DOCSLIB.ORG

2016 Top Markets Report: Civil Nuclear

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2016 Top Markets Report: Civil Nuclear 2016 Top Markets Report Civil Nuclear A Market Assessment Tool for U.S. Exporters May 2016 U.S. Department of Commerce | International Trade Administration | Industry & Analysis (I&A) Industry & Analysis’ (I&A) staff of industry, trade and economic analysts devise and implement international trade, investment, and export promotion strategies that strengthen the global competitiveness of U.S. industries. These initiatives unlock export, and investment opportunities for U.S. businesses by combining in‐depth quantitative and qualitative analysis with ITA’s industry relationships. For more information, visit www.trade.gov/industry I&A is part of the International Trade Administration, whose mission is to create prosperity by strengthening the competitiveness of U.S. industry, promoting trade and investment, and ensuring fair trade and compliance with trade laws and agreements. Jonathan Chesebro served as the lead author of this report. William Lahneman at the U.S. Department of Energy put in significant time to develop the methodology and draft the 2015 report. Special thanks to Kyle Deming for updating the country case studies and helping to finalize the 2016 report, including incorporating input from the interagency. Jason Portner, Devin Horne, Sarah Batiuk and Jessica Huang contributed valuable data, graphics and content for the 2015 Country Cases Studies. Thank you also to David Kincaid for spearheading the development of this report and providing expert advice on the methodology and report template. In addition, several insights were garnered from conversations with, and edits by the U.S. Department of Energy, the National Security Council, the U.S. Department of State, the U.S. Export‐Import Bank, and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................... 3 Overview and Key Findings ................................................................................................................ 5 Country Case Study Brazil ......................................................................................................................................................... 11 Bulgaria.................................................................................................................................................... 15 Canada ...................................................................................................................................................... 19 China ......................................................................................................................................................... 23 Czech Republic ...................................................................................................................................... 27 India .......................................................................................................................................................... 31 Japan ......................................................................................................................................................... 34 Malaysia ................................................................................................................................................... 39 Mexico ...................................................................................................................................................... 41 Poland....................................................................................................................................................... 45 Saudi Arabia ........................................................................................................................................... 49 South Korea ............................................................................................................................................ 51 Turkey ...................................................................................................................................................... 55 Ukraine .................................................................................................................................................... 59 United Arab Emirates ......................................................................................................................... 63 United Kingdom.................................................................................................................................... 67 Vietnam .................................................................................................................................................... 71 Addendum: Resources for U.S. Exporters ................................................................................... 75 Appendices Appendix 1: Market Categorization Flow Chart ...................................................................... 77 Appendix 2: Methodology ................................................................................................................ 78 Appendix 3: Top 50 Overall Markets for U.S. Civil Nuclear Exports ................................ 82 Appendix 4: Subsector Definitions ................................................................................................ 83 Appendix 5: Role of U.S. Government Agencies in Civil Nuclear Energy........................ 84 Appendix 6: Key Trade Policy Issues in Civil Nuclear Energy ............................................ 88 2016 ITA Civil Nuclear Top Markets Report 1 This Page Intentionally Left Blank 2016 ITA Civil Nuclear Top Markets Report 2 Executive Summary The U.S. Department of Commerce’s International Trade Administration (ITA), under its Civil Nuclear Trade Initiative (CNTI), is committed to strengthening the competitiveness of the U.S. nuclear industry by identifying the industry’s trade challenges and commercial opportunities and coordinating public and private sector cooperation to address these issues. As part of the CNTI, ITA developed the Civil Nuclear Energy Top Markets Report, a tool for prioritizing U.S. government (USG) export promotion efforts to help target limited resources toward the civil nuclear markets and activities most likely to result in U.S. exports. The report, now in its second year, is designed to inform decision makers, managers and analysts of key trends, areas of opportunity, and important challenges facing U.S. civil nuclear energy exporters through 2030. ITA’s Civil Nuclear Energy Top Markets Report recognizes the growing demand for civil nuclear technologies worldwide and, with it, new export opportunities for U.S. companies. Global energy demand growth has intensified concerns about energy security, fuel price stability and carbon emissions. In response, many national governments are driven to consider building nuclear power plants as a low carbon, domestically produced, base- load solution to their electricity needs. The intention of this report is to identify best prospect markets in the civil nuclear energy sector, including noting where USG activities can most effectively be leveraged to support the success of U.S. companies. It is not intended to be an ordering of priorities for the industry itself nor is it a direct reflection of industry priorities. U.S. civil nuclear companies represent a broad range of industry subsectors, and each has a different set of objectives. Furthermore, it is not the role of the USG to direct industry priorities but rather to identify where resources can be most effectively leveraged within current legal frameworks to support the already existing export promotion efforts of U.S. companies. A number of important developments marked growth in the global nuclear power market in 2015. The Paris Climate Conference recognized the importance of nuclear energy to meet global carbon reduction goals. The Convention for Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage (CSC) nuclear liability regime entered into force. China kept its place as the fastest growing market for nuclear energy. China brought eight reactors online in 2015, bringing its total to 30 operating reactors; China also announced plans to export its reactor technology. Meanwhile, India and the United States achieved a breakthrough in bilateral civil nuclear cooperation, including understandings reached on issues of civil nuclear liability. With an eye on how economic and policy developments have impacted U.S. industry export prospects, ITA has updated its Top Markets rankings for nuclear power. Among other examples, Ukraine rose in the rankings due to the sale of Westinghouse fuel to Ukraine’s Russian-designed reactors and indications that more U.S. industry involvement is desired to support Ukraine’s existing fleet. Turkey rose due to plans at its third nuclear power plant (NPP) site that could involve U.S. reactor technology. Conversely, Saudi Arabia dropped in the rankings due to its nuclear plans not developing as quickly as expected, and Brazil dropped in the rankings due to corruption scandals that discouraged potential export opportunities for U.S. civil nuclear companies. Countries are continuing to evaluate nuclear power as a low-carbon, reliable, high density energy source to meet their energy demands and climate change goals. Key export markets are shifting from the traditional and mature markets of North America and Western Europe to emerging markets in Eastern Europe and Southeast
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Regulatory Oversight Report for Uranium Mines and Mills in Canada: 2018
    Regulatory Oversight Report for Uranium Mines and Mills in Canada: 2018 Commission Meeting December 12, 2019 CMD 19-M36.A CNSC Staff Presentation e-Doc 5970530 PPTX e-Doc 6018833 PDF Commission Meeting, December 12, 2019 CMD 19-M36.A – 2018 ROR for Uranium Mines and Mills CNSC Regulatory Oversight Reports for 2018 • November 6, 2019: Canadian Nuclear Power Generating Sites: 2018 • November 7, 2019: Use of Nuclear Substances in Canada: 2018 • November 7, 2019: Canadian Nuclear Laboratories Sites: 2018 • December 11, 2019: Uranium and Nuclear Substance Processing Facilities in Canada: 2018 • December 12, 2019: Uranium Mines and Mills in Canada: 2018 Reporting on licensee performance based on CNSC oversight nuclearsafety.gc.ca 2 Commission Meeting, December 12, 2019 CMD 19-M36.A – 2018 ROR for Uranium Mines and Mills Presentation Outline • Errata • CNSC’s regulatory oversight activities • Uranium mine and mill facilities • Performance of uranium mines and mills • Interventions • Conclusions SAG mill used to grind ore at the McArthur River Operation. (Photo source: CNSC) nuclearsafety.gc.ca 3 Commission Meeting, December 12, 2019 CMD 19-M36.A – 2018 ROR for Uranium Mines and Mills Errata – to be corrected before the report is published Appendix B, Table B1, corrected information Facility Safety and control area Date report issued Fitness for Service, Conventional Health and Safety, March 20, 2018 Environmental Protection, Human Performance Management Environmental Protection, Radiation Protection, October 31, 2018 McArthur Conventional Health and Safety River Physical Design, Environmental Protection, Radiation August 8, 2018 Operation Protection, Conventional Health and Safety Environmental Protection October 2, 2018 Emergency Management and Fire Protection January 16, 2019 nuclearsafety.gc.ca 4 Commission Meeting, December 12, 2019 CMD 19-M36.A – 2018 ROR for Uranium Mines and Mills Errata – to be corrected before the report is published Appendix J: Environmental Action Level and Regulatory Exceedances Reported to CNSC.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear France Abroad History, Status and Prospects of French Nuclear Activities in Foreign Countries
    Mycle Schneider Consulting Independent Analysis on Energy and Nuclear Policy 45, allée des deux cèdres Tél: 01 69 83 23 79 91210 Draveil (Paris) Fax: 01 69 40 98 75 France e-mail: [email protected] Nuclear France Abroad History, Status and Prospects of French Nuclear Activities in Foreign Countries Mycle Schneider International Consultant on Energy and Nuclear Policy Paris, May 2009 This research was carried out with the support of The Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI) in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada (www.cigionline.org) V5 About the Author Mycle Schneider works as independent international energy nuclear policy consultant. Between 1983 and April 2003 Mycle Schneider was executive director of the energy information service WISE-Paris. Since 2000 he has been an advisor to the German Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Reactor Safety. Since 2004 he has also been in charge of the Environment and Energy Strategies Lecture of the International Master of Science for Project Management for Environmental and Energy Engineering at the French Ecole des Mines in Nantes, France. In 2007 he was appointed as a member of the International Panel on Fissile Materials (IPFM), based at Princeton University, USA (www.fissilematerials.org). In 2006-2007 Mycle Schneider was part of a consultants’ consortium that assessed nuclear decommissioning and waste management funding issues on behalf of the European Commission. In 2005 he was appointed as nuclear security specialist to advise the UK Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM). Mycle Schneider has given evidence and held briefings at Parliaments in Australia, Belgium, France, Germany, Japan, South Korea, Switzerland, UK and at the European Parliament.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Power As a System Good: Organizational Models for Production Along the Value-Added Chain
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Wealer, Ben; von Hirschhausen, Christian R. Working Paper Nuclear power as a system good: Organizational models for production along the value-added chain DIW Discussion Papers, No. 1883 Provided in Cooperation with: German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin) Suggested Citation: Wealer, Ben; von Hirschhausen, Christian R. (2020) : Nuclear power as a system good: Organizational models for production along the value-added chain, DIW Discussion Papers, No. 1883, Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW), Berlin This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/222865 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open
    [Show full text]
  • History of Mining in Saskatchewan
    History of Mining In Saskatchewan Early Mining in Saskatchewan The earliest mining occurred when earth’s inhabitants started using various stones for tools or certain clays for cooking vessels. The earliest recorded occupation in Saskatchewan was around 9000 B.C. at the Niska site in the southern part of the province. Ample evidence of the use of stone tools, arrow heads, and spear heads, etc. has been found in the area. Much of the material used by these early inhabitants was imported or traded from other regions of North America. The study of the stone tools provides us with information about the people’s work, their history, their religion, their travels and their relationships with other groups or nations. Stone is readily available throughout most of Saskatchewan. This was especially important for Saskatchewan’s First Nations people who moved their camps frequently in search for food. The stones available were not all suitable for tools and they needed a constant supply of stone material that broke cleanly or was hard enough for pounding. Consequently, they made regular trips to the source areas or traded with people who lived near the sources. For these early residents of our province, the exchange of goods was more than just a means of acquiring things. Bartering and gift exchange was a means of creating and reinforcing relationships between individuals, families and nations. For thousands of years, goods have been exchanged through networks that extended across North America. Although perishable goods were also traded, our records are in the form of shell or stone artefacts.
    [Show full text]
  • Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
    CANADIAN NUCLEAR SAFETY COMMISSION Jason K. Cameron Vice-President, Regulatory Affairs, and Chief Communications Officer NARUC Summer Policy Summit – Committee on International Relations July 15, 2018 – Scottsdale, Arizona OUR MANDATE 2 Regulate the use of nuclear energy and materials to protect health, safety, and security and the environment Implement Canada's international commitments on the peaceful use of nuclear energy Disseminate objective scientific, technical and regulatory information to the public Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission – nuclearsafety.gc.ca THE CNSC REGULATES ALL NUCLEAR FACILITIES 3 AND ACTIVITIES IN CANADA Uranium mines Uranium fuel Nuclear power Nuclear substance Industrial and and mills fabrication and plants processing medical applications processing Nuclear research Transportation of Nuclear security Import and Waste management and educational nuclear substances and safeguards export controls facilities activities Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission – nuclearsafety.gc.ca CNSC STAFF LOCATED ACROSS CANADA 4 Headquarters (HQ) in Ottawa Four site offices at power plants One site office at Chalk River Four regional offices Fiscal year 2017–18 • Human resources: 857 full-time equivalents • Financial resources: $148 million Saskatoon Calgary (~70% cost recovery; ~30% appropriation) • Licensees: 1,700 Chalk River HQ • Licences: 2,500 Point Lepreau Laval Bruce Darlington Mississauga Pickering Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission – nuclearsafety.gc.ca INDEPENDENT COMMISSION 5 TRANSPARENT, SCIENCE-BASED DECISION MAKING • Quasi-judicial administrative tribunal • Agent of the Crown (duty to consult) • Reports to Parliament through Minister of Natural Resources • Commission members are independent and part time • Commission hearings are public and Webcast • Staff presentations in public • Decisions are reviewable by Federal Court Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission – nuclearsafety.gc.ca THE CNSC’S NEW PRESIDENT 6 Ms.
    [Show full text]
  • At Work 2021 Edition Foreword
    At Work 2021 edition Foreword 2020 is a year unlikely to be forgotten anytime soon, for published a white paper, The need for large and small a number of reasons. All of us have been impacted by nuclear, today and tomorrow, describing how both large- the pandemic in one way or another, and we have been scale nuclear power plants and small modular reactors forced to reassess our priorities. The ongoing crisis can play a significant role in the clean energy transition. showcased just how important affordable and reliable Towards the end of 2020, the Association also began electricity is, both hallmarks of the nuclear industry. As we its preparation for COP26 in earnest, meeting with UK look ahead at the challenges of the post-COVID economic government ministers to reinforce the importance of recovery, of achieving greater climate ambitions at COP26 nuclear energy in any deep decarbonization efforts. and reaching the Sustainable Development Goals, nuclear energy is perhaps more important than ever before. The World Nuclear University became virtual in 2020 to Association will continue to devote every effort towards continue its mission to train the future leaders of the ensuring that the industry’s voice is heard loud and clear. nuclear industry. Two World Nuclear Industry Today courses were hosted, one in China and one in Brazil, The pandemic recovery has inevitably been an important with over 1400 participants. Furthermore, three Extended aspect of the Association’s work for the past year. We Leadership Development workshops were hosted, joined forces with the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency attracting more than 350 participants.
    [Show full text]
  • At Work 2017 Edition
    At Work 2017 edition Foreword Year in review In 2016 the global nuclear industry The World Nuclear Association works future industry leaders. The 2016 continued the steady progress recorded towards this priority through the Summer Institute was held in Canada in 2015, with ten new units (totalling Harmony programme. This has entered and the University also organised four 9579 MWe) connected to the grid. a new stage with the establishment short courses in Malaysia, South Korea, Five of these new connections were of three work areas: achieving a level China and Romania. in China with one each in Russia, playing field in global electricity markets, Pakistan, India, South Korea and the harmonizing international regulatory In terms of new initiatives, our firstWorld USA. The dominance of Asian countries processes, and developing a more Nuclear Performance Report made an and especially China in new nuclear effective safety paradigm. important impact. This report series construction evidently remains an targeted at industry and international important trend. The Harmony programme is integrated organizations provides an up-to-date with our existing industry cooperation, factual picture of the nuclear power For the second year running, the nuclear information and communication sector today. We also launched the industry was on the right path for activities – all of which saw steady Nuclear Footprints advocacy campaign, achieving the Harmony goal of 1000 improvement in 2016. A special mention a collection of five short animations GWe of new nuclear added to reach goes to the Regional Workshops led by which describe nuclear energy in terms 25% of global electricity by 2050.
    [Show full text]
  • Structural Setting of the Sue C Uranium Deposit, Mcclean Lake Mine, Northern Saskatchewan
    Structural Setting of the Sue C Uranium Deposit, McClean Lake Mine, Northern Saskatchewan 1 1 I Ghis/ain Tourigny, Steve Wilson , Guy Breton , and Philippe Portel/a Tourigny, G .. Wilson. S., Breton, G .. and Portclla, I'. (2000): Structural setting of the Sue C uranium dcposit. McClcan Lake mi_ne. no~hern Saskatchewan ; in Summary of Investigations 2000. Volume 2. Saskatchewan Gcological Survey. Sask. Energy Mmes. Misc. Rep. 2000-4.2. Abstract localized normal displacemenl. Uranium mineralization is essentially located within the The Sue C deposit is a structurally controlled, prominent thrust fault system and appears comrolled basement-hosted, high-grade uranium deposit located by ductile structures inherited.from the pre-existing at the eastern edge ofth e Athabasca Basin ofn orthern ductile deformation. Saskatchewan. Strongly foliated and /ineated metamorphic tec1onites exp osed in the pit display Northeast-southwest and northwest-southeast evidence ofa complex structural evolution involving conjugate normaljaults, minor strike-slip faults and a rhree main pre-mineralization ductile deformational set ofsubhorizontal thrust faults are the youngest events. The earliest de.formation, DI, produced aflar­ structures developed in the mine sequence. lying bedding-para/le/foliation, SI. and two styles of folds due to a single progressive deformation. Primary 1. Introduction lithological contacts have been folded by east-west­ /rending FI a folds. FI b .foldr are defined by folding of The Sue C deposit is a structurally controlled. the SO-SJ surfaces and represent recumbent, basement-hosted, high-grade uranium deposit located concenlric flexures associated with flat-lying thrust at the eastern edge of the Athabasca Basin in northern slices.
    [Show full text]
  • Managing Environmental and Health Impacts of Uranium Mining
    Nuclear Development 2014 Managing Environmental and Health Impacts of Uranium Mining Managing Environmental Managing Environmental and Health Impacts of Uranium Mining NEA Nuclear Development Managing Environmental and Health Impacts of Uranium Mining © OECD 2014 NEA No. 7062 NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT The OECD is a unique forum where the governments of 34 democracies work together to address the economic, social and environmental challenges of globalisation. The OECD is also at the forefront of efforts to understand and to help governments respond to new developments and concerns, such as corporate governance, the information economy and the challenges of an ageing population. The Organisation provides a setting where governments can compare policy experiences, seek answers to common problems, identify good practice and work to co-ordinate domestic and international policies. The OECD member countries are: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Chile, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, the Republic of Korea, the Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. The European Commission takes part in the work of the OECD. OECD Publishing disseminates widely the results of the Organisation’s statistics gathering and research on economic, social and environmental issues, as well as the conventions, guidelines and standards agreed by its members. This work is published on the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. The opinions expressed and arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of the Organisation or of the governments of its member countries.
    [Show full text]
  • Fifth Canadian National Report for the Joint Convention
    Canadian National Report for the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management © Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) 2014 PWGSC catalogue number CC172-23/2014E-PDF ISSN 2368-4828 Extracts from this document may be reproduced for individual use without permission provided the source is fully acknowledged. However, reproduction in whole or in part for purposes of resale or redistribution requires prior written permission from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. Également publié en français sous le titre: Rapport national du Canada pour la Convention commune sur la sûreté de la gestion du combustible usé et sur la sûreté de la gestion des déchets radioactifs Document availability This document can be viewed on the CNSC website at nuclearsafety.gc.ca. To request a copy of the document in English or French, please contact: Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission 280 Slater Street P.O. Box 1046, Station B Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5S9 CANADA Tel.: 613-995-5894 or 1-800-668-5284 (in Canada only) Facsimile: 613-995-5086 Email: [email protected] Website: nuclearsafety.gc.ca Facebook: facebook.com/CanadianNuclearSafetyCommission YouTube: youtube.com/cnscccsn Publishing history October, 2011 Fourth Report October, 2008 Third Report October, 2005 Second Report October, 2002 First Report ii Preface Information in this report covers the period up to March 31, 2014. However, in some instances the reporting period extends beyond this to the time of writing the report: July 31, 2014. Examples include the current status of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission’s regulatory documents, the Nuclear Waste Management Organization’s (NWMO) Adaptive Phased Management (APM) approach, and Ontario Power Generation’s (OPG) Deep Geologic Repository (DGR).
    [Show full text]
  • Official Catalog
    ATOMEX-Europe Prague, Czech Republic, October 25 - 26, 2011 Official Catalog Participants Participants Contents DEKRA Industrial AB . 20 The State Atomic Energy Corporation ROSATOM . 8 Dunamenti Fire Protection Co . 20 AF-Consult Czech Republic s .r .o . 8 EGP INVEST, Ltd . 21 «All-Russian Scientific and Research Institute for Nuclear Power Plant Operation» Elektro Kroměříž a .s . 21 (VNIIAES, LTD) . 8 Enersense International Oy . 22 All for Power Journal . 9 European Nuclear Society . 22 «ALSTOM Atomenergomash», LLC . 9 ENVINET a .s . 22 ALTA, a .s . 9 EPLAN ENGINEERING CZ, s .r .o . 23 AMT Group . 10 Europe Today – Europe-Today .Ru . 24 Arako s .r .o . 11 EXCEL CSEPEL MACHINE TOOLS LTD . 24 ARMATURY Group a .s . 11 FANS, a .s . 25 ATB RIVA CALZONI SPA . 12 FCRB . 25 OJSC Atomenergomash . 12 FNK Group of Companies . 26 Atomenergomontage Ltd . 12 Fortum Power and Heat Oy . 26 Joint-Stock Company Nizhny Novgorod Engineering Company GEA EGI Contracting/Engineering Co . Ltd . 27 «ATOMENERGOPROEKT» (JSC NIAEP) . 13 GETINGE LA CALHENE . 27 Joint Stock Company «Saint Petersburg Research and Design Institute GLENTOR s .r .o . 27 «ATOMENERGOPROEKT» (JSC «SPAEP») . 14 JINPO PLUS a .s . 28 ATOMSTROYEXPORT JSC . 14 JSC OKB «GIDROPRESS» . 28 Armaturka Krnov, a .s . 15 GKN – STROMAG . 29 JSC Atomenergoproekt . 15 HOCHTIEF CZ a .s . 29 ATOMEX GROUP . 16 Hungarian Power Companies Ltd . 29 AUMA Servopohony spol . s r . o . 17 I .B .C . Praha spol . s r .o . 30 BESTTECHNICA TM-Radomir PAD . 17 «Institute «Orgenergostroy» . 30 Burns and Roe Enterprises, Inc . 18 Invensys Operations Management . 31 CZECH NUCLEAR FORUM . 18 “ISCOM” Ltd .
    [Show full text]
  • CMD 20-M25.A – Presentation from CNSC Staff – Regulatory Oversight
    Regulatory Oversight Report for Uranium Mines and Mills in Canada: 2019 Commission Meeting December 10, 2020 CMD 20-M25.A CNSC Staff Presentation e-Doc 6334201 PPTX e-Doc 6367917 PDF Commission Meeting, December 10, 2020 CMD 20-M25.A – 2019 ROR for Uranium Mines and Mills Presentation Outline • Overview • Uranium mine and mill facilities • CNSC regulatory efforts • CNSC staff assessments • Other matters of regulatory interest • Conclusions SAG mill used to grind ore at the McArthur River Operation. (Photo source: CNSC) 2 Commission Meeting, December 10, 2020 CMD 20-M25.A – 2019 ROR for Uranium Mines and Mills CNSC Regulatory Oversight Reports - 2019 • November 4, 2020: Use of Nuclear Substances in Canada • December 8 to 10, 2020: Canadian Nuclear Laboratories Sites Uranium Processing and Nuclear Substance Processing Facilities Uranium Mines and Mills Canadian Nuclear Power Generating Sites 3 Commission Meeting, December 10, 2020 CMD 20-M25.A – 2019 ROR for Uranium Mines and Mills OVERVIEW 4 Commission Meeting, December 10, 2020 CMD 20-M25.A – 2019 ROR for Uranium Mines and Mills Improvements and Status of Previous Actions (1/3) • 2017 ROR: Plain language summary • 2018 ROR: Orano’s engagement strategy CNSC working agreements with Saskatchewan 5 Commission Meeting, December 10, 2020 CMD 20-M25.A – 2019 ROR for Uranium Mines and Mills Improvements and Status of Previous Actions (2/3) • 2017 ROR: Plain language summary • 2018 ROR: Orano’s engagement strategy CNSC working agreements with Saskatchewan 6 Commission Meeting, December
    [Show full text]