I I I I I I I I ■ I

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

I I I I I I I I ■ I %/ft I I i i i i i i ■ i College of Engineering The Ohio State University Columbus DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency Thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. DISCLAIMER Portions of this document may be illegible in electronic image products. Images are produced from the best available original document. C00-4121-3 FINAL REPORT VOLUME IJL DELAYS IN NUCLEAR POWER PLANT CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT NO. E(ll-1)-4121 DECEMBER 14, 1977 -NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United States Government Neither the United States nor the United States Department of Energy, nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product or prnrru disclosed, or represents that its use would not mfringf privately owned rights NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United States Government. Neither the United States nor the United States Energy Research and Development Administration, nor any of their employ• ees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product or process disclosed or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. asimamoNOf ^^m^mmm C00-4121-3 DELAYS IN NUCLEAR POWER PLANT CONSTRUCTION VOLUME II G. E. MASON AND R. E. LAREW THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY COLUMBUS, OHIO 43210 J. D. BORCHERDING THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS @ AUSTIN AUSTIN, TEXAS 78712 S. R. OKES, JR. KELLOGG CORPORATION LITTLETON, COLORADO 80120 P. F. RAD CLEMSON UNIVERSITY CLEMSON, SOUTH CAROLINA 29631 DECEMBER 14, 1977 PREPARED FOR THE U. S. ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION UNDER CONTRACT NO. E(ll-1)-4121 ABSTRACT This report identifies barriers to shortening nuclear power plant construction schedules and recommends research efforts which should minimize or eliminate the identified barriers. The identified barriers include: 1) Design and Construction Interfacing Problems; 2) Problems Relating to the Selection and Use of Permanent Materials and Construction Methods; 3) Construction Coordination and Communica• tion Problems; and 4) Problems Associated with Manpower Availability and Productivity. 0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The principal investigator would like to express his appreciation to the following parties who contributed their efforts to the research project the results of which are presented herein. 1. Members of the ASCE Construction Research Council Advisory Committee a. Dr. Daniel W. Halpin, Georgia Institute of Technology b. Mr. John W. Leonard, Morrison-Kntidsen Company, Inc. c. Dr. Jack H. Willenbrock, Pennsylvania State University 2. Project Subcontractors a. Dr. John D. Borcherding, The University of Texas @ Austin b. Mr. Sid R. Okes, Kellogg Corporation c. Dr. Parviz F. Rad, Clemson University 3. Project Consultant a. Dr. Russel C. Jones, The University of Massachusetts - Amherst TABLE OF CONTENTS VOLUME I Introduction Sec. 1 Barriers to Shortening Construction Schedules Sec. 2 Research Needs - Design-Construct Interfacing Sec. 3 Research Needs - Construction Materials & Methods Sec. 4 Research Needs - Construction, Coordination & Communication Sec. 5 Research Needs - Manpower & Productivity Sec. 6 Research Needs - Other Areas Sec. 7 Summary & Conclusions Sec. 8 VOLUME II Introduction Sec. 1 Nuclear Power Plant Construction - An Overview Sec. 2 Barriers to Shortening Construction Schedules - Texas Sec. 3 Barriers to Shortening Construction Schedules - Kellogg Sec. 4 Barriers to Shortening Construction Schedules - Clemson Sec. 5 Listing of Participants •. .. Sec. 6 General Reference Bibliography Sec. 7 VOLUME TI SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION by Dr. Russel C. Jones Dean, School of Engineering University of Massachusetts - Amherst r SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Impetus Time delays in the consturction of large projects, and related cost escalations, have become a major concern of the construction industry and its clients. This problem has become particularly bad in the con• struction of large technically complex projects such as the construction of a nuclear power plant. In such projects, construction time delays and cost escalations not only have major impact on the initial cost of the facility but are additionally very costly in terms of lost production capability. The Construction Research Council of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), consisting of persons with background and expertise in the construction process and an interest in the improvement of that pro• cess through research and development, developed an interest in studying construction delays on nuclear power projects during meetings in 1975 and early 1976. A pre-proposal indicating an interest in undertaking a sub• stantial research effort in this area was prepared and circulated to po• tentially interested agencies. During 1976 the Energy Research and De• velopment Administration (ERDA) indicated an interest in having the Con• struction Research Council initiate such research with ERDA funding. Interest by ERDA in construction delays on nuclear power projects stems from concerns in both the electric power industry and the major part of the construction industry involved in construction nuclear power projects. Since industry sources were not organized to define and spon• sor research on construction delays in this area, ERDA agreed to play that role. The Light Water Reactor Program, Nuclear Research and Appli• cations Branch, of ERDA provided funds for this research on construction delays on nuclear power projects, beginning in late 1976. 1.2 Purpose The primary research objective of this study is the identification of the major types of delays occurring on nuclear power plant construc• tion projects, their direct causes, and contributing factors. This study has been organized to document delays occurring on actual nuclear power plant projects and to classify delay sources into categories containing similar causes. In order to give a measure of the importance of types of delays identified, frequency of occurrence and severity of delay are es• timated. The output of this research effort is to be the identification of areas for future research needed to eliminate the delay causes or mini• mize the delay impact. Researchable areas are identified and defined so that necessary research can be undertaken by appropriate individuals and 1.1 agencies. The results of such research could be disseminated most effectively through demonstration projects involving industry in direct cooperation. Thus, the overall long term objective of this research project is to substantially reduce the cost associated with nuclear power plant construction by identifying and making recommendations on how to re• duce the time delays associated with their construction. 1.3 Methodology The Construction Research Council of ASCE is not in itself a re• search contracting agency but instead works through the established re• search organizations of its members. This study on construction delays on nuclear power projects has been centered at the Ohio State University, in the Department of Civil Engineering. An advisory committee of Con• struction Research Council members not directly involved in the project has been established to provide overall guidance and monitoring. It was anticipated in structuring the research team to carry out this project that there would be significant differences in construction delays in the several geographic regions where nuclear power plant con• struction has been undertaken. In order to most effectively conduct this research in several geographic regions of the country, regional subcon• tractors to Ohio State University were sought and engaged. Proposals from several potential subcontractors were received and evaluated by the Construction Research Council Advisory Group and final selections were made on the basis of background and expertise in this type of construc• tion research, geographic locations, and ability to complement the other researchers on the team such that a broad area of construction expertise was represented. The first part of this research effort has emphasized the identifica• tion of delays being experienced in the construction of nuclear power plants currently underway. A list of nuclear projects in all phases of construction was developed. Each project was assigned to one of the sub• contractors, depending upon geographical location. The participating subcontractors were then assigned a representative subset
Recommended publications
  • Federal Register/Vol. 86, No. 145/Monday, August 2, 2021/Notices
    41540 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 145 / Monday, August 2, 2021 / Notices DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE III. Investigation Process Producers Will Face Increasing Import A. Initiation of Investigation Competition Bureau of Industry and Security B. Public Comments VIII. Conclusion C. Site Visits and Information Gathering A. Determination RIN 0694–XC078 Activities B. Economic Impacts of 25 Percent U.S.- D. Interagency Consultation Origin Requirement Publication of a Report on the Effect of E. Review of the Department of Commerce C. Public Policy Proposals Imports of Uranium on the National 1989 Section 232 Investigation on Security: An Investigation Conducted Uranium Imports Appendices Under Section 232 of the Trade IV. Product Scope of the Investigation Appendix A: Section 232 Investigation Expansion Act of 1962, as Amended V. Background on the U.S. Nuclear Industry Notification Letter to Secretary of Defense A. Summary of the U.S. Uranium Fuel James Mattis, July 18, 2018 AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and Cycle Appendix B: Federal Register Notices— Security, Commerce. B. Summary of U.S. Nuclear Power Notice of Requests for Public Comments on Generation Industry ACTION: Publication of a report. Section 232 National Security Investigation VI. Global Uranium Market Conditions of Imports of Uranium, July 25, 2018; SUMMARY: The Bureau of Industry and A. Summary of the Global Uranium Market Change in Comment Deadline for Section Security (BIS) in this notice is B. Uranium Transactions: Book Transfers 232 National Security Investigation of and Flag Swaps publishing a report that summarizes the Imports of Uranium, September 10, 2018 C. The Effect of the Fukushima Daiichi Appendix C: Summary of Public Comments findings of an investigation conducted Incident on U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • ISP Response Opposing BN Unauthorized Filing
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE COMMISSION ) In the Matter of ) ) Docket No. 72-1050 INTERIM STORAGE PARTNERS LLC ) ) (Consolidated Interim Storage Facility) ) September 24, 2018 ) INTERIM STORAGE PARTNERS LLC’S RESPONSE OPPOSING BEYOND NUCLEAR, INC.’S UNAUTHORIZED SEPTEMBER 14, 2018 FILING Timothy P. Matthews, Esq. Stephen J. Burdick, Esq. Ryan K. Lighty, Esq. Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP Counsel for Interim Storage Partners LLC TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 1 II. WCS CISF PROCEDURAL HISTORY .................................................................................... 4 III. THE COMMISSION SHOULD REJECT THE UNAUTHORIZED FILING FOR NUMEROUS, INDEPENDENT REASONS ............................................................................ 6 A. To the Extent the BN Filing Is Treated as a Motion Filed Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. § 2.323, It Must Be Rejected ....................................................................................... 6 B. To the Extent the BN Filing Is Considered a Request for Reconsideration of CLI-17-10, It Must Be Rejected ................................................................................................... 8 C. To the Extent the BN Filing Could Be Construed as a Stay Request, It Must Be Rejected ...................................................................................................................... 10 D. BN Fails to Identify
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 75, No. 211/Tuesday, November 2, 2010
    Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 211 / Tuesday, November 2, 2010 / Notices 67399 Federally registered lobbyist possesses Associate Administrator for Diversity to an operating license upon a unique or exceptional value to a board and Equal Opportunity, NASA determination by the Commission that or commission? Headquarters such amendment involves no significant A12: The policy makes no provisions Assistant Administrator for Human hazards consideration, notwithstanding for waivers, and waivers will not be Capital Management, NASA the pendency before the Commission of permitted under this policy. Headquarters a request for a hearing from any person. Associate Administrator for This biweekly notice includes all Preeta D. Bansal, Independent Program and Cost notices of amendments issued, or OMB General Counsel and Senior Policy Evaluation, NASA Headquarters proposed to be issued from October 7, Advisor, Office of Management and Budget. Chief Engineer, NASA Headquarters 2010 to October 20, 2010. The last [FR Doc. 2010–27621 Filed 11–1–10; 8:45 am] General Counsel, NASA Headquarters biweekly notice was published on BILLING CODE P Chief Technologist, NASA Headquarters October 19, 2010 (75 FR 64359). Chief Scientist, NASA Headquarters Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Chief Information Officer, NASA Amendments to Facility Operating NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND Headquarters SPACE ADMINISTRATION Licenses, Proposed No Significant Chief, Safety and Mission Assurance, Hazards Consideration Determination, [Notice (10–144)] NASA Headquarters and Opportunity for a Hearing Director, Ames Research Center Performance Review Board, Senior Director, Dryden Flight Research Center The Commission has made a Executive Service (SES) Director, Glenn Research Center proposed determination that the Director, Goddard Space Flight Center following amendment requests involve AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Director, Johnson Space Center no significant hazards consideration.
    [Show full text]
  • Advances in Nuclear Power Technology
    ADVANCES IN NUCLEAR POWER TECHNOLOGY OCTOBER 2011 A REPORT BY THE CONNECTICUT ACADEMY OF SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING FOR THE CONNECTICUT ENERGY ADVISORY BOARD ADVANCES IN NUCLEAR POWER TECHNOLOGY A REPORT BY THE CONNECTICUT ACADEMY OF SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ORIGIN OF INQUIRY: THE CONNECTICUT ENERGY ADVISORY BOARD DATE INQUIRY ESTABLISHED: JUNE 17, 2010 DATE RESPONSE RELEASED: OCTOBER 26, 2011 © COPYRIGHT, 2011. CONNECTICUT ACADEMY OF SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING, INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ADVANCES IN NUCLEAR POWER TECHNOLOGY This study was initiated at the request of the Connecticut Energy Advisory Board on June 17, 2010. The project was conducted by an Academy Study Committee with the support of Study Managers David Pines, PhD, and Thomas Filburn, PhD. The content of this report lies within the province of the Academy’s Energy Production, Use, and Conservation, and Environment Technical Boards. The report has been reviewed by Academy Members Peter G. Cable, PhD, John Cagnetta, PhD, and Sten Caspersson. Martha Sherman, the Academy’s Managing Editor, edited the report. The report is hereby released with the approval of the Academy Council. Richard H. Strauss Executive Director ii CONNECTICUT ACADEMY OF SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ADVANCES IN NUCLEAR POWER TECHNOLOGY MEMBERS OF THE STUDY COMMITTEE ON ADVANCES IN NUCLEAR POWER TECHNOLOGY Michael F. Ahern Harris Marcus, PhD (Academy Member) Vice President, Utility Services, Northeast Utilities Director, Institute of Materials Science University of Connecticut Donald W. Downes Chairman, DPUC (ret.) Regis A. Matzie, PhD (Academy Member) Executive Consultant A. George Foyt, ScD (Academy Member) Westinghouse Electric Company LLC Manager of Electronics Research United Technologies Research Center (ret.) Kevin McCarthy CT Dept.
    [Show full text]
  • NRC LIAISON REPORT Senate Panel Clears Ostendorff for Second Term
    NRC LIAISON REPORT Senate Panel Clears Ostendorff For Second Term On Commission. The Dow Jones Newswires (6/9, Tracy) reports that the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee unanimously approved William Ostendorff's nomination for a second term as an NRC commissioner. Diablo Canyon Relicensing On Hold Until Seismic Studies Done. The Orange County Register (6/10, Sforza) reports, "The controversial re-licensing of Central California's Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant has entered a state of suspended animation - something officials at your neighborhood nuclear power plant are watching very closely." The NRC's "Atomic Safety and Licensing Board ordered Diablo's operator to report monthly on the progress of seismic studies probing hidden earthquake risks" and the agency says it "won't consider giving the plant an extra 20 years to operate until those studies are done." U.S. Nuke Industry Sets Fukushima Response Plan: The building blocks call for the industry to: • Maintain focus on excellence in existing plant performance, assigned to INPO; • Develop and issue lessons learned from the Fukushima events (INPO): • Improve the effectiveness of U.S. industry response capability to global nuclear events (INPO/NEI); • Develop and implement a strategic communications plan (NEI); • Develop and implement the industry’s regulatory response to the accident (NEI); • Participate and coordinate with international organizations to ensure that findings from international investigations into the accident are used to inform U.S. industry response actions (INPO/EPRI): and • Provide technical support and R&D coordination necessary to address safety and other issues identified by the industry (EPRI/nuclear plant owners’ group).
    [Show full text]
  • Management Consulting Services for Nuclear Power Operators
    Overview of The Nuclear Industry and New Build In the U.S.A – Issues and Challenges A Presentation for IAEA Mission Supporting Nuclear Energy Infrastructure Development National Workshop on Workforce Planning and Human Resource Development August 19-21, 2013 Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 1 Presentation Outline • Overview of Goodnight Consulting • Overview of The U.S. Nuclear power Industry • Impacts From Fukushima Dai-ichi • Progress in The U.S. Nuclear Power Industry • Construction Progress of New Nuclear • Key Issues & Challenges In The U.S.A. • Key Issues & Challenges for Newcomers to Nuclear Power • Appendix – Small Modular Reactor Information 2 Goodnight Consulting Provides Important Services To The Electric & Nuclear Power Industries Workforce Process Organizational Strategic Planning & Cultural Analysis & Analysis & Planning Staffing Assessments Redesign Redesign Benchmarking 3 Goodnight Consulting Has Developed Staffing Models For New Nuclear Plant Designs • Under separate contracts to Westinghouse (AP1000), Areva (EPR), and GE Hitachi (ESBWR) we have developed proprietary NPP staffing models: ➢ Multi-Unit Staffing Models For Steady State Operations ➢ Staffing ramp-up curves, for each functional area ➢ Refueling outage duration and cost estimates ➢ Comparative Staffing relative to Gen II designs • We also developed a multi-unit model for the Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation for KHNP’s APR1400 4 We Have Also Provided A Wide Range of Support To All Aspects Of Utility Operations • Staffing Benchmarking • Staffing Model Development • Work Force Planning Generation • Operational Analyses • Fossil • Hydro • Outage Performance Analyses • Nuclear • Cost Analyses Transmission • Compensation & Benefits Benchmarking Distribution • Process Analyses & Redesign Customer Service • Performance Benchmarking Corporate Administration • Organizational Analysis & Redesign • Organizational Migration • Cultural Assessments • M &A Support 5 We Maintain Real-World Staffing And Organizational Databases To Apply As A Baseline For Nuclear Staffing • Goodnight Consulting, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • WS ® Expansion Potential for Existing Nuclear Power Station Sites
    ORNL/TM-5927 WS® Expansion Potential for Existing Nuclear Power Station Sites D. F. Cope g H. F. Bauman t , ^ • * . ". •J •• . • v, • J ' * '• .. ' ' • * f' i ' . ... • v t - « v »*.•-. •1 \ I .. / OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY ' OPERATED 8Y UNION CARBICE CORPORATION-FOR THE ENERGY RKWf^H AND DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION V f ••'• • • , • ••• ^ / . * f! « 4 % . ' • \ ; ORNL/TM-5927 Dist. Category UC-80 Contract No. W-7405-eng-26 Engineering Technology Division EXPANSION POTENTIAL FOR EXISTING NUCLEAR POWER STATION SITES D. F. Cope H. F. Bauman Manuscript Completed — September 26, 1977 Date Published - November 1977 — notice Thb report wu prepared as an account of wort spouored by the United Sulci Gorer.--ler.t. Neither tfw United Sulci not the United Statu Department of Energy, r« any of their employees, no* any of then contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, makes any warranty, express o: Implied, or aasumes any legal ItabUlty o< icspoaAWy for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any Information, apparatus, product or ptooea disclosed, or repnsents that lu use would not Infringe privately owned rtjlts. Prepared by the OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 operated by UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION for the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DISTRIBUTION f THIS DOCUMENT IS UNLIMITED - • • - h. cv ID o R - ' •. <4 UHUS. B - 4-8 UNITS * C - 9-16 UHllS O D - >16 UH11S 0- POTENTIRL NEW NEC SITE locating the United States Map of the BLANK PAGE / V CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT •. vii FOREWORD ix ACKNOWLEDGMENTS xi LIST OF TABLES xiii 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 General 1 1.2 Purpose 2 1.3 Scope 3 1.4 Organization 4 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Commission Memorandum and Order (CLI-12-16) to Suspend Final Licensing Decisions, to Grant the Requests in Part and Deny The
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION COMMISSIONERS: Allison M. Macfarlane, Chairman Kristine L. Svinicki George Apostolakis William D. Magwood, IV William C. Ostendorff ) In the Matter of ) ) CALVERT CLIFFS NUCLEAR PROJECT, LLC ) Docket No. 52-016-COL (Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 3) ) ) DETROIT EDISON CO. ) Docket No. 52-033-COL (Fermi Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 3) ) ) DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC ) Docket Nos. 52-018-COL, (William States Lee III Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2) ) 52-019-COL ) ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC. ) Docket Nos. 50-247-LR, (Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 2 and 3) ) 50-286-LR ) ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC. ) Docket No. 50-416-LR (Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1) ) ) ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC. ) Docket No. 52-024-COL (Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 3) ) ) EXELON GENERATION CO., LLC ) Docket Nos. 50-352-LR, (Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2) ) 50-353-LR ) EXELON NUCLEAR TEXAS HOLDINGS, LLC ) Docket No. 52-042 (Victoria County Station Site) ) ) FIRSTENERGY NUCLEAR OPERATING CO. ) Docket No. 50-346-LR (Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1) ) ) FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO. ) Docket Nos. 52-040-COL, (Turkey Point, Units 6 and 7) ) 52-041-COL ) LUMINANT GENERATION CO. LLC ) Docket Nos. 52-034-COL, (Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Units 3 and 4) ) 52-035-COL ) NEXTERA ENERGY SEABROOK, LLC ) Docket No. 50-443-LR (Seabrook Station, Unit 1) ) - 2 - ) NUCLEAR INNOVATION NORTH AMERICA LLC ) Docket Nos. 52-012-COL, (South Texas Project Units 3 and 4) ) 52-013-COL ) PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO. ) Docket Nos. 50-275-LR, (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2) ) 50-323-LR ) PPL BELL BEND, LLC ) Docket No.
    [Show full text]
  • June 2, 2011 the Honorable Thomas R. Carper Chairman, Subcommittee
    June 2, 2011 The Honorable Thomas R. Carper Chairman, Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety Committee on Environment and Public Works United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Mr. Chairman: On behalf of the Commission, I am pleased to submit the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC’s) semi-annual report on the status of our licensing and other regulatory activities. Before reviewing our actions, I want to summarize and update the NRC’s response to events in Japan. On March 11, 2011, a devastating earthquake hit Japan, resulting in the shutdown of more than 10 reactors in that country. The ensuing tsunami, however, appears to have caused the loss of normal and emergency alternating current power to the six units at the Fukushima Daiichi site. Shortly after 9:00 AM EDT on March 11, we went into the monitoring mode at the NRC’s Emergency Operations Center and the first concern for the NRC was possible impacts of the tsunami on U.S. nuclear plants and radioactive materials on the West Coast, Hawaii, Alaska, and U.S. Territories in the Pacific. On that same day, we began interactions with our Japanese regulatory counterparts and began dispatching staff to assist the Japanese Government with technical support as part of the U.S. Agency for International Development response and to support the U.S. Ambassador in Japan. I personally traveled to Tokyo on March 28, to convey directly to my Japanese counterparts a message of support and cooperation, and to discuss the current situation. We continue to monitor the situation and provide on-the-ground assistance in Japan.
    [Show full text]
  • World Nuclear Outlook 1994
    This publication and other Energy Information Administration (EIA) publications may be purchased from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office. Telephone orders may be directed to: Superintendent of Documents U.S. Government Printing Office Main Order Desk (202) 512-1800 FAX: (202)512-2250 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., eastern time, M-F All mail orders should be directed to: U.S. Government Printing Office P.O. Box 371954 Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954 Complimentary subscriptions and single issues are available to certain groups of subscribers, such as public and academic libraries, Federal, State, local and foreign governments, EIA survey respondents, and the media. For further information and for answers to questions on energy statistics, please contact EIA's National Energy Information Center. Address, telephone numbers, and hours are as follows: National Energy Information Center, EI-231 Energy Information Administration Forrestal Building, Room 1F-048 Washington, DC 20585 (202)586-8800 Internet E-Mail: [email protected] TTY: For people who are deaf or hard of hearing: (202)586-1181 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., eastern time, M-F Cover Photo The Bugey plant has five operating units with a combined capacity of 4.2 net gigazvatts. Photo Credit Appendix C: TU Services, Comanche Peak Released for Printing: Decembers, 1994 ftirj Printed with soy ink on recycled pafier GPO Stock No. 061 -003-00883-6 ^^ DOE/EIA-0436(94) Distribution Category UC-950 World Nuclear Outlook 1994 December 1994 Contains information on commercial nuclear capacity, fuel requirements, spent fuel and the uranium market.
    [Show full text]
  • United States of America
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (Updated 2014) 1. GENERAL INFORMATION The United States of America's (U.S.) nuclear power industry is the largest in the world. Of the 104 operating reactors in the United States in 2012, 4 reactors were permanently shut down in 2013. In 2013, the United States generated an estimated 789 net terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity from 100 nuclear reactors. France, the second largest producer in the world, generated about half that amount. The industry includes most phases of the fuel cycle, from uranium exploration and mining to nuclear waste disposal, but does not include reprocessing. Many services and supplies to the U.S. nuclear power industry are imported. Most of the U.S. nuclear power industry is privately owned and managed, although federal, state, municipal, and regional agencies own and manage nine reactors and have partial ownership of other reactors. 1.1. Country Overview 1.1.1 Governmental System The United States is a constitutional federal republic, consisting of fifty states, one federal district, three territories, and two commonwealths. The federal government is composed of three branches: executive, legislative, and judicial. The executive branch is led by the President. The legislative branch is composed of a bicameral Congress, which includes the Senate and House of Representatives. The judicial branch includes the Supreme Court as well as lower federal courts. 1.1.2 Geography and Climate The United States extends over the midsection of North America, stretching from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean plus Alaska and Hawaii. The three inhabited territories are found in the Caribbean Sea (U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • IEEE NPEC Subcommittee SC-3 Operating, Maintenance, Aging, Testing& Reliability Meeting 11-01 Minutes Monday-Tuesday, Januar
    IEEE NPEC Subcommittee SC-3 Operating, Maintenance, Aging, Testing& Reliability Meeting 11-01 Minutes Monday-Tuesday, January 24 - 25, 2011 Scottsdale, AZ Members Present: Gopal Aravapalli Singh Matharu George Ballassi Kirk Melson John Beatty Joe Napper Suresh Channarasappa Jim Parello Tom Crawford Ted Riccio Sharon Honecker Mansoor Sanwarwalla (Chair) Dave Horvath Glen Schinzel Jacob Kulangara Rebecca Steinman (Tuesday) Bob Lane Yvonne Williams (Secretary) Jim Liming (Vice Chair) Members Absent: Rachel Gunnett Owen Scott Hamid Heidarisafa John Stevens Peter Kang Kiang Zee Guests: Tom Carrier Phil McClure (Monday only) Soo Kim 1.0 Welcome and Desired Outcomes Chair Mansoor Sanwarwalla called the meeting to order at 1:33 pm. He identified that the desired outcomes for the meeting include preview of IEEE 338 and a presentation of the proposed revised model for maintenance of the standards. The attendees introduced themselves. The rolling attendance is provided as an attachment. We need to start working on how the various working groups will work during the SC-3 meetings. We now have three WGs actively involved in standards work, and the membership for the WGs and the time available for them to meet need to be re-examined to avoid conflicts and loss of time. Options include: WGs meet Monday/Tuesday around the SC-3 meeting and Wednesday (means an added room and that NPEC members miss Wednesday WG meeting) Continue the WGs meeting Monday/Tuesday around the SC-3 meeting, breaking up into 2-3 groups (complicated when persons are members of multiple WGs) Meet on Thursday for leftover work, or for individual WGs (which Jim P.
    [Show full text]