUM INDUSTRY UPDATE Page 5. Miciiel Fois sonnet Président« Cogema Resources Inc.

Last, but not least, Cogema is currently revising the Midwest project and will submit a new EIS in November of this year. The project may be referred a second time to FEARO, and be reviewed again by a Panel. The Midwest project will be a complement to the McClean opération, and the ore from Midwest will be processed at the McClean mill. These new projects will be responsible for intense governmental assessment activity in Saskatchewan over the next several years. At least two rounds of public hearings can be expected in 1995 and 1996. In addition it is expected that the review process for the nuclear waste disposal concept will likely start soon, and public hearings may well be organized in Saskatchewan for this project as well during the next two years. It is our hope that, both directly and through FEARO, AECL and the mining companies will coordinate their efforts and their messages to the public in order to keep these two issues - uranium mining and waste disposal - completely separate and distinct. Several years ago, a report prepared by a consultant in Saskatchewan for AECL, associated these two issues. This has created some unnecessary confusion and has given our common opponents arguments against both of us. As fuel suppliers, we recognize that we are part of the nuclear industry. This is why we, the Canadian miners, are active members of the Canadian Nuclear Association. However, we believe that it is in the best interests of all parties that the issues of uranium mining and waste disposal remain separate, so as not to be confused - in the minds of the public - and of the governments. Returning to our mining projects, I should mention that, once approved by governments and regulatory agencies, these projects will be brought into production only if market conditions are favourable. It is also worth mentioning that all these new projects which have been mentioned do not represent additional production capacities which would saturate the . McArthur River for example, will replace the Key Lake orebody which will be depleted in a few years. URANIUM INDUSTRY UPDATE page 6. Michel Poissonnet President, Cogema Resources Inc.

To conclude, let me mention that the long term future of our industry can be as brilliant as the promises offered by outstanding orebodies such as Cigar Lake and McArthur River. The Athabasca Basin in Northern Saskatchewan probably hides several other such high grade world class deposits that we will hopefully be able to discover once improved market conditions allow the mining companies to resume and increase their exploration efforts. In fact, the long term future of the Canadian mining industry may well reside in the Northwest Territories, in the Baker Lake area, where several orebodies have already been discovered by Urangesellschaft Canada, a Cogema subsidiary. However, this is a story for the next century, in a completely new political and regulatory environment since this area will be part of the new Nunavut Territory. Let me say ladies and gentlemen that we are excited about the future of uranium mining in Canada. I thank you for your attention. — — y Limit of Athabasca Basin OD Proposed Mine/Mill • Beaverlodge 0 Q| Operating Mine/Mill J^ Past Producing Mine Athabasca Lake

Athabasca McClean Lake Sandstone Basin CluffLake Midwest Project

\ Cigar Lake Q

ALBERTA Me Arthur Rive

Rabbit Lake and SASKATCHEWAN Eagle Point Key Lake

SCALE Project Locations

APRIL 1994 Canadien Noctear Association 34th Annual Conference Montmal, Canada June 5-4 1994

GOING GLOBAL Growing Small Businesses by OaWcf ft. Anderson, P.Eng. CANATOM INC. Going Global • Growing Small Businesses

In October 1992, the Canadian Nuclear Association, with the Organization of CANDU Industries (OCI) and several of our leading companies was host to an incoming mission of senior executives from Korea's power industry. The mission identified significant opportunities to strengthen business ties with Korea, principally in the field of nuclear energy but extending across the entire electrical power sector and beyond.

GOING GLOBAL : It quickly became "^—^l"—•"•"""^• evident that there was a need to help GGESC's MANDATE Canadian Small and Medium Size Enterprises (SME's) to develop and j0 promote and facilitate Industrial strengthen their international business cooperation and exports of arrangements. Several of Canada's equipment and services for Canada's larger companies agreed to lend their electrical power sector in names and reputations to help the less Asia/Pacific, and longer-term in well-known SME's. The Going Global Eastern Europe and Latin America. Energy Steering Committee (GGESC) - an initiative of Canadian industry - was •IB"—"^™™™11™1™11"™" established to guide this task. GGESC encompasses all aspects of the electric power industry, including hydraulic, thermal, and nuclear electric generation, transmission and distribution.

THE NEW GLOBAL ECONOMY : Innovation and technological change are rapidly transforming Canada into a knowledge intensive economy. Simultaneously, a revolution in telecommunications and transportation, accompanied by reduced barriers to international trade and investment, has given birth to a global economy in which traditional distinctions between domestic and foreign markets are being eroded.

The new technologies put more power ——~^*^—^^*^^—^^— into the hands of those SME's that WHAT IS AN SME? choose to take advantage of them - but the promise of this new global economy • A Small Manufacturer will be best realized by those who keep with < TOO Employees up with change, hone their skills and • A Small Service Business innovate aggressively. wnh < 50 Employees • A Medium-sized Manufacturer While this new, knowledge-based with 100 - 500 Employees economy will continue to change, it has several important characteristics of ««••••^•••••«•••••••••«•M significance to Canadian SME's.

Page 1 Going Global • Growing Small Businesses

GLOBALIZATION : Technological change and the removal of trade barriers have created a global marketplace. This erosion in the distinction between domestic and international markets means that it's increasingly easy to source, produce, and deliver anywhere in the world. Globalization offers access to new markets and new opportunities. At the same time, it exposes domestic markets to the full force of international competition. Even those companies who choose to stay at home, must start acting like exporters, if they are to compete successfully against the best in the world in our domestic markets.

PROMINENCE OF SERVICES: Services account for almost two-thirds of the GDP in most advanced industrial societies. It is now no longer possible to draw a clear distinction between goods and services. A large part of the value-added in the goods-producing sector is attributable to service-based activities. The emergence of a service-based economy presents opportunities for SME's. Many are service providers built on the knowledge and cleverness of the entrepreneur without the need for large capital investments. However, as more companies move into the service-sector, securing a distinct competitive advantage will become more challenging.

KNOWLEDGE INTENSITY: Knowledge is the •———————— central theme in this new global economy. THE NEW GLOBAL ECONOMY Increasingly the knowledge component of many products is more valuable than the • Globalization materials, physical labour, or capital that goes • Service Based into them. In a knowledge-based economy, • Knowledge Intensity technology confers significant competitive • size advantages to companies that know how to •Niche Markets use it. SME's for example, can use information • fate of Change technologies to create value, extend reach, and compete with large organizations on a more •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••1 even playing field. On the other hand, technological change is a threat to a company that fails to keep up with or stay ahead of its competitors.

SIZE: The technological revolution has reduced the relative importance of size as a determinant of competitive advantage. Automated systems and process controls mean that short production runs can be just as cost-effective as long ones. Computerization, automation and rising productivity mean fewer workers are required for any one task. This means that SME's can be just as cost-effective as larger firms, - and larger firms often lack the flexibility to keep up with a rapidly changing environment.

Page 2 Going Global • Growing Small Businesses

NICHE MARKETS: Markets are fragmenting as customers and consumers become more demanding and particular about what they want. SME's can compete successfully against large organizations by identifying and occupying small, tightly defined segments of the marketplace that they can serve better than anyone else. Technology is making it possible to customize goods and services to meet highly specific requirements.

CHANGE: Changes that used to take centuries are now compressed into decades and, sometimes, into a few years. Many new technologies are emerging while product life cycles are shortening. A highly fluid environment continuously presents new technologies, new markets, and new opportunities. At the same time, we are challenged to keep up with the latest developments. The business that stands still risks being swept aside by the onrush of change.

IMPLICATIONS FOR SME's: Few, if any, —•-——••————•••— SME's can hide from the realities of the STRATEGIES FOR SUCCESS new global economy. Each will be influenced differently, depending upon the «Management Practices market being exploited and the objectives « Labour Skills Development being pursued. Growth implies taking on « Innovation new responsibilities, learning to manage • international Marketing larger organizations, and solving ever • Financing for Growth more complex problems. It means finding the right people tO fill expanding roles. It ma^mmmmmimÊÊ^im^mÊmmÊm^mmamm^mm implies abandoning routine and pursuing innovation - this in turn, requires at least some familiarity with technology. Even with all this, growth may not be possible if a company restricts itself to a local or domestic market - we must look abroad to find new markets - and growth also means having access to supportive financing when required.

INDUSTRY DIRECTORY : In 1993 —————^— GGESC developed a Resource Directory PARTNERSHIPS FOR PROSPERITY for Canada's Electric Power Industry. A Resource Guide to the Canadian The Directory, entitled "Partnerships for Electric Power Industry Prosperity: A Resource Guide to the Canadian Electric Power Industry" comes Volume 1: Overview of Capability in two volumes: an overview of Canada's capability; and profiles of sixty Canadian Volume 2: Company Profiles companies in the electric power sector. Copies have been distributed to our ""^•"•"l"—"'•'^•^•™l

Page 3 Going Global • Growing Small Businesses

Trade Commissioners around the world. During preparation of this Resource Guide we encountered reluctance on the part of many SME's to enter into the global marketplace. To find out why, and to determine what could be done to remedy the situation, GGESC recently organized a seminar for small businesses.

SMALL BUSINESS SEMINAR : The •—•————•— seminar was designed with two thoughts GROWING SMALL BUSINESSES in mind. It's first objective was to provide the participants with an • strategies for Success opportunity to learn about the • Successful Case Studies characteristics of the new global • international Marketing economy, the implications to SME's and • what do SME's Need? to hear about some of the success • What can SME's Do? strategies which are working for • where do we go from here? flourishing businesses. The second was to encourage discussion, promote the ^•"•""^•^™"^™^™ exchange of information and to identify what SME's felt they needed to help them make a successful entry into the global marketplace.

Without a doubt the seminar was a success. Almost without exception, participants indicated their approval for the program. They felt the market information, strategies and pitfalls were well presented and the group discussions were useful and focused. They considered it to be time well spent and they left three very clear messages.

MARKET INTELLIGENCE : Marketing intelligence is the key. Obtaining the information necessary to enter the global marketplace is intimidating to SME's. They are looking for someone to initiate and manage a system of market intelligence for them

NETWORKING : Participants saw the seminar as being ^~^^~*m^^^^m^ the start of a network and dialogue between SME's, KEY MESSAGES government and larger organizations. They want it to continue and they need an organized mechanism to • Market Intelligence encourage it to happen. • Networking • Financing FINANCING : Going Global is expensive. SME's are looking for tax and market development incentives to ••l—">™i—™^— ease the burden. They also seek improved access to export financing.

Page 4 <* Going Global • Growing Small Businesses <*

Given these messages what do SME's expect of •"•""•••'^• GGESC? Again they provided quite clear and MEXT STEPS specific advice. They are looking for one stop shopping and see GGESC as the facilitator for • Facilitation Role SME's. They recommend that GGESC, either • Networking alone or in conjunction with other electrical • Bulletin Board Service industry associations, set up a permanent interface • Small Business Seminars for SME's. They want GGESC to facilitate networking - to look into putting together consortia •"•"•~"•»•—i—•••• and to co-ordinating information on international tenders and market opportunities. They ask that GGESC establish a bulletin board service for both market and SME information, and they encourage the arrangement of regular small business seminars on a wider basis. WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? : It is clear that economic transformation - globalization, technological innovation and accelerating rates of change - is presenting small and medium sized businesses with many special challenges. SME's want help in going global and they're looking for someone to provide it. Is this an appropriate role for a steering committee? Is now the time to re-examine the roles of the CNA, OCI and our sister associations which represent other segments of our electrical power industry? Can we afford separate industry associations? is now the time to consider a single organization representing the electric power industry?

As we move through 1994 and beyond, we must address questions such as these. We must continue to identify obstacles to Going Global and we must continue the search for solutions. Above all we must find new and different ways of working together if we are to ensure future success for Canada's electric power industry. This is not a new message - but's it's probably never been relevant than it is today. It's no longer an option, it's a necessity.

June, 1994 David R. Anderson, P.Eng

Page 5 SESSION 4 • Gestion du cycle de vie des centrales nucléaires / Life Cycle Management of Nuclear Power Plants

Président de session/Chain M. Therrien (Hydro-Québec, Canada)

J.-P. Combes et al. - "Lifetime Management of the Nuclear Units in France" (EDF, France)

R.W. Durante - "Nuclear Plant Life Cycle Costs" (AECL Technologies Inc., USA)

M.H. Ross - "Plant Life Management and the Single Reactor Utility" (Hydro-Québec, Canada) CNA/CNS ANNUAL CONFERENCE JUNE 5-8, 1994 MONTREAL, CANADA

LIFETIME MANAGEMENT OF THE NUCLEAR UNITS IN FRANCE

Jean-Pierre COMBES Raymond GODIN ÉLECTRICITÉ DE FRANCE Nuclear Power Plant Operation Division PARIS-LA-DEFENSE, FRANCE

A - INTRODUCTION

Installed power in standardized pressurized Water Reactors exceeds 55,000 MW in France.

ÉLECTRICITÉ DE FRANCE ClST JANUARY 19941 34 NUMBER OF UNITS 20 ACQUIRED EXPERIENCE 412 (REACTOR-YEARS) 118

AVERAGE REACTOR AGE 12.1 (YEARS) Ï.9

INSTALLED POWER 30 770 (MW) 26370 CUMULATIVE NET OUTPUT SINCE 2184 COMMISSIONING (TWh) 839 STANDARDIZED NUCLEAR POWER UNITS CONNECTED TO THE GRID IN FRANCE

Like each one of us, PWR plants inexorably age and the day will come when they will no longer be able to competitively provide the service we expect from them: they will then have to be replaced. of course, they are still comparatively young: 12 years on average for the thirty four 900 MW units, 6 years on average for the twenty 1300 MW units.

Hence, their renewal probably does not call for immediate decisions to be taken. However, when the time comes, the range of possible solutions may be restricted by choices which bave been taken (or not taken) to date. It is therefore important to focus right now on the possible lifetime of NPP's, on the way in which this lifetime is managed and on the potential impact on it of the decisions taken today.

As they get older, NPP's tend to individualize. Minor differences in manufacturing or operating modes lead to behavior patterns which become increasingly varied with the passing of time. It soon became obvious that, despite the high initial standardization, it will not be possible for lifetimes to be identical for all the units of the same plant series. French legislation, which does not determine a service life in advance (unlike the American license) vill probably enable some units to be operated longer than others. This dispersion will have beneficial effects : it will allow our PWR 55,000 HW generating capacity, commissioned in about fifteen years, to be decommissioned over a much longer period (20, 30, perhaps 40 years); the technical and financial effort corresponding to the replacement program will be easier for the company to sustain when stretched out in this way.

.Installed capacity (MID) Scenario

1 • • • • .,.,• . ,_ • • 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 Vears USE OF THE LIFETIME POTENTIAL TO SMOOTH THE REPLACEMENT PROGRAM

A systematic design study program was set up at EDF seven years ago under the name of LIFETIME PROJECT. This transverse organizational set-up, mobilizing all the corporate Branches concerned, guarantees the coherence and thoroughness of such a "think tank", which calls upon many areas of expertise. Although all the issues are closely interlinked, they will be presented one afcer the other for the sake of clarity.

The first step (chapter B) will be to look at the question of the technical end of life of the equipment items, which different degradation modes may bring to a state in which they no longer fulfil the required functions. The aging of the components naturally depends on the conditions in which they are operated and maintained, and its impact on NPP lifetime depends on the difficulties raised by their replacement. It is clear that the technical problems alone require the taking into consideration of design, manufacturing, operation, maintenance, industrial policy and research and development issues !

Next, NPP's must provide competitive production (chapter C), while there is a rise in the maintenance expenditure needed to combat the effects of aging and in the expenditure arising from changes in safety requirements. This means that it is necessary to estimate the probable groi/th in routine and exceptional (revamping-replacements) maintenance expenditure.

Moreover, the equipment must fulfil its function in a safe manner. Now, the available margins from the originally-set limits may be "nibbled away" by aging or "used up" to change the operating conditions. As for these limits, they may themselves change under the effect, for example, of a tightening of the safety requirements. Although the "periodic safety reassessment" approach is a favorable context for controlling these changes, these can only increase (chapter D). B - EQUIPMENT TECHNICAL LIFETIME

This part of the "think tank" was the main investigative area of the Lifetime Project. It involved, on the one hand, cm assessment of the lifetime potential of the main NPP components and, on the other, the set-up of a large-scale expert evaluation program on equipment items decommissioned after a long service life.

1 - COMPONENT STATUS AND OUTLOOK

Within the Lifetime Project scope, some components were identified as "critical", in view of the difficulty or cost of their replacement, or of the excent of the repair actions which could prove necessary.

They are: - the reactor vessel - the main primary system large-diameter pipes - the other main primary system pipes - the steam generators - the primary pump casings - the pressuriser - the auxiliary pipes - the control rod drive mechanisms - the vessel internals - the containment - the reactor pit - the anchorings - the turbine - the generator - the instrumentation/control - the electrical cables - the cooling tower - the polar crane.

For each of these eighteen "critical" items, a circumstantial examination was made, allowing for all available elements (design rules, manufacturing and operating experience feedback, results of research and development actions), in order to assess their lifetime potential. For this purpose, a further design study and investigation program had to be implemented (cost in excess of 50 M$).

Overall, it appears that, subject to appropriate equipment operating, surveillance and maintenance conditions, the French 900 and 1300 MW NPP's should be able to ensure the expected service for a period probably exceeding 4 0 years, providing the following reservations are made good.

* Reactor vessel

The main reservation concerns the irradiation embrittlement of the steels in the core zone. This problem is monitored through the surveillance program, based on removable specimens located to confirm and anticipate actual trends in the vessel material brittle/ductile transition temperature. Extrapolation of the current results of this surveillance program leads, for all the French reactor vessels, to sufficient margins relative to the fast fracture risk for a 40-year period. Also, the vessels exhibit a fairly wide spread in the residual element content of the steels, therefore in the effects of embrittlement and in their lifetime (the 1300 MW units are furthermore advantaged by a smaller neutron fluence). Expert assessments on the CHOOZ A vessel (see below) will provide confirmation of these forecasts and in 1996 the first surveillance specimens representative of the vessel "end of life" situation will be available.

Confirmation nevertheless needs to be furnished on two points: - details on the effect of ghost lines in the shells produced from solid ingots, which may be a critical phenomenon, are still necessary, - to achieve a proper assessment of the margins, there is a need to clarify the evaluation methodology and to agree upon the acceptability limits (either directly in terms of erabrittlement, or indirectly in terms of probability).

If the aim is to operate the vessels beyond the 40-year mark, it is advisable for some of them to take appropriate fu«l management measures without delay, in order to save their "fluence capital". Loading patterns more favorable from this standpoint have already been developed.

The vessel also contains a number of alloy 600 (Inconel) parts which are now known to be susceptible to primary water stress corrosion cracking . This susceptibility was first evidenced in the steam generator tubes, in zones highly stressed due to their manufacturing conditions. The same phenomenon then occurred in the instrumentation nozzles of the 1300 MW NPP pressurizers - these nozzles were replaced by austenitic stainless steel ones.

In the vessel, it was the closure head adaptor sleeves which were affected. Although the number of cracking cases is still small, it is impossible to guarantee that the risk will be limited to some penetrations or units. As a result, this problem will call for treatment of all French NPP's (vessel head repair or replacement).

These operations, expensive and limiting in terms of dosimetry, do not however compromise the lifetime of the vessels, and even less that of the NPP's.

* Main primary system pipes

The steels of "cast austeno-ferritic" grade, particularly used for the primary system elbows, have proved to age at service temperature. The phenomenon, which results in a decrease in material toughness (risk of fast fracture) is sensitive to the chemical composition of the product. Moreover, these items feature foundry defects, like all castings. They are considered acceptable at plant startup, but justification of their in-service strength may become problematic following the decrease in operating toughness of the material, underestimated at the design stage.

Replacements are easy at lower cost for the elbows joined to the SG's, during replacement of the latter. They will obviously be carried out if justification of the relevant elbows cannot be obtained for a period of at least 40 years.

The justification concerning the strength (over at least a 40-year period) of a number of elbows not connected to the SG's or located in units without SG replacement has not been generated to date. A large-scale work program is underway to determine the replacement criteria applicable to castings. This program comprises the removal of some affected elbows for expert assessment in laboratory. But at thie time it is impossible to rule out the risk of having to replace some elbows outside SG replacement campaigns, or even some instrument nozzles or valves fabricated from the sume material. The second major difficulty encountered in primary system pipes concerns the dissimilar metal welds (or "junctions") between the main components (made of clad ferritic steel) on the one hand/ and the pipes themselves (made of austenitic steel), on the other. Metallic dilution anomalies are liable to cause a local decrease in toughness, reducing the margins from the fast fracture risk. An extensive research program has been undertaken to thoroughly investigate this issue and to evaluate the potential consequences. In parallel, studies are underway to ensure that appropriate means of repair are available, if necessary.

* steam generators

Some of them will have to be replaced following the various degradation phenomena affecting the alloy 600 tubes. The tubes of the replacement SO's will be made from Inconel 690. Everything is being done to ensure that a second SG replacement is not necessary in a unit operated for 40-50 years. The technical and industrial aspects are fully controlled and the problem is only economic. The replacement program now underway concerns at least one 900 MW unit per year as of 1993 and applies to most of the oldest units.

For the least-affected SG's, a probabilistic maintenance study was started, relying particularly upon the results of an exhaustive investigation into primary water stress corrosion cracking of high nickel content austenitic alloys. The extension of this study to other types of defect (corrosion originating on the secondary side in particular) is under development.

So it can be seen that the SG maintenance strategies are based on probabilistic studies.

* Vessel internals

The vessel internals take the form of a complex mechanical structure, whose in- service behavior is difficult to accurately model and predict. The most delicate problem follows the discovery, in some 900 MW units, of a number of baffle bolts cracked in service in high-flux zones. Their replacement is possible, but the operation would be difficult. The loss of ductility due to irradiation plays a major role in the development of this phenomenon. Moreover, it cannot be ruled out that the degradation will spread to other internals components (baffles, etc...). This issue is being investigated. The safety studies underway and a materials irradiation program will be developed to gain insight into the in-service materials properties and to validate any substitute materials.

Should justification difficulties be confirmed, we could be led to consider replacements of all or some of the lower internals. The feasibility of this replacement has already been proved.

* Containment

Of all the "critical" components, the containment is the only one it ia out of the question to replace. Its aging must therefore be closely followed.

It is well-known that natural concrete creep phenomena generally stabilize over a period of about ten to fifteen years, depending on the type of structure. This phenomenon leads to loss of the concrete prestressing value, which must not compromise, even at end of life, the performance of the containment under design basis accident conditions. A special-purpose study is in progress to gain closer insight into the influence of creep on thick concretes (deadlines 1995) .

A surveillance program has been set up for all KpP's. Generally, the oldest containments (including the whole 900 MW series) are now stabilized at a broadly satisfactory level. For the younger containments, the follow-up is continuing.

* Instrumentation/control

Instrumentation/control is being analyzed in two different ways. Firstly, discussions have been started with the major suppliers to ensure the long lifetime of the current components: procedures are now being established. Also, an I/C replacement methodology is under review. Various replacement scenarios have been evaluated; partial replacements could be made at the time of the various ten year outage programs (as of the second one). This would cover the Systems or hardware for which there is a strong uncertainty about keeping them in proper service until the next ten year outage.

To date, the policy in the 900 MW series is to retain the electromagnetic relay circuitry and cables and to keep the analog type control room.

* Conclusions on the aging of critical components

The analysis of the technical issues has led to a status report on the condition of the equipment items, their lifetime outlook and the work now underway to firm up these estimations.

The reservations identified hereabove may have expensive consequences for the maintenance programs. But, on the strength of the current knowledge, it is possible to assert that no equipment problem should prevent NPP's from reaching and passing the 40-year mark; however, some vessels and containments will merit special attention. For the PWR units as a whole, a 40-50 year timespan is a reasonable target.

2 - EXPERT ASSESSMENT PROGRAMS

When NPP's are permanently retired, their expert assessment may help provide greater understanding of the aging-related degradation mechanisms and the actual damage level (confirmation of hypotheses arising from R and D, validation of Non Destructive Tests by destructive examinations, ...). These assessments are useful, since the accelerated aging tests run elsewhere are not always fully representative.

Two large-scale programs have been started in France (cost for EDP: 20 M$ for samplings and expert assessments):

. on a steam generator removed from Dampierre 1 in 1990. Samples have been taken and expert assessments are in progress.

. At the Chooz A power plant (300 MW PWR), shut down on Oct>oer 30th 1991, after 24 years of service, expert assessments were scheduled when they were of the kind to expand the knowledge base on aging mechanisms of our PWR's. The program was defined in June 1992 (it covers the vessel, primary system, secondary system, Z/C, the electric cables and the civil works). Sampling is in progress and expert assessments will go ahead until end 1994. G - ECONOMIC ASPECT

The consequences of keeping an old unit on the power grid are twofold:

1. the routine maintenance expenditure rises, exceptional maintenance expenditure (heavy repairs and replacements) are necessary, the unit may lose operational possibilities and flexibility,

2. on the other hand, the utility may postpone the investment of the replacement generating unit.

The decision to decommission a plant must be taken when the expenditure arising from continued operation (restoration to good working order and running costs) becomes greater than the value of the services it renders. These services are evaluated from the cost of the substitute facilities it would be necessary to operate to mitigate the decommissioning of the plant. In the case of the French standardized NPP's it is considered, to cater for power demand, that the decommissioning of a unit would be followed by the commissioning of a new PWR unit, whose operating characteristics and fuel cost would not be perceptibly different.

Thus, the value attached to a one-year extension of the lifetime of a PWR unit can be evaluated by the formulât

[Annual instalment corresponding to the investment of the replacement generating facility] minus [reconditioning expenses plus extra cost of former unit operating charges].

If this formula is durably negative, the unit must be shut down for economic reasons.

A numerical approach was implemented on the basis of realistic hypotheses corresponding to the forecast French economic situation. The total gain yielded in economic terms by continuing the operation of a 900 MW unit for 5 years around the year 2010 is on the order of a

In practise, given the uncertainty on future expenditure, the operation would have to show a clear profit to justify keeping the unit in service. But the total sums involved seem high enough to justify very extensive work.

Thus, it is likely that decommissioning of French standardized PWR units will not be economically justified for a long time. D - SAFETY ASPECT

1 - STATEMENT OP THE SAFETY PROBLEM

NPP lifetime can be affected in three ways: a) the aging of the components or materials can be such that the performance of the syatema important for safety has deteriorated and the safety criteria are no longer met (for example, insufficient pressure bead of pump) or the materials properties have been modified in such a way that the margins with respect to accident events have become insufficient (for example, vessel embrittlament). Through its surveillance, routine maintenance and exceptional maintenance (heavy-duty operations) policy, the utility manages the available margins in the light of the applicable criteria and ensures that they always remain positive. The problem is then mainly economic (maintenance and/or replacement cost overruns) b) changes in the plant environment can be such that the design assumptions are no longer valid, which may lead to reappraisal of the initial design. For example, regarding the environment related to human activity, a rise in air traffic may lead to a larger plane crash risk than originally predicted. c) the reference frame of the safety requirements and the regulations may vary with time, for different reasons: - experience feedback from events occurring in French or foreign units bringing to light certain specific potential risks. - new knowledge avising from studies performed in France or abroad (identification through Probabilistic Safety Studies of the risks arising from shutdown states, for example), - recent or projected plant design bases different fom those of older plants, a situation which may lead to a safety level discrepancy whose acceptabilty will have to be assessed (for some options, public opinion may play a role).

In France, all these problems are regulated by the "periodic safety reassessment" approach, which was developed with the Safety Authorities. This roassessment takes place about once in 10 years. Based on the "Safety Reference"concept applicable to a unit, it is in two stages: - demonstration of unit conformity with its applicable "Safety Reference". This covers points a) and b) above. - assessment of the "Safety Reference" level and i"-.s trend. This covers point c) above.

2 - "PERIODIC SAFETY REASSESSMENT" APPROACH

The NPP periodic safety reassessment approach must enable EDF to control the whole plant justification process on a long-term basis, by centering the latter on the conformity warranty, the overall results and the risk evaluation, together with the safety benefit of further measures to match the growth in knowledge. This approach must enable the assessment to be based on reasonable risk control, and not on a direct comparison with means provided for in the technical options retained for the new projects.

2.1 - Review of NPP conformity with ita applicable "Safety Reference"

During the Periodic Safety Reassessment, a status report on conformity with the Safety Reference and a safety status report, including follow-up of the NPP environment and its radiological situation, must be generated. An opinion must also be expressed on the results of the tests and inspections run. Thus, an account is kept of the safety margins which have been used up or recovered.

2.2 - ABBBBBment of the "Safety Reference"level and of the need to raise It

Concurrently with the first step, a reviewing process of all the insights important for safety is set up jointly between EDF and the Safety Authorities. New developments (margin studies, probabilistic safety studies, ), whether they are the result of national and international experience feedback or specific studies, are evaluated from the point of view of their impact on the safety level of the different plant series. Whenever their safety benefit shows the need for it or justifies the cost they incur, corrections will be made to the reference frame of the safety requirements and the corresponding modifications of the plants will have to be made.

As a general rule, the reference frame of the safety requirements will only be revised as a whole within the scope of the ten-year safety reassessments. In practise, this revision is made for a whole plant series.

This change in the safety reference clearly appears to be the factor which, from the safety standpoint, may have the most significant impact on service life. But it is also the roost difficult to control since it is more or less directly related to issues outside the company, such as:

- the context of relations between the Safety Authorities and EDF,

- the international context (positions/changes adopted in other countries, particularly the United States),

- the safety requirements applicable to the future reactors (in France and abroad), particularly with respect to severe accident risks.

2.3 - Estimation of changes reasonably foreseeable in the future

It is likely that the commissioning of new units will be accompanied by an increase in safety requirements in three main areas:

- general probabilistic and radiological targets protection against severe accidents allowance for more severe externally-generated hazards.

Although it is obvious that today's units will not always be in line with the requirements for the future units, it is likely that they will have to move slightly towards them. Nevertheless, this risk of "Safety Reference" change may be mitigated by several factors:

1/ A proven product like our current 900 MW units, with a high design safety level relative to present international standards, will have to its safety credit the strong (and let us hope, positive) endorsement of extensive experience feedback. This will make it possible to stabilize and drastically improve the guarantee of its real safety level, provided there is tight control of the specific aging effects (vessel, containment, reliability of systems...). The comparison with the advantages expected from a new plant series will have to allow for this factor, beyond a still-theoretical Probabilistic Safety Study. 2/ It will only be possible to make this comparison when the future plant series have had their first experience feedback endorsement. This corresponds to the international trend: the"new standards" used on a prospective basis for the "safety reassessments" do not refer to a drawing- board but to the latest reactor types proven in service. 3/ As stated hereabove, some tightening of the safety level in today's units is economically acceptable. 4/ The "Periodic Safety Reassessment" approach will provide optimum control, on a long-term basis, of the whole change process, by avoiding unjustified modifications.

E - CONCLUSIONS

We have seen that, both from the technical (aging of materials) and economic standpoints, today's French units have a large lifetime potential; a lifetime target varying with plants between 40 and 50 years appears, in the light of present knowledge, a reasonable goal but one which will need to be periodically updated.

On the safety front, given the probable increase in requirements due to the upcoming commissioning of more modern units, forecasting is more difficult.

Nevertheless, the risk of early shutdown may be mitigated by the "Periodic Safety Reassessment But pressure will grow with time. Although it can reasonably be expected that the comparison with the new units which will be started in the next decade will be spread over a long period, this will be much more difficult when the new units benefit from significant experience feedback, i.e beyond the year 2015.

Lastly, other decision inputs not discussed here will have to be taken into consideration. These include:

- constraints arising from the renewal of generating capacity

- the industrial environment

- action taken by foreign countries, concerning both the lifetime of their current units (generally older than the French ones) and changes in safety requirements.

In the light of all the above considerations, the following conclusions can be drawn:

- a lifetime in excess of 35 years is very likely; for the sake of conservatism, this value will be adopted for the time being in France for the maintenance optimization technical/economic studies

- a 40 to 50-year timespan is a reasonable target from the technical and economic standpoints; it will have to be periodically updated (about once every 5 years). This timespan should ultimately make it possible to spread the replacement program over a sufficiently long time

- there is a strong risk that the increase in the safety requirements will be the main parameter pulling this timespan downwards. ' f

NUCLEAR PLANT LIFE CYCLE COSTS

Raymond W. Durante AECL Technologies Inc.

When nuclear power generation was first introduced, it was accepted eagerly by utilities because it promised low cost, reliable, and endless quantities of electricity. Everyone knew construction costs would be high compared to fossil plants, but low fuel costs would more than offset this factor making nuclear power a clear economic choice. After all, what more did you need to know other than the cost of the plant and the cost of the fuel, and in those days it was assumed the cost of fossil fuel would increase while better technology would drive down nuclear fuel costs. Also, there was a general feeling that the initial surge of orders we saw in the 60s and 70s represented first generation plants. Larger more efficient designs were on the drawing boards even before some of the early plants were started up. Plant life cycle, license renewal, and decommissioning were not terms used very often. At the same time reactor vendors were lulled into complacency with regard to the entire fuel cycle by assurances that the government would solve problems such as waste storage, decommissioning, enrichment, and reprocessing, while continuing to support favorable regulatory and economic energy policies. As a result, industrial effort and technology was directed primarily towards the reactor, the rest of the NSSS, and fuel fabrication with only passing thought given to the front and back end of the fuel cycle. Today we see a number of plants that have been or are being considered for early shutdown because they are uneconomical to operate. In many of those cases the reactor still operates as it was designed and would probably continue to do so for many years to come. It is the presence of other economic penalties brought on by unplanned auxiliary problems of "life cycle costs" that bring about decisions to terminate plant operations. This is not unlike the experience many of us have had with automobiles that have been junked even though their engines are running well and have thousands of miles of life left. Usually it is because some auxiliary system or combination of optional features have failed and they are simply too expensive to replace.

The major problem facing the nuclear industry today is that nuclear plants are losing their competitive edge over fossil fuel plants. We all knew the problems of developing nuclear power and were willing to take them on because the reward was cheaper

-1- electricity. Without this economic edge it makes no sense to build new nuclear plants, or even to continue to operate the present ones. The 1980s have seen the electricity production costs of nuclear plants slightly exceed that of coal-fired plants for the first time in history. Every nuclear utility is engaged in an intensive program to lower these costs in order to continue to operate existing plants and preserve the nuclear option. Currently there are 110 nuclear plants in the United States producing 22 percent of the annual electricity demand. Despite fluctuations in our economy, electricity use continues to grow while total energy use remains relatively flat. In fact, electricity's share of total energy is projected to increase from the 1980 level of 32 percent to over 41 percent in the year 2010. Deregulation, however, has introduced stiff competition and nuclear is finding it very difficult to compete economically. Electricity production costs from natural gas-fired plants and combined cycle plants have dropped dramatically and the gap between nuclear and fossil is quite small (Figure 1). Although there has been no nuclear plant construction and relatively few fossil plants constructed in the past 15 years, it is clear that new generating capacity will be required even at the modest growth rates projected. In addition, 36 percent of the baseload capacity (200 MWe) will be over 30 years old by the year 2000 and this capacity must be replaced. Included in this are a significant number of nuclear plants up for relicensing (Figure 2) . If nuclear does not improve its economic situation, it could be phased out completely as a power option. If we cannot improve the economics of plants currently operating, they will be shutdown before the end of their designed life cycle and the incentive to build new plants would be lost as well.

Lets look at the economic penalties resulting from plant life cycle costs which have either been mishandled or neglected. Costs increases have occurred across-the-board, but some are a result of the normal advancement of the art as well as lessons learned from previous experience including the accident at Three Mile island. New environmental requirements and new NRC regulatory procedures (i.e., seismic reviews) added to the cost of operations. This paper briefly examines four major life cycle costs that were, in my judgement, not given full recognition in the early design phases of our industry:

1. Decommissioning Costs. Nowhere in the history of industrial development has there been so much consideration given to the dismantling and final disposition of nuclear projects. We build bridges, buildings, dams, and other large structures without a thought about how they will be torn down and disposed of. More importantly, we do not allow the cost of this final disposition to impact on their operation or value. Can you imagine what the cost would be to disassemble the Grand Coulee Dam and return the site to its original condition. In keeping with our penchant for inflicting double standards on the nuclear industry; however, nuclear plant operators must show the NRC they have an acceptable plan, know what the costs are, and set aside the necessary funds for decommissioning, then the rate payers are charged, the money collected, and invested in state or municipal bonds until needed. During 1992 three utilities made decisions to shut down plants: Yankee Rowe, Trojan, and San Onofre I. other plants such as Shoreham and SMUD were abandoned prior to startup. The utilities are now struggling with these costs. Over the next 30 years operating licenses for 30 plants will expire and decisions will have to be made as to whether to extend these licenses or shut the plants down (Figure 3). The costs and complexities of decommissioning a nuclear plant are so great that financial analysts consider this an important factor in the economic health of a utility. The amount that utility regulators allow the company to increase its rates to fund future actions such as decommissioning, significantly affects their competitive position. If the utility charges too much, they lose customers. If they charge too little, there will not be enough money available to do the job when the time comes and the stockholders could lose out.

Many questions need to be answered before one can arrive at true decommissioning costs. An excellent article in The Wall Street Journal by Barry Abramson lists the questions and the difficulty in arriving at answers. Me includes a catch-all section entitled, What About Surprises? that points out we do not know how much decommissioning is really needed or exactly how to do the job. Our current plants were not designed to be easily decommissioned; therefore, we do not know what the real impact is on the cost of electricity. A rule of thumb estimate for decommission costs was established at $165 million for 600 MWe plants and $265 million for 1,200 MWe plants. Some examples of what we actually face can be seen in recent figures released for the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD). In 1991 the decommissioning costs were estimated at $328 million. In 1993, they rose to $370 million — an increase of $42 million. This increase was attributed to much higher costs for storing low level waste and a 100 percent increase in labor costs. The original estimate was made assuming normal labor costs, but we find that we must pay premium rates for decommissioning. Portland General Electric1s Trojan plant decommissioning costs were first estimated by Battelle to be $124 million. A more recent estimate shows them at $226 million, an increase of 81 percent. The Fort St. Vrain gas-cooled reactor operated by Public Service Company of Colorado has estimated decommissioning costs to be $157 million.

-3- The fuel has already been removed from the core and is being stored in a $25 million facility. The dismantling and decommissioning has been completed on this plant and 144,000 cubic feet of concrete and other debris will have to be removed from the site. Indications are that this cost will increase by 20 to 40 percent. It appears that decommissioning cost estimates will be going the same way nuclear power plant construction estimates have been going — upward. The old joke about the ant and the elephant is appropriate here. Waste Management. When President Carter in his sincere, but misdirected concern over proliferation eliminated the breeder and reprocessing, he created an enormous nuclear waste problem. Now instead of dealing with compact, high density radioactive waste, we throw away entire full-size fuel elements — most with a lot of value as fuel. I will not dwell on the problems with the U.S. nuclear waste program and Yucca Mountain, you need only read a newspaper to see what a sorry state that program is in. The fact is that waste management life cycle costs were not fully considered in the original planning for a nuclear industry. The economic impact is enormous and instead using the breeder and reprocessing to lower costs, higher costs resulted because the utilities are required to charge their rate payers additional money which in turn is placed in a trust fund directed at finding solutions to the problem. This directly adds to the cost of electricity and impacts the competitive position of nuclear versus other fuels. But perhaps more important, it has created another arena for controversy and further eroded the public's confidence that nuclear is a viable option. Even if the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) had not done such a poor job in this area, the time required to arrive at an acceptable solution has put the return of nuclear power even further into the future. The lack of a solution to the waste problem is cited as the main reason for the public's unacceptance of nuclear power. The blame for this can and should be placed directly on the utilities and the industry. This is a life cycle cost that should have been factored in as soon as the problems arose. Over 30 nuclear power units will exhaust their storage pool capacity by the year 2000 (Figure 3). Everyone knew when the pools would be filled, but relied on the government to solve the problem. This has not happened and the additional cost of on-site storage could increase electricity costs even more.

-4- 3. Major Component Replacement. No one expects any mechanical system to operate flawlessly. There will always be a need for replacement and repair and the cost of this activity is usually part of the overall economics of the system. So it is with nuclear, except that once again the double standard is applied with the radiation factor contributing to higher costs. Also, repairs to nuclear plants require the plant to be shut down for long periods and substitute power is usually more expensive resulting in rate hikes, further contributing to the public's perception that nuclear is very expensive. A case in point is steam generator replacement. No single component has caused as much operational disruption and financial penalties as the steam generator. • In March 1991, Consumer Power completed the change-out of 2 steam generators as a cost of $91 million. This did not include the cost of the new units or the replacement power needed during the 93 day outage. • The R.E. Ginna 470 MWe plant estimated the costs of replacing their steam generator at $115 million, more costly than retiring the plant prematurely. • Indian Point 2 endured a 4 month shutdown to repair cracks in all 3 of their steam generators. • Palo Verde had to reduce power levels in all three units after excessive corrosion was detected in an effort to slow down crack formation. The drop in power costs $7 million for replacement power and $6 million for maintenance costs. • In July 1993, the Steam Generator Strategic Management Program was formed by EPRI. This group is composed of 29 U.S. utilities and 7 international companies and addresses the criteria that could be used to control degradation and monitor the operations of steam generators to prolong their life. Some remedial measures such as sleeving and plugging have been improved so a plant can operate efficiently with a given amount of plugged tubes. If necessary, steam generators can be replaced and a number of plants have performed this complex and expensive procedure. Perhaps the most difficult component to consider for replacement is the pressure vessel. This is the largest and most integral major structural component of a nuclear plant. It can weigh as much as 250 tons and contains the uranium core which produces the fission

-5- that can cause embrittlement of the reactor walls as a result of interaction with impurities in the steel. Uncertainty about the level of pressure vessel embrittlement at the 175 MWe Yankee Rowe PWR, Massachusetts led to a shutdown and deferral in that plant's application for license renewal. The final decision was to permanently shut the plant down and decommission it. Utilities are now actively taking steps to control the level of pressure vessel embrittlement and reduce the. risks of brittle fracture. Considerations are also given to thermal and annealing a reactor vessel in place to remove some or all of the effects of neutron embrittlement. While it is possible to replace a reactor vessel, this would be a capital intensive, labor intensive, and occupational radiation exposure operation. Even for plants with favorable operation economics and the potential for 20 year operating license extensions, the cost might be unacceptable.

4. Operation and Maintenance Costs. O&M costs have steadily increased and are now more than 70 percent of production costs (Figure 4). Only a Herculean effort by the utilities to introduce efficiency and better cost control into the industry have kept them from completely running away. Some examples of this are increased staffing, training and security; new fire protection requirements; new environmental qualifications; etc.

Although the Omaha Public Power District has publicly indicated they will need generating capacity over the next 25 years, they have also considered shutting down their Port Calhoun 478 MWe pressurized water reactor. The reason for this disparity is that O&M costs for the nuclear plant have risen so steeply since 1988 that the resulting power generated is more expensive than electricity produced from their fossil plants. Fort Calhoun1s O&M budget for 1990 was $103 million, well above its target for that year. In order to avoid costs of on-site storage of their spent fuel, they have initiated a re-racking program in their pool and have instituted a strict cost control program to reduce other O&M costs by 10 percent. It is hoped that by doing this they can keep the plant on-line until the year 2008.

Nationally, total costs for the production of electricity have increased from 1.7 cents/kilowatt hour to 2.2 cents/kilowatt hour over the period 1980 to 1990. The major reason for that increase has been the O&M costs. One of the factors contributing to that increase has been the significant staff increases at the plants. The growth in staff was a result of the

-6- initiatives like new training programs, increased commitment to preventative and predictive maintenance programs, and staff requirements for planning and performing the work. The second major contributor to O&M costs is outages. During this time period (1980- 1990), many utilities were implementing TMI lesson learned activities and other industry and NRC related improvements. Therefore, it was necessary to shut down plants more than normal. Evolving NRC requirements include implementation of the training and maintenance rules. NUMARC initiatives such as efforts to achieve greater efficiencies in the area of personnel access will help to reduce these operating costs. However, the industry will continue to experience some changes in the regulatory requirements that will drive O&M costs up. The light at the end of the tunnel is, of course, efforts underway by U.S. utilities representing the Nuclear Power Oversight Committee. In comparing their strategic plan for building new power plants included among the 14 building blocks are concentrated attention to the operation and maintenance aspects of nuclear plants (Figure 5). In effect, they are assuring the ability to correctly operate and maintain a nuclear power plant is built into the original design. In the meantime, U.S. plants lag far behind in performance factors as shown in Figure 6.

-7- ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author wishes to acknowledge data and information obtained from the following sources: Marvin s. Fertel, Nuclear Energy Institute Nuclear Engineering International U.S. Utility Data Institute Electric Power Research Institute, EPRI Journal American Nuclear Society, Nuclear News Barry Abramson, The Wall Street Journal Levelized Generating Cost Breakdown 600-MWe Capacity Alternatives

Emissions Decommissioning Allowance \ Cost O&M

s

Nuclear Nuclear Pulv. Coal Gasified Coal Combined-Cycle Gas One 600-MWe Two 600-MWe (IGCC) (CCCT)

Figure 1. NUMBER OP NUCLBAR PLANT LICKNSHS > •XPIRINO PBR YEAR, 2002-3030

10 12 Expiration datas assuma all plants will apply and ba granted tha ability to racaptura their construction lima.

Figure 2. By the beginning of the next century, roughly 30 nuclear power units in the U.S. will have exhausted their storage capacity. The 30 units are:

• Arkansas Nuclear One, Units 1 and 2 • Beaver Valley, Unit 1 • Big Rock Point • Brunswick, Units 1 and 2 • Calvert Cliffs • Davis-Besse, Unit 1 • Dresden 2 • H.B. Robinson, Unit 2 • James A. Fitzpatrick • Maine Yankee • Millstone, Unit 1 • Nine Mile Point, Unit 1 • Oconee, Units 1,2, and 3 • Oyster Creek • Palisades • Peach Bottom, Units 2 and 3 • Pilgrim, Unit 1 • Point Beach, Units 1 and 2 • Prairie Island, Units 1 and 2 • Surry, Units 1 and 2

Figure 3. U.S. NUCLEAR O&M COSTS Constant 1992$/kWe

S/kWe

90.00 -

85.00 -

80.00 -

75.00 -

70.00 -

65.00 -

60.00 -

55.00 -

50.00 -

45.00 -

40.00 -

1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992

Sourer Utility Oat» IncituM lor acluil com; eomtntd to 1992 doltn by USCEA.

Figure 4. STRATEGIC PLAN FOR IMPROVED ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE FIGURE 1-1: BUILDING BLOCK SUMMARY

ACTIONS TO IMPROVE OPERATIONAL COST EFFECTIVENESS

v#///s//mm//MWjyM'///s//My0^^^ I. Individual Utilities Enhance Operational Cost Effectiveness (Utilities)

IA. Effective Use of Resources IB. Standardized Industry Practices (INPO) (NUMARC)

IC. Technology Applications ID. Operational Design Improvements (EPRI) (Equipment Vendors and NSSS Owners Groups)

IE. Economic Performance Measures (EEI)

Supporting Building Blocks ACTIONS TO IMPROVE INDUSTRY INTERACTIONS WITH EXTERNAL ENTITIES

w////im«WM////mrMM'/////M&&//^^^ II. Individual Utilities Enhance Interactions With Regulators (Utilities)

HA. Guidelines (or Licensee IIB. Management of Generic Issues Interactions With the NRC (NUMARC) (NUMARC)

IIC. Economic Regulation IID. Public and Financial (EEI) Community Confidence (USCEA) Supporting BuWrtfl Blocks

ACTIONS TO IMPROVE REGULATIONS AND REGULATORY PROCESSES

III. Individual Utilities Implement New Regulatory Approaches (Utilities)

IIIA. Effective Regulations IIIB. Regulatory Threshold and Risk/ (NUMARC) Performance-Based Regulation (NUMARC)

INC. Effective Regulatory Processes (NUMARC)

Figure 5. Supporting Building Blocks "•2 The Top Twenty-five Lifetime World Power Reactor Performance to September 30,1993* from among 362 reactors over 150 MW

Rank Country Year of Capacity Year of Capacity First Power Factor %t First Power Faelor %t 1. Canada Canada 1984 84.6 Point Lepraau 1982 91.0 BtuceS 2. Germany Finland 1978 84.4 Emstand 1988 90.8 TVO1 3. Slovak Republic Hungary 1984 84.2 8olwnico4 1985 89.2 4. Canada Finland 1980 84.0 Pickering 7 1984 88.1 rvoz 5. Canada Korea 1982 83.9 Picketing 8 1986 87.9 Wdsongt Germany Germany 1981 83.0 6. Giotmde 1984 87.5 Gtafeariteintekt 7. Hungary Spain 1983 82.9 Paksï 1987 87.3 Atmaraz2 8. Finland Switzerland 1972 82.8 LovSsa2 1980 86.8 Muehteberg 9. Belgium Switzerland 1979 82.8 THiangeS 1985 86.2 Gosgan 10. Germany Canada 1983 82.8 Mecfcar? 1985 85.5 Pickerings 11. Germany Canada 19S6 82.8 PhMppsbutg 2 1982 85.0 Bnxa7 Switzerland Belgium 82.3 12. 1971 84.9 1987 • BeznauZ Th2 Hungary 13. 1986 scftiaf ûloctri&ty çsrw/âtfcwi Pate 3 84.7 •Source: Nudear Engineering Intemofional ^Capacity Factor-

Figure 6. PLM AND THE SINGLE REACTOR UTILITY

OR How A SINGLE REACTOR UTILITY CAN FACE THE PLM ISSUES

Michel H. Ross Senior Nuclear Advisor ^n, ?nnrft ' Nuclear Management Directorate Hydro-Québec

INTRODUCTION

Ageing is a phenomenon that no one can escape, not even a high-tech nuclear generating station. There are many aspects and many issues to cope with when a utility considers a station plant life management (PLM) program : economics, nuclear safety, technical assessment, knowledge and know-how.

To maintain the long-term availability and capacity factor with controlled and reasonable generating costs during the whole service life is a prime concern. Safety is also a major issue. The deterioration, with time, of the safety level and the rise of uncertainty with regard to safety are real concerns.

A single reactor utility has much to gain in seeking cooperation, in order to share its limited experience and resources with others. Also, it may be wise to go one step at a time along the road to life extension.

1. AGEING

Getting Old ageing should receive early attention

Equipment performance, station reliability and capacity factor are expected to drop during the late middle and latter years of a nuclear station nominal life.

Different degradation mechanisms may affect the systems, structures and components (SSC's) to such an extent that they may not fulfill adequately their function anymore. This is based on their design, manufacture and installation, but also on the conditions in which they have been operated and maintained. Their impact on station life is related to ihe difficulties to repair or replace them. They may also become obsolete and no longer fulfill their mission. Ageing mechanism will manifest itself, with time, in functionality and performance. Factors that affect SSC's can be fatigue, wear, temperature, humidity, pressure, chemistry variables, vibration, flow erosion and corrosion, neutron bombardment, gamma radiation, etc. Ageing mechanisms begin to take their toll on components from the very moment they are delivered, even before plant construction.

IAEA defines ageing as a "continuous degradation of components, systems, structures resulting from cumulative changes with time under normal service conditions, including normal operation and transient conditions". Th'j degradation can hit material property and/or functional capability.

It is believed that ageing issues and their impact on the nuclear station's reliability should receive early attention in the station's life so that proper planning and proactive maintenance and programs can be put forward to manage the effects of age related degradation.

One of the main features of a plant life management program is to demonstrate that the stresses of time have not degraded the physical conditions of the station, especially the passive SSC's. The most vulnerable SSC's beyond 40 years of operation seem to make an increasingly large consensus. They are the containment, the concrete structures, the pressure tubes, the supports, the steam generators, the piping and the cabling.

Any Signs that Gentillv 2 is Turning into an Old Folk? pressure tubes may force the station into premature shutdown

The design life of our pressures tubes is 210,000 hours at 100% FP or 30 years at 80% capacity factor. This is significantly less than the nominal 40 years for the reactor pressure vessels of the light water reactors. This introduces, up front, a different perspective to life management.

Candu-6 pressure tubes seem to have a good tolerance to flaws, debris fretting, fuelling scratches, crevice corrosion, fuel bearing pad fret marks or manufacturing flaws both in the body of the pressure tube and the rolled joint.

However, they are prone to hydride blister formation for pressure tubes in contact with the calandria tubes and with hydrogen equivalent level greater than the blister formation threshold at contact location. The current strategy for fuel channel maintenance and inspection addresses adequately this major issue.

Also, pressure tube material properties change in-service. The present evaluation of integrity usirig the current data shows adequate safety margins even though fracture toughness nay decrease faster than predicted and may remain a concern. Recent data shows that pickup is higher than expected. This may alter the leak-before- break criteria. It may prove to be a life limiting factor or require, in the distant future, a prohibitive amount of in-service inspection. In the long run, dimensional changes may prove to be the pressure tubes' life limiting factor. Monitoring, to date, of axial elongation has shown that the fastest growing tubes could run out of bearing travel before the end of their design life. Engineered solutions could offset this dimensional change. Diametrical expansion is within the value assumed in the design analysis. This dimensional change may bring reactor derating at the end of service life, due to bad erosion of operating margins caused by trip setpoint penalties. Remedies may exist to offset this. Pressure tube fuel channel sag can lead to several limits that could be reached before the end of design life : contact with horizontal mechanisms, contact between pressure tube and calandria tube, and fuel bundle pressure tube interference. This is not a big concern, but still a concern.

We already know at lot of things about pressure tubes through the R & D programs and the station inspection programs, but there is still a lot to be done. Hopefully, we will eventually identify the life limiting mechanisms and conditions for our station, and count on good and reliable life indicators.

In any case, pressure tubes may force the station into premature shutdown, because there is still so much uncertainty on many aspects, in spite of very significant R & D and inspection efforts.

Other station early ageing signs: tighter margins on the regional overpower trip setpoints, practically no margin left on the inlet header temperature (increasing primary side and secondary side fouling in the steam generators), increasing containment leak rate, increasing corrective maintenance rate for the important valves on the heat transport system, general wear as measured by the increase in the cobalt radiation field from the heat transport system, etc....

On the other hand, our steam generators have not shown any signs of degradation so far. They seem to be in excellent condition and the very few tubes that have been plugged are those that have been taken out for destructive examination.

AECB Generic Action Item to provide the assurance of continuing station safety

On October 4,1990 the Atomic Energy Control Board (AECB) sent us a letter about the assurance of continuing nuclear station safety. This is now known as Generic Action Item No 90-G-03. Figure-1 introduces some of the key words on that issue: "physical changes with time, age, not compromising safety, remain assured of future safety,..."

This generic action item expresses the well-founded concern that safety-related SSC's may become less reliable with time. The effects of ageing may eventually challenge the design safety margins, if not detected nor corrected.

This issue is twofold: the assurance that the physical changes affecting the SSC's are not compromising their functional ability to perform their safety task, and the assurance that these physical changes are not compromising the safety analyses themselves. To provide this assurance of continuing nuclear station safety to ourselves and to the regulator, a variety of ageing management activities and programs are performed over the life cycle of the station in order to anticipate, detect, prevent, correct and mitigate the effects of ageing.

2. THE PLM OPTIONS to retub or not to retub, that is the question

The Do-Nothing Option the original investment at risk

The do-nothing option does not mean that we are actually to do nothing. On the contrary, we would try to get as high a return as possible out of the original investment in the station. This station is amortized over a 30-year period, so we would try to get 30 years of production out of it, while keeping 0 & M costs as low as possible.

The do-nothing projection reveals that availability would most probably decrease significantly if no special action is taken. Even for a patch and run program, the station would only barely maintain a 60% level of availability during the last years of operation. And the cost of a patch and run maintenance program would skyrocket to a point where it would be so prohibitive that we would most probably shut the station down prematurely, say after 27 years of operation, to be optimistic.

This is well illustrated in figure-2. The 80% capacity factor is the design target. The reversed bath tube shape curve is what one would normally expect. The solid line curve is what would most probably happen. The left hand side curve is what one wants to avoid but is hanging over his head if maintenance is neglected.

There is a definite possibility that the do-nothing option will not allow a maximum return on investment, nor will it protect the original investment.

The Life-Assurance Option a life-time capacity factor enhancer

The life-assurance option is the very first objective of a plant life management program. It is aimed at getting the expected return on the original investment, i.e. first, to get to the end of the station design life of 30 years and, second, to maintain the capacity factor as high as possible while keeping the station safe.

The life-assurance option is designed to keep a good record as far as electric production snd nuclear safety are concerned, to avoid any station early retirement because we have neglected maintenance or have not been using the right maintenance programs or the proper operation methods. Also, this option should provide the utility with a reasonable assurance against any unexpected "catastrophe" or any unforeseen major flaw or disruptive event that may be station-life threatening or overly costly, such as having to replace the steam generators without warning and having to undergo a two-year station outage because there would be no replacement generators available.

This option should also allow us to be ready far ahead of time, just in case something dramatic happens to the pressure tubes before the end of their design life.

This option should allow us to set long-term performance-based goals for critical and for important SSC's, and to document that the SSC's are meeting their goals with either the existing or corrected maintenance programs or with modified operation methods. To do so, nearly the same assessment studies as for the life-extension option would have to be performed.

Gain on the capacity factor (and on the return on investment) should be at hand as illustrated in figure-3. Not only should the station avoid premature shutdown, but this option should allow for a substantial increase in the capacity factor during the last ten years of design life.

The Life-Extension Option a lucrative opportunity

As it is not clear that we may operate our station for even its total design life without having to replace the pressure tubes, the life-extension option means for us a scenario where, during a prolonged shutdown, reactor retubing and station refurbishment take place after, say 25 years of operation, and station life is extended for say another 20 to 25 years, for a total service life of 45 to 50 years. This is not much more than the expected 40-year "design life" of the US or French reactors or much more than the expected 40-year "strategic life" of the CANDU stations in Ontario.

For the foreseeable future, technical obsolescence would probably not affect the CANDU-6 stations because they are of a generation of relatively mature commercial power plants with a high basic safety level. On the other hand, even though there are significant pressures to ever increase the level of safety, there is now a tendency to slow down the rate of increase throughout the world.

To maintain the life extension potential of the station, studies and vigorous implementation of their recommendations would contribute to improve or maintain production reliability, to enhance or maintain safety margins and to provide greater assurance that the design operating period can be achieved.

The life-extension option, as shown in figure-4, would also secure THE only nuclear site qualified in Québec and the nuclear option open within the utility. Geriatrics the international experience

Almost every country where there are operating reactors has an ageing and plant life management program of some sort aimed at determining the safety, economical and technical feasibility of continued station operation while maintaining or improving safety, availability and 0 & M costs. Most of these programs seek to identify and better understand ageing mechanisms and the necessary mitigating measures.

In the United States of America, DOE and EPRI have demonstrated, back in 1984, that it was economically profitable to invest in license renewal and life extension of nuclear plants; the License Renewal exercise with the two lead plants (Surry and Monticello) has demonstrated, as early as 1987, the feasibility of life extension up to 70 years for essential SSC's (with some replacement and repairs); since then, there has been a blockage of the process between NRC and the utilities.

Nevertheless, the NRC NPAR (Nuclear Plant Ageing Research) phase II program is still moving ahead and, in the US, the odds are that most stations will continue to operate through their first 40 years, as a minimum.

A few years ago, the life extension road appeared relatively straightforward but license renewal has taken unexpected turns in the last two years. The American utilities (Virginia Power, for example) now talk about plans to apply for a five-year license renewal instead of 20 years; on the other hand, instead of going for lead plants, they may go for a more generic approach with the Owners Groups.

Électricité de France (EDF) has had a Life Management Project ("Projet Durée de Vie") since 1985; this project studied eighteen essential SSC's and concluded in the "Rapports de Constats", the topical reports, that the technical potential for life extension to 50 years or more was excellent. In addition, seven generic studies have been done on the degradation phenomenon or technique, such as vibration, fatigue, bimetal joints, ... The program is completed by an evaluation of out-of-service equipment such as the Dampierre steam generators or the Chooz A reactor pressure vessel.

EDF expects to run its PWR's for at least 35 years and up to 40, 50 and maybe even 60 years. So far, the reactor lifetime limiting factor is the reactor vessel embrittlement.

The "Projet Durée de Vie" also deals with aspects such as: economic competitiveness of extended life plants (O & M costs and refurbishment costs) with other energy sources. Under basic assumptions, it looks like there may be adequate margins. The project also tackles issues, such as safety and licensing, that may prove to be bothersome if the reference licensing basis is shifting too much. It also takes into account the production system and grid renewal as well as the industrial context.

Ontario Hydro has almost completed the scoping phase of its Nuclear Plant Life Assurance (NPLA) program started in 1987. The goal of the program is "to improve plant productivity in the longer term by improving maintenance to offset the effects of plant ageing". The program aims at providing 40 years of station service life, avoiding major surprise failures and preserving the option of life extension beyond the assumed nominal service life (40 years). To achieve this goal, the program has developed a basis for operation, inspection and maintenance of the critical components (with respect to cost, safety or reliability) and for managing the effects of ageing. The program also has the objective of making sure that all relevant activities are part of an overall plan. While the US PLEX program is mainly driven by licensing considerations, the Ontario Hydro NPLA program emphasises reliability of operation.

The OECD Nuclear Energy Agency PLIM Group was created in 1990 to achieve a systematic and high level of collaboration between the many different countries involved in these issues of ageing and life management. They have identified a model PLM program composed of many elements related to sound management, technical issues, safety issues and economic issues. Also, an IAEA NPP Ageing Program has been in existence since 1985.

3. THE PLM FEATURES looking for the show-stopper

International studies over the last five years or so have demonstrated that there is probably no such thing as a single component being life limiting to the station; for example, CANOU reactors have been fully retubed, steam generators are being replaced, and studies show that a light water reactor pressure vessel can be replaced at a cost lower than steam generator replacement.

In the US, the expected service life is 40 years for BWRs and PWRs; in France, it is 40 years for PWRs; in Ontario, it is 40 years for CANDU stations. Design service life and the financial amortization period for the Gentilly 2 station is 30 years. With a full reactor core retubing, there is, at minimum, a very real potential for life extension from 30 to 40 years!

Economic a steam generator replacement for every three years of extended life

The optimum service life of Gentilly 2 has to be assessed in relation with the Hydro- Québec system, existing and planned. This is not an easy task because of the very high complexity of the network, the very long time frame involved in the planning and basic uncertainties about the future.

Nevertheless, a very preliminary exercise has been performed. This preliminary estimate was not based on the insertion of the extended service life of Gentilly 2 in the planning of a new generation program, thus displacing or postponing the construction of new equipment. The calculation was based on the value of the energy and power at system marginal cost in the existing generation mix versus the production cost. It is the calculation of revenues versus investment and O & M costs. It is a comparison between the value of the service (energy and power) to the grid and the cost of maintaining the station in operation.

The results of this exercise are very encouraging. According to the current reference scenario calling for station retubing and refurbishment after 25 years of operation, less than 15 years of extended service life would be necessary to justify the investment, for a total service life of less than 40 years. Any operation beyond that point would be highly profitable. In fact, these preliminary results show, for example, that a steam generator replacement could be affordable for every three years of prolonged service life.

These results are good enough to carry on with the studies in greater details. Cost/benefit analysis has to be fed back into the generation planning model to determine if routine 0 & M costs, exceptional maintenance costs, such as replacement or modifications imposed by safety or availability requirements, on top of the capital spending associated with the refurbishment needed for life extension, are justified in comparison to other energy options.

For the time being, it is thought that station life extension (beyond 27 or 30 years) expenditures are a justifiable and competitive alternative to new station construction including site approval.

In any case, the length of our station life will be a "business decision".

Safety cost-benefit criteria should be introduced in regulatory decision making

Safety should be a major feature in any plant life management program. The deterioration with time of the safety level and the raise of uncertainty in safety are real concerns. Demonstration has to be made that the station is still always as safe i.e. maintaining its current level of safety.

However it should be accepted that the station has to comply with its original licensing basis. Older stations should not be asked to comply with later standards and undertake massive backfits.

It should be basic common sense that a station that has operated for twenty years or more with an excellent operational safety record should be credited for this achievement and not be asked to satisfy the same criteria as newer stations. A station that was safe on its twenty-fourth year of operation will not suddenly become unsafe, overnight, on its twenty-fifth year.

Of course, we should be ready to evolve with the tools, methods and criteria used to reassess the safety of the station on an ongoing basis. Although this evolution may bring some adjustments or modifications to the SSC's, it should not lead to radical questioning because the CANDU-6 design is still very current. The judgment as to wether the current safety level is enough should be based on a criteria measuring the gain in safety against cost. Cost-benefit criteria should be introduced in AECB regulatory decision making. One should not spend considerable amounts of capital on supposed low probability accident situations. For example, a difference between costs and supposed benefits of two orders of magnitude should be considered sufficient to eliminate any further consideration of the degree of uncertainty in any analysis. Utilities do not want to play fast and loose with safety, but they do not want to misappropriate public funds either.

All together, we must find a reasonable way to slow down the actual inclination of our regulator to have unduly high requirements. These ever increasing requirements can be found in the protection against serious accidents such as in the Secondary Side Break Accident or in the protection against external attacks such as floods and earthquakes, or in the future as demonstrated by the C-6 Requirements for the Safety Analysis of CANDU Nuclear Power Plants or the C-98 Reliability Requirements. These new requirements are far from the original licensing basis and, moreover, would have very little net benefit for the safe operation of the station, while introducing a very significant financial overburden in analysis and modifications.

In extreme cases, over-regulation or undue requirements by regulatory agencies can become counterproductive even with respect to safety. For example, the existence of undue restrictions in the accreditation of senior operating personnel may mobilize all the training resources, thus jeopardizing all other personnel training or, in effect, depriving the utility of essential technical resources. Indeed, by remaining at the helm of the operation too long, authorized senior operating staff run the risk of getting "stuck on shift" while waiting for their successors to take over. This, in turn, keeps their experience from being put to the best use, i.e. serving safety.

Cost-related premature shutdowns are likely to become an issue if one has to navigate the uncertainties brought on by the regulator's ever changing rules. We are confronted with a technology killer here.

Moreover, public attitudes towards ageing nuclear stations and public feelings towards the nuclear industry in the years 2010-2020 may eventually be key in terms of gaining public acceptance for continued or extended operation. Safety issues should be addressed in a transparent way and the solution readily understandable. An open dialogue on the impacts of continued operation versus other energy options should be promoted.

Ultimately, one of the best ways to deal with the safety issue would be to establish a constructive day-to-day dialogue with the regulator and help him regain trust in the utilities. With that trust we would show them that, for us, good safety is good business. 10

Technical Assessment the non-committing aspect of PLM

Technical SSC's life assessment requires:

the knowledge of the actual conditions (including transients) in which the components operated;

the verification that these conditions and their associated degradation mechanisms are compatible with the design envelopes or hypotheses;

- the definition of functional life indicators or the identification of margins left, or remaining service life.

The technical assessment is discussed in greater details below.

The Knowledge and the Know-How to count on a sufficient number of qualified workers and staff

As stations age, the relative importance of maintenance increases, and the difficulty to perform maintenance tasks becomes increasingly complex, as one has to deal with intensifying radiation fields, for example. Hence, the necessity to be able to rely on a sufficient number of technically trained workers and qualified supervisory personnel. It is not easy either to attract personnel to older plants or to keep them there.

Some of the technology will become obsolete. To maintain or replace technical obsolescence adds on to the growing complexity of stations, and of operating and maintenance procedures, and it exerts increasing pressures on technical training programs intended for various categories of personnel: operators, trades, technicians and engineers. Often, those responsible for providing the training are themselves hardly equal to the task.

As for the safety aspect, the aim of the first phase of the PLM in the know-how area, after the finding of the first obviousness, is to bring out the main roads of future actions.

The PLM Objectives

The objectives of our PLM are (figure-5):

a) To maintain the long-term reliability and safety of Gentilly 2 during the nominal design life of 30 years (life assurance);

b) To maintain the long-term availability and capacity factors of Gentilly 2 with controlled and reasonable generating costs during the nominal design life of 30 years (life assurance); 11

c) To preserve the option of extending the life of Gentilly 2, with good safety and availability at reasonable costs, beyond the nominal design life of 30 years, up to 50 years or more (life extension).

4. THE HYDRO-QUÉBEC APPROACH the single reactor utility strategy: to team up and to go step by step

Even though the Gentilly 2 station is only eleven years old, it is necessary to undertake a life assessment now and to initiate in-depth thinking about plant life management, to evaluate the impact on station life of decisions taken today on operation methods as well as on maintenance.

It is equally important to maintain the site licensed as a nuclear site for an operating reactor and to keep the nuclear option opened, just in case...

It is highly desirable that any decision to decommission or extend the life of the station be taken on the basis of sound technical and economical data. To do so, a good way to proceed is to go step by step and to have key decision points as illustrated in figure-6.

Each significant advance in the program will lead to a decision by management to go further or to step back. In the same manner, a decision is required before any significant commitment is made in the refurbishment project.

In any of the three PLM options mentioned earlier, we have to work on the important and critical SSCs1 long term maintenance strategy and programs. We have seen that there are strong incentives to further study the PLM fearures. On the other hand, technical assessment of the SSC's can be very expensive. Even though technical life assessment is station dependent, there are so many similarities between CANDU-6's that we have every reason to look for partnership in this area.

This is why we have been looking for partnership with New Brunswick Power (N.B. Power), who operates the Point Lepreau station, and with Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL), the nuclear designer of the CANDU-6 reactor.

There are also other good reasons to get into a teaming agreement:

N.B. Power has to answer to the same AECB generic action item about "Assurance of Continuing Nuclear Plant Safety";

there is a need to provide the information with respect to available remaining life of major components necessary to support the evaluation of the merit of performing a reactor retub;

this is an opportunity to spend smarter dollars in maintenance and in R&D; 12

to have a credible scenario that the stations can run for more than 30 years. This could eventually be used in the marketing of CANDU internationally;

to pool our scarce resources (manpower and dollars);

to pool our experience in station design and operation;

to add to the credibility of the assessment for: . the regulator . the senior management of our companies . the existing and potential customers.

The mission statement of our joint team for the assessment part of the PLM for CANDU- 6 will be: 'To perform the assessment phase of a program to manage the effects of ageing degradation to ensure continuing safe, reliable and cost effective operation of our existing CAN DU-6 stations."

5. THE PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT

every partner represents 1/3 of the team

Scope of the Agreement This three-party agreement (Hydro-Québec, N.B. Power and AECL) provides for the performance of phase one of the Plant Life Management program i.e. the Plant Life Assessment of Gentilly 2 and Point Lepreau, including the CANDU-6 generic issues.

Terms of Reference

rules for a healthy cooperation

The teaming agreement encompasses the following terms of reference, among others:

to work by consensus of the three parties; every partner will share 1/3 of the total cost of the studies and will assume its share of the management of the agreement;

to not reinvent the wheel, and to keep the costs of the studies as low as possible. For example:

use the best methodology of similar initiatives, such as the OECD NEA PLIM Group or the IAEA, the EPRI terminology will be used, and already available Canadian studies will be used as the basic technical reference documents. 13

The agreement and the studies will be managed by a Steering Committee composed of one representative from each partner.

Guidance of the technical activities will be done in consultation with a Technical Review Committee. It will be composed of up to two representatives named by each partner, in addition to the members of the Steering Committee.

For each study resulting in a Topical Report (the deliverable), there will be a Study Leader. Based on Ontario Hydro experience, we concluded that there are several advantages to locating the PLM study team leaders in a single location, the main one being the frequent exchanges that take place between them. Also, the Study Leaders should have early strong interface and relationship with the operations staff.

Deliverables and Milestones topical reports and a four-year schedule

Figure-7 shows a summary of our master schedule for the assessment phase of the PLM program. The project is expected to last four years and it starts with two pilot studies. These pilot studies will be reviewed by the utilities management before going ahead with the three-year full scale project.

At the same time, a screening methodology and criteria will be developed and applied to the station safety related SSC's and to any non-safety related important SSC to draw up the list of the critical SSC's that will be subject to a topical study under this project. Topical studies preliminary list, in figure-8, will have to be substantiated.

The deliverables will be Topical reports. Figure-9 resents a typical report content. The recommendations for future actions should be worked out and should include cost estimates and a rough schedule.

The Definition of the Critical SSC's the trickiest part of the assessment phase

There is no simple single list of equipment defined as critical SSC's because SSC's differ from plant to plant, and operating histories and physical environments further compound differences among plants.

Critical SSC's may be defined as the ones for which the difficulties, the cost and the plant shutdown time for refurbishment or replacement cannot be included in the normal maintenance program. 14

Criteria for the screening methodology used to assess the station SSC's in terms of ageing mechanisms may include elements such as: - high impact on costs - high impact on safety - high impact on reliability - high impact on plant availability.

The high impact on costs could include elements such as a prohibitive overall lifetime maintenance cost, replacement or repair technically extremely difficult, very high cost in terms of personnel radiation doses, or a prohibitive station outage time.

One positive approach could be to start with all safety-related SSC's, and not to focus on a few to start with. Then, if one has made a careful choice in his screening criteria, most of the components should fall under the existing programs, such as the maintenance, inspection, surveillance and testing programs. Only those SSC's not sufficiently covered by the existing programs or revised existing programs, generally not focusing on long term ageing issues, would be the subject of PLM assessment. These SSC's are the ones that we want to study in our PLM assessment phase.

The selection of adequate screening criteria is probably the thrickiest part of such an assessment phase. "If one sets these criteria too low, then too many components will require a full-blown analysis of ageing mechanisms, and program costs will skyrocket. On the other hand, if one sets the criteria too high, most of the components will undergo only a qualitative ageing analysis."

CONCLUSION

There are, indeed, many obstacles on the road to life extension. Knowledge and know- how have to be maintained over the entire period. Annual 0 & M costs as well as refurbishment costs have to be controlled. Technical issues have to be mastered, such as the adequate definition of critical SSC's, the proper identification of degradation mechanisms and their effects on various components, and the sound assessment of remaining service life.

Even if human, budget and technical challenges are met, the life extension of a given station has to fit within utility planning, according to electrical demand and other energy options. For example, despite the same technical evaluation, N.B. Power and Hydro- Québec may eventually reach opposite decisions as far as the service life of our CANDU-6 stations.

A few years ago, there was real excitement world-wide about plant life extension and everybody in the US, for example, was talking about a twenty-year license renewal. We now see work done to apply on a more generic design basis through the Owners Groups. Also, utilities may not be ready to commit huge amounts of money for the long run and some are considering shorter terms, like five years. Ultimately, the regulator's requirements may have life-and-death consequences for nuclear stations. 15

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish to thank Mr. A. L. DeLong from N.B. Power and Mr. J. I. Saroudis from AECL.

REFERENCES

WATSON, P.C., MARUSKA, C.C., ANDREEFF, T. ,"CANDU Nuclear Plant Life Assurance Program for Pickering NGS-A", PLEX-93, Zurich, Dec. 1993.

Special Report, "Outlook On Life Extension", Nucleonics Week, March 31,1994.

JOOSTEN, K. J., GODIN, R. /'International Issues and Initiatives in Plant Life Management", PLEX-93, Zurich, Dec. 1993.

"Methodology For The Management Of Ageing Of Nuclear Power Plant Components Important To Safety", IAEA, TRS No. 338, Vienna, 1992.

JOOSTEN, K. J., private communication about Nuclear Power Plant Ageing and Life Management, January 25,1994.

GODIN, R., presentation to the "DOE Workshop - Ageing Management - Life Extension", Las Vegas, February 1994.

BIOGRAPHY

Michel H. ROSS is Senior Nuclear Advisor with the Nuclear Management Directorate of Hydro-Québec. Among other tasks, he analyzes and handles complex technical and/or administrative files of corporate interest falling within the field of nuclear operations.

Mr. Ross holds a diploma in Physics Engineering and is a graduate in Nuclear Engineering from the Nuclear Engineering Institute of Montreal Polytechnic. He has great experience of commissioning and operating CANDU plants. As a reactor physicist, he actively participated in the Gentilly 1 NGS commissioning. He became manager of the Technical Division of Gentilly 1, and, subsequently, Chief Engineer responsible for mothballing the plant. He then was put in charge of commissioning the newly built Gentilly 2 NGS as Senior Commissioning Engineer. He directed the Operations and Planning Division of Gentilly 2 over its first years of operation.

CNA94.doc Gentilly 2 - PLM

AECB GENERIC ACTION ITEM NO 90-G-03 ASSURANCE OF CONTINUING NUCLEAR STATION SAFETY

... that physical changes occurring ... with the passage of time, are not compromising safety ...

... potentially detrimental changes are being systematically identified and dealt with before they challenge the defense-in-depth design philosophy...

You are requested to submit a summary of the means by which you remain assured of the future safety of your respective nuclear plants, as they age.

Figure 1

• Gentilly 2 - PLM The do-nothing option capacity A factor ' 80%

1983 1993 2003 2013 time, years Gentilly 2 lifetime projection of capacity factor

Figure 2 Gentilly 2 - PLM The life-assurance option capacity factor 80% I- -

1983 1993 2003 2013 time, years Gentilly 2 lifetime projection of capacity factor

Figure 3

Gentilly 2 - PLM The life-extension option capacity factor

80%

1983 1993 2003 2013 2023 2033 time, years

Gentilly 2 lifetime projection of capacity factor

Figure 4 Gentilly 2 - PLM

OBJECTIVES OF OUR PLM

a) To maintain the long-term reliability and safety of Gentilly 2 and Point Lepreau during the nominal design life of 30 years (life assurance).

b) To maintain the long-term availability and capacity factors of Gentilly 2 and Point Lepreau with controlled and reasonable generating costs during the nominal design life of 30 years (life assurance).

c) To preserve the option of extending the life of Gentilly 2 and Point Lepreau with a good safety and availability at reasonable costs, beyond the nominal design life of 30 years, up to 50 years or more (life extension).

Figure 5

Gentilly 2 - PLM

1994 1995 1998 SSC'S Tech. Assessment Economic Assessment Partnership Agreement Safety Assessment Two pilot studies Know-how Assessment

Important SSC's / no Maintenance Strategy '

Critical SSC's Long Term Maintenance

2002 2008 2010 2035

Pre-Englneerlng & ^^ Engineering & . Government Appmuaia^^^ Procurer"»»"* ^^nofiirhlnhmrint ^^ Operation

Prepare Decommissioning Gentilly 2 - PLM

CANDU-6 Assessment Phase Work Plan

| 1994 199S 1996 1997

Projet definition — and approval

Project Guidelines Critical SSC's • Pilot Studies — Topical SSC's •Hi I and Generic Studies Compilation Report • Utility Mngt Review

Figure 7

Gentilly 2 - PLM

CANDU-6 ASSESSMENT PHASE TOPICAL STUDIES PRELIMINARY LIST

- Reactor pressure tubes - Instrumentation and control - Steam generators - Cables - Containment - Polar crane - Reactor assembly - Transient and fatigue and structures monitoring - Civil structures - Safety at the current level - Nuclear piping - Retub costs - Conventional piping

Figuce 8 Gentilly 2 - PLM

CANDU-6 ASSESSMENT PHASE TYPICAL TOPICAL REPORT CONTENT

Summary 1. Introduction 2. Description of the SSC and their sub-components 3. Design data 3.1 Situations taken into account 3.2 Functional criteria 3.3 Working iife indicator 3.4 Safety requirements 4. Manufacturing and installation data 4.1 Peculiarities or anomalies 4.2 Methods of repair and replacement 5. Operational feedback 5.1 Monitoring, inpection, testing 5.2 Maintenance 5.3 Canadian and international 6. Degradation mechanisms and life assessment 7. Data collection and record keeping 8. Recommendation for future actions 9. Conclusion References

Figure 9 SESSION S - Évolution de la technologie nucléaire / Evolution of Nuclear Technology

Président de session/Chain D. Torgerson (AECL Research, Canada)

T.S. Andersen - "Westinghouse Advances in Passive Plant Safety - AP600" (Westinghouse Electric Corporation, USA)

R.S. Hart - "The CANDU 9" (AECL CANDU, Canada) WESTINGHOUSE ADVANCES IN PASSIVE PLANT SAFETY—AP600 T. S. Andersen Manager, Advanced Technology Operations Westinghouse Electric Corporation Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

ABSTRACT inception, through design implementation, to the first-of-a-kind-engineering (FOAKE) detailed design. The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) initiated the Advanced THREE-TffiR APPROACH TO PLANT SAFETY Light Water Reactor (ALWR) Program to develop and commercialize ALWRs for the next round of power The ALWR URD describes a three-tier plant construction. Advanced, simplified technology is approach to plant safety—accident resistance, core one approach under development to end the industry's damage prevention, and mitigation. The AP600 design search for a simpler, more forgiving, and less costly has used each of these safety tiers in the development reactor. Since 1985, Westinghouse has been developing process for obtaining design certification, as exemplified AP600, a 600 MWe two-loop, advanced, simplified below in the following paragraphs. passive plant, in response to this program. The AP600 design strikes a balance between the use of proven Accident Resistance technology and new approaches. The result is a greatly streamlined plant that can meet safety regulations and A fundamental AP600 design principle is to reliability requirements, and promote broader public include ample margins in the design by way of features confidence in nuclear energy. that minimize the severity of initiating events that could challenge the safety of the plant For example, the core This paper will describe how the AP600 design can run at a linear heat generation rate of less than 80 development uses the "three-tier" approach to safety, as percent of present plants. In turn, the low-power defined by the .ALWR Utilities Requirement Document density core results in increased thermal and safety (URD), and the resultant enhancements to the AP600 margins. The pressurizer in AP600 is as large as that in safety systems design. This will be. followed by a a typical Westinghouse three-loop plant generating 900 comprehensive explanation of the passive safety systems to 1000 MWe—and 30 percent larger than that used in and how their performance has been supported by an plants with a comparable power rating—allowing AP600 extensive tesung program, which is still under way. to accommodate transients that could cause a reactor trip The paper will close with a brief account of the AP600 in an older plant. Other examples of the accident- design status in relation to design certification. resistance approach are described in the following paragraphs. INTRODUCTION The passive residual beat removal system has Through the broad participation of the nuclear an increased design pressure that is able to withstand industries and utilities of numerous countries, a wealth full reactor coolant system pressure and is available for ot information has been generated worldwide relating to use under any postulated plant condition. nuclear power plant safety and operations; this information and has been collected and focused in AP600 uses canned motor reactor coolant EPRI's ALWR URD. The purpose of the URD is to pumps, thereby eliminating the shaft seal and associated present a clear, complete statement of utility desires for support systems. This elimination removes the potential their next generation of nuclear plants. To this end, it for a pump seal loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA). consists of a comprehensive set of design requirements for future plants. While these requirements are The AP600 design uses a digital diverse grounded in proven nuclear technology, they also actuation system (DAS) that is an extension of the incorporate new features that ensure a simple, robust, anticipated transient without scram mitigation system and more forgiving plant Incorporation of the ALWR actuation circuit (AMSAC) system in present plants. URD has been a key design goal for AP600 from design The DAS provides an automatic diverse means of

O581w.wpf:Ib/6294 shutting down the plant if some common mode In addition, components were modified to hardware or software failure renders the normal remove traditional design aspects that negatively protection system inoperable. The DAS scrams the affected the deterministic safety analyses of traditional reactor, trips the turbine, and actuates the passive plants. For example, the canned motor reactor coolant residual heat removal system to provide heat removal in pumps eliminate the need for a pump crossover leg, and the event the reactor does not trip when the scram signal thus help keep the core covered in the event of a is received. This is similar to the AMSAC function in small-break LOCA. present plants. In addition, the DAS actuates selected engineered safety features, including the core makeup Probabilistic. The use of the Probabilistic Risk tank (CMT) and containment isolation. The DAS Assessment (PRA) contributed significantly to the prevents a normal transient from developing into an AP600's meeting the rigorous safety requirements of the accident in the event of multiple failures in the normal ALWR URD. Recent technological advances in the protection system. Accident resistance is also provided data processing industry have introduced the computing by multiple layers of defense within the passive, safety- capability to use PRA in the development of nuclear related systems. For example, decay heat removal by power plants. PRA is one of the most significant the passive residual heat removal system is backed up technological advances in nuclear power today and is a by a feed and bleed function using CMTs and the powerful design tool. Its great value lies in its capacity automatic depressurization system (ADS). to dovetail plant safety and performance, rather than sacrificing performance for safety. The use of PRA Accident resistance is also provided by other techniques in plant design allows a much better active, but non-safety-related, systems. These systems understanding of safety, and at the same time and from have the capability to bring the reactor to a safe the same data, an attainment of better capacity factors shutdown condition without challenging passive safety for the life of the plant systems. The systems are powered by two power sources, one of which is the onsite diesel generators, Size well B, a Westingbouse-designed plant, is the which also support functions such as lighting and air first commercial LWR to use a complete PRA as a compressors. The other power source is normal offsite design tool. PRA has also been an integral part of the power. This double power source provides a low AP600 design process, used to probe the design for likelihood for a loss-of-all ac power. features that could be improved from a risk standpoint. A number of plant design enhancements were made as a The accident-resistant nature of the AP600 result of these PRA studies, including: design is reinforced by systems simplification, which minimizes the frequency of initiating events and greatly • A diverse fourth-stage ADS valve operator reduces complex components, especially those most • A change of normal residual beat removal system subject to regulation. AP600 will use 50 percent fewer (RNS) valves to motor-operated valves valves, 80 percent less safety-grade pipe, 70 percent less • Parallel check valves in the CMT line control cable, 35 percent fewer pumps, and 45 percent • Parallel active valves in the IRWST line less seismic building volume than other conventional • A logic modification to the startup feeuwater system plants. • Diverse actuation of selected engineered safeguard features Core Damage Prevention • Automatic steam generator tube rupture (SGTR) protection During the detailed design phase, core damage prevention is examined from both a probabilistic and a In addition to the plant design enhancements, deterministic viewpoint changes were made to the operating procedures, including: starting the RNS after any ADS actuation; Deterministic. Deterministic safety studies maintaining containment integrity during mid-loop were performed as an integral part of the AP600 design operation; establishing in-service testing intervals; and process, and were used to optimize such parameters as requiring CMT/ADS to be available during shutdown. the size of the CMTs, the size and setpoint of the cold leg accumulators, the elevation of the in-containment Not only has PRA been an effective design tool, it refueling water storage tank (IRWST), and the setpoints also demonstrates that the AP600 design meets safety for the control and protection system. goals set by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and EPRI, with a core damage frequency of

058lw.wpf:lb/6294 3.4E-7 per year for at-power, internal events, using all systems. These simplified nonsafety-related systems AP600 systems. The AP600 is not overly dependent on automatically actuate to provide a first level of defense, operator actions, nonsafety-related systems, or any one to reduce the likelihood of unnecessary actuation and passive safety-related system. The passive safety-related operation of the safety-related systems. The ultimate systems in the design back up other passive safety- safety of the plant is provided by the passive related systems, which are in turn backed up by active safety-related systems, which provide multiple layers of nonsafety systems, creating an effective redundancy and defense. diversity in plant protection. PROVEN, SIMPLIFIED, PASSIVE SAFETY Mitigation SYSTEMS

The ALV/R policy on accident mitigation is to AP600 passive safety systems simplify safety ensure a whole 24-bour-body dose of less than 25 functions that have traditionally been provided by active man-rem at the site boundary for accident sequences safety systems. The principal safety functions of with a cumulative frequency less than lE-6/yr, and to primary coolant inventory control, reactivity control, provide conservative, rugged containment systems to reactor residual heat removal, and fission product meet this requirement. containment are accomplished with safety systems that, while based on logical extensions of proven reactor AP600 accident mitigation features include, in technology—the overall plant design follows in the addition to the passive core cooling system: the passive decades-long tradition of Westinghouse two-loop PWRs, containment cooling system; the ADS; a core spreading which have consistently operated with average lifetime ;irea that exceeds 0.02 Mwt/M:; hydrogen ignitors; and availabilities of 83 percent—also rely on natural forces provisions for manual flooding of the area under the such as gravity, convection, and evaporation rather than reactor vessel, if flooding has not occurred on active components such as the pumps and ac automatically. generators found in previous plant designs.

The AP600 steel containment has been proven to Primary Inventory Control he robust. No series of credible events will breach the containment's integrity. This is one of the AP600's The AP600 safety system for primary coolant greatest strengths. The result is a severe release inventory control uses gravity injection and nitrogen frequency of 3E-8 per reactor year, and an average body pressurized accumulators to provide primary coolant dose at the site boundary that does not exceed 1 makeup for core cooling and reactivity control in the man-rem, both of these figures representing conservative event a pipe rupture or other accident causes reduction assessments. With this kind of release frequency and in primary coolant volume. This system actuates associated dose at the site boundary, there is no automatically if the reactor protection detects reduced technical or regulatory requirement that would coolant inventory, and requires only a one-time change necessitate an emergency planning zone. in valve positions. Pumps, ac power sources, and operator realignment of equipment are not required for AP600 DEFENSE-IN-DEPTH this system to ensure plant safety.

The AP600 design provides for multiple levels of Residual Heat Removal System defense for accident mitigation (defense-in-depth). Extensive PRA studies have recently shown that even if The AP600 safety system for reactor residual beat none of the active defense-in-depth systems are removal uses a natural circulation beat exchange loop available to perform mitigation functions, the passive connected to the reactor and located inside containment. systems alone meet safety goals. Furthermore, many of Using the forces of natural circulation to drive coolant the tests in an extensive testing program have begun or flow, this system transfers heat generated in the reactor been completed with early results indicating that to a water pool heat sink inside containment. Heat passive safety systems perform reliably and meet design entering the water pool results in steaming that is cooled expectations. by an evaporation on the outside of the steel containment vessel. This simple, naturally driven, Defense-in-depth features provide the designed-in full-pressure system serves the same function as a capability to accommodate transients without causing conventional emergency feedwater system. initiation of engineered safety systems. The first level of defense that exists uses the normal AP600 nonsafety

0581w.wpf:lb/6294 Steel Containment Vessel be the most thoroughly and rigorously tested reactor system in the world. The results to date bave verified The AP600 steel containment vessel prevents the performance of those components and systems radioactive releases to the environment and serves as the unique to the plant where their operation is essential to beat transfer path for reactor residual heat removal in the natural, passive safety concept upon which the the event of postulated accidents. Heat removal from AP600 is based. the containment is by evaporative cooling of the outside of ihe steel vessel. Outside air is ducted by air baffles Passive Containment Cooling System (PCS) Tests between the steel containment shell and the concrete building, cooling the vessel's outer surface by natural Large-Scale Integral Heat Transfer Test. The convection. In accident scenarios, this air-cooling is results of water distribution tests, which support the beat enhanced by draining water stored in a 400,000-gallon transfer test, were used to establish water coverage on annular tank designed into the roof of the shield the vessel dome and walls, which ranged from full to building, onto the steel containment shell. This tank has partial coverage. The initial testing has been completed, sufficient water to provide three days of cooling, after and the results verify the design of the water delivery which time additional cooling water would be provided and distribution system on the containment dome. by operator action to maintain low containment pressure and temperature. But even if no additional water was The facility, at Westinghouse Science and provided at this time, air-cooling alone should be Technology Center (STC) in the U.S., is currently being sufficient for continued public safety. prepared for the next phase of testing, which will model and measure the effects of the internal heat transfer INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL (I&C) mechanisms, non-condensables, and transient conditions similar to those that may be encountered in a severe Advanced, microprocessor-based I&C systems also accident scenario. contribute to overall plant safety by simplifying and enhancing plant operation and maintenance. A digital, The AP600 wind tunnel tests have been completed multiplexed control system takes the place of hardwired at both the University of Western Ontario's boundary analog controls and cable-spreading rooms, accounting layer wind tunnel, and the National Research Council of for a significant decrease in control cable (80 percent Canada's high-speed wind tunnel. These tests have been less control cable than current nuclear plants). I&C used to develop air baffle wind loads and have shown components feature built-in diagnostics and board-level that the shield building air inlet\outlet configuration repair. Most faults can be repaired quickly by swapping results in positive wind-induced cooling air flow. a printed circuit card or instrument module. Other Results at high Reynold's numbers have confirmed test AP600 I&C features that enhance safety and reliability scaling. Testing has also been completed on the effects ;irc train separation, self-diagnostics, and equipment of site terrain, and the results are being reviewed. monitoring. Tests completed earlier at STC—bench wind Data derived from extensive human-factors studies tunnel experiment, water film formation test, heated are used throughout the I&C and control room design to plate test, and air flow path resistance test—have all enhance operability and decrease the probability of supported the results of the PCS tests mentioned above, operator error. These data were also incorporated into verifying the AP600 containment integrity. the design of the alarms, displays, controls, and procedures; the computer-driven graphics and Passive Core Cooling System (PXS) Tests safety-qualified displays simplify the operators' tasks in assunilaung information. The result is a control room PXS Integral Tests. A complete one-quaner-scale design that brings the plant to the operator, rather than model of the AP600 is nearing completion at Oregon making the operator go to the plant State University for the scaled low-pressure test. These tests will investigate the behavior of the entire AP600 AP600 TEST PROGRAM safety system performance, with emphasis on the long-term cooling behavior. AP600 technology is supported by rigorous testing. The test program is the single most visible portion of Full-height, full-pressure tests are currently in the AP600; it is a global effort, with the cooperation of progress using the SPES-2 test loop at the SET the government, industry, and the academic world. facilities in Piacenza, Italy. Modification of the test When the program has been completed, the AP600 will

O581w.wpf:lb/6294 facility has been completed, and pre-operational testing One of the NRC's major concerns with the advent to characterize the facility is under way. of the new, simplified passive designs has been bow to regulate nuclear nonsafety-related systems. PXS Separate Effects Tests. A core makeup tank Westinghouse, the NRC, EPRI, and other members of test facility has been built at the Westinghouse Waltz the industry developed a conceptual approach to resolve Mill site, and pre-operational testing is currently in this issue, wherein the mitigation functions of the progress. These tests have resulted in the addition of a nonsafety-related systems were taken out of the PRA: simple steam distributor in the tank inlet. Smooth tank results verified that the safety goals could be met with drain down at anticipated flow rates has been achieved the safety system mitigation functions alone. The PRA over a full range of initial pressures and temperatures. results, along with the results of deterministic evaluations of the importance of the nonsafety-related Initial testing of the IRWST and sparger was system, were submitted to the NRC in September 1993. completed as part of the automatic depressurization Westinghouse and the NRC agreed on a partial review system test in Italy, demonstrating the sparger of nonsafety-related systems that do not fall under the performance and resulting IRWST loads. The next phase traditional NRC scope of review, but are important of this test program is now under way, with more tests enough to warrant some kind of oversight. planned for late 1994. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION The AP600 test program also comprises extensive component design testing. The AP600 has recently benefited from successful testing and design development, and a significant AP600 PROJECT STATUS number of regulatory approvals. It is an elegant combination of new, natural safety systems, and of On June 26. 1992, Westinghouse submitted the successful technologies used in existing Westingbouse AP600 Standard Safety Analysis Report (SSAR) and PWRs, which have over 1550 reactor years of PRA to the NRC for review. As of the end of May experience around the world. The benefits of the best 1994. Westinghouse bad answered 1387 of the NRC's proven technologies and workforce from the U.S., plus 1879 requests for additional information, and the first the best from Europe and Asia, will enable the AP600 revision of the SSAR was submitted January 14, 1994. to deliver safety and licensability as well as reliability, making a new generation of nuclear plants a reality. On January 11, 1993, the AP600 received a vote of confidence from the marketplace when all ! 6 Advanced Reactor Corporation (ARC) utilities voted to fund the AP600, with half of them voting all their funding to it to complete first-of-a-kind engineering, which goes beyond the design work already submitted. This effort will result in engineering documents that can be used to plan for plant construction.

0581w.wpf:lb/6294 <ï •/ THE CANDU 9

R.S. Hart AECL CANDU 2251 Speakman Drive Mississauga, Ontario, Canada L5K 1B2 (905)823-9040X4596

ABSTRACT direct antecedent of the CANDU 9 plants is the multi-unit Bruce B station operated by Ontario Hydro. CANDU 9 The CANDU 9 nuclear power plants, with electrical also incorporates advanced features which were outputs ranging from 900 MW to 1300 MW, can meet the developed for the newer Darlington and CANDU 3 current and future requirements of utilities with relatively design. large electrical grids. Large nuclear units (i.e. units with greater The CANDU 9 plants are single unit versions of the very electrical output) offer a number of advantages to utilities successful four unit Bruce B design, incorporating with compatible grid capacity. These include economy relevant technical advances made in the CANDU 6 and of scale in capital cost, economy of scale in operating the newer Darlington and CANDU 3 designs. The cost, and more effective land utilization. The CANDU 9 CANDU 9 plant described in this paper is the CANDU 9 plants exploit the CANDU experience base by utilizing 480/SEU with a net electrical output in of about the proven systems, components and technologies of the 1050 MW. In this designation 480 refers to the number very successful Bruce B and CANDU 6 plants, updated of fuel channels, and SEU refers to slightly enriched by relevant technical advances made in Darlington and uranium. CANDU 3, to provide a modern, economical and safe large CANDU plant. The design is also consistent with Emphasis is placed on evolutionary design and the use of the Electrical Power Research Institute (EPRI) top tier well-proven design features to ensure minimum financial requirements for Advanced Water Cooled Reactors and risk to utilities choosing a CANDU 9 plant by assuring the established requirements of CANDU utilities. regulatory licensability and reliable operation. Specific attention is given to enhancing safety through the Modern design methods and features provide simplification and improvement of key systems and further economies in both capital cost and operation costs components. In addition, the CANDU 9 power plants through the use of advanced technologies; this is reflect the important lessons learned by utilities in the particularly true for construction methods (heavy lift construction and operation of CANDU units and, the cranes, modularization, etc.) and control and information relevant experience gained by the world nuclear systems, where technology has advanced at a very rapid community in its operation of over 400 reactors of a rate. Gains have also been made by utilizing the variety of types. As a result, the CANDU 9 plants offer experience base developed by operating plants. a high level of investment security to the owner, together with relatively low energy costs. The latter results from All of the basic and well-proven features which reduced specific capital cost, reduced operation and are the hallmarks of CANDU are retained. These maintenance cost, and reduced radiation exposure to include: plant staff. - heavy water (D2O) moderation and cooling A high level of standardization has always been a feature - horizontal pressure tubes in a low pressure, low of CANDU reactors. This theme is emphasized in the temperature moderator tank called the calandria CANDU 9 plants; all key components (steam generators, - standard CANDU 37-element natural uranium or heat transport pumps, pressure tubes, fuelling machines, Slightly (SEU) fuel etc.) are of the same design as those proven in-service on operating CANDU power stations. - on-power refuelling which avoids refuelling outages. This paper also briefly reviews CANDU fuel cycle flexibility; the advanced fuel cycles noted are readily - two diverse, fast-acting and fully capable safety accommodated by CANDU 9. shutdown systems which are independent of each other and of the reactor regulating system. The CANDU 9 The CANDU 9 is intended for utilities having a 1. DESIGN BASIS grid capacity suitable for 900 M We to 1300MWe class The CANDU 9 design follows the same units. The electrical output of CANDU 9 is determined evol utionary path as the CANDU 6. which is a single-unit by the number of fuel channels and the fissile content of design evolved from the Pickering multi-unit design. The the fuel which are selected. All CANDU 9 models are

ii.ui accommodated within the same basic design. The many operations activities (for example, plant CANDU 9 480 SEU is the focus of this paper; in this surveillance and operation work control), and by reduced designation, 480 refers to the number of fuel channels, radiation exposure to plant operating staff. and SEU to the use of slightly enriched uranium fuel. The CANDU 9 power plants are readily adaptable to the individual requirements of different The use of slightly enriched uranium fuel (0.9% utilities, and are suitable for a range of site conditions. U235) in CANDU 9 480/SEU, in place of the natural For example, the space provisions within the reactor uranium fuel (0.7% U235) utilized in the operating 480 building and the equipment and piping layout can fuel channel Bruce and Darlington plants facilitates an accommodate different component sizes associated with increase in net electrical output to the range of 1050 different cooling water temperatures and changes in the MW(e). This results from two factors: output range. The use of SEU fuel increases the reactivity A high level of standardization has always been differential between new fuel and depleted fuel. This a feature of CANDU reactors. This theme is emphasized allows higher reactivity fuel to be maintained in the in the CANDU 9 plants; all key components (steam outer fuel channels, thereby increasing their power generators, heat transport pumps, pressure tubes, fuelling output to levels approaching that of the inner machines, etc.) are of the same design as those proven channels. in-service on operating CANDU power stations. 2. PLANT DESCRIPTION - The use of a 2 bundle shift refuelling scheme, facilitated by the use of SEU, instead of the4 bundle 2.1 PLANT LAYOUT shift refuelling scheme used with the NU fuelled CANDU 9 plants are designed as self-contained reactors, reduces the increase in channel power on single-unit power plants (Figure 2.1). Multiple-unit refuelling (known as the refuelling ripple), thereby CANDU 9 stations are achieved using single-units as increasing the time averaged channel powers building blocks (Figure 2.2). The layout provides for a without increasing the peak fuel bundle or channel short construction schedule by simplifying, minimizing power. and localizing interfaces; by reducing construction congestion through the provision of construction access Hence, the fuel and fuel channels of CANDU 9 to all areas; by providing flexible equipment installation 480/SEU perform within the same operating limits as sequences; and by reducing material handling CANDU plants now in service, including the maximum requirements. The relatively small and narrow fuel burn-up in the high bumup fuel pencils. In addition, "footprint" of the C ANDU 9 plant provides flexibility in all of the principal characteristics of natural uranium fuel the arrangement and construction sequence of that influence the handling and storage requirements of multiple-unit CANDU 9 stations, resulting in very new and irradiated fuel are retained in the SEU fuel (for effective land utilization. The relatively small exclusion example, no potential for criticality in light water). radius required for CANDU 9 plants (700m) further enhances land utilization. The emphasis placed on evolutionary design The layout is strongly influenced by the and the use of well-proven design features is intended to Two-Group Separation Philosophy. This safety-related ensure minimum financial risk to utilities choosing a design approach requires that all plant systems be CANDU 9 plant by assuring regulatory licensability and assigned to one of two groups (Group 1 or Group 2). reliable operation. In addition to this emphasis, the Each group can, by itself, shut down the plant, assure CANDU 9 reflects the important lessons learned by removal of decay heat from the fuel, and provide plant utilities in the construction and operation of CANDU monitoring. Generally, Group 1 systems sustain normal units and, indeed, relevant experience gained by the plant operation and power production and support plant world nuclear community in its operation of over 400 safety, whereas Group 2 systems are dedicated to plant reactors of a variety of types. safety. The two groups are separated in the layout, so that a local hazard such as a fire cannot disable more than one The CANDU 9 plant designers have paid group. For widespread external events, such as an particular attention to the protection of the owner's earthquake, at least one group is capable of mitigating the investment and to minimizing energy costs. This effects. The layout also benefits from the application of includes the minimization of capital cost, the provision of modern human factors design practices, including a plant a short and secure construction schedule, the assurance of wide "Link Analysis"; this serves to improve operations a high capacity factor through the use of highly reliable and maintenance efficiency, and to minimize the and easily maintainable systems and components, the frequency of human error. maximization of component life, and the provision for the fast and easy replacement of components at the end of A single unit CANDU 9 station layout is shown their life. Operations, maintenance and Administration in Figure 2.1. The principal buildings comprising the (OM&A) costs are further reduced by the automation of CANDU 9 plant are: The reactor building, a steel-lined, reinforced 2.2 NUCLEAR STEAM PLANT concrete structure, contains the reactor, the main reactor This section gives abrief description of the main cooling system (the heat transport system), the moderator parts of the Nuclear Steam Plant, comprising systems and system, and other support equipment. The reactor equipment within the reactor building, the reactor building assures containment of radioactivity in case of auxiliary building, and the Group 2 service building. an accident. The design improvements relative to the CANDU 6 reactor building, including increased design 2.2.1 FUEL pressure and the use of a steel liner, eliminate the need for The fuel for CANDU 9 plants is the standard the complex and costly dousing system, eliminate the CANDU 37-element bundle (Figure 2.4). CANDU 9 cost and inspection burden of post-tensioning cables, and 480/SEU utilizes uranium dioxide enriched to 0.9% substantially reduce building leakage. A section view U235. This level of enrichment is consistent with that through the reactor building is shown in Figure 2.3. available in Recovered Uranium, a product of spent LWR fuel reprocessing. CANDU 9 plants can take advantage The reactor auxiliary building surrounds the of the CANFLEX fuel bundle when it is available. reactor building, and contains the main control room, the fuel handling and irradiated storage facilities, and the 2.2.2 FUEL CHANNELS piping and cabling which run between the main The CANDU 9 plants use the proven CANDU buildings. The reactor auxiliary building is protected 6 fuel channel (Figure 2.5). Each fuel channel consists of against internal and external flooding and is qualified to a zirconium-niobium alloy pressure tube, centred in a earthquake and tornado standards according to specific Zircaloy calandria tube by annular spacers, and expanded site requirements. into stainless steel end fittings at both ends. Eachchannel contains twelve fuel bundles. Modest improvements The Group 2 service building contains have been incorporated in the CANDU 6 fuel channel, essential Group 2 safety services including the secondary including thickening the end sections of the calandria control area, Group 2 diesel-generators, emergency water tubes (to reduce sag), addition of a second set of pressure supplies, and safety shutdown systems. The Group 2 tube rolled joint grooves in one end fitting (to reduce service building and its contents are seismically qualified pressure tube replacement time), and more stringent and protected against design basis external hazards such metallurgical specifications for pressure tube material as tornadoes according to specific site requirements. This that reduce initial hydrogen concentrations and increase safety philosophy places essential Group 2 safety resistance to toughness reduction (in order to ensure a equipment in one area where it can be protected against 35-year life). external and internal hazards, and where it is isolated from the effects of accidents affecting Group 1 systems. Pressure tube replacement is not required for 35 or more years; however the design of the fuel channels The Group 1 service building contains the and the layout within the reactor building facilitate fuel Group 1 diesel-generators and the Group 1, Class IV and channel replacement, required to achieve the 60 year Class HI electrical power distribution systems. plant design life. The turbine building houses the turbine 2.2.3 CALANDRIA AND SHIELD TANK generator and support equipment. The turbine generator The reactor core consists of 480 fuel channels axis lies along the reactor building radius, both to protect held in a square lattice array by circular end-shields, and nuclear steam plant equipment from missiles due to a contained within a cylindrical low-pressure tank called postulated turbine breakup, and to minimize station land the calandria (Figure 2.6). The calandria contains the requirements. heavy water moderator at near-atmospheric pressure. The CANDU 9 plants utilize the proven Bruce The maintenance building provides the 8/Darlington (480 fuel channel) calandria. Some limited facilities for the day-to-day maintenance of the plant improvements have been made; the most significant is the including shops, stores and change rooms. It is located relocation of the moderator system inlet and outlet between the turbine building and the reactor auxiliary nozzles to enhance moderatorcirculation in the calandria, building, with direct access to both. On multiple-unit thereby providing improved cooling during potential stations, the maintenance building crane halls are severe accident conditions. connected, and extend the width of the station. The CANDU 9 plants adopt the basic The station services building accommodates Bruce/Darlington arrangement of a water filled steel certain services for the station such as heavy water shield tank surrounding the calandria. Improvements to management, liquid waste management, overhaul the shield tank include a cylindrical shape (rather than the facilities, and change rooms for contract staff. Only one octagonal shape of Bruce and Darlington) to enhance station service building is needed for a multiple-unit seismic capability and supporting the shield tank by CANDU 9 station; it can be located at either end of the embedding the end structure into the reactor vault end station or between units. walls (similar to CANDU 6), rather than by supporting it

IIJI: • 1.1') from the floor as in Bruce B/Darlington; this stiffens the thereby limiting the release of fission products to the heat structure, and further improves seismic capability. The transport system coolant. Systems are provided for the C ANDU 9 shield tank design combines the advantages of detection and location of defective fuel. the Bruce/Darlington shield tank, including reduced Fuel handling system improvements relative to construction time and access to the reactor vault during CANDU 6 include: reactor shutdown, with the structural and seismic advantages of the CANDU 6 design. • Location of new fuel loading outside of the reactor building as in Bruce B/Darlington, to minimize 2.2.4 HEAT TRANSPORT SYSTEM radiation exposure of staff loading new fuel. CANDU 9 plants utilize the basic single-loop • Moving the fuelling machines on transfer carriages Bruce B heat transport system arrangement, with two that travel between the reactor face and the reactor inlet headers and one outlet header at each end of the building wall (as in CANDU 3); this improves reactor, and two single discharge, single suction, heat seismic capability and simplifies the fuel transfer transport pumps serving the inlet headers at each end of system. the reactor (Figure 2.7). CANDU 9 plants utilize the CANDU 6 fuelling At each end of the reactor, each inlet header machine design, with a number of enhancements, provides coolant flow to alternate fuel channel inlet adopted from the proven Bruce B/Darlington fuelling feeders. For large reactors, this arrangement (derived machines. These include: from the Bruce B design) reduces the rate of reactivity • A forged body housing with an end flange, thereby insertion in the event of a large Loss of Coolant Accident eliminating the costs and complexity of the large (LOCA), thereby increasing safety margins relative to Graylok connection. arrangements in which all inlet feeders at one end of the reactor are supplied by a single inlet header. For smaller • Electric drives to replace the D2O hydraulic drives, reactors (such as CANDU 6) a similar benefit is obtained thereby improving reliability and reducing by dividing the heat transport system into two maintenance. independent circuits or loops. 2.2.8 SAFETY SYSTEMS 2.2.5 MODERATOR SYSTEM The four Group 2 safety systems comprise the two diverse, passive, dedicated reactor shutdown Heat is deposited in the heavy water moderator systems; the emergency core cooling system; and the during normal operation, from direct gamma and neutron containment system. Each is separated from and is interaction and through thermal conduction from the fuel independent of the Group 1 systems, and of all the other channels. This heat is removed by the moderator cooling safety systems. system, which circulates and cools the heavy water in an external circuit connected to the calandria. Shutdown System No. 1 utilizes spring-assisted, gravity-drop neutron absorbing rods, which drop into the 2.2.6 REACTOR CONTROL moderator, between the fuel channels. Shutdown System No. 2 utilizes horizontal Reactor control is provided by reactivity control perforated tubes through which a liquid neutron absorber mechanisms consisting of light-water zone is injected into the moderator. compartments, absorber rods, and adjuster rods; all are located between fuel channels within the low pressure The Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) heavy water moderator. The overall reactor control uses high pressure gas to inject ordinary water into the system is described in Section 2.2.10. fuel channels, followed by pumped recirculation and cooling of water within the reactor building. The 2.2.7 FUEL HANDLING emergency core cooling system is essentially the same as for Bruce B, but is replicated for each CANDU 9 unit, The CANDU 9 plants utilize the CANDU 6 whereas a single system serves the four Bruce B units. double-ended on-power refuelling system (see Improvements incorporated are discussed in Section 4.3. Figure 2.8). On-power refuelling is performed by two fuelling machines, located at opposite ends of the reactor. The containment system is a conventional dry These machines transport new fuel bundles to the fuel single-unit structure, consisting of a reinforced-concrete channel to be refuelled, and load them into the fuel building with a steel inner liner which encloses the channel while the reactor is operating. Simultaneously reactor and other nuclear steam supply system used fuel bundles are removed from the fuel channel. The components. Each CANDU 9 unit has its own fuelling machines subsequently transport the used fuel to independent containment system. Note that the the irradiated fuel storage bays. The refuelling operation containment type is independent of the reactor type. is fully automatic. In the event that a defect occurs in a CANDU does not require a specific form of containment fuel bundle during reactor operation, the fuelling system and can readily adopt other containment system machines can be used to remove the defective fuel, arrangements to suit specific utility requirements. 2.2.9 INFORMATION AND CONTROL - Reduced maintenance resulting from a significantly SYSTEM reduced number of components including cables, cable trays, wiring and terminations. Plant instrumentation, computer control systems, control room man/machine interface and the - Less labour intensive plant configuration control. plant information system are provided by the ICS-9O+ Systems (Information and Control Systems-90+). Less Manual control of plant operation - for example, warm-up from zero power cold. ICS-90+ evolved from the highly automated CANDU control systems developed for the CANDU 6 4. SAFETY ENHANCEMENTS stations and Darlington, and takes advantage of the 4.1 GENERAL dramatic developments in digital systems and communications systems that have occurred in recent A large number of system and component years. The result is substantial improvements in safety improvements have been incorporated in the CANDU 9 and reduced operating cost. to enhance safety. Many of these improvements, including the improved Grouping and Separation The CANDU 9 main control room is illustrated philosophy (Section 2.1), the dry steel lined reactor in Figure 2.9. The control room retains the basic building (Section 2.1), and the full pressure Group 2 arrangement of the CANDU 6 control room, while feedwater system were developed for and implemented incorporating major technical advances; these include the on CANDU 3. The following subsections give further addition of large displays, control consoles from which information on CANDU 9 safety enhancements. Many the plant is operated via keyboards and CRTs, and of these have been incorporated in the CANDU 3. reduced main panel complexity. 4.2 RESERVE WATER SYSTEM 3. OM & A COST REDUCTION The reserve water system illustrated in A cost reduction in the range of 25% of the Figure 3.1, which is an extension of the coolant recovery OM & A costs from operating CANDU-6 plants on a per system of the CANDU 6, includes a large high-level megawatt basis will be realized. Some of the factors reserve water tank, located in the reactor building. The contributing to this improvement, principally through reserve water tank, conceptually similar to the CANDU staff reduction, are the following: 6 dousing tank, serves as a head tank for the shield cooling system; and provides passive cooling of the shield tank - The use of proven components and system designs, and end shields in the case of a loss of normal cooling improved based on operating experience, to reduce capability. The tank also provides makeup water via maintenance and inspection requirements. gravity to the steam generators if required, provides - The use of a detailed three dimensional (3-D) makeup water to the moderator and heat transport electronic plant model permits the designers to better systems if required, and supplies water to the ECC system provide for maintenance procedures and staff sump in the event of a LOCA to ensure ECC pump net requirements. Hence, access routes, shielding, positive suction head. cranage, etc. to facilitate maintenance and inspection In addition to the passive functions noted above, are provided as part of the basic CANDU 9 design. the reserve water system includes recovery pumps that - Improved operational state monitoring and detailed can return leakage from either the heat transport system plant configuration control and work management is or the moderator system to the appropriate system. provided by the ICS-90+ operations information 43 EMERGENCY CORE COOLING system. SYSTEM Specific design changes focused on eliminating The CANDU 9 Emergency Core Cooling personnel operations inside containment, reducing System (Figure 3.2), although conceptually the same as the number of components, reducing complexity and the system utilized at Bruce R, incorporates a number of increasing automation in labour intensive areas such enhancements. These include: as safety system availability testing and plant surveillance activity. • Placement of all ECCS equipment, except the gas tanks, within the Reactor Building, eliminates the - The automotion of activities such as plant need for a number of isolation valves, and precludes surveillance and operations work control. the possibility of active leakage outside of Faster fault correction resulting from improved containment during ECC operation. on-line equipment diagnostics. • The use of one-way rupture discs to separate the heat Immediate availability of real-time operational transport system from the emergency core cooling information to utility management and operational system, thereby greatly simplifying the emergency support personnel. core cooling system.

'M02X-VI 20 11.H- Although significantly reducing both the capital shield cooling system to the reserve water tank; shield cost and maintenance cost of the Emergency Core cooling is hence available by passive convection Cooling System, the principal safety benefit is a (thermosyphoning). substantial increase in reliability. 5. FUEL AND FUEL CYCLE FLEXIBILITY 4.4 MAN MACHINE INTERFACE High neutron economy is the feature of the CANDU reactor that makes it possible to operate with a Advanced human factors principles have been variety of low-grade fuels. These include natural applied throughout the CANDU 9. This is particularly uranium (NU cycle) and slightly enriched uranium (SEU the control centre and operator interface. Information is cycle). Also, this feature of CANDU provides a unique presented to the operators in a clear and concise manner synergy between CANDU and LWRs as there is through the extensive use of graphic displays. This, in sufficient fissile content in spent PWR fuel to burn in combination with electronic procedures and symptom CANDU (Tandem cycle) as mixed uranium and based diagnostic tools provide assurance of appropriate oxide (MOX) fuel. Alternately, the recovered operator actions under accident conditions, and reduce uranium from the PWR spent fuel can be burned without the likelihood of operator error throughout the plant the plutonium (RU cycle) to operate in synergy with operating life. PWRs that recycle the plutonium. 4.5 OPERATIONAL SAFETY In addition to burning the products of conventional reprocessing, the CANDU reactor can Operational safety is assured by the application operate on PWR spent fuel (DUPIC cycle), the latter of human factors principles to all aspects of plant being a dry process that is easier to safeguard against operation and maintenance. This assures adequate diversion of . access, and the provision of appropriate facilities for all maintenance and inspection operations. This An overview of the fuel cycle options is given significantly reduces the radiation exposure to operating in Table 1. CANDU capability to detoxify is staff, and reduces operation and maintenance costs. discussed in another paper being presented at this conference. [1]

4.6 SEVERE ACCIDENT PREVENTION / 6. SUMMARY MITIGATION The CANDU 9 plants are an evolutionary single As in operating CANDU plants, there is a unit development of the successful four unit Bruce B defence in depth approach to the prevention of severe design,utilizingproven systems, componentdesigns, and accidents. This includes the two independent, passive concepts. The CANDU 9 incorporates a number of shutdown systems that greatly reduce the probability of safety enhancements derived from the ongoing research a transient without shutdown (scram) occurring, and the and development activities within AECL. CANDU 9 moderator system which can remove decay heat from the makes large modern CANDU plants available to both fuel even if no coolant is present in the fuel channels Canadian and foreign utilities with compatible grid size (LOCA plus loss of ECC). and electricity requirements. 7. REFERENCES Should the moderator heat sink also fail, the light water shield tank surrounding the calandria can [I] Actinide Annihilation in CANDU, A. Dastur/ retain the debris from the overheated fuel channels. In N. Gagnon AECL CANDU presented at CNS CANDU 9 this capability is enhanced by connecting the 94, Montreal Québec, Canada.

'1KI2K1/12II II.IM TABLE 1 Summary of Fuel Cycle Options

Fuel Cycle Option Fuel Cost Security of Supply Quantity Spent Fuel 1) Natural uranium About 50% of PWR Uranium utilization 4700 CANDU fuel (KU) fuel fuel cost. approximately 30% bundles (about 110 higher than PWR's. tonnes spent fuel) per No depend., nee on en- year from CANDU-6 richment. plant, based on 80% capacity. 2) Slightly enriched About 40% of PWR Enrichment readily As low as 1/3 spent (SEU) fuel fuel cost for 1.2% available. Uranium fuel volume of NU SEU. utilization 100% cycle. higher than PWR. 3) Recovered Ura- As low as 33% of Existing and planned About 1/2 spent fuel nium (RU) fuel PWR fuel, cost vary- reprocessing facilities volume of NU cycle. ing with RU price. have capacity for RU to supply 60 CANDU plants. 4) DUPIC cycle Fuel cost impact will Existing stock of As low as 1/2 spent depend on final devel- PWR spent fuel is a fuel volume in opment of DUPIC resource for CANDU. CANDU compared to process. Note: Cost Overall Uranium uti- NU. PWR spent fuel improvement in- lization up to 40% volume drastically re- creases for "sca«w" lower than PWR duced by recycling. fuel resource scenar- alone. io. 5) Thorium/U235 Similar to natural ura- Major resource for Marginal reduction cycle without repro- nium fuel cost. countries with tho- from natural uranium. cessing rium. 6) Thorium/U235 Depends on repro- Major resource for Depends on frequen- cycle without repro- cessing costs. countries with tho- cy of reprocessing. cessing rium. 7) Transuranic mix Depends on reproces- Secure for countries Negligible. sig costs. withPWRs. 1 REACTOR BUILDING 2 REACTOR AUXILIARY BUILOING 3 GROUP 2 SERVICE BUILDING

RECIRCULATED COOLING A GROUP 1 SERVICE BUILDING WATER SYSTEM EQUIPMENT S TURBINE BUILDING 0 MAINTENANCE BUILOING 7 STATION SERVICES BUILDING

TURBINE AUXILIARY BAY

ELECTRICAL SHOP MECHANICAL SHOP GROUP 1 ELECTRICAL FUELLING MACHINE DECONTAMINATION AND MAINTENANCE CORRIDOR CORRIDOR

TRUCK \ /TRUCK ENTRANCE y CRANE HALLAND TRUCK ACCESS V ENTRANCE

-. GROUP 2 FEEDWATER

_ IRRADIATED FUEL BAYS

GROUP 1 •• -- SECONDARY ELECTRICAL CONTROL AREA

GROUP2 DIESELS VERY HEAVY LIFT CRANE ACCESS

•W1W5 ?

Figure 2.1 Single Unit Station Layout

"»4«I2R4/I3(I Man TRUCK ENTRANCE

TRUCK , , TRUCK ENTRANCE; 'ENTRANCE

STATION SERVICES BUUCNQ LOCATION OPTION 1 1 REACTOR WJIUHNQ S. TURBINE BUILOtNO 2. REACTOR AIMLJARV BUILOINa C MAINTENANCE BUUXNO T X GROUP 2 - SERVICE BUUXNG 7. STATION SERVICES BUHJMNQ 4. GROUP 1 - 8ERVICE BUUXNO B TRUCK ENTRANCE

TRUCK .TRUCK ENTRANCE' .ENTRANCE

STATION SERVICES BUUMQ LOCATION OPTION 2

Figure 2.2 Multiple Unit Layout Options

'4O2H4/12O Un 14/(15/25 FUELLING MACHINES

Figure 2.3 Reactor Building Section

94)1284/120 Man 94/1)5/25 INTER ELEMENT SPACERS

PRESSURETUBE

END VIEW INSIDE PRESSURE TUBE

ZIRCALOY BEARING PADS

CANLUB QRAPHITE INTERLAYER

URANIUM DIOXIDE PELLETS

ZIRCALOY FUEL SHEATH

ZIRCALOY END SUPPORT PLATE

ZIRCALOY END CAP

«30014 2.2-1

Figure 2.4 37-Element Fuel Bundle

WO284/12I) Hjrt •M/05/25 ëâg

1 CHANNELCLOSURE 2 CLOSURE SEAL INSERT 3 FEEDER COUPLING 4 LINER TUBE 5 END FITTING BODY 6 END FITTING BEARING 7 TUBE SPACER 8 FUEL BUNDLE 9 PRESSURE TUBE

•n 2. O S'a si FIXED END OF CHANNEL (0 (A en O

10 CALANDRIATUBE 11 CALANDRIASIDETUBESHEET 12 END SHIELD LATTICE TUBE 13 SHIELD PLUG 14 END SHIELD SHIELDING BALLS 15 FUELLING MACHINE SIDE TUBESHEET 1B CHANNEL ANNULUS BELLOWS 17 CHANNEL POSITIONING ASSEMBLY

R3W14-U-4 REACTIVITY MECHANISMS SHIELD TANK OVER DECK PRESSURE RUPTURE DISC AND PIPING OUTLET HEADER VERTICAL REACTIVITY CONTROL UNITS INTERCONNECT LIQUID ZONE CONTROLTRENCHES

CALANDRIA OVER PRESSURE RUPTURE PISC AND PIPING

SHIELD TANK BALL SHIELDING

FEEDERS

FUEL CHANNEL TRANSFER CALANDRIA TUBES

END FITTINGS WOT MODERATOR PIPING

SHIELD WATER PIPING

STEEL BALL SHIELDING (END SHIELD) HORIZONTAL REACTIVITY CONTROL UNITS

FUELLING MACHINE SIDETUBESHEET, LATTICE TUBES

CALANDRIA SIDE END SHIELD TUBESHEET.

SEMI-FLEXIBLE JOINT - SHIELD TANK END WALL

EMBEDMENT REACTOR VAULT BUILDING INTERNAL ENDWAU CROSSWALL

Figure 2.6 Reactor Assembly

4O2X4/I2II IJII D

nEACTOn OUTLET HEADEn [—

HLAC10HINLL1HLAULH \

RFACTOHINIFTHFAPFn JL

| RFACTQB INI FT HFAOFB 1

I HLAC1OHINLL1 lU-AULH

nEACTOn OUTLET HEADEn |— ED

Figure 2.7 Heat Transport System Simplified Composite Flow Diagram

940284/120 Hart 94/05/25 iCKING FRAMES, 7 HIGH STACKING FRAMES, 7 HIGH

920660

Figure 2.8 Fuel Transfer System Figure 2.9 Control Centre Layout

94(04/120 VENT t

HESERVE WATER

TO MODERATOR

TO D2O FEED PUMP SUCTION

DEMINERAUZED WATER SUPPLY

TO SHIELD COOLING SYSTEM

ECC RECOVERY SUMP

8300U 2.5-8

Figure 3.1 Reserve Water System

05/25 ACCUMULATOR WATER TANKS

«30014 2.3.-2-8

Figure 3.2 Emergency Core Cooling System

940284/120 Hart 94/1)5/25 SESSION 6 - La technologie de demain / Technologies for Tomorrow

Président de session/Chain R. Bolton (Centre canadien de fusion magnétique, Canada)

R. Décoste - "Contributions of the T de V Tokamak to the International Fusion Effort" (Centre canadien de fusion magnétique, Canada)

D.P. Dautovich et al. - "CFFTP Development in Fusion Technology" (CFFTP, Canada)

E.D. Earle - "Observing the Sun from Two Kilometers Underground" (AECL Research, Canada) Contributions of the TdeV Tokamak to the International Fusion Effort

Real Décoste

Centre canadien de fusion magnétique* Varennes, Québec, Canada

Canadian Nuclear Association/ Canadian Nuclear Society Annual Conference , June 5-8, 1994 Le Reine Elizabeth, Montréal, Qc, Canada

* Funded by Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, Hydro-Québec and the Institut National de la Recherche Scientifique. Contributions of the TdeV Tokamak to the International Fusion Effort

The path to fusion with . Outstanding issues and TdeV s contributions. Status and parameters of TdeV. One example of TdeV s contribution: • Electrical plasma biasing through the divertor. Future plans and upgrades on TdeV. TdeV TdeV vs large TOKAMAKs

Dlll-D (performance scenarios) /JT-60U (steady-state technologies) General Atomics, San Diego, USA / Japan

2mr JET (highest performances) European Community

5m TdeV, Canada TFTR ( burning) TORE SUPRA Princeton, USA (supraconducting) France ITER (self-sustained bum) T-15, Russia (design phase, 2005)

TdeV is not a large high performance tokamak. TdeV's flexibility is used to test new technologies and physics ideas. TdeV's divertor is quite relevant for large tokamak. The PATH to ELECTRICITY PRODUCTION

1992 1992 2005 2025 2040 I

B

Dlll-D JET ITER DEMO ARIES IV thermal 1000 MW 300 MW 2100 MW electric 100 MW 1000 MW confinement, H 3 2.7 2 4.5 3.3 stability, #N 4.5 3.3 3 6 6 current drive 0.6 0.5 0.7 0.4 0 fraction divertor loading 15 17 33 16 77 P/R TdeV \ 6 cryosorption pumps in upper 3 divertor (10 m /s H2)

Graphite divertor plates (electrically insulated) CFC divertor plate (electrically grounded) Divertor chamber Fast horizontal positioning coils (HP) \ncone) Ymer Multijonction LHCD antenna

Divertor triplet

• Rp: 0.86 m a: 0.26 m

• BT: 2.0 T (<30s)

• lp: 250 kA (qg5 :3.6) • LHCD : 1.3 MW

HP Physics Issues for a Reactor and TdeV's Contributions

DT Plasmas; (TFTR, JET, ITER) • Burn physics and instabilities • He ash exhausts with H-mode: improved exhausts with biasing

Pressure and current profile control: (higher p and confinement) • density profile: CT core fuelling • current profile: edge lower hybrid current drive (LHCD) • energy and particle confinement: control H-mode with biasing

Steady state plasmas: (long pulse operation) • non-inductive current drive for the core and edge plasma: edge LHCD • material studies: wall and divertor components testing • divertor power load: reduced with biasing

Diverton (high heat loads, divertor retention, particle exhaust) • divertor geometry and plate design: modeling, TdeV upgrades • radiative edge and divertor: impurity control with biasing TdeV HIGHER He EXHAUST with BIASING

3 3 toward the outer divertor with pumping (10 m /s D2, 6 m /s He) 3 Ip:210kA, Bi.:1.5T, N,,: 3.3, ne: 2x10 m 650 kW LH U 2/3 of Ip (V) non-inductivel y driven

i 1 1 \ \ H t- Da div. strong divertor (rel.) pressure increase with heating + biasing. 0 25

(kW) • highPlossinthe "active" divertor. îâs^nb'jCH JHell zedge •Tp,He^JOxE even I (rel.) at low ne with biasing | 0 02 .He4. -175 V bias 1.0 injection (sec) TdeV BIASING GEOMETRY for BOTH POLARITIES (model prediction) biased grounded

floated

• good compromise for "-" • best geometry for "+" p w w

18 3 ne(10 m )

Er (kV/m) -15 8 Q distance from separatrix (cm) "++" bias .43 .35 .75 .25 "-"" bias- .54 0 .17 0 throughput *—sputtering throughput ^—sputtering TdeV LONG TERM PLAN

500kA,2T tokamalc 210kA,l.ST 2T 300kA,2T new PF coils, chamber

LHCD: I 1.3 MW 2.2 MW

improved closed divertor, increased cooling, new actively dtvertor bias pumping bias cooling new material cooled divertor pulse length: Is <5s 30 s (1.5 T), 10 s (2 T) diagnostics, code comparisons

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

advanced diveitor material studies i • long pulse operation • controlled J(r) profile with LHCD radiative divertor with biasing at high n jn H-modc

divcrtor/SOL studies at higher n0 i ^ optimize SOL E-field effects with flexible diveitor biasing geometri • biased divertor studies with auxiliary heating in H/L-modc LHCD coupting/efficiencies at high N^ compact torus penetration/fuelling improved He divertor pumping with biasing characterize biased SOL/diveitor establish biased diveitor physics base TdeV SHORT TERM UPGRADES 1994 1996-97

BT: 2.0 T, Ip: 210 kA BT: 2.0 T, Ip: 300 kA 1.9 V.s • 2.5 V.s, strike point control flexible 1.2 MW LHCD • 2.2 MW LHCD (2 antennas) pumped, biased divertor (<5s) • pumped, biased, long pulse divertor (<30s) TdeV—M LONG TERM UPGRADE

TdeV TdeV-M

• Ip: 300 kA, 2.4 V.s • Ip: 500 kA, 3.5 V.s • triplet divertor • flexible divertor TdeV CONCLUSIONS

The path to fusion: • Large tokamaks already operates near fusion reactor conditions. • Long lead time still required for a commercial reactor.

TdeV is a moderate size facility relevant to large tokamaks for • divertor and edge studies: variable/flexible divertor geometries, plasma biasing, impurity control. • long pulse technologies: current drive technologies, new material studies, heat handling techniques. • profile control physics: non-inductive current drive, compact torus injection. CFFTP Development in Fusion Technology

D.P. Dautovich, J.D. Blevins. PJl Gienzewski ItS. Matougu, A.B. Mcildc

June 7,1994 CNA Conference* Montreal CFFTP About CFFTP

CFFTP's program is designed to serve the interests of its stakeholders...

Federal long-term energy interest

Ontario Hydro long-term energy interest and short-term use of technology

Provincial short-term industrial benefits

CAN Conf, Montreal, Presentation by DP. Dautovich June 7/94 CFFTP CFFTP Program Focus

To contribute to world fusion energy development by providing needed goods & services related to tritium & remote handling technologies. Seek alternative applications such as CANDU.

Research and development

Engineering

Manufacturing

Supply of components & turn-key systems

Commercialize technology for alternative applications

CAN Conf, Montreal, PrcMnUtion by D.P. Dautovich June 7/94 CFFTP CFFTP Associates

In order to cany out its work, CFFTP relies on the services of industry9 universities and laboratories

Industry Associates

Adamek Associates NITEK Ceramics Kingston Inc. Numet Engineering Ltd. EG&G Labserco Division NOW Corporation ENSAC Associates Qualprotech Inc. E.S. Fox Limited R.N. Tooling Corporation Fermi Systems Inc. Scintrex Nucleonics MEC Limited Spar Aerospace Limited Monenco AGRA Spectrum Engineering Corp Monserco Limited Tecnova Limited MORWIL Inc. Torrovap Industries NEL Engineering Systems Wardrop Engineering Inc.

CAN Conf. Montreal, Presentation by DP. Dautovkh June 7/94 CFFTP CFFTP Associates continued:

Universities Laboratories

McMaster University Ontario Hydro Technologies Trent University Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. University of New Brunswick (CRL & SPEL) University of Manitoba Stern Laboratories Inc. University of Saskatchewan University of Toronto

CAN Conf, Montreal, Presentation by DP. Dautovich June 7/94 Contracts to CFFTP Associates by Sector Total program value fo 1993/94 - $10.7M

$ Millions

Industry Universities AECL Ontario Hydro CFFTP CFFTP Technology Needs

Fusion energy research projects are major capital undertakings. Capital and technical risks in support systems must be minimized by the use of high performance systems which are safe, reliable and cost competitive. For tritium technology and remote handling, this means...

low tritium inventory good engineering practice

avoiding oxidation of tritium industrial scale prototypes

• waste minimization extensive testing

CAN Conf. Montreal, Presentation by D.P. Dautovich June 7/94 THE FUSION FUEL CYCLE Fusion uses tritium/deuterium and remote handling technology, as does CANDU

FUEL FIRST WALL/ BLANKET INJECTION OIVERTOR

REMOTE FUEL HANDLING EXHAUST BLANKET PUMPING TRITIUM RECOVERY

FUEL CLEANUP

ISOTOPE SEPARATION

EXTERNAL FUEL WASTE/COOLANT AIR SUPPLY DETRITIATION i DETRITIATION CFFTP Products Developed

Since 1982, R&D by CFFTP has lead to technology advances & development of products delivered to clients in the US and Europe.

Isotope separation systems

Enclosure clean-up systems

Microballoon tritium fill station

Tritium storage systems

Tritium monitors

Safety analysis and environmental impact modelling

Remote maintenance concepts

CAN Conf, Montreal, Presentation by DP. Dautovich Juno 7/94 Lithium Zirconate Nuclear Testing Canadian ceramic pebbles have been well tested

Temp, oC 1,200 Mast production - Good "til ATRIX-IH' High bumup tasts - Good 1,000 Material» propartie» - Good CRITIC H : Thermal cycling - Weak Tritium release • VGood Activation • Poor 800 Corrosion • Good Water absorption • Fair 600

40C EXOTIC-7 200 -F 1994

0 0.1 1 10 100 Li burnup, at% CFFTP

Compact Toroid Plasma Fuelling

Currentlyy tokamaks are fuelled by centrifugal injection of ice pellets of deuterium and tritium. Technical limitations limit the pellet velocities to around 3km/s which is insufficient for large tokamaks. CFFTP has provided an advanced CTfuellerfor testing at Tokamak de Varennes.

CAN Conf, Montreal. Presentation by DP. Dautovich June 7/94 Tritium fuelling by injecting a CT at speeds -1000 km/s

Compact Toroid (CT) Tokamak Plasma CFFTP Picture of CT

CAN Conf, Montreal, Presentation by D.P. Dautovich June 7/94 CFFTP Compact Toroid Plasma Fuelling

Features Benefits • Centre fuelling • Increased • Gas feed • Lower tritium inventory • Electrical acceleration • Easier tritium handling • Improved reliability

Status • Fuel acceleration to 250 km/s • 30% mass added to plasma without disruption • Centre fuelling demonstrated at 1 Tesla field • Scale-up to higher fields/larger machines under consideration

CAN Cnnf. Montreal, PreaenUtion by D.P. Dautovich JUM 7/94 Tritium isotope separation Fusion R&D advances benefit CANDUs

Inventory, gT 1,000

100— DTRF 88 AECL 88 KfK89 • Gas Chrom 10— + ~ \ + Cryo Dist

1 —

OHT93 TFTR93 0.1 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1,000 10,000 Feed, mol Q2/hr CFFTP Picture of TPS

CAN Conf, Montreal, Presentation by D.P. Dautovich June 7/94 CFFTP TPS Notes

over 2,000 automatics tube welds 200 valves 10 pumps 5 equibilators 2 diffusers 11 mass flow controllers over 2,000 small diameter stainless steel tubing 12,000 hours to assemble As many inputs/outputs on the control system as you would have on oil refinery

CAN Conf, Montreal, Presentation by D.P. Dautovich June 7/94 CFFTP Tritium Processing System (TPS)

The TPS delivered to Princeton University9 is currently one of the most advanced hydrogen isotope separation systems in the world.

Purity H2 <10"8 % tritium <10"7 % tritium 99.9% tritium

Inventory 1/2 gram

Feed Flowrate 2 litres a minute

Throughput 1 gram tritium/day

CAN Conf, Montreal, Prcacnution by DP. Dtutovich June 7/94 Tritiated Water Processing Fusion needs cover range of CANDU interests

T level, Ci/kg 1,000,000 100,000 ' -, Mol/AECL J E-cell 10,000 CANDU tramp 1,000 CANDU Multi-unit water 600 CANDU 100 • • •• • •• •. •• • 10 Fusion • exhaust » i . • ~* *•" *. i • ! - ANS / 1 (option) • »•• ; ITER 0.1 1 1 0.01 West Valley 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1,000 Feed, kg/hr CFFTP Tritium Monitors

A complete line of monitors including process, stack, area and portable monitors have been developed. Measurements can range from 1 juCi per cubic metre to 100 % tritium. The monitors have been tested for effects of pressure, carrier gas, memory and HTO/HT. They have been calibrated against absolute standards and are manufactured to Quality standards.

Available models

• Ontario Hydro T1000 and T100 • AECL AEP5321, AEP5336, AEP5293, flanged, cross and vacuum monitors • Scintrex 209, 309, 275 and 292 • BOT PI00, P300

CAN Conf. Montrée!, Presentation by D P. Dautovich Jun« 7/94 CFFTP Enclosure Cleanup

CFFTP has developed cleanup systems for recovery of tritium from inert glovebox atmospheres. The unit strips tritium from cover gas by cycling through a metal scavenger bed.

Benefits

• Self-contained, easily installed and mobile • Automatic control of tritium, cover gas pressure, temperature and humidity Tritium concentrations controlled to less than 1 (iCi per litre Metal bed storage capacity of 5000 Ci Tritium is available for recovery

CAN Conf, Montreal. Presentation by D.P. Dautovich JUM 7/94 CFFTP Plasma Decontamination Process

Common methods for decontaminating tritiated surfaces of washing, purging, thermal desorption and isotopic exchange have drawbacks. The techniques are slow & tedious. Washing produces large amounts of low specific activity waste water. High temperature desorption is not always possible. Tritium regrowth is a common experience. CFFTP has developed a plasma decontamination technique for stainless steel surfaces.

Benefits • Fast, low temperature treatment • Small volume gaseous waste can be readily immobilized • Glow discharge cleaning of S/S surfaces reduced sorbed activity by factor>250 • Regrowth is slow • Plasma cleaning is low cost, simple & adaptable to different sizes/shapes

CAN Conf, Montreal, Presentation by D.P. Dautovich June 7/94 Fusion Power Progress

Fusion power, MW 10,000 1,000 100-- 10--

0.1-- • DD 0.01 -- + DHe3 0.001 - - * DT 0.0001 I ) I I ) I ) I f I I ) I I I ) II ) I I I I I II I II I I I I'l I I I I I I 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Year CFFTP ITER Picture

Iter notes

1500 MW fusion power

EC, US, Russia, Japan with Canada through EC

R&D + Design 1992-98 $1 billion

Reference tritiu8m system designs largely from Canada

Site selection 1996 (Shane Smith's talk - 4:30)

Site requirements - similar to nuclear plant also power to run Iter auxiliary and systems to cool 250 MW continuous over 20 y, 1000 MW peak

CAN Conf, Montreal, Presentation by D.P. Dautovich June 7/94 OBSERVING THE SUN FROM TWO KILOMETERS UNDERGROUND.

E. D. Ear le, •• V CRL, AECL Research on behalf of the SNO project

Introduction: The Sudbury Neutrino Observatory (SNO) will make a major contribution to solar neutrino research. The civil construction work for the observatory is complete and the installation of the scientific components will begin after the Inco summer shut down. The results from other solar neutrino experiments show a significant deficit of electron neutrinos as compared to theoretical predictions. In addition, measurements of the neutrino energy spectrum suggest that the electron neutrinos produced in the sun may be changing to another type enroute to earth. SNO's relatively high sensitivity to neutrinos and its unique sensitivity to all neutrino types make it an ideal observatory for checking models of solar burning, for answering the fundamental question of a neutrino mass and for observing supernova in our galaxy.

SNO is being built in Inco1s Creighton Mine near Sudbury and will use 1000 tonnes of heavy water, on loan from AECL, as the neutrino detection medium. SNO has been funded by the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council, the National Research Council, Industry Science & Technology Canada, the Northern Ontario Heritage Fund Corporation, the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.K. Science & Engineering Research Council. It has been designed and built with the help of Monenco-Agra and will be operated by an international team of 60 scientists under the direction of Dr A.B. McDonald, Queen's University, Kingston. The Neutrino: The neutrino is one of the few fundamental particles of nature. Unlike all other particles it is only influenced by the weak force and for that reason, it is of particular interest to scientists, as a way to study the weak force. The weak force is 10l3 times weaker than the strong force and so most neutrinos travel unimpeded through matter. For example, for every 10^-0 neutrinos passing through the earth only one interacts. Solar neutrinos are created in the fusion processes in the sun's core. Unlike all other forms of energy generated in the sun's core, which take a million years to reach the solar surface, the neutrinos leave the sun immediately and so they are the only messenger of current solar core conditions. The measured deficit in solar neutrino flux could be an indication that the sun's core is colder than surface measurements suggest and, consequently, the sun's lifetime is a billion years less than previously calculated. On the other hand the deficit could be because the solar electron neutrino has changed (or oscillated) into one of the other two types of neutrinos known to exist in nature. These other types can not be detected by existing experiments but will be by SNO. Such a revelation would have far reaching implications for physics and cosmology. It would indicate a non-zero neutrino mass which, because there are so many neutrinos in the universe, could be the source of most of the missing mass postulated to exist from other cosmological evidence. It would also narrow the search for grand unification theories of nature's four forces.

The Detector:

The SNO detector has a central 1000 tonne region of heavy water contained in an acrylic vessel which is surrounded by 9500 photomultiplier light sensors. The photomultipliers will be mounted on a geodesic structure in a 22 meter diameter by 30 meter high rock cavern filled with ultra pure water. The cavern is 2000 meters underground where it will be well shielded from cosmic ray backgrounds.

A sketch of the underground excavation is shown in Fig. 1. The ramp, used for removing much of the 60,000 tons of rock, will

L«b Entrance & Car Wash

Fig. 1 A sketch of the underground excavation. be back filled. The large utility room will house the water circulation, purification and assaying equipment. Also shown are the control room, the lunch and change room and the equipment cleaning area. The change room and cleaning areas are required to keep the dust levels in the laboratory to a minimum. Dust, containing naturally occurring radioactivity, will be the major source of background to the neutrino signal and so equipment and personnel must be cleaned before entering the observatory. Even trace levels of Ra, Rn and K in the water or on the inner detector components are unacceptable. A cross section of the detector is shown in Fig. 2. The heavy water is contained in a 5 cm thick acrylic sphere supported from the deck by ten pairs of ropes. The sphere is submerged in 7000 tonnes of light water required to shield the heavy water from radioactivity in the surrounding rock. The light water also significantly reduces the forces on the acrylic vessel thereby allowing for a thinner vessel. The photomultiplier array surrounds the vessel and the 2.5 meters of light water between the two reduces the backgrounds in the heavy water from radioactivity in the glass and in the materials of the array.

Deck Support Very occasionally a Structure neutrino entering the heavy water will interact, producing a high speed electron which Control Room emits Cerenkov light as it slows down. This light Support Cables will be detected by a number (say 50) photomultiplies which will record the neutrino's time of arrival, its energy and Acrylic Vessel its direction. By putting (12 m diameter) a small quantity of chlorine in the water its sensitivity to non- electron neutrinos is Shielding Blocks greatly enhanced, thereby enabling SNO to determine if neutrino oscillation is the explanation for the apparent solar Photomultipliers neutrino deficit. With Reflectors Norite Rock

Fig. 2 A cross section of the detector. A significant technical challenge is to keep the background due to radioactivity, which also produces high speed electrons, to a minimum. With this in mind, acrylic measured to have thorium and uranium at the level of 1 part in 10^3 by weight has been purchased. Vessel fabrication must be controlled so as not to introduce radioactivity at the 10~12 level. The furnace, which made the glass for the photomultipliers, was constructed of selected materials so as to minimize the glass radioactivity and the water purification system has been designed to produce water containing less than 1 part in 10^4 of thorium and uranium. In addition, the thorium and uranium radioactive daughters must be equivalently miniscule and the water system must be able to monitor the levels of some of these isotopes so that the scientists will know the ratio of background events to neutrino induced events.

Status :

The cavity has been excavated and lined with shotcrete and a layer of Urylon, a thick polyurethane coating designed to contain the light water. Fig. 3 is a photograph looking down at the construction platform on the floor of the cavity from the deck. The two men on the platform provide an appropriate scale. The deck from which the photomultipliers, acrylic vessel and all other detector components will be suspended has been installed. The civil construction in the adjacent rooms is complete and all services have been installed. Later this summer after a replacement construction platform has been installed in the cavity the top part of the photomultiplier structure, with the photomultipliers, will be installed, followed by the acrylic vessel and the bottom half of the geodesic structure. Fig. 4 shows the photomultiplier geodesic structure after it was test assembled in California before shipment to Sudbury.

At the same time as the detector components are being installed in the cavity the water plants will be installed and commissioned in the utility room and the electronics and data taking equipment will be installed on the deck and in the control room. The water fill will take place in late 1995 and data taking will begin immediately thereafter. Statistically significant results are expected by late 1996. Fig. 3 A view of the construction platform at the bottom of the cavity, taken from the deck. Two men are standing on the platform. •JS*

ÏÏfife3ft^'C---V-..

Fig. 4 The photomultiplier support structure, dry assembled in California before shipment to Sudbury. SESSION 7 - Combustible nucléaire irradié et stockage des déchets de faible activité / Nuclear Used Fuel and Disposal of Low-Level Waste

Président de session/Chair. C.I Allan (AECL Research, Canada)

K.W. Dormuth et al. - "Disposal of Canada's Nuclear Fuel Waste" (AECL Research, Canada)

D.R. Champ et al. - "A Perspective on the Management of Low-Level Radioactive Waste" (AECL Research, Canada)

R. Ahenakew - "Self-Determination and Economic Development: The Storage of Used Nuclear Fuel - Community Consultation and Participation" (Meadow Lake Tribal Council, Canada) DISPOSAL OF CANADA'S NUCLEAR FUEL WASTE

K.W. Dormuth ...... AECL Research Whiteskell Laboratories Pinawa, Manitoba ROE 1L0

K. Nuttall ';,. / AECL Research Pinawa, Manitoba ROE 1L0

P.D. Stevens-Guille . r ^ Ontario Hydro 700 University Avenue Toronto, Ontario M5G 1X6

June 1994 1 Introduction

Three provincial utilities, Ontario Hydro, Hydro-Québec, and New Brunswick Power, own and operate CANDU power reactors and own the used fuel removed from them. A limited amount of used fuel, from three prototype power reactors that have been permanently shut down, is owned by AECL.

,*' No new construction after 1993

No nuclear power generation after 1994

-\ h 1993 2003 2013 2023 2033 2043 2053 2063 2073 Year Figure 1: Projected Quantities of Used Fuel in Canada

Figure 1 shows projections for the amount of used fuel that would arise in Canada under four scenarios: expansion of nuclear power at a rate of about 3% per year, maintaining existing nuclear generating capacity, running existing reactors for their projected lifetimes with no replacement, and no nuclear power generation after 1994. The used fuel is currently stored in water-filled pools or dry-storage concrete containers by its owners. Current storage practices have an excellent safety record. They permit easy monitoring and retrieval and could be continued for many years. They do, however, require institutional controls such as security measures, monitoring, and maintenance. Used fuel is not necessarily waste, because it could be reprocessed to extract useful material for recycling. However, in Canada used CANDU fuel is not currently reprocessed, and there are no plans to reprocess and recycle it [1]. If it is reprocessed in the future, most of the fission products and actinides that are not recycled could be incorporated in a solid such as a borosilicate glass. When we refer to "nuclear fuel waste," we mean either the used fuel itself, if it is not to be reprocessed, or the high-activity solid formed from reprocessing waste. According to Canada's nuclear regulatory agency, the Atomic Energy Control Board [2], For the long-term management of radioactive wastes, the preferred approach is disposal, a permanent method of management in which there is no intention of retrieval and which, ideally, uses techniques and designs that do not rely for their success on long-term institutional control beyond a reasonable period of time. ... Where reasonable disposal alternatives clearly exist, those options which rely on monitoring, surveillance or other institutional controls as a primary safety feature for very long periods are not recommended. This is not because of concern that future generations will be technologically incompetent, but rather because methods of ensuring the continuity of controls are not considered very reliable beyond a few hundred years.

Reviews initiated by governments in Canada have concluded that disposal is necessary. For example, the study group chaired by F.K. Hare [3] recommended that waste should not be allowed to accumulate indefinitely in interim storage. Ontario's Royal Commission on Electric Power Planning [4] concluded that "There is clearly an urgent need to develop ultimate disposal facilities to ensure that these wastes are isolated from the world's ecosystems." The House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Forestry [5] also recogi ized the need for disposal, stating that, whatever the future of nuclear energy, "the waste which it produces must be disposed of." Thus storage, while an effective interim measure, is not a permanent solution. Canada needs a method of managing nuclear fuel waste that does not depend on institutional controls to maintain safety in the long term. Society may choose to implement long-term institutional controls at a disposal facility, but the facility should be designed such that, if such controls should fail, human health and the natural environment would still be protected. In 1978, the governments of Canada and Ontario established the Nuclear Fuel Waste Management Program "to assure the safe and permanent disposal" of nuclear fuel waste [6]. Responsibility for research and development on "disposal in a deep underground repository in intrusive igneous rock" was allocated to AECL. Responsibility for studies on interim storage and transportation of used fuel was allocated to Ontario Hydro. In 1981, the governments of Canada and Ontario further announced that "No disposal site selection will be undertaken until after the concept has been accepted" [7]. In 1974, through consultation between the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources and AECL, it was decided to direct most of the research on disposal of nuclear fuel waste toward disposal in plutonic rock, prevalent within the extensive area of the Canadian Shield in Ontario [8] (Figure 2). The decision was based on studies carried out by three branches of Energy, Mines and Resources: the Geological Survey of Canada, the Earth Physics Branch, and the Canada Centre for Mineral and Energy Technology. Subsequently, the Hare study group [3] confirmed that resources ought not to be spread too thinly, and that the primary effort should be given to the crystalline rocks of plutonic origin; but they added that careful attention should be paid to the work of scientists in other countries on different rock types. The preference for plutonic rock was also supported by the Royal Commission on Electric Power Planning [9].

Figure 2: The Canadian Shield

The disposal concept, then, is a proposed method for geological disposal of nuclear fuel waste in which the waste form—used fuel or solidified reprocessing waste—would be placed in long-lasting containers and emplaced in a disposal vault nominally 500-1000 m below the surface in plutonic rock. The containers would be surrounded by sealing material (buffer), and eventually all excavated openings in the rock would be backfilled and sealed in such a way that the system would be passively safe. As shown in Figure 3, the disposal vault would be a network of horizontal tunnels and disposal rooms, with vertical shafts extending from the surface to the tunnels. Rooms and tunnels might be excavated on more than one level. The vault would be designed to accommodate the rock structure, groundwater flow system, and other subsurface conditions at the disposal site. The disposal container and vault seals would also be designed to accommodate the subsurface conditions at the chosen site. Although the figure illustrates emplacement of the containers in boreholes in the room floor, other emplacement designs, such as emplacement in a clay mass in the room itself, may be preferable under particular geological conditions. After the disposal facility was closed, multiple barriers—the container, the waste form, the buffer, backfill and other vault seals, and the geosphere—would protect humans and the natural environment from both radioactive and chemically toxic contaminants in the waste. In the following sections, we discuss the R&D that has been conducted to develop and assess the disposal concept, the evaluation of acceptability of the concept currently under way, and the future steps that are envisaged should the concept be found acceptable. Figure 3: Illustrative Disposal Facility

2 Research and Development for Disposal

Most of AECL's research and development on disposal is currently funded by AECL and Ontario Hydro through the CANDU Owner's Group. In addition, through a Technical Assistance Program, Ontario Hydro provides expertise and advice to AECL on topics such as disposal containers and vault seals, and has assessed the potential environmental effects of nuclear fuel waste disposal during the preclosure phase. Ontario Hydro is also responsible for studies on interim storage and transportation of used fuel. From 1978 to 1992, AECL's research and development on disposal cost about $413 million, of which $305 million was from funds provided to AECL by the federal government and $77 million was from Ontario Hydro. The remaining funding was obtained primarily through cooperative programs with other countries. These cooperative programs have also enhanced the cost-effectiveness of Canadian research and development by providing valuable information from work carried out internationally. Table 1 outlines the scope of the research and development. In developing and assessing the disposal concept, AECL has consulted broadly with members of Canadian society to help ensure that the concept and the way in which it would be implemented are technically sound and represent a generally acceptable disposal strategy. Many groups in Canada have had opportunities to comment on the disposal concept and on the Nuclear Fuel Waste Management Program. These include government departments and agencies, scientists, engineers, sociologists, ethicists, and other members of the public. The Technical Advisory Committee to AECL on the Nuclear Fuel Waste Management Program, whose members are nominated by Canadian scientific and engineering societies, has been a major source of technical advice [10]. Long-term management of nuclear fuel waste has received much attention internationally. Table 1: Research and Development on the Disposal Concept

Aspect Objectives Activities

Disposal Understand the behaviour of potential disposal • studies of corrosion of titanium, copper, nickel Container containers in order to design and lest long-lasting alloys, and a variety of steels containers and to develop models for estimating their performance under disposal vault conditions, • manufacture and structural testing of prototypes of several container designs

Waste Form Understand the behaviour of nuclear fuel waste in order • studies of processes for making glass and to develop models for estimating the rale of release of glass-ceramic reprocessing waste forms contaminants from a waste form in a disposal vault. • studies of dissolution and leaching of used fuel and solidified reprocessing watte

• studies of uranium ore bodies, such as that at Cigar Lake in northern Saskatchewan, as analogs of the used fuel as a waste form

Vault Seal* Understand the behaviour of potential vault seals in • studies of both clay-based and cement-based sealing order to develop methods for sealing a disposal vault materials for use as and to develop models for estimating the rate of transport of contaminants through the seals. - buffer around the container - backfill in excavated openings - grout in fractures in the rock - bulkheads or plugs in rooms, tunnels, shafts, and boreholes

Geoaphere Understand the behaviour of plulonic rock and • studies of processes that could affect contaminant associated groundwater flow systems in order to assess transport the performance of plutonie rock u a host medium. • development and demonstration of methods for obtaining the geoscience data needed for screening and evaluating potential disposal sites

Surface Understand the surface environment of the Canadian e development and demonstration of the methods for Environment Shield in order to develop models for estimating the characterizing and monitoring the surface transport of contaminants through the biosphere and environment the potential eiposure of humans and non-human biota. • studies of movement of contaminants in the near-surface and surface environment

Total System Develop and evaluate engineering conceptual designs for • large-scale, in situ tests and demonstrations of a disposal facility and transportation systems in order excavation methods, engineering activities, and to utnt feasibility, cost, and safety. selected elements of disposal vault designs in the Underground Research Laboratory

• designing a cask for transportation of used fuel, obtaining a design approval certificate from the AECB, and manufacturing a full-scale demonstration cask

Assessment ..." Develop and demonstrate the methodology for • identifying factors important to safely Environmen < evaluating the effects of nuclear fuel waste disposal on Effects human health and the natural environment. • developing, testing, and evaluating assessment models

• estimating the environmental effects of disposal systems (including transportation systems)

• analyzing the sensitivity of the estimates to changes in the disposal system The Nuclear Fuel Waste Management Program, developed in parallel with programs in other countries, includes monitoring of the research being done internationally on disposal in plutouic rock, on disposal in geological media other than plutonic rock, and on alternative waste forms, container materials, and other engineered components of a disposal facility. Canada exchanges information on nuclear fuel waste management with the United States, Sweden, Finland, Japan, Republic of Korea, and the Commission of European Communities. We also have representatives on international working committees of the IAEA and the OECD/NEA. Canada participated in international research on seabed disposal and in the International Stripa Project, a program of underground experiments and developmental research on disposal conducted in an abandoned mine in Sweden [11,12]. We believe that the research in Canada, supported by research conducted in other countries, provides convincing evidence that Canada's nuclear fuel waste can be safely disposed of in the plutonic rock of the Canadian Shield using current technology or reasonably achievable developments.

3 Evaluating the Acceptability of the Concept

The acceptability of the disposal concept is now being reviewed under the federal Envi- ronmental Assessment and Review Process. In 1988, the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources referred the issue of nuclear fuel waste management to the Minister of the Environment, requesting that a review be conducted of the disposal concept and of a broad range of nuclear fuel waste management issues [13]. Although many organizations have contributed to the Nuclear Fuel Waste Management Program, AECL is the sole proponent of the disposal concept in this review. In 1989, a federal Environmental Assessment Panel was appointed to conduct the review [14], and in 1990, the Panel established a Scientific Review Group to provide a scientific evaluation of the disposal concept. The Panel conducted a number of activities to help it develop guidelines for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). In 1990, the Panel held open houses in Ontario, Quebec, and New Brunswick, the provinces that have nuclear generating stations; in Manitoba, where AECL conducts much of its research on nuclear fuel waste disposal; and in Saskatchewan, where there are uranium mines. The objective was to inform potential review participants about the review process and the disposal concept. Later the same year, the Panel held scoping meetings at 14 locations in the same five provinces, hearing presentations from the public and from government departments and agencies. The Panel also obtained input from written presentations, a conference for university students, and a workshop for aboriginal groups. The Panel issued draft guidelines in 1991, received extensive comments on them, and issued the final guidelines in 1992 [15]. AECL is preparing the EIS to provide information requested by the panel and to present AECL's case for the acceptability of the disposal concept. A Summary of the EIS will be issued as a separate report. Nine major reference documents, which provide detailed support for the EIS, axe also being released as separate reports. In addition, hundreds of papers in the scientific literature provide information relevant to assessing the acceptability of the concept. After the Panel has received and reviewed the information requested in the guidelines, it will hold public hearings and consider the findings of the Scientific Review Group. According to the Panel's terms of reference [14],

As a result of this review tfie Panel will make recommendations to assist the governments of Canada and Ontario in reaching decisions on the acceptability of the disposal concept and on the steps that must be taken to ensure the safe long-term management of nuclear fuel wastes in Canada.

4 Future Steps

We assume that those who have responsibility for the safe management of used fuel, the federal government and the owners of the used fuel, also have responsibility for implementing the disposal concept if it is found to be acceptable. Disposal of nuclear fuel waste would proceed in sequential stages—siting, construction, operation, decommissioning, and closure—and would ei>cail a series of decisions about whether and how to proceed [16]. The involvement of potentially affected communities would be sought and encouraged throughout all stages. Any potential host community would share in the decision making regarding whether and how to proceed with siting and subsequent stages of implementation. All activities undertaken in connection with the implementation of the disposal concept, including the transportation of nuclear fuel waste to a disposal facility, would have to comply with applicable legislative requirements, hi addition, directives, policies, or procedures of the governments or government agencies might have to be considered. Approvals, including licenses, would be required from several regulatory agencies. One of these would be the AECB, which takes a sequential approach to licensing nuclear facilities. Potential environmental effects would be identified, and measures would be taken to avoid adverse effects, to mitigate unavoidable adverse effects, and to compensate for adverse effects that were not avoided or sufficiently mitigated. The implementing organization would be responsible for protecting public health and the natural environment and for ensuring that every reasonable precaution was taken to protect employees from occupational disease or injury. It is estimated that, considering the need to fully involve the public in the decision making, and considering the time required to obtain information on geological conditions at potential sites, it would take about 20 years or more to complete the siting stage, and several more years to begin emplacing waste, at a disposal facility. Thus acceptance of the disposal concept at this time should be viewed as the first of many steps necessary to implement safe disposal. In particular, acceptance at this time would not imply approval of any particular site or facility design. It is important to a successful review, that representatives of the nuclear industry participate in the hearings and make their views known to the panel. We believe that a successful review will lead to concept acceptance, a vital first step in establishing Canada's ability to safely dispose of its nuclear fuel waste.

References

[1] P. Brown and R. Morrsiou, "Radioactive waste management policy in Canada," in Waste Management '92, (Tucson, Arizona), pp. 145-151, 1992.

[2] AECB, "Regulatory objectives, requirements and guidelines for the disposal of radioac- tive wastes—long-term aspects," Regulatory Policy Statement R-104, Atomic Energy Control Board, Ottawa, June 1987.

[3] A. Aikin, J. Harrison, and F. Hare, "The management of Canada's nuclear wastes: report of a study prepared under contract for the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources," Tech. Rep. EP 77-6, Department of Supply and Services, Ottawa, 1977.

[4] Royal Commission on Electric Power Planning—Arthur Porter, Chairman, "The report of the Royal Commission on Electric Power Planning," 1980.

[5] Standing Committee on Environment and Forestry— B. Brisco, Chairman, High-level radioactive waste in Canada: The eleventh hour, Report of ike Standing Committee on Environment and Forestry, Second Session of the Thirty-Third Parliament, 1986-87. Ottawa K1A 0S9: Supply and Services Canada, 1988.

[6] "Canada/Ontario radioactive waste management program, joint statement by the Min- ister of Energy, Mines and Resources Canada and the Ontario Energy Minister," June 5 1978.

[7] "Canada/Ontario joint statement on the Nuclear Fuel Waste Management Program, joint statement by the minister of Energy, Mines and Resources Canada and the Ontario Energy Minister," August 4 1981.

[8] J. Scott, "EMR program for geological disposal of high-level radioactive wastes," Pub- lished for the Canadian Geoscience Council by the Geological Survey of Canada as Paper 79-10, 1979. [9] Royal Commission on Electric Power Planning—Arthur Porter, Chairman, "A race against time, interim report from the Royal Commission on Electric Power Planning," 1978.

[10] Technical Advisory Committee on the Nuclear Fuel Waste Management Program—L.W. Shemilt, Chairman, "Thirteenth annual report," TAC-13, 1993.

[11] Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co. (SKB), "Executive summary of Phase 1," Tech. Rep. TR-86-04, Stripa Project, 1986.

[12] Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co. (SKB), "Executive summary of Phase 2," Tech. Rep. TR-89-01, Stripa Project, 1989.

[13] Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources, Canada, "Letter to the Minister of the Envi- ronment, Canada," September 23 1988.

[14] Minister of the Environment, Canada, "Terms of reference for the nuclear fuel waste management and disposal concept environmental assessment panel," 1989.

[15] Federal Environmental Assessment Review Panel, Final guidelines for the preparation of an environmental impact statement on the nuclear fuel waste management and disposal concept 13th floor, Fontaine Building, 200 Sacre-Coeur Blvd., Hull, Quebec, K1A 0H3: Federal Environmental Assessment Review Office, 1992.

[16] C. Allan, "Building confidence in deep geological disposal of nuclear fuel waste: Canada's approach," Presented to the International Nuclear Congress INC93, October 1993. /•••

A PERSPECTIVE ON THE MANAGEMENT OF LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE

by

D.R. Champ and D.H. Charlesworth Waste Management Systems Division Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Chalk River Laboratories Chalk River, Ontario Canada KOJ IJO

1994 May 24 1. INTRODUCTION The approach to management of Low-level Radioactive Waste (LLRW) is undergoing intensive scrutiny and change, both in Canada and abroad. LLRW includes all radioactive waste exclusive of spent fuel and, mine and mill tailings. The degree and duration of the hazard associated with the LLRW is waste stream dependent and very variable, and must be taken into account in the practices applied to the management of each individual waste stream. The practices applied are largely a function of the end result of the waste management operation; namely, storage versus disposal. The choice of a storage versus disposal option can significantly impact both the operational practices and the costs of waste management for the nuclear industry. This paper is intended to provide a perspective on the status of LLRW management, the requirements for effective LLRW management, the changes and developments in the management of LLRW, the reasons for those changes and developments, and the implications for the Canadian nuclear industry.

2. CURRENT LLRW PRACTICES 2.1 Canadian The current Canadian waste management practice is interim storage where storage is defined by the IAEA [1] as, "The placement of waste in a nuclear facility where isolation, environmental protection and human control (e.g. monitoring) are provided with the intent that the waste will be retrieved for exemption or processing and/or disposal at a later time;". Storage is an active function that carries with it the longer- term liability of continuing management actions including those actions required to make the transition to disposal.

Waste management practices in Canada are evolving towards disposal which is defined by the IAEA [1] as, "The emplacement of waste in an approved, specified facility (e.g. near surface or geological repository) without the intention of retrieval. Disposal may also include the approved direct discharge of effluents (e.g. liquid and gaseous wastes) into the environment with subsequent dispersion."

In Canada, a policy to move from storage to disposal was first enunciated by Atomic Energy of Canada (AECL) in the 1970s [2] and R&D studies have been underway in AECL since the late 1970s. Ontario Hydro also carried out preliminary R&D studies relevant to disposal in the 1980s. In 1987, the Canadian Atomic Energy Control Board (AECB) issued the Regulatory Policy Statement R-104 [3] which states that; "For the long-term management of radioactive wastes, the preferred approach is disposal, a permanent method of management in which there is no intention of retrieval and which ideally uses techniques and designs that do not rely for their success on long-term institutional control beyond a reasonable period Of time." This policy statement defines the basic regulatory requirements and provides guidelines for their application to achieve acceptable disposal.

Currently in Canada, there are a variety of programs underway that are gathering the information and developing the technology required to achieve disposal. The major waste generators, AECL and Ontario Hydro, have evaluated and documented approaches [4] and options [5] for moving from storage to disposal. The Low-Level Radioactive Management office (LLRWMO) under is assisting in the development of policies for achieving an effective transition from storage to disposal [6], AECL is currently in the licensing process for a prototype disposal facility [7] that is designed to handle a certain category of waste. AECL, Ontario Hydro and Hydro Quebec sponsor a CANDU Owners Group (COG) research and development program [8] that is developing the understanding and technology for LLRW disposal to cover the full spectrum of wastes generated in CANDU reactors and research facilities. The Federal Siting Task Force on Low-Level Radioactive Waste is evaluating concepts and sites for disposal of a large volume of historic wastes currently stored in the Port Hope area.

2.2 International

The transition from storage to disposal of solid LLRW is well underway internationally [9, 10]. Permanent disposal facilities based upon either near-surface concrete vaults or subsurface rock cavities have been constructed and are in operation in a number of countries. Near-surface disposal facilities based upon concrete vault systems are in operation in France, Spain and Japan. Sweden is operating the SFR-l (Swedish Final Repository for Radioactive Waste), a shallow rock cavity system located 50m below the Baltic Sea. Finland also began operating a shallow rock cavity system in 1993. Concrete vault systems are also planned for most of the US state compact facilities. Germany is operating a deep repository in salt and has a program that is well advanced towards deep geological disposal of LLRW in rock. Planning has started for underground repositories in the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Korea and the Czech Republic.

3. Driving Forces for Disposal

The primary driving forces for disposal are to meet the objective of minimizing the burden on future generations and to avoid the liabilities associated with continued interim storage and the transition from storage to disposal. Additionally, as exemplified by the international developments, to put Canadian LLRW management practices in line with modern waste management practices.

The stated objectives of disposal in the Regulatory Document R-104 are to; minimize any burden placed on future generations, protect the environment and protect human health, taking into account social and economic factors. Interim storage, the current LLRW management practice in Canada, cannot meet the first objective since it requires institutional controls (e.g. access control, monitoring, site maintenance, etc.) as long as the wastes pose an unacceptable hazard to the environment and human health or until the wastes are retrieved for disposal. In addition to meeting these ethical responsibilities, the nuclear industry has a business objective of minimizing the liability associated with the long-term management of their wastes. Interim storage followed by retrieval of the waste and transfer to a disposal facility, as opposed to direct disposal, is likely to lead to higher lifetime costs and occupational doses. If the stored wastes were not adequately characterized, segregated and tracked at the time of storage, large costs could be incurred in acquiring, after the fact, the information required to meet the safety case and operational requirements for disposal. As the inventory of stored waste increases, the liability also increases due to the increasing mismatch between the size of the waste management operation required to handle the accumulated inventory of wastes and that required to manage the annual production of wastes. 4. A Comprehensive Approach to Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management

Regulatory approval for operation of a waste management facility carries with it a requirement for a clear statement of the long-term intent since the future safety of the facility depends upon it. For a storage facility, the safety case can be based upon continued operational controls, monitoring and a commitment to future action, namely decommissioning. With current management practices decommissioning is likely to require waste retrieval and transfer to disposal. For a disposal facility, the safety case depends upon our ability to credibly predict the long-term fate of the contaminants contained in the disposed wastes. In order to minimize our future liabilities, both options should follow a comprehensive approach to the management of the wastes, such as illustrated in Figure 1. A comprehensive approach includes: identification of waste streams, characterization of waste streams, waste segregation and classification, waste processing and conditioning, waste routing and tracking and finally waste emplacement. Each step and its significance are described briefly below. 4.1 Waste Stream Identification

One of the most important front-end features of disposal programs, that is common to most countries that have implemented disposal, is the requirement that generators segregate their wastes into identified waste streams. The generator should establish operating envelopes for each stream so that the waste manager can assume that all wastes assigned to a particular stream have common characteristics within a specified range. This is an essential requirement for the safety assessment analysis required for licensing a disposal facility. In addition, waste stream identification together with the subsequent tracking and routing of each waste stream, at the interim storage stage, will reduce overall costs. Additional cost savings will result from the identification of wastes that can be segregated and routed to non-radioactive waste management facilities, and from the avoidance of the potentially large characterization effort that may be required to transfer ill-defined wastes from interim storage to disposal.

4.2 Waste Characterization

The characterization of the radiological properties of each waste stream/waste package must be sufficient to quantify the associated hazard, both at the time of acceptance into a waste management facility (primarily external exposure) and for the future (internal and external exposure resulting from radionuclide release from a facility). As long as the waste remains hazardous, i.e. the time over which some form of protection against radiation dose to humans is needed, safety will be dependent on the local conditions as well as radiological characteristics. The latter point highlights the tight linkage between the disposal strategy chosen and the anticipated waste characteristics.

Characterization can require extensive and costly analysis or it can be relatively straightforward depending upon the source of the waste and the degree to which the source of the waste limits the radionuclide content of the waste. For example, waste from a laboratory in which only one pure radioisotope has been used will not require extensive analysis. At the other extreme, waste from a hot cell used for a variety of operations with nuclear fuel and with the potential to concentrate some radionuclides relative to others, will require extensive analysis.

For most LLRW, the relative hazard of the non-radiological components is not expected to be significant compared to that from radioactivity. However, the non-radiological hazardous components of the waste will need to be considered and may be significant in some cases. 4.3 Waste Segregation and Categorization

Waste segregation and categorization are tightly linked in a feedback loop with waste characterization. The ultimate objective is to ensure that waste streams with differing characteristics are not mixed in such a way that the costs for characterization are driven up and the safety case is jeopardized. For example, if a large volume waste stream containing a single short-lived radionuclide is mixed with a small volume of waste containing long-lived radionuclides, the entire volume will require much more extensive, and expensive characterization. The addition of the long-lived radionuclide may also necessitate more elaborate performance assessment to demonstrate that the long-lived radionuclides do not create an unacceptable hazard. Appropriate segregation of wastes is critical not only for disposal but also prior to interim storage in order to avoid the associated liability in the future.

4.4 Waste Processing In addition to the radiological properties of the waste, the waste volumes and form can significantly impact the storage or disposal strategy and costs. The storage or disposal concept chosen, the facility size and location will all be influenced by the volume of waste to be handled. The costs of waste processing to achieve volume reduction through compaction or incineration needs to be evaluated against the costs for provision of a larger space for storage or disposal.

Waste processing is also applied to alter the chemical and physical form of the waste. The form of the waste can be one of the most important factors controlling the release rate of hazardous materials from the waste. This is important since the performance of a waste repository is characterized by the magnitude of the release rate of critical contaminants. For example, since most contaminant release from a waste will be water borne, control of the rate at which waste and water interact can be a controlling factor in the rate of release of particular contaminants. The interaction of water and waste will be a function of the stability, water permeability and chemical reaction with the contaminants. All of these factors are waste form dependent.

A further barrier to migration of the radioactivity contained in the waste can be the packaging or container. The dominant role of the container is to prevent release of radioactivity during handling. Because of its limited durability, the container is not usually a significant factor in the release of long-lived radionuclides after emplacement. However, for the more mobile radionuclides, such as tritium and radioiodine, the container may sufficiently restrict diffusion from the waste into the surrounding backfill to materially reduce the overall release.

4.5 Waste Emplacement - Storage or Disposal The characteristics of the waste will determine its acceptability for management in any particular facility. The relative importance of the various characteristics (contaminant content and concentrations, physical/chemical form and leachability, packaging, etc.) will depend on the safety philosophy applied in the design of the waste management facility, most critically the final disposal option chosen. The disposal option chosen will, in turn, be based on an integrated evaluation of the total system that includes; the waste inventory to be placed in the facility, the engineered design characteristics of the facility, and the characteristics of the site in which the facility is placed, as shown in Figure 2. The safety evaluation of the total system must include operational and public safety. Operational radiation safety can be achieved through good practice and external radiation monitoring; however, public safety needs to take into account the potential exposure pathways for the time period over which the wastes remain hazardous. For storage, monitoring can be used to assess public impact but it does not provide a measure of future impact. A predictive capability through performance assessment models is required to assess public safety in the long-term.

5. Performance Assessment Performance assessment is the integrator to assess the long- term safety of a disposal facility after institutional control activities (maintenance and monitoring) have deteriorated or been discontinued. Performance assessment is achieved through the use of a computer model that mathematically describes the relevant, specific features of the disposal system, as discussed in Section 5. The following series of steps are generally followed in the performance assessment process: identify features, events and processes (FEPS) that could impact safety; define combinations of FEPS (scenarios) that may be relevant: identify scenarios that are potentially important for consequence analysis for the specific facility; develop, verify and validate models, databases and computer codes for analysis of the disposal system; calculate the safety consequences of relevant scenarios; identify uncertainties in the results and the most important parameters (sensitivity analysis); and finally compare results with relevant standards and criteria. The steps leading to the final performance assessment should be an iterative process with design in order to drive the design to maximize present-day and future safety, and to minimize costs.

6. Summary and Conclusions

In Canada, a comprehensive approach to LLRW management has not been achieved. Many of the issues discussed above will require substantial work to fully resolve. Technology development programs are in progress but progressing slowly, to acquire the knowledge required to make sound decisions towards implementing optimized waste management practices for LLRW. AECL is well advanced towards building a prototype disposal facility for a portion of their waste streams. Licensing and operation of the prototype facility will provide valuable guidance on the development of safety cases for licensing other disposal facilities and for the practical aspects of implementing a disposal operation that takes into account the many developments required to achieve the comprehensive approach discussed in Section 4.

Waste acceptance criteria must be carefully developed to ensure disposal safety for both workers and the public, and to ensure that cost-effective, efficient operational procedures are applied to wastes from all generators. Any additional requirements placed on waste generators must yield safety or economic benefits. An additional benefit expected from the work on waste characterization and categorization is the ability to subst?ntially reduce the amount of waste that goes into radioactive waste management facilities by segregating out those waste streams that are "non-radioactive".

Initiation of disposal operations need not wait for full development of all of the requisite knowledge and technology, the liability associated with a protracted transition from storage to disposal could be substantial. An implementation strategy that will facilitate regulatory acceptance of an early transition to disposal would be advantageous to the Canadian nuclear industry. The European model of a national strategy implemented by a national organization may be the most expeditious means of achieving early disposal. Indeed it may be imposed on the industry if the Canadian nuclear industry does not itself take the initiative to define a joint strategy, pool resources, and get on with the job. Careful development and implementation of a strategy for disposal of LLRW will move the industry into the modern world of waste management practices and should yield economic benefits in the long-term. References il] IAEA, Radioactive Waste Management Glossary", International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, 1993. [2] D.H. Charlesworth/ " Current Development Programs for the Disposal of Low- and Intermediate- Level Radioactive Wastes", Atomic Energy of Canada Report, AECL-6545, 1979.

[3] AECB, "Regulatory Objectives, Requirements, and Guidelines for the Disposal of Radioactive Wastes - Long- Term Aspects", Regulatory Policy statement R-104, Atomic Energy Control Board, Ottawa, June 1987. [4] D.F. Dixon, éd., "A Program for Evolution from Storage to Disposal of Radioactive Wastes at CRNL", Atomic Energy of Canada Report, AECL-7083, October 1985. [5] Ontario Hydro, "Radioactive Materials Management at Ontario Hydro - The Plan for Low- and Intermediate-Level Waste", Ontario Hydro, 1992. [6] P.A. Brown, et al, "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management in Canada", Nuclear Waste Management and Environmental Remediation International Conference, Prague, Czech Republic, 1993. [7] D.G. Hardy, et al, "Design, Development and Safety Assessment of the IRUS Repository for Low-Level Radioactive Waste", Atomic Energy of Canada Report, AECL- 9830, Presented at SPECTRUM '88, Pasco, Washington, September, 1988. [8] CANDU Owners Group, "The COG R&D Strategic Plan for the Low- and Intermediate- Level Waste Management Program", CANDU Owners Group Report, COG-93-273, 1993.

[9] K.J. Templeton, et al, "Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Technologies Used Outside the United States", Technical Bulletin EGG-LLW-11026, INEL, Idaho Falls, Jan. 1994.

[10] Nuclear Energy Agency, "Update on Waste Management Policies and Programmes", Nuclear Waste Bulletin No. 8, July 1993. Radionuclide Radionuclide Waste Waste Generation Distribution Streams Segregation and Categorization

Matrix

Understanding Control

Waste Processing Storage Radionuclide Migration Concentration/ Volume Reduction from Waste Disposal to Man Waste Form Preparation Control Short- and Long-Term Safety

Figure 1 : A Comprehensive Approach to LLRW Management Inventory Vault Geosphere Biosphere

Waste Stream Vault Design Flow model Biosphere Data Model

T • - Vault Model Geosphere Facility Model Inventory 1 '~1 Operations t Decommissioning Geochemical Etc. Model

\ r \ Integrated Performance Assessment Code i Safety Assessment

Figure 2: Disposal Facility Design and Performance Assessment rrr;l

SELF-DETERMINATION AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT THE STORAGE OF USED NUCLEAR FUEL COMMUNITY CONSULTATION AND PARTICIPATION

Ray Ahenakew Executive Director Meadow Lake Tribal Council Meadow Lake, Saskatchewan, Canada

While the title of the paper may appear to suggest a somewhat ambitious message, it incorporates a number of factors which are key to Canada's First Nation peoples as they strive for dignity and their full and rightful place as equal partners in all facets of Canadian society. The title also highlights an important recognition by the Meadow Lake Tribal Council that economic development is critical to achieving self-determination, that is self-government, and that traditional subsistence activities such as hunting, fishing, trapping and arts and crafts must be supplemented by the formation of business enterprises which embrace technology and capitalize on the extraction and value-added processing of the natural resources associated with our traditional lands. The title further suggests that any economic development strategy, particularly one as controversial as the storage of used nuclear fuel, must be supported by the people it is intended to benefit and that the manner in which that support is solicited is crucial to arriving at a balanced and informed opinion, that is, at a healthy decision.

The paper will address each of these elements in turn, will describe the Meadow Lake First Nations and the Council's self- government and economic development strategy including the study it is conducting on the feasibility and desirability of used nuclear fuel storage and will deal in some detail with the community consultation and information program the Council has initiated.

First a few words on the Meadow Lake Tribal Council (MLTC), more specifically, the nine Meadow Lake First Nations (MLFNs). The MLFNs number some 9,000 people and consist of two linguistic, cultural groups. The groups are Crée and Dene and are about equally represented. The MLFNs are located in the northern part of Saskatchewan. The MLTC is a body comprised of the Chiefs of each of the nine Meadow Lake First Nations as well as a Council Chief and two Vice-Chiefs who represent the two linguistic, cultural groups. The Council can best be characterized as a collégial body charged with developing the vision and strategies to provide policy formulation and services and support in areas such as health, social services, education, economic development. The Council does not supplant the authority of the nine MLFNs each of which is fully autonomous. This arrangement has worked rather well and has -2- resulted in the MLFNs assuming responsibility for their own destiny in education, health, social services, economic development, etc - areas which were formerly the prevail of the Canadian Government's Department of Indian and Northern Affairs. The primary and overriding objective of the MLTC is to provide for healthy individuals, families and communities. The path to this vision is through self-government which in turn requires self- sufficiency, self-reliance and self-determination. Economic development plays an extremely important role. Work, that is, long-term, quality jobs, provides a sense of self-worth and the prospect of a promising future where First Nation peoples enjoy economic parity with the rest of the Province and with their fellow Canadians. We do not want to be wards of the state, to depend on welfare. We want to be full and equal participants in and contributors to the Canadian economy. We have demonstrated that we have the capability, the desire, the courage, the business acumen to achieve this. Our success in forestry operations, to wit, NORSASK, a forestry company in which we own 40 % equity, and which employs some 120 native people, is testimony to our competency. Our dividends from NORSASK have allowed us to establish an Economic Development Heritage Fund which will expand our ability to support First Nation enterprises.

But this is not enough! The MLTC population is growing at such a pace that MLTC must provide some 3,000 jobs or 150 jobs per annum over the next twenty years. This is a challenge in any one's language. It is obvious that we must look beyond the traditional activities detailed above, that MLTC must explore a number of opportunities such as mining, tourism, forestry, environmental management, energy, etc.

Each of these opportunities require the following attributes:

* long-term, quality employment; * full and equal participation in the control and management of the enterprise;

* environmental responsibility and sensitivity;

* recognition of First Nation peoples' traditional values, spirituality, culture and lifestyles.

In addition, we want to work as partners in growth with non-native communities. Not as adversaries. Together we can all achieve a promising future for our children, for all Canadians. Our successful joint venture with NORSASK serves ably as a model.

How then did we get to consider the storage of used nuclear fuel in -3- Northern Saskatchewan, that is, the Canadian Shield. Our acquaintance with this economic development opportunity came about as a result of MLTC's interest in the uranium mining industry. In fact, we have been exploring ways in which to maximize First Nation participation in one of the Province's most successful industries. This led in turn to a more comprehensive appreciation of the nature of the entire Nuclear Fuel Cycle, specifically, the permanent storage of used nuclear fuel in deep, stable geological formations. In other words, the technology developed by AECL at its Whiteshell Underground Research Laboratory. The permanent storage of used nuclear fuel utilizing AECL's technology appeared to possess all of the economic development criteria previously mentioned. Yet it did entail one major challenge, one feature which was sure to have its detractors and to constitute a considerable potential for dissension if we, the Council, did not fully inform ourselves, and the members of the MLFNs about the nature of the project and the technology. We had foremost to assure ourselves and our people of the safety aspects associated with this potential project. Safety was and is most paramount in our consideration.

It was imperative therefore that the elected Chiefs and Council executive felt comfortable enough to proceed with the study before bringing this to the people. No commitment would be made as to site, timing, etc until the study was completed and until we had the mandate from the people to proceed. And certainly we would not proceed if this project were deemed not to be safe. Indeed we would oppose it if it were deemed to be unsafe and would do so no matter where in Canada it would be built.

The MLTC Chiefs decided that we would commission a feasibility study to report on such matters as safety, economic development potential, financing, impact on First Nation traditions, job creation potential, etc. We wanted an exhaustive study that would call on experts and our own people to contribute to the recommendations. In addition, and we feel most important, the people would have to decide whether they truly wanted this. So we called it a feasibility and desirability study. Even though from a technological, safety, economic perspective the project might hold much promise, the people could conclude that truly they did not want it, be this for ethical, moral, social or whatever reason.

This posed quite a challenge for how do you assess the potential of any economic development initiative without appearing to promote it. How do you maintain balance and encourage all views to present themselves without introducing disinformation, without emotion running rampant and excluding fact, particularly in an area which has all the emotional elements and then some. -4- We decided to give this to the people, to have them participate fully in the information program and in the community consultation activities. We conducted surveys as to whether people wanted economic development and if so what kind. We prepared inserts for our community newspaper, the NortWest Eagle. And we made a video about the project. This and many other things we have done to inform people and to seek their opinions and encourage their input. What is perhaps unusual about our approach, so others tell us, is that the people have decided what questions, what issues, what information goes into the surveys, the newspaper articles, the video. In other words, it is their product, their program, their decision as to how the project is presented. This is not the infamous Decide, Announce, Defend (DAD) system. This is pure grassroots. And we are not in a rush. We have plenty of time to decide.

One aspect that we had to confront and deal with fairly, openly and honestly, was not to discourage input from those who may oppose the project - regardless on what grounds. Yet, as mentioned, we did not wish to see emotion, or appeals to the emotions, to dominate. As an initial step to deal with balance, with pros and cons, we have written a letter to both camps asking them for comments, for their views, and have asked them to provide facts and the evidence, research, documentary substantiation for their position. Some of you will have received such a letter. The replies, for those who decide to respond, will be available for all to read.

We have also established two positions for economic development officers, one from each of the Crée and Dene communities, to look at this and other opportunities. These individuals are to advise us and the people on the advantages and disadvantages and to obtain, make available and explain the projects and the accompanying material. MLTC has also hired nine Community Consultation Assistants, one for each of the nine MLFNs. Their job is to conduct the surveys, to explain the project to the people by visiting every household in their community, to take note of concerns, questions, etc and to deal with these promptly, completely, honestly. These people were not chosen on the basis of their stance on the project. Rather they were chosen on the basis of their ability to communicate and on their standing in their community.

Everyone of these people, including the Chiefs and the executive, have visited Whiteshell and have gone down in the hole. We have visited the laboratories. Some of us have visited Ontario Hydro's Darlington complex. All of us have had intensive familiarization sessions on the technology and why we are looking at economic development and this project in particular. I should note that we have also run bus tours to Whiteshell for our elders, our children and their parents; for our teachers and counsellors -5- and staff. We intend to do more of this. Indeed, we did not present this project in isolation. We presented it as one of a number of candidates for potential business enterprises. All this was done in the context of our vision and the role economic development plays therein. To have done otherwise would have served to confound and confuse and would have cast us as out-and-out proponents. We would have given the appearance of having already made a decision and were merely going through the stages. We also sought out other people's experience and knowledge. For instance, we visited tribes in the US interested in the Monitored Retrievable Storage (MRS) facility. We have met with scientists, engineers, government, industry, labour, academia and trade associations both here and abroad. Much has been learned in this process. For example, it has become obvious that if we as First Nation peoples aspire to create economic opportunities and to be full and meaningful participants in and contributors to the Canadian economy, and if we want long- term, quality jobs, then we have to educate our people starting now as technicians, technologists, engineers, scientists, administrators and managers. And we must provide them with training and related work experience. To date we have concentrated on law, health and social services and teaching as areas in which to qualify our people. The time has come to focus, to concentrate on science and mathematics, on technology. Our surveys and community consultation programs and meetings indicated that our people wanted us to embrace this as part of the study process, that is, to identify what was needed in technology- based education and training. Our elders emphasized this most strongly. We appreciate the cooperation we have received from the academic, government, private sector, labour and education communities as well as the professional and trade associations. Our Board of Education and our teachers now have cooperative programs underway to develop science and math curricula, run science camps for teachers and students alike, work with mentors who are scientists and engineers, and place students in related summer employment positions. In fact, we had more offers for summer employment than we could accept given we wanted to proceed on a pilot basis first. Some of our students will work this summer in environmental monitoring. Others will work in geological characterization and the preparation of Environmental Impact Statements. We are discussing the development of a curriculum for environmental technologists with the University of Windsor and the Great Lakes Institute for Environmental Research. All of these activities will -6- help us to train for and create jobs in environmental management in the near term as we prepare for longer term initiatives such as the storage of used nuclear fuel.

We owe a great debt of gratitude to many of you attending this conference. Both as individuals and as organizations you have encouraged and assisted us enormously. Most importantly, you have shown our children what careers are available in science and engineering and have provided real opportunities. You have given them hope. This is an example of what I mean when I say we can and must work together constructively as equal partners. We will all benefit accordingly and know we have done something for our peoples and for our great country.

I wanted to share this with you for it has much to do with a collective effort to work as a community to explore opportunities of real promise. To not only work for the collective good in an open, honest and sincere manner but to appear to be doing so. It is this which we consider and hold to be true community consultation and participation wherein people determine and shape their own future.

Much more could be said of the project, MLTC's study, and of the approach which has been adopted by the people of the Meadow Lake First Nations to familiarize themselves with the feasibility and desirability of the permanent storage of used nuclear fuel in the Canadian Shield in Northern Saskatchewan. Involving the outlying communities, information sessions with governments, meetings with the press to name but a few, come to mind.

This is a complex, involved business which calls for openness, honesty, sincerity and ownership by all stakeholders. It is an inclusive process where all points of view are welcome provided facts are presented without prejudice and bias and are supported by verifiable scientific, economic, etc evidence.

Before I conclude my address I must return to the matter of safety and its determination. We are not scientific experts but know whether legislation, policy, regulation and process are sufficiently and comprehensively established to ensure no stone is left unturned to protect society. We have access to scientific experts and will follow the Federal Environmental Assessment Review Office (FEARO) hearings on the proof of concept of AECL's storage technology. Indeed we have asked FEARO to provide us with the AECL Environmental Impact Statement so that we can study it. We intend to appear before the FEARO panel as intervenors when its public meetings start.

All of us are responsible for our actions and our decisions. We are accountable to our people, the people who elected us or appointed us to our positions regardless of the sector of endeavour -7- in which we operate. It is a trust that has been given us and we must not treat it lightly. The permanent storage of used nuclear fuel exacts all of this and more from us. It, the storage of used fuel, is critical to the future of the nuclear industry; an industry which has a vital role to play in meeting today's and tomorrow's energy needs. It is our intent that the Meadow Lake First Nations make a positive contribution to the examination and the realization of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy as we proceed with our feasibility and desirability study. The decision to proceed with the study is the product of daring to think big, to dream, to actualize our vision. To date we have enjoyed the experience immensely and have found it to have led to other promising ventures such as new initiatives in education, training, employment and summer jobs for our young students. We are exploring joint ventures in environmental management. In addition we are organizing a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Roundtable at Meadow Lake this fall. This meeting will be attended by representatives of native peoples from Canada, Mexico and the United states and will examine ways in which we can make NAFTA work for us. I can tell you of many more benefits which have come our way as a consequence of embarking upon this study. The dream is paying off. We are excited about what we have launched.

The road upon which we have embarked is a long journey. No decisions will be made until the FEARO panel has finished its report on the safety of the AECL technology and much remains to be done thereafter if safety is reasonably assured and the economics are right and we have a mandate from our people to proceed further. We do not anticipate any major activity until 2010 and do not foresee an operating facility before 2025. SESSION 8 - L'économie mondiale et la consommation d'énergie / World Economics and Energy Consumption

Président de session/Chain L. Titus (New Brunswick Power, Canada)

M.T. Tremblay - "Energy Consumption and Economie Development" (Royal Bank, Canada)

D.P. Ward et al. - "Meeting the World Energy Needs - The Economie and Environmental Aspects of the Nuclear Option" (Sargent & Lundy, USA) ENERGY CONSUMPTION AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Talk given to the

Canadian Nuclear Association

Annual Conference - Montreal, June 8, 1994

Michel T. Tremblay

Royal Bank Energy Consumption and Economic Development

Energy consumption tends to grow with the overall economy. Energy is an essential factor of production and its use is broadly related to the scale and intensity of economic activity. That would appear to be a reality of economic life that we have no reason to doubt. There has been a lot of economic research devoted to measuring quantitatively the relationship between energy consumption, f requntly electric power consumption, and GDP growth. Most of this research confirms that, indeed, most of the time and in most places there has been a positive interdependence between energy use and economic growth.

But as we all know, in practice, as a method for forecasting energy consumption, that approach has not been very successful during the past 10 years or so. The main difficulty is that it entails an enormous simplification of complex underlying behavioral and structural relationships. Its validity depends on these relationships either remaining fairly constant over time or evolving in a predictable way. Arguably, that has not been the case in the recent past. Also, there is always the non-trivial problem of getting the GDP forecast right.

I would like to take a different approach, this morning, basically because conditions have been changing too fast for us to have much confidence in extrapolations from quantitative estimates based on past data. Instead, I would like to take a fresh look at the relationship between Energy and the Economy, with reference to three main themes — technological change, market liberalization and sustainable development. Under the assumption that you are all ably advised by or otherwise have access to knowledgeable professional economists, I felt it might be more useful if I put a somewhat different spin on the topic. The issues are deep and complex but I hope that, in the next few minutes and at the risk of over-simplification, one or two ideas will emerge that could contribute to your long-term strategic planning.

Technological change The aspects of technology usually discussed in the energy context are its energy-saving and off-oil substitution impacts on demand, or its role in allowing the energy-producing or consuming industries to adapt to environmental constraints. I would like to look at two less-examined aspects of technological change: its impact on economic growth and on competition. It certainly isn't a startling observation to say that for perhaps two decades, we have been going through a period of accelerating and increasingly broad-based technological change. It began with the great leap forward in microcircuitry and microprocessor technology in the 1970s, based on earlier fundamental breakthroughs in electronics. Undreamt of increases in computing power gave rise to equally unanticipated advances in communications, information processing, data management, process control, robotics and CAD-CAM applications. These became the parent technologies for what has been a cascade of technological change in virtually every type of economic activity. Similarly rapid advances took place more autonomously in microbiology, genetics, and in the health and new materials sciences. The parent technologies are still evolving very fast and continue to facilitate further rapid development in the areas that depend on them. There is a self-sustaining aspect to this kind of technological change and its pace does not appear to be slowing down.

Technological developments in communications have facilitated the globalization of enterprises, industries and markets, so that new technologies are being disseminated on a more truly global scale than previously. They are also being disseminated much faster. With dramatic advances in computer- based design and simulation technologies, the time between conception and implementation of new processes or products has shortened dramatically.

Technological progress, embodied in new machines and processes, is the main source of productivity improvements. And growth in productivity and the labour force are, arithmetically, the two primary sources of economic growth and development. For the foreseeable future, then, the global economy's real economic growth could turn out to be faster than we would have had reason to expect only a few years ago. This conclusion is, of course, subject to the usual ceteris paribus — other things being equal — conditions. There are other crucially important pre-requisites for growth: political and social stability, access to capital markets, a sufficiently skilled labour force, etc. At a minimum, however, the kind of sustained technological change I have described is a significant positive factor for economic growth. It is therefore also a favourable development for energy demand.

Rapid technological change has other implications: the rate of technological obsolescence has increased and will likely continue to do so. This puts a premium on the development of new products, markets and processes in order for firms or industries to remain competitive, let alone thrive. Long-term planning has to take into account that the ground can change more rapidly under one's feet than at any time in the past and has to be particularly responsive to changing conditions. That increased adaptability has to be reflected in strategic planning.

The nuclear power industry is no exception. Let us assume that public opinion can be brought around to accepting nuclear technology because the issues of plant safety and nuclear waste disposal have been adequately and convincingly addressed. Nobody in this room doubts that that can be done. Much progress has been made on these fronts and the industry is right in placing these issues foremost on its R&D and public relations agendas.

So let us assume that, in the not too distant future, nuclear safety and waste disposal are no longer a major public policy concern. The nuclear industry will face a different set of challenges.

Providers of electric power, like everyone else face an uncertain and rapidly changing future. They may become increasingly hesitant to commit themselves to a power generating project which they perceive could be obsolete or outdated in a generation or less. The problem is that it takes something like 10 years to bring a costly, large nuclear power plant from design to commissioning. That plant will be operating in an environment in which relative prices and costs of competing fuels and technologies may be very different from what they are today.

Rapid technological change may well imply that serious efforts will have to be directed towards developing smaller and more cost-efficient plants — plants that take less time and money to build and are cheaper to maintain and operate per unit of output. But that same technological change is also contributing to making that sort of adaptation possible. The ability to adequately simulate complex processes is increasing exponentially, so that the development time to accomplish such a goal will be getting shorter and shorter.

There are, of course, possible future developments which would make such an R&D goal appear unnecessary or even frivolous. Take, for example, the assumption of rising energy costs. Conventional wisdom sees nuclear energy as the inevitably preferred source of electric power generation perhaps 15 or 20 years down the road. The argument is that it is environmentally relatively benign and that fossil fuels are a non-renewable source of energy, the price of which will eventually soar much higher as they become scarcer and more costly to find and exploit. The assumption that goes along with this is that the costs of environmental compliance will further contribute to pricing coal and fuel oil out of the power market. I will outline an alternative scenario which, although perhaps not the most likely, still has a non-negligible chance of taking place. But to make that scenario more credible, I have to introduce the second theme of this talk — market liberalization.

Market Liberalization

We turn now the enormous changes that are occurring in the economic infrastructure that ultimately determines how goods and services are allocated, given the scarcity of resources and the constraints of technology. Many of the major political and economic developments of the past few years have led to an increasingly responsive and fluid global system of markets and prices. I will only list some of the more dramatic developments. The former Soviet Union and Eastern European economies have dismantled much of the former central command structure and are in a transition toward market free or at least mixed market structures. China is introducing elements of a market economy and India is rapidly dismantling a system of controls that have long hampered the efficiency of its mixed economy. The North American Free Trade Agreement and the European Monetary System are examples of continental integrationof markets. The US has deregulated one industry after another, the energy sector included, and many of those trends are spreading to other developed economies. De-nationalization and deregulation are well under way in the UK and have begun in earnest in countries such as France and Italy. Developing economies have been opening their doors to foreign capital and expertise, notably in the energy field, but for an increasing number of industries as well. Financial markets are expanding in scope, i.e. the variety of traded financial instruments is rapidly growing and those markets are globalizing rapidly.

The liberalization of markets, like technological change augurs well for long- term global economic growth. It contributes to growth directly since it helps ensure that investment takes place in projects that have the highest expected payoff and that the most efficient technologies are likely to be implemented. It also means that developing countries will no longer suffer from technology lag as they had in the past. A significant proportion of capital projects in developing countries already involve the transfer of state-of-the-art technology and expertise through joint ventures and other forms of partnerships and this trend is unlikely to be reversed.

But these advantages have exacted a harsh price. Market liberalization has been challenging most economies and a wide range of industries and firms to become more competitive or be left behind. Economic restructuring is the name we give to the painful responses these challenges have elicited in recent years. And the effects of market liberalization will continue to be felt during the foreseeable future. In particular, because the allocation of capital globally will be increasingly the result of market decisions rather than those of a central authority or bureaucracy, competitiveness and cost-effectiveness can be expected to become even more pervasive as criteria for investment than in the past in the developed as well as developing economies. Long-range strategic planning must increasingly make comepetitiveness a central goal.

So far, we have looked at the sea changes in technology and markets that have already begun and are likely to characterize much of the foreseeable future. I have focused on two conclusions: first, both processes tend to stimulate economic growth and to that extent the demand for energy in general; and second, both processes contribute to an intensely competitive environment. I have been trying to be relevant in particular to your industry's long term planning. The operation of markets has still another lesson to give us in this regard, which I will discuss under the rubric of sustainable development.

Sustainable Development Again, I would like to approach a familiar topic from a non-standard viewpoint and talk of sustainable development in a more general sense than is usually intended by the term. In this view, environmental issues do not enjoy a special priviledge. Economic development may be interrupted or reversed for a variety of reasons other than environmental strain or catastrophe: i.e. external or civil wars, revolutions, and/or political or economic systems characterized by excessive arbitrariness and rigidity.

The factors we have considered so far — technological change and market liberalization both operate in the same direction, namely increasing the speed and efficiency with which feedback takes place and adjustments are made in an economy. This is another way of saying that these important developments enhance the chances of economic development being sustained. All too often this very real and important phenomenon is inadequately considered — by people from all over the political and economic spectra, and by environmental activists as well as energy planners. Environmentalists like to project actual or perceived trends well into the future in order to generate the kind of apocalyptic scenario that motivates action. Electric energy planners are also among the select few who take a long-term view and they also project trends, albeit different ones, into the future to guide appropriate action. In both cases, what is often not sufficiently taken into account are the adjustments which free societies and market-based economies make to developments which get too out of line. If a resource is getting scarce, it becomes more costly to develop, its price initially rises, substitutes are found and, as different technologies for its production and use are developed its price then likely to re-adjust downwards. If a resource is a public good, and is judged by the citizenry to be scarce, public policy as well as market forces set similar adjustments into motion. Thus, the population explosion is slowing down in the world's most populous countries, India is now agriculturally self-sufficient, world oil reserves have increased, while real oil prices are only modestly higher, and particulate emissions have declined in North America and Western Europe since the Club of Rome's projections came out over 20 years ago. When markets are allowed to function, and an informed citizenry has a voice in social choices, all development has a tendency to be sustainable — in the broadest sense of that term.

At this point, I would like to recover the thread of that illustrative scenario I had set out to sketch a a bit earlier. If you recall, I was suggesting that counting on higher energy prices to contribute to the future attractiveness of nuclear technology might turn out to be misleading. Can we be so sure that 10 years from now, when a plant built today goes into operation, it will be operating for most of its life in a world of significantly higher relative fossil fuel prices? What if real fossil fuel prices and the costs of building clean fossil-fuel power generation facilities remained unchanged or declined. I would like to sketch in outline one of several possible scenarios in which technological change, abetted by efficient markets could bring about a prolonged period of low oil prices and therefore low natural gas prices.

Here's the way it goes. Some time during the next few years, Iraq changes its leadership and/or its policies and a few million barrels per day hit world markets. World oil prices weaken at first but rise quickly as demand catches up with supply. That triggers an intensification of exploration and development globally: Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Kuwait and the UAE collectively add another 6 mmb/d of capacity during the next five years, the former Soviet Union has developed a semblance of economic stability and begins reversing the decline in its oil output, raising it by 6 mmb/d, not quite to its 1989 levels, early in the next decade. Capacity elsewhere in the world remains constant as new discoveries in LDCs and intensified development in Mexico and Venezuela just offset declining North American production and the beginning of a turn-down in the North Sea. By the year 2004, world crude oil capacity has increased 20% from present levels. Meanwhile, hydrogen fuel technology has developed very substantially: the storage problem had been largely solved in the early 1990s (hydrogen could be safely stored in a relatively cheap porous medium as of 1993), solar cell and electricity storage technology were commercially developed at the turn of the century so that in temperate climates, cheap garage-top or house-top solar energy panels produced enough electricity during most of the year to supply much of a household's power needs and produce all the hydrogen by electrolysis to power a rotary-engine-driven automobile. By the year 2005, 8% of the the North American and Western European auto fleet was running on hydrogen. The high cost of the gasoline pollution tax continued to reduced the number of conventional vehicles on the road faster than they could be replaced and raised the proportion of hydrogen-powered vehicles in the developed economies to 20% by 2010 and 90% by 2020.

Since the year 2000, the developed economies' consumption of crude oil for road transportation purposes declined at the rate of about 1 mmb/d per year, initially more than offsetting rapid growth in LDC oil consumption to fuel their still growing fleet of conventionally powered road vehicles and a significant portion of their growing electric power generation. While atmospheric pollution declined dramatically in the developed economies, urban air pollution in many developing countries reached critical levels, obliging them as well to begin converting to hydrogen-powered vehicles. On the whole, the developing economies had a different environmental emphasis than their richer neighbours. When it became clear that carbon dioxide emissions wre less of a threat to global warming than had initially been supposed, international pressure to reduce all forms of combustion subsided. The developing economies, for the most part, responded initially to urban crises of air and water pollution, since the cities are the sources of economic and political power. All these factors combined brought world oil prices to pre-1973 levels in real terms, in the $11- $12 range in constant 1994 US dollars.

I make no particular claims for this scenario over a number of others. I don't think it is the most likely. In fact, one might give it, together with other variations on the low oil price theme a significant but modest probability of occurrence, say 16.7%. But that is enough to pay attention to if you're a long- range planner counting on high hydrocarbon prices — 16.7% is, of course, exactly the probability of losing at Russian Roulette played with a standard six- shot revolver. If you plan only for the most probable outcomes and give insufficient consideration to risk, the long run costs could be very substantial.

8 I have argued that the technological and market mechanisms necessary to sustain global long-term economic growth have improved quite substantially. But in so doing, they have also increase the need for competitiveness. Moreover, they will speed up the process of change, adding to the uncertainty in long-term planning and the need to focus increasingly on the risks to any forecast.

I do not know if my talk has been useful. Certainly the last thing I would want is for my remarks to have been discouraging or worse, taken as a pretentious rebuke. I was honored to accep your invitation to speak at your annual conference. My personal bias is very much toward what the nuclear power industry could become in the 21st century — the leading, because most cost- efficient and most environmentally benign source of base load power generation. My only concern is not to give you the impression that, from the point of view of applied economic theory, that goal is likely to be easily attained. • -r)ù

MEETING WORLD ENERGY NEEDS

The economic and environmental aspects of the nuclear option.

Dennis P. Ward Dennis M. chalpin Sargent & Lundy Engineers Chicago, Illinois, USA INTRODUCTION

With the end of the cold war, the pace of economic development has increased. Along with increasing economic development, energy needs are increas ng. This paper will assess the viability of nuclear power as an option for meeting these increasing energy needs. The paper will examine the nuclear option from a business prospective, i.e., if it were your money, is nuclear power a good investment. In this discussion, we will assess technical, environmental and economic aspects of nuclear power and its competitors. In addition, the assessment will include consideration of the entire fuel cycle of each of the competitors. Competitors is the appropriate term because in today's global economic environment, assessing the alternatives for meeting the world's energy needs requires a competitive business evaluation.

COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS The first aspect of a competitive business analysis is a market assessment. Much has been written about the linkage between economic development and energy consumption. But what is the relationship? At a fundamental level, the relationship is not between energy consumption and economic development. Rather the relationship is between the benefits of energy use and economic development. Categorically, there is a direct positive relationship between these factors. Increasing economic development requires increasing benefits from energy use.

The benefits of energy use, electrical energy use in particular, are heating, lighting, cooling, mechanical work, e.g., electric motors, and similar items. Each of these items allows or facilitates people to perform more work, produce more goods and services. These benefits can be increased by constructing new supplies of electricity, improving the efficiency of existing supply facilities, improving the efficiency of end-use devices, or changing end-uses from lower value uses to higher value uses. Each of these basic methods of increasing the benefits of energy usage is a competitor for resources. In addition, within each method are options that are competitors with each other and with the options of other methods. To th*3 extent that one method or option provides the increased benefits of energy use required to support the increase in economic development, the other methods and options will provide . The most appropriate method and option to support increasing economic development is truly case specific and will depend on a number of factors. However, all experts and studies agree that at the global level, increasing economic development will require the construction of new electric generating facilities.

The central question that this paper addresses:

Is nuclear power a viable option for meeting the world's increasing energy needs? The answer is an unqualified yes!

This conclusion is not based on the wishful thinking of the nuclear power industry. It is based on a competitive business analysis that benchmarks nuclear power against the competition. In this analysis, the two key activities are identifying the competitors and establishing the analysis parameters.

Competitors The electric energy supply competitors are nuclear, hydro, fossil fuels, such as coal, natural gas and oil, and renewables which include solar, wind, biomass, waste-to- energy, wave, geothermal and similar fuels and technologies. The first step in the competitive analysis is to define the strengths of each competitor in the three electric power supply market segments: base load, intermediate or cycling load, and peaking load. As shown in Figure 1, nuclear power is an effective competitor only in the base load segment of the market. Hydro power can be an effective competitor in all three market segments; however, its availability is dependent on unique natural conditions that are not available in all areas of the world. Therefore, it is rated as a moderate competitor. Coal fired power plants are a major source of electric power in the world. However coal's effectiveness decreases as you move the base load market segment to the peak load. Natural gas, when available, is a major competitor in all market segments. With the use of LNG (liquefied natural gas), natural gas can be available worldwide. Technically, oil enjoys the same features that make natural gas a broad market competitor; however, the value of oil in the transportation industry makes oil a more effective competitor in the peaking and intermediate load market segments. Renewables continue to improve as a competitive alternative to the convent onal fuel options; however, technology limits and/or natural reliability variability make renewals a moderate competitor in each of the market segments. With this assessment of the competitor strengths in each of the market segments, the competitive business analysis of the nuclear power option will be limited to the base load market segment and the nuclear, coal and natural gas competitors.

Analysis Parameters The analysis parameters for the analysis are life cycle costs and environmental impacts that are not explicitly included in life cycle costs. Life cycle costs include all costs associated with the three phases of power plant: construction, operation and decommissioning. Within these phases, construction costs include labor and materials; operating costs include fuel and O&M (operating and maintenance) costs, including capital expenditures after initial construction; and the decommissioning costs include labor and materials. (Figure 2)

In performing a competitive business analysis that tests the viability of one option against it*competition, the variability of key cost parameters must be explicitly considered. Therefore, a range of values for the key parameters is appropriate. Table 1 shows the estimate of the range of probable values for key variable parameters for new nuclear, coal and gas power plants in the 1,000 to 1,200 MW range and Table 2 provides the estimated values for plants in the 250 to 500 MW range.

The net result of the economic number crunching is a range of production costs. The degree of overlap among the competitors is a direct measure of the viability of any particular competitor. As shown, at the larger MW size range, there is considerable overlap among all three competitors. (Figure 3)

Therefore, nuclear power is a viable option and may be the optimal option in some circumstances. At the lower MW range, there is less overlap. Although nuclear power is a viable option, it is less likely that it will be the optimal option. On a measurable cost basis, nuclear power is a viable option. What if unmeasurable costs are included in the eco- nomic analysis. In addition to the measurable costs, a complete life cycle economic analysis would include consideration of unmeasurable costs. These are costs that cannot be directly measurable. To support each phase of a power plant project, construction, operation and decommissioning, there are many systems that supply the materials, labor, fuel and other required items. Associated with each supply system are the economically measurable production activities and factors that are included in the market price. In addition, there may be other factors that impose a cost on society that are not included in the market price of the good or service provided. For example, the price of materials and fuel delivered to the power plant site includes transportation costs. The transportation costs include emission pollution control associated with the transportation vehicles and fuel production facilities; however, the potential cost to society, such as increased health costs or crop or building damage, of the actual emissions resulting from the transportation activities are not included in the cost. Similarly, there are activities associated with construction, operation and/or decommissioning that are not measurable and, therefore, not included in the costs of the economic analyses. Again, environmental impacts of actual emissions or discharges are a good example of unmeasured costs. (Figure 4)

In some countries, most noticeably the United States, authorities are attempting to include such costs in the economic analysis by imposing regulatory based cost for residual emissions. However, based on the wide range of values that have been developed, it is clear that these costs are not based on an estimate of actual societal costs. At a fundamental level, the difference between nuclear power and its fossil fuel competitors is a low volume of radioactive waste that requires special handling and remains a potential hazard for hundreds of years; and a high volume of non-radioactive emissions and solid wastes. As shown in Tables 3 and 4, nuclear power produces radioactive waste in the hundreds of tons per year while fossil fuel competitors produce emissions and waste in the thousands to millions of tons per year. These tables are not intended to be an exact accounting of all unmeasured cost items. Rather they illustrate the type of factors that may not be fully accounted for in a standard economic analysis. When the first level of unmeasurable costs associated with environmental emissions and waste disposal are consid- ered, the true costs of coal and gas increase substantially more than cost for the nuclear option. Thus, the degree of competitive overlap increases and likelihood that the nuclear option is the optimal option increases. Policy Considerations In selecting the appropriate option for a new supply facility, the decision criteria used can be market economic, policy considerations or some combination. Market economics is a straight forward numerical evaluation of the measurable economic aspects of each competitive alternative. Policy considerations are factors other than quantifiable economics. As the global electric power industry moves from government owner or government sanctioned monopolies to capitalist competitive markets, market economics becomes the predominant decision criteria. However there are two circumstances in which reliance alone on market economics may not produce an acceptable result. When market economics do not include all associated costs and those other costs are potentially significant. Also when the capital requirements and/ or lead times effectively prevent the market from satisfactorily self correcting. The normal market penalty for poor investment decisions by a business is bankruptcy and loss of shareholder investment. However, in a world dependent on available electric energy for basic societal functions, bankruptcy accompanied by blackouts may not be an acceptable situation. For electrical energy supply decisions, policy consideration as well as market economics should continue to be an important decision criterion. When policy factors such as environmental impact and diversity of supply are considered, nuclear power is an even stronger competitor in the new supply market.

SUMMARY In summary, under the strict test of a competitive economic analysis, nuclear power is a viable option for meeting the world's electric energy needs. In addition, when appropriate policy criteria are considered, the viability of the nuclear option increases, TABLE1 \ Nuclear Coal i 0 *S i 1,000-1,200 MW ! Low High 1 tow High j L

TABLÉ 2 \ '* Nuclear "\'••'" ""Cotf"' '"" GAS i 250* 500 MW 1 Low High I Low High. Low High Capital (S/kw) 1,700 2,000 900 1,200 450 550 Fuel (S/MBtu) j 0.7 0.7 i 1.5 1.5 2.5 2.5 | Fuel Escalation (%) (1) 1 0% 1% ' 0% 2% 0% 4% ! Heat Rate (Btu/kWh) | 10,500 12,000 10,000 10,000 8,000 8,500 | Fixed O&M (S/MW) I 70 80 20 30 9 10 j Variable O&M (Mills/Kwh) ! 1 1.5 1 2.5 1 1.2 1

Decommisioing (SM) : loo IM 200^ j 10 20 2.5 5 !

Note (1) Escalation above general inflation.

TABLES \ Nuclear \ 1,000-1,200 MW Low High I High Level (tons/yr) 400 500 Low Level (tons/yr} 200 300

TABLE 4 ! Coal , ...&» I 1,000-1,200 MW \ Low High Low High i CO2 (1,000 tons/vr) ! 290,000 325,000 130,000 190,000 ' SO2 (1,000 tons/vr) i 20 440 0 0 NOx (1,000 tons/vr) i 130 410 40 325 Patriculate (1,000 tons/yr) 20 8,900 9 13 Solid Waste (1,000 tons/yr) 15 30 0 0 Energy Supply Competitors

Base Load Load Nuclear • Hydro Fossil -Coal • -Gas • -Oil • Renewables

Good ^ Moderate ^ Poor Figure 1

Life Cycle Costs - Measurable Costs

Construct Operate Decommission

Labor Fuel O&M Labor Materials Materials

Figure 2 f Production Cost Range N Measurable Costs

Nuclear 7.0 - 1 cfc/ kWh • Gas Nuclear Gas •I •» 1 Coal 6.0 - I mil ei IB Coal 1 1 • 1 Overlap ""• — • • t 0 KHHE 5.0 - rS//À : •• 1 t """' I H88888» IB 4.0 - •1 r • 1 1,000 -1,200 MW 250-500 MW \^ Figure 3

/Life Cycle Costs - Unmeasurable Costs \

Environmental & Societal Impacts • $

Construct Operate Decommission

$ /$/$ / $ Labor Fuel O&M Labor Materials Materials Supply Systems V V V Environmental & Societal Impacts $ Figure 4

8 Production Cost Range Measurable and Unmeasurable Costs Nuclear

Gas Gas <£/ kWh Nuclear t

Overlap

1,000 -1,200 M W 250-500 MW

Figure 5